Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Enigma who wrote (49619)	2/25/2000 10:00:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 116778

What numbers are you referring to? I stated that Canada has under 40 million people (CIA factbook puts it at around 31 million as of Jan, 2000). As for the pension program, it is no different that any other socialized economy where the govt assumes a large responsibility for providing exorbinant retirement benefits. Question... is Canada running a current budget surplus, or deficit? Is their GDP growth consistent with their longterm budgetary obligations? (Is GDP growth surpassing or matching their liabilities?). Basically, socialized govt programs almost always write checks that they can't pay for, thus necessitating greater deficit spending to make good on their political promises. That's the problem with govt pension programs. Social Security is a hybrid system, originally created as an social safety net for the down and out, but morphed into a govt funded pension plan. US policies (such as Roths, IRAs, and 401Ks) are intent on placing more responsibility on the individual to plan for their retirement. You can almost bet your bottom dollar that one of these days in the future the US govt will move toward making SS a needs/means based program, returning it to its original intent. The wealthy will not see the return that they put into the system (and probably that is the cost that must be born to bring the system back into balance). I don't too much emphasis in more socialized economies to encourage private savings. Private savings provide the means of reducing govt control over its citizens. And that seems to be cultural value in Europe, control over its people, either with a carrot or a stick. I believe Canada is adopting more of the US perspective on IRAs (RRSPs), but I don't believe they have quite as wide a participation as in the US. Please correct me if I am wrong. Canada still posesses a bit of a sterotype here in the US with regard to the amount of govt control of the public sector (like health care.. etc). Certainly the tax rates are higher there. Regards, Ron