David Rosenberg On Austerity, Politics, And The Light At The End Of The Tunnel

Tyler Durden's picture

David Rosenberg, Gluskin Sheff: PARTING OF THE CLOUDS?

Austerity is not some dirty nine-letter word as the socialists in Europe would have you believe. It is all about living within your means and living up to your commitments.

There is some good news in the United States with respect to this topic.

Wisconsin and the controversial Governor Scott Walker and his electoral victory grabbed the headlines last week. But the really big development took place in California where San Diego, by a two-thirds majority vote, approved a plan that puts new city workers on a private sector-type retirement fund and a six-year wage freeze for current employees. San Jose also saw a 70% majority pass of a reform bill that offers civil servants two choices: contribute more to fund their pensions or be willing to accept a cut in benefits.

As last Thursday's Investor's Business Daily aptly put it in its lead editorial piece:

San Diego, and San Jose are emblematic of the tidal wave of pension liabilities faced by cities across California — and, indeed, the U.S. It's unsustainable...if liberal California recognizes the depths of its public-sector union problems, no doubt others will too.

Amen to that.

I've been saying for a while that if Canada could pull back from the brink of fiscal insanity in the early 1990s, then certainly America can do it today. Don't wait for a crisis to shock you into it as we did — it makes the transition to budgetary integrity much tougher. There are more than 80 million millennials out there — kids between the ages of new-born to twenty. This cohort (our future) is even bigger than the boomers. It is imperative that we don't saddle them with a debt noose around their necks and no job prospects to speak of. As it stands, the average college student has an average debt load of $30,000 and the male unemployment rate for those between 20 and 24 years old is 14%. That, my friends, is the statistic that keeps me up most at night because the longer it stays that high, the more one should be concerned over social stability.

Mitt Romney seems to have taken over in the polls and is the candidate who is taking the high road so far in this campaign. He managed to raise more money in May than the President — an impressive feat (nearly $77 million dollars versus $60 million for President Obama). To be sure, it is difficult to unseat a sitting president but when it has happened, it was because of a deteriorating economic backdrop. This economy was already growing slowly and is about to slow down even more as the European recession and Asian softening hit our exports and production data in coming months.

The uncertainty over the extent of next year's tax bite is also likely to cause households and businesses to pull spending back and raise cash, at the margin. All this means the economy won't turn around in time for Mr. Obama — by the time the election rolls around, we could be talking about a 9% unemployment rate, especially with those on emergency jobless benefits getting termed out and as such will be compelled to come into the workforce to engage in a job search (either that or move into your brother-in-law's basement -- if he'll let you).

In any event, it's all about resolve, courage, discipline ... and the right political moment to strike. Canada has the benefit of granting governments on occasion the benefit of running the country with a majority. The advantage of a parliamentary system — so long as the party in power doesn't blow it. Canada is blessed with that today — a Conservative majority with a pro-business agenda — as it was in the 1990s with the Liberals under the leadership of Jean Chretien and Paul Martin. Stalwarts who were willing to part from their populist election campaign in 1993 and embark on the road towards fiscal austerity.

It wasn't easy— cuts to health and education. Privatization. Various revenue- raising initiatives. Keeping the national sales tax that was imposed by the prior Mulroney government (which deserves a lot of credit for blazing the trail). Means-testing Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement. Cutbacks to the civil service and wage freezes. Raising the retirement age too in order to curtail bloated actuarial pension liabilities. And a move towards privately delivered medical care. All in formerly Socialist Canada — what Lord Black once labeled a 'Banana Republic' (not exactly the right climate to grow the fruit, mind you).

The United States can do the same. But having one party in power at both the executive and legislative levels would be necessary since the divide between the GOP and the Democrats is far too wide to get anything done. A lot can be accomplished, even in a two-year span. The Republicans look set to take the Senate and reclaim the House, so it would stand to reason that those who believe this is a time for courageous action to replace gridlock, would be opting for Mr. Romney.

No candidate is perfect, but let's just say, from a purely economics standpoint, that Mitt, based on his background as a businessman, understands the time-worn link between profits and jobs. And the U.S., to be sure, has a jobs crisis. Solve that, and you'll be surprised at how the other ills from social divisiveness to health care funding to government revenues will be resolved.

This will thus require a re-write of the tax code, a highly inefficient tax code that promotes consumption at the expense of savings and investment — investment that is at the root of future productivity growth and in turn the critical driver of our standard-of-living. This means "no" to higher top marginal tax rates — it is imperative to keep the incentive system for success fully intact. You can't mess with that. Better to build public support for and enact a national sales tax like Canada did over two decades ago. Was it controversial? Yes. Did the retailer lobby picket the parliament buildings and make a whole lot of noise? Absolutely. But in the end, it allowed for lower marginal rates and over time, a declining path for the unemployment rate — which is now far below the level prevailing in the U.S. Tax consumption and this will also fall on foreign producers and help narrow the bloated trade deficit. Encourage the development of natural gas and finally wean us off of oil import dependency and the United States could again emerge as a nation with a trade surplus, deserving of being the world's reserve currency. Reducing tax breaks and loopholes is necessary — especially those that favour housing. Having a system that encourages a shift in the nation's resources to basically an unproductive asset is plain wrong — who else has both mortgage interest deductible and tax-free capital gains on the sale of the principal residence? Not just wrong but wasteful.

In a world of finite financial resources, it is important to not have policies that encourage resource mis-allocation. Studies from decades past indicating that homeowners are better citizens than renters have already been proven to be out-dated. So the National Retail Federation would undoubtedly throw a fit over a VAT and the National Association of Homebuilders would rattle the cage over the phasing-out of the tax goodies that promote overconsumption of an unproductive asset — simply put, a house is a large consumer durable good, it's a place we live and that's about it — but if replaced by a system that encourages growth in the private sector capital stock, the job creation that will follow should quiet down these lobby groups.

At the same time, there is little doubt that "entitlements" are going to have to be amended — one first step would be to get rid of that word. The only "entitlement" that really is or should be in America is a fair shot at the yellow brick road — not a cheque from Uncle Sam.

Resolve. Courage. Discipline. Shared sacrifice. I can sense it coming down the pike. As was the case with Ronald Reagan, just having a clear and coherent fiscal plan will part the clouds of uncertainty and encourage capital to be put at risk rather than sit as idle unproductive cash on corporate balance sheets.

We've seen this before, by the way. The rewrite of the tax code during the Reagan era wasn't legislated until 1986 and this was the reform that took sky- high top marginal rates on a declining path. But the bottom of the economy and the market was in 1982 as households and businesses responded ahead of the fact to a new level of certainty and confidence as it pertained to the outlook for fiscal policy. There is no shortage of books on behavioral economics that deal with how "expectations" play a crucial role in spending patterns today.

I may be cautious on the outlook for risk assets and cyclical securities over the near- and intermediate term. But change is always at the margin. And it usually starts in the political sphere. Within that realm, it is the local levels that tend to lead reforms at the national level. And that we could see the pension reforms take hold in California of all states — hey, isn't that our "Greece"? — is a real bellwether. The temptation to stay bearish at the peak level of desperation in 1982 must have been strong, but superimposing the experience of the prior 16 years of cost-push inflation, excessive regulation, extreme labour power, the costs of the Vietnam War (at every level), economic sclerosis and labour immobility to the next 16 years would have been a colossal error, because as it turned out, the 1980s and 90s belonged to America. Fancy that. But you couldn't have sold that story in 1982, that much is for sure.

The future is brighter than you think. This does not mean we will not have another recession, by the way — we had a doozy within the first two years of the fabled Reagan presidency, but we endured nonetheless and came out stronger on the other side once the inflationary excesses of the day were purged (today, it is a case of curing a deflationary debt deleveraging). The structural tax reforms, a new approach for dealing with the Soviet Union, and the air traffic comptroller lockout (which forever changed management-union relations) ultimately ushered in a prolonged period of prosperity that would have seemed like a dream in the 1970s when families had to line up on different days of the week to fill their cars up with gas. What Reagan managed to do was instill confidence with a coherent, credible and cogent strategy that gave people — who make up the economy — a higher degree of certainty over the future. I cannot stress how important it is for any government to ensure at all times that households and businesses have as much clarity over the policy outlook as possible. That makes it easier to plan ahead. And in turn, it leads to better economic results.

I'm noticing a certain degree of despair these days, just as I am getting enthusiastic about the future. Much depends on what happens on November 6th and between now and then we still have the European mess, China hard landing risks and the U.S. debt ceiling issue to confront. Be that as it may, those with some dry powder on hand will have their clients in a solid position to take advantage of whatever forced "panic" selling takes place.

For the record, I do see a light at the end of the dark tunnel. Don't be surprised if I end up turning bullish ahead of the pack — though it may not be until the like of my good friend, Jim Paulsen, is hiding under his desk screaming "uncle"! But the Rosenberg shift to perma-bull status — I was there in the 80s and 90s, but obscurity got in the way — could come as early as Thanksgiving.

I'm so excited I just can't hide it. But for now, I'm keeping the powder dry.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
francis_sawyer's picture

it's an oncoming train...


BKbroiler's picture

It's the 2nd Great Depression leading to the 2nd Dark Age.  Get your camping gear!

notbot's picture

Rosie nails it...again.

The Big Ching-aso's picture



If I was a bullish bear I would be nailing it at least some of the time 2.  Kinda like flipping a coin & getting accolades when it turns up tails because 2 times B4 that it came up heads.

economics9698's picture

The only difference between Reagan and his insane spending and Obama and his insane spending is Reagan had Volcker jacking up the interest rate to 19% and Bernanke lowering the interest rate to 0.00001%.

Both are ideological fools spending money on bull shit.  Both suck.

Volcker stopped Reagan’s bull shit economy; Bernanke is the head cheerleader for Obama’s bull shit economy.  Any mother fucker who tells you Reagan was a good economic leader is full of shit.



jeff montanye's picture

i think you got it righter than rosie.  "much depends on what happens november 6"?  really.  like the huge difference that having a change agent like obama made in fixing what that police statist bush mucked up?  rosie might be right though.  romney may have fewer fixed beliefs than obama so anything might happen.


Michael's picture

Let's just all agree to stop calling it "Austerity", and start calling it what it really is, "Government Spending Cuts".

Michael's picture

Lawyers For Ron Paul Civil Rights (Voting Rights) Lawsuit FAQ

walküre's picture

spending cuts affecting the 99% and the top 1% are having another banner year.

thx, Michael for setting the record straight

want extra whipping cream with that cake?

Escapeclaws's picture

Let's agree to stop calling it "Austerity" and start calling it "Hell on Earth" for the true guilty party--the American middle class which cannot suffer enough in the coming 15 or 20 years. Yes, it was the middle class that egged on the bankster mafia to take over government, privatize the gains and socialize the losses. Kneel before Baal you craven slaves!

Something tells me that libertarianism isn't going to survive the coming austerity under the hard-right turn we're about to make with piranha-faced Mitt as the new puppet. Rosie just sees what is coming and is already paying homage to Baal in the hopes that his children won't end up in concentration camps. Can't blame him really--this population shrinkage project is serious business.

The Big Ching-aso's picture



Until systemic fraud is prosecuted then all of Rosie's feeling-good spouting about a rosier future is absurd.  Essentially I think he's delusionally FOS.

SeattleBruce's picture

It's not Presidents that spend money, it's Presidents, Congress and vested constituencies that spend money.  And especially since 1971, both parties have spent debt based money like drunken sailors.

Create accountability - end debt based money. http://economicedge.blogspot.com/2009/12/freedoms-vision-outline.html

Mugatu's picture

I like Rosie too.  His economic thoughts are always provoking and inciteful.  Unfortunately, his short term and even intermediate timing can sometimes be off.  Economists never make great traders.  This whole story is chock full of "2-4 years out" stuff which is great, but some serious shit storms will hit us before the U.S. is on a happy pill diet again.

economics9698's picture

The shit is already hitting the fan.  This monetary blow up is about 3 year, 8 months, on a 3-5 year time line.  No one can hit the timing exactly but by year 4 all but the dullest will see this bitch exploding.

Doubleguns's picture

Rosie is dreaming if he thinks the "R's" are going to save the day. What is the budget they propose doing, deficit spending for 28 more years. That sounds like a swell plan folks. /s


Dont trust either party to be the savior, both are corrupt and have an agenda to deal with. You the voter are just an annoyance every couple of years. Kiss your ass, tell you stories, get your vote and then promply bend you over all the while making you feel good about it. 


The question simply comes down to "who do you want standing behind you when your bent over".

masterinchancery's picture

Delusional.  When has one (massively indebted and taxed) country ever prospered in a world wide depression?

Cadavre's picture

Rosie nails it...again

If, by "nails it" you mean Gluskin Schlepberg's non profit 501s just got a fat check and can meet budet for the next quarter from an Obeeannabe's Cyber Army grant or the GE Foundation for the particular sweat shirt ivy league smarty pants banner he penned below, ...
Austerity is not some dirty nine-letter word as the socialists in Europe would have you believe. It is all about living within your means and living up to your commitments.

... you may have "nailed it" as well ...

If by "austerity" author means means the US closing down 900 forward foreign genocide base of operations or extracting the commons military service employees from 3 (or more) war crime theaters, and getting ALCIADA out of the smack money laundering business, and our employees stop spending money on cyber warfare to create stuxnet and flame that cause mass death catastrophic accidents like the reactor failures in Japan, and fire the the mercs the commons pays it's employees working in the  ALCIADA or Department State Sponsored Terrorism, or the Obewannabe administration not deploying the 30,000 drones to spy or shoot Americans, of which one, at a cost of 176 Million per, crashed today in Maryland while a Blackwater trainee was at the stick while working through a cocaine hangover or ending the Department of Wasteland Insecurity that views all it's employers (that's be us) and  our 3 year old children as terror suspects, and quit monitoring the net and flagging content that publishes one of them 377 verbotten terms, including words like "pork" - if he means ending that shit - then he nailed it and you nailed it when you nailed him for nailing it (get it?)!

If he-you means Ending the Mafia Banks and Trillion Dollar Bails to Wall Street so the Bankster Mafia has the "disposable" cash to payout 144 Billion in bonuses at year end when the fruits of their collective corruptive fraudulent extorting influence came to a head , with the complicity of those same ass wipes fascists the Diebold Flippers been [s]electing since time was time and the wack jobs those very same Diebold Droids keep appointing to head the commons's Federal Agencies,, then you and the author both nailed it flush with one single "manly" stroke.

Speaking of "stroke" .. allow me to offer a chorus from a blues tune urs true penned years back .. a chunka chunka 1-5-1 progression

was sitting on the toilet
  my hand wrapped around my blues
yeah .. was sitting on the toilet
  with my hand wrapped all round my blues

one more stroke pretty momma
  this last shot just for you

But the article's author didn't say that stuff and neither did you - so what lines were you reading in between when you came to that confusing conclusion and shared it with ZH?

Lucius Cornelius Sulla's picture

Funny how Rosey never mentioned bringing finance down.  Romney is a GS shill just as O is a public employee union shill.  Talk about picking the lesser of two evils!  Putting your faith in politics is a waste of energy.  The only thing that will set this economy straight is Mr. Market.  The longer deleveraging is dragged out, the more pain will be inflicted.  

batterycharged's picture

I saw this coming 10 years ago...maybe more. It's as bad as we think it is.


People scream xenophobia when you blame globalization, but dig this. This is the sum of all sums of what the hell is going on:

The west is like a person that once made $100,000, but now makes $10/hr with no benefits....but still has outstanding debt for 2 trucks, 2 vacation homes, 2 wives and a penchant for fine cuisine.

That's it in a nutshell. The great depression was the result of the destruction of millions of farm-intensive jobs. And nothing to replace them.

What we have now is the 3rd world providing adequate replacement of labor at 3rd world costs.

Now this would be fine if we could compete with 3rd world wages. And even more importantly, we could compete if we didn't have a mortgage that was based on our previous higher-than-global-standard wages.

Essentially what we have is an income mismatch with debt. We have past expectations with future realities. We have debts that we obviously can't pay.

Blame globalization. Blame the lack of any planned economy and the blind consent to the financial industry that lives off of slave debt holders.


Freddie's picture


Yup. I had about the same discussion with a friend about 6 years ago.

The west is like a person that once made $100,000, but now makes $10/hr with no benefits....but still has outstanding debt for 2 trucks, 2 vacation homes, 2 wives and a penchant for fine cuisine.


Bobbyrib's picture

What's amazing to me it that no one is really talking about letting the economy adjust and restructure (other than Ron Paul) rather than keeping the same failed economic policies going.


Obamney 2012..we're fucked.

IBelieveInMagic's picture

We had a choice.

We could have avoided reserve currency status and scrambled to compete for jobs with the best of the third world (how does wage of $0.80/day sound!) -- of course we would not have enjoyed the outsized consumption that the reserve currency status enables (even if it is for short term -- turned out to be 40+ years and going!).

Or we could have opted for reserve currency with all it's related consumption benefits. But, this required shedding of jobs like so much ballast from a gondola.

So, what is an entitled people to choose?

The American publiic chose instant gratification -- consumption. And by-and-large, loved the free ride.

Now the free ride is under threat and the entitled public is whining like crazy. An entitled (and armed) populace gets down right nasty when the freebies are taken away.

And denies responsibility for making this choice. And constantly blames everyone... except themselves.

ATM's picture

They chose consumption for a couple of reasons but neither was "instant gratification".

People chose consumption because it was so cheap. Credit has been basically free from a rate standpoint. I can pay back debt with debased currency. Or I bought a house that was increasing in price faster than the rate of interest paid on the debt. Then I could use that phantom increase in price to buy all the shit I needed to put in that house! It's simple.

What made the choice even easier was the "social safety net". That's nothing more than the government encouraging people and businesses to take on far more risk than they normally would because the consequences of bad decision making have been skewed. The risks aren't that bad because I can always count on the government cheese. I got a guarantees SSI check in retirment so I don't need to save what I really should.

Instant gratification is nice and absent true consequences and a social safety net the vast majority would not choose the new TV over living on the street. It's just that our system that has evolved to create nothing but consumerism and debt has led them to make those decisions.

I've had some interesting thoughts on that subject. (maybe not interesting to anyone else however.) That debt, both individual and sovereign is the key to the one world government. As I expect, all those debts will be refinanced via a world wide governing body and the rules of ownership will be changed. The true owners and all their rights will simply be subordinated to the IMF, UN or whatever other bullshit appointed, non-elected body may arise. Worldwide Peonism. That's how they do it.  

IBelieveInMagic's picture

Reserve currency makes financing cheap and money is created and dribbled on the American citizenry in the form of wages for make work, entitlements, government boondoggles, low cost lending, etc. Americans get first use of $ which then flows out and buys goods and services from competing sources around the world which keeps prices low for the buyers.

Hence the reserve currency is stoutly defended by the US as it gives us unbelievable advantages while all the time falsely and misleadingly complaining about how burdensome the role of reserve currency provider and consumer of last resort is!

ATM's picture

They chose consumption for a couple of reasons but neither was "instant gratification".

People chose consumption because it was so cheap. Credit has been basically free from a rate standpoint. I can pay back debt with debased currency. Or I bought a house that was increasing in price faster than the rate of interest paid on the debt. Then I could use that phantom increase in price to buy all the shit I needed to put in that house! It's simple.

What made the choice even easier was the "social safety net". That's nothing more than the government encouraging people and businesses to take on far more risk than they normally would because the consequences of bad decision making have been skewed. The risks aren't that bad because I can always count on the government cheese. I got a guarantees SSI check in retirment so I don't need to save what I really should.

Instant gratification is nice and with true consequences and without a social safety net the vast majority would not choose the new TV over living on the street. It's just that our debt based system can only survive as long as debt is increasing. The system becomes selfserving creating the very conditions necessary for the expansion of debt until it cannot expand any longer.

So peole are pissed and they don't understand why their decision was not correct. They made the right choices based on the conditions that they were presented with, the decisions that furthered the system but they weren't told the system itself could and would collapse.

Mitzibitzi's picture

All true. But... how exactly does one sell this truth to J6P, when he is addicted to all his now unaffordable stuff? And has a locker full of guns. And 100 million friends just like him?

On the moral level, we in the West do need to stop living high on the hog at the expense of every bugger else on the planet. It's unpardonable that people are starving all over the world, by deliberate policy, so a relative minority can live like kings. But our elite handlers can't tell us that (the few that care about it, anyway. The rest just see $-signs) or Mr. 6P will start racking shells into his Mossberg.

IBelieveInMagic's picture

Was just making observation in response to the blatantly pious and false denial upthread -- was not recommending any solutions.

GeezerGeek's picture

If "people are starving all over the world" it is most likely because the local government is impeding agricultural production and distribution. It would not help for "we in the West do need to stop living high on the hog". Was that the origin of the famines induced by Stalin in the USSR? Was the West's living standards responsible for famines in China under Mao? I frecall stories from a few decades ago where people in Africa starved while food supplies were accumulating on docks. The local warlords refused to distribute the food donated by extranational groups.

Before I buy into your claims I need to see some examples of policies requiring deliberate starvation implemented by the West.

dolce vita's picture

"change the terms to Entitlements:"......you mean that  ACCOUNT i was FORCED to contribute to since i was a 15 years old working stiff? Now the govi thinks that" I" should sacrifice?

Dudes ...this is your marker...yes ,change the name ,means test it, stop giving it out to illegal seniors, deal with fraud with hammers  jailtime and stockades, and cut friggin bloated  spending...but this is my ACCOUNT... not some handout i didnt earn. Yea , im "entitled" to my account.

see... problem is pensioners dont contribute but expect lavish payoffs...somethings gotta give.

ACP's picture

That light at the end of the tunnel...

...is a freight train full of DEBT, BITCHEZ!

Paul Atreides's picture

Triple headed, in run 8 with the emergency breaks burnt off...

HarryM's picture

The argument against austerity is that with historical increases in productivity , it takes a lower percentage of the population working to provide a given standard of living for the entire population.

A farmer today can feed exponentially more people than 100 years ago.

It takes less workers to produce a car , etc.

Take it one step further and eliminate useless agencies and positions -  ( these people are essentially on welfare )

i.e. - simplify the tax code so it would only take 5000 IRS agents - 95 percent of accountants and tax lawyers would no longer needed, etc

Self navigating vehicles will soon eliminate truck and cab drivers.

In the end , we should all be working 20 hours a week and retire at 50, but the 1% would not get as rich.

Instead it takes 2 people working 50 hours a week - and they want more.

Attica  ... Attica ... Attica !!!

(all figures are complete guestimates of course)








CommunityStandard's picture

Tyler seems to like trolling us with the guest posts every so often.  Sorry.  I've learned to avoid hopium.

CommunityStandard's picture

Really????  And here I thought it was only from ads for Obama dinners and some dude that language professors hate.  Now I have even less respect for guest posts (well, some of them).

Fail2Deliver's picture

The futures are up...did I miss ANOTHER country get a bail out? That would obviously be bullish...

Calculated_Risk's picture

"Austerity is not some dirty nine-letter word as the socialists in Europe would have you believe. It is all about living within your means and living up to your commitments."

Ya, give me my SS$ I've put in all these years, THEN talk austerity!
Otherwise it's just plain fucking fraud and theft douchenberg!!!

LetThemEatRand's picture

Hadn't you heard?  The teachers destroyed the economy and forced the bankers to create $70+Trillion in derivatives.  The bankers need your SS money.  Sorry.

Sophist Economicus's picture

He "hadn't heard" about the teachers destroying the economy, but I can see that the teachers destroyed your mastery of the English language.


BTW, read any Rand yet?

LetThemEatRand's picture

Sorry about Travolta being gay and all.  Who saw that coming?   BTW, which color pants do you get to wear this week?  Wait, do I have the wrong cult?  Sorry.  Carry on.

Sophist Economicus's picture

Is that what passes for wit in your "mind"?    LOLz

LetThemEatRand's picture

Hit a nerve, did I?  Don't worry, I'm sure there are some additional rarely seen abbreviations you can throw at me to demonstrate your superior intellect.  Now go back and reread your daily Rand.  It will help to calm you.

LetThemEatRand's picture

Here's a new one for you, as it seems you've run out.  LRLY (L. Ron Loves You)

Sophist Economicus's picture

He might at that.   But, nobody could love you...

Ricky Bobby's picture

Sophist - He is obviously a delusional leftist. You know the type that believes racial and gender identity is more important then sound economics. You know the type that believe that scarcity really does not exist and that utopia is achievable by just the right amount tyranny from the peoples party.


There are some good arguments on ZH from both sides but God I really tire of these useful idiots.

masterinchancery's picture

The Teachers, and especially their unions, have indeed helped destroy the economy with their terrible public education level, combined with politically liberal brainwashing.

Jack Burton's picture

Yeah, We all know the greedy teachers crashed the world economy! I know that because the bankers told me so.

Grandma on her $1,200 a month pension after her and graddad payed in for 45 years are also worthless leeches who are cutting into banker profits.

You want to know about the above guest post. He quotes something about Canada moving towrds private health care delivery to save money!

Now how fucking stupid does he think we are?