Real Estate - Nobody ever explained it to me like that!

The Trees don't grow to the sky

2012-01-27T12:33:00.000-05:00

My oh my ... the Stock & Bond folks have a saying for everything

Even Sucker's Rally

Definition of 'Sucker Rally'

A temporary rise in a specific stock or the market as a whole. A sucker rally occurs with little fundamental information to back the movement in price. This rally may continue just long enough for the "suckers" to get on board, after which the market or specific stock falls.

Also known as a "dead cat bounce" or a "bull trap".

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sucker-rally.asp#ixzz1kgHfcZwS

Aboriginals meet the Crown - Jan 24 2012

2012-01-24T17:06:00.000-05:00

Ab's meet Crown Jan 24/12 .... who's the Crown? ... who's representing the Crown at the meeting? ... who's representing you?

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

--incomplete-

I assert that Canada may most accurately compared to a rough-around-the-edges asylum (built on a gold mine, a basin of oil and serviced with boundless fresh water), under absentee-ownership of a far-away, too-rich-to-care Lord (the Crown of Canada) that is being 'stewarded' by inmates who run things with an entitlement-style attitude much like the entrenched-and-determined-to-retain-power era of Pig administration "4 legs good, 2 legs better - some animals are more equal than others" described in George Orwell's Animal Farm.

The nub of my arguments is that governance of British North America/Canada has never progressed past the concept of Responsible Government (defined as Executive powers accountable to the Legislative power) which was introduced imperfectly by the Constitutional Act of 1791 (Governor, Executive Council, plus Legislative Council & Legislative Assembly) and subsequently the Legislators (and other rascals) fought for truly Responsible Government under the banner of "grievances before supply".

This "imperfectly responsible" system was the basis for the Confederation-wide superstructure of 1867 that was placed atop the colonial/provincial "imperfectly responsible" system extended/enacted/restored by the same BNA Act of 1867.

In all these "imperfect" systems, (notwithstanding the 3rd para of the Statute of Westminster 1931 and clause 2 of the motherland's Canada Act 1982, (U.K.) 1982, c. 11 that removed the "in Council" from HRH-in Canada), Sovereignty and Authority remain at the Top of the hierarchy and all Accountability and Responsibility still flows UP to the Crown.

Never, was "Popular Sovereignty" granted to the Citizens of Canada (some say Subjects of the Crown is more accurate, albeit not well-received), allodial title was never transferred to the Stewards of Canada nor to any Fee Simple Titleholder,

I wish to condemn those who has purposely permitted this law-breaking, abused their Offices by not subsequently correcting it and explicitly denounce every lawyer, Judge and Professor who claims to be a "Constitutional Expert, Advisor or Teacher".

I seek by an analogy to our contemporary view about the historic dis-treatment of our First Nations/Indians/Autochthonous peoples to point out the "one-day-to-become-apparent-to-all" anti-constitutionality of our currently-operating governance system.

Bottom Line ... If we are NOT following the as-written provisions of our Constitution ... what rules ARE we following?

Jan 23 2012

I cannot finish this ... sorry

Dear Editors & Friends,

and Jay M UCalgary PoliSci- I see you too are not quite clear on the Privy Council -appended

Most 'Ordinary Canadians' think that the Constitution/BNA Act of 1982 wrought significant changes to our governance system.

It's not true ... we were deceived by smoke and mirrors, sleight of hand and distraction - simple tricks of obfuscation more suitable for magic shows.

While we did :

1) formally eliminate the power of the UK's Lower & Upper Houses over Canadian law (previously exercised via the "in-Council" control that their un-written traditions/conventions hold over the Monarch's decisions)

and 2) we did add "subject to" clauses to (and thus limiting) the rights we formerly had at common law (s.1 Judicial veto and s.33 provincial veto),

plus 3) we added "amelioration to disadvantaged groups" mumbo-jumbo

and finally 4) included a virtually-impossible to use set of Amending Formulae (save the Bilateral formula see s. 93a of 1997) - the structure of Accountability and foundations of Sovereignty we not addressed.

The nub of my arguments is that governance of British North America/Canada has never progressed past the concept of Responsible Government introduced imperfectly by the Constitutional Act of 1791 (Governor, Executive Council, plus Legislative Council & Legislative Assembly) and subsequently the Legislators (and other rascals) fought for truly Responsible Government (Executive powers accountable to the Legislative power) under the banner of "grievances before supply".

I assert that Canada may most accurately compared to a rough-around-the-edges asylum (built on a gold mine), under absentee-ownership of the Crown and being 'stewarded' by inmates who run things much like the "4 legs good, 2 legs better - some animals are more equal than others" era of Pig administration described in George Orwell's Animal Farm (as you may recall from this modern classic, the "Leader Pigs" kept changing the rules to further their own position, authority and comfort).

Not following the as-written hierarchical powersharing format: Monarch (since 1982, no longer "in Council"); Executive Power (GovGen + Privy Council); Legislative Power (Upper House-Senate + Lower House-Commons), whether through benign neglect, purposeful intent, nescience, cowardice or bald-faced "ignore-ance"/defiance on the part of our Representation Stewards, our present-day (and as long any anyone can remember) system of a juggernaut Prime Minister's Office(PMO)/ Privy Council Office(PCO) dominating the entire governance system is the antithesis of the intent of the Fathers/Mothers of Confederation AND wholly contrary to the as-written text of 1867.

Consider the chickens-coming-home-to-roost ramifications of another "Similar in Principle" defiance of the foundational laws of Canada by past Stewards of the Crown regarding the First Nations/ Indians/ Aboriginal People.

In the Proclamation of 1763, the lands won/ceded from France (plus the unexplored, contiguous land mass beyond those "watershed boundaries") were claimed for "the Crown" - everything and all things were declared to be possessed in the Monarch's name (also deemed to be under the care and protection of same) and were to be administered, licensed, granted, leased, bought, sold etc only by authorized Stewards of the Crown ie officials duty-bound to protect, safeguard, save harmless the Assets of the Crown and make recommendations for the development and prosperity of those Assets and (to a collateral degree) the peoples living upon those assets.

Until the Calder case of 1973, most Canadians (and most of the Crown's authorized Stewards, it now appears) thought very little about the existing peoples living on the thus-claimed Crown Land Assets "beyond the Heads or Sources of any of the Rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean from the West and North West, or upon any Lands whatever, which, not having been ceded to or purchased by Us" (para 17) ...we now see that NOT paying attention (aka ignoring) to the foundational laws and as-written provisions of Canada's first Crown law proved embarrassingly costly, hugely dis-honourable to the autochthonous people's sovereignty and wholly disgraceful through the lens of modern eyes. The Steward's tacit policy of assimilation and eradication failed and now an era of lawful compensation, apology and restitution reigns, overseen by and underpinned by shame.

Why didn't the Stewards just follow the as-written rules regarding our Native/Autochthonous peoples? Even further, why didn't the scholars, Judges, Editors, bleeding-heart liberal types, Lawyers, Members of the Legislative powers in Ottawa or in any province kick up a stink?

Bottom line ..... why didn't some member of the non-native-blood public say something?

Was it deference to authority and elite accommodation (they must know what they're doing...), and/or plain old "I'm all right Jack, that's not my worry ... I got kids to feed.

Robert Ede,

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860)
“Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats.” Howard Aiken, U.S. Computer engineer & mathematician (1900-1973)

Typical mis-understanding of Privy Council AND its role vis a vis the Cabinet

Editorial comments/corrections noted in Red

Excerpt From Mapleleafweb -Jay Makarenko - U Calgary

Queen’s Privy Council for Canada

The Privy Council Office is an administrative arm of a larger body, referred to as the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada (or “Privy Council”). Established at Confederation under Constitution Act, 1867 (later renamed the Constitution Act, 1982), (NB ed Jay has BOTH Acts incorrectly cited - s/r respectively Br N Am Act 1867 and Const Act 1867) the Privy Council is formal body which is intended to advise the Canadian monarchy on policy and government issues. Privy councillors are appointed for life by the Governor General of Canada on the advice of the prime minister, (NB -de facto but not de jure) and include the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, provincial premiers, former and present cabinet ministers, speakers of the House of Commons and Senate, and distinguished public figures or public servants.
The Privy Council is primarily a ceremonial body. (Wrong, unless author means calling a meeting of ALL PC members) An important exception is the federal cabinet, which is a body of mainly elected representatives (referred to as “cabinet ministers”), led by the prime minister of Canada. The cabinet decides the policies and directions of the nation and administers the day-to-day operation of government(and submits these for approval by a) Commons, Upper House & GG). It is, in sum, (Wrong) the pinnacle of federal executive political power in Canada. It is important to note, however, that the cabinet is simply a committee (Wrong) of the larger Privy Council. Moreover, only those specific individuals that have been appointed to the cabinet by the Governor General, on the advice of the prime ministers, may exercise the power associated with it (an expansive personal interpretation by author that is based on his abovenoted misunderstandings, but does have a shred of truth in the midst of it).

Two iterations of Central Banks ability to "Print themselves Out"

2012-01-20T11:10:00.000-05:00

Marc Faber Sees Bubble in Safest Government Bonds VIDEO CLIP
Jan. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Marc Faber, publisher of the Gloom, Boom & Doom report, talks about the outlook for stocks versus bonds and his investment strategy. He speaks with Sara Eisen and Erik Schatzker on Bloomberg Television's "InsideTrack." (Source: Bloomberg)

Bill Gross, PIMCO: Central Banks 'Printing Money Like Gangbusters'

cnbc.com
JANUARY 12, 2012

VIDEO LINK

The world's central banks are "printing money like gangbusters," which could revive the threat of inflation , Pimco founder Bill Gross told CNBC Wednesday.

By putting "hundreds of billions" in currency in circulation, the central banks "can produce reflation—that's why we’re seeing the pop in oil, gold" and other commodities, he said in a live interview.

At the same time, "there’s the potential for deflation if the private credit markets can’t produce some sort of confidence and solvency going forward," Gross said. "So we’re at great risk here, not only in the U.S. but on a global basis."

Gross has previously predicted a "paranormal" market in 2012 characterized by "credit and zero-bound interest rate risk" and fewer incentives for lenders to extend credit.

He said stock and bond investors must lower their expectations when it comes to returns, with 2 percent to 5 percent as good as they get this year.

He also told CNBC he expects the Federal Reserve will keep interest rates "exactly where it is at 25 basis points for the next three to four years."

Gross's Total Return Fund, the world's largest bond fund, had over $10 billion in outflows in 2011, but Gross stressed the fund "started 2011 at $240 billion and ended it at $244 billion."

He said he will run the Pimco Total Return Fund ETF , which starts March 1, the same way he runs the bond Total Return Fund, adding, "They're twins."

London North Centre By Election 2006

2012-01-04T14:22:00.001-05:00

This was done in a rush by a non-expert employee of the London Free Press Newspaper - great lighting eh?

Sadly (and stupidly) I mis-spoke, the last reference to "Governor General" - it s/be Prime Minister.

Background

I was "Independent Candidate" and the local paper felt obligated to give me the same one minute spot as the others.

I kept doing it over - running overtime - explaining too much

When finally I kept under a minute - we never reviewed it

Hair a mess and shirt collar no help either

Importune

2012-01-03T13:26:00.000-05:00

im·por·tune (mpôr-tn, -tyn, m-pôrchn)

v. im·por·tuned, im·por·tun·ing, im·por·tunes

v.tr.

1. To beset with insistent or repeated requests; entreat pressingly.

2. Archaic To ask for urgently or repeatedly.

3. To annoy; vex.

v.intr.

To plead or urge irksomely, often persistently. See Synonyms at beg.

adj.

Importunate.

[French importuner, from Old French importun, inopportune, from Latin importnus : in-, not; see in-¹ + portus, port, refuge; see per-² in Indo-European roots.]

impor·tunely adv.

impor·tuner n.

Who's mandate is the well-being and betterment of each and every Canadian? The Order in Council of 1940.

2011-12-25T19:28:00.001-05:00

Bottom line & Executive Summary
Knowing that nothing can stop a Majority PM, We must elect the Governor General.

Originally Posted January 25/2009

Introduction

I've been ranting and railing about the Office of Governor General (and how the Executive's powers to BE the Executive, or "deciding element" within Canada, was usurped by the Legislative order) for many years .... BUT anyone I ever talk to about it just rolls their eye - not interested.

I'm either a lousy explain-er,
or
the explanation is not deemed worthy of consideration,
or
the solution I'm proposing is connected with a problem that no one sees as a problem, never mind whether anyone agrees with my idea of a solution.

THIS BLOG ENTRY CAME ABOUT because the only person who ever asked for more information about, asked on Jan 9/09 "I read King's letter of March 1940 but I need some explanation of the consequences of that particular action.

My understanding of parliament is not that great so when you have a moment to spare I would like to know more the effect of that decision which I presume is how Harper got his wish talking to the Governor. thank you"

To you Vic, thank you and here goes, once more ... perhaps only for my own benefit ... or for someone to read after I'm gone.

rce

Nothing can stop a Majority Canadian PM

Since 'twas never intended like this, is this what you want?

Since the opposite was the framers intent, should we not follow the original plan?

The gov't of Canada was set up in 1867 as a superstructure erected over top of the existing colonial governance structures.

The concept and design of the new, superior, Confederal level (called the General Gov't) was based on everything "parliamentary" -both good and bad- that had transpired in Britain, the breakaway USA, France AND any/all of the colonies in British North America or elsewhere on the planet.

A new independent country was NOT being created, just an agglomeration of colonies that had one of two possible fates i) the starting point for new coast to coast 'Dominion' to be within the UK's orb or ii) a territory that could be plausibly abandoned should the Americans turn their (now stilled) Civil War military resources northward.

The Confederal government would be loosely based on the Westminster, fool-enough-commoners-who-can-vote democratic "cabinet system" with a drone Monarch masquerading as titular head of the regime, and styled a constitutional-Monarchy, but with the local bicameral influences of the Iroquois Confederacy's Council of Grandmothers and the 2nd USA Constitution (check the 11th Article of their FIRST attempt)

BUT... slightly different (hence the phrase "similar in Principle" within preamble to the BNA 1867)

-a) it's not a design FOR governing the mother country,

-b) it's not a design for governing an independent country,

-c) it's not for governing a fully developed country (many anticipatory steps had to be included)

-d) it's not for governing a "conquered" country

The fathers (in Canada but more importantly those in the UK) of the 1867 system:
1) saw the checks and balances benefits of the division of powers in the USA;
2) knew the Ancient philosophers wish to be governed by a Benevolent Dictator (I prefer to use the less-coloured word Autocrat);
3) knew that the Linguistic+Religion-based factionalism of Canada was nowhere near resolved;
4) knew the nature of human beings with not-enough freedom for their circumstances and the nature of those with too-much freedom;
5) knew the system they picked couldn't approximate the USA system (that would just be inviting trouble);
6) knew that the Loyalists of North America and the Executive powers in the UK would have to be satisfied with "enough" control being retained in Gr Br, so that rag-a-muffin rebels wouldn't try again;
7) knew that the hierarchy of powers (as in UK) would accomplish the compromise necessary to assuage all parties.

Canadian Sovereignty remained vested in the Crown (this was just a little local administrative shuffling),

The Crown remained Monarch-in-Council (ie the Cabinet retain operational control over the titular Monarch),

The new Confederal gov't would have an all-the-powers-of-the-Monarch-in Council EXECUTIVE Officer, the Governor General including the power to veto any Cdn Bill,

the Governor General (who could be a newbie) would have an independent panel of appointed-for-life local advisors (the Privy Council) to balance out what the Legislative level proposed,

AND the Monarch in Council/Br Cabinet would have the power to disallow any silliness that snuck past the GovGen and his privy Council,

The New Parliament had three elements the Monarch (assent or not), the Upper House styled Senate, the lower House of Commoners.

The Upper house was to represent the propertied class (property taxes paid the bills, with a little help from excise & custom tax) and each Senator had to prove and maintain a net-worth and a clear-of-encumbrances real property holding equivalent to ~$300,000 today.

('Tis truly a shame that the Senators' original ($4,000) qualification is the only dollar amount in Canada that's never been adjusted for inflation)

These propertied folk were to be drawn equally from the 3(now4) divisions(now referred to as regions) of Canada. So that the varied economic interests could be represented - fish, farm, timber, mines, commerce etc, east west, french/catholic, dissentient/separate see 93(2) etc etc

The lowest chamber was for elected representative. They were to be from ridings distributed by province in relation to the representation-based-on-population of the new Quebec province (the most populous prov in 1867, the-then most powerful one but ... trending down)

The new 4 provinces continued to have a Governor appointed by the Monarch-in-Council's representative so that any business approved in those local Legislative Assemblies, Legislative Councils and Executive Councils still needed assent by the Lt Governors (as before Confederation), but as a new measure, any Provincial Bill could be Disallowed by the new office of Governor-General in Council (the GG with the Advice and Consent of the Privy Council)

So ... the Confederal system of 1867 was really being run (Executive Power rested) by the Governor General and the Monarch-in-Council.

The system was set up this way purposely ... so that no one person or level could get too powerful and that at all times the Crown-in-Council could correct any local excesses.

Nothing has changed since then, except

1931 the Statute of Westminster granted an independent Foreign Policy to Canada.

1940 The Office of Clerk of the Privy Council (head of Executive admin) is merged with the office of Secretary to the Cabinet (head of Legislative administration) by Order in Council 1940-1121 of Rt Hon Wm Lyon Mackenzie King;

King government and his Dollar a year Men transform Canada from agrarian backwater to munitions manufactory, initiate pan-national transportation, communication, defense, fiscal/monetary plans, nationalize anything and everything to aid the war (very successful) effort

1947 the Letters Patent of the Governor General re-state (I'd say re-instate) the 1867 delegated powers to the Office of GovGeneral PLUS expressly designate the GG as Commander in Chief in place of the Monarch (as in 1867)

1947 Rt Hon Wm Lyon Mackenzie King initiates Canadian citizenship (passports in a different name, no new rights, privileges or ownerships) in addition to British subject-ship for Canadian,

1950 the Rt Hon Wm Lyon Mackenzie King succeeds in lobbying to have a Canadians (not Brits) appointed to Office of GG (ie individuals to be recommended by Cdn PM not U.K. PM);

1950's National transportation, communication, manufacturing schemes are transformed to peacetime uses (as if they'd been designed that way)

1950's With the War over, (Korea too) and once the Seaway and D.E.W. line are underway, not many new 'huge' projects are on hand for the much-bigger gov't to undertake.
-International financing and ownership of a National pipeline not is publicly accepted because of Parliamentary opposition (they too are looking for things to do after such a long time of agreeing to everything) - pushing it thru causes gov't to fall.
-While USA worries about communist infiltration of gov't and the UK pretends they're still a world power, Canada institutes National Hospitalization ...the gov't will now have a interest in how "safely" you live .... "unsafe living" could lead to unnecessary hospital expenditures.

1960's The Liberals regain power as minority and jam thru the UnionDParty's, social top 10 list of programs to stay in power.
-they buy votes with Healthcare for everyone and senior citizen pensions .... both pay-as-you-go schemes based on perpetual-baby-boom demographics. Pays as you Go means current benefits will be paid out of current revenue, future (increased) benefits will have to come from future (increased) revenue (or borrowings) that will have to be paid/serviced by future-future increased revenue (or borrowings) et cetera

1968 An "I'm too smart to be constrained by the laws of nature" libertine (perhaps a Fabian, too) is elected Prime Minister and soon after:

1) undoing the conventions on dissolution of marriages;
2) eliminating the written penalties against his friends' type of sexual immorality;
3) discovering that the Native Canadians WILL win every case where they present the Proclamation of 1763 as their claim as they did in the Calder case:
4) realizing that the baby-boom is over and he'll need some more people FAST (hello wide-open immigration) to pay for all the pay-as-you-go programs;
and
5) seeing that since the 1774 Quebec Act , French facts about Canada cannot be assimilated away and so he starts a program to assimilate the English;

becomes bored with the whole thing and lets his all-political party-men run things with ONLY the next election in mind.

Then spending balloons in the high-interest cycle of the late 1970-early1980's until only by 1)ceaseless tax increases by Myron Baloney heading his party's traditional opponents and 2)ceaseless erosion of principle by inflation-over-time and 3) slashing transfer dollars to the provinces (in exchange for more autonomy - a deal they stupidly gobble up) does a successor government balance the budget that he un-balanced 20+ years before.

He temporarily snapped out of this boredom when the sincere-but-boneheaded minority PM who briefly succeeded him, naively thought he could govern-in minority, as-if he had no-blood-thirtsty-opposition-waiting-to-pounce and thereby gave him another chance.

He took the opportunity (knowing that as a Majority PM no one could stop him) to fulfill some personal projects

1) Removing the need to have the UK Parliament approve every change to the Canadian foundational documents (unf. achieved by making the Constitution now virtually IMPOSSIBLE to amsnd)

2) Adding a Codified Set of Legal Rights into our Common Law system (unf. achieved by ONLY with ridiculous conditions and subject-to clauses that undermine those rights - net effect less rights than before under Common Law).

3) Saving the World by meeting each World Leader in person and changing their minds by the force of his personality (unf. dismal failure - even as personal PR - this part now conveniently forgotten).

When his term expired and even though he was technically not the leader, his party was reduced to a rump of 40 in 1984 ... But not before he "accomplished":
-#1, by compromising so much with his opponents that we have an impossibly complex set of amending formulae (things will never change beyond BiLateral (Confederal gov't + 1 province) matters , and getting the UK Parliament to remove the "in Council" part about the Monarch in relation to Canada ... now it's just the Individual Office Holder that is the source of all sovereignty and the holder of the Disallowance power .... not the UK Cabinet.

#2 by compromising so much with his opponents that all the so-called "rights" he enshrined are but condition-ridden, subject-to shadows of what we enjoyed prior to that acts passage - in addition Parliament was in charge of law, thereafter the Supreme Court (and the predisposition of the person appointing individuals to that now-politicized legal office) became truly so.

#3 is so sad I won't even talk about it

So that's how I think the government of Canada's very-suitable hierarchical system of checks and balances got perverted and its people got subverted into tax-drenched drones that cannot even think about there government system because we don't know anything about it. We've never been taught the mechanics of its operation.

We're not taught the "civics" of the "Constitution" because the on-the-ground-facts do not match the on-the-paper written laws-of the land.

If we did teach our foundational rules FOR/ restrictions UPON government in detail, the attentive teens might inquire as to why 'twas so. This would be either an embarrassment to the teacher (who'd likely NOT be able to answer why the government need not follow the constitution) or an encouragement to already-scofflaw-ish teens to do so also.

HOWEVER despite my complaints ... the country is constantly mentioned as tops (or close) in every survey or poll of countries.

REGARDLESS of how much better Canada could already be (if these excesses in power-wielding/power-concentrating and self-serving mistakes in policy & math had not taken place), it could still be great IF we act to stop any further mis-management of the country, it's people, it's money, it's resources, it's laws, it's constitutional protections and safeguards.

If Canada and Canadians do nothing we will become:

a) fully socialist (we have no property rights, we're already taxed to death and already almost totally reliant on government FOR services, FOR protection, FOR remedies, FOR money to subsidize the young, the old, the indigent, the business startup, the business-windup etc etc

b) part of the North American economic Zone with all the problems of the USA's biggest cities and all the rape-of-resources-with nothing-to$$show for it of the most underdeveloped countries .. just another cog in the one world, New world order.

Do nothing and what else can you expect ... something in-between, that is not quite so gruesome ... who cares.

If we did:

1) require our government to follow the constitution,

2) want to be competently informed about the actions and accurate costs of the planned expenditures of gov't,

3) require our representatives to do what they said they'd do (at least not to do the exact opposite once in office),

4) expect to have a government system with provisions in place that would stop self-serving or short-sighted or only-politically motivated decisions from ever taking effect.

If we did want those things (at a minimum)

.........we'd need a veto.

Or a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best in a position of power WITH a veto.

The Governor General has that power of veto.

We'd need a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best to have the mandate of a Benevolent Autocrat .. one person whose sole objective and highest unwavering aim is the well-being and betterment of each and every Canadian

The Governor General has that mandate now.

We'd want that big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best to not be able to get too human.To not be able to get corrupted by power.
Perhaps to have no power to initiate laws or spend money (that's the assembly's job), but just to say no to the stupid spending and ill-considered laws. AND if in doubt to put the law or expenditure "on hold" and call the question in a nation-wide referendum.

The Governor General has these powers already - withholding of Royal Assent and Reservation (scroll down to s. 55 and s.57 )

If we had a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General, S/he could re-instate the office of Comptroller General - a sort of Auditor General BEFORE the spending.

If we had a big Uncle/Aunt-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General, S/he could rescind the 1940 Order in Council that stole control of the Privy Council away from Her/his predecessor(s).

If we had a big Uncle-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General S/he could get the discussion going on adjusting the Senate's $4000 property qualification/disqualification standard for inflation - thus re-establishing its place as House of Taxpayers

If we had a big Uncle-who-loves-us-best who was the Governor General S/he'd have to have all of that Office's powers already written down because i) the existing usurpers would fight tooth and nail to retain their power, ii) the existing Constitution is too difficult to amend and iii) Canadians politicos and pundits would never agree on the terms if we had a Royal Commission or First Ministers Conference to try and set the terms.

Fortunately this is the case.

If we had this kind of Governor General ... that person should be elected.

Fortunately, this IS readily achievable because The Monarch selects the GG based on recommendation -this recommendation, by CONVENTION not LAW, was initially received from the UK Cabinet, more recently from the Cdn Cabinet .... no laws need be changed to have the recommendation flow from a nationwide election (Perhaps held simultaneous with every-other General Election and for a term that starts 365 days after the return of the Writs for the simultaneous General Election).

I further suggest a single transferable-style ballot so that many candidates could run and no run-off would be necessary.

Bottom line & Executive Summary
Knowing that nothing can stop a Majority PM, We must elect the Governor General.

Dec 1/08 Prorogue#1 GovGen misinerpreted King-Byng precedent --i wonder who's advising Her/Him NOW!

2011-12-24T11:28:00.000-05:00

From Dec 1 2008 on Sunset Sketches

GovGen misinterpreted King-Byng precedent --who's advising Her NOW!

Executive Summary

-The current Minority/Coalition crisis will end up on the Governor General's desk.

-Ms Jean must Stand Up to the self-serving individuals proffering advice to Her (particularly the elected ones) or in my opinion, She must Stand Down - acknowledging that She is unequal to the challenges of the full, as-written, authority of the Highest Office in the land.

-Ms Jean must tell Mr Harper to form an All-the-Talents Cabinet with members called from all the parties represented in the Lower House and to stipulate that this form of ministry will govern for the term set out in Mr Harper's Fixed Elections Date legislation, irrespective of who holds the office of Prime Minister and further stipulate that the Office of Clerk of the Privy Council will be returned to the control of the Governor General (simply by rescinding Order in Council P.C. 1040-1121 -see link below).

I respectfully ask the Canadian people to endorse this proposed solution.

--Your Excellency, Rt Hon. Mr Harper, Editors, M. Belanger,

In my opinion, Ms Jean and her advisors mis-read the precedent established in the King-Byng affair when she granted Mr Harper a dissolution in September (never mind his fixed elections legislation).

Please consider:

King-Byng was much different - in this much-cited-but-never-fully-recounted example, the opposition Conservatives held more seats than Mr King, the Liberal PM, who had, legally-retained/stubbornly-refused-to-relinquish, power after "a defeat" in the popular election.

excerpt from Claude Bélanger,Department of History,Marianopolis College:"Mackenzie King's Liberals had come to office in December of 1921 (party standings: Liberals 117, Progressives 65, Conservatives 50, Labor 2, and Independent 1) but had been unable to achieve a majority because the Western provinces had supported a third party which promised reforms demanded in the West.Despite its minority position, the King government stayed in power until 1925 particularly because the Progressives continuously supported them. An election was called by King for October 29, 1925, under the pretext that the government lacked "a clear majority" and could not dispatch certain important business. The voters responded poorly to the appeal of the government. The results were: Conservatives 116, Liberals 101, Progressives 24, Labor 2, Independents 2."

A carefully reading of the whole backgrounder by M Belanger (or any), will lead the observer to conclude that based on this historic example (verified by our recent 2008 results), the Governor General should NOT have granted Mr Harper a dissolution in Sept 2008, but instead should have considered THEN what is being bounced around NOW regarding the existence of another Member of the Commons who might enjoy the "confidence of the House" and be able to continue conducting the business of a Parliament that Mr Harper had declared to be beyond his patience and/or ability.

Please excuse my impertinence, bordering on hubris.
I am trying not to be disrespectful to anyone or towards any political Officeholder.

I am a fiercely loyal Canadian, 55yrs old and a self-taught student of Canadian history, law and politics.
I am a strict BNA/Constitutionalist.
I see a gargantuan procedural mess unfolding - I am compelled to do something to stop it.

The ONLY Office in Canada with the power to contain this me-first, damn-the-consequences for Canada & Parliament schmozzle is the Governor General.
The GG has been delegated the powers of the Queen (Queen in Council expired with 1982) in the Letters Patent 1947.
The GG heads the Executive (ss.9-16) and needs not follow anyone's advice since this is not a s.13 (GG in Council) circumstance.

By no fault of Her own, Ms M Jean holds an Office that has been stripped of its independent advisors (the Privy Council) by Order in Council P.C. 1940-1121 .
Thereby, since 1940, control over the Privy Council (intended to supervise and contain the Legislative Order) has fallen into the hands of the Prime Minister.

Further, and again with all due respect, and by no fault of Her/their own, Ms Jean and most of Her predecessors since 1950 have been unfit for their Office, they were purposely chosen as recommendations to the Queen, by the then Prime Ministers knowing that they would be subservient to the office of Prime Minister.

This is the opposite of the intention of the British Crown-in-Council and the 1864-7 BNA Act framers.

I make these statements not to hurt Ms Jean personally or professionally and politically but to re-establish the as-written provisions of the BNA/Constitution 1867.

The current Minority/Coalition crisis will end up on the Governor General's desk.

Ms Jean must Stand Up to the self-serving individuals proffering advice to Her (particularly the elected ones) or, in my opinion, She must Stand Down - acknowledging that She is unequal to the challenges of the full, as-written, authority of the Highest Office in the land.

Ms Jean must tell Mr Harper to form an All-the-Talents Cabinet with members called from all the parties represented in the Lower House and to stipulate that this form of ministry will govern for the term set out in Mr Harper's Fixed Elections Date legislation, irrespective of who holds the office of Prime Minister and further stipulate that the Office of Clerk of the Privy Council will be returned to the control of the Governor General (simply by rescinding Order in Council P.C. 1040-1121).

I respectfully ask the Canadian people to endorse this proposed solution.

Every cloud has a silver lining

ELECT THE NEXT GOVERNOR GENERAL - Give Him/Her a REAL Mandate

May we hope that the silver lining of this Minority vs Coalition debacle will be that public attention can be focussed on the method of selecting the next person to be recommended to the Queen as holder of Canada's greatest office, our TRUE Executive Head & National Leader - the Governor General.

If the GovGen was atop the Canadian power totem, all this wrangling in the lowest order of gov't would be minor details in the running of the country - barely needing the attention of the press and/or our Constitutionally empowered Executive.The partisan 'leadership' of the biggest bunch of charlatans in the elected assembly WAS NEVER intended to run Canada.

My preference is for that person to be found by a popular election held simultaneous with every-other General Election, with the term of Office to start 365 days after the House returns (Since any Citizen could run, a single-transferable ballot system -asking voters for their 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc choices all at once - would be the only way to get even a 50% result).

IMHO only by electing the GG can we hope to have an Officeholder with the mandate to return our bastardized-by MacKenzie-King/too-much-PMO/PCO-power government system to the supremely-suitable and wonderfully-crafted, as-written format described in 1867. Perhaps you'd like to read the Plain Language Version of it

Order in Council PC 1940-1121 (allowed PMO to MERGE with PCO)

2011-12-19T14:03:00.001-05:00

Bank of Canada Says Additional Time Needed to Meet 2% Target in Some Cases

2011-11-09T14:01:00.000-05:00

Bank of Canada Says Additional Time Needed to Meet 2% Target in Some Cases

Bloomberg
By Greg Quinn - Nov 9, 2011 1:02 PM ET

The Bank of Canada said its 2 percent inflation target allows policy makers the flexibility to take extra time to meet their goal in situations such as a severe shock or economic slowdown.

Governor Mark Carney will keep using a horizon of 18 months to 24 months to bring inflation back to target in most cases, while using discretion when financial or economic conditions require otherwise, the Ottawa-based central bank said today.

....
Today’s Bank of Canada report gave three reasons for taking longer to meet its inflation goal -- persistent economic or financial shocks, responses to “financial excesses or credit crunches” and risks that create “a degree of uncertainty” to the economy.

The report also included an analysis on monetary policy and financial stability where it concluded that in “some exceptional circumstances” monetary policy may be an appropriate tool to support the financial system.

gobbelty-gook
....

Five Years (to do What?!!)

The bank had spent the last five years studying if the targeted inflation rate should be lower or if the level of the consumer price index should be the focus instead of the inflation rate. Both those options were rejected in today’s paper because research showing they may benefit the economy didn’t offset the risks they could introduce.

gobbelty-gook
.....

Additional Easing Programs to Push Yields Higher

2011-10-31T15:06:00.001-04:00

Gross: Additional Easing Programs to Push Yields Higher

Bloomberg
By Liz Capo McCormick - Oct 31, 2011 9:28 AM ET

Bill Gross, manager of the world’s biggest bond fund at Pacific Investment Management Co., said the additional easing programs hinted at by Federal Reserve officials will push yields on longer-term Treasuries higher.

“Sovereign monetary and fiscal policies, while generating undersized real growth, have managed to produce disproportionally large inflation,” Gross wrote in a monthly investment outlook posted on Newport Beach, California-based Pimco’s website today. “Developed economies -- the U.S. included -- have experienced 3 percent plus inflation in the midst of a New Normal economy. Portfolios should avoid longer dated issues where inflation premiums dominate performance.”

More quantitative easing suggested by Fed officials including Vice Chairman Janet Yellen is likely to push the central bank’s objective for inflation to above 2 percent, which will cause investors to demand higher yields on longer-term Treasuries, Gross wrote. Investors should buy “safe haven” maturities of under 10 years and in equity markets focus on dividend-producing stocks, Gross added.
Yellen and other officials have said the central bank should be prepared to do more to spur growth as policy makers prepared for a two-day meeting that starts tomorrow. Governor Daniel Tarullo and New York Fed President William C. Dudley said this month that additional stimulus may be needed. The central bank announced in September it would replace $400 billion of short-term debt with longer-term Treasuries to contain borrowing costs.

Bonds Beat Stocks

Fixed-income investments advanced 6.25 percent this year, almost triple the 2.18 percent rise in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index through last week, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch indexes. Debt markets are on track to return 7.63 percent this year, the most since 2002, the data show. Long-term government bonds have gained 11.5 percent a year on average over the past three decades, beating the 10.8 percent increase in the S&P 500, said Jim Bianco, president of Bianco Research in Chicago.

The shift to debt wasn’t anticipated by Gross, who as co- chief investment officer of Pimco runs the $242 billion Total Return Fund. Gross unloaded Treasuries in February before the rally, leading to returns of 2.55 percent this year in the fund, putting it in the bottom 22th percentile of similar funds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury note yield fell 10 basis points, or 0.10 percentage point, to 2.21 percent at 9:25 a.m. New York time, according to Bloomberg Bond Trader prices. The 30-year bond yields dropped 13 basis points to 3.25 percent.

New Normal

Pimco outlined the firm’s “new normal” scenario at its annual Secular Forum in May 2009 that set investment guidelines for the firm for the next three to five years. The forecast predicted that following the market collapse in 2008 the U.S. economy would grow at a below-average pace for the next several years as growth in the developed markets slows, unemployment stays elevated and the “heavy hand of government” would be evident in the markets.

U.S. government debt-market bets on inflation rose to a two-month high last week. The difference between yields on 10- year notes and Treasury Inflation Protected Securities, a gauge of expectations for consumer prices over the life of the debt, widened to 2.24 percentage points on Oct. 28, the most since Aug. 15. The so-called breakeven rate was at 2.14 percent today.

“With fiscal policy in most developed countries incredibly restrictive instead of stimulative, central banks have assumed the helm on their own -- but it has been a long and relatively futile watch,” Gross wrote. “Structural growth problems in developed economies cannot be solved by a magic penny or a magic trillion dollar bill.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Liz Capo McCormick in New York at emccormick7@bloomberg.net

Japan Intervention in Markets to Weaken Yen (See SwissFranc Peg Aug 12/11)

2011-10-31T12:11:00.001-04:00

Japan Intervention in Markets to Weaken Yen

Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) -- Richard Yetsenga, global head of foreign-exchange strategy at Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd., talks about Japan's decision to intervene in currency markets to weaken the yen. Yetsenga also discusses Europe's sovereign debt crisis, and economies in U.S. and Asia. He speaks
with Rishaad Salamat on Bloomberg Television's "On the Move Asia." (Source: Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/79187184/

see Swiss Franc Peg -Bloomberg Aug 11/2011 -posted here on 12th
http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011_08_12_archive.html

New type of (USA) bond ...appeal to investors concerned that the Fed’s pledge ...and other stimulus will spark inflation.

2011-10-24T10:37:00.001-04:00

Treasury Eyes First New Debt Type Since TIPS

By Liz Capo McCormick - Oct 24, 2011 7:26 AM ET

Bloomberg

The U.S., seeking to attract investors who might otherwise avoid Treasuries amid a $1.3 trillion budget deficit, is considering the sale of floating- rate notes in what would be its first new security since it began offering inflation-linked debt 14 years ago.

The Treasury Department said this month it asked Wall Street’s biggest bond dealers for recommendations on structuring securities with coupons that rise or fall with benchmark rates.

...snip

While the government’s interest in offering a new type of bond may signal that it doesn’t expect deficits to diminish anytime soon, the securities would likely appeal to investors concerned that the Federal Reserve’s pledge to keep the federal funds rate at a record low through mid-2013 and other stimulus will spark inflation.

...snip

Falling Yields

The Treasury has had little problem generating demand at its bond auctions even with the amount of marketable U.S. debt outstanding rising to $9.625 trillion from $4.339 trillion in mid-2007 and Standard & Poor’s cutting the U.S.’s credit rating on Aug. 5 to AA+ from AAA. Yields on 10-year notes fell to as low as 1.67 percent last month from 5.32 percent in mid-2007.

There is still a large group of investors who are spurning Treasuries, including Leon Cooperman, the chairman of hedge fund Omega Advisors Inc., who said last week during a presentation at the Value Investing Congress in New York that he “wouldn’t be caught dead owning a U.S. government bond.”

There are signs that foreign demand may be diminishing. Fed data show its holdings of Treasuries on behalf of central banks and institutional investors outside America plunged $76.5 billion in the seven weeks ended Oct. 12, the steepest drop since 2007, to $2.69 trillion.

“If rates go up it could cause problems for the government because they will have to pay a higher interest rate,” Campbell Harvey, a finance professor at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business in Durham, North Carolina, said in an interview on Oct. 19. He’s also a researcher for the National Bureau of Economic Research, which determines when recessions begin and end.

...snip

‘Convenient Product’

A floating-rate note whose coupon is reset at a rate that matches that of the six-month Treasury bill twice a year “would be a ‘convenient’ product” for which “demand will likely increase if rates are expected to rise,” TBAC wrote in its February presentation to the Treasury.

snip...

The notes “would very likely be snapped up by investors, as many now buy fixed-rate Treasuries and use the swaps market to convert them into floating-rate debt anyway, to hedge the risk exposure to changing interest rates,” Moorad Choudhry, the head of business treasury, global banking and markets at Royal Bank of Scotland Plc in London, said in an Oct. 18 interview.

snip...

Inflation, stagflation, interest and stuff

2011-10-12T10:43:00.001-04:00

Five Questions for Pimco’s Mihir Worah

By Ben Steverman - Oct 12, 2011 10:12 AM ET Bloomberg

The next 20 years will have higher inflation and slower growth than the last two decades, and investors need to be prepared, says Mihir Worah, a managing director at Pacific Investment Management Co.
Worah heads the Pimco Inflation Response Multi-Asset Strategy fund. Launched at the end of August, it combines several different ways to protect against inflation. Worah discussed the strategy with Bloomberg.com’s Ben Steverman. Edited excerpts of their conversation follow:

1. How worried should investors be about inflation?
As far as the next six months to a year, not worried. With the 9 percent unemployment rate and the global economy slowing down, there are not going to be a lot of inflationary pressures.

That said, the big picture in our opinion is fundamentally changing. Asia has moved from 20 years of exporting ever-lower prices to the West, to now -- through commodity prices, currencies and wages -- starting to export higher prices to the West. Also in the West, the trend of ever-higher productivity has come to a halt.

So the future has a slightly “stagflationary” smell to it. Not 1970s-style stagflation, with double-digit inflation, but lower growth and higher inflation than the last 20 years. Today’s environment just puts an exclamation mark on it: The U.S. economy is growing at about 1 percent, while inflation is running at 3.5 percent.

2. Why has inflation been so relatively high, and what can investors do about it?

Oil prices have come off the peak somewhat, but in March and April, during the Arab Spring, they went up significantly. Gasoline prices are higher today than when we started the year. The second driver of inflation has been the cost of shelter. As buying housing gets less attractive, there are more and more people renting. Rents are going up. The cost of shelter, or rent, in the U.S. is 30 to 35 percent of the inflation basket. Also, past weakness in the dollar and last year’s increase in cotton prices are feeding into higher clothing prices.

With all the volatility in the markets, everyone is very concerned with capital preservation but no one is focused on inflation. Sneaky, higher-than-expected inflation is another way of eroding your standard of living. It’s something people have to hedge themselves against or prepare themselves for.

Treasury-Inflation Protected Securities, or TIPS, should be the cornerstone of any inflation-hedging program. Their value is guaranteed by the government to go up one-for-one with inflation.

3. The yields on TIPS are pitifully low now, even with inflation creeping higher. What's going on?
Two years ago, 10-year TIPS gave you inflation plus 2 percent. That was very attractive. Today TIPS guarantee that you’ll keep up with inflation but don’t give you any more. You’re not getting any other return on your investment.

I view them as an insurance policy. They’re not your entire portfolio, nor are they going to be return generators. In the last year, TIPS have returned 7 percent. This year, TIPS have returned close to 10 percent. Going forward, I don’t think TIPS are going to give you those kind of returns, but you still need a little bit in your portfolio. If inflation really runs away, TIPS are one of the only things that will protect you.

At Pimco we’ve offered different inflation-hedging solutions. We’ve got a flagship commodity fund. A fund that invests in real estate investment trusts is a good inflation hedge in the U.S. because REITs have to pay out 90 percent of the rents they get in the form of dividends. As every developed-market central bank tries to depreciate their own currency in order to make their economies more competitive, gold starts getting more attractive as a hedge.

So we’ve had all these piecemeal solutions. We decided to come up with a fund that is a one-stop shop. It has a baseline allocation to all these different inflation hedging asset classes: TIPS, commodities, REITs, gold and emerging market currencies. It’s about 40 percent in TIPS and 15 percent each in each of these other asset classes. We will actively manage the mix, based on what we think would be the best hedge for inflation and the best return driver. (The no-load version of the Pimco Inflation Response Multi-Asset Strategy Fund [PDRMX] charges a management fee of 1.1 percent per year.)

4. Some see stocks as a pretty good inflation hedge. What’s your view?
It depends on the time period. Stocks are a good inflation hedge in an economy like we had in the 1990s with strong growth and modest inflation. But if you have hyperinflation, stocks are going to get crushed. So, if like the 1970s -- or like we saw for a couple months this year -- inflation is coming from higher and higher commodity prices, stocks might not be a great inflation hedge.

5. What are the risks of worrying too much about inflation?

Our expectation is a move from a disinflationary epoch to an inflationary epoch. Clearly there are a lot of minefields along the way and what’s happening in Europe is the most important one. You’re worrying about inflation too much if you put all your assets in inflation-hedging programs.

In general, most investors are underinvested in inflation hedges, because we’ve gone through 20 years of low inflation. Strategies such as these are volatile, so you’ve got to make sure that you’ve got the right allocation, whether it’s 5 percent or 10 percent of your broader portfolio.

Canada Best for Business --Forbes Magazine

2011-10-04T18:43:00.000-04:00

Kurt Badenhausen

10/03/2011 @ 6:01PM |17,094 views

The Best Countries For Business

During the run-up to every U.S. presidential election, countless Americans threaten to move to Canada if their preferred candidate does not emerge victorious. Of course, few follow through with a move north. Maybe it is time to reconsider.
Canada ranks No. 1 in our annual look at the Best Countries for Business. While the U.S. is paralyzed by fears of a double-dip recession and Europe struggles with sovereign debt issues, Canada’s economy has held up better than most. The $1.6 trillion economy is the ninth biggest in the world and grew 3.1% last year. It is expected to expand 2.4% in 2011, according to the Royal Bank of Canada.
Canada skirted the banking meltdown that plagued the U.S. and Europe. Banks like Royal Bank of Canada, Bank of Nova Scotia and Bank of Montreal avoided bailouts and were profitable during the financial crises that started in 2007. Canadian banks emerged from the tumult among the strongest in the world thanks to their conservative lending practices.
Canada is the only country that ranks in the top 20 in 10 metrics that we considered to determine the Best Countries for Business (we factored in 11 overall). It ranks in the top five for both investor protection as well as lack of red tape, which measures how easy it is to start a business.

Full List: The Best Countries For Business

Canada moves up from No. 4 in last year’s ranking thanks to its improved tax standing. It ranks ninth overall for tax burden compared to No. 23 in 2010. Credit a reformed tax structure with a Harmonized Sales Tax introduced in Ontario and British Columbia in 2010. The goal is to make Canadian businesses more competitive. Canada’s tax status also improved thanks to reduced corporate and employee tax rates.
Canada leans on the U.S. economy heavily: it’s the biggest oil supplier to Uncle Sam and three-quarters of its exports end up in the U.S. each year. Yet while U.S. unemployment has stayed above 9%, it’s only 7.3% in Canada compared to the 25-year average of 8.5%. The eurozone unemployment rate is 10%.
We determined the Best Countries for Business by looking at 11 different factors for 134 countries. We considered property rights, innovation, taxes, technology, corruption, freedom (personal, trade and monetary), red tape, investor protection and stock market performance.
Forbes leaned on research and published reports from the Central Intelligence Agency, Freedom House, Heritage Foundation, Property Rights Alliance, Transparency International, the World Bank and World Economic Forum to compile the rankings.
Denmark dropped from the top spot in 2010 to No. 5 this year as its relative monetary freedom declined as measured by the Heritage Foundation. Denmark’s stock market also fell 14%, which was the worst performance of any of our top 10 countries. Four other European countries in last year’s top 20 also dropped in the rankings, with Finland sliding to No. 13, the Netherlands to No. 15 Netherlands, Germany to No. 21 and Iceland to No. 23.
The U.S. ranked No. 10, down from No. 9 in 2010. The world’s largest economy at $14.7 trillion continues to be one of the most innovative, ranking sixth in patents per capita among all countries (No.7 overall Sweden ranks tops for innovation).
What hurts the U.S. is its heavy tax burden. This year it surpassed Japan to have the highest corporate tax rate among developed countries. The U.S. also gets dinged for a poor showing on monetary freedom as measured by the Heritage Foundation. Heritage gauges price stability and price controls and the U.S. ranks No. 50 out of 134 countries.
Bringing up the rear are three countries where the economies are smaller than $10 billion. No. 132 Burundi, No. 133 Zimbabwe and No. 134 Chad all fare poorly when it comes to trade and monetary freedom as well as innovation and technology. Chad has the highest GDP per capita of the three at $1,600, but scores last among all countries on both corruption and red tape.

Full List: The Best Countries For Business

Who should I vote for? (Oct 6/11 Ontario Election version)

2011-10-04T11:43:00.001-04:00

Two of my colleagues have asked the question "Who should I vote for, Edely?"

Answer was the same to both:

1) Decide if you want to vote "for" something (a person, a policy or a point of view/ideology) or "against" something.

2) I suggest the affirmative approach - pick something you "want" as an outcome, nevermind trying to vote "strategically", it requires too much anticipation of too many other people's actions and other variables.

3) Examine the Leadership - does one Party-spokesperson's message, content & tone- resonate with you as true and "what you'd say in the same situation"?
-if not, forget them (they might not get elected in their own riding anyway)

4) Examine the local candidates -does one of those person's message, content & tone PLUS their person (age, life experience, political/social/economic background, maturity, enthusiasm, practicality, verge, gusto, responsibility etc) - resonate with you as true and "what you'd say in the same situation"?

Does one local candidate seem "almost like you"?

5) Pick the person who YOU think will do what's best for YOU (and everyone like you).

6) If this makes sense - Pass this on.

Woodward -11 Nations of USA and Canada -THE REAL MAP

2011-10-03T09:42:00.000-04:00

Excellent 5-part-er from Bloomberg

excerpted from Colin Woodward's new book,

“American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America,” published Sept. 29

From #5 - Summary of Future possibilities

..."Another outside possibility is that, faced with a major crisis, the federation’s leaders will betray their oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the primary adhesive holding the Union together. In the midst of, say, a deadly pandemic or the simultaneous destruction of several cities by terrorists, a fearful public might condone the suspension of civil rights, or the dissolution of Congress. Some regional nations would be happy with the new order and others, deeply opposed. With the Constitution abandoned, the federation could well disintegrate, forming one or more confederations of like-minded regions."

...."Cross-Border Coalitions

"The situation might be more complicated within the often- divided Greater Appalachia or the nationally mixed states of Texas, California, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Arizona. It isn’t impossible to imagine some of the resulting coalitions extending into Canada or, in the case of El Norte, into Mexico.

Or perhaps the federation would simply reach accommodation over time as its component nations came to realize that the only issue on which they could find common ground was the need to free themselves from one another’s veto power. Perhaps they’d join together enough to pass laws and constitutional amendments granting more powers to the states and liquidating many of the functions of the central government. The U.S. might continue to exist, but its powers would be limited to national defense, foreign policy and the negotiation of interstate trade agreements. It would, in other words, resemble the European Union or the original... Articles of Confederation of 1781 (see Clause XI re Canada).

"If that were to happen, the states could be counted on to behave in accordance with their respective national heritages. The 11-nation format would be useful as a predictor of behavior. Yankee New Englanders might cooperate closely with one another, much as the Scandinavian countries do within Europe. Texans might finally assert their constitutional right (under the terms of their annexation to the U.S.) to split into as many as five individual states. Illinoisans might agree to divide downstate from Chicagoland. California might split into southern, northern and interior states.

The external borders of this retooled U.S. might remain in place, or perhaps some Canadian or Mexican provinces might apply for membership in the looser federation. Far stranger things have happened in history."

1
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-29/real-u-s-map-a-country-of-regions-part-1-commentary-by-colin-woodard.html

2
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-30/the-real-u-s-map-a-country-of-regions-part-2-colin-woodard.html

3
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-03/the-real-u-s-map-a-country-of-regions-part-3-colin-woodard.html

4
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-04/the-real-u-s-map-a-country-of-regions-part-4-colin-woodard.html

5
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-05/the-real-u-s-map-a-country-of-regions-part-5-colin-woodard.html

5 of my 15 minutes of fame" -- Russell Challenger's "Compliments to the Thief"

2011-09-28T17:38:00.001-04:00

Safe Haven (negative yield) --Read the "Hyperinflation Fears" section

2011-09-16T12:24:00.000-04:00

The Risks Lurking in "Safe Haven" Treasury Bonds

Bloomberg --By Lewis Braham - Sep 14, 2011

How's this for an investment opportunity: a guaranteed yield of 3.27 percent, with an enormous potential downside. As risky as that sounds, millions of investors are moving money into Treasury bonds as a "safe haven." In early September, the yield on the 30-year Treasury bond sank to a new low of 3.27 percent, while the 10-year note fell to 1.9 percent. If the inflation rate stays anywhere close to its current modest 3.6 percent pace, long-term investors will be guaranteed to lose money after factoring in inflation's toll.

And that's only scratching the surface of the risks.

Many savvy money managers are steering clear of the Treasury minefield. "I wouldn't lend money to anybody for 30 years at 3.2 percent, especially not the U.S. government," says Carl Kaufman, manager of the Osterweis Strategic Income Fund, which has delivered a peer-beating 7.3 percent annualized return over the past five years. Instead, Kaufman is loading up on short-term high-yield bonds such as those of discount retailer Dollar General, which yields in excess of 5 percent with a two-year maturity.

The risk Kaufman and other managers are worried about is something most bond investors haven't had to deal with since the 1970s -- the prospect of a sustained rise in interest rates. When rates go up, bond prices fall as their yields are less attractive compared with new bonds issued at the higher rate. The longer the term, or maturity, of the bond, the greater the interest rate risk, because investors are locking in yields for a longer period of time.

'Scary Ride'

With yields so low now, an inflationary shock of any sort would be devastating, as rates would spike in response. Ben Inker, director of asset allocation at Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo, a Boston money manager, calculated what the damages would be if, say, yields on Treasury bonds went up just three percentage points, driving prices down. The answer: a 23.5 percent loss for the 10-year Treasury and a 40.7 percent loss for the 30-year bond.

While no one expects a big jump in inflation in the near term, "I see the likelihood of an inflationary shock as a high probability," says Thomas Atteberry, manager of the FPA New Income Fund, which has never had a losing year since its 1984 inception. Atteberry expects inflation to pick up in the next three to five years.

It could come as an unpleasant surprise, as in 1974 when OPEC flexed its muscle and U.S. inflation topped 12 percent. It can also happen as a result of war. After Iraq invaded Kuwait, consumer prices rose at more than a 6 percent rate in the fall of 1990. Inflation also rises in less traumatic periods: It blipped above a 4 percent annual rate in the spring of 2006 and above 5 percent during the summer of 2008.

Add to that inflation rate an additional 'real rate' of interest, which investors typically demand, and you could be looking at 6 percent Treasury rates.

Inker's firm is well-known for its seven-year projections for asset classes, which have been very accurate. "Our expected return is that the 10-year Treasury note loses 1.3 percent a year after inflation," says Inker.

With the likely returns for Treasuries so low, Inker believes that emerging-market stocks are actually less risky than Treasuries for long-term buy-and-hold investors. Emerging-market stocks, which have sold off sharply in 2011, will be the best-performing sector, he predicts. Inker expects such stocks to produce annual inflation-adjusted returns of 6.5 percent. The downside is that they may be much more volatile in any given year.

"Emerging-market stocks now have higher dividend yields than 10-year Treasury bonds and their earnings are growing," says Inker. "Over 10 years, the odds of emerging markets losing to Treasuries are very, very low. But it's going to be a scary ride."

Hyperinflation Fears

Why are investors willing to put up with such low yields? While conservative investors own the bonds because of the guarantee of repayment and the liquidity of the Treasury market, many people buying Treasuries today aren't long-term investors. They're speculators and traders betting on a continued decline in America's fortunes.

"There's a decent likelihood that Treasuries will be the best place to invest in coming months, but I'd be very worried about them as a long-term investment," says Rob Arnott, who oversees some $80 billion of asset allocation funds and accounts at Research Affiliates in Newport Beach, Calif. "The scenario in which they do well is the Japan scenario in which deflation emerges. The scenario in which they do horribly is even a modest uptick in inflation."

Arnott isn't predicting just a modest uptick in inflation, however. Over the next 10 years, he thinks, there is a 50-50 chance the U.S. may enter a hyperinflationary environment like the 1970s when interest rates soared to the double digits. Because the U.S. national debt is so large, he predicts the Federal Reserve will try to inflate its way out of the problem by printing loads of dollars.

Higher inflation would debase the currency, making it easier for the U.S. to pay off its debt. Inflation increases the overall supply of dollars, without raising the amount owed. That makes the debt burden easier to pay. "The temptation to debase the currency and reduce the debt in that way will, politically, be too tempting to ignore," says Arnott.

So should investors rush out of Treasuries and into emerging markets? No, as developing nations remain volatile. Arnott thinks the U.S. is entering a double-dip recession and that emerging markets will fall in tandem. For many individual investors, he says, gradually adding to cash is a reasonable move -- albeit one that is so safe that it yields nothing. Except peace of mind.

(Lewis Braham is a Pittsburgh-based freelance writer.)

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Suzanne Woolley at swoolley2@bloomberg.net

ALSO vitally informative

GOLD and the Future

Martin A Armstrong

Swiss Decision: Exchange Rate Stability or Inflation Rate Stability

2011-09-14T07:41:00.000-04:00

Swiss Inflation Specter Lurks in SNB Sales

excerpts
While central banks around the globe are seeking to ward off a recession through additional stimulus or rate cuts, the franc’s ascent forced Swiss policy makers into measures that sparked a decade of surging inflation when last introduced in the 1970s.

“The SNB is creating an extremely high inflation potential,” said Thorsten Polleit, an economist at Barclays Capital in Frankfurt. “They create money and those obtaining these newly created funds will spend at least part of it on real estate, shares, bonds and consumer goods.”

By Klaus Wille - Sep 14, 2011

Swiss central bank President Philipp Hildebrand’s pledge to protect the economy with unlimited currency purchases may come at a higher cost than billions of francs: faster inflation.

Hildebrand’s decision risks flooding the financial system with cash and undermining the Swiss National Bank’s job of delivering price stability, said economists at Credit Suisse Group AG and Barclays Capital.

While central banks around the globe are seeking to ward off a recession through additional stimulus or rate cuts, the franc’s ascent forced Swiss policy makers into measures that sparked a decade of surging inflation when last introduced in the 1970s.

“You can’t have your cake and eat it,” said Claude Maurer, an economist at Credit Suisse in Zurich. “You can either pursue a ceiling on the exchange rate or you can fight price pressures. The SNB apparently sees medium-term inflation threats as the lesser of two evils.”

The Zurich-based central bank said on Sept. 6 it would purchase “unlimited quantities” of foreign currencies to defend a franc ceiling of 1.20 versus the euro “with the utmost determination.” The currency had previously appreciated 13 percent against the euro this year to a record 1.0075 on Aug. 9, chocking exports such as of Swatch Group AG watches.

Alexandre Ziegler, an assistant professor of finance at the University of Zurich, said inflation will breach the SNB’s 2 percent limit within the next three years even if the economy fails to grow. Consumer prices rose 0.2 percent in August from a year ago.

‘Inflation Potential’

The Swiss currency had been pushed higher on investor concern that European governments may be unable to contain the region’s debt crisis and prevent Greece from defaulting. It has remained above 1.20 versus the euro since the SNB imposed the cap, trading at 1.2037 at 11:30 a.m. in Zurich today.

“The SNB is creating an extremely high inflation potential,” said Thorsten Polleit, an economist at Barclays Capital in Frankfurt. “They create money and those obtaining these newly created funds will spend at least part of it on real estate, shares, bonds and consumer goods.”

To defend their ceiling, the SNB is taking on the $4 trillion-a-day foreign-exchange market. Before imposing the cap, the central bank’s foreign-currency holdings jumped to a record 253.4 billion francs ($305.1 billion) at the end of August, partly on foreign-exchange swaps to weaken the franc. That’s about half of Swiss gross domestic product.

Memories of 1978

The ceiling “is credible as long as the authorities are prepared to accept the liquidity implications of this potentially very large intervention,” said Dirk Schumacher and Adrian Paul, economists at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., in an e- mailed note. The policy “can potentially be maintained until inflationary pressures materialize.”

When used in 1978 to stem franc gains against the Deutsche mark, Swiss inflation breached the central bank’s ceiling in 12 of the following 20 years. Annual price growth reached 7.5 percent by mid-1981 after averaging 1 percent in 1978.

Juerg Iseli, 62, who experienced that time as chief executive officer of Swiss components maker Micronor AG, said it was a “difficult” period with some companies having “big problems” as a result of the SNB’s intervention policy.
“First the strong franc and then inflation,” Iseli said in a telephone interview. “Companies lost competitiveness because rising inflation forced them to increase prices.”

‘Challenging Journey’

The SNB also risks paving the way for a real-estate bubble as seen in the 1980s, according to Ziegler. In the four years after the central bank last introduced a currency cap, costs of rental apartments jumped 52 percent, with prices of single- family homes surging 37 percent, he said.

Swiss lawmakers, during a debate in Bern today, signaled concern that the SNB’s currency policy may boost price threats.

“I don’t want the country to face inflation rates last seen in the 1980s,” said Maximilian Reimann, a member of the upper house of parliament. “I’m not pessimistic by nature but the worst case can’t be totally excluded. The dangerous inflation vulture is already circling.”

The SNB already started flooding money markets with liquidity when cutting borrowing costs to zero last month. Swiss banks’ so-called sight deposits, an indication of potential future bank lending, ballooned to 187.7 billion francs on Sept. 9, up more than six times from Aug. 5.

Hildebrand has said that policy makers have started “a challenging journey” with possible “very high” costs.

Franc Action

“The SNB has made a conscious decision,” said David Kohl, deputy chief economist at Julius Baer Group in Frankfurt. “They are putting more emphasis on the exchange rate than on inflation.”

Hildebrand, 48, has been trying to get the franc under control since taking the SNB’s helm last year, while seeking ways to maintain price stability. A 15-month campaign to sell the franc was abandoned in June 2010 after price threats mounted along with accelerating economic growth.

Now, a cooling economy and inflation near zero are giving policy makers room to boost liquidity.
“The SNB has launched the ultimate weapon,” said Alexander Koch, an economist at UniCredit Group in Munich. “The subdued inflation outlook currently leaves the door wide open for massive monetary expansion.”

Swiss Slowdown

The franc’s ascent has hurt some of the country’s largest companies. Holcim AG, the world’s second-biggest cement maker, said on Aug. 18 that currency effects shaved 203 million francs off operating profit in the second quarter. A slump in exports was the main reason why Swiss economic growth slowed to 0.4 percent in the second quarter, the weakest since the economy emerged from a recession in 2009.

The SNB will publish its latest economic projections tomorrow, when policy makers meet for their quarterly rate assessment. The central bank will probably keep borrowing costs at zero, according to all 21 economists in a Bloomberg News survey. It will announce its decision at 9:30 a.m. in Zurich.

While the SNB’s toolbox contained measures such as a temporary franc peg to the euro, Hildebrand opted for a policy that allowed the SNB to maintain its rate-setting independence. By imposing a ceiling against the euro, the central bank went a step further than last year, when policy makers intervened over 15 months without setting a target.

Israel to Hong Kong
Policy makers had been under increasing pressure to act after lawmakers, facing October general elections, joined executives in calling on the SNB to step up efforts to weaken the currency. All five ruling-coalition parties at a Bern meeting on Sept. 2 pledged their support to the central bank.

“Elections mean that preventing a recession and job cuts in the short term have become more important than possible inflation threats down the road,” said Daniel Kalt, an economist at UBS AG in Zurich. “We’ll only see in two or three years whether it was the right decision.”

Other central banks have already seen surging prices in the wake of efforts to weaken their currencies. The Bank of Israel’s currency purchases have helped keep inflation above the government’s 1 percent to 3 percent range since January. In Hong Kong, the local dollar’s peg to the greenback has left the economy exposed to surging consumer-price growth.

While SNB policy makers opted to maintain their independence over tying the franc to the euro, Ulrich Kohli, the bank’s former chief economist, said it will be “very difficult” to withdraw liquidity.

“The SNB’s intervention policy has a range of consequences that should be taken seriously,” he said in a telephone interview. “The liquidity will remain in the system for a very long period of time.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Klaus Wille in Zurich at kwille@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Craig Stirling at cstirling1@bloomberg.net

Uncaged Inflation Is a Beast That’s Easy to Free, Hard to Control: Bloomberg

2011-09-02T07:13:00.001-04:00

Uncaged Inflation Is a Beast That’s Easy to Free, Hard to Control: View

Illustration by Bloomberg View

By the Editors Sep 1, 2011 8:00 PM ET

A bit of inflation could help grease the wheels, by eroding the value of debt and debt-service payments.

Inflation? No, thank you.

We just endured and survived a major political crisis over the possibility that the U.S. government might default on its debts. Most people -- other than a few high-stakes poker players on the right wing of the Republican Party -- agreed that this would be a terrible thing. But now, a growing number of voices, mainly on the left wing of the Democratic Party but also in the Federal Reserve, are calling for what is in effect default in slow motion. It goes by the name of inflation.

Inflation decreases the value of debts, like the $14 trillion owed by the federal government to lenders such as the government of China (and a lot of ordinary American savers, too), and it increases the value of assets, like houses. Thus it helps all debtors, from the federal government to individual homeowners who can’t pay their mortgages. Inflation has been running at an average of 2.4 percent over the past decade. After a couple of years of, say, 6 percent inflation, that $14 trillion would be worth closer to $12 trillion in current dollars. A $400,000 mortgage would be worth about $350,000.

The U.S. government is going to be trying a tricky maneuver over the next couple of years. First, it wants to give the still-sickly economy another kick in the pants. That requires a larger federal deficit -- not as an unfortunate side effect, but because that’s how a stimulus works. Then, the government must perform a U-turn and concentrate on seriously reducing the deficit for our long-term economic health. A bit of inflation could help grease the wheels, by eroding the value of debt and debt-service payments.

full Bloomberg article

see also

March 10, 2010 The 4% Solution - the IMF's Rethinking on Inflation

March 12, 2010 4% Solution -Part 2 -Inflation Eroding China Deposits Feeds Asset Pressure

Tuesday, October 19, 2010 Corcoran: Stoking the Great Reflation

"Royal" -restored to Military - how about the governance system?

2011-08-16T08:04:00.002-04:00

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Don't you wish the Governor General & Commander-in-Chief had had the public-mandate to step in and stop (or reserve for a National Referendum) some of the other unsustainable,and/or blatantly political and/or unCanadian decisions that rocked the fabric of this country since 1965?

There is no "formula" for selecting the person to be recommended to the Monarch as the GG - let's create an election system and put an end to the "Friendly Dictatorship"(Jeffrey Simpson) running Canada.

Dear Ed,

Hooray! "Royal" will be restored to the names of our Navy & Air Force .... another mistake of our Libertine P.M.'s regime is corrected!

Now, let's go all the way - Restore the "Vice Regal" Office to its proper place as "Benign Autocrat"/supervisor of the gov't/cabinet-of-the-day (and, since 1947's Letters Patent as the Commander-in-Chief in and over Canada).

How? Elected the Governor General!

The GG (see Executive Power Part III ss9-16 BNA 1867, representing the Monarch) has a veto over every Bill and action of the Legislative Power ( Part IV, ss 17-57).

As described in s. vs s13, our Governor General, as an individual, can simply withhold Royal Assent or Reserve any Bill (s.55) for further consideration by HRH (in Canada She's no longer "in Council" since 1982).

By electing the GG (at-large, every other General ConFederal Election, with a term commencing 365 days after return of Writs) we would give a mandate to actually use the double-checking powers crafted by the Fathers of Confederation as integral parts of the "seamless web" that is the BNA 1867.

They saw in 1867 (as we all can see now) how a republic can "lose itself" to self-interest, nationalism/jingoism, partisan politics, zeal-for-re-election, militarism and abuse of the fisc to buy votes from market-segments.

Our Upper House's purpose was lost to some of these frailties (plus inflation because the Senate's disqualifying/qualifying criteria for net-worth & property-ownership were never revised from $4,000 - do the math)

The Senate was intended a the "first-check" on the Democratic Element and the Executive ( GG & Privy Council) were devised as the second-check, with the Monarch-in-Council as ultimate arbiter of the wisdom/folly of any Canadian measure.

Oh yes, that was then and this is now .... but the Constitution/BNA 1867 still reads the same way .... we're just not following its as-written, as-intended provisions.

Canada, I salute you & challenge you,

Whose "Dominion" is Canada in the 21st Century?

rce

PS There's also a Provincial Disallowance Power (s.90) the GG holds "in Council" with the Executive Power's Privy Council. As another restorative step we can rescind Order in Council 1940-1121 (scroll to text at bottom), a wartime, emergency measure of Wm L.M. King that merged the PMO with the Privy Council Office by changing the Clerk's job-description and appointing Mr King's, existing Principal Secretary to the "new", "expanded", anti-constitutional position.

Swiss Franc Peg to Euro a `Ridiculous Notion'

2011-08-12T12:06:00.000-04:00

Swiss Franc Peg to Euro a `Ridiculous Notion'

Aug. 11 (Bloomberg) -- David Bloom, global head of currency strategy at HSBC Holdings Plc, talks about the Swiss National Bank's policy proposals to stem the currency's record-breaking rally. He speaks with Andrea Catherwood on Bloomberg Television's "Last Word." (Source: Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/73844098/

Swiss franc has gained 31 percent versus the euro - Policy Options and unintended circumstances

2011-08-11T05:47:00.000-04:00

Swiss Franc Falls as SNB Sees Possible Euro Peg

By Klaus Wille and Paul Verschuur - Aug 11, 2011 4:56 AM ET

The franc weakened after Swiss central bank Vice President Thomas Jordan said a temporary peg of the franc is part of the bank’s toolbox, as policy makers struggle to stem a record-breaking rally.

“Any temporary measures to influence the exchange rate are permissible under our mandate as long as these are consistent with long-term price stability,” Jordan said in an interview with Tages-Anzeiger newspaper published today, when asked about a temporary peg of the franc. Swiss National Bank spokesman Walter Meier confirmed the remarks.

The comments highlight the scale of the crisis engulfing the Swiss economy as policy makers seek measures to fight off investors piling into the franc, a haven in times of crisis. While President Philipp Hildebrand has signaled the central bank is unwilling to give up its sovereignty, some economists have said the franc’s surge toward euro parity is adding pressure on the SNB to consider a peg for the first time since the Bretton Woods currency system was abandoned in 1973.

“Normally, we would have argued this could never happen,” said Ursina Kubli, an economist at Bank Sarasin in Zurich. “It would be a very drastic measure but now it’s becoming more and more realistic.”

Surprise Cut

The franc traded at 1.0515 versus the euro at 10:54 a.m. in Zurich after rising as high as 1.0257 earlier today. It reached a record 1.0075 on Aug. 9. Against the dollar, the currency traded at 73.81 centimes, down 1.6 percent.

The franc has gained 31 percent versus the euro over the past year, reflecting investor concern that the euro region’s fiscal crisis may continue to worsen. While the SNB boosted liquidity on the money market and earlier this month unexpectedly trimmed borrowing costs to zero, the currency continued to appreciate, choking economic growth and exports.

Jordan didn’t say whether the SNB currently considers a currency peg. Hildebrand said earlier this month that “a fixed and permanent peg of the franc to the euro isn’t compatible with our constitutional and legal mandate to conduct an independent monetary and exchange rate policy.”

Independent Policy

“It’s certainly not the easiest measure to introduce neither in political nor legal terms,” SNB Governing Board member Jean-Pierre Danthine told Le Temps newspaper in an interview published today. The SNB’s mandate is “to conduct an independent monetary policy.”

With exports accounting for about half of gross domestic product, the Swiss economy is vulnerable to an appreciating franc. Nestle SA (NESN), the world’s largest food company based in Vevey, Switzerland, said yesterday the franc’s strength stripped 14 percentage points off its first-half sales growth.
Bank Sarasin’s Kubli said the franc’s surge could prompt companies to shift production sites abroad to help protect earnings and avoid “repeated exchange-rate shocks.”

“For a lot of exporters, it becomes impossible to remain competitive,” she said. “People know that if there are any turbulences, the franc appreciates as a result. That could be enough of a reason for companies to leave.”

The SNB said on Aug. 3 that policy makers are “keeping a close watch” on currency developments. The franc’s surge “has accelerated sharply” over past weeks and the “outlook for the Swiss economy has deteriorated substantially,” it said.

‘Right Time’

The central bank boosted the supply of liquidity to the money market yesterday, expanding banks’ sight deposits to 120 billion francs ($163 billion) from 80 billion francs.

“We are able to increase liquidity even further,” Jordan said. “We are also considering a range of other monetary-policy measures and we’ll act as soon as we’re convinced that it’s the right time,” he said without elaborating.

George Magnus, senior economic adviser to UBS AG in London, said he “can’t see any merit” in a franc peg. “Any form of pegging structure actually gives them obligations to intervene and perhaps even on a daily basis and I’m not sure that’s something they would want,” he said. “It doesn’t mean that the franc won’t be subject to speculative pressure, which would still oblige them to intervene.”

Jordan also said he considers the franc “massively overvalued” against both the dollar and the euro. The central bank ended attempts to weaken the franc through purchases of foreign currencies in mid-June 2010.

The measure sparked a record loss of $21 billion last year.

The SNB will hold its next quarterly meeting on Sept. 15.

To contact the reporters on this story: Klaus Wille in Zurich at kwille@bloomberg.net; Paul Verschuur in Zurich at pverschuur@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Craig Stirling at cstirling1@bloomberg.net

2% Inflation Means Prices Increase 25% in 12yrs - Guaranteed!

2011-07-20T08:39:00.001-04:00

The Rule of 72 - divide your rate of return (in this case, a discount rate) into 72 to get the # of years that it will take to double (halve) your original principal at that constant rate

1	2	3	4	5	6
100	102	104.04	106.1208	108.2432	110.4081

7	8	9	10	11	12
112.6162	114.8686	117.1659	119.5093	121.8994	124.3374

13	14	15	16	17	18
126.8242	129.3607	131.9479	134.5868	137.2786	140.0241

19	20	21	22	23	24
142.8246	145.6811	148.5947	151.5666	154.598	157.6899

25	26	27	28	29	30
160.8437	164.0606	167.3418	170.6886	174.1024	177.5845

31	32	33	34	35	36
181.1362	184.7589	188.4541	192.2231	196.0676	199.989

So .....

If we maintain a Bank of Canada sanctioned 2% inflation
-- the debts of all of us will diminish by 25% in just 12(+) yrs

That coupled with wages rising by COLA (remember that from 1970's)
the "whole problem" will just disappear

Who's on "constitutional thin ice"!

2011-06-03T17:05:00.002-04:00

Dear Professor & Ottawa Citizen,

RE: Harper is headed for constitutional thin ice

Thank you for the summary of purposely-perpetuated dis-information and commonly-held misconceptions regarding the Senate of Canada. Unfortunately it's based on mostly-wrong premises and interpretations, save the 7-50 amendment aspects.

If your readers can grasp what is "true" in this letter, "what never made sense in their own minds" or "what never was successfully explained" then perhaps we all will eventually thank Mr Harper for re-introducing discussion on the priority, hierarchy, purpose and structure of the Superior House within our Constitutional-Monarchy's Legislative power.

As an ordinary Canadian who has "translated the BNA/Constitution Act 1867 into Plain Language", I hope to offer the as-written text and a plain-as-the-nose-on-your-face accurate interpretation of our foundational document's clauses re: the Upper House, as a contrast to the accepted-but-incorrect views published on June 3/11.

My hope is to help stimulate a debate by other ordinary Canadians on how we were able to be led so far off the 'as-written and still-valid' track by our leaders and the law/education professional class.

Yes, Prof Mckenna is correct - this whole 2011 Senate Re-form exercise is a sham -- the "7/50" s.38(1) amending formula prevails.

The Rt Hon PM is just waving the Reform's "The West Wants In (or else)" flag for/at the faithful old timers back home, albeit fluttering it disdainfully and with no hope for success.
--and of course, he's using it as a distraction/diversion-of-attention!

The question remains, if Peter McKenna is wrong, but, everybody THINKS he's right ..... DOES ANYONE know what the BNA/Constitution actually says on the matter?

Further and far more important, if the de jure BNA text describes a situation far-different from the de facto - what prevails? (rhetorical)

If we're not following the "as-written text" .... what 'rules of engagement' ARE we following?

NB It's similar in principle to the UK .... that means it IS different!

A few specifics.

1) Originally, one of the primary functions of the Senate was to represent the interests of the provinces or the regions in Ottawa.

No. The purpose of Upper House styled Senate was to be a House of Lords in a land with no Lords.

It is based on the hierarchical structure of the Constitutional Act of 1791 (Crown-in-Council, Governor, Executive Council, Legislative Council, Legislative Assembly). see attached Evolution of Governance Chart

The Senate Members' Property-ownership & Net-Worth disqualifications of s.31, qualifications of s.23 and their special oath in the Fifth Schedule clearly show the office was to be filled with what we'd now call "Taxpayers" - no income tax existed in 1867, just property tax, excise & customs revenue.

The Lower house was for the Plebeians, the Upper House for the Patricians - the Senate was for the "Upper Class" to be selected equally from the 3 (now 4) 'Divisions' (now regions)

It's the ONLY office in Canada with a Property-ownership & Net-Worth prerequisite - lost to inflation .... $4,000 just ain't what it used to be. Learned folks say it should be 60x ($240,000) or 80x ($320,000) - not a stupendously high threshold ... but remember, it is a "net" amount.

2) Other premiers, like Darrell Dexter of Nova Scotia and Dalton McGuinty of Ontario, have supported the outright abolition of the Senate.

Foolish drivel -- 7/50 amendment again.

These Premiers too, lack understanding of the true purpose of the Senate (they too think the Upper House reps the Provinces vis a vis representing the "taxpaying class") and therefore fear that the Senate could undermine their position as 'elected-monarch' of their sorta-sovereign fiefdoms. That's what the ss.91-92 (plus 92a thru 95) Distribution of Legislative Powers PART IV is all about.

HOWEVER, quite separately, Mr Layton objects because he's a Unionist/Corporatist, social-democrat. How can his ilk (representing the plebes) "take over" if a permanent, wealth-based, super-structure exists above the Lower House of assembly?

3) There are other potential problems: can you have an elected Senate without a corresponding increase in powers and responsibilities for that body (or acting authoritatively with its traditional powers)?

The Power of the Senate as a hierarchical, senior-partner in the Legislative Power triumvirate s.17 is clear - it's mandate and place within the "power-sharing agreement" has simply become obscured by time, nescience and the patronage appointments described by Professor McKenna - appointments (of "unqualified-if-inflation-adjusted" hacks) that were intended to control the subsequent votes/ loyalty of the grateful new Upper House members.

4) But if you enhance the powers of Senators, which chamber of Parliament would take precedence when the inevitable legislative stalemate occurs?

Remember the GST Senators? s.26 allows the s.12 Governor General (i.e. NOT the s.13 Governor General In Council) to appoint more Upper Class/ Patricians to break the tie. - Wonderfully prescient those 1867 Charlottetown/Quebec/London folks!

5) send the proposed legislation to the Supreme Court as a reference matter to test its constitutionality. That way, any potential provincial blowback could be cut off at the knees -presuming, of course, that the court rules in favour of the federal government's unilateralism.

No question of Constitutionality ... it's just not being followed -- I encourage the reference case and look forward to the (unexpected) blowback!

6) So expect the governing Conservatives to go fullsteam ahead with Senate reform and pay little heed to constitutional challenges

Expect nothing but self-aggrandizement. On the PM's part, on the part of tenured and scholarly constitutional "legal experts" (think how much of their writing and pontificating they'd have to "undo"), the political backroom-player's part and even the Supreme Court's members' part (how much "wrong" they've allowed by avoiding the issue).

But now you know. You now know you've been deceived for your whole lifetime by every political science writer, teacher, prof, friend who has ever explained to you the Canadian Governance system

The Senate IS screwed up, but the real problem is with a neutered Governor General (widely-considered just another anachronism) and His/Her subsumed/stolen stable of appointed-for-life, independent advisors -- the Queen's Privy Council for Canada!!

The pivotal point EVERYONE'S missing is the usurpation of the CLEARLY superior Executive Power (ss.9-16) by the Legislative Power's Lower House's 50%+1 majority (with less than 40% support) Gang-Leader's office - ask me about Wm L M King's Order in Council P.C. 1940-1121 that accomplished this manoeuvre under cover of war while their was no GG!

With hope,

rce

Will Canada lose too much sovereignty if ....

2011-05-27T09:58:00.002-04:00

QUESTION OF THE DAY and of our future

Will Canada lose too much sovereignty if it creates a coordinated security perimeter with the U.S.?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside-politics-blog/2011/05/question-of-the-day-364.html

A: YES.

Sovereignty

We do not cherish our sovereignty - we take it for granted.

Initially as 'favourite son' under commonwealth umbrella and now 'little brother' under the USA.

And now as "youngest son of a wealthy family, with a sensitive nature", unsure of who we are, what we want, what we don't want and without any attention to the dierction we are being "led" and "by who" and not too attentive to any of it.

My opinion is that we (me the greatest) are spoiled brats.

Constantly relying on bailouts and second-chances from "our elders" when we mess up or chicken out or 'can't be bother just now"

AND are blessed with such a plethora of wealths that the money keeps coming to bail us out.

What SOVEREIGNTY do we want to keep/protect/conserve?

-The Crown in Right of Canada? and the whole 4-level hierarchy of powersharing and checks & balances?

ie the masterfully-crafted written BNA/Constitutional system that is not being followed?

-One of the Biggest land-masses on the Map? (sparesely-populated)

-French-British history & heritage? (no longer taught)

-Judeo-Christian-Judea moral tradition?

-Freedom to live, move, talk, work, save, give, marry, believe etc without much restriction (unless you do something really dumb/selfish)

-Great mineral and natural wealth - sold off at bargain prices to speculators, temporary-employers/exploiters and/or foreign financiers?

-Judicial system -packed by patronage and ideology?

-Education system - filled with Fabians, Syndicalists, Corporatists and failed-artists?

-Canadian banking and monetary systems?

-Crazy-quilt jurisdictional system of blatantly UNequalities demanding to be treated equally?

-Cray-quilt cross-subsidization of just about everything?

-High Taxes that cover the cost of (abused by everyone) Healthcare (that's dying a death of a thousand cuts)

-Skilled (but small), poorly-equipped Army, Navy & Air Force?

-Reputation (from Suez .... long time ago) as Honest Broker in Int'l affairs?

MILITARY Self-Defense

What would happen if "our enemy" attack Canada ... perhaps enroute to the USA or perhaps for our known & unknown mineral wealth.

NATO will not help us - they'll be busy in Europe

The UN will not help us because "the enemy" will hold a veto on the Security Council.

The USA's Manifest Destiny thinking will lead to assistance from them .... but likely with a "tit or tat" clause or two.

The USA WILL help us -as a buffer zone in their own defense- but they'll really be helping themselves.

Lose Sovereignty

We have never been able to police our borders (that's why the UK pulled out and the 1867 Confederation was devised).

-Shall we beef up our military? -impossibly expensive

-Sub-contract to the USA as mercenary soldiers to protect us?

-Join an alliance with the USA where they pay the bulk of the project and we give them base stations and permissions for pan-Canadian surveillance ?

-Join a defense/repulse/pre-emptive joint-venture with the USA where we pay 35-45-55% of the cost?(and get a comensurate proportion of the military-industrial work)

-Just muddle along and hope no enemy appears, no enemy infiltrates, no enemy attacks Canada AND THAT no enemy of the USA uses us as a jumping-off point?

Lose too much

We can only lose, will only lose and will lose "too much" if we do nothing.

Or if we make the "wrong" read "expedient" choice.

Who is a) our enemy, b) our friend always, c) our friend-if-convenient, d) our enemy's friend and d) our enemy's enemy

please add your thoughts to comments

The Future of Canada in the World - 'Model state' or mushy-middle Power that flaps with the wind

please add your thoughts to comments

Neo-Con? Neo-Reform? Neo-Suckers -- Same anti-legal system, same result.

2011-05-19T08:49:00.004-04:00

Executive Summary

...don't blame the Rt Hon Mr Harper, he's just blithely following the anti-legal footsteps in the snow of Messers King, Trudeau, Mulroney & Chretien.

If the government is not following the Constitution .... what rules ARE they following?

Mr Stinson & Editors,

Good stuff in Harper plays Canadians for suckers!

I will be a little bit gentler on dear ol' Firewall Steve, more akin to the approach taken by Mr Corcoran in The government is too big, not the Cabinet - don't damn the sinner, damn the sin!

The as-written Constitution has been raped and pillaged (right under our noses) and the whole as-written system of checks and balances has become bastardized into non-effect - just read the "in-Council Community's" bafflegab blatherings on Ministerial Responsibility as a sample of self-serving dis-information.

So don't blame the Rt Hon Mr Harper, he's just blithely following the anti-legal footsteps in the snow of Messers King, Trudeau, Mulroney & Chretien.

Our hugely-overweight governance system is a function of two things - that every "ordinary Canadian" takes as given:

1) the government-in-the-Commons, created by an election, has a mandate to "manage" the Canadian economy, its industries, assets, treasury, its people, its currency, its communications & transportation systems ....in anyway it (an incumbent-seeking-re-election) sees fit;

2) the government-in-the-commons, created by an election, soon becomes as self-serving and arrogrant as "da bums" we just "threw out" for the same bad behaviour.

The quintessential fact that is widely-unknown (or purposely ignored) is that this same government-in-the-commons, created by an election is but the lowest "link" in a hierarchical 4-level, "chain of command" with elegant checks and balances, that is eminently suitable for today's Canada. (NB 3 small non-constitutional changes ARE required see below)

Huh?

Canada now & forever has been a constitutionally-limited Monarchy .... not a democracy - although we have a "democratic element" at the bottom of our foundational "power-sharing agreement".

Every official and elected representative is a "steward" of the Crown, who swears loyalty to the Crown, whose authority flows from the Crown, and who is ONLY accountable to the Crown (except when they need their 'contract' renewed by Jean/Carol Canuck and they pretend otherwise, in the oft-successful game of fooling enough of us to stay on the pension/power trip).

So the real question becomes -in 2011, what/who is the "Crown"?

Surely .... after all the fiddling with the Statute of Westminster of 1931, Letters Patent in 1947, Canadian Citizenship, partial-Patriation in 1982 (see EndNote 80), Charter of conditional-Rights and limits-to-Freedoms ... that the "Crown" has been "re-defined" or "re-formed" or modernized or "something"? .... or is the Crown still "legally" what it was in 1867?

Well, if HRH is the Boss ... why doesn't She stop some of the stupid stuff our trying-to-stay-in-office buffoons do? Why doesn't She exercise the still-existing Disallowance power (ss.56 + 90) that Mr Trudeau was complaining about in his opposition to Charlottetown speeches in 1992?

And if the Governor General is the "delegate/representation" of the Monarch's Canadian "sovereignty" why doesn't s/he Reserve a Bill or two, or Withhold Assent on a particularly odious patronage/payoff program when it's legislated into being?

Mr Trudeau challenged Mr Mulroney to also address this power of Reservation (ss. 55& 57 +90) at the same time!

And if the GG is the "legal" top of the totem pole, why has the GG's institutional-memory of independent advisors (s.11) been stripped from its place in the (superior) Executive Power and been allowed to continue (only since 1940 --see pdf at bottom of link) in the control of the (constitutionally-inferior) Legislative Power's kingpin-of-the day?

Never mind that the Kingpin is wielding all this power with as little as a 50%+1 majority in a House whose 'confidence' s/he controls with a mandate from ~40% of the electorate!

Further, the Upper House, styled "the Senate" is superior to the "Lower" House. It's the only office in Canada with a Property-ownership & Net Worth qualifications/disqualifications ss28+31 AND a special Oath Schedule 5 specifically banning 'collusively or colourably' obtaining those qualifications, but blatant patronage appointments & inflation ($4000 qualification has never been adjusted-for-inflation s/be ~$240-$320,000) have allowed the Plebes'-representatives to paint the Patricians-representatives into a corner via (social)"democratic demagoguery".

Where is this all "written down"? The BNA/Constitution Acts 1867-as amended (annotated Plain Language Version)

Yes, the Constitution --it's NOT about Quebec, it's about you!!

No need to take my word for it --read it!

There, in plain text, you discover "what's gone wrong that you can't quite put your finger on" and with a little poking around, you can discover how "your sovereignty" has been "kidnapped and locked in a tower" by the behind-the-barricades 'dogs of war' who want to keep "your inheritance" for themselves.

If the government is not following the Constitution .... what rules ARE they following?

Oh yes, the 3 small changes .... Rescind Order in Council P.C. 1940-1121, adjust the Senate's $4,000 qualifications for inflation & select our recommendation for GG by at-large election.

Simple(ton) Majority of 50%+1 "ain't" democracy either

2011-05-18T08:25:00.001-04:00

Why Vancouver prices are "going nuts"

2011-05-17T08:04:00.001-04:00

By Hui-yong Yu and Christopher Donville

Chinese Spreading Wealth Make Vancouver Homes Pricier Than NYC

May 17 (Bloomberg) -- Vancouver’s Royal Pacific Realty had such a surge of business during the first two weeks of February that agents and assistants worked day and night shifts to find homes for Chinese buyers visiting during the Lunar New Year.
“It was unprecedented,” said Royal Pacific Chief Executive Officer David Choi. “I called them sleepwalkers.”

Sales of detached homes, townhouses and condominiums in metropolitan Vancouver jumped 70 percent in February from January, to 3,097 units from 1,819, and were up 25 percent from a year earlier, according to the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver. In March, sales climbed 32 percent from February, to just shy of a record for the month of 4,371 transactions set in 2004. Sales increased by 80 percent from two years ago.

Buyers from mainland China are leading a wave of Asian investment in Vancouver real estate as China tries to damp property speculation at home. Good schools, a marine climate and the large, established Asian community as a result of Canada’s liberal immigration policy make Vancouver attractive, said Cathy Gong, who moved from Shanghai to the Shaughnessy neighborhood on Vancouver’s Westside about three years ago.

“The schools here are the best and there are a lot of Chinese people here,” said Gong, whose son is in sixth grade at Shaughnessy Elementary School. Eastern Canada wasn’t an option because “I cannot bear cold weather,” Gong said. Vancouver has the second-largest immigrant Chinese population in Canada after Toronto.

China Curbs Speculation
China, where home prices rose 28 percent in Beijing and 26 percent in Shanghai last year, according to the country’s biggest real estate website owner SouFun Holdings Ltd., has taken steps to curb property speculation within its borders. Chinese home prices gained for 19 straight months through December and climbed in almost all 70 cities tracked by the government during the first quarter. Premier Wen Jiabao placed curbs on mortgage lending, boosted down-payment requirements and limited the number of purchases.

“As the Chinese get more and more prosperous, they are diversifying their assets out of China,” said Jim Rogers, an American investor who moved to Singapore from New York four years ago so his daughters could learn Chinese. “Vancouver is very high on the list.”

Pricier Than New York
In 2010, Vancouver had the third-highest housing costs among English-speaking cities worldwide, according to Canada’s Frontier Centre for Public Policy. Only Hong Kong and Sydney, another magnet of Asian immigration, were more expensive. Vancouver’s median home price of C$602,000 ($618,000) was 9.5 times the annual median household income of C$63,100, the group said in a study released Jan. 24. Canada had a 4.6 national multiple, making it “seriously unaffordable,” while the U.S. at 3.3 was “moderately unaffordable,” the study showed. To be affordable, the multiple must be 3 or less.
Vancouver was more expensive than San Francisco, London and New York by that measure, the Winnipeg-based center said.

“This makes it all the more difficult for people who are already struggling to get into the market or businesses who can’t hire people to come here because of the high housing prices,” said Peter Ladner, a former Vancouver city councillor and a columnist for the Business in Vancouver weekly newspaper. “There are a lot of people who are really frustrated.”

Unlike London or New York, “we don’t have enough jobs with high incomes to justify” the home prices, said Ladner. He noted Australia has placed restrictions on foreign home ownership. The British Columbia government also could consider an increase in property transfer taxes for foreigners, he said.

‘Control the Price’
Cecilia Huang, a Canada resident since 2003, also is concerned about rising prices.
“I hope the government can do something to control the price” so younger generations can buy, said Huang, who paid almost C$1 million for a condo in the Westside’s Kitsilano neighborhood two months ago so her daughter, now aged 6, could attend school nearby. She couldn’t afford a house and prefers apartment living because she doesn’t like yard maintenance. She also likes the views from her sixth-floor condo.

Holidays in China have been a popular time to look for houses in Vancouver. Sales picked up in October during China’s weeklong national holiday, said Winnie Chung, a Royal Pacific agent who represented buyers or sellers in C$285 million of home sales in 2009 and 2010 combined. Chung employs eight full-time assistants and travels to China twice a year to meet potential clients.

50 Sales
Mainland Chinese are buying houses primarily in Vancouver’s Westside, boosting the median sales price to C$2 million in the district known for its wide boulevards, beaches, expansive parks and stucco Tudor mansions. Prime Westside neighborhoods include Point Grey, Shaughnessy and Dunbar. The University of British Columbia is at the area’s western end.

“Our office has done 50 sales this year, which is pretty incredible,” said Vancouver realtor Tom Gradecak at his office in Point Grey, where he has one colleague who speaks Mandarin and Cantonese and is hiring a second. “Half of those sales are from mainland China.”

One Chinese buyer paid C$1.7 million in March for a five- bedroom, three-bath house that the previous owners had completely renovated in 2003, C$150,000 more than the asking price, said Gradecak. The buyer plans to tear it down and build anew.

‘Cashing Out’
“There’s more value in the land,” he said. “We’re seeing a lot of empty nesters cashing out.”
Many existing houses were built in the 1940s and ‘50s and have outdated electrical systems and plumbing and are “much smaller” than allowed today, said Vancouver architect Loy Leyland. As buyers prefer to demolish old houses than renovate, new homes for Asian clients make up two-thirds of his more than 30 current projects.
“I’ve never been busier” in a 30-year career, Leyland said.

Leyland’s clients usually stick to traditional styles such as Villa or Georgian for exteriors. Inside, designs are changing. Every new house has two kitchens: a large Western- style one and a small “wok” kitchen with a stove, sink, strong exhaust fan and door to seal off cooking aromas, said Leyland.

Some buyers acquire multiple homes, one to live in and others for investment, said Chung, the broker. Her clients made their money in a variety of businesses, she said, including mining, stainless steel manufacturing and real estate. About 10 percent of them speak English, she said.

Westside Gains
The Westside, also known as Vancouver West, had the biggest five-year gain of all 15 areas in greater Vancouver, edging out Richmond, the municipality just south of Vancouver, according to the Real Estate Board. Westside home prices rose 77 percent during the past five years through April amid the housing collapse in the U.S. People of Chinese or South Asian ancestry make up more than 60 percent of the residents in Richmond, a hub of Hong Kong immigration during the 1990s.

In 2010, the average home price in greater Vancouver rose 14 percent from 2009, according to the Real Estate Board. Excluding the three most expensive areas -- the Westside, Richmond and West Vancouver -- the average price gained 8 percent. West Vancouver is a separate municipality on the north shore across Lions Gate Bridge from downtown and not to be confused with the Westside. The three priciest areas usually account for about one-third of annual home sales in greater Vancouver.

Third Wave
The current group of Chinese homebuyers in Vancouver is the third “wave” from Asia since 1990, following Taiwanese and Hong Kong immigration, said Manyee Lui, a veteran Vancouver realtor. “People from mainland China are the new immigrants,” Lui said.

Vancouver’s Expo ‘86 was pivotal in the city’s growth. In 1988, the Expo site downtown on the shore of False Creek was acquired by Concord Pacific Developments with investors led by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing. The group developed high-rise condos and sold them in Asia during the early 1990s. Concord Pacific Place today is Canada’s biggest master-planned urban community, comprising about 50 buildings with 10,000 homes, parks, a school and daycare centers.

“That was like turning on a switch; it’s okay to invest in Vancouver because Li Ka-shing did,” said Peter Cowley, who grew up in Vancouver and is director of school performance studies at the Fraser Institute, which grades schools in Canada on academic performance. Chinese immigrants routinely check the Institute’s website to decide where to buy homes.

Tiananmen Square
Migration to Vancouver also was spurred by the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and a flight from Hong Kong in the years before its return to Chinese rule from British sovereignty in 1997. Vancouver home prices dropped when some people returned to Hong Kong after the handover.

British Columbia, the province where Vancouver is located, gets about 55 percent of Canada’s investor-class immigrants, people who have a minimum net worth of C$1.6 million, said Cameron Muir, chief economist of the British Columbia Real Estate Association. The province drew a total of 3,779 investor- class immigrants from China last year, or 69 percent of all investors moving to British Columbia, said Muir.
Starting about 18 months ago, so many homeowners applied to change the last two digits of their addresses to remove or shift the number 4, which in Chinese sounds like the word for death, or add the numeral 8, which is considered lucky, that Vancouver began turning down some requests, said Bonnie Lee, addressing coordinator for the city.

Korean, Taiwanese Buyers
“We used to do eight or nine a month but in March we did 25,” said Lee. “A lot of it is cultural. A lot of it is just people trying to change it before they list because estate agents are telling them to.”
It’s not just the Chinese who are shopping for homes, said Gradecak. Korean and Taiwanese buyers also have been active, he said.

“Foreign investment in Vancouver residential real estate is showing no signs of slowing,” said Gregory Klump, chief economist of the Ottawa-based Canadian Real Estate Association, in a May 9 report. The surge of multimillion-dollar sales in Vancouver prompted the trade group to revise its forecast for national home sales. It now expects Canada home sales through the Multiple Listing Service to fall 1.3 percent in 2011 to 441,100 units, less than the 1.6 percent decline it forecast in February.

Low Rates
Low interest rates inflated home prices and created a bubble, said Lawrence Wong, an immigration lawyer with many Chinese clients. Unlike the U.S., Canada has no tax deduction for mortgage interest.
“There is this psychological fear that ‘Ok, if I don’t get into the market, I might not be able to get in later on,” said Wong.

Chinese buyers frequently are absentee owners, wealthy businessmen who buy second or third houses for their wives and children while continuing to live in China for work, said Norman Chow, a fourth-generation Canadian engineer who lives near Quilchena Park on the Westside.

“You see a lot of these satellite families,” said Chow. He said it’s not unusual to see college-age kids of wealthy Chinese parents driving Bentleys, Maseratis and Porsches around the Westside. “The kids seem pretty nice,” he said.

Forty-one percent of the pupils at the Westside’s Maple Grove Elementary have English as their second language, according to the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute, the school- ranking organization. The institute doesn’t break out ethnicities for ESL students. The Living Word Chinese Baptist Church at Arbutus St. and 33rd Avenue West introduced a Mandarin fellowship last October after 16 years of only Cantonese and English.

Protecting Savings
While education for children often is the primary goal, some immigrants just want to move money out of China because they don’t feel it’s safe, according to one homebuyer who moved to Vancouver from Wuhan with her son two months ago and asked that her name not be used. Her husband remains in Wuhan for work.

Interest is spreading to other parts of Vancouver as prices on the Westside jump. The latest hot markets are West Vancouver and the southern bedroom community of White Rock, said Raymond Wong, a local realtor.

Feng Shui
Because houses in West Vancouver are built on the mountainside with their backs to the Coast Range, they generally face south, providing views of English Bay and Burrard Inlet. This situation conforms to the principles of feng shui, the proper placement of features within and surrounding a house to increase wealth and deflect bad luck, said Wong.

In November, Osaka Supermarket, part of Canada’s biggest grocery chain, opened its second Vancouver-area store in West Vancouver’s Park Royal shopping center. Osaka offers items ranging from marinated duck wings to a full dim sum bar and Asian fruits such as mangosteens, rambutans and longans that can be hard to find in North America.

“Five years ago, Chinese buyers avoided West Vancouver because of the Lions Gate bridge -- it just wasn’t convenient,” said Wong. “Now Osaka makes it much better and Chinese people are spreading the word.”
By contrast, Richmond has cooled since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami in Japan, said Wong. Parts of Richmond are at or just above sea level because of its location in the Fraser River delta.

Nonstop Flights
Beginning June 15, China Southern Airlines Co. will offer Canada’s first nonstop flights to China’s most populous province, Guangdong, with service between Vancouver and Guangzhou, the province’s capital city.
“Canada is a very attractive country these days for many reasons,” said Rogers, the investor. “They’ve done a much better job than the U.S. has over the last 15 to 20 years.”

Canada’s natural resources-based economy has gained from the economic growth in China and other countries. The Canadian dollar climbed 70 percent against the U.S. dollar since 2002, reaching parity in 2007 for the first time since 1976 as rising prices for commodities such as oil and gold boosted Canada’s export revenue. Nine years ago, one Canadian dollar bought 65 U.S. cents. Today it buys $1.03.

Overseas homebuyers can act much more quickly on a purchase since their offers often aren’t contingent on the sale of another residence, said Gradecak, the Westside realtor.

“It’s definitely for real,” Gradecak said. “How long it’s going to last, that’s an unknown. I get asked the same question every single day.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Hui-yong Yu in Seattle at hyu@bloomberg.net; Christopher Donville in Vancouver at cjdonville@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Kara Wetzel at kwetzel@bloomberg.net

Chinese Spreading Wealth Make Vancouver Homes Pricier Than NYC

Iceland -“bankrupting yourself to recovery” -Nobel economics laureate Paul Krugman

2011-05-16T08:56:00.000-04:00

Un-flipping-believable!!!

Iceland Sets Sights on Euro Even as Bloc’s Debt Crisis Deepens

By Marianne Stigset and Omar R. Valdimarsson
May 16 (Bloomberg) -- Iceland is determined to join the euro as soon as it meets the bloc’s criteria for the currency switch, Foreign Minister Ossur Skarphedinsson said.

The Atlantic island, where krona losses helped generate a trade surplus that carried the economy out of its 2008 banking meltdown, will target the currency switch once it gains European Union membership, Skarphedinsson said in an interview in Greenland’s capital Nuuk.

Iceland is underlining its commitment to the euro as European finance ministers meet in Brussels for the latest round of talks to tackle the currency bloc’s debt crisis. Euro-skeptic parties in some of the region’s AAA rated nations including France and Finland have won support as voters balk at the prospect of funding more bailouts that many investors say may fail to prevent defaults.

“The top shots in the EU are busy trying to work out these problems,” Skarphedinsson said in the May 12 interview. “I have full faith that they will be able to do so.”

Iceland started EU accession talks last year and would need to wait about six or seven years before euro adoption could be achieved, Skarphedinsson said. Accession remains attractive even as the region’s debt crisis deepens because the turmoil is “a temporary situation,” he said. “I’m not too worried -- by then they will have sorted this out.”

Iceland’s financial collapse more than two years ago sent the krona tumbling 80 percent against the euro offshore after the island’s biggest banks were unable to secure short-term funding. The government took control of the lenders, splitting the foreign and domestic assets, heaping losses on international bondholders while maintaining local deposit and payment facilities.

EU Backbone
The central bank then imposed capital restrictions to stem the krona selloff that ensued. The measures were in contrast to those taken in Greece and Ireland, where EU bailout terms dictated bondholders be protected and euro membership prevented the trade benefit of currency depreciation.

Nobel economics laureate Paul Krugman has praised Iceland’s model, calling it “bankrupting yourself to recovery” in a Nov. 24 New York Times column. The island’s currency decline transformed at least six years of trade deficits into a surplus one year after its banks collapsed.

Still, Iceland might have fared better if it had been backed by the EU, Skarphedinsson said.
“The hard efforts that the EU is undertaking to shore up the finances of those countries in dire straits show that it is better to have the EU as your backbone than not,” he said.

Iceland’s economy will expand 1.5 percent this year and 2.6 percent in 2012, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said in its latest set of forecasts in November. Ireland’s economy will grow 0.6 percent this year and 1.9 percent in 2012, the European Commission said on May 13. Greece’s economy will contract 3.5 percent in 2011 and grow 1.1 percent next year, it said.

To contact the reporters on this story: Marianne Stigset in Oslo at mstigset@bloomberg.net Omar R. Valdimarsson in Reykjavik valdimarsson@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Will Kennedy at wkennedy3@bloomberg.net Tasneem Brogger at tbrogger@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: May 15, 2011 20:01 EDT

"overseen by a new Treasury Board president " -the buck stops WHERE?

2011-05-16T08:47:00.000-04:00

Executive Summary

If the government is not following the constitution .... what rules ARE they playing by?

Dear Mr I. & Editors,

Within your Sunday 15th piece, Four challenges that could keep Harper up at night, I spotted a reference to my "favourite" topic - the anti-constitutional usurpation of the Executive Power's (1867, ss9-16) Privy Council (s.11) by the Legislative Power (ss.16-57).

"That will mean significant cuts ..., overseen by a new Treasury Board president ... in cabinet."

Further to the point you raise --

How can any Privy Council Treasury Board President "oversee" the Finance Dept:

a) when all are under the control of the same iron-fisted Rt Hon PM;

b) the individual holding the constitutionally "lesser" position has more political-oomph than the "greater one";

c) no one in cabinet, the Executive, the Legislative, the Judicial or the 4th column (never mind the blindly-trusting, benignly-neglectful public) seems to know (or care) that the government of Canada is not following the as-written BNA/Constitution Acts?

Indeed, how can any officer of the Privy Council, give any independent advice to the Governor General when the day-to-day Privy Council (vis a vis the complete Council), is wholly populated by members of the same cabinet-government-of-the-day that the Privy Council was intended to "check & balance"?

My essential point:

--If the government is not following the as-written text of the Constitution, what authority (beyond force & of course public nescience) do they have to act?

The quintessential point:

- If the government is not following the constitution .... what rules ARE they playing by?

Reverse aspect on same point:

--Did not Mr Harper ask some "Privy Council Office" administrator to fall on his/her sword as the patsy for the security clearance screw-up regarding Mr Bruce Carson?

--when in fact, due to PC 1940-1121 Mr Harper controls the Privy Council?

and despite the fact it was mid-election time, when any RT Hon PM is at his/her least powerful ......no press, no pundit, no Justice official pressed Mr Harper on the question of the buck stops here responsibility!

AGAIN ...

If the government is not following the constitution .... what rules ARE they playing by?

I attach the Order in Council (ed note; see pdf at bottom of linked page) that allowed this 'bloodless coup' by the Rt Hon Wm L M King that was accomplished in the brief period between the death of Lord Tweedsmuir & arrival of Lord Athlone in 1940 under cover of wartime expediency -please read the temporary & emergency nature of the "need" to merge the workload.

This Order in Council, P.C.1940-1121, prepared, recommended by Mr King and approved by Mr King & his Council on March 25, 1940 (effective March 23, 1940) was step 1 in Mr King's revenge for Lord Byng's refusal of a dissolution in 1926, (step 2 was the successful lobbying to switch to the appointment by the Monarch of a "Canadian" of the Cdn PM's choice as GovGen rather than the recommendation of the UK PM).

and again.... If the government is not following the constitution .... what rules ARE they playing by?

Recommendation

As citizen of Canada and as subject of the Canadian Crown in Right, I invite you to join me in an urgent recommendation that we immediately revert back to the as-written provisions of our foundational documents before any more excesses of power come to pass.

May 6 2011 - Inflation or NO? "GDP boost from Squatters Rent" vs "...Fed Behind Curve"

2011-05-06T10:36:00.000-04:00

May 6 (Bloomberg) -- Melissa White and her husband stopped paying their mortgage in May 2008 after it reset to $3,200 a month, more than double the original rate. That gave them extra cash to pay off debts and spend on staples until their Las Vegas home sold two years later for less than they owed.

“We didn’t pay it for about 24 months,” said White, who quit her job as a beautician during that period after becoming pregnant with her first child and experiencing medical complications. “What we had, we could put towards food and the truck payments and insurance and health things I was dealing with.”

snip...
So-called “squatter’s rent,” or the increase to income from withheld mortgage payments, will be an estimated $50 billion this year, according to Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at JPMorgan Chase & Co. in New York. The extra cash could represent a boost to spending that’s equal to about half the estimated savings generated by cuts to payroll withholding in December’s bipartisan tax plan.

“We’ve had a lot of government transfers to the household sector; this is a transfer from the business sector to households,” Feroli said. “It’s a shock absorber that has helped the consumer ride out the storm.”

more
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aZqgjYA25BGs&pos=10

Restaurants Lift Prices as Inflation Hawks See Fed Behind Curve

By Anna-Louise Jackson and Anthony Feld

May 6 (Bloomberg) -- Dining out will cost more this year as U.S. restaurants take advantage of the nearly two-year long expansion to boost prices on food and drinks.

Higher-priced menus reflect growing confidence by eateries that consumers can afford to pay more to eat out. Restaurants are emboldened in part by the success of U.S. airlines, which have raised fares almost 10 percent since a year ago, according to Dean Maki, chief U.S. economist at Barclays Capital in New York.

“The fact that the airline industry was able to pass along cost increases signals that the pricing environment has become somewhat more favorable than it was during the heart of the recession,” Maki said. “It’s more likely restaurants will be able to pass along price increases now relative to the last few years.”

snip ...
Pressure on the Fed

All this is putting pressure on the Federal Reserve to prevent inflation from getting out of hand, said Samer Nsouli, chief investment officer in New York for the Lyford Group Macro Fund.

“Inflation hawks see restaurants and airlines passing through higher prices and say the Fed’s behind the curve,” Nsouli said. “The Fed’s not paying enough attention to such trends when it comes to its continued accommodative monetary policy.”

The central bank’s Federal Open Market Committee said it “will pay close attention to the evolution of inflation” in the statement for its April 27 meeting, when it kept the target for the federal funds rate, or overnight inter-bank lending rate, at zero to 0.25 percent. It first set the rate at the record low in December 2008. The Fed also reaffirmed at the April meeting its plan to complete a $600 billion Treasury purchase program by June.

full article
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=ahEOfkKdNVvY&pos=11

‘Squatter Rent’ May Boost Spending as U.S. Mortgage Holders Bail

By Bob Willis and John Gittelsohn

P A R A D I S E in O L D E M A R K H A M

2011-05-03T08:44:00.001-04:00

"Who should I vote for Uncle Bob-o?" Electoral Primer & Research summary -ending w All-the-Talents

2011-05-02T08:21:00.000-04:00

This started out as a note to my niece responding to her question " Who should I vote for Uncle Bob-o?"

you were cc'd

Dear E,

Just in case you're still undecided

these links are in reverse-time order

-start at the bottom, if you like

-top-most links are most current (considering a minority House of Commons) based on perhaps-accurate polls particularly Nanos of Apr 26/27 showing 14-18% undecided (fourth place across Canada, third in Quebec) ie not including "leaning" in the "decided" group. New Link Mon May 3 shows fewer undecided

eg - what if ..... the Ref/Cons get 40% of seats, NDP gets 26%, Libs get 24% and the rest, Bloc/Green/Ind. get 10%?

- IIn that case I'm suggesting an All-the-Talents Cabinet - Harper stays, but invites pro-rata the other parties into Cabinet.

NB the members of Cabinet NEED NOT be sworn as members of the PRIVY COUNCIL - look it up.

WHERE WE ARE NOW

As greatest seat getter on Monday Harper continues as PM automatically

BUT does he have the confidence of the House ... on first or second vote?

Now that a "coalition" of sorts has been suggested by Mr H in 2004 (when Dithers was faltering) and by Dion/Layton/Duceppe+Rae in late Dec 2008, it's an option. NDP + Libs with a bare 50% (I'm sure they could get an MP to two to cross the floor for the right price)

To forestall that .... Why doesn't Mr Harper just invite a few NDPers and a few Liberals into Cabinet on May 3-4-5?

It's called an All-The-Talents cabinet.

No deals about time or support for certain measures (a la Ontario Lib/Ndp Accord in 1984-5) and not like the recent UK coalition, but a real partnership - teamwork - letting all the voices be hear ..... one MP = 1 vote ... they call it Representative Democracy

Once we're there .... it'll be time to talk about Re-Storation of the Executive Power (stripping it from the Legislative Power - ie re-dividing the PCO from the PMO) to its as-written place in the text of the (not being followed) BNA/Constitution Acts

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011/04/all-talents-cabinet-solution-to-hung.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011/04/cdn-party-names-history-vis-vis-liberal.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011/04/how-to-fix-canadian-governance-system.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2006/05/what-canadians-holding-long-view-can.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011_03_27_archive.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011_03_24_archive.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011_03_23_archive.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011_03_22_archive.html

http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011_03_08_archive.html

Robert Ede,

All The Talents Cabinet -the solution to 'Hung Parliaments" & 50%+1 Majorities

2011-04-30T11:29:00.003-04:00

An All the Talents Cabinet

-best solution for a "Hung" House of Commons

& who says 50%+1 is enough support to totally deny/ overrule/ ignore the wishes of the "50% less 1"

66&2/3 sure no problem!

but 50%+1 is NOT enough for one person to control both the anti-constitutionally-combined PMO&PCO that exists now

NB not even 75% is enough for that!

The combined PMO&PCO is not the way the Executive/Legislative hierarchy of checks and balances was intended to function - see http://robertede.blogspot.com/2011/04/how-to-fix-canadian-governance-system.html

Election Ringside, April 28: ‘Winning the election, losing the House?’

Last Page

8:25 AM on April 29, 2011

A 'hung' house of commons (particularly in perilous times) is best served by an "All-the-Talents" cabinet.
-Pro-rata representation in cabinet by seat count.
-Party Leader w greatest # of seats can be head of PMO (but NOT Head of PCO - see below)

This should have been the GG's suggestion in reaction to Mr Harper's request for dissolution in 2008 (tell him to team-up and complete the fixed-term timelimit), and/or the GG's reaction to Dec 2008 request for prorogation and/or the GG's reaction to the phoned-in (2nd annual?) prorogation request AND definitely the GG's response to the 2011 request for Dissolution (again Team-up and finish the 4yr cycle).

**If the GG had had the chutzpah to truly and fully act as the Monarch's representative and simply enforce the as-written text of the BNA/Constitution of our country, .........we'd not have had to endure all the silly, never-to-be-implemented promises (all based on the impossible-to-achieve Budget 2011 with its preposterous 5 yr plan of 40+% Rev increase with <10% Program increases - with of course a 33% increase in Public Debt Charges).

The exercise of that Office's Executive power, (fully-authorized by the highest law of the land), would have put all these trumped-up blowhards from the Legislative Power (who think the public can be fooled again and again by the same old hoopla & rah-rah) back in their intended-in-1867 place.

Let them fight all they want in the 'Children's Hour' of QP ( C.D. Howe's phrase) and bicker all day long in the Lower(lowest) House of assembly,
Let them pass all the bills and/or recommendations they wish ... but let the public's interest be protected by the ultimate check-and-balance and veto --an elected Vice Regal.

Just like is says on the BNA documents - the nomination for GG is for the Monarch's consideration .... let's elect the person to be recommended - no need to even change on piece of letterhead.

Let the legislative order (includes Senate) present their ideas to a newly-restored to relevance and superiority GG (elected at-large, every-other general election for term that starts 365 days the Return of the Writs)

RESCIND Order in Council P.C. 1940-1121 and restore the Privy Council to the Executive Power - accountable to the GG not the PM. This would require new letterhead but no const. amendment .... it's an order in council, not a law.

Gold as a "Currency" + 2) Renminbi (Chinese Yuan) on the move up

2011-04-29T07:47:00.001-04:00

Gold itself is now just about the only 'Currency' still on the "Gold Standard"
-'currency' concept from Dave Rosenberg, conclusion Rce

1) Gold Luring Central-Bank Buyers May Extend Record Rally in Price

April 29 (Bloomberg) -- Central banks that were net sellers of gold a decade ago are buying the precious metal to reduce their reliance on the dollar as a reserve currency, signaling demand that may extend a record rally in prices.

As developing countries accelerate purchases, gold may reach $2,000 an ounce this year, compared with a record of $1,538.80 yesterday in New York, said Robert McEwen, the chief executive officer of producer U.S. Gold Corp. Euro Pacific Capital’s Michael Pento, who correctly predicted gold’s highs for the past two years, forecast a 2011 high of $1,600.

Prices reached a record 14 times this month on demand from investors seeking an alternative to the dollar after the currency slumped to the lowest since 2009, U.S. debt widened, and the Federal Reserve signaled April 27 that borrowing costs will remain near zero percent for an extended period. The economy in China, the biggest foreign holder of U.S. Treasuries, grew 9.7 percent in the first quarter.

“China is out to have more gold than America, and Russia is aspiring to the same,” McEwen said yesterday in an interview in New York. “When you have debt, you don’t have a lot of flexibility. China wants to show its currency has more backing than the U.S.”

continue
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a3Pxj9OUMnsw&pos=6

2) Yuan Breaks Through 6.5 Per Dollar for First Time Since 1993

Open a CNY (Renminbi) denominated account at the Bank of China (Canada)
Downtown, Milliken & Peanut Plaza Locations

Ride the wave of USdollar down simultaneous with CNY up

Cdn Party Names & History vis a vis "Liberal & Conservative" values

2011-04-23T10:53:00.003-04:00

A reply to a friend - who sent me a link to a USA-based discussion on "Liberal" vs "Conservative" (appended to very end)

Dear I',

This US-based overview is quite good as an introduction

-esp the media bias (university professor bias) part

In Canada we enjoy/suffer Party Names that are (now)identical to these two main ideological categories, and therefore recommend that the categories need examination before application to any Party Name (i.e. define your terms)

FIRST the TWO CATEGORIES, then the CDN PARTY NAMES (w commentary) , then some issues that might need discussion-at-elections re: "conserving" or "liberalizing"

1) CATEGORIES

Conservative - conserve what? perserve what?

-The Status Quo? or a return to the essence of the original principles that Canada was founded upon?

Liberal - liberate/free-up what? re-form what?

2) PARTY NAMES & Parties

Now a word or two on our Parties

Conservative Party (nee Reform Party)

-a western, agrarian & oil/gas extraction +smallish town protest party based in BC & Alta

-the organisers wanted more clout (ie beyond their pop or economic contribution level) than they had had - capitalized on the innate hatred/envy of centralized power in Ontario/Quebec

-The original slogan (born in mid-80's when things were booming out there) "The west wants In ....or else" NB they dropped the last part when they crossed the Man/Ont border.

-wanted electoral reform (House and Senate) and reform of equalization/subsidization formulae and ..... at least as much coddling as was going to Quebec

-in mid 1990's there was a merger of the Reform Party (with seats in the west but no national credibility) with the PC party (which had national credibility, but few seats) which itself was a merger (1930's) of the Conservative/Tory/Status Quo Party and the Progressives (a western agrarian protest party)

Stephen Harper is a Leaside-born, Etobicoke-raised and transplanted-to-Calgary, thin-skinned, proud-of-himself-as-overachiever who hopes nobody finds out he's much-less than everybody thinks he is (much like you and me). He's university educated as an economist and never-really applied that knowledge, because the pap they were teaching then was so inimical to what he himself thought.

Stevie quit Reform, he merged the two parties (achievement), he proposed a coalition to replace a fallen Paul Martin Jr in 2004, he 'gave up' governing in 2008 and bamboozled the GG into giving him a new election (about 30 days before Lehman Bros blew-up - I guess he didn't want to try to get elected {under his own 2007 rules on fixed election dates} in 2009)

He overstepped with his post-2008 Economic Statement and had to a) back down in 5 seconds and then bamboozle the GG to prorogue Parliament to avoid falling into the identical 'coalition" trap that he himself advised/promoted in 2004.

THEN just before the Olympics he bamboozled the GG (dear sweet thing probably thought she'd get a term-extension out of the deal) into another (2nd annual?) prorogation ON THE PHONE, to avoid unpleasant questions while the world was watching Canada Own The Podium.

Now he's spent the last six months undermining/knifing Iggy on TV and on the internet and esrtwhile formulating an election-style "budget" that he'll never have to implement per se. This cream-puff "Budget" predicts revenue will go up 40+% in 5 yrs while programs go up a meagre 9.8% in same timeframe and as a result of faulty premises #1 &#2 ends up "balanced" a few yrs out - PREPOSTEROUS!

Oh yes and then he was surprised when the Lib's et al "forced" an election that he didn't want. Poor baby. Chess player ... maybe ... but the moves are too obvious.

Liberal Party

Since the modern era post WW2 this party is a mess/mass/morass of "wherever the wind blows" policy.

The Liberal Party of Canada stands for nothing permanently, but anything if you'll vote for it. Accompanied by a fingers-crossed probability to NOT fulfill any policy pledge if not ABSOLUTELY forced to do so, to stay in office.
Stand up for "something" or you'll Fall for anything. - Libertarian Hill Cox circa 1993
The Liberal Party stands for "nothing" ..... except Election.

After Wm L M King (who KNEW what he wanted for Canada) passed the torch to Louis St. Laurent they lost focus - while indeed they did very well in electoral popularity in 1950's (boom time), 1960's (albeit in in minority parliaments most of the time) 1970's (spending borrowed public money on vote-getting programs that stood no actuarial hope (post baby-boom) of ever being able to repay it)

They got complacent/arrogant in office and blew up in 1957 (Pipeline Scandal) 1979 (everyone was sick and tired of Trudeau by then) and then again in 2004-06 when the great-new leader Mr P Martin Jr turned out to have feet-of-clay and a ditherer (this is why Chretien held on so long ... he knew Martin was incompetent).

It is to be remembered that the unaffordable (once the Baby Boom ended) pay-as-you-go Great Cdn Cradle-to-Grave Social Safety Net programs (Universal Health, Can Pension Plan, Old Age Security, Unemployment Insurance) were CCF/UFA/UnioNDP policies that were pushed thru Minority Liberal Parliaments to placate the 3rd party and garner their support for the Liberal Minority.

Trudeau (1965-1968) enthralled the country with his flair, youth, decisiveness and sense of purpose (actually it was the predictable ego & hubris of a nouveaux-riche "rich-man's" son who felt himself unbound by natural laws)

His 'modern' thinking (rooted in Fabian-Socialism and the ?noblesse-oblige? of the Rationalist-intelligentsia towards the great unwashed) changed Canada.

He however recognised that post-baby boom, Canada needed more people; that the USA was our neighbour but NOT our trust-able friend; that the Constitutional History & Law of Canada was always going to side with the Aboriginal Peoples; that Keynes was right only if a war came along to kick-start production AND curtail consumption WHILE changing the public attitude towards higher taxation ..... and .... if a war didn't come along, that the inflation/currency devaluation was the only way "out" of the debt; that placating the domestic public and enduring the House of Commoners games (particularly in minority) was boring and better suited to underlings.
Further he saw that with control of the PCO (thanks to Wm L M King's 1940 emergency, temporary usurpation of the Privy Council) he could centralize all decision making to his inner circle .... and delegate everything mundane to political operators who would get future votes in exchange for "little favours" doled out along the way.

Chretien was an old-school patronage pro (Trudeau was his school, but Chretien skipped "elan" classes). A no holds barred street-fighter you had to admire for his sheer chutzpah but hate for his objectives, strategies, tactics and bald-faced glibness.

Paul Martin Jr, is the son of a successful and respected parliamentarian (it's just too bad that the dad was a social-engineering, central-interventionist). Mentored (some say bought) by Paul Desmarais (the only job Jr ever had) and 'given' the no-money down opportunity to re-organize (under Liberian et al flags) Canada Steamship Lines - from which Jr made some money to entitle himself to join the country-club set (I can only guess whether or not PowerCorp / Desmarais ever asked any favours of Jr in return)

Iggy - was fooled into thinking he could become CDN PM in a yr or two. Currently being hustled off the stage by Bob Rae (sorry not til after this disastrous defeat) with Trudeau Jr nipping at Rae's heels (a son of a nouveau-riche, well-loved parliamentarian ... sheesh - I'm sure this kid's being "tutored" by someone a la Obama ... just wish I knew who)

Next Lib leader Bob Rae. Then merger of Lib's and NDP under first Layton succeeded by Rae, then by Justin-baby.

unioNDP

-the New (Democratic) Party grew out of the CCF UFA and the Unions - then industrial/agrarian unions NOW civil service unions AND THEIR pension funds (which must soon be broken up into manageable competitors and not mono-lithic "pay-too-much' realty/bond monopolies

-Party stands firmly for Social Democratic "transformation" like Obama (i.e gov't control of the "means of production" and property" etc etc based on Marx's ideas for the proud, tenacious and energetic people of GERMANY, but instead applied to Russia and China instead)

This phrase Social Democracy is code for socialism but slowly and step by step (ie by gradually penetrating the mindset of the proletarian idiot/drone/workers, election by election) The People's Democratic Republic of ....fill in the blank ... - a top-down, military-enforced, police-state, bureaucracy of party insiders + mostly poor illiterate people)

- this was the gradual approach of the Mensheviks(minority) - but the Bolsheviks (majority) 'victory at-any-cost' approach prevailed in Russia

-UNION dues (and of course the Quarterly Electoral subsidy) finances their operations and Unions dominate the control of the party (again, once industrial/agrarian, now civil service, unions)

-stand for EXACTLY the same thing as the Bloc Quebecois and Parti Quebecois -sans sovereignty-association/separation of the Belle Province

-NDP success in Quebec (if polls are to be believed) indicates that Quebec leans heavily socialist (France, Europe etc) but sees less hope/desire/applicability/practicality in separating from Canada - Hooray!

-as above, soon to merge with the Liberals (just as Reform merged with the PC's)

Green Party

-Former Leader, Jim Harris, figured out that by running a paper (no campaign, just on paper) candidate in every riding, they'll get enough votes (from none-of-the-above & protest voters, tree-hugger, animal-rights, pollution, Carbon DiOxide, Carbon MonOxide folks ... heck we'll take a vote for any reason) that they'll qualify for permanent electoral financing .... now nearly $1.9million/yr to run the office and pay the top leaders a good salary .... even if they NEVER get elected.

Elizabeth May ran to the head of this gravy-train

3) Issues to Conserve/Liberalize?

Examples:

-Continue pillaging the land and forests and waters for immediate employment and tax revenue? or a 'cost-of replenishment' system of licensing, stumpage fees and production royalties that will allow the ultimate owner (the Crown on behalf of the populace) to share in the immediate harvest(non renewables) and permit the replenishment of renewables.

-Continue to have no law on whether "the state" can sanction the "taking of a life"? or realize that the next step from legalized abortion is legalized euthanasia.

-Continue making backroom purchases and acquisitions without true tender (or for future consideration) or be open about who's getting what contract, why and for what reason & based on what criteria?

-Continue not-following the as-written BNA/Constitution re: the Executive Power of Canadian governance or return to the original power-sharing hierarchy (checks and balance within Legislative & Executive power-sharing)?

-Continue to allow helter-shelter immigration (and family reunification) without enforcing any means-test or sponsorship-pledges? or risk offending multi-cult constituencies by 'changing the rules' in the middle of 'the game' THEY are playing with gov't against the middle-class?

-Continue allowing the existing trade/professional guilds to deny/decide on whose credentials THEY will accept? or establish certification tests/exams/practicums that can be passed BEFORE arriving?

Link to about 17 more Election issues you'll never hear about:

36 Days leading to your 55 seconds of Power ( ~time from receiving to returning your ballot)

Elections are much more than the "Leader's Tour" and slogan book

-but who'da thunk it?

rce

FROM my friend 'I'

Now the election time is coming, and I found very interesting information
about the beliefs of two main parties the conservatives and liberals.
I would like to send this site to U; please read it.
After reading that important information I have no doubt that
Christians should vote for conservatives.
Please pay your attention to section "Religion and Government","Same sex marriages"and
"War on Terror". I always was for conservatives, but I did not have written facts to protect my believe in that party. Now I have these strong arguments and I bravely can say that conservatives are for God and liberals are going against God.

Dear friends,

Please read it.http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

How to fix the Canadian Governance System - this election! "The Emperor's 2011 New Clothes".

2011-04-20T11:01:00.013-04:00

Dear Taxpaying, Resident, Canadian Citizen,

I believe the as-written British North America/Constitution Act is the perfect system for governing Canada.

But unfortunately our politicians and public servants are not following its "as-written" provisions.

Here's a graphic to show what I mean:

Military Comparison I BNA/Constitution 1867

Commander-in-Chief I Governor General

Generals I Privy Council

Colonels I Senate

Captains I Cabinet/P. M.'s Office

Soldiers I Members of Parliament

The Folks at home

As you can see the Chain of Command has become confused, cluttered and turned on it's head.

The way things are now a Captain is running almost everything because the Prime Minister (not in 1867 BNA/Constitution) has taken over the Generals' job (Privy Council) and the Commander-in-Chief (GG) dares not refuse any measure that Captain (who appointed him/her) proposes.

This down-is-hoisted-up and up-is-emasculated devolution of our as-written system completely defeats the checks and balances built into the system to prevent any one Officeholder from becoming too powerful.

The key to understanding how the "new" anti-constitutional system came to be is knowledge of the implications of one, wartime, Executive Order in Council (P.C. 1940-1121) that added extra, political duties to the responsibilities of the non-political Head of the Privy Council (the Clerk) and created a new position "Clerk of the Privy Council AND Secretary to the Cabinet". (link to PCO site)

This transformative decision was reached on March 25rd 1940, surprisingly soon after the death of Governor General Lord Tweedsmuir (Feb 11/1940) and the changes were in place prior to the arrival of Major General The Earl of Athlone (appointed June 2/1940) as Tweedsmuir's successor.

A point to note is that the PM of the day (Rt Hon Wm L M King) appointed his existing Principal Secretary to the "new" job. The result being that the whole, (intended to be non-political) civil service AND the Generals (Privy Council) became accountable to the all-political Captain (Prime Minister) instead of the Commander in Chief (Governor General).

I append the actual document below so you can read it yourself. Therein you'll see that the emergency that prompted this wholesale re-ordering of the power-sharing hierarchy and step-by-step, approval-protocol described in the BNA/Constitution was World War II.

In 1940 the country was totally committed to an all-out effort to mobilize Canada to save Britain, Europe and the free world - this was accomplished virtually overnight and must be acknowledged as an unbelievable wonderful achievement, by Mr King, his 'Man of the Hour' C.D. Howe and the 'dollar-a-year' volunteers from industry and finance.

By reading the Order, you will also see that the Captain (PM King) approved the changes (that he himself proposed) in his capacity as President of the Privy Council.

For Pete's sake, what army has Captains telling the Generals what to do? and then allows those Captains to approve their own recommendations?

In my view, that terrifyingly-urgent emergency is long past.

Why can we not go back to the as-written provisions of the BNA/Constitution? (Otherwise, how can we possible know what rules we ARE following?)

Do we still want 'a Captain' holding ALL the reins of administration, the powers-to-advise AND the powers-to-decide?

Do we still want this when hard (politically unpopular) decisions need to be made? (e.g. every single day since the time it became common knowledge that the Baby-Boom was over and therefore all the just-instituted, pay-as-you-go, social benefit programmes were unaffordably unsustainable).

If we go back to the as-written BNA/Constitution by rescinding this Order in Council, we'll be well-advised to make one more non-constitutional change. We should start holding elections at-large for the person to be recommended to the Monarch as OUR choice for Governor General.

With that popular mandate, our GG will be able to 'Just Say No' to some silly notion of a legislative Bill (or Order in Council) that the Captains-of-the-Day want to rush through to expand their power, award a friend or simply stay in office.

This election, ask your local Candidate if they support rescinding Order in Council PC 1940-1121, returning to the as-written Constitution and electing the Governor General?

If they don't know what you're talking about .... you'll know they're either "unpardonably stupid or unfit for their office" - H.C. Andersen "The Emperor's New Clothes".

Truly,

rce

Suggestion -- Elections for Governor General could be held every-other General Election, to select one person, for a single, two-Parliament term, starting 365 days after the Return of the Writs - a single transferable ballot is probably best - no need for runoff elections to get a winner.

What Canadians holding 'the long view' can learn from the Iroquois' Council of Grandmothers

2011-04-19T07:02:00.000-04:00

Originally BlogEntry May 2006 - brought fwd to re-use UCL & Council of Grandmothers

Caveat to Readers:

This may be the first time you've examined the foundations of our government's Executive power structure particularly the REAL operations of the Governor General and Privy Council.

Not to worry -many things in and about government are well-known to the public (or presented for public consumption) in a form that is backwards or upside down to the truth.

An example is the much touted Freedom of Information legislation at fed & prov levels. These Bills should be more accurately entitled "Limits to/Restrictions on Access to Information" since the legislation outlines the issues, topics and conditions that will legally preclude the citizen from obtaining the info s/he requests. (more similar at end)

The Editors of Walrus Magazine,

Serendipity brought me to the Hon. Roy J. Romanow's "A House Half Built" on your webpage.

His lament for the nation's traditions, his many references to our Autochthonous peoples, his great sentence "We did not invent multiculturalism, we joined it in progress", his caution about potential great changes in Canada enacted on short-term time horizons made me think about what to do to forestall foolishness forced on us within 5 year mandates.

In short his quest was for 'the Long View' to be our pre-eminent political tradition.

If I may be so bold as to suggest a solution for Mr Romanow and the nation - let's take a lesson from the Great Iroquois Confederacy's governance model and see if adapting their 'Council of Grandmothers' to our BNA Confederation might provide us with that longer, common-good sense of what's right and what's not-so-right as policy for our people.

I was introduced to the Haudenosaunee, Deganaweda (whose name, I'm informed, should never be spoken aloud), the "real" Hiawatha and the Great Peace (the Kia eneri Kowa) by "Deganaweda -an old tale" (its first few paragraphs outline the story and the web will fill in the details for any whose interest is piqued).

My quest is to gain support for the application of the Haudenosanee's Council of Grandmothers' oversight of the warriors' decisions to Canada's "One Parliament"(BNA s.17).

"In the way of the Great Peace, women are the keepers of the family lineage and as the bearers of life, they teach the knowledge of harmony and balance within the family. The tribe is the extended family, and neighbouring tribes should be considered relatives who are necessary for a healthy genetic evolution, an extended family, if you will. The balance within the whole of a society originates with the individual. The balance of male/female within the individual expands to the relationship between man and woman, and then into relationship with their offspring. This then expands into the extended family. All women are mothers to all the children, as are all men their fathers. The tribe was a living ecosystem for human consciousness, a living heart.

Women had equal status within the tribal council. They formed the Council of Grandmothers that looked out for the survival of the family structure above all things, for without the family structure, the people could not continue. No major decision that would affect the tribe as a whole was ever made by one individual of either gender, or any singular council; all councils were accountable to the Council of Grandmothers. Thus, they had devised a matriarchal system whereby no structure of dictatorship could arise and seize power from the people themselves. There simply was no position that allowed for the rise of a tyrant within their society." (emphasis added)

To me, the House of Commons in Canada is NOT the place for final decisions, it's a place for introducing ideas and discussing them. Similarly the Prime Minister is NOT the final arbiter of Canadian life, but more like unto the Chief Spokesperson FROM the place of initial discussion.

The House of Commons (watch any Question Period) is a partisan 'sandbox' (C.D. Howe called Q.P. 'the Children's Hour') that masquerades (particularly since 1940) as a showcase for ideas and discussion, but is really a gathering place of the members of private, election-staging 'gangs' and is controlled (esp in majority) by the cabal-in-cabinet.

The Brits and Canucks who thought-through the BNA Act knew all this could/would unfold and devised a system to contain any potential mis-management by nice-looking sweet-talkers, promising bread and circuses to the multitude.

The Senate, with its property-ownership & net-worth qualifications (now lost to inflation) was supposed to represent the property-taxing constituency (no income tax then, while now most Canadians "participate" in the revenue-gathering) was to double-check the affordability of the Commons initiatives and any Act or act of these two groups was submitted for approval to the Executive Authority, embodied locally in the Governor General and ultimately in the Queen-in-Council over home (ss.9,10,12,13).

The GG (who often was a newbie) was to be advised by his/her own set of advisors (including some Cabinet members) styled the Privy Council (s.11) and this is where the Council of Grandmothers concept fits in.

All members of the Privy Council are sworn to loyalty and secrecy for life - their membership (and Oath) is never extinguished. Constitutionally, the Governor General (then and now) could summons all or any of them for a parlay on any issue OR appoint any of them to the various committees of the Privy Council ( Treasury Board etc) INSTEAD of having the SAME folks in Cabinet occupying ALL the seats on the Council committees that are supposed to oversee and make recommendations about the Cabinet decisions.

The Privy Council was designed to BE the Council of Grandmothers - the holders of the long view, the non-partisan advisors on what might be best for the future and the present BECAUSE they brought with them the wisdom of the past!

The Office of GG departs from the Haudenosanee model, but is "similar in Principle' to the traditions of Great Britain's Parliament in a Constitutional-Monarchy.

Although the Confederacy had devised a "system whereby no structure of dictatorship could arise and seize power from the people themselves. There simply was no position that allowed for the rise of a tyrant within their society", Britain did not - we know from history that the United Kingdom had had autocratic Monarchy-by-Royal-Proclamation and in a series of moves limited their King/Queen to the current "to be consulted, to encourage and to warn" role, where the Monarch is bound to accept the Advice of Her/His ministers.

So Canada got a Monarch-in-Council at the top across the Atlantic and 1) a Vice-Regal, acting as an individual (s.12) AND 2) a Vice-Regal-in-Council (s.13) to be 'the decider', on the ground, over here. The GG (and Lt Governors) grant(ed) Royal Assent to Bills from the local Legislative Order (or withheld or reserved Assent) and then ship(ped) His/Her decision to Britain for the final OK (ss.55,56,57,90) .

That's how it was supposed to work (and did operate) until an uppity Prime Minister tried to trump the constitutionally-valid decision of his Governor General and when he failed, he enacted a two-stage plan of revenge - to prevent THAT from ever happening to him again.

First in 1940, he appointed HIS man (now-called Secretary of the Cabinet and head of the Prime Minister's Office) to be simultaneously Clerk of the Privy Council and once he'd captured the 'head', just gradually took over the Privy Council itself.

How? well it WAS wartime and the idea/spin was to unify implementation of decisions on the war-effort. Who could/would/should object? Heck - it was an emergency! PLUS the only Officeholder who COULD/WOULD/SHOULD have rejected the then-PM's notion-to-usurp(the G.G. Lord Tweedsmuir ) had just died Feb 11/40 and his successor Lord Athlone didn't arrive until June 2/40)
Second, the 'offended' PM lobbied long and hard that the GG should be a 'Canadian' and not some Brit passing through on his/her way up the ambassadorial food-chain.

Once control over the appointmentt process for the Vice-Regal post was in his pocket, no one and nothing (save the Queen-in-Council, a.k.a. British Cabinet, who'd similarly hobbled THEIR boss a few centuries ago) could stand in the way of the Rt Hon Wm Lyon Mackenzie King.

No subsequent PM's have found the need or desire to reverse the concentration of power delivered to their office by Order-in-Council P.C. 1940-1121. An the history books tell us ... the late P.Elliot Trudeau enhanced the PMO/PCO power by further concentrating decision-making into it's (and his personal) hands (his cabinet ministers were required to submit their departments initiatives to him before introduction to the full cabinet)

BUT .... if that Order was un-done AND we adopted a method of selecting a Governor General that would enable us to 'feel good' about one person holding a "veto" (no power to initiate, just the power to say Yes, No or Hold-on-a-second) , we'd be very close to following the provisions of the as-written, purposefully-devised BNA/Constitution and having re-established our own Council of Grandmothers.

Caveat to Readers
This may be the first time you've examined the foundations of our government's Executive power structure particularly the REAL operations of the Governor General and Privy Council.

Not to worry -many things in and about government are well-known to the public (or presented for public consumption) in a form that is backwards or upside down to the truth.

An example is the much touted Freedom of Information legislation at fed & prov levels. These Bills should be more accurately entitled "Limits to/Restrictions on Access to Information" since the legislation outlines the issues, topics and conditions that will legally preclude the citizen from obtaining the info s/he requests.

Better yet, the 180-degrees misunderstood Charter of Rights. This condition-ridden section of Constitution Act 1982, over-ride-able by any fed or prov legislature (s.33) is much loved by Canadians, but most of the lively discussions on it are in court rooms where judges decide when and if these 'rights' (that we already enjoyed at common law) can/may be trampled/not-recognized/ placed beneath one another by the exceptions granted in Section 1 . (NB The Premiers hated this Charter (they thought it gave too much power to the judiciary at the expense of the legislative order) and only went for it after their own-personal over-ride (s.33) was added.

Political Evolution of Cdn Governance on ONE page (email me for word.doc version)

2011-04-18T11:04:00.000-04:00

Origins and Evolution of Canada's Constitutional-Monarchy

- "Similar in Principle" means our system IS NOT "exactly the same" as the United Kingdom

- Sovereignty/Power Flows "Top Down" in Canada, NOT from "Bottom Up"

* Follow progression by dates

UNITED KINGDOM

COLONIAL - Upper & Lower Canada

CANADA 1867

CANADA 1982

* since Glorious Revolution -1688

Constitutional Act of 1791

BNA/Constitution Act 1867

Constitution Act 1982

& Bill of Rights 1689

"Responsible Government"

EXECUTIVE POWER

* no "written" Constitution

Monarch "in Council"

Monarch-not obliged to Council

* Monarch MUST accept advice

*can disallow Bills within 2yrs

* can disallow Bills w/in 2yrs s.57

* U.K.'s Canada Act 1982 removes

of Privy Council - NB. in exchange,

*communication only by ship

Lords & House from Cdn law

Minister/Ministry must resign if

Governor General s.12 & s.55

* Disallowance w/in 2yr untouched

Advice was 'bad' / needs reversing

* acts with or without Advice

* BNA Act becomes "Constitution"

Rebellions of 1837-38

*can Withhold Assent or Reserve Bills

wholly amendable here (see below)

Privy Council

*taxes pre-announced Throne Speech

a.k.a. U.K.Cabinet

* Upper & Lower Canadians

Gov Gen "in Council" s.13

Charter

rebel against arbitrary acts

* ONLY "by & with" Advice

* conditions and limits on existing

House of Lords

of Governor, Chateau Clique

common-law rights added s.1, s.33

Appointed

& Family Compact

Queen's Privy Council of Canada

*pre-existing rights became subject

House of Commons

* Appointed for Life

to Court interpretation & Prov/Prov.

Elected

Lord Durham's Report on

* Independent advisors to GG

declaration(s) of exception(s)

* Member with "support of House"

Cdn. situation -"Two nations

* could / should include top Cabinet

* adds array of grounds for claims

asked by Monarch to "Form a

warring in the bosom of a

Ministers as ex officio members

of "group" discrimination and

gov't " - i.e. assemble a Cabinet

single state" -results in the

exempts laws/programs designed

to run day-to-day affairs

LEGISLATIVE POWER

for "amelioration of conditions of

* Support of House is "source" of

Act of Union 1840

One Parliament s.17 (3 parts)

disadvantaged individuals or groups"

Prime Minister's authority.

* An experiment to

1) Monarch (rep'd. by GG)

assimilate/eliminate the

2) Upper House, 'styled' Senate

Amending Formulae

French& Catholic rights

* Appointed for Life (now till age 75)

* Array of math. and pop. ratios

ROYAL PROCLAMATION of 1763

granted in Quebec Act 1774

* Min. property ownership &net-worth

est. to obtain Provincial Consent

* after War with France, Britain

* Upper&Lower Cda. merged

Qualifications & Disqualifications

*100%consent items=unamendable

obtains Quebec, E.& W. Florida &

into Canada East & West

** $4,000 never adjusted for Inflation!!!

* Bi-lateral amndmnts permit 1 prov.

Grenada as spoils of War

* Complex double majorities

*GG can add 4or8 Sen.(as tie-breaker)

and Confed gov't to change items

* Proclaims British Sovereignty

and dual capitals.

3) Lower House - Commons

affecting only that 1 province.

* Watershed Boundaries estblshd

** Experiment fails

"Democratic Element" - Part 1

~ lands drained by rivers & lakes

* Legislative impasse in Can.

* Individually Elected in Local

flowing into St Lawrence River

East & West + threat of war

Constituency ballot by citizens

(s/to 13 Colonies & Labrdr bndries)

from USA after Civil War

* Member with "support of House"

* Lands draining into Hudson's Bay

leads to 4 colony/province

asked by GG to "Form a gov't" ie

already licensed-Hudson's Bay Co

confederation in 1867

assemble a Cabinet to run affairs

* Lands beyond bndry "reserved"

* Support of House is "source" of

for "Nations or Tribes of Indians"

Prime Ministers authority.

"as their Hunting Grounds."

* Prescribes exact process to

Colonial British N. America

PROVINCIAL

acquire title on behalf of Crown

EXECUTIVE POWER

Gov Gen in Council s.13

QUEBEC ACT 1774

* ONLY "by & with" Advice Privy Cncil

* "Act for more effectual Provision

* can disallow Prov Bill w/in 1yr s.90

for the Government of … Quebec"

* Approves French Language use

Governor/Lt Governor

Lt Governor s.65

* Removes penalties against

* decisions subj. to Disallowance

appointed by Governor General

"persons professing the Religion

* Assent "by&with" Advice and

* acts with or without Advice s.65

of the Church of Rome"

Consent of Legis.C'ncil&Assembly

* can refuse Assent or Reserve Bills

* Re-instates Fr.Civil Code/Justice

* Taxes pre-announced in Speech

Lt Gov in Council s.66

* Br. Criminal Law remains in force

from the Throne

* ONLY "by & with" Advice

* Extends Boundary of Quebec to

northern shore of Ohio River

Executive Council

Executive Council (Ont Que)

Appointed by Governor

specific Mnstr's ex officio members

REACTION to Quebec Act

Nova Scotia & New Brunswick

Declaration of Independence -1776

carried on as before Confederation

* One of their "grievances" reads:

"For abolishing the free system

LEGISLATIVE POWER

of English laws in a neighbouring

Legislative Council

Legislative Council (now disbanded)

province [Quebec], establishing

Appointed by Governor

Appointed

therein an arbitrary government,

and enlarging its boundaries,

Legislative Assembly

so as to render it at once an

* Individually elected in Local

"Democratic Element" - Part 2

example and fit instrument for

Constituency ballot by property

* Individually elected in Local

introducing the same absolute

owners & qualified ($) ratepayers

Constituency ballotting

rule into these colonies."

* Member with "support of House"

asked by Lt.G to "Form a gov't" ie

PLUS - Article # 11 of 1777

assemble a Cabinet to run affairs

U.S. "Articles of Confederation"

* Support of House is "source" of

*Support of House is "source" of

IX. "Canada acceding to this

Prime Minister/Premier's authority.

confederation, and adjoining in the

measures of the U.S., shall be

admitted into, and entitled to all

the advantages of this Union;"

Governace Evolution- another format -- email me for ONE page Word.doc

2011-04-17T11:10:00.000-04:00

Origins and Evolution of Canada's Constitutional-Monarchy

- "Similar in Principle" means our system IS NOT "exactly the same" as the United Kingdom

- Sovereignty/Power Flows "Top Down" in Canada, NOT from "Bottom Up"

* Follow progression by dates

UNITED KINGDOM

COLONIAL - Upper & Lower Canada

CANADA 1867

CANADA 1982

* since Glorious Revolution -1688

Constitutional Act of 1791

BNA/Constitution Act 1867

Constitution Act 1982

& Bill of Rights 1689

"Responsible Government"

EXECUTIVE POWER

* no "written" Constitution

Monarch "in Council"

Monarch-not obliged to Council

* Monarch MUST accept advice

*can disallow Bills within 2yrs

* can disallow Bills w/in 2yrs s.57

* U.K.'s Canada Act 1982 removes

of Privy Council - NB. in exchange,

*communication only by ship

Lords & House from Cdn law

Minister/Ministry must resign if

Governor General s.12 & s.55

* Disallowance w/in 2yr untouched

Advice was 'bad' / needs reversing

* acts with or without Advice

* BNA Act becomes "Constitution"

Rebellions of 1837-38

*can Withhold Assent or Reserve Bills

wholly amendable here (see below)

Privy Council

*taxes pre-announced Throne Speech

a.k.a. U.K.Cabinet

* Upper & Lower Canadians

Gov Gen "in Council" s.13

Charter

rebel against arbitrary acts

* ONLY "by & with" Advice

* conditions and limits on existing

House of Lords

of Governor, Chateau Clique

common-law rights added s.1, s.33

Appointed

& Family Compact

Queen's Privy Council of Canada

*pre-existing rights became subject

House of Commons

* Appointed for Life

to Court interpretation & Prov/Prov.

Elected

Lord Durham's Report on

* Independent advisors to GG

declaration(s) of exception(s)

* Member with "support of House"

Cdn. situation -"Two nations

* could / should include top Cabinet

* adds array of grounds for claims

asked by Monarch to "Form a

warring in the bosom of a

Ministers as ex officio members

of "group" discrimination and

gov't " - i.e. assemble a Cabinet

single state" -results in the

exempts laws/programs designed

to run day-to-day affairs

LEGISLATIVE POWER

for "amelioration of conditions of

* Support of House is "source" of

Act of Union 1840

One Parliament s.17 (3 parts)

disadvantaged individuals or groups"

Prime Minister's authority.

* An experiment to

1) Monarch (rep'd. by GG)

assimilate/eliminate the

2) Upper House, 'styled' Senate

Amending Formulae

French& Catholic rights

* Appointed for Life (now till age 75)

* Array of math. and pop. ratios

ROYAL PROCLAMATION of 1763

granted in Quebec Act 1774

* Min. property ownership &net-worth

est. to obtain Provincial Consent

* after War with France, Britain

* Upper&Lower Cda. merged

Qualifications & Disqualifications

*100%consent items=unamendable

obtains Quebec, E.& W. Florida &

into Canada East & West

** $4,000 never adjusted for Inflation!!!

* Bi-lateral amndmnts permit 1 prov.

Grenada as spoils of War

* Complex double majorities

*GG can add 4or8 Sen.(as tie-breaker)

and Confed gov't to change items

* Proclaims British Sovereignty

and dual capitals.

3) Lower House - Commons

affecting only that 1 province.

* Watershed Boundaries estblshd

** Experiment fails

"Democratic Element" - Part 1

~ lands drained by rivers & lakes

* Legislative impasse in Can.

* Individually Elected in Local

flowing into St Lawrence River

East & West + threat of war

Constituency ballot by citizens

(s/to 13 Colonies & Labrdr bndries)

from USA after Civil War

* Member with "support of House"

* Lands draining into Hudson's Bay

leads to 4 colony/province

asked by GG to "Form a gov't" ie

already licensed-Hudson's Bay Co

confederation in 1867

assemble a Cabinet to run affairs

* Lands beyond bndry "reserved"

* Support of House is "source" of

for "Nations or Tribes of Indians"

Prime Ministers authority.

"as their Hunting Grounds."

* Prescribes exact process to

Colonial British N. America

PROVINCIAL

acquire title on behalf of Crown

EXECUTIVE POWER

Gov Gen in Council s.13

QUEBEC ACT 1774

* ONLY "by & with" Advice Privy Cncil

* "Act for more effectual Provision

* can disallow Prov Bill w/in 1yr s.90

for the Government of … Quebec"

* Approves French Language use

Governor/Lt Governor

Lt Governor s.65

* Removes penalties against

* decisions subj. to Disallowance

appointed by Governor General

"persons professing the Religion

* Assent "by&with" Advice and

* acts with or without Advice s.65

of the Church of Rome"

Consent of Legis.C'ncil&Assembly

* can refuse Assent or Reserve Bills

* Re-instates Fr.Civil Code/Justice

* Taxes pre-announced in Speech

Lt Gov in Council s.66

* Br. Criminal Law remains in force

from the Throne

* ONLY "by & with" Advice

* Extends Boundary of Quebec to

northern shore of Ohio River

Executive Council

Executive Council (Ont Que)

Appointed by Governor

specific Mnstr's ex officio members

REACTION to Quebec Act

Nova Scotia & New Brunswick

Declaration of Independence -1776

carried on as before Confederation

* One of their "grievances" reads:

"For abolishing the free system

LEGISLATIVE POWER

of English laws in a neighbouring

Legislative Council

Legislative Council (now disbanded)

province [Quebec], establishing

Appointed by Governor

Appointed

therein an arbitrary government,

and enlarging its boundaries,

Legislative Assembly

so as to render it at once an

* Individually elected in Local

"Democratic Element" - Part 2

example and fit instrument for

Constituency ballot by property

* Individually elected in Local

introducing the same absolute

owners & qualified ($) ratepayers

Constituency ballotting

rule into these colonies."

* Member with "support of House"

asked by Lt.G to "Form a gov't" ie

PLUS - Article # 11 of 1777

assemble a Cabinet to run affairs

U.S. "Articles of Confederation"

* Support of House is "source" of

*Support of House is "source" of

IX. "Canada acceding to this

Prime Minister/Premier's authority.

confederation, and adjoining in the

measures of the U.S., shall be

admitted into, and entitled to all

the advantages of this Union;"

Dollar weakening (on purpose) - Should we start denominating Commodities in another Currency?

2011-04-11T09:19:00.000-04:00

Bloomberg

By Allison Bennett and Garth Theunissen

April 11 (Bloomberg) -- The most-accurate currency strategists see no recovery for the dollar in coming months as the Federal Reserve delays raising interest rates after the end of its $600 billion asset-purchase program in June.

Wells Fargo & Co., the top forecaster for the second straight quarter, and No. 2 St. George Bank Ltd., say America’s currency will be little changed through June as the Fed lags behind central banks boosting rates. Schneider Foreign Exchange Ltd., Societe Generale SA and Bank of Nova Scotia, the next three analysts during the six quarters ended March 31 as measured in data compiled by Bloomberg, say the dollar will keep falling after its weakest start to a year since 2008.

“The currency of just about any central bank that has been willing to contemplate an interest-rate hike in this environment has performed strongly as money flowed to higher yield assets,” said Kit Juckes, London-based head of foreign-exchange research at Societe Generale. “The U.S. would like to keep interest rates as low as possible for as long as it can.”

While diverging central banks may stop the dollar from appreciating from a 16-month low, the policies are helping the U.S. recover from the biggest downturn since the Great Depression as the Fed begins to drain some of the more than $2 trillion of stimulus it pumped into the economy. U.S. exports have risen each month since August to a record $167.7 billion in January, Commerce Department data show.

Helping Obama
Fed policy has also helped keep borrowing costs on 10-year Treasury notes below a two-decade average of 5.22 percent for the entirety of President Barack Obama’s term, helping the U.S. fund a deficit the Congressional Budget Office projects will be in excess of $1 trillion for a third consecutive year. Obama and congressional leaders agreed on April 8 to cut about $38 billion of federal spending to avert a partial government shutdown with less than two hours to spare.

Treasuries due in one-to-three years yield about 0.78 percentage point less on average than the rest of the global market for government bonds of similar maturity, Bank of America Merrill Lynch indexes show. There was no difference in the yields a year ago. In that period, IntercontinentalExchange Inc.’s U.S. Dollar Index fell 8.1 percent to 74.929 as of 11:01 a.m. in London.

“We have to get past this period of very easy monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, but then we feel that the dollar is going to make a comeback against the euro and yen,” said Nick Bennenbroek, head of currency strategy at Wells Fargo in New York. Low expectations for any rise in rates also means there’s more room for a shift in perception that may benefit the dollar at the conclusion of quantitative easing, he said.

Higher Rates
The dollar dropped 1.7 percent last week to $1.4483 per euro, and strengthened 0.8 percent to 84.76 yen as the European Central Bank boosted its benchmark rate on April 7 to 1.25 percent from 1 percent, and ECB President Jean-Claude Trichet signaled more increases may be on the way. The greenback traded at $1.4464 and 84.63 yen today.

Brazil, Chile and Colombia have raised rates twice this year while Peru has lifted them by 25 basis points every month in 2011. Sweden, Hungary, Poland, China, India, Indonesia and Taiwan also increased borrowing costs in 2011, with the U.K. predicted to join them, according to Bloomberg surveys.

The median estimate of more than 70 economists surveyed by Bloomberg is for the Fed to keep its target rate in a range of zero to 0.25 percent through year-end.

Bank of Nova Scotia in Toronto predicts the dollar will end this year at $1.45 per euro, and Schneider sees the U.S. currency at $1.42. Wells Fargo predicts an advance to $1.40 at the end of June and $1.34 by year-end, while St. George forecasts $1.38 at the end of December. Societe Generale says it will slide to $1.50. The median of 44 estimates compiled by Bloomberg is for the greenback to climb 6.3 percent to $1.36.

Dollar Bulls
Statements by central bankers have encouraged dollar bulls.
Fed Bank Presidents Thomas Hoenig, Jeffrey Lacker, Charles Plosser and James Bullard have signaled optimism about the U.S., with St. Louis Fed President Bullard saying the central bank may be able to cut about $100 billion from its $600 bond-buying plan. The Federal Open Market Committee has reiterated rates will be kept at “exceptionally low levels” for an “extended period” for the past 25 months.

Futures traders have trimmed holdings on the dollar’s decline over the last month, data from the Washington-based Commodity Futures Trading Commission show. The difference in the number of wagers by hedge funds and other large speculators on a drop in the dollar compared with those on a gain reached 405,267 last month, the most since the data began in 2003.

Repeat Performance
Strategists are betting the currency market won’t repeat its performance following the end of the first round of Fed bond purchases, or quantitative easing, in March 2010. Back then, the Dollar Index posted a two-month, 10 percent rally to a 15-month high. The index tracks the currency against the yen, euro, pound, Swiss franc, Canadian dollar and Swedish krona.

That rally was underpinned by a flight to safety as Europe’s debt crisis erupted, resulting in a bailout of Greece. Europe’s leaders last month beefed up an aid fund for nations that can no longer fund themselves.
Spanish 10-year bonds have rallied relative to benchmark German bunds this year, indicating the risk of contagion has diminished after Ireland and Portugal also requested aid. The yield spread narrowed to 1.78 percentage points last week from a euro-era record of 2.98 percentage points on Nov. 30.

Euro Surge
Europe’s unified currency gained 3.5 percent in the first three months of this year against a basket of currencies tracked by Bloomberg Correlation-Weighted Indexes, the best first quarter performance since the shared currency was introduced in 1999. The euro advanced last week even as Portugal said it needed rescuing as well.

“Even though there will be times that the euro shakes on the back of sovereign concerns, overall at this point the framework is in place to support Europe,” said Camilla Sutton, chief currency strategist at Bank of Nova Scotia in Toronto.

The ECB’s primary mandate is containing inflation, while the Fed must also promote full employment. The U.S. central bank’s preferred measure of inflation was 0.9 percent in February. Consumer prices that month rose 2.4 percent in the euro region and 4.4 percent in the U.K., both of which target about 2 percent.

U.S. Unemployment
Policy makers may avoid raising rates even if U.S. inflation accelerates as long as unemployment remains elevated, according to Stephen Gallo, head of market analysis at Schneider Foreign Exchange. The Labor Department said April 1 that the jobless rate was 8.8 percent in March, compared with 4.6 percent the last time the central bank boosted benchmark borrowing costs in mid-2006.

While weakening, the dollar remains the world’s reserve currency.(ed. --for how long?) The dollar’s share of foreign reserves held steady in 2010, ending at 61.4 percent, according to the International Monetary Fund in Washington. The dollar was involved in 85 percent of currency trades from April 2007 to April 2010, compared with 90 percent in the three years through 2001, data compiled by the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland show.

China, the largest investor in U.S. government debt after the Fed, has increased its Treasury holdings by 30 percent to $1.154 trillion in January from a year earlier, helping the U.S fund its fiscal deficit and keep interest rates at a record low. Japan’s Treasury holdings have climbed 16 percent to $885.9 billion over the same period.

‘Structural Decline’
The dollar’s decline has supported the U.S. economy, with the trade deficit 30 percent smaller than before the financial crisis in August 2008. The economy may expand 3.1 percent this year, compared with 2.2 percent for the euro area, 1.8 percent for the U.K., 0.8 percent for Japan and 2.8 percent for Canada, according to Barclays Capital.

“The Fed will be quite late in raising rates,” said Besa Deda, chief economist at St. George, a unit of Westpac Banking Corp. “I’m not looking for a lot of dollar strength as I still think the U.S. dollar is in a structural long-term decline.”

Bennenbroek was the best forecaster for the second-straight quarter, helping Wells Fargo beat 51 firms across eight currency pairs with a 4.61 percent average margin of error, even as his call for a stronger greenback failed to materialize, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The firm’s margin in the survey ended Dec. 31, 2010, was 4.97.

Survey Methodology
Wells Fargo was followed by Sydney-based St. George at 4.79 percent; London-based Schneider at 4.86 percent; Paris-based Societe Generale at 4.93 percent; and Toronto-based Bank of Nova Scotia at 5.11 percent.

The firms were compared based on estimates at the end of each quarter for the close of the next, starting with the fourth quarter of 2009. One annual pick which was made at the end of March 2010 for exchange rates as of March 31, 2011, was also included. All estimates were weighted equally.

Only firms with at least four forecasts for a particular currency pair were ranked, and only those that qualified in at least five of eight pairs were included in the ranking of best overall predictors. In all, 51 firms submitted enough forecasts to be ranked in at least one currency.

To contact the reporters on this story: Allison Bennett in New York at abennett23@bloomberg.net; Garth Theunissen in London gtheunissen@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Dave Liedtka at dliedtka@bloomberg.net; Daniel Tilles at dtilles@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: April 11, 2011 06:07 EDT

Best Currency Forecasters See Weak Dollar as QE2 End Looms (2)