[joeblow9999]

Originally Posted by Ibanez

U.S. Banks lately are firing thousands of people in fear of penalties from strict and complicated government regulation.

Citation needed? I'm curious to know the details surrounding these mysterious "strict and complicated" regulations, what they are in place for, and in what ways it can be unequivocally demonstrated that they are the direct cause of mass layoffs.

Originally Posted by Ibanez

But hey, at least people are being saved from themselves and from accepting mortgage terms they can't afford...

It's far more complex than that.

Originally Posted by Ibanez

Its not as simple as the typical liberal talking point "more regulations" but the type of system.

A survey conducted by the World Economic Forum, concluded that Canada has the best banking system in the world, receiving a score of 6.8 out of possible 7. We have a simplified regulatory system.

But it is nevertheless regulated. You must understand that when we're at a starting point of few if any real, effective regulatory measures, any changes in policy will naturally result in "more regulation" than was present at the beginning. Alternatively, in scenarios where regulation already exists but is said to be in need of reform by policymakers, one should not confuse new regulation with "more" regulation.

Originally Posted by Ibanez

We have no Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac promoting "affordable housing" through guarantees or purchases of high-risk loans. The banks own the mortgages instead of selling them off. Mortgage interest is not tax deductible. its harder to qualify for a mortgage, and if a down payment is less than 20% of the value of a home, the mortgage holder must purchase mortgage insurance. So you can't have an idiot buy with a 3% down payment freely like you can in the US. Plus in the US you can walk away from a mortgage...in Canada you are responsible under all circumstances.

So basically what I'm gathering from your post is that effective regulations are better than ineffective ones. Well, with all due respect, no shit. Nobody's contesting that. But people who want to bring effective regulations to the table are "typical liberals" who scream for "moar gubmint"? I'm confused.

Originally Posted by Ibanez

And yet it's not any more regulated than the US, or more government involvement - it's just a streamlined system with less legislation tying the hands of lenders and more responsibility on the buyers. Efficiency ftw. /end rant

Now wait a minute. You just listed quite a few restrictions on mortgages that Canada has and the US lacks. Those restrictions were put in place by legislation, a.k.a. regulations. So how does Canada's housing market have "less government involvement" again? If anything, there's more "government involvement" and more regulation than the US has. I don't believe for a second that Canada regulates its lenders less than the US does. Could it be that Canada's success is attributable to regulating their lenders so they aren't handing out high-risk loans to anyone who can dot an "I" and cross a "T"?

The subprime mortgage crisis in the US is directly attributable to lack of government oversight and accountability on the part of lenders. It most certainly was not due to "too much government." I for one am quite curious as to how the supposedly overregulated lender Wells Fargo managed to make $49 billion in profit from 2008 to 2010 while paying absolutely no taxes and even receiving a tax rebate of $681,000,000. Yep, obviously too much government tying their hands.