Lieberman vs. Lamont

Posted in Commentary on July 30th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

There is an interesting election coming up on August 8 – the primary election in the state of Connecticut to see who gets the Democratic party nomination in the 2006 Senate election.

Joe Lieberman has been the senator for the last 18 years, but there has been a large movement by the state democrats to remove him from office because he supports the war in Iraq. Ned Lamont is Lieberman’s competition.

I originally believed that Lieberman would win the primary 55/45 (which is a very close result considering the length of incumbancy), but now my research shows considerable uncertainty. The polls are very inaccurate and should be taken with a grain of salt.

As such, I took bets that Lieberman would win the primary, but now my opinion is shifting such that that he will be losing the primary. I am not certain enough where it would warrant a bet at existing market odds, however.

I originally took my position with a 55% probability of Lieberman winning, but liquidated this bet for 45%. I took a $16 loss. The original risk-reward profile was $88 risked for a potential $72 gain, but my money is now off the table and the losses have been limited.

Vancouver Fireworks last Saturday

Posted in Commentary on July 30th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

Yesterday, I saw the fireworks from the rocks of English Bay, so it was a nice up-close and personal view of the fireworks barge. You can tell how far you are from the fireworks by counting the time it takes the sound to travel to your present location – the speed of sound is about 340 meters per second. From Kitsilano, there is about a 5-6 second delay, but from English Bay there was a one second delay.

China was the country doing the fireworks today and they did an incredible job. I saw Italy’s performance the previous Wednesday and suffice to say, Italy will not be winning. I don’t know if I can catch the Czech Republic the following Wednesday, or Mexico on Saturday.

Gas Prices in Canada

Posted in Commentary on July 28th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

The best place on the internet to view information concerning the gas prices in Canada is on Gasbuddy.com.

Surprisingly, the southern borders of Ontario leads the country in having the lowest gas prices – down to $1.02/litre currently. Not surprisingly, Nova Scotia with their ‘regulated gasoline price’ scheme ranks as the highest. BC is around the middle, with $1.18 in the Lower Mainland and $1.10 in the Fraser Valley (Abbotsford, Mission and Chilliwack).

Justin on the critical mass of human resources

Posted in Links on July 26th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

Justin writes an essay titled “Attracting, Creating and Keeping Educated People is Essential“. Although he probably needs to upgrade the marketability of his weblog entry titles (perhaps something less obvious), the rest of the essay is quite good.

Building a Stronger Canada

Posted in Commentary on July 26th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

The following letter was written by Gordon Campbell, premier of British Columbia. It was published in the Vancouver Sun and Globe and Mail. Normally such letters written by politicians can be safely ignored since they have been completely sanitized of information. Not this letter – it is so brilliant that that I will just quote it entirely in this post, with bolded parts emphasized by me:

Canada’s premiers are meeting once again to discuss ideas for strengthening Confederation. Central to that endeavour is the need to ensure that all governments have the revenue they need to provide the services for which they are responsible, within taxpayers’ ability to pay.

Canadians contribute about half-a-trillion dollars annually to their governments at all levels. That should be more than enough revenue to pay for all of the programs and services that governments provide. The question is: how can we better use that money to benefit taxpayers across Canada? How can we better ensure that all levels of government in every province have the fiscal capacity to deliver reasonably comparable levels of service at reasonably comparable levels of taxation?

Premiers have often called on Ottawa to assist in funding all sorts of worthy national priorities, from health care or skills training and post secondary education to transportation, infrastructure and a national pharmaceutical strategy. These represent billions of dollars in potential new investment, to say nothing of our common commitment to close the gaps for Aboriginal Canadians in health, education, housing and economic opportunity.

These are all vitally important national needs that should be supported within governments’ means. But there is a limit to what provinces can expect or should demand from the federal government, because taxpayers also deserve a break.

There is only one taxpayer in Canada – you. The biggest fiscal “imbalance” is not the so-called “vertical imbalance,” which suggests that the federal government has relatively more revenue than the provinces to pay for its responsibilities. Nor is it the “horizontal imbalance” that relates to the provinces’ differing abilities to generate revenues. Rather, it is the growing imbalance between governments’ insatiable appetite to spend and taxpayers’ ability to pay.

Simply put, governments at all levels are taking too much out of taxpayers’ pockets for too little marginal benefit, leaving working families too little to make ends meet and get ahead. If the federal government has more money than it needs to fulfill its responsibilities, its first priority should be to reduce the tax burden on all Canadians with a significant tax cut. This should take precedence over any increases in equalization or massive new increases in federal transfer payments to other governments.

Governments striving to increase revenue should focus on economic growth and wealth creation. While we look at modernizing fiscal federalism, we should also be driving a national competitiveness agenda, with competitive tax rates at the top of the list.

To compete and prosper in today’s economy, we must step up our commitment to train, attract and retain skilled workers. We do need new investments in post secondary education, skills training and apprenticeships. We also need to dramatically expand our efforts to recruit skilled immigrants, with flexible and pragmatic new immigration policies and national strategies for credentialing in areas of skills shortages. And we need to face up to the challenges of our aging population and consider alternatives to mandatory retirement.

Let’s create wealth by closing the social and economic gap with Aboriginal Canadians, the fastest growing segment of our population. The sooner we close the Aboriginal skills training gap, the faster we will address skills shortages and improve the quality of life for Aboriginal Canadians. Moreover, the sooner we negotiate contemporary solutions to the age-old problems that have made Aboriginal Canadians Canada’s third solitude, the faster we can all benefit from new partnerships across the economic and social spectrum.

Working together, Canada’s governments can generate economic growth by expanding targeted investments in infrastructure and transportation. We need to open up Canada’s Pacific Gateway and establish a Pacific corridor into the heart of the country and the continent with strategic investments in our ports, airports, roads, bridges and border crossings.

Economic growth can also be generated by getting accountability for spending tax dollars closer to the level of government delivering the service. For example, we could transfer 80 per cent of federal fuel taxes back to the provinces, along with the responsibility for funding provincial transportation priorities and the cost of the “New Deal” with municipalities, which is funded from fuel taxes. The federal government could then retain 20 per cent of that funding to pay for strategic transportation investments that are vital to our national competitiveness.

We should foster greater mobility of labour, investment and truly free trade within Canada. British Columbia and Alberta are leading the way in this regard through a new landmark agreement that establishes the second largest economic union in Canada, after Ontario. This is something that all provinces could do on their own, without a penny of new federal funding.

These are all far more urgent priorities, in my view, than a wholesale renewal of the equalization program. At a minimum, any change in equalization must not create new barriers to competitiveness through policies that tilt the scales against taxpayers in provinces that foot the bill.

Provinces that receive equalization should not have a higher fiscal capacity than non-recipient provinces. Provinces that benefit from equalization should not have higher per capita program expenditures than the average of provinces that foot the bill. And equalization subsidies should not grow faster than the average rate of inflation or the average rate of economic growth for Canada.

We should not make the equalization formula even more unfair and complicated by counting assessed property values as a measure of fiscal capacity when, in fact, these property values are not a measure of taxpayers’ ability to pay.

In the new fiscal federalism, commitments made should be commitments kept. And all governments should respect the hard work it takes for every taxpayer in every province to generate the revenues that we are entrusted with.

As we meet in Newfoundland, the premiers should be considering how we can strengthen Canada’s competitiveness through lower taxes, strategic national investments, co-ordinated planning, new relationships with Aboriginal Canadians and fair transfer payments. That is the roadmap to prosperity for all Canadians that British Columbia is committed to pursuing.

Efficient government, not more money thrown at issues is the way forward. I’m glad that our premier understands this.

Badwater Ultramarathon

Posted in Commentary on July 25th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

As if running 135 miles wasn’t bad enough, there is a race called the Badwater Ultramarathon that starts in Death Valley, California and goes north up to the base of Mount Whitney, nearly 8600 feet higher in elevation.

The high temperature in Death Valley is 120F or 50C. The winner, aged 31, last year did it in 24 hours and 36 minutes. Second place went to a 48 year old who crossed the line two hours later.

This year, the winner of last year’s race, Jurek Scott, finished first again with a time of 25 hours and 41 minutes. Absolutely amazing.

US Election research queue

Posted in Commentary on July 25th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

I will be investigating the following elections in the 2006 USA midterm elections, held on November 7. It will be impossible to cover all of these with 100% precision, so some may be covered more superficially than others (with appropriate weightings on any monetary positions taken on the outcomes thereof!).

Numbers in brackets are the priority I will assign to the research. You will see I have a west coast bias, as my knowledge is better of the pacific region.

State Governor races:

  • [1] California
  • Iowa
  • [2] Michigan
  • Minnesota
  • [3] Oregon
  • Wisconsin
  • US Senate:

  • Connecticut (only interesting if Lieberman loses Democratic nomination)
  • Maryland
  • Missouri (tight race)
  • Montana
  • [2] New Jersey (tight race)
  • Ohio (tight race)
  • Pennsylvania
  • Rhode Island (tight race)
  • [3] Tennessee
  • Virgina
  • [1] Washington
  • US House races: I am still deciding whether I should cover certain individual house races (for example, Tom Delay’s old seat in TX-22). I will cover the “Republicans to Retain Control of the House”, which is expected to be a tight race. This will be my first priority as the market for this is quite liquid compared to the rest.

    Coyote on Global Warming

    Posted in Commentary, Links on July 25th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

    This is a really good article from the Coyote Blog on things to consider about global warming. He writes something that I would never have the patience to do myself.

    For many years now I’ve been increasingly skeptical of all the “doom and gloom” scenarios that people have been painting about the climate. I think what finally “snapped” in my head was when the movement changed from using the term “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” so that way they can cover their asses for any variation of climate, not necessarily warming.

    The other source of skepticism was reading the history behind the scientists predicting a new “ice age” back in the 1960′s. There were actually proposals on the books to spray paint the arctic and antarctic ice caps black to reduce the earth’s total surface albedo and increase absorption of solar energy.

    The final issue deals with something Coyote touched upon – solar output. Astronomers have also noticed that the Martian ice caps are shrinking – presumably Mars has its own global warming problem as well.

    I really don’t think climate scientists can predict with a damn what the climate will be like in ten years, let alone a hundred or a thousand until they can model solar output properly.

    I’ve always viewed it as the ultimate hubris that certain environmentalists believe that the climate that the earth had in 1900 or 1950 or whatever is the “absolute perfect climate” and if there is any deviation from the climate of that “perfect year” that it must be man-made and therefore we have to shut down civilization to prevent it.

    If the earth is too hot today, then what is the ideal temperature? Should we cool ourselves down 2 degrees? 4? 8? Bring the planet into an ice age?

    What doesn’t worry me is the actual debate on whether the earth is actually warming or not, but what worries me is when you mix this in with politics.

    My real big fear is that if activists are successful in doing something stupid (like putting in a carbon tax), that any subsequent increase in temperature would be a sign that the tax isn’t high enough. Any decrease in temperature would of course be interpreted as a success, and so we would have to increase the carbon tax because it’s obviously successful. There is absolutely no benchmark that you could reliably measure the success of such a measure or not. The only guarantee is that you will be slowing down the economy, which is the ultimate goal of this movement (and Al Gore’s re-election campaign for 2008).

    Canada’s Fiscal Situation is good

    Posted in Finance on July 25th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

    Finance Canada publishes an account of the country’s income statement every month. Anybody can subscribe to the Fiscal Monitor if they are so interested. The May 2006 edition shows that our country economically is doing very well.

    Of course, this all is looking in the rear-view mirror, but usually you can see an economic downturn when revenue figures stall. Specifically, the number to look at is corporate taxes – in the month of May 2005, the government took in $2.4 billion. This year, the government took in $2.9 billion. When corporations pay taxes, they are profitable and this is usually good for the economy.

    The other note is that employment insurance premiums collected for the month is at $1.6 billion, while the amount given out to people is $1.1 billion. This means the government is currently collecting about $500 million or 30% more than they spend for the month. Considering the unemployment rate in this country is at a low, this is to be expected. When the country is facing a recession and many people are out of work, in theory this surplus through EI should revert back to a deficit. Over a period of an economic cycle, the balance should be neutral.

    Scales at the produce store

    Posted in Commentary on July 24th, 2006 by Sacha Peter

    Here’s a money-saving tip: when you’re at the checkout of a produce store, make sure that the scale is set to ZERO before buying stuff. When I went and bought some fruit today, I noticed that the scale was reading 0.29 pounds. This is like paying 30% more if you are buying one pound of produce.

    What was I buying? Rainer cherries (the yellow ones) were going at $2/pound. I noticed the BC Okanagan cherries (the red ones) were selling for $3.69/pound, which is quite expensive (they should go down in a day or two). Normally the yellow ones sell for significantly more than the red ones. So I bought some – I’ve actually never had them before.

    I also bought some blueberries. They were $2/pound as well, although I’m going to try scouting at some of these local farms in Richmond around the No. 6 road area and see what they have to offer – they should be cheaper in higher quantities. Blueberries are great fruits because they hold their flavour really well when you freeze (and thaw) them. If you buy a ton of them, you can store enough for the winter. They’re good for making blueberry pancakes and muffins.