Looks like Suze Orman is plagiarizing poor Dave Ramsey....LOL!!! Which is a good thing. Although Suze may be very knowledgeable about finances.......in my book Dave Ramsey is THE MAN!!!
Suzie is a nice person but a micro economic personality. She's great to give advice on managing your household, but has no idea what is going on on a macro economic level!
On wanting to give her economic advice for the Country: DENIED GIRLFRIEND!!
Ask an expert....wow...that's just great! She's just giving generic advices that pretty much everybody with half the brain working would know in the first place.
But yeah she's on TV so she's the EXPERT!! I work as a financial consultant and do know stuff.....just too bad I'm not in the TV though, otherwise lot more ppl would listen.
If American banks were regulated by the government like here in Canada, they wouldn't be in as deep an economic hole as they are now. Banks were offering loans and credit cards with such high interest rates to consumers who didn't have the money to pay off that debt. At least in Canada there is a cap on interest rates.
Australia has a similar system in Canada and we are weathering the crisis quite well. Our banking system is well regulated and never got into this subprime mess - you can't get a home loan without 10% of the principal and 2 years permanent employment at the very least.
My girlfriend and I are planning to stay in Australia for 2 years in Sydney and wanted to know to rent an apt there. we are debating whether it's best to buy or rent -what would you suggest?
well housing prices have fallen a little or have been flat but are expected to be up by 10% by mid next year. Vacancy rates are only 1% so rent can be exorbitant. We don't have a problem of housing oversupply like in the states or UK so expect housing prices and high rent to be somewhat of a challenge.
Her explanation of overstretching your credit is exactly what the U.S. govt is doing. She trusts the Obama administration? They are trying to put out a fire by soaking it in gasoline. Go watch Peter Schiff he knows what he's talking about
She says consumers shouldn't spend money they don't have, which is correct, yet she has faith in Obama??? The governments spending money it doesn't have!
@return135 A lot of these things are manipulated with computers. I'm sure they meshed pieces together to como up with this, especially that part. Someone find this video so we can find out for sure.
You know how these people got on TV because we are too stupid to know anything. It is pathetic that we need someone to tell us how not to spend money that we don't have.
The Hour, good video. Canada's banks are in better shape because of tighter laws and a conservative monetary policy. Maybe, unlike the USA, they actually learned something from American history. Maybe they did not swallow Dr. Phil Gramms the deregulation placebo or perhaps they did not drink too deeply from Greenspans punch bowl. Maybe it was just luck.
No it wasn't luck. Canada hit the fiscal wall in the 90's and went through some painful times. Also the government blocked the merging of our banks which could have opened the door to 'unregulated deregulation'.
army2k08, sorry about that luck comment, what was I thinking. Banking and investments must be an exact science in Canada. Please forgive me I cant distinguish between AAA securities selling at the same market for the same price. Canadian investors must be able to see a sub-prime equity while others around the world could not. Amazing Canada; again, I apologize.
Bill, I wasn't offended by that. I don't want to leave you with the impression that the Canadian banking system is perfect, because it is not. Predatory leading does exist. In fact all of the same elements exist here as in the US. Predatory lending, the overextension of household credit and credit agency collusion, etc. What is different, is the federal balance sheet, up until the last quarter, we were running surpluses...
Also(and this is the big one), our banks never sold 'insurance' called Credit Default Swaps(CDS). In the US, CDS were sold, but because they were not called insurance but sold as 'put options', the banks and insurance companies such as AIG, did not withhold the funds should a claim be made. Once the housing market crashed, and the 'paper' associated with it became effectively worthless, claims were made. Yet there was no money to pay the claims. The rest is history....
Canadian banks and institutionals bought some of this toxic paper and CDS, and have been writing down billions of losses ever since. Also the financial system, is just as, if not more corrupt than the US. We don't have a national securities agency such as the SEC in the US, and white collar crime goes effectively unpunished unless the US SEC decides to pursue legal action.
army2k08, thanks for the additional information. Looking back at my first comment perhaps I used a poor choice of words but I would not rule out luck as a factor. Its good that Canada ignored Phil Gramm and his deregulation banter that gave rise to many of the problems we have today.
drchiodo...Obama has priority on healthcare and education..these 2 priorities are going to significantly help kids, pensioners, and everybody...under fiscal conservative Bush, No kids left behind act is destroying education,priority on abstinence over sex education increased teen pregnancy,stopped federal funding on stem cell research..and why do you put a negative connotation on government spending that Obama is doing?the money he spends goes towards americans not to some war
SuchAknoob. Thanks for your interest in my comment. I never said, implied or even conceived the notion that I was defending GW. Neither is GW a fiscal conservative, nor are the men of your examples.
You've suggested that these big spenders are fiscal Cs but, you're incorrect. Anybody who runs a deficit, is not so. BO is just even more of a neo-liberal spender (perhaps not accepted term in this use yet).
R-Wing ideology as fiscal policy? It died a long time ago. One can have health care, education etc. and still be a fiscal C. Where are you getting your definitions from? I don't blame you. Most media is rather simple in its understanding and labels.
I've no problem with BOs ideas. It's the fiscal imprudence of following GW in his big business spending tactics. He's essentially rewarding the 'loosers' in the market. He's buying his supporters to bail out rather than 'stimulate'.
I do not reward based on political hope. It is not a negative connotation as much as a realistic, wait and see, approach. I'm a political pragmatist.
This video was about how fiscal C spending saved the CDN economy from the extreme downslide the US is going through. It is BECAUSE they are closer to the definition of fiscal C that they are better off. AND they have healthcare, education, social programmes etc.
Furthermore, these 'wars' are a fraction of the spending of the USA's spending. Furthermore, BO (& I'm not giving any value judgements regardless of war/spending/R/L0wing) is continuing to expand GW's spending on exactly the items you bring up, war, economy, social policies etc.
I appreciate your input but, I question your knowledge or thoroghness of the topic.
The reason I said 'steal'. Is because any gov, GW, BO (I don't care which party/person) that prints such a deficit perpetuating more debt is stealing from the future. Yours, Mine, our children and the world through inflation. It's not fair and it's indicative of the culture of entitlement that has taken over society.
..but with Clinton's "spending" and taxing, 200+ billion surplus
..and what do you mean Obama's steals from kids and pensioners? Bush's iraq war is now costing the US billions..those billions could have been spent towards kids and pensioners
Interesting but, she contridicts herself. Her faith in B.Obama's administration is not congruent with her presentation telling us to 'not spend'. I happen to agree fully with her but, the Democrats are doing the same as GW's way, only worse. Canada is better off because they are more Conservative with fiscal policy. BO is somehow, the new face of Neo-Spenders as he steals from the children and pensioners of the US. He will create more poverty with this course of action. He sounds great though.
Looks like Suze Orman is plagiarizing poor Dave Ramsey....LOL!!! Which is a good thing. Although Suze may be very knowledgeable about finances.......in my book Dave Ramsey is THE MAN!!!
Stringfellow74 9 months ago
Obama should watch this video.... or, Suze Orman for president !! =)
Alejandrofication 1 year ago
Yeah for Canada !!! We still have to be careful though : ))
ttruneh 1 year ago
Shes just sucking up to Obama !!
TheKerryzzz 2 years ago
Oh, girlfriend, open your eyes. The USD is not ok, but I appreciate the Orman rah-rah rally cheer.
Lexi8888 2 years ago
Suzie is a nice person but a micro economic personality. She's great to give advice on managing your household, but has no idea what is going on on a macro economic level!
On wanting to give her economic advice for the Country: DENIED GIRLFRIEND!!
I luv her nonetheless!
buzzz1213 2 years ago
Expert doesn't know that Canada had 0/40 mortgages I guess. Yah, ZERO down instituted in Canada.
supersocco 2 years ago
Ask an expert....wow...that's just great! She's just giving generic advices that pretty much everybody with half the brain working would know in the first place.
But yeah she's on TV so she's the EXPERT!! I work as a financial consultant and do know stuff.....just too bad I'm not in the TV though, otherwise lot more ppl would listen.
alkatifa04 2 years ago
If American banks were regulated by the government like here in Canada, they wouldn't be in as deep an economic hole as they are now. Banks were offering loans and credit cards with such high interest rates to consumers who didn't have the money to pay off that debt. At least in Canada there is a cap on interest rates.
musicbrain5 2 years ago
Australia has a similar system in Canada and we are weathering the crisis quite well. Our banking system is well regulated and never got into this subprime mess - you can't get a home loan without 10% of the principal and 2 years permanent employment at the very least.
bongpsumera 2 years ago
hey bongsumera. your comment is interesting
"the banking system is well regulated...mess"
My girlfriend and I are planning to stay in Australia for 2 years in Sydney and wanted to know to rent an apt there. we are debating whether it's best to buy or rent -what would you suggest?
Owleyes888 2 years ago
well housing prices have fallen a little or have been flat but are expected to be up by 10% by mid next year. Vacancy rates are only 1% so rent can be exorbitant. We don't have a problem of housing oversupply like in the states or UK so expect housing prices and high rent to be somewhat of a challenge.
bongpsumera 2 years ago
Her explanation of overstretching your credit is exactly what the U.S. govt is doing. She trusts the Obama administration? They are trying to put out a fire by soaking it in gasoline. Go watch Peter Schiff he knows what he's talking about
clof2001 2 years ago 7
She says consumers shouldn't spend money they don't have, which is correct, yet she has faith in Obama??? The governments spending money it doesn't have!
return135 2 years ago 10
@return135 A lot of these things are manipulated with computers. I'm sure they meshed pieces together to como up with this, especially that part. Someone find this video so we can find out for sure.
lcvd1 1 year ago
Wasnt Suze Orman the one saying to buy houses at the peak of the bubble because interest rates were low? How do these people get on TV!?!?
brad111515 2 years ago 4
You know how these people got on TV because we are too stupid to know anything. It is pathetic that we need someone to tell us how not to spend money that we don't have.
moniequa 2 years ago 3
The Hour, good video. Canada's banks are in better shape because of tighter laws and a conservative monetary policy. Maybe, unlike the USA, they actually learned something from American history. Maybe they did not swallow Dr. Phil Gramms the deregulation placebo or perhaps they did not drink too deeply from Greenspans punch bowl. Maybe it was just luck.
bil1yjoe 3 years ago
No it wasn't luck. Canada hit the fiscal wall in the 90's and went through some painful times. Also the government blocked the merging of our banks which could have opened the door to 'unregulated deregulation'.
army2k08 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
bil1yjoe 2 years ago
army2k08, sorry about that luck comment, what was I thinking. Banking and investments must be an exact science in Canada. Please forgive me I cant distinguish between AAA securities selling at the same market for the same price. Canadian investors must be able to see a sub-prime equity while others around the world could not. Amazing Canada; again, I apologize.
bil1yjoe 2 years ago
Bill, I wasn't offended by that. I don't want to leave you with the impression that the Canadian banking system is perfect, because it is not. Predatory leading does exist. In fact all of the same elements exist here as in the US. Predatory lending, the overextension of household credit and credit agency collusion, etc. What is different, is the federal balance sheet, up until the last quarter, we were running surpluses...
army2k08 2 years ago
Also(and this is the big one), our banks never sold 'insurance' called Credit Default Swaps(CDS). In the US, CDS were sold, but because they were not called insurance but sold as 'put options', the banks and insurance companies such as AIG, did not withhold the funds should a claim be made. Once the housing market crashed, and the 'paper' associated with it became effectively worthless, claims were made. Yet there was no money to pay the claims. The rest is history....
army2k08 2 years ago
Canadian banks and institutionals bought some of this toxic paper and CDS, and have been writing down billions of losses ever since. Also the financial system, is just as, if not more corrupt than the US. We don't have a national securities agency such as the SEC in the US, and white collar crime goes effectively unpunished unless the US SEC decides to pursue legal action.
army2k08 2 years ago
army2k08, thanks for the additional information. Looking back at my first comment perhaps I used a poor choice of words but I would not rule out luck as a factor. Its good that Canada ignored Phil Gramm and his deregulation banter that gave rise to many of the problems we have today.
bil1yjoe 2 years ago
It will happen again, not in our lifetimes, but it will. It's in our nature. Take care of yourself Bill.
army2k08 2 years ago
drchiodo...Obama has priority on healthcare and education..these 2 priorities are going to significantly help kids, pensioners, and everybody...under fiscal conservative Bush, No kids left behind act is destroying education,priority on abstinence over sex education increased teen pregnancy,stopped federal funding on stem cell research..and why do you put a negative connotation on government spending that Obama is doing?the money he spends goes towards americans not to some war
suchAnoob 3 years ago
SuchAknoob. Thanks for your interest in my comment. I never said, implied or even conceived the notion that I was defending GW. Neither is GW a fiscal conservative, nor are the men of your examples.
You've suggested that these big spenders are fiscal Cs but, you're incorrect. Anybody who runs a deficit, is not so. BO is just even more of a neo-liberal spender (perhaps not accepted term in this use yet).
drchiodo 3 years ago
R-Wing ideology as fiscal policy? It died a long time ago. One can have health care, education etc. and still be a fiscal C. Where are you getting your definitions from? I don't blame you. Most media is rather simple in its understanding and labels.
I've no problem with BOs ideas. It's the fiscal imprudence of following GW in his big business spending tactics. He's essentially rewarding the 'loosers' in the market. He's buying his supporters to bail out rather than 'stimulate'.
drchiodo 3 years ago
Obama is in a tough spot. Wall street is holding everyone hostage. He's got to get everything done now, before the Chinese turn off the spigot.
army2k08 3 years ago
I do not reward based on political hope. It is not a negative connotation as much as a realistic, wait and see, approach. I'm a political pragmatist.
This video was about how fiscal C spending saved the CDN economy from the extreme downslide the US is going through. It is BECAUSE they are closer to the definition of fiscal C that they are better off. AND they have healthcare, education, social programmes etc.
drchiodo 3 years ago
US, in fact much of the world's media has such blind faith, even spriritual faith in BO.
Do you know your facts on the examples you brought up? 'Some war'? Try 'a few wars'.
drchiodo 3 years ago
Furthermore, these 'wars' are a fraction of the spending of the USA's spending. Furthermore, BO (& I'm not giving any value judgements regardless of war/spending/R/L0wing) is continuing to expand GW's spending on exactly the items you bring up, war, economy, social policies etc.
I appreciate your input but, I question your knowledge or thoroghness of the topic.
Am I missing something in your points?
Respectfully, drchiodo.
drchiodo 3 years ago
The reason I said 'steal'. Is because any gov, GW, BO (I don't care which party/person) that prints such a deficit perpetuating more debt is stealing from the future. Yours, Mine, our children and the world through inflation. It's not fair and it's indicative of the culture of entitlement that has taken over society.
drchiodo 2 years ago
drchiodo...fiscal conservative is a dying right-wing ideology..
-Reagan (fiscal conservative)200+ billiion deficit
-GeorgeH(fiscal conservatibe)300 billion deficit
-GeorgeW(fiscal conservative) 400+ billion deficit
..but with Clinton's "spending" and taxing, 200+ billion surplus
..and what do you mean Obama's steals from kids and pensioners? Bush's iraq war is now costing the US billions..those billions could have been spent towards kids and pensioners
suchAnoob 3 years ago
Comment removed
drchiodo 2 years ago
Interesting but, she contridicts herself. Her faith in B.Obama's administration is not congruent with her presentation telling us to 'not spend'. I happen to agree fully with her but, the Democrats are doing the same as GW's way, only worse. Canada is better off because they are more Conservative with fiscal policy. BO is somehow, the new face of Neo-Spenders as he steals from the children and pensioners of the US. He will create more poverty with this course of action. He sounds great though.
drchiodo 3 years ago
Well, yay us I guess...
us as in us, not as in U.S., I know it's confusing...
fluke72 3 years ago 2
I wish I was in Canada!
jerrylentz 3 years ago 2
Neat video!
NathanCharrois 3 years ago
go canada
ClassicRockMitch 3 years ago 5