Is it just me, or does it appear that world has gone mad? Based on the images we are seeing from England, I asked myself that very question. The images are shocking and very troubling when you consider why it’s happening. What started as a peaceful demonstration in Tottenham, has now become a violent uprising in many cities. There’s doesn’t appear to be any visible reason for why this is happening. Cities are burning for kicks. Maybe it’s just me getting older but after the third day of watching cities burn I was wondering why the British Government had not deployed the military to quell the civil disobedience. At the very least the police should have been using stronger measures to bring this to an end. The police seem to be taking the velvet glove approach with the anarchists. So far no water cannons or rubber bullets have been used. There’s reluctance by the police, pardon the pun, to pull out the big guns. The British Prime Minister, David Cameron, questioned police methods in parliament yesterday. He’s demanding the police use a much more aggressive approach with the hooligans, anarchists, arsonists and petty thieves. Gee, hugging won’t work?

The average age of the rioters is between 18 and 21. I’m not sure how the state has wronged them to such a degree that they would be willing to burn their cities down, and shame their country in front of the world. But it’s clear that in their tinny pointed heads they’ve found some irrational justification. I get it, 18 to 21 year old are dumb or rather have a lot to learn. I remember being that age, I had all the answers, how my parents survived all those years without my council was beyond me, but even being that dumb at no time did I say to myself, “I think I’ll go burn down Toronto, just for the hell of it”. Why? Because we respected authority, we were taught right from wrong, and I was more afraid of my mother than I was of the cops. That part still true today. When the civil unrest finally ends in London, we will hear the usual verbal diarrhea. The youth of Britain feels disenfranchised, they’re poor, they have no hope, blah, blah, blah. What that really means is, “I live in a world of entitlement, I’m accustomed to getting something without earning it, the state owes me, and if I don’t get mine I’ll burn the city down”. No, that’s not just anger, that’s nuts.

Conversely we’ve witnessed the Sprig Arab Uprising. It still continues today in Libya and Syria. These people took to the streets peacefully in the name of freedom and self-determination. They faced jets, tanks and bullets because they wanted to overthrow oppressive totalitarian regimes. I live in the greatest country in the world, Canada. I’ve been accorded every opportunity to succeed. My parents worked themselves to the bone to provide a better life for their kids. My success or failure is my responsibility. As I compare my so called “problems” to those who took to the streets in the Arab world, I’ll take my problems any day of the week.

There does seem to be a common thread in the in the world today. People are taking to the streets to protest. Is some cases it’s warranted, in others it’s mind boggling. So I can’t help but wonder – can it happen here? The Tea Party in the US is a populist movement. So far Tea Party demonstrations have been peaceful but partisan politics in the U.S. has become so anger based one can’t help but wonder if they will be able to keep a lid on this boiling pot. Based on the language being used by both sides in the U.S., I think there’s reason for concern. As for Canada, I think we would all like to believe that it won’t happen here. We’re far too reasonable and respectful of our community. Then I think about the G20 in Toronto, and the aftermath of game seven in Vancouver, and now I’m not so sure.

Until next time,
Cheers

That famous line was attributed to Jogi Berra, Hall of Fame New York Yankee baseball player. Besides being a great ball player, Berra was also known for malapropism, mangling the English language. Normally it’s done for comedic relief but in Berra’s case it was his standard way of speaking. I thought of this quote based on what’s been happening to the markets over the last week. It’s starting to feel like 2008 all over again. Back in 2008, the world faced an economic crisis. The news was stunning. How on earth could iconic companies such as Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns fail? Yet that’s exactly what happened. The U.S. Government forced banks to take T.A.R.P. (Troubled Asset Relief Program) money to ensure that lending would continue. The ministers of the G7 countries rushed to Washington for emergency meetings because there was fear that the markets wouldn’t open. As events unfolded in 2008 we were all left wondering what’s next? It appears the other shoe has dropped.

One of the significant differences, relative to our present day situation, is the fact that back in 2008 nobody questioned America’s credit worthiness. That all changed last Friday when S & P (Standard and Poor’s) downgraded the US from AAA to AA Plus. Not since 1917 has the US been rated lower than AAA. Not surprisingly the Obama administration has come out swinging against S & P. The administration is questioning S & P calculations and motives for the downgrade. Funny how S & P’s motives were never questioned when the US had a AAA rating. I should note that the other two rating agencies, Moody’s and Fitch, have not downgraded the US. So the question is, which rating agency has it right? In time the answer will become clearer but I’ll say this about S & P, the move they made on Friday took a lot of chutzpa. That’s a Yiddish word for tenacity and guts. I suspect shirt collars are feeling a little tight today in the corporate offices at S & P.

Based on what’s happened in the last week, what does this mean for Canada? Firstly, no one can predict with any certainty. We’re in-uncharted waters here. Besides what’s happening in the US, numerous countries are in dire straits financially in Europe. All of these factors will have an impact on us. “Canada is not an island,” Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said late Friday in a statement. “We are a trading nation, with about a third of output generated by exports and deep linkages with the U.S. economy. The global economic recovery remains fragile and this uncertainty may eventually impact Canada”. One of the ways it may impact us is that if borrowing costs increase in the US, due to S & P’s downgrading, there could be further negative impact to the US economy. This impacts us because we export so much of our goods to the US. If the Americans are not spending, we feel it. There’s also predictions that the loonie will go higher relative to the US greenback. That of course makes our goods more expensive in the US and abroad.

Conversely there’s been some positive speculation about Canada. Investors will look for a safe haven. There’s plenty of cash on balance sheets today but given the uncertainty of the market place cash is being hoarded. Eventually corporation will want a return on their capital, and Canada is a safe bet. Based on workforce, commodities, stable financial sector and fiscally responsible government, Canada should benefit. Countries which are AAA rated today will be in demand. S & P rates Germany, Britain, Austria, Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, Australia and Canada AAA. If Europe makes investors nervous, Canada’s a solid option.

It’s become fashionable in this country to pat ourselves on the back and say, “we’re so much smarter than the Americans”. Frankly, recent history clearly shows that we have managed our affairs far more effectively than our neighbours to the south. But things can change. In 1993, the Canadian Bond Rating Agency downgraded Canada from AAA to AA Plus. In a short period of time the other international rating agencies followed suite. How did we get our AAA rating back? The government attacked the deficit. If you recall back in the 90’s the Liberals, remember them, ran things in Ottawa. Under Finance Minister Paul Martin, programs were slashed, transfer payments reduced, and taxes were increased. This was done all in the name of deficit reduction, and it worked. Here we are in 2011, our deficit is too high and the Harper government will have to do something about it. Harper’s backed himself into a corner by campaigning that our taxes are too high, and increasing taxes is not the answer. He had me at hello. So then the only way to reduce our deficit is to cut spending. Don’t expect him to use a scalpel to cut programs. This may require a hatchet.

Until next time

Cheers

This was a term we were all too familiar with back in August and September of 2008. It is also the name of a new HBO movie which chronicles what transpired at the beginning of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown. HBO assembled an outstanding cast, and given the subject matter the movie was rather entertaining. I would highly recommend watching the movie. It is a good reminder to all of us that the term boom and bust is as applicable today as it always has been.

In typical Hollywood fashion, a liberal bias amounting to revisionist history, the movie tried to blame George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan for the meltdown, and all other evil things. The truth is you can go back to the Jimmy Carter administration, and the passing of the Community and Reinvestment Act. That work of art stated that home ownership was a right, and not a privilege. This is where the slippery slope began. Then old Slick Willie, aka “which way are the political winds blowing today because that’s what I’ll stand for”, Bill Clinton, put that program on steroids. Suffice to say the responsibility for the meltdown, and the nuclear fueling of the problem, is equal parts Republican and Democratic.

The movie is a great reminder of how perilously close we came to an economic meltdown. How our standard of living was at the precipice. If you think this is hyperbole, because this was really a US issue, the reality is that this carcinogen (sub-prime mortgages) infected world markets. I can’t help but to think about the auto worker in Windsor and Detroit, the welder in Germany, the machinist in France, all, asking the same question: “Tell me again why my pension has taken a hit because of some mortgage problem?” No one from Wall Street could explain what happened in laymen terms. The average person cares little about default swaps, derivatives and mortgage-backed securities. All the layman cares about is finding out who the hell let this happen. That question has still gone unanswered.

The movie doesn’t deal with the who. The movie played up of the part about the moral dilemma the government faced. Who did the government decide to bail out, AIG, and who did they allow to fail, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers. All very fascinating and dramatic. But after watching the movie I couldn’t help but ask myself the following question: “How the hell has no one gone to prison over this?” I’m all for a free market system, and the pursuit of wealth, but reckless endangerment of our economy and standard of living should not go unpunished. There were individuals and institutions who knew full well they were passing on toxic assets. They were passing on the risk so they didn’t care. They could care less about the consequences. Yet none of the perpetrators of this ingenious fraud has ever been charged or convicted. You would think at least a couple of them should be experiencing the joys of being passed around in prison for a carton of smokes.

Until next time

Cheers

For those of you who reside outside of Ontario, you may not know this but we here in Ontario get to exercise our democratic right one more time.  Then again some of you who live in Ontario may have forgotten that we have a provincial election coming up this October.  Who could blame you for wanting to suppress the idea of yet another election.  In the last 12 months, the good residents of Toronto endured a municipal election, and the voters in Ontario cast their ballots for a needless federal election. Could voter fatigue be setting in? I suspect the incumbents, the provincial liberals, hope so.

During our municipal election, candidate Rob Ford ran on a very simple campaign. The message was clear and to the point, “the gravy train stops here”. I’m not kidding, that was his campaign slogan.  His message was that days of wasteful spending was over.  It was time to be fiscally responsible, and do what was right for the citizens of Toronto.  I know what you’re thinking, sheer lunacy.  Being fiscally responsible was the complete opposite of what everyone in Toronto had became accustomed to under the previous regime. The spend first and think later cabal that used to run city hall were flabbergasted that Rob Ford’s message resonated with the electorate. So much so that the incumbent mayor, David Miller,decided he wouldn’t run for re-election because he wanted to spend more time with his family.  When a politician says he’s not running because he wants to spend more time with his family, it really means that we just did a poll and the results say if I run again I’m going to get my ass kicked. I digress.  Rob Ford won overwhelming majority, and the citizens of Toronto have spoken.

The federal election is still fresh in everyone’s mind.  The conservative party finally got their majority.  Why? Ontario put them over the top. The only way the torries could gain a majority was to do well in the 416 and 905 are code, and that’s exactly what happened. What was the message that resonated with the voters in Ontario? Fiscal responsibility, cutting wasteful spending and lowering the deficit. I’m not a Rhodes Scholar by any stretch of the imagination but I think I see a pattern here.

This brings me to the upcoming provincial election. I’m going to let you take a wild guess what Tim Hudak, leader of the Ontario PC Party, platform is for the upcoming election. You’re so smart, you’re not just another pretty face.  Tim, you had me at lowering taxes.

The fact that you want to bring back chain gangs makes me school girl giddy. That’s not a joke. The issue has been getting a lot of air time in Ontario, and it appears the idea is gaining a lot of support. As a voter I’m a buyer of a politicians vision. Every four years I buy what a politician is selling by casting my vote. Political parties share similarities with private enterprise. If you don’t give consumers/voters what they want, if you think you’re smarter than the consumer/voter, if you suffer from hubris, you do so at your own peril.  But you don’t have to take my word for it. Just ask David Miller and Michael Ignatieff

Until next time.

Cheers,

Image Source: McLeans Magazine, July 27, 2001