Canadians struggling to save and pay off debt; 38 per cent have no savings

[carverman]

Your choice, you can pay for 65 of them now to replace twice as many money pits, or you can pay much more for them after losing contracts and trying to maintain 30 year old jets for another decade while the liberals do their "fair evaluation" to realize there's no other option

There ARE other options. Watching the CPAC channel yesterday, the whole
day on that channel was experts and interviewers discussing the F-35 JSF'
and whether that is a good choice for Canada.
Although the military wants the latest and greatest and stealth capability,
you don't need that kind of high tech to defend Canada's Sovereignty
in the far north or on maritime patrol..it's overkill. Yes, if you want to
participate in future bombing wars (like Libya and such), then a strike
fighter that can fly under the radar undetected to knock out russian made
SAM missile launchers is just the thing..but at 70 mil a piece for the basic
airframe, no engine, no avionics for attack or ECM, it's not going to be
the ideal fighter of the next 20-30 years for Canada. This was some
"sweetheart deal" that Harper and his cronies arranged with Lockheed-Martin.

Boeing is prime contractor for the Super Hornet, another strike fighter variant
that is based on the F-18 but next generation with partial stealth (ECMs) to
provide multirole capability and they are only 42 million COMPLETE with
avionics and ECMs!

But I guess if the PCs want the Ferrari, they are not going to settle for a
Mustang at less than half the cost now. The F-35 is projected to be
double the intial cost with the next 10 years as delivery starts to ramp up.
Some countries like Britain who were initially eager to order 70, have decide
it's too expensive for their budgets and cut down the initial order to 40!

Now as one may know, on any high tech item, the huge developement cost
is written off over x copies..if those copies sold are less than anticipated,
then the cost per unit goes up tremendously!..and that's what's going to
happen if they decide to go ahead with it. Harper's promise to families
of new tax credits etc..will go out the window..because that promise is
predicated on the PC eliminated the deficit in the next 4 years..and that
isn't going to happen if they keep spending on Ferraris to fight foreign wars!

All the big numbers you hear are for the life of the jet, which is likely twice as long as predicted. How much will health care cost over the next 30-40 years?? A lot more than 65 JSF's that's for sure!

Health care costs are esculating..but that's where they should be spending
the money..after all health care benefits all the people of Canada and
some are taxpayers.

How about we reduce the police, the fire department, and the search and rescue while we're at it? Surely the failing US will pick up the slack

Again, are we missing the point? Money spent on police/fire services/SAR
benefit the people of Canada directly. Some fancy JSF is only to fight
foreign wars because we are part of NATO and it's the old story with
technology changing the face of war.."Ya can't take a knife to a gunfight!"

[I'm Howard]

caverman, big guns are like cavalry in WW1, the real war is some guy on a mission from God with a virus in his briefcase or some computer hacker who shuts down the power grid or knocks out the computers for the banking system.

Canada does not need a strong Airforce, we need a strong Navy, we are surrounded by water, that is what we should be defending.

It is all BS, we are just ATM's for some jerk with his own idea of what is good for us, same kings, same vassals, differant castles.

I will vote for the first guy who says we are going to reduce Governments by 10%, bring benefits in line with the private sector, and quit paying Cops and Firemen over $100,000 a year.

[financialnoob]

$45k is taxed on average 17-23%, hardly half. That's $35-38k, or ~$3k/month. Obviously they are blowing the other $1k/month on booze a partying, as they forgot they even had it and claim it went to taxes

That's not even counting any of the tax credits besides the big personal tax credit everyone gets

That's also just the average salary, which is skewed downward by entrepreneurs, drug dealers etc etc

If I look around at my peers, neighbours, or just people in general, more than 38% can afford to save money based on what they are buying/wasting on consumer debt. Taxes are hardly to blame imo

I got a chuckle out of grouping entrepreneurs and drug dealers together. Some drug dealers would also argue they are entrepreneurs!

I think everyone knows people who could afford to save but don't. But I also think it's too simple to think the entire 38% is made up of lazy people.

According to Stats Can, the median total income in Canada for households was $78K (before taxes) in 2005. However, the median income for unattached individuals was only $32K, while single parents had a median income of $44K. Note these figures include all types of income, including assistance from government programs. When looking at income-only, the numbers can drop even more ($70K for households, $27K for singles, $36K for single parents, again all figures before taxes).

Median is more useful than average because, as you pointed out, averages are easily skewed. So $27K income is the middle point for singles; half make more, half make less. And half of single parents make less than $36K though they have the added costs of raising a child. That puts these groups at $9K to $18K below the average, a pretty significant margin. It's possible to do and still have a bit left over for savings, but not easily, and not a lot.

Which again, is not to excuse personal responsibility from this discussion. I know from first-hand experience that there are people who are guilty of poor spending habits. But it'd be good to avoid using a broad brush to paint everyone who can't afford to save as the same type.

[andrewf]

People have taken far more things into consideration to decide that jets are a requirement, which you agree. The debate is only if they are the best purchase for the job. Canada spends practically nothing % GDP on military compared to other countries while we still defend other countries as well as ourselves during unconventional warfare. Yes you need more jets for conventional warfare, but the 1970's are over and you also need more cops to establish peace in a lawless city..

The presence of a single roaming cop car keeps the street crime at bay in a stable area. Yet a few F35's are useless for defense of a stable airspace? I guess we don't need to host world events such as the Olympics and G20 either. With the current handfull of F-18s, we manage to not only defend Canada but also the USA when their fleets have been grounded and additional countries as part of NATO air policing.

Besides diplomacy it's also technology, information, training, knowledge, intel, skills, surveillance, interoperability, economy and the list goes on. How about we just shut down NORAD and NATO contributions and all the other platforms and equipment you probably don't even know exists. Jets offer far more capabilities than you have considered. No other platform can provide a sensor with as much range/speed/flexibility etc

Let's just get some nucs, and police our air sovereignty with that? I'm sure that would be cheaper than 65 jets and whenever someone breaks the rules, we'll nuc their home without any sensor int, without radio or visual contact and without any warning. How about the cops just shoot anyone who speeds too? Then maybe more Canadians would save money instead of buying cars and jets eh?

Do you need stealth aircraft for sensing? Wouldn't the thousands of drones we could buy for the same coin be more useful in that regard? These aircraft don't seem remotely useful for 'policing'. Your options are to destroy aircraft in our airspace or do nothing. And if anyone was serious about controlling Canadian airspace, we're outgunned ten to one.

It's like the security guard trying to stop a dozen thieves from robbing a bank. He's really more just decoration for the customers than a real security measure. I guess in this analogy, the jets are to make Canadians feel better, not really to defend our airspace.

[m3s]

There ARE other options. Watching the CPAC channel yesterday, the whole
day on that channel was experts and interviewers discussing the F-35 JSF'
and whether that is a good choice for Canada.
Although the military wants the latest and greatest and stealth capability,
you don't need that kind of high tech to defend Canada's Sovereignty
in the far north or on maritime patrol..it's overkill. Yes, if you want to
participate in future bombing wars (like Libya and such), then a strike
fighter that can fly under the radar undetected to knock out russian made
SAM missile launchers is just the thing..but at 70 mil a piece for the basic
airframe, no engine, no avionics for attack or ECM, it's not going to be
the ideal fighter of the next 20-30 years for Canada. This was some
"sweetheart deal" that Harper and his cronies arranged with Lockheed-Martin.

Boeing is prime contractor for the Super Hornet, another strike fighter variant
that is based on the F-18 but next generation with partial stealth (ECMs) to
provide multirole capability and they are only 42 million COMPLETE with
avionics and ECMs!

But I guess if the PCs want the Ferrari, they are not going to settle for a
Mustang at less than half the cost now. The F-35 is projected to be
double the intial cost with the next 10 years as delivery starts to ramp up.
Some countries like Britain who were initially eager to order 70, have decide
it's too expensive for their budgets and cut down the initial order to 40!

Now as one may know, on any high tech item, the huge developement cost
is written off over x copies..if those copies sold are less than anticipated,
then the cost per unit goes up tremendously!..and that's what's going to
happen if they decide to go ahead with it. Harper's promise to families
of new tax credits etc..will go out the window..because that promise is
predicated on the PC eliminated the deficit in the next 4 years..and that
isn't going to happen if they keep spending on Ferraris to fight foreign wars!



Health care costs are esculating..but that's where they should be spending
the money..after all health care benefits all the people of Canada and
some are taxpayers.



Again, are we missing the point? Money spent on police/fire services/SAR
benefit the people of Canada directly. Some fancy JSF is only to fight
foreign wars because we are part of NATO and it's the old story with
technology changing the face of war.."Ya can't take a knife to a gunfight!"

People can arm chair it all they want, but they haven't scraped the surface of all the factors.

You can buy an airframe that's perfect for air sovereignty patrol, but it won't be interoperable with other countries for the next 30 years. JSF is a jack of all trades master of none fighter. I would rather buy a long range bvr fighter and a close air support fighter but that would surely cost more to be interoperable 5th gen

Super Hornet is a great jet but it's not a 5th gen fighter nor is it a jack of all trades. The Aussies are buying the Super Hornet as an interim fighter until they get the JSF. Canada is going the cheap route and extending the life of the Hornets instead.

We signed for a fixed price and we are sheltered from Lockheed Martin R&D costs. The media, the opposition, and these investigative TV shows just keep repeating the same poor information

We could also buy a 1000 cheap Mig-29's. That has a lot of other downsides on all the other factors I listed but hey it would defend Canada according to your understanding of air defense.

Canada does not need a strong Airforce, we need a strong Navy, we are surrounded by water, that is what we should be defending.

It is all BS, we are just ATM's for some jerk with his own idea of what is good for us, same kings, same vassals, differant castles.

I will vote for the first guy who says we are going to reduce Governments by 10%, bring benefits in line with the private sector, and quit paying Cops and Firemen over $100,000 a year.

Navy costs even more and it's slow as molasses. Small number of air force can cover a much larger range in far less time, which is good for the stable area we have. You cry for money saving and say you want Navy?

How much does a CEO make? He still makes just as much during these economic conditions and he is just as much to blame as the public sector. Cops make nothing in Mexico and they aren't corrupt at all

Do you need stealth aircraft for sensing? Wouldn't the thousands of drones we could buy for the same coin be more useful in that regard? These aircraft don't seem remotely useful for 'policing'. Your options are to destroy aircraft in our airspace or do nothing. And if anyone was serious about controlling Canadian airspace, we're outgunned ten to one.

It's like the security guard trying to stop a dozen thieves from robbing a bank. He's really more just decoration for the customers than a real security measure. I guess in this analogy, the jets are to make Canadians feel better, not really to defend our airspace.

I guess you don't understand show of force do you? Sure a brute force mob can overrule a cop car, but that doesn't mean it's just decoration. I lock on a bike is "decoration" as well then. I already explained that we have stable streets and a stable airspace, so 2 security guards and 2 jets on standby maintain the peace. 1 cop calls for backup etc, more jets get put on alert. You have 0 understanding of the subject

1000's of drones that have no person to interpret the information and can do nothing else, so we'd need more satellites since Canada is not covered by radio towers. What we actually need is a few AWACS like Australia, but we're talking about Canada here that spends less GDP on military than Kenya. JSF is the cheap route. I should really be screaming that JSF is not enough, but I would rather see debt paid off myself. It's just ridiculous to cry over the 1.5% GDP we spend as if it's the biggest waste, when it's actually the bare minimum!

It's a shame that the media is designed so that a 5th grade drop out could understand, because this is a very complex topic that is obviously not explained at all.

[KLR650]

Time to bring home economics back to middle and high schools. Then personal financial planning. Too many people legitimately have no clue how to handle money.

Look at this:
http://news.ontario.ca/edu/en/2009/1...r-economy.html

It's about time they did this.

[carverman]

You can buy an airframe that's perfect for air sovereignty patrol, but it won't be interoperable with other countries for the next 30 years. JSF is a jack of all trades master of none fighter. I would rather buy a long range bvr fighter and a close air support fighter but that would surely cost more to be interoperable 5th gen

Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion... and how it influences your vote.

IMO, FWIW..

1. Canada does not need stealth capability. The Russian threat went out
with the end of the cold war. Canada needs interceptor capabilty and that
can be satisfied with the next generation of CF18 (or the super hornet)
as the US navy calls it. These are optimized for defence/offence and patrol
and carry weapons and ECM,and the infrastructure to support them (maintenance) is already in place. The controls are pretty much the same,
so the cost of retraining pilots (one of the most expensive logistics component) is minimized. The engines are new..mach 1 + and that's all the
airforce needs. At 42 mil per copy, you still have lots of millions left over
for support and weaponry.

2. Canada needs better and improved maritime patrol aircraft. The Aurora
subhunter is a piston driven aircraft that is half a century old. I'm not saying
that high speed jets are the solution here...but an upgrade to protect our
maritime borders should be a priority, not some "shock and awe" demonstration of superior technolgy aircraft dropping bombs on the middle east! Look at what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan after the stealthy
B-2s and B-52 dropped their bunker busting bombs...they had to move in
ground troops and encounter many countless lives lost on both sides..and
its still going on..and it will continue..that kind of war will not defeat the
will of the people to control their own destiny. As soon as Canadian troops
leave this year, the Taliban will start moving in again..and in a year or two
it will be a similar sitiuation to what it was in 2001.

3. Lester Pearson, one of the top few PMs that I still have respect for,
always said we are a nation of peacekeepers..if that is our role..we don't
need stealth jets..leave that to our US friends to invade and bomb the
hell out of any country that doesn't agree or follow with the US foreign policies.

4. We need to concentrate on the quality of life for Canadians over the
next 20 years!

5.We are already in a big deficit..we don't need some US made war machines
to add to that! Canadians are already struggling with personal debt..the
US is practically "bankrupt" with debt in the multi trillions! Why should we
saddle the next generation of Canadians to pay for war machinery that some
other country will benefit from. Time to think with a bit of sensibility here!

Super Hornet is a great jet but it's not a 5th gen fighter nor is it a jack of all trades. The Aussies are buying the Super Hornet as an interim fighter until they get the JSF. Canada is going the cheap route and extending the life of the Hornets instead.

Neither is the F-35! It's not even completely developed yet and they are
asking for advance orders? C'mon..lets see the track record of these
planes first. There are other options, including the European strike fighters
that are just as capable..it's just that Lockheed-Martin is trying to convince
us that this expensive contract is right for us..because it will generate jobs
in Canada..ya right..have to see that when it materializes!

We signed for a fixed price and we are sheltered from Lockheed Martin R&D costs. The media, the opposition, and these investigative TV shows just keep repeating the same poor information

How is that? With any military contract, the fixed price" is just the price
for this year, next year and the year after that and 10 years from now
when the last jet gets delivered, with inflation and cost overruns it will
be DOUBLE what they are quoting today. Don't believe that propoganda
for a minute!

We could also buy a 1000 cheap Mig-29's. That has a lot of other downsides on all the other factors I listed but hey it would defend Canada according to your understanding of air defense.

Well even if that was an option, Canada being part of NATO would not
buy jets from a country that it is trying to defend western values and policies
from. That is a ridiculous assertion.

Navy costs even more and it's slow as molasses. Small number of air force can cover a much larger range in far less time, which is good for the stable area we have. You cry for money saving and say you want Navy?

The navy can do it more efficiently. Flying expensive supersonic jets around
wasting large amounts of expensive fuel to find enemy subs or boat people
is just ridiculous..and what are the jets going to do up north?
..count the number of seals and polar bears..c'mon man!

It's a shame that the media is designed so that a 5th grade drop out could understand, because this is a very complex topic that is obviously not explained at all.

The media is just trying to show the true reality of the situation, so even, yes,
even a 5th grade dropout can understand try to understand something..not just accept the hot air of a dictatorial PM that is trying to shove his political decisions down our collective throats!

[m3s]

Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion... and how it influences your vote.

IMO, FWIW..

1. Canada does not need stealth capability. The Russian threat went out
with the end of the cold war. Canada needs interceptor capabilty and that
can be satisfied with the next generation of CF18 (or the super hornet)
as the US navy calls it. These are optimized for defence/offence and patrol
and carry weapons and ECM,and the infrastructure to support them (maintenance) is already in place. The controls are pretty much the same,
so the cost of retraining pilots (one of the most expensive logistics component) is minimized. The engines are new..mach 1 + and that's all the
airforce needs. At 42 mil per copy, you still have lots of millions left over
for support and weaponry.

2. Canada needs better and improved maritime patrol aircraft. The Aurora
subhunter is a piston driven aircraft that is half a century old. I'm not saying
that high speed jets are the solution here...but an upgrade to protect our
maritime borders should be a priority, not some "shock and awe" demonstration of superior technolgy aircraft dropping bombs on the middle east! Look at what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan after the stealthy
B-2s and B-52 dropped their bunker busting bombs...they had to move in
ground troops and encounter many countless lives lost on both sides..and
its still going on..and it will continue..that kind of war will not defeat the
will of the people to control their own destiny. As soon as Canadian troops
leave this year, the Taliban will start moving in again..and in a year or two
it will be a similar sitiuation to what it was in 2001.

3. Lester Pearson, one of the top few PMs that I still have respect for,
always said we are a nation of peacekeepers..if that is our role..we don't
need stealth jets..leave that to our US friends to invade and bomb the
hell out of any country that doesn't agree or follow with the US foreign policies.

4. We need to concentrate on the quality of life for Canadians over the
next 20 years!

5.We are already in a big deficit..we don't need some US made war machines
to add to that! Canadians are already struggling with personal debt..the
US is practically "bankrupt" with debt in the multi trillions! Why should we
saddle the next generation of Canadians to pay for war machinery that some
other country will benefit from. Time to think with a bit of sensibility here!


The media is just trying to show the true reality of the situation, so even, yes, even a 5th grade dropout can understand try to understand something..not just accept the hot air of a dictatorial PM that is trying to shove his political decisions down our collective throats!

The JSF isn't even stealth, it's just next generation (which you falsely call the Super Hornet) There's no such thing as stealth, it's just designed to be low observable. It's still a loud aircraft loaded with electronics, and it can already be easily detected. It's a cat mouse game, and stealth is just a catch phrase

Buying the Super Hornet is cheaper in the short term. I work with the pilots and maint and it's not a factor either way. They train all the time anyways and maint is provided with the jet at first. Super hornet is a completely different jet than the hornet. I argued for the hornet for a long time, but the biggest factor is now interoperability. You cannot understand how important this is unless you're in the trade. We ordered half the JSF that we would have ordered Hornets, there goes all your savings!

The fact is there are far more contributing factors than we can even discuss here. The current gov has done a great job to listen to the subject matter experts, instead of catering to tomorrow's votes and screwing over the future instead. The Aurora needs to be replaced as well but thankfully we filled bigger holes first with the Globemasters, Herc Js, Chinooks, Cormorants and hopefully JSFs. Personally I'd replace the Auroras with a couple much more capable Wedgetails, but that's just me

Peacekeeping is just a cop out for spending absolutely nothing on the military. I understand where you're coming from as the US has spent far too much on their Leviathan forces, but we have found a good balance imo. All the other air assets are required for peace keeping, the JSFs are for air policing which is peacekeeping of the sky believe it or not. The JSF can just peacekeep the sky for much longer period effectively with other nations. It's a matter of paying more for the same thing later, or just buying it now while it's relevant and useful

[sags]

Tax independance day keeps getting pushed back later and later into the year. I believe I read that, in total Canadians pay over 50% of their income in taxes, fees, and levies.

It is only because two or more people are working in the family unit, that allows homes to be sold at today's prices, and consumers to have any money at all to spend.

Yes, low wage earners bring down the averages, just as 7 figure CEOs bring them up. Someone earning 5 Million per year brings a lot of 25,000 per year wage earners up to a higher average.

Bottom line..............if you earn 20 dollars an hour, you would earn about 40,000 per year, or below the average.

People line up by the thousands for a 20 dollar per hour job, because there aren't many of them around.

[Square Root]

Boy, you guys sure have a lot of complaints. Canada must be the world's worst country based on this thread. Come on.