Friday 30 December 2011
Thursday 29 December 2011
Canadian Housing
The CMHC reported that housing-related spending of about $330 billion a year in 2010 has risen by 67 per cent since 2001 and now comprises 20.3 per cent of Canada's gross domestic product in 2010 — which underlines the importance of that debt load, and what might happen to the economy if for any reason Canadians crack under its burden.
CMHC figures show that mortgages made up about 68 per cent of total household debt in 2010 — up from 63 per cent in 1971 but down from the peak of 75 per cent in 1993. Consumer credit, which makes up the other 32 per cent, has been growing faster than mortgage debt over the past two decades, it says.
"Concerns expressed about household indebtedness have been largely driven by the total household debt-to-disposable income ratio," the report says, noting that the ratio hit a record high of 1.506 in the second quarter of 2011.
"The major risk in the mortgage market is impairment in a household's ability to pay, often due to job loss. Recession or other adverse economic scenarios, such as rising interest rates, could certainly pose a challenge for some Canadian households."
Canadians' debt levels have been growing fairly steadily since the 1960s, the report notes, but adds that a number of more recent factors have allowed debt to grow to its current record level, including low interest rates, rising household incomes and financial product innovations, which have allowed Canadians to make lower payments on higher debt loads.
While about 6.5 per cent of Canadian households are financially vulnerable according to Bank of Canada guidelines, the CMHC says continued employment growth, increasing net worth of households and a growing population are all positive factors for housing demand.
Meanwhile, low interest rates, and a relatively small inventory of homes for sale, helped push existing home prices 5.8 per cent higher in 2010, to an average $339,042, and the new housing price index rose 2.2 per cent last year.
Postmedia News
Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/Housing+mania+leaves+Canadians+over+indebted+economy+vulnerable+pullback/5923763/story.html#ixzz1hxM4TUXG
Tuesday 27 December 2011
Thursday 22 December 2011
Wednesday 21 December 2011
Tuesday 20 December 2011
Monday 19 December 2011
Saturday 17 December 2011
Friday 16 December 2011
Thursday 15 December 2011
Wednesday 14 December 2011
Tuesday 13 December 2011
Monday 12 December 2011
Save A Horse
Horse slaughter poised to resume in U.S. -- with PETA's approval?
December 1, 2011 | 12:47pm
Slaughtering horses for meat -- which was halted in this country in 2007 -- could resume after a recent quiet change in the law. And PETA supports the change.
Turns out, this animal issue is not as black and white as one might
think.
Most Americans would never consider eating horse meat. The creatures are a
cherished symbol of the West, are kept by many as beloved pets and family
members, and celebrated in literature, TV and movies.
But other countries, including France, Canada and Mexico have no problem with
putting horse meat on the dinner table. U.S. slaughterhouses helped feed this
demand by exporting horse meat -- until Congress effectively banned the practice
by refusing to fund the necessary government oversight. (Meat is legally
required to undergo a federal inspection in the U.S.)
The move was cheered by many animal right activists. But some -- such as
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA -- said there were
unintended side effects. For one, the ban did not halt the practice of eating
horse meat. Horses that were abandoned, rounded up or seized weren't put to
death in the U.S., true. They were instead shipped under inhumane conditions to
other countries for slaughter there.
So, let's make it clear: PETA -- which is known for taking provocative
positions in its fight to protect animals -- continues to oppose the slaughter
of horses for meat. But it says that allowing the reopening
of U.S. slaughterhouses may ultimately reduce the animals' suffering.
A better alternative, PETA says, is to ban both the domestic
slaughter of horses and the export of horses for slaughter.
"PETA was always worried about the horse-slaughter bill, fearing that it might cause more suffering while the option existed to ship horses on a frightening, long, and miserable journey to Canada or Mexico to meet their end in slaughterhouses there," the animal rights organization said in a statement released to The Times.The statement adds: "This transport of live horses -- often in vehicles with low ceilings in which horses must hunch over, slipping and sliding on their own waste ... is an indictment of the horse-breeding and -ranching business. To reduce suffering, there should be a ban on the export of live horses, even if that means opening slaughterhouses in the U.S. again.""But the better option is to ban slaughter in the U.S. and ban the export of live horses so that no one is slaughtering America's horses."
Not incidental to this controversy, or PETA's position: The mere prospect of
reopening slaughterhouses in the U.S. will cast a greater spotlight on a
practice that could raise the ire of even the most devoted steak eaters.
Such a showdown could occur in a matter of months. Congress' decision to lift
the de facto ban via its new spending bill does not explicitly set aside money
for slaughterhouse oversight. But the U.S. Department of Argriculture confirmed
this week that if a slaughterhouse were to open, the agency would conduct
inspections, reports
the Billings Gazette.
The paper adds that plans for a slaughterhouse in either Wyoming or Montana
could be up and running by spring. And according to a pro-slaughter group called
United Horsemen, meat processors are now considering opening facilities in at
least a half-dozen states across the U.S. including Georgia, North Dakota, and
Oregon, according
to the Christian Science Monitor.
Saturday 10 December 2011
Thursday 8 December 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)