111–120 of 417 posts
I have said this over and over again: Canada is the most overrated of all the developed countries. The whole country is a gigantic house of cards propped up by real estate, with horrible service quality, terrible healthcare, no jobs, ZERO innovation, risk taking and entrepreneurship. Having lived and travelled extensively, most Canadians want a house somewhere in the woods instead of doing something meaningful with t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Restricting foreigners from owning domestic assets is the beginning. Next comes restricting / heavily taxing domestic owners that own more than one home. Sooner or later, housing gets closer to being what it's supposed to be (shelter and space for people who need it) rather than a financial vehicle.
This proposal is a slippery slope to economic disaster. First, restricting ownership rights—foreign or domestic—distorts the market, disincentivizes investment, and ultimately harms those it claims to help by reducing the supply of housing. Second, treating homes purely as shelter ignores the reality that property is also an investment and a key component of individual wealth and economic freedom. Imposing heavy taxe…
But that's the problem, isn't it? The basic necessities of life shouldn't become a vehicle for speculation.
FTR, all of my wealth is in two homes.
To maybe offer a different perspective: I think the Canadian mortgages linked to Chinese accounts will likely all be paid. What may be happening is that there is a lot of underground chinese financial activity that is not recorded in Canada and part of this 'network' is utilized to get money out of china.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The government asked for their cut" actually means that for laundering that $881 million in cartel money - they were fined $1.9 billion and then had to pay an additional $665 million in other civil penalties. They wouldn't do it again and again because they don't earn $880 million when accepting $880 million in dirty money - remember that bank deposits are liabilities to the bank - they only earn money from interest…
I'd be very surprised if the $880M was the extent of the crime. The government not jailing anyone involved in the scheme is completely inexcusable and in my view makes the government complicit in the crime, in which case my trust that the public information about this case is accurate is 0.
So who would you jail in this case? The bank tellers interfacing with cartel? They're in Mexico anyway. Some overworked compliance manager in the US who ignored the suspicious transactions? Some C-Level exec person who didn't know about the suspicious origin of a billion dollars into a bank with something like 2.5 trillion in assets?
What specific crime do you think they committed?
Nobody likes these global banks, they're run by absolute psychopaths but remember, the optimal amount of fraud is non-zero. All of the mirror image complaints about banks not wanting to touch Crypto or proceeds from gambling/porn sites is downstream from settlements like these.
https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fra...
To maybe offer a different perspective: I think the Canadian mortgages linked to Chinese accounts will likely all be paid. What may be happening is that there is a lot of underground chinese financial activity that is not recorded in Canada and part of this 'network' is utilized to get money out of china.
It's still fraud
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still fraud
You can label it however you want, if both the lender and borrower are willing participants, it will be difficult to prevent this from happening. Like mentioned in the article, often times the material is very obviously suspicious and banks probably know this and still turn a blind eye to it because these borrowers are low risk and much less sensitive to the high/rising interest rates of today...
All sounds very plausible, but where are the effects of this? We should be seeing many people holding mortgages at HSBC not able to pay. Are there no public stats showing how many lack of payments being made to HSBC? Is HSBC going to hold on to these properties taking massive losses? For how long? It has definitely helped the run up of prices here. It will also help the collapse of prices as well, either that or the…
I think that's what a lot of people here are not realising (or perhaps they haven't read the article). In this case the main victim is HSBC if these loans were made to individuals who are speculating on foreign real estate without the income to cover the loan. This doesn't look like originate and distribute, i.e. HSBC shareholders will bear the losses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most governments would do anything for foreign direct investment. From many points of view, having foreign investors buy property without immigrating is a best case scenario for governments.
In the long run (30+ years from now)? Or just for the few years they are in office?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The government asked for their cut" actually means that for laundering that $881 million in cartel money - they were fined $1.9 billion and then had to pay an additional $665 million in other civil penalties. They wouldn't do it again and again because they don't earn $880 million when accepting $880 million in dirty money - remember that bank deposits are liabilities to the bank - they only earn money from interest…
That comes out of the company's wallet, but does it come out of a person's? Persons responsible for committing crimes, not customers or other third party members. HSBC has trillions in holding, so those numbers might not be as big as they appear.