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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (986)	10/2/2005 3:52:20 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218579

Canada has very good management for mineral and energy companies, even if the resources are located in other countries. Franco-Nevada, now Newmont,being one example, Cameco , Talisman Energy, lots of others. Even if the US goes in a protective tariff direction (Smoot-Hawley), ther are likely to be exceptions for Canada. Nafta is a good example. The US is NOT completely stupid. Canada has done better about managing their budget. They don't have huge military obligations driving their budget either. Canadian military spending is about $ 250 per capita vs. $950 + for the US. There are drug and biotech companies, some software, aircraft, and some world class automotive suppliers. For example, the highly modified Pontiac Firehawk and WS-6 versions of the TransAm were built and partial designed by SLP and ASE in Canada. Partial assembled cars were sent to SLP, were fitted and adjusted with the high performance components, then sent back into the production line. There are also some well run banks. Canada also has great interest as tourist destination - great sceanic vistas, some very good food, and, unlike a certain country to the south, a low probability of a body cavity searches ;-)

To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (986)	10/5/2005 9:36:39 PM
From: Taikun	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218579

< I know of no good investments in Canada OTHER THAN the oil,gas,uranium,coal stocks.> What about the other half of the Canadian economy? Doesn't seem like a long-term solution to China to me. Besides an investment in the Loonie is only an investment in Ottawa's proficiency at overtaxing Canadians to the point where on a GDP basis Canadians' standard of living is at least 15% lower than where it would be if it were another nation. This is part of your Canadian solution: Canadian plants in peril of losing labour cost advantage against U.S.: GM VP Gary Norris Canadian Press October 4, 2005 TORONTO (CP) - The highly regarded factories of General Motors of Canada are in danger of losing their long-standing labour cost advantage over GM's American operations, an executive of the world's largest automaker said Monday. GM Canada's new three-year agreement with the Canadian Auto Workers, ratified by union members during the weekend, "drove some cost where we'd rather it hadn't," said Al Green, vice-president for personnel of GM Canada. GM won non-wage "offsets" - notably a reduction of health-care costs - to the contract's annual pay increases of 1.5, one and one per cent, plus inflation protection, for its 19,000 unionized Canadian workers. Additionally, "we have a number of initiatives in Canada that could allow us to reduce our overall employment levels between 1,000 and 2,000 over the life of the agreement," Green said. "Who knows the exact number of lost jobs? But this contract definitely trades better compensation for fewer jobs," commented industry analyst Dennis DesRosiers of DesRosiers Automotive Consultants. Green told a media briefing on the contract that how job cuts will be distributed between CAW members and United Auto Workers members in the United States remains to be seen. He said productivity at GM Canada plants has been improving at between 3 1/2 and five per cent annually in recent years, but the strong Canadian dollar has offset this. The currency - currently worth close to 86 cents US, up from under 80 cents a year ago, 75 cents two years ago and 63 cents three years ago - "has eroded considerably the labour cost advantage that we as Canadians and as a Canadian manufacturer had, vis-a-vis the U.S. especially," Green observed. "Depending on what happens in the next year or so in the U.S. environment, knowing that there are significant talks going on with the UAW relative to health care, it is conceivable that we will lose the labour cost advantage that we had previously had here in Canada," he said. "And that certainly will have an impact on future decisions around product allocation and investment." The pinch point for the Canadian dollar in GM's decision-making "depends on a number of other factors, but in round numbers probably in the 88-to 92-cent range." The contract with the CAW, whose assembly-line members earn about $30 an hour, "was significant in that it allowed us to cap some expenditures in a number of areas," Green said. It puts limits on what workers can claim for such benefits as long-term care, semi-private hospital rooms and drug dispensing fees, but the impact on individuals will be negligible, he said. "Without those caps or limits we know that we were being charged more by some institutions for those services than were other providers who did in fact have caps on their expenses," Green said. "It did not really impact our employees, because the caps are basically set at levels we know are acceptable to many of the providers." The overall result of the contract is that GM, whose Oshawa, Ont., car plants rank first and fourth in productivity in the widely watched Harbour Consulting survey of North American auto factories, is positioned against its competition "as well as we can be at this time," Green said. CAW members at GM voted 79.6 per cent in favour of the deal, whose monetary package parallels contracts ratified earlier at the Canadian divisions of Ford and DaimlerChrysler. However, the three companies are "fundamentally different and negotiated fundamentally different non-wage language," DesRosiers said in a commentary. And he warned that the cost gap between Canadian and American workers "will move significantly in favour of UAW workers." For CAW members, he said: "This does not bode well for their long-term survival." © The Canadian Press 2005