Canadian Personal Finance Blog

Personal Finances and Consumer Concerns, essays, stories, examples and how to articles with a distinctly Canadian Point of View

Archive for May 3rd, 2007

If I buy a Double Double with it do I get Change?

Thursday, May 3rd, 2007


So the Royal Canadian Mint has decided that they needed to create a new gold coin for Canada. So far there is only one of these, 100 kg 99999 pure coins in existence, which is good. What vending machines could you use this coin in? I guess a cigarette machine, given the costs of a pack of cigarettes these days. I guess you could walk into a Lexus dealership and buy a new convertible with it too.

You know someone actually thought this would be a good idea, and more likely than not got a bonus for thinking this thing up. I don’t really get why this is important, except to show that we can do it, but there you are. Just think of the size of the change purse you’d need to carry that thing around? Staggers the imagination!

Canadian Investment Internationally

Thursday, May 3rd, 2007

We Canadians are shrewd investors, if not at times overly cautious (as a general rule). Our investment in the outside world continues to expand, even with the dollar strengthening due to our richness of resources. Stats Canada says that in the past 8 years our holdings in foreign securities has doubled (2x), which is very interesting (Year end 2005).

Where are we investing? Are we just looking below the 49th parallel? Nope, not just there, but all over the world (in fact not as much in the U.S. as I thought). This is a good thing, since I suspect the American economy’s relative strength in the world is weakening (slowly). The Far East and Pacific Rim are areas of growth in Canadian investment (moneys spent in that area, not growth of the investment), so we Canadians are looking far and wide for investment opportunities.

Well, if we can invest so much, does that mean we are making that much more money? The median income for a Canadian family (of two or more people) rose about 1.4% to about $56,000 which is not bad really. The problem is the gap between the “have” and “have not” families and the fact that it is widening significantly.

The gap between the top and bottom quintiles started at $83,800 in 1980, and fluctuated between $79,500 and $84,500 until 1996. By 2005, the gap had reached $105,400.

(…)

Average after-tax income in 2005 was $128,200 for the 20% of families with the highest incomes, compared with $22,800 for the 20% with the lowest.

That is amazing, over $100,000 now separates these fifths of the population? I think I have talked about this gap before, but this data really does bring it home, that there is a world of difference between those who “have” and those who “do not” in Canada.

While that one is concerning here is another one to ruminate over:

The 20% of families and unattached individuals who took home the highest amount of after-tax income in 2005 collectively paid almost 60% of all personal income taxes that year, up from 50% in 1980.

Paying their fair share, is what comes to mind. Here is a good table to end with:

Selected income concepts by main family types, 2005
Median
Market income Government transfers Income taxes After-tax income
2005 constant dollars
Economic families, two persons or more 57,700 3,900 8,600 56,000
Senior families 22,100 22,000 2,900 40,400
Non-senior couples without children 63,700 200 10,400 55,700
Two-parent families with children 72,800 2,700 11,600 65,700
Female lone-parent families 22,200 6,800 500 30,400
Single persons 18,100 500 2,000 21,400

Fat, fatter, fattest

Thursday, May 3rd, 2007


What does body mass have to do with Financial Planning? First, the actual data I am about to talk about, Stats Canada study of Body Mass Index sites the following:

Between 1981 and 1996, the prevalence of combined obese and overweight people in Canada rose from 48% to 57% among men and from 30% to 35% among women. Rates rose in all provinces.

57% overweight or obese men in Canada? This is from 10 years ago as well, and as a country I don’t think we all got on a collective treadmill or started exercising, did we? What would a large portion of the population being overweight do to the economy?

  • Health care costs will increase just from cardio vascular issues and such.
  • Work related time off will increase (decreased productivity)

These are not trivial issues and they are going to get worse, before they get better.

Oh and if you are asking who is the corpulent chap who’s hairy back you are looking at? That’s me 4 years ago before I lost about 80 lbs. Why did I lose the weight? Look at that picture and ask me that question again. Curious as to what obese might mean?

An adult male who is 1.8 metres tall (five-foot-10) and weighs 95 kg (210 pounds) would have a BMI of 30 and be considered obese.

I weighed 285 lbs. and I am 6′3″, so I wasn’t overweight I was OBESE, by this definition.

Help the Economy, find your body mass, and see your doctor if you are overweight. It’s important, if not for you, for your family.

www.financialwebring.com