Whattagame
Active Member
The CPP fund managers are among the best in the world. This wouldn't just be pulling the plug on everything. It would be strategic divestment from certain funds/stocks and reallocation to others from friendly nations.
|
|
|
- Thread starter TAS
- Start date
SarcasticMarmot
Active Member
Allowing political goals to play a role in dictating CPP investments is a hard line that I don't believe should be crossed. No matter how valid the reason, once that happens its hard to stop. If we can direct CPP investments to punish the US for the tariffs why can't we direct them to support our energy industry? Political motivations need to stay far away from CPP or we risk going the way of the US' social security system. I don't want Smith OR Ottawa to have any say in our pension investments.
We can find better ways to strike back against the USA.
We can find better ways to strike back against the USA.
Whattagame
Active Member
I think the point is that we're kind of reaching an existential crisis. If we don't pull these levers to try and have the American public push for action internally, the end-goal of the administration will be to simply take our resources. No CPP left to protect.
SarcasticMarmot
Active Member
And to many in Alberta, the move away from fossil fuels is an existential crisis. Hence why an APP that props up industry is appealing to them.
The tariffs are gonna hurt, but until the us military is amassing at our border, CPP should be off limits.
kcantor
Senior Member
I don't mind if you share it but the credit isn't all mine. It was the result of some back and forth musing my eldest son a month or so (along with some assistance from ChatGPT). I don't know why it wouldn't be practical and almost wonder if it's something that shouldn't be initiated before the US imposes taxes on foreign capital assets or withholding taxes on the dividend or other returns paid outside of the US.
kcantor
Senior Member
There are many jurisdictions in the world where Canadians and Canadian entities are already prohibited from investing including Central African Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Myanmar, Russia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Zimbabwe even though there may be some very attractive investment options in those countries.
This was not always the case and In each case these embargoes were based on what was/is in the best security and economic interests of Canada. Should the federal government also choose to provide some incentives to make it more attractive for them to invest that capital in certain sectors (which is part of what I am proposing), each of the funds would still be free to make their own decisions on whether those would be more or less attractive investments for their funds than other options in Canada or in other non-prohibited jurisdictions. Those opportunities would simply be additional options for them, not enforceable or compulsory directives.
Gronk!
Senior Member
Source?
bodsbods9090
Senior Member
I have to find it but his economic minister, or whatever his title is (Lutnick) said he's willing to meet in the middle.
The stock market crash has already hurt a lot of people a ton. I'm sure they are getting A LOT or pressure from big business to turn this around, and fast.
ADob
Active Member
I love how we use terms like "meeting in the middle" as though this is a reasonable debate between reasonable people and not trying to minimize the damage of the mad ravings of a power hungry lunatic whose understanding of economics is miniscule, at best. I know I'm not saying anything earth-shattering here, but I feel like the world is understandably taking a while for it to sink in that we're not dealing with a reasonable world leader and that the US is no longer what it once was, and maybe never will be again.
Airboy
Senior Member
Makes Warton look Soooooo good now, turning out someone who has no grasp on economics. But Its like everytime he pushes and people push bac. just let him have a semblance of a win. I figure he will come out and says Canada has increased border security like he asked so he is lessening the Tariffs.
What I didn't like was a few GOP senators saying the next response should be kinetic.
archited
Senior Member
From the New Yorker Daily...
trevorhayden
Active Member
Polls don't matter when you think you are prez 4 life.
David A
Senior Member
This "meeting in the middle" talk is a bunch of bs. This is how Trump negotiates, he tries to take your shirt and jacket and then says he will give you back the shirt to make it sound like a good deal for you.
It is not that he cares about us at all, he is facing tremendous pressure from the auto industry and the agriculture industries in particular and the market in general to back off.
policyenthusiast
Active Member
Chrystia Freeland wants Mark Carney to be finance minister, if she becomes PM
Liberal leadership candidate Chrystia Freeland says if she wins and becomes prime minister, she will invite rival Mark Carney to serve as her finance minister, a job she dramatically vacated just a few months ago.I doubt Carney will want Freeland to serve as Finance Minister if he wins.
archited
Senior Member
A very backhanded compliment from Ms. Freeland. By the way I love her backstory and I think she would be a very good PM. Both her and Mr. Carney having Alberta roots might bode well for western Provinces.