U.S. foreclosure rates see massive jump and worst not yet over
CNN Money is reporting today that the U.S. home foreclosure rate “spiked 112%” in early 2008, and the worst of it likely isn’t over, as some $362 billion dollars worth of adjustable rate mortgages will “reset” this year.
More than 155,000 families have already lost their homes this year. Approximately 1 in 194 U.S. households have received some sort of foreclosure filing.
Nevada is the hardest hit state with 1 in 54 households received foreclosure filings. Stockton, California tops the list for foreclosures in a U.S. municipality. Approximately 1 in 30 homes have received foreclosure notices.
Read the CNN Money article here.
I’m always happy to answer your Saskatoon real estate questions. All of my contact info is here. Please feel free to call or email.
Follow our daily updates on Twitter @SaskatoonHomes.
Norm Fisher
Royal LePage Saskatoon Real Estate
72 comments so far. We'd love to hear your thoughts.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:09 PM
No suprise here.
Wait until May 2009. 2007 will look like a minor blip in comparison. Also watch for who’s buying corporations and land at pennies on the dollar when this all goes down.
“Give me control of a nation’s money supply and I care not who makes it’s laws”
Mayer Amschel Rothchild
May 12th, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Just wait till some one realizes they can move to Montana, or Idaho for far cheaper than Saskatchewan, live in a similar city (Boise is pretty) and buy a far bigger house, in communities with lower crime and way lower taxes.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Sure, but it’s not that easy, as a Canadian, to just pick up and move to the US, especially a small city like Boise, you need visas and all that. If you are professional who’s service is in high demand (doctor, engineer) sure, why not? But the average person is going to have to marry an American to go live there.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Jim,
In Boise you get to smell potatoes all day and night long. The hills of Idaho hide some wierd folk who shave their heads. I’d go for Montana only because they used to have no speed limits. Wyoming, good god you get lonesome there. Coal fields, Devil’s Tower antelopes and geysers – all done.
In fabulous Saskatoon you smell sweet prairie grass, watch grain fields sway in the wind, see beautiful women, eat great steaks, have way better fishing and of course there’s Norm. – Priceless! .>)
May 12th, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Never mind Idaho or Montana, let’s move to Arizona, where the sun is shining year round. Beautiful golf courses at every turn and thousands and thousands of houses under 200K. And I’m talking beautiful houses. The one i was admiring was 195K, built in 2001, 2000 sqft, 6 bedrooms, 4 bathrooms, double car garage and backing a gold course. Try and find anything like that in Canada, anywhere????? The listing actually said the house cost 225K to build, but hey everyone needs a nice deal every now and then right?
May 12th, 2009 at 4:11 PM
And house listings in Saskatoon are going up by the day, Saskhouses.com is now over 200 listings for the first time I’ve ever seen….
May 12th, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Larry, Have you ever met some of the weird folk in small town Saskatchewan? At least Idaho has nice rolling hills and green valleys. And smell? Idaho, despite the potatoes, actually smells nothing like potatoes. Saskatoon, smells like that agriculture research farm on the U of S campus, I thank my lucky stars every time that I drive by that I don’t live withing wiffing distance of the U of S farms. They just stink. I’ve often wondered how any one in Saskatoon can criticize anywhere else for smell.
And Callum, those professionals, like engineers (and I would argue most tradespeople) are the one’s we really need to stay here. And a lot of them, can get paid more in the states, and now buy a big house right out of school (there, not here) how do we expect to keep young doctors here if they can go to the States, get paid more and buy a nice house whereever they feel like? Or Dentists? Of Pharmacists?
And yeah, for anyone, tough to move to the States, but for housing that’s less than half? If the jobs exist in some fields, I think we’ll see an exodus.
Or for 60 year old (ie young fit seniors) this would be a pretty nice time to cash out of expensive Saskatoon housing and buy a retirement villa in Arizona or Florida. Yes, health insurance, but lower income taxes, they can likely subsidize the health insurance with the hundreds of thousands of dollars they cashed out of their house here, and for older seniors (ie. 80) snow traps them in their houses and hip fractures are scary in ways we can’t even imagine, with a really high mortality. I would never want to retire here at 80, as you’re a virtual prisoner in your own house when it’s snowy/icy out.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Good points Jim. Really good points, straight from the core of practical application.
I don’t like the US, but there are some jobs that survive downturns quite nicely. They’re often the people who get ignored during storms of greed like what Sasaktoon got hit by.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:12 PM
I think we all remember when the US used to be cool. About 8 years ago. Then George Bush happened and now it’s cool to dislike the states. Aside from Bush, a lot of the things we liked about the US as kids (warmer, proximity to stuff, low taxes (okay something that in hind sight we should have liked)) still exist today. Who knows, Harper supported all Bush’s bad ideas, including invading Iraq, and it looks like President Obama (or Clinton) will soon be in charge. Plus the Conservatives here don’t like Ukrainians, that’s gotta be a huge chunk of our population.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Add better Olympic performances to the reason the states was cool as kids, as a summer Olympics approaches, you just know Canada is going to lose to some eastern european country in the battle for 40th in something we’ve never heard of.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Yeah, we Americans are not in fashion these days…
LOL
Just for the record, the American Revolutionary War was also not in fashion, either. A good chunk of our people thought it was a bad idea.
Neither was getting involved in WWII. A good chunk of our people thought it was okay if Hitler killed a few million people, as it was OVER THERE… and not HERE.
This planet would be an awful place to live if it was taken over by dictators like Saddam Hussein.
So go ahead an dislike us. Most of us really don’t care. We’re doing what others can not.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Doug,
Sometimes drastic measures have to be taken to intercept big problems, ie. Hitler, and good people have to die for the cause. However I don’t think the Iraq war is vindicated. I don’t disagree that Saddam Hussein needed to be stopped, but the methodology was lousy, and the reasons leading up to the war aren’t justifiable. Is the U.S. STILL looking for “weapons of mass destruction”?
Face it, your president Bush is a terrible leader, a puppet, and is somewhat responsible for why the U.S. is in a recession. I just can’t believe he was voted in a second time! Although I’m sure the last thing you want from me is sympathy, I really feel badly for U.S. citizens. Many people are losing their homes and jobs with no end in sight.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:14 PM
Doug,
Most of you don’t care, because most of you are ignorant and by the way it probably has something to do with your extremely poor education system. Whats the average American education level? Grade 6?
May 12th, 2009 at 4:15 PM
>Heather: Let’s see… the Iraqis thought he was such a brutal dictator – they tried, convicted, and executed him. That leads me to believe that – at least in their minds – he was as bad as Hitler.
Although weapons of mass destruction was the salable point to the masses, the US didn’t need anything more than the fact that Saddam was not complying with the cease fire agreement from the Gulf War. If you lose a war – then thumb your nose at the victor who allowed you to keep your country – you might get an ass-kicking.
And yes, we are having economic difficulties… but the roots of that problem don’t lie with the President… nor does the problems with our real estate markets. And don’t buy into that garbage about the US being in a recession… we’re not. We’re in a slowdown. We might fall into a recession… but we’re not there, yet. 73% of Americans feel very comfortable about their financial stability.
And finally – you are right. I don’t want sympathy. We are still in better shape than virtually anywhere in the world… and we do it while bearing the burden of keeping the free world – FREE. Most of the world do not have to spend a big chunk of their gross domestic product on defense, as the US will come to their aid, if attacked.
That’s why we went into Iraq in the first place… remember Kuwait?
May 12th, 2009 at 4:15 PM
>Wesco: Yep… we have an awful educational system. It’s run by the government…
The liberals in this country do not want more school choices for the people… they just want to keep the monopoly intact.
But every country needs menial laborers…
May 12th, 2009 at 4:18 PM
Doug,
I’m not comparing Hussein to Hitler, they’re definitely two peas in a pod. I’m saying the way the situation in Iraq was handled is terrible at best! Are you in fact a person who voted Bush in a second time? I can’t, and probably won’t ever believe he did one good thing for your country and your people.
You’re the one buying into garbage hand fed by your media. You really don’t believe the U.S. is in a recession right now???…
From Wikipedia: “In macroeconomics, a recession is a decline in a country’s real gross domestic product (GDP), or negative real economic growth, for two or more successive quarters of a year.”
Sure sounds like it to me. But believe what you want, name it whatever you want (ie. “slowdown”) but that won’t change what’s happening.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:19 PM
>Heather: I had to vote for Bush… I certainly couldn’t vote for his opponent. Sometimes you have to vote for the lesser of the two evils. I’m no big fan, trust me.
Not only have we not had two quarters of negative growth – we haven’t even had one quarter of negative growth, yet. Both of the last two quarters we still had growth… albeit weak.
Our stock market rallied to the highest point in the last four months… so you can believe what you want – but those who put their money where their mouths are seem to believe in the strength of our markets.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Doug;
There is no doubt in my mind that your economy is resilient enough to bounce back from the setbacks it is facing now.
Like wise I think the citisens of the US are grounded enough to overcome the inanity of your current executive officers. Sorry but the limited amount I know about Bush Cheney and crew is not real positive.
Canada is involved in what very well may be a no win fight for the rights of others in Afghanistan as you are in Iraq.
I really have no point to make except there are those here in Canada that do respect the leadership role the US has taken over the years and value the friendship and ideals our two countries share.
Now; do you think you could let me know of any cheap Florida condos you hear about?
May 12th, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Doug,
I agree with Ken. There isn’t a whole lot of difference between the average Canadian and the average American.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:20 PM
If the USA is ‘fighting for Freedom’ and ‘keeping the world safe for Democracy’ in Iraq, a pig just flew by the window.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:20 PM
>Ken: Most of the media is run and populated by those who are not of the political persuasion of our President. Therefore, it’s no surprise that the impression of him is less than admirable.
Canada’s participation in the effort to free those who have been enslaved is a noble one. It will only be a no-win effort if we allow ourselves to be beaten.
I value the friendship, as well. And not just because I am (was) a dual citizen of the US and Canada…
If you can spare the change… there are some outstanding deals to be had in Florida. It’s a great time to buy a vacation home, for sure.
>Norm: You’re right. Other than I’m a turncoat and you’re a Canuck…
LOL
May 12th, 2009 at 4:21 PM
>jrochest: You’re entitled to your opinion… but to those who are no longer oppressed – your opinion doesn’t mean much.
http://tinyurl.com/5vfuo7
May 12th, 2009 at 4:21 PM
To the other Doug
The lesser of two evils? Really? Al Gore was a greater evil than Bush? Gore, The nice guy, with experience as vice president during the previous successful presidency. The nobel prize winning environmental crusader.
For some reason people don’t like an academic, the same way we don’t like Stephen Dion, the intelligent environmentalist running against our right wing pro war Harper.
And no one said Sudam was a good guy, but why not occupy Sudan? Far more people are dying there than Iraq where weapon inspectors were when the US decided to.
War happy residents aside, there are lot of nice places in the states, and less than half of them actually voted for Bush.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:21 PM
And those who are no longer oppressed? Afghanistan, the country actually involved in attacks against the US, the country Canada is stabilizing, as the US wastes resources in Iraq still is a very dangerous country and has among the world’s highest infant mortality.
And Iraq? Just because it’s not the government, doesn’t mean those people aren’t oppressed. Fearful of gangs and militia instead of their own government. I’m not sure what the lesser of those two evils is.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Doug Quance;
So who is going to be the next president in your opinion?
PS: Kidding about Fla. I couldn’t stand all the great weather.
I am an Albertan after all.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:14 AM
>Dougy: Yes… the lesser of two evils. Al Gore is a fraud, and even his own home state didn’t vote for him. And being Vice President makes you less qualified that the Governor of a state, when considering executive experience.
And I used to work with some really intelligent people back in my engineering days – and my father was a borderline genius… and I can tell you that a high IQ and common sense are often not found in the same person. Some of our biggest failures as President had some fairly high IQ’s. (Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon…)
Sudan is another example where the world should step in and do what needs to be done. Obviously, because of our economic interests, we had to deal with Iraq first. Just because we’re busy doesn’t mean we shouldn’t go in to Sudan. It’s possible we might have already been there – if not for all the security we continue to supply to Iraq.
“Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither”
For the most part – the average Iraqi gets it.
>Ken: The next President? Who knows… all the candidates are seriously flawed. Though the polls don’t support my prediction – I think it will be John McCain. The other guys are too inexperienced. His likely opponent has more experience at running for office than he has at doing the job he was elected to do…
May 13th, 2009 at 9:15 AM
So Doug Quance;
to try to pull this back to a real estate discussion; how does what is happening there look on the street? Are there foreclosure signs evey where? Families standing in their driveways with all their belongings? Or does perhaps the media hype this a bit too? Maybe people are trying to sort things out as usually happens when plans take a wrong turn?
May 13th, 2009 at 9:15 AM
>Ken: It’s bad… but not as bad as the media would lead you to believe. My state (Georgia) is near the top regarding the number and rates of foreclosures, so I think I have a pretty good handle on it.
Many people bought into the idea of buying all the house that a lender will finance them for – regardless of how much the payments would go up in a few years… because they figured they could always sell at a big profit.
Not so.
When the bubble started to break, these guys were stuck holding the bag… so many of them are walking away because they can’t afford the payments that they always KNEW THEY COULDN’T AFFORD.
It will all work out, in the long run.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Doug Q;
Too bad. So many people only trust the “advice” they want to hear.
My advice to my kids was to only buy 75% as much house as they could get a mortgage approved for. With the recent run up in prices I don’t think that is valid any more but still at the time I knew it wasn’t what they wanted to hear.
everything always works out one way or another.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Here in Calgary during the race to being overpriced Iactually had a realtor outright lie when discussing a property’s potential. I’m not talking about opinion, I’m talking about an event that would have made the property more desireable… presented falsely.
That was followed with…Prices are only going up.
Luckily that kind of agent is in the minority but their advice if taken as fact can be damaging.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:16 AM
>Ken: I’m with you. 75% of what they can buy is a good measure. I’ve never put a percentage on it… I simply remind them that because the CAN buy that much house… doesn’t mean that they SHOULD.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Doug Q.,
It may not be an “official” recession yet, but economists aren’t so optimistic:
http://bstocksdev.weblogsinc.com/2008/03/27/final-q4-2007-gdp-may-indicate-the-u-s-is-in-a-recession/
I guess we’ll see what happens with your 2008 Q1. And I also don’t believe for one second Gore was the worse of the two, he couldn’t have screwed up anything worse than Bush has. That’s just my opinion though, and of course I don’t have a vote to count.
I’m also interested in knowing who your vote is for this time around, same party I presume?
May 13th, 2009 at 9:17 AM
Doug Q.,
I apologize, I’ve been misinformed. I heard that the official stats for Q1 wouldn’t be out for awhile yet – but one person just told me that the U.S. Q1 GDP is reported to still be at .6%, same as 2007 Q4. That’s good news I suppose.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:17 AM
>Heather: When gasoline was $1.00 a gallon, Gore proposed a 50 cent tax in addition to the taxes that were already on the product. Had he been elected, who knows how much additional taxation we would have seen. Just because the Europeans pay X for gas doesn’t mean we should.
Our economy is suffering as much – if not more – from energy costs… and while in office, he opposed any legislation to drill offshore; build new refineries; drill in ANWAR; and would also oppose nuclear power, as well.
Like I said… Gore’s own state of Tennessee did not vote for him – and they know him the best.
We also got the stats on the unemployment figures today… and unemployment went down – albeit slightly – so that’s another good sign.
What you might not know is that Bush inherited a recession when the tech bubble bursted… and then 9/11 happened. His leadership in tax policy helped to make that recession one of our shortest… and since then he has presided over the longest period of economic growth the country has seen.
So he’s not a total failure. History will treat him better than you might think.
And yes, I’ll be voting for the same party… because it’s the lesser of the two evils, again. I am NOT liking my choices this time any more than last time.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:20 AM
By the way… the economy has slowed down – in large part – to the liberal media and liberal candidates who have tried to talk this economy down. It happens whenever a liberal is not in the President’s office.
When Bill Clinton was running the first time, he went around saying that the economy was the worst in 50 years (a lie) and the left-wing media ran with it. When Gore was running – and the economic indicators were turning sour – you didn’t hear a peep out of the mainstream media… and when it did recede (within the first three months of Bush’s first term) all the liberals tried to paint it as Bush’s recession.
Not all of us Americans believe the crap the media feeds us.
LOL
May 13th, 2009 at 9:20 AM
Doug Q
Your responses have been very reasoned and unargumentive given some of the (unnecessary) shots you have taken here.
However,I have a real aversion to developing a “brand loyalty” to anything including political parties or individual politicians. I hope your preference towards Bush and the conservatives in general are based on relevant issues and not just an aversion to the liberals.
To me George Bush seems like a very likeable guy, down to earth reasoned and vulnerable. But his pressis sooooo bad I have trouble believing there is not some fire to the smoke.
Gore; Trust a politician to feel the answer to a problem is to tax it. One of the things I admire about the U.S. is you have manged to somewhat hold your politicians accountable or the money you give them. We have a problem with that here.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:20 AM
I think Doug Q has been extremely argumentative and he sets himself up for shots. George Bush.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:26 AM
And maybe more gas tax is what we need to increase bus ridership, when I take it, it’s all sketchy west enders or university students, and it stops down town next stop after university! Where are all the accountants and lawyers in suits and ties? Until normal people with jobs start taking the bus as a standard, except for the day they need to run errands or pick up some one from the air port, it means gas really is not that expensive. As long as gas tax is their to pay for bus/train/subway services and bike paths drivers should have to subsidize more responsible modes of transport.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:27 AM
Doug Q.,
I would have definitely voted Gore in just for that reason! I think gasoline SHOULD be taxed like it is in Europe. Perhaps people will stop buying their SUVs, 1/2 tonne trucks, ATVs, motorhomes, etc. And incase you didn’t know, we also pay more for gasoline than you guys.
If a Republican gets voted in again, this one will just end up being Bush II. Scarey times.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:27 AM
>Ken: There’s plenty about each of our major political parties I disagree with… but in general, the liberals are out to grow the government – which is already too large. They pit groups against each other constantly (just listen to any of their speeches) and in general are not pro-business. Just listen to Hilary talk about how she wants to “stick it” to the oil companies with a windfall profits tax. Liberals never see a tax they don’t like. Ever.
>Dougy: I have no idea what you’re talking about.
>Doug: What’s so fun about riding a bus? When I lived in Houston, I would occasionally take the bus to work. My 20 minute commute would take well over an hour. Your comment is typical of the liberal mindset, here. It’s okay to tax someone else for to subsidize what YOU feel is what someone should be doing. So much for freedom. I guess you think freedom should be taxed, too.
>Heather: You’re entitled to see things that way, Heather. I don’t. I’m not trying to micro-manage your life… and I would appreciate if you wouldn’t try to micro-manage mine. If I want an SUV – I should be able to own one… without some added taxes that some other group feels I should pay because I don’t think like they do. That’s not freedom.
Kinda reminds me of the how the liberals want to take away our right to own guns. There is empirical evidence that where guns are banned – crime goes up… but they don’t care about the truth. They don’t care about freedom.
Same thing with global warming. Do a little research and you’ll see the planet hasn’t been warming up since 1998… and this last year wiped out the increases over the last 50 years – but Al Gore and the liberal media still run with the story. None of those scientists can explain all the previous global warming periods… nor will they debate the subject. That’s how liberals are, today… they just want to shut down the discussion.
So in closing I will repeat – I am just choosing between the lesser of the two evils.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:30 AM
Doug,
I laughed out loud when I heard Hillary say, “I would take those profits and…”
My thought, “…and make them go away forever.”
May 13th, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Doug – it seems as though you “hear what you want to hear”. Do more research than what your pocketbook favors and it shows a scarier picture than most of us want to face.
Do I want to give up certain luxuries? Not really, but I certainly want water and food for my future. It seems that this realization will not hit until it is too damn late to do anything about it. We worry more about the stupid TSX than oil sands poisoning our lakes/rivers. The rest of the population (poorer) don’t give a care as they are struggling just to make ends meet. Thats the enslaved indebted world that makes the wealthier even wealthier.
This has absolutely everything and nothing to do with real estate in the role food and shelter plays. I could talk till I am blue in the face – but we live a lifestyle in North America that is simply unsustainable. BUT now all of the growing economies want it – with populations that quadruple ours. That makes for DISASTER. We should be endeavoring at this point to set better examples for sustainability – such as Europe. But we are too selfish to do so.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:32 AM
>Cindy: While you might believe our way of life is unsustainable – I do not.
Do you believe that man did not pollute prior to the industrial revolution?
The cleanest form of fuel we have is hydrogen… and it’s the most abundant element in the entire universe. We are learning how to produce it and tame it… and when we do, we’ll have this problem licked.
Of course, you’re always welcome to walk, if you choose. Just don’t make that choice for me.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:32 AM
Doug,
One North American utilizes the resources of 125 people in a third world country. The individual in the third world country pays for it- they are the ones starving right now. I guess what I feel – instead of destroying more resources, we conserve a little now for the future. Your mentality of selfishness, and that we are not all interconnected is what I feel is the problem. In you saying “don’t decide for me” you already have decided that your lifestyle is worth destroying mine and others lives for.
ps – I do walk, I recycle, and I try to give back. I am the more fortunate that believes it pays to give back. My life is pretty good and I believe I attract better things into my life because of it. I used to believe differently, and all it brought was negativity into my life. The more I do and give back, the better I feel. Am I trying to change you? No – you won’t get it because you don’t want to.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:33 AM
>Cindy: Using your logic – if all of us in the modern world stopped using resources, then those who are starving in the third world would be full of bounty.
Poppycock.
It’s not an issue of selfishness. I live a relatively meager life. I drive a car with decent (25-30 mpg) gas mileage. I don’t go out of my way to waste resources. I don’t drive needlessly… and plan my trips – even when gas was cheap. I live in a small home because I don’t need a larger house.
But if I did want a large car, house, etc. – I don’t think you or anyone else should have a say in that.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:33 AM
Doug,
You are a prime example of what most Canadians perceive to be the stereotype of a typical American:
Your idea that global warming doesn’t exist, taking away guns is taking away freedom, you have the right to whatever, whenever, etc…
For the sake of others living in the U.S., I’m making a conscious effort not to believe EVERYONE holds these ideals. (but it’s difficult)
Are you Texan by any chance???
May 13th, 2009 at 9:35 AM
>Heather: Did I say that global warming didn’t exist? I’m sorry… I didn’t mean to leave you with that impression. What I should have said is that global warming exists – and man’s contribution to it is far from certain. This planet has been warming since the little ice age – although we did have global cooling between 1950 and 1980.
Perhaps you are convinced that man has caused the climate to change. You have every right to believe so. And perhaps you believe that Greenland was never green. You are free to believe that, as well. I, on the other hand, remain a skeptic.
As far as the gun thing goes – silly me. We have a right that is expressed in the second amendment to our constitution as a specific FREEDOM… so pardon me for my belief that to infringe upon that right is to take away a constitutional freedom. What was I thinking?
Don’t worry… not everyone in the US holds my ideals – that’s why our country is under attack from within. We have plenty of people here who will give up their freedom for security… and our government schools are run by people who are working hard at brainwashing our kids. Just take a look at our Presidential election – we’re going to take someone with absolutely no experience at running ANYTHING – and make him leader of the free world.
BTW, I lived in Texas for ten years. Not my favorite place on the planet… but at least when you kill someone in Texas – they kill you back.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Doug,
Bet you never dreamed that you’d spend two weeks here defending your ideals.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:35 AM
>Norm: No… I can’t say that any of my dreams included this…
LOL
It’s all in the effort of a good dialogue.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Doug,
Well, you’ve been a good sport and a true gentleman.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Doug,
Yes it’s difficult to measure what impact humans are having on global warming VS a variety of other explanations – but we’re certainly not helping the situation! We could CHOOSE to help reduce our carbon footprint.
As far as the presidential candidates go, Clinton has TONNES of experience, but I guess that’s not who you’re implying…
To have everyday citizens running around with guns would scare the $HIT out of me, but I suppose people are mostly products of their environment. The United States is extremely military-oriented, so it’s only natural to think guns are the answer.
As a Southern gent you have definitely kept your cool on here whilst debating, kudos. :’)
May 13th, 2009 at 9:43 AM
>Heather: Sorry for the delay… no email notification that I am aware of…
I absolutely support efforts to find alternatives to our current energy needs… and I am certain that in time, we’ll have those answers (such as all that hydrogen I spoke of). We could go far by planting more trees, as the clearing of forests is counterproductive to pulling carbon out of the air.
Hillary doesn’t really have any experience running anything. Not a state, not an agency, not a department, not even a corner drug store.
Nor does Obama.
McCain has some experience as a squadron commander… but not much else, either.
None of these guys have true executive experience in government… which you only get as a governor of a state – or at least mayor of a city.
To me, they’re all unqualified for the job.
As far as guns go… perhaps it’s cultural. Knives scare me way worse than guns… and no one hears the blast of a knife.
There’s an old saying:
“An armed society is a polite society.”
In the places where guns are plentiful – crime rates are lower. Criminals know that to rob or assault someone might be the last thing they ever do. In places where guns are banned, crime runs rampant. And that’s not just here in the US… look around the world – in many places where citizens can’t own guns, they are held hostage by their governments. (Think Cuba, for example)
Yes, we Americans are military-oriented… especially those of us who served.
And now, I’ll return to my regularly scheduled Memorial Day holiday weekend… where some of us remember those who gave their lives for the cause of freedom in the world.
P.S. Thanks for the kudos. I’m just keeping it real with my neighbors to the North, as we’ll all be moving up there as the globe warms up. Keep the lights on for us, okay?
May 13th, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Doug,
Some United States citizens carry guns AND knives. (double scarey!) I’ve actually never encountered an average Canadian citizen carrying a handgun, and hope I never will.
I still must disagree, while being the wife of a 2-term President, and being involved with politics for a long time, I think Clinton has decent experience, and definitely more than Obama.
I’ve heard feedback from travellers that they feel a lot more comfortable walking around outside of their resorts in Cuba than they do in many other countries. Isn’t the crime rate in Cuba fairly low BECAUSE of their strict government?
We have Remembrance Day November 11th, have you heard of it? We do honour our fallen soldiers, lest we forget.
Would you be interested in relocating this conversation to a more recent blog? :’}
May 13th, 2009 at 9:44 AM
>Heather: Since we don’t have email notification here, I have to wait for my memory to kick in.
While Clinton has more experience… it’s not relevant experience. Vice Presidents would be classified as having such experience… yet only two have ascended to the presidency in the last 100 years.
Ah… Cuba. Great example. My Cuban friends told me years ago that when Castro came to power, he convinced everyone that he would create a society where no guns were needed… a true utopia.
So he set out to collect everyone’s guns… and when all of the guns were confiscated… so was the Cuban people’s freedom. Read up about that sometime.
Our founding fathers were quite aware of what can happen when guns are taken away from the people – that’s why the right to bear arms was so important to them… and why it became part of our bill of rights.
It is not only our right… but our duty… to take up arms in the event of a tyrannical government. And if the Cuban people would have held to that principle in 1959, they would never been ruled by a dictator.
I’m babbling… it’s 3 AM…
May 13th, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Doug,
Having a former vice president as president would definitely be awesome experience – since none of these candidates were vice presidents I believe Clinton has the most relevant experience overall. Oh well, looks like Obama’s taken care of that.
I admit I don’t know a lot about the history of Cuba. I will definitely try and read up on it.
Your viewpoint of guns = freedom, mine is more like guns = violence. Unless they’re hunting rifles the only purpose guns have are to hurt other humans. I also don’t agree with capital punishment. :’)
Now if you look at Canada, there aren’t many people who own handguns. Our Prime Minister is nowhere near (not even close) to being a dictator. Actually, people in our country can question any single thing he does without fear for their own safety.
It’d be very nice to have e-mail notification I agree!
May 13th, 2009 at 9:45 AM
>Heather: Yes, the Democrat Party – as they like to do – played with the rules to make sure Obama would get the nomination. Many Hillary supporters are very angry about that.
The gun thing… well the Palestinians and others in the middle East seem to do a pretty good job of killing and maiming people without guns… so maybe you should consider that guns don’t kill people – people kill people. And violent people will find a way to commit violence with or without guns. Are you too young to remember the bombings in Northern Ireland? No guns there… just violent people committing violent acts.
The vast majority of gun owners in the states are law-abiding citizens who would never use the weapon to harm anyone unless provoked. You are no different. I bet if your car was surrounded by people trying to smash your windows and do you harm – you’d hit the gas and run some of them over trying to escape. No difference, really. You would simply be using the best tool at hand to perform a task.
Hey Norm… maybe you should request Point2 to work on email notification!
LOL
May 13th, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Cars and knives have “useful” purposes, guns don’t. Plus innocent bystanders get killed from shootings, it isn’t the same if some gangs start knife fighting each other.
It must be cultural differences that allows Canada to be so “gun-free”. As we become more integrated with the U.S. I wonder if we’ll continue seeing more and more guns up here too?
Are you talking about religious wars in Ireland? That is very sad, religion is supposed to be used as a MORAL teaching tool, and instead turns into violence and deaths all because people can’t leave each other ALONE! :’(
May 13th, 2009 at 9:46 AM
Doug,
Email is out. You could subscribe to comments in your feed reader.
I also see a “subscribe to email alerts link down below. For some reason, it’s not there all of the time.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:46 AM
>Heather: LOL – I must say, I really do like you. But I think you’re a little naive.
Guns have useful purposes… namely self-defense. When you get a little older, and society gets more wacky, you might consider one for yourself.
Personally, I like Canada the way it is. It already has too much influence from south of the border.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:46 AM
Hah, I think you’re confusing naivety with idealism. I really feel people should be able to rise above gun violence, or at least try to. Wars have never solved anything, only killed off one side of the problem.
I do agree with your last comment, it’s nice to have a sense of individuality. Unfortunately Canada and the U.S. are well on their way to becoming homogenized. :’)
May 13th, 2009 at 9:48 AM
>Heather: I would like to see people rise above gun violence, as well.
But I can’t agree that wars have never solved anything. That’s like thinking that surgical operations in medicine have never solved anything.
Surgery is the path we only go down if we must… and it’s not always successful – in fact it often causes more problems than it solves.
But in spite of this… sometimes – as a last resort – it works. It just never works without a heavy price.
The world is trying to do everything – including bribery – to get Iran to give up its quest for nuclear weapons. Iran agreed years ago NOT to seek these weapons… yet like North Korea, they want to blackmail the world by obtaining them.
At what point during their stated mission of wiping Israel off the map do we say that mere words are not getting the job done? Will that point be after a nuclear bomb is dropped on Tel Aviv?
Sometimes, the choices are simply NOT simple. I wish they were.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Doug,
I know I know, everyone has weapons, so who will put theirs down first? NOBODY, that’s the problem. So our excuse for killing others is that they might kill us first. So the saga continues. *sigh*
And surgeries don’t intentionally kill people, but that’s definitely an interesting stretch, LoL.
So when are you guys going to vote in a new president?!?! I’m sure there’s still a LONG ways to go judging from the preliminaries, is it happening sometime next year? :’)
May 13th, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Heather and Doug,
I must say that I am enjoying following this conversation, even though it has gotten pretty far away from “foreclosures.”
I have a question I’d like to throw at both of you, and I’d be very interested to hear your perspectives if you can find the time.
Let’s imagine for a moment that the U.S. made a decision to move forward using nothing but diplomacy from here on in, and they destroyed all of their weapons tomorrow. How would your life be impacted?
Heather,
The election is on November 4, 2008.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:50 AM
I thought we were having some pretty interesting convo happening here too, LoL!
It’s hard to say what would happen because that very idea is a simile to hell freezing over. There would certainly be an abudance of illegal arms trading in the U.S… similar to the Prohibition, but bloodier! The world would absolutely be a better place without weapons (and alcohol!), but people will never allow that to happen.
Glad to hear the election is happening this year! How much do U.S. citizens here about our government in the media? “And the newly elected Prime Minister of Canada is…” That’s about the extent of it I believe. ;’)
May 13th, 2009 at 9:51 AM
>Heather: Sorry for the delay!
Geez, Norm… what a grenade you lob…
It’s so hard to say how our lives would be impacted… but if the US were to unilaterally disarm – it would only be a matter of time before the world collapsed into chaos.
The functional part of the “carrot and stick” has always been the stick. Laws without law enforcement mean nothing.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Great post! I’m glad to see that Canadians are also keeping informed on the current housing crisis in the US.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Doug,
It’s the eternal cycle of violence. Ghandi however is a great example of something gone RIGHT! Sometimes one has to be a “type” of martyr to set an example and to make real changes…
While I make small sacrifices comparitively, I do consciously make an effort and that DOES count for something. I’m inspired by those who fight against the numbing drone of “society” and what we’re spoonfed. Unfortunately I don’t know many people who stand up for ANYTHING anymore. They just want their video games and MTV. Where’d all the hippies go?
May 13th, 2009 at 9:52 AM
One must simply follow the motivation for violence before judging it. Self preservation, for example, is totally understandable. Violence to take something from another for your own gain is another story.
The hippies are still out there, albeit in smaller numbers. It’s easier to find those who want to “tune in, turn on, and drop out” when there’s a draft for a war that many do not want to fight.
The liberals here in the U.S. pressured their congressmen and women to de-fund our activities in Iraq… but in the final analysis – they could not.
Obama says he will end the war when elected – but the first thing he will learn is that he can’t end a war… he can only win or lose one – and most of the American public isn’t interested in losing.
I believe you’ll see your uprising in a few years. It will come after the pacifists are in power… and the aggressors commit atrocities that even the peace lovers can no longer tolerate.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Doug,
Some scary thoughts.
I agree with your thoughts about “chaos” following a US disarmament. As a Canadian, I hope that the US can maintain a position of strength in their military.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:54 AM
Hey Heather -
Now that the Russians are invading Georgia with the intentions of invading the other former Soviet satellite states, maybe you can follow my twisted logic.
The Russians were only able to do this because the Georgian military is weak… and the Georgian people, themselves, poorly armed against such aggression.
The Russians are actually pretty smart, really. They pick a time where the US doesn’t have much desire to be involved in, yet again, another war…. and the Europeans, as always, are full of appeasement. Looks to me like the Cold War has started again.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:54 AM
I just saw this item today about some crazy nut on the subway who started beating some guy with a claw hammer. Witnesses (unarmed) did nothing to help the victim… even though there was ten of them.
And then you wonder why I think that law-abiding citizens should have the right to own guns?
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20080909_Psycho_hammers_subway_passenger.html
In this particular case, I don’t know if the victim would have been helped if he was armed, as he apparently was snoozing when the nut cracked him upside the head with the hammer… but if I was on that train and armed – I would get him to stop, guaranteed. Not sure I would want to take a hammer in the head to do it, though.
May 13th, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Damn… what’s going on up there in the frozen white North with Greyhound bus passengers getting stabbed! At least this latest victim got to keep his head.
I’m guessing that nobody has moved to outlaw knives, yet… right?