3 ms·

They aren't doing anything. Bank of Canada said they don't want to adjust rates for a couple years, ruling parties have been mum on the whole thing because it b

They aren't doing anything. Bank of Canada said they don't want to adjust rates for a couple years, ruling parties have been mum on the whole thing because it benefits a good chunk of voters that are homeowners. Right now it seems like to buy a house you have to offer no conditions, so no housing inspections etc. which is probably going to lead to a good number of screwed people when they find out their 900k home needs an extra 200k in work.

bradleyjg 6y ago
> because it benefits a good chunk of voters that are homeowners. Western nations all deciding to encourage homeownership looks like a bad decision in retrospect. Having a large percentage of voters with a large percentage of their net worth in a particular asset class practically guarantees bad policy with respect to that asset class. The same sort of thing is no happening with pension programs being replaced by investment schemes that encourage widespread stock ownership.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  As far as I know, pension fund board members were investing in stocks and REITs and hedge funds also. What is the difference between an individual owning a broad market index fund ETF like VTI and a pension fund? Both are going to get bailed out by governments the same way, by inflating asset values. At least with the individual investing in the index fund directly, they get to save money by not having to pay the pension fund board members and actuaries and lawyers and all that overhead.
  - bradleyjg 6y ago
    The pressure to bailout is lessened when the assets are owned by an intermediary institution. It took until the third covid free money bill for the multiemployer pension fund to get nearly a hundred billion of dollars with no strings attached. Meanwhile housing has been bailed out several times since those funds started ailing.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      The biggest owners of pension fund assets (and hence liabilities) are governments themselves, whether it be city, state, or federal. Multi employer funds also got bailouts via all the asset inflation, but I assume you are referring to an explicit cash transfer bailout, which I am not aware of. I am simply referring to the continuing trend of devaluing currency and inflating assets to fulfill debt obligations. In which case pension funds only serve as unnecessary middlemen where a target date fund from Vanguard/Fidelity/Schwab will do just the same.

bradleyjg 6y ago

> because it benefits a good chunk of voters that are homeowners. Western nations all deciding to encourage homeownership looks like a bad decision in retrospect. Having a large percentage of voters with a large percentage of their net worth in a particular asset class practically guarantees bad policy with respect to that asset class. The same sort of thing is no happening with pension programs being replaced by investment schemes that encourage widespread stock ownership.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
As far as I know, pension fund board members were investing in stocks and REITs and hedge funds also. What is the difference between an individual owning a broad market index fund ETF like VTI and a pension fund? Both are going to get bailed out by governments the same way, by inflating asset values. At least with the individual investing in the index fund directly, they get to save money by not having to pay the pension fund board members and actuaries and lawyers and all that overhead.
- bradleyjg 6y ago
  The pressure to bailout is lessened when the assets are owned by an intermediary institution. It took until the third covid free money bill for the multiemployer pension fund to get nearly a hundred billion of dollars with no strings attached. Meanwhile housing has been bailed out several times since those funds started ailing.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    The biggest owners of pension fund assets (and hence liabilities) are governments themselves, whether it be city, state, or federal. Multi employer funds also got bailouts via all the asset inflation, but I assume you are referring to an explicit cash transfer bailout, which I am not aware of. I am simply referring to the continuing trend of devaluing currency and inflating assets to fulfill debt obligations. In which case pension funds only serve as unnecessary middlemen where a target date fund from Vanguard/Fidelity/Schwab will do just the same.