kEiThZ
Superstar
There's 5% GICs available now. GIC rates won't match mortgage rates. Banks need to make money after all. And the spread is their profit.
|
|
|
PM Justin Trudeau's Canada
- Thread starter King of Kensington
- Start date
There's 5% GICs available now. GIC rates won't match mortgage rates. Banks need to make money after all. And the spread is their profit.
Northern Light
Superstar
On interest rates:
I think the bigger difference vs say 40 years ago is not GIC rates vs Mortgage rates, but rates for regular bank accounts adjusted for bank fees.
I opened my first bank account at age 8 in the early 80s; mom did help, but after it was opened I didn't need her signature for anything, I even got a cheque book.
At any rate, there was no bank fees of any kind on my account except if you wrote an NSF cheque; and it paid interest (not much mind you, maybe 2% or something). Today, I have considerably more money
with my primary bank, I still pay no fees, but that's a privilege of maintaining a high balance; but I don't get any interest whatsoever on my day to day account.
For the typical person, who can't sustain a high balance, you now literally pay to have a bank account either through fees or the monthly payment to avoid same.
****
On Mortgage rates vs GIC rates, the comparison on spreads is actually quite interesting over the decades, and can be seen through these two links:
www.ratehub.ca
wowa.ca
I think the bigger difference vs say 40 years ago is not GIC rates vs Mortgage rates, but rates for regular bank accounts adjusted for bank fees.
I opened my first bank account at age 8 in the early 80s; mom did help, but after it was opened I didn't need her signature for anything, I even got a cheque book.
At any rate, there was no bank fees of any kind on my account except if you wrote an NSF cheque; and it paid interest (not much mind you, maybe 2% or something). Today, I have considerably more money
with my primary bank, I still pay no fees, but that's a privilege of maintaining a high balance; but I don't get any interest whatsoever on my day to day account.
For the typical person, who can't sustain a high balance, you now literally pay to have a bank account either through fees or the monthly payment to avoid same.
****
On Mortgage rates vs GIC rates, the comparison on spreads is actually quite interesting over the decades, and can be seen through these two links:
The history of GIC rates | Ratehub.ca
Learn about the history of GIC rates and how they've changed over the years.
www.ratehub.ca
Canada Mortgage Rates History (1975 to 2024)
From double-digit interest rates in the 1980’s to record-low rates in the 2020’s, take a look at Canada’s mortgage rate history, download historical mortgage rates, and compare home affordability in Canada over the years.
wowa.ca
kEiThZ
Superstar
Plenty of no-fee banking options that didn't exist in the past. Nobody below the age of 40-45 I know bothers with full service bank accounts requiring a minimum balance.
Richard White
Senior Member
I have two full service banking accounts requiring a minimum balance to waive fees.
I pay no fees on either of them.
I'm 35
I’m above that age bracket and have used Simplii for years (since its inception with PC) and have never paid a penny in bank fees. I also never go to a bank branch. We do use a traditional bricks and mortar bank for our business account and some investment, but we have always negotiated fees down, including annual credit card fees.
Northern Light
Superstar
A story tailor made for @kEiThZ input.
For those lacking previews..........more delays in the RCAF getting drones, apparently because DND questions their ability to operate in the high arctic.
For those lacking previews..........more delays in the RCAF getting drones, apparently because DND questions their ability to operate in the high arctic.
Towered
Senior Member
I'm tired of Trudeau in general, but I'm not impressed by the alternatives either. Sigh.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Many of us have been saying this internally for months to years. I think the project is obsolete.
Northern Light
Superstar
I confess, I expected a critique of how this was being handled, but I didn't expect that one.
Could you elaborate, please?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Non-stealthy drones are not survivable in a near-peer threat environment. The Reapers are fine for hunting terrorists and insurgents who don't have air defences. But in heavily defended airspace their utility is limited. Drone warfare is evolving to a Hi-Lo mix.
On the high end there's flying wingman equipped with substantial artificial intelligence that can do sophisticated tasks. Like this:
Boeing MQ-28 Ghost Bat - Wikipedia
On the low end, you have cheaper attritable systems; loitering munitions that are cheap, can reconnoiter an area and conduct single or swarm kamikaze attacks. For example:
AeroVironment Switchblade - Wikipedia
Systems like Reapers and Predator aren't cheap like loitering munitions and can't help our aircrews survive a higher threat environment. Australia recognized the changing threat environment and cancelled their purchase of the Reapers. I hope Canada does the same.
As a purely surveillance asset, it's fine. But then I question why the air force is operating it and not Transport Canada. And for the Arctic, we'd need something much bigger than a Reaper. This seems like they don't want to buy Global Hawks to patrol the Arctic, and want to get a drone that can drop ordinance while occasionally doing surveillance up north. I don't see the point. If it's Arctic surveillance either use satellites or get larger drones capable of operating in that weather.
Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk - Wikipedia
Northern Light
Superstar
Non-stealthy drones are not survivable in a near-peer threat environment. The Reapers are fine for hunting terrorists and insurgents who don't have air defences. But in heavily defended airspace their utility is limited. Drone warfare is evolving to a Hi-Lo mix.
On the high end there's flying wingman equipped with substantial artificial intelligence that can do sophisticated tasks. Like this:
Boeing MQ-28 Ghost Bat - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
On the low end, you have cheaper attritable systems; loitering munitions that are cheap, can reconnoiter an area and conduct single or swarm kamikaze attacks. For example:
AeroVironment Switchblade - Wikipedia
Systems like Reapers and Predator aren't cheap like loitering munitions and can't help our aircrews survive a higher threat environment. Australia recognized the changing threat environment and cancelled their purchase of the Reapers. I hope Canada does the same.
As a purely surveillance asset, it's fine. But then I question why the air force is operating it and not Transport Canada. And for the Arctic, we'd need something much bigger than a Reaper. This seems like they don't want to buy Global Hawks to patrol the Arctic, and want to get a drone that can drop ordinance while occasionally doing surveillance up north. I don't see the point. If it's Arctic surveillance either use satellites or get larger drones capable of operating in that weather.
Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk - Wikipedia
Excellent response, thank you.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Should be noted as well that Canada has unique issues because of our geography. We don't have great satellite coverage at our northern latitudes. This can impact our ability to ascertain position and our ability to communicate with a drone.
Many of these are issues I thought the government would address in the Defence Policy Update. But who knows if this government will ever actually table one of those.
Many of these are issues I thought the government would address in the Defence Policy Update. But who knows if this government will ever actually table one of those.
lenaitch
Senior Member
A major government purchase or program rendered obsolete by the time it is rolled out is a well-established Canadian tradition.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Exactly. And this is actually a decent example. I get the impetus. We need improved surveillance of the Arctic. A small fleet of Auroras (P-8s in the future) isn't enough. But buying a MALE UCAV may not be the best solution here. We're mixing two missions here in a manner that isn't appropriate for the current era.
1) Arctic Surveillance. Requires exceptionally long endurance, massive sensor arrays and robust airframe capable of withstanding Arctic weather. This can be done with HALE UAVs or satellites or manned platforms (like the P-8).
2) Precision strike and air interdiction. The ability to put "warheads on foreheads" as we say. This can be done with far smaller and cheaper drones than a Reaper or even just with loitering munitions. The optimized space for a non-stealthy MALE UCAV is getting smaller as loitering munitions get cheaper and better and stealthier UAVs become more relevant.
Since the Armenia-Azerbaijan war, there has been simmering debate on the utility of drones, loitering munitions, etc and their role in Western doctrine. You will find everything from academic papers in military science journals to opeds in military magazines. Ukraine has brought this debate a bit more into the public eye. I was hoping the government would study the issue in earnest and look at the Canadian context and better decide how and where we should invest. Instead, we're trying to justify the purchase of a MALE UCAV for surveillance in weather so hostile we may not get the airplane back, just so we can have the ability to drop Hellfires on insurgents like it's 2012.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Same. But this government is digging their own grave everyday. I can't believe how much they sought to prop up housing prices, only to end up plummeting the birth rate and creating a housing crisis. That's rank incompetence.
Though, as you say, the alternatives are incompetence of another kind. Honestly, I fear the ideological twist we're getting from the CPC after they win a massive majority and after the LPC brand is decimated with younger voters for a decade. Right now polls are showing a Mulroney like landslide for the CPC.
And yet despite the polling, this government is still not treating housing as a real immediate crisis. And is still not really cracking down on the shady student pipeline. I don't know if they are just out of touch or arrogant.