Business
The Mortgage Maelstrom: Navigating the Impending Financial Tempest in Canada
From The Opposition with Dan Knight substack
As renewal rates surge and interest rates soar, Canadian households stand on the precipice of a fiscal fallout that could redefine the nation’s economic landscape
As we wade through the current economic climate, it’s becoming increasingly clear that a storm is brewing on the Canadian horizon, one that could sweep away the financial stability of countless households. The heart of this looming tempest? The mortgage market—specifically, the shock awaiting about 60% of mortgage holders in the next three years as their terms come up for renewal.
RBC has crunched the numbers and the forecast is grim. More than $186 billion in mortgages is set to renew in 2024 alone, and if today’s interest rates hold, homeowners could see their payments leap by a staggering 32%. And that’s just the beginning. The following year, $315 billion worth of mortgages are on the renewal chopping block, many of which are variable-rate mortgages, potentially pushing the payment shock to 33%.
What’s the root cause? It’s the interest rates—sitting at a 5% benchmark, the highest we’ve seen since the turn of the millennium. If there’s no significant decrease, we’re looking at a tidal wave of credit losses come 2025. And let’s not forget the elephant in the room: those with variable-rate mortgages could face a payment shock as high as 84% by 2026 if the rates stay put.
Here’s the scoop, folks. Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem laid out a cold hard truth: fiscal and monetary policy are at loggerheads. While the central bank is straining every sinew to wrestle down inflation with rate hikes, the federal and provincial governments are lighting the fuse with their spending, fueling the very inflation the Bank of Canada is trying to stamp out.
In the red corner, we’ve got the Bank of Canada, gloves on, ready to slug inflation down to its target by 2025. In the blue corner, Trudeau’s government, doling out dollars like there’s no tomorrow. What does this mean for John and Jane Doe on Main Street? As their mortgage renewals roll in, they’re staring down the barrel of a 32% to a mind-boggling 84% payment shock.
Folks, let’s cut to the chase. This economic quagmire we’re sinking into? It’s got Trudeau’s fingerprints all over it. The fabric of Canadian society is getting shredded not by accident, but by a government playing fast and loose with fiscal policy. The Bank of Canada is scrambling to counteract with rate hikes, but Trudeau’s Liberals seem hell-bent on doling out dollars like candy on Halloween, inflaming inflation and leaving families to foot the bill.
As for Trudeau, he’s steering the ship with a blindfold on, and the polls? They’re reading like an obituary for the Liberals’ prospects. Come the next federal election, if these mortgage hikes hit as hard as predicted, Trudeau’s so-called economic strategy could be the very thing that buries his political future. We’re not just talking about a swing in the voting booths; we’re talking about a full-scale revolt from a populace that’s had enough of being ignored in the face of an economic abyss.
As Canadians navigate the turbulent waters of an economy where the dream of homeownership slips through their fingers and the basic necessity of putting food on the table becomes a herculean task, the political pageantry of promised dental plans rings hollow. When the ballots are drawn, the echo of dissatisfaction will thunder across the voting booths. Yes, my dear readers, as the national mood simmers with the desire for change, there’s a palpable sense that a political reckoning looms on the horizon — a red wedding in the electoral sense, where the old guard may be unseated in a dramatic upheaval.
Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight.
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Dan Knight
From the Fraser Institute
By Matthew Lau
From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population.
According to a recent poll, there’s widespread support among Canadians for reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy. The support extends across the political spectrum. Among the political right, 82.8 per cent agree to reduce the federal bureaucracy compared to only 5.8 per cent who disagree (with the balance neither agreeing nor disagreeing); among political moderates 68.4 per cent agree and only 10.0 per cent disagree; and among the political left 44.8 per cent agree and 26.3 per cent disagree.
Taken together, “67 per cent agreed the federal bureaucracy should be significantly reduced. Only 12 per cent disagreed.” These results shouldn’t be surprising. The federal bureaucracy is ripe for cuts. From 2015 to 2024, the federal government added more than 110,000 new bureaucrats, a 43 per cent increase, which was nearly triple the rate of population growth.
This bureaucratic expansion was totally unjustified. From 2015 to 2024, headcount at Natural Resources Canada increased 39 per cent even though employment in Canada’s natural resources sector actually fell one per cent. Similarly, there was 382 per cent headcount growth at the federal department for Women and Gender Equality—obviously far higher than the actual growth in Canada’s female population. And there are many similar examples.
While in 2025 the number of federal public service jobs fell by three per cent, the cost of the federal bureaucracy actually increased as the number of fulltime equivalents, which accounts for whether those jobs were fulltime or part-time, went up. With the tax burden created by the federal bureaucracy rising so significantly in the past decade, it’s no wonder Canadians overwhelmingly support its reduction.
Another interesting poll result: “While 42 per cent of those surveyed supported the government using artificial intelligence tools to resolve bottlenecks in service delivery, 32 per cent opposed it, with 25 per cent on the fence.” The authors of the poll say the “plurality in favour is surprising, given the novelty of the technology.”
Yet if 67 per cent of Canadians agree with significantly shrinking the federal bureaucracy, then solid support for using AI to increasing efficiency should not be too surprising, even if the technology is relatively new. Separate research finds 58 per cent of Canadian workers say they use AI tools provided by their workplace, and although many of them do not necessarily use AI regularly, of those who report using AI the majority say it improves their productivity.
In fact, there’s massive potential for the government to leverage AI to increase efficiency and control labour expenses. According to a recent study by a think-tank at Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly known as Ryerson), while the federal public service and the overall Canadian workforce are similar in terms of the percentage of roles that could be made more productive by AI, federal employees were twice as likely (58 per cent versus 29 per cent) to have jobs “comprised of tasks that are more likely to be substituted or replaced” by AI.
The opportunity to improve public service efficiency and deliver massive savings to taxpayers is clearly there. However, whether the Carney government will take advantage of this opportunity is questionable. Unlike private businesses, which must continuously innovate and improve operational efficiency to compete in a free market, federal bureaucracies face no competition. As a result, there’s little pressure or incentive to reduce costs and increase efficiency, whether through AI or other process or organizational improvements.
In its upcoming budget and beyond, it would be a shame if the federal government does not, through AI or other changes, restrain the cost of its workforce. Taxpayers deserve, and clearly demand, a break from this ever-increasing burden.
Matthew Lau
Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Later this week the United Nations will hold a vote on a multi-billion climate-change tax targeted squarely at American industry. Without quick and decisive action by the White House, this U.N. tax on fossil fuels will become international law.
This resolution before the International Maritime Organization will impose a carbon tax on cargo and cruise ships that carry $20 trillion of merchandise over international waters. Roughly 80% of the bulkage of world trade is transported by ship.
The resolution is intended to advance the very “net zero” carbon emissions standard that has knee-capped the European economies for years and that American voters have rejected.
This tax is clearly an unnecessary restraint on world trade, thus making all citizens of the world poorer.
It is also an international tax that would be applied to American vessels and, as such, is a dangerous precedent-setting assault on U.S. sovereignty. Since when are American businesses subject to international taxes imposed by the United Nations?
The U.S maritime industry believes the global tax would cost American shippers more than $100 billion over the next seven years if enacted.
Worst of all, if the resolution passes, it will require the retirement of older ships and enable a multi-billion-dollar wealth transfer to China, which has come to dominate shipbuilding in recent years. China STRONGLY supports the tax scheme, even though, ironically, no nation has emitted more pollutants into the atmosphere than they have. Yet WE are getting socked with a tax that indirectly pays for THEIR pollution.
Despite the fact that we pay a disproportionate share of the tax, the U.S. has almost no say on how the revenues are spent. This is the ultimate form of taxation without representation.
Even if the United States chooses not to implement the tax on domestic shipping, it will still be enforced by foreign ports of origin or destination as well as by flag states. As a result, American importers and exporters will be required to pay the tax regardless of domestic policy decisions.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, and Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy have jointly stated that America “will not accept any international environmental agreement that unduly or unfairly burdens the United States or our businesses.” They call the financial impact on the U.S. of this global carbon tax “disastrous, with some estimates forecasting global shipping costs increasing as much as 10% or more.”
The U.S. maritime industry complains that although American vessels carry only about 12% of the globally shipped merchandise, U.S. flag vessels would bear almost 20% of this tax. No wonder China and Europe are for it. The EU nations get 17 yes votes to swamp the one no vote out of Washington.
Unfortunately, right now without White House pressure, we could lose this vote because of defections by our allies.
To prevent this tax, the White House should announce a set of retaliation measures. This could include a dollar-for-dollar reduction in U.S. payments to NATO, the U.N., IMF and World Bank.
At a time when financial markets are dealing with trade disputes, the last thing the world — least of all the United States — needs is a United Nations excise tax on trade.
Stephen Moore is co-founder of Unleash Prosperity and a former Trump senior economic advisor.
Canada’s birth rate plummets to an all-time low
Pierre Poilievre says Christians may be ‘number one’ target of hate violence in Canada
Jordan Peterson needs prayers as he battles serious health issues, daughter Mikhaila says
Devastating COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effect Confirmed by New Data: Study
-
Alberta2 days agoFact, fiction, and the pipeline that’s paying Canada’s rent
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoProtestor Behind ‘Longest Ballot’ Chaos targeting Poilievre pontificates to Commons Committee
-
Business2 days agoFinance Titans May Have Found Trojan Horse For ‘Climate Mandates’
-
Energy1 day agoIndigenous Communities Support Pipelines, Why No One Talks About That
-
Alberta1 day agoOil Sands are the Costco of world energy – dependable and you know exactly where to find it
-
International2 days agoSigned and sealed: Peace in the Middle East
-
Business1 day agoFinance Committee Recommendation To Revoke Charitable Status For Religion Short Sighted And Destructive
-
Alberta22 hours agoThe Technical Pitfalls and Political Perils of “Decarbonized” Oil