May 31 Episode
01:09:58 Share

Welcome to Money Talks. My name is Mike Campbell. We've got an important show for you. If you've been following Bitcoin, or not necessarily owning it, but just following it, you might have noticed the continual new highs that it's filming, and money just keeps pouring into it, even on a down day. I'm going to talk to Joey Trampilli about that. He is the Canadian Bitcoin podcast. I think you're going to really enjoy it. But

also an incredibly important subject. Canadians tell me at least that they care about health care. Well, things are clearly wrong, whether you're looking at the ranking of Canadian health care for the time it takes to see a physician to a specialist, whether you've been waiting in an emergency room, whether you don't have a family doctor, all of that stuff. Well, I've got Dr. Brian Day, who's been, in my opinion, absolutely the leading advocate for

for patient care in this country. He's got a brand new book that I really encourage people to read, but looking forward to getting a chance to chat with him about all that's going on in those ways. But first, if you think you pay too much tax, there's a lot of Canadians who think that, or at least you want your tax dollars spent efficiently. Here's my surefire prediction.

billions in tax dollars are going to continue to be wasted. You know, one of the questions I asked when we came into the federal election was, is government mismanagement, make that gross mismanagement of our tax dollars going to be an election issue? Will it be an issue in the leaders debate? Will anyone in the political commentariat bring it up?

Well, bring it up. Things like the Auditor General's report on Sustainable Development Technology Canada. It identified 90 instances of conflict of interest with agency directors voting in favor of $59 million in grants to companies in which they had a declared interest.

You should note that the Liberal government never fully complied, by the way, with Parliament's request or Speaker Ferguson's ruling to release all the documents related to Sustainable Development Technology Canada. You know what? Instead, they prorogue Parliament having to avoid to disclose those documents. And they still haven't. We still don't know where and to whom millions of dollars went.

How can anyone other than the most pathologically partisan liberal think that's open and transparent government like they promised?

You know, I'm thinking of the self-employed Canadians who have to file June 15th for their tax filing deadline and thinking of the string of mismanagement, cronyism, failures exemplified by programs like Arrive Can, Phoenix Pay System, which was 1100% over budget. They're sending their tax dollars in, and I'm sure thinking of those things makes more than a few angry. So

Thinking about the Auditor General Karen Hogan's conclusion that $49 billion Canada Emergency Business Account Program, in quotes, was not managed with due regard for value for money.

I think about that. She said, we found significant weaknesses. Taxpayers paid for poor contract management, a $49 billion program that was not managed with due regard for value for money. I mean, there's so many other examples of gross misspending. But the point I don't want you to miss is that nothing is going to change.

I can't resist one more story for you, by the way, from last summer. $286 million Canada Summer Jobs Program, which taxpayers paid 50% of the cost of the minimum wage for private and public sector employees, 100% for non-profits. Auditor General Karen Hogan found, in quotes, despite the program being described as a job creation program, the Department of Employee did not collect data to know how many summer jobs were actually created.

In other words, no cost benefit analysis, just like every single green energy project, according to the Parliamentary Budget Office. We're told that they're very important, of course, but not important enough to figure out which one gives us the best bang for the taxpayer buck.

The point is, this is nothing new. Listen to these quotes. Auditor General Denny D. Sotel, 1999. We continue to see programs where funds are distributed and dispersed without proper oversight, resulting in significant waste. Sheila Fraser, 2003. We're seeing recurring issues in government programs where poor planning and lack of oversight led to significant waste.

Michael Ferguson, 2017. It's deja vu all over again. The government continues to repeat the same mistake, wasting taxpayers' money through indifference and poor management. Perhaps more damning than that, though, as both Michael Ferguson and Denis Dussautel concluded, there's a culture in the federal civil service that's predicated on avoiding responsibility.

My point is nothing is going to change until the system itself changes. We're guaranteed to have more arrive cans, more consultant scandals, more gun registries, where the government spent $67 million by September last year, hadn't collected a single gun. In its final report, Auditor General Denny DeSaudel asked this question.

Why do these problems seem so intractable? Why do they persist year after year despite expressed commitments to set them straight? Well, the answer is straightforward. It's a system that regularly operates without clearly defined and measurable goals. It avoids cost-benefit analysis for fear it's going to expose significant waste. And most of all, it lacks accountability. And it continues to this day.

with Mark Carney refusing to produce a budget which not only denies the public's right to transparency in how our tax dollars are spent, but denies the critical oversight provided by independent bodies like the Parliamentary Budget Office and the Auditor General. You know, when I think of the scorn I feel and disrespect I feel, I think they deserve it all, especially from all the hard-working Canadians who are spending such a huge chunk of their paycheck to government.

Consistently tell pollsters that healthcare is their number one issue. I don't doubt it if you've been waiting in an emergency room and not got treatment and so many other issues.

You know, Brian Day has been a champion of patient care. He's an orthopedic surgeon. If you're not aware, he's been a former president of the Canadian Medical Association. And you know what? He's won so many awards. I'm not going to start listing them, but I thought it was kind of interesting. This year, he won the King Charles III Coronation Medal this year. He also was named a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of London. And as I say, it's a long list. But he's also the author of a brand new book, My Fight for Canadian Healthcare, A 30-Year Battle to Put Patients First.

Brian Day joins me right now. Brian, first of all, congratulations on the book and thank you so much for finding time. Thanks, Michael.

Let me sum up the book by saying I think this is an essential read for anyone who cares about health care and is concerned or outraged by the fact that, as you chronicle, Brian, and have been chronicling, that millions of Canadians don't have a family doctor or that 1.3 million Canadians left emergency rooms last year without getting treatment or that Canada ranks near or at the bottom when it comes to timely access to a specialist after referral. I mean, the list is a long one.

Maybe the one that I don't want to oversimplify it, but it should at least ring an alarm bell is that 33,000 Canadians plus died waiting for a diagnostic scan or treatment in the last couple of years. But still, that alarm bell doesn't seem to be ringing. You're right, Michael. And I think it's, you know, it's.

Even though those numbers are large, the reason is simple numbers. If you don't need healthcare at this time, then they offer free healthcare, so-called free healthcare. It seems like a good deal, but then when you need it, it's not there. Yeah.

Well, and that's been the case for an increasing number. It's interesting. You've been, I'm going to call it a fight because it's cost you deeply personally and financially to try and fight for patient care. Do you think there's an attitude change on the part of the Canadian public as these things start, you know, as they do over time experience some of these shortcomings? Well, I think it's always been that way. I think in terms of, you know, if you ask the question, do you think someone who is

ill, waiting for healthcare in pain, should they have the right to look after their own body when the government has promised to look after it but then doesn't? Most

Canadians would say yes. Now, you know, it depends, but the polls showed that in the Charlie decision of 2005, where the Supreme Court of Canada legalized private health insurance for Quebec, the majority of Canadians and 81% of doctors supported the decision because it just made sense. I think one of the things few Canadians know is that

of the almost 200 countries on earth, there is only one country where obtaining private health insurance is illegal in most jurisdictions, and we're in that country. It's legal in communist China, in all the authoritarian countries, in Russia, in Cuba, and Laos, Vietnam. These countries that are communist countries even,

allow freedom when it comes to your bodily health? I would think, you know, I've been thinking a lot over the years of the hypocrisy that's involved in saying to me, I'm a, you know, Mike Campbell is a Canadian citizen. You are not allowed to access private care in these ways, you know, for a medically insured, you know, procedure. And then I look at, you know, the politicians who do access care as I, you know, the origins of the Cambie Street Surgery Center to let

injured unionized workers bypass our system, you know, to jump in. I think that was 1996, you know, NDP government at the time, I might add also. I mean, the list is just so long. Yeah. We've had, we have had as private patients in our clinic, uh,

two leaders of the NDP. I mean, this is how extensive the hypocrisy is going. We have had major trade union leaders, the nurses union that initiated this problem, the BC Nurses Union, was sending us private

patients during the trial, as were the defendant in our constitutional challenge. The official name was named as the Office of the Attorney General of British Columbia. They were sending us private patients during the trial. So this is how extensive the hypocrisy is that

But, well, you know, a multitude of federal and local politicians of all parties, including the NDP and the liberals and the conservatives, have used private services themselves. So I think, and the reason for the book, really, is that this has now gone through

It's gone through the government. It's gone through the law courts. It's now up to the people to demand change because we cannot be the only country on the planet where the government considers itself as owners and controllers of your bodily health.

And I'll just say, don't wait until it's somebody in your family. I've had a personal experience, but I have a personal experience with my daughter who faced these challenges. And again, I, and again,

you know, it's not that the people involved, I'm talking nurses, doctors, other healthcare, don't want to provide the service and they do a great service, but it's the system and the government that prevents them from, you know, treating in so many instances. Oh, yes. Well, so that was a conclusion in our constitutional challenge of the BC Court of Appeal. They came out and astoundingly to

despite denying us the same rights as Quebecers, came out and concluded that our health system is deliberately rationed to maintain fiscal sustainability. And as a result...

patients are suffering and dying on wait lists and, and also dying, uh, of the reason of, you know, it's not just dying of incidental things, it's dying of the illnesses and diseases that they're waiting for. So, you know, it's a terrible thing to, to, to realize that

Just one example of the, you know, there are standards of maximum acceptable times that the BC government and other governments of Canada have determined is the longest you should wait. And in, say, one category out of thousands of bladder cancer with a serious risk of progression. In other words, the doctors have diagnosed it. This is already spreading. We have to treat this.

only 16% of patients are receiving treatment in this time within the timeline that the BC government itself has said is the maximum time it's safe to wait. And those other, those 84% with their cancer spreading are, it's illegal. It's not legal for them to do anything about it in their own province. You know, one of the,

things I talk about is the so-called Angelina Jolie gene. There's a gene that if a woman has this gene, she is going to get breast cancer. It's called the BRCA gene. And Angelina Jolie had prophylactic breast surgeries to deal with that risk. In BC alone, this has been a published study, six young women a year

who are known to be cancer-free when this gene is discovered, develop breast cancer while they're waiting for over a year for this surgery to prevent them getting breast cancer. And it's illegal for them to do anything about it. This is bizarre. This should not be the case.

You know, I'm going to come back to something you said there, because a lot of people appreciate we have wait times and, you know, over the medically acceptable amount. They don't realize that's by design. They don't realize that when governments came in that mid-90s and continue to this day, the way to control costs was to lower the level of, or the number rather, of people, professionals getting a doctor's or, you know, a nurse. So you lower it that way. But the other is a wait time. Hey,

We don't have to, if we don't treat you, we don't earn an expense. And I think they have to, people should understand that the wait time that you may be experiencing or family may be experienced is literally by design.

As is the shortage of doctors and nurses, was a strategy in the 90s of the NDP government to close medical schools by up to 30% cut back medical schools and to close nursing schools. In the 90s, 1,600 nursing positions were closed.

cut back and medical schools were cut back. That's been the strategy. There was a subsequent premier who you know quite well who reversed that and increased nursing training positions and also doubled the medical school intake. But you know who that person is, Michael. Yeah.

I'm just going to show the book again here because I want people, I mean, I am encouraging people to go out. You can get it on Amazon right now and get it the next day. But this is the book with Dr. Brian Day. And as I say, because I think if you're interested in this stuff, just the history, but also what's going on, and you also talk about what they can do, and I'll come to that now, is that you recommend a public-private sort of hybrid system, as you say, that is run in every other Western country in the world.

But again, that's had success in lowering costs. And I want you to elaborate on that and obviously shortening the wait time. Yes. Well, you know, one of the things that's really bizarre, if you think about it, is it's actually cheaper.

economically cheaper to treat people quickly. And we proved this when I was president of the Canadian Medical Association. We did a study on just four procedures in four provinces. And during a one-year period, the

economic costs of the wait list was 14.8 billion dollars now if you extrapolate that to thousands of procedures and the you can imagine how much it costs the trouble is these are longer term costs projected and and wage and economic benefits um but but

the reason Canada is spending so much on healthcare, I mean, it's kind of logical. If you neglect an illness, it's going to get more serious. And unless the patient dies, then it's cheap. But if the patient lives and deteriorates, their treatment is going to be longer lasting. And it's the same with, you know, it's the same with

say you get admitted to hospital, an elderly person admitted with a hip fracture. In the old days, we would operate on those patients within a few hours. Now they often fester around for a few days. They develop chest problems. They develop bed sores. They develop complications. They end up staying in hospital for sometimes months instead of going home within a few days if they're treated quickly. And these costs are

But those types of patients who lose that ability to return to their former selves, especially elder patients, there are long-term costs. And the trouble with government-running healthcare is it only thinks in three- to four-year financial cycles. Because the government today does not care whether a government 15, 20 years from now looks good with the economy.

It's funny, I just read a study that was out in 224 talking about exactly what you're saying, the cost of wait times in Canada. And I think they said the overall lost working hours for an average work week was something like $5.2 billion or about $3,400 billion.

per the 1.54 million Canadians who are stuck waiting for treatment, you know, in those wait lists. I mean, your point's so well taken and it's understandable. It costs us money not to deal with that, you know, with this stuff. And, uh,

Let me come back to something I asked earlier. Do you feel that the public's acceptance now of a public private care system, which, by the way, they should because they've gone to a doctor's office, they've probably got eyeglasses, they go to a chiropractor. So it's not some foreign thing to most people, but I'm seeing a shift at least as these problems manifest and maybe they know someone personally or it's a family member.

Well, as you alluded to, it's not just eyeglasses. It's things like

prescription drugs. I mean, how nonsensical is it that you go to the doctor and are diagnosed with an infection and you're given a prescription for antibiotics to treat the infection? That's not covered. You go to a pharmacy and you'll get a bill unless you have extended health private insurance. And 70% of Canadians do. The other example that's even more bizarre, in my opinion, is you're hit by a

You fall off your bike or hit by a bus or you break a leg in the street, the ambulance that comes along takes you to the emergency department. Even if you're at risk of dying, that is considered a private accident.

It's not covered unless you have private health insurance. And so 70% of us have that kind of extended health insurance, which is private health insurance. Those companies should be allowed to extend that coverage to cover everything.

if you're waiting an inappropriate time. And my answer to those who say, well, that's, you know, for those who can afford it, what about the 30%? My answer to that is do what the Swiss do, what the Dutch do, what other countries, the Australians do. Subsidize the premiums for those that can't afford it. But make Conrad Black pay the full price. So, you know, I...

I remember the days when I used to get family allowance checks for my kids. So I would get a check every month or so, but then the government realized I didn't need it as much as the single mother in a lower income area of Vancouver and cut

introduced a means test and I stopped getting it and that person got double. So let's target the lower income groups. And as you know, Canada, developed countries that have universal health care

the group that suffer the most in Canada are low income Canadians. That is bizarre. When we think we're, we're, we've got this wonderful system. There is no, nothing wrong with allowing those that can afford it to pay for private insurance. Those that can't afford it. The premiums are subsidized by the province. So they get it too. And I, I,

I lived and worked in Switzerland for six months, and that's what happens there. So the low-income groups are sitting in the same private rooms with the same private healthcare as a wealthy person, and no wait lists, no significant wait lists. And this is how this... So in Britain, where they allow private health insurance also, of course,

The premiums for price for a start are around $60 a month. And if you can't afford that, there's no reason why the state can't fund it for you.

The other thing that still gets to me is that you mentioned earlier, you know, you've had two court cases, your own court case in the B.C. Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court of Canada. But there's no doubt that people are suffering, waiting for treatment. Like that's not up for debate. And yet the answer in some quarters is don't change anything meaningfully. And then they don't look at other parts in the world who outperform Canada.

You know, the Commonwealth Health Index, it makes that very clear. They outperform Canada, especially in terms of waiting for treatment, waiting for a specialist. They're medically unacceptable wait times. Sorry, I'm going on and on, but it's unbelievable to me.

that we still maintain the status quo seemingly at all costs, a cost that you paid personally trying to change it. Well, I think one of the worst things I find is, you know, you talk about your daughter. We are actually mortgaging our youth. Yes. Our children, grandchildren, we're piling up. The baby boomers are about already hitting the health system big time. And,

the costs are rising. We, you know, we are in some ways victims of our own success when Medicare was introduced. There were no heart transplants. There were no stem cell therapies. There weren't even, you know, there wasn't, there were no MRIs. There were no, there were no major surgeries for cancer. These complex surgeries we do now, and we're now getting into robotic surgery. And,

These things did not exist. So what's happening now is we are introducing these complex procedures when you can get them, there's a wait list, but we're borrowing the money, mortgaging our youth in order to afford that. And we are, you know, one of the sad statistics is that

the baby boomers are getting back more than they gave in. Absolutely. Next generation are going to be paying an awful lot more than they get back. And this isn't, this is not right. And we, you know, one of the things I do talk about

Other countries, even the British National Health Service, they have hospitals, public hospitals that generate revenue by opening on evenings and weekends and treating private patients often from other countries. So, you know, I talk medical tourism is one of the fastest growing international businesses in the world. And Canada can't participate in that. The biggest customers are

are Americans. Two million of them go abroad every year for procedures, none come to Canada because we close our operating rooms and it would be politically unacceptable. But that could be a revenue generator instead of healthcare being a cost

That could be a massive revenue generator for Canadian hospitals. I'm not talking about private hospitals. I'm talking about public hospitals, opening them on weekends and evenings and using that revenue in order to expand care for Canadians. That's what they do in Cuba. Communist Cuba does that. It's a crazy system that we are

cutting ourselves out of that. And, you know, again, to reiterate, the shortage of doctors was government and is government created. We have 3,500 young Canadians going to foreign medical schools and half of them don't come back because they, you know, they're young and they need to want to live. And the other half that want to come back, we put barriers out because as the BC Appeal Court

We are deliberately rationing healthcare. We have a massive bureaucracy in our healthcare system. So for every health bureaucrat that Germany has, where there are no significant wait lists and they spend about the same as we do, and they have a hybrid system, for every health bureaucrat in the public system that they have, Canada has 11.

BC has 64 vice presidents in their health regions, each probably earning half a million dollars or more. That money should be cut back and that money should be going into the treatment of patients.

But when you've got a monopoly, name me one monopoly, which is what the government has in the funding and delivery of healthcare, name me one monopoly that is good for the consumer. Yeah.

Your point is so well taken. And there's so much there for individuals. And I'm going to come back. I don't want to put words in your mouth. I'm saying these are mine. That if you are serious about health care, and remember, every one of us ends up in this system somehow. Depends. I might end up as a 50-year-old. I might end up as a 90-year-old. But I'm going to be in this system. And I joked, Brian, that when people talk about their top issues, I said, believe me, none of those other issues are going to matter when it's your turn and you're waiting for care. And as both corporations

Court cases, as I alluded to, said people are needlessly suffering. And as you alluded to, they're waiting a medically unhealthy amount of time. So let me just, I want, again, I'm just going to hold the book up here so people can see it. I highly recommend it. Go on Amazon. You get it tomorrow, for goodness sakes, this miracle of delivery. But yeah, if you are interested in healthcare, you'll do something about it.

the way Dr. Brian Day has done with courage for Canadians everywhere to get timely and effective treatment. Brian, thank you for finding time. Congratulations on the book. Thanks, Michael.

There are generational growth opportunities in foundationally growing sectors such as AI, nuclear power, cybersecurity, robotics, and many others that while more volatile than traditional portfolio holdings, have the potential for significant returns.

Hi, I'm Neil McIver, founder of McIver Capital Management at CG Wealth. This is one of the key investment ideas behind the public launch of our Vancouver growth portfolio. The VGP is a hedge fund-like 100% growth-orientated portfolio that prioritizes long-term capital appreciation.

The VGP has been offered to existing McIver clients since 2017 and has exceeded our 10% net annual target return every year. Now it's available to you and your family. If you'd like to know more about the Vancouver Growth Portfolio, including the low initial entry, same-day liquidity, and direct ownership structure, you can book a call at vancouvergrowthportfolio.ca. That's vancouvergrowthportfolio.ca.

One of the most fascinating aspects, I think, of the financial markets over the last half dozen years, you can make an argument it goes back much further, though, is the advent of Bitcoin. Joey Tramprilli has been on top of that with the Canadian Bitcoiners from the get-go. Joey, first of all, I appreciate you taking time. And my big thing is you just watch the mainstream acceptance of this. And I mean, obviously propelled by what's going on in the U.S. with President Trump's attitude, which was quite different than what we were experiencing before that.

Yeah, it's great to be with you and your listeners, Mike. Thanks for having me again. I couldn't agree more. You know, we were chatting before the show about the difference now between the ecosystem around Bitcoin and the environment around Bitcoin for investors at all levels in the previous administration. And I will also say that it was the same in Trump 1 compared to Trump 2. I've mentioned on our show and I've heard, you know, you guys talk about this on Money Talks as well. The administration is taking a hands-off approach to a lot of things where, you know,

administrations past, dating back to Obama and probably even before, you know, when I was barely paying attention to any of this stuff, these governments have chosen to really put their hands in every pie they could and sour as many different recipes as they could along the way.

This administration has chosen to do nothing in that regard on Bitcoin and crypto. And we've seen an explosion in legitimate vehicles for using it, legitimate businesses. You know, we've talked a little bit on our show about endowments, pensions, state treasuries. Obviously, there's been an explosion in corporate treasuries the last decade.

I don't know, a year or so, 18 months or so. So very exciting times in Bitcoin. And I'm happy to be a Bitcoiner. And I would advise people who are not in Bitcoin to take another look at this thing with fresh eyes if they haven't in the recent past.

Well, and we had Paul Beattie on BT Global, one of my favorites, you know, great guy too, but a very good analyst, good track record and saying that they had got into Bitcoin over the last year or so, you know, but I thought it was interesting. He said, because of the convenience, the transaction ability, you know, it's a real challenge to banks. If I've got, I want to transfer you money where you are today for me, I mean, Bitcoin done, you know, banks are

Let's go through the process. If I enjoy a bank lineup, it's probably good, but I don't. You know, and just saying the practical applications were making the case for it too. I just thought it was interesting. I'm used to people saying, as I have nonstop, you know, the declining purchasing power of your currency, the efforts to diminish it. That's been a big motivation. The rise in debt, that's another discussion I'll get to. But I loved his practical application, rationale for owning it.

- There are a lot of good reasons to own this thing as a medium of exchange as far as, you're right, avoiding things like traditional banking. I've been at the bank a few times in the last few weeks to take out cash to build a deck,

And every time I was in there, it was more questions. It was people who don't know what they're doing. I don't know if you know this now, the banks at least used to count the money for you. Now they have you count it so that you agree that the... I mean, I'm not sure what value banks are providing these days, but maybe that's just a signal that I'm a little too young to appreciate the glory of banks in the bygone eras. But the thing that I think is important in Bitcoin these days as far as owning it is...

In years past, the argument was always about volatility. And it was a fair point. I mean, we've seen 80% drawdowns multiple times, often because people were playing stupid games and winning stupid prizes. You've talked about FTX on your program. We've talked about Celsius on our program. And there's many different crypto, Bitcoin, rehypothecation scams that have gone awry in the last five years, let's say. But Mike-

In the last four years, three years, what have we seen? Even while Biden's administration was trying their best to choke this thing to death, we saw the growth of, I think, two big prongs that I will call slow money adopting Bitcoin as an asset of choice. One is treasuries. So

whether that's state treasuries, corporate treasuries, obviously Michael Saylor and MSTR, but also we've seen a bunch more, MetaPlanet,

among them. And recently a company called 21, headed up by Jack Mallers, who's the sort of crypto kid, Bitcoin kid in the United States, with support from Cantor Fitzgerald and SoftBank. I mean, tell me if you've heard of them before, and Tether as well. These guys are becoming vehicles to acquire Bitcoin on their treasury and give people exposure to Bitcoin. So what

When I say treasury, what do I mean? I mean that they're using this instead of cash or short paper or long paper. And why not? The long bond is producing, you know, what, 4% or something if you buy a 10-year bond. I'm not sure exactly what the rate is right now. But, you know, like we said before the show, the five-year CAGR for Bitcoin is like 60%. So, yeah.

Your hurdle rate as a corporation is significantly different than it was pre-Bitcoin. And there has to be consequences for that in boardrooms. I suspect that there are consequences for ignoring Bitcoin and choosing to go these other routes while companies like MicroStrategy, Semler, and the like really rip higher in terms of their equity price. So that's one prong.

And then the second prong. Let me come to that just for a sec, Joey, because it's that sort of the opposite environment that you found yourself three or four years ago, because there was, you know, your sort of job risk if you jumped into Bitcoin and you had one of those drugs. So now it's the other you're not in. So you may have a job risk. You have to explain that. I totally agree. And actually, I was talking to a few friends this morning about that exact that exact

And, you know, if we could look at that as a separate thing entirely, maybe that's like the, you know, prong 1A before I go into the second one. The career risk used to be that if you were in Bitcoin and things went sideways, you were cooked, right? You know, you'd be terminated, you'd be persona non grata on all these boards, blah, blah, blah.

That has completely changed. And I think that now, you know, people still say that there's career risk associated with Bitcoin and boards are not really keen on voting on this. Microsoft recently had this at their shareholder meeting, you know, adding Bitcoin to the corporate treasury. It received 0.55% of the vote in favor, barely anything. Uh-huh.

A lot of people saying, okay, we got to look at this. This is not even close to catching on. Microsoft is a tech company. They get this. If there's something to be understood, they understand it and they're not doing it. This thing's not ready. I would just inform the listeners that back in 2021 or 22, I forget when, a company you may know, Boeing,

had a vote, a shareholder vote at one of their meetings about abolishing any DEI policies and initiatives at the company. Do you know what percentage of the vote was affirmative confirming that they wanted to get rid of that DEI set of policies? What's your guess, Mike?

Oh, it'd be low. It would be very low, I would think. It was 5.5%. Oh, I wish I'd guessed because I was going to say 5.4%. Just kidding. It was 5.5%. And then three months later, Mike, all the DEI policies were gone anyway. And so the changes are not necessarily happening at the vote level. They're happening on the margins. The erosion of what was once a policy position or a strategy or an investment aim is

that seemed to have like, you know, the grip of a 16 foot Cobra just disappeared in three months. And for people who say that that's a one-off, I would also point to stuff like ESG right now, completely evaporating everywhere in the world, everywhere, everywhere from American companies to Canadian pension plan investment board, abandoning ESG overnight because they're

It's just no longer feasible, tenable, and palatable, I think, for the people who are invested in those programs. So that's what I would say. These things happen gradually and then suddenly. And I think that suddenly is going to accelerate as more people look at stuff like the Kager. Now, the second prong is these endowments and state pensions and state treasuries, these things might buy Bitcoin and never sell. They will never sell.

We're talking 10, 20, 30 year time horizons. Universities like Harvard and Yale both have exposure to Bitcoin through the spot ETF, through MSTR and through other vehicles. These are publicly available investment releases. And as we found out over the last little while, I think most people probably knew this, but if you didn't, these universities are basically just hedge funds. Harvard in the news these days for the way that they conduct their business. And

These guys are in the business of making money and not paying taxes, not having a red quarter, not doing all these things. And so how do you do that? You hold. One of the other legitimate pieces that's come into sort of focus over the last year or so, since January, I think, is this coin-based lending program. Everyone knows that the most wealthy among us get wealthy by leveraging assets to take fiat loans and watching those assets appreciate and re-leveraging and blah, everyone knows this.

Coinbase now is offering this to Bitcoin holders. Coinbase a few years ago was a wildcat upstart in crypto. Now, Mike, it's in the S&P 500. And do you know what company it replaced in the S&P 500? Talk about a signpost. Discover Financial. Does that ring any bells? If you needed more of a signal than a traditional financial service that used to run commercials during the Super Bowl being upended by the crypto company in the S&P 500,

I mean, these are telling signs. And for people to continue to ignore this, to sort of tie a bow on this, that's where the career risk is.

Now, if you favor Bitcoin, your board appreciates all you've done. And also, Mike, you might wind up in the White House. Hey, JD Vance talking at the Bitcoin conference. Howard Letnick and Besant, both of whom are Bitcoin bulls. David Sachs, huge Bitcoin bull. The career risk is on the opposite side now. If you like Bitcoin, you may end up next to POTUS signing something on TV. I don't know about you, but to me, that doesn't sound like career risk anymore.

Well, I mean, we had talked about this at the time. I thought it was such a milestone with the ETFs coming out with Bitcoin because of the people behind them, because of the institutional financial institutions behind them. I thought, well, there's no going back now. You know, I mean, but I loved your point, and I want people to make sure they note it, about slow money coming in. It's not just traders and people, and all legitimate, of course, looking to scalp, that kind of thing. But I find it very interesting exactly what you said when I see pension funds moving in.

you know, endowment funds moving in, et cetera. They're not there to trade next weekend. And again, that provides more foundational support. Yeah. Think about even the, like, I just want to say something to Canadian investment funds, Canadian pensions, like, you know, OMERS and the teachers union here in Ontario, um,

What else do you have to see before you buy Bitcoin? CPPIB, what more do you have to see? You know, CPPIB is in the news these days because there's a lot more eyes and a lot more commentary around how they set their benchmark. A lot of people don't know CPPIB sets their own benchmark. They don't compare it to the S&P. They don't compare it to...

you know, whatever other standard benchmarks there are. They set their own. And like every year they underperform. Their president, their CIO or president just took like a $20

bonus for performance. And, you know, when I think about this and I think about the situation Canadians find themselves in, basically a long for the ride as far as our position in the global economy. We don't have the firepower, influence, soft power, hard power, anything to really dictate terms to any other nation. Certainly none of our biggest trading partners, as we found out the hard way over the last month or so.

I say to these guys at the pension and CPB level, what else will it take? And to Canadians, individual investors,

What else do you want to see? I realize that there's some ego blocking investing in Bitcoin because Donald Trump said it on TV and JD Vance was at the Bitcoin conference. And you might hate that guy enough that you're willing to take a loss in your portfolio and live a lower standard of living than you otherwise would. But I would just advise these people and everyone listening, again, have a look at this with a

You're going to see, in short order, incredible amounts of deficit spending here in Canada, incredible amounts of deficit spending in the United States, yield curve control, additional tariffs, additional capital controls. If I had told your listeners, Mike, that in December, I think, when I was on here last, or January, if I had told your listeners then that during a Canadian federal election campaign, the candidates would be discussing...

That Canadians could expand their TFSA contribution by $5,000 if they give that $5,000 in its entirety to pre-approved Canadian companies. That would have sounded nuts because that's like soft capital controls. And yet that was on the platform, Mike. You know, like the first salvo for capital control should be 5%, not almost 50%.

And, you know, when you look at all these things taking shape around you, as you mentioned before, and as I've heard many of your guests discuss, and as we discuss on our program, by the time you need Bitcoin, because you realize that something is awry in the traditional financial system, or that too many people are telling you where to put your money, or that the incentives are slanted in a way that forces you to lose on your investments as opposed to win financially.

it's going to be too late. It's not too late now. Spend some time, learn a bit about it, and you'll be glad you did. It will influence the way you think about money and finance in ways that you could not have imagined. Certainly it's done that for me, and I could point to hundreds of other very similar cases over the years.

No, it's a terrific point you're making. Sorry, I've got to just give a little plug. Coming up, our shocking status about the Canada Pension Board and their remuneration. So there you go. And not performance-based, as you said. But let's finish with this though, okay? So someone says, okay, I haven't been part of this. You know, I've heard about it. I haven't done... Where do they start? Your advice is great. Learn about it. But if you just said, let me give you three things to get you more comfortable with it. I would love for people to...

First of all, understand what Bitcoin is. It's a bearer asset similar to gold. And this is getting into the weeds a bit, but you've invited me to do so with the question. So I'm going to oblige you, sir. It's a bearer asset like gold. You hold it. There's no counterparty risk. OK, there is no debt associated with your Bitcoin. There is no contract associated with your Bitcoin. You hold it yourself.

If you don't want to hold it yourself, if that's intimidating for you or the technicals are difficult for you to get your head around, that's okay too. You can use the ETF. I do not share the view of many of my colleagues that the ETF is poisonous financialization of a pure asset. I think that the ETFs are important and the idea that Bitcoin is going to become global, you know,

you know, value store, a global value store without financialization, I think is a pipe dream. You know, farmers markets and buying t-shirts at conferences, both great, but you don't get to a trillion dollars, you know, buying artisanal honey on the weekends at your local skating rink. So that's, I think, fine too. The ETFs are good. And the third thing I would say to people, and this is just broad advice about Bitcoin, forget what you think you know about

index investing, about metals investing, and specifically about what money is.

governments all around you are printing money. Now, the powers that be at the CBC and other media outlets talking about how it's not money printing, Andrew Coyne correcting economists on Twitter, like it's the Twilight Zone out there, talking about this wasn't money printing and publishing sloppily edited grok responses to people who really do understand how bond purchases and debt issuance work at the state level.

These things are happening all around you. And by the time, like I said earlier, by the time you find out, it's going to be too late. And the urgency is going to prevent you from understanding what's going on. So I would say start slow, take it easy. You can listen to our show. I think our show is a good entry point, the Canadian Bitcoiners podcast. And there are many others like ours that are friendly to newcomers. We are not abrasive with our language. We are not abrasive with...

our expectations, what we want. Unlike when you go to BMO or RBC or TD, you know, when you come to us and ask for advice, I don't get two in 10. When you come to me and ask for support on how to hold your Bitcoin, I don't take any fees. I don't get paid by the hour. I'm doing it because I saw what it did for me. And I think it can do it for other people too.

Well, as I say, I think you do a great job. I got to thank you and James Thorne of Wellington Altus because I'm going back several years who forced it on my agenda. And I mean that in the best way. You know, say, hey, exactly what you've said. Hey, take a look at this. You know, that's where we started to talk about it at the World Wide Web Conference. Well, Mike, think about, sorry to interrupt you. Think about your first appearance on our show, okay? You didn't know a lot about Bitcoin, but you and I share a lot of the same concerns about what's happening. Now, that's...

That's so important. Many Canadians are different in the way they think about, you know, how to approach these concerns. But the concerns are the same. Find common ground with people. And before you know it, you know, now me and Mike are talking about Bitcoin on Money Talks. Who would have thought a few years ago? But these things bring people together and there are solutions that we can work on together as well. Great stuff, Joey, as usual. Much appreciated. And again, Canadian Bitcoiners podcast. People can tune in there. Joey, thank you. My pleasure.

Well, of course, the big news, I think it was on Thursday, they come out and say that the court in New York, the U.S. Court of International Trade, ruled against Trump being able to just lay on these retaliatory tariffs. I'm going to bring Rob Levy in here from Border Gold to talk about this. Rob, I mean, I assume you were surprised like everybody else was.

It was a shocker this week, Mike, you know, the ruling that they're immediately going to appeal the Trump administration to appeal. But these tariffs, they said the Liberation Day tariffs are illegal from the Trump administration. Kind of makes you sit back and take stock of what's been going on these past couple of months. Well, you also do we need a little more uncertainty going on? I guess they have to kick in in 10 days. They've got to back off. But

Come on, this has been the main party platform pursued by the Trump administration. And now the judge saying you can't do that.

No, exactly right. I mean, you know, to take that step back, I mean, there's still that debate. You know, was this to raise revenues for the U.S. economy? They sort of hinted at, talked about a few different times. Was this a negotiating tool for the Trump administration to better their terms of trade? And, you know, the fact of the matter is, as you said, creates a little confusion because

the potential now that this tool is being taken away. If they do appeal, it eventually goes to the Supreme Court, how that outcome then turns out and then the impact of what, you know, policy tool or lever they have at their disposal. But as you said, it's just an added area of now

uncertainty for the markets in this environment because, you know, as the administration said, we have other tools that we can specify to impose tariffs on countries that aren't cooperating with us. So, you know, what's next in this sort of era of a million different headlines a day?

Yeah. And it's important to note also that there's lots of ways to prevent competition. You can have a regulatory environment that says you've got to meet this level of environmental standard, knowing darn well that the people you're importing from can't meet that standard. It doesn't qualify specifically as a tariff, but it prevents competition to your domestic market. So, I mean, there's all of that still on the table. I mean, you can't catch Kevin Hazard. I mean, he's the new National Economic Council, I think. I mean, they're not backing away.

No, no. Yeah. And it was that direct quote that he made on Thursday morning on Fox Business, you know, that America has been mishandled by other governments and tariffs are taking them to the table. They're coming with massive concessions to open up their markets to our products and lowering their tariffs on us. So.

You know, it shows that, as you said, this was a major policy tool and a part of the major plans of the Trump agenda to the beginning of this year. And they almost had the view that it was working.

And it seemed to be working because there was the slow announcement of trade deals. So what happens when this tactic gets taken away? And, you know, we remember Liberation Day because of the pain, that immediate pain that it put on the market. So it almost raises the question, as we're within 4% of all-time record highs of the S&P 500, you know, what blunt tool might be next?

Yeah. Yeah. I think your point about that quote is that there will be something next. I think that's the key. And I think the markets are understanding that. How did the gold market react to this? I mean, there's so many other factors. So it's sort of silly to think it's going to be a univariable kind of impact. But did it have a reaction to this or is it wait and see? Because, you know, as you say, they're going to appeal anyways and people are going to back off for a while.

Yeah, if you bought gold Wednesday night, you made out well so far because it corrected. It was down about 40 bucks and you wake up Thursday morning and, you know, we're back where we finished the day on Wednesday before this announcement had come out. So it was back to volatility in the gold market. But yeah,

You know, it's interesting you mentioned gold for that exact reason, because it was a note that came out with Goldman this week, you know, to tie into this. And it said to their clients, buy gold, buy crude oil, because these are the two ways for investors right now to manage geopolitical risk in their portfolios. Because you look back over the past year and you had the 60-40 bond portfolio where both equities and bonds had losses together, gold and crude oil were the assets that performed. So

As your risk manager in these kind of markets, we had that slight correction because I think there was brief optimism. Oh, a global growth story. There's no tariffs, you know, free or trade, but reality sets in. And yeah, there is going to be more tariffs down the road from a Trump administration and gold is your diversifier.

Forgive me for being tiresome, but I mean, those are our themes on Money Talks for ages. And I like Canadian oil. The companies, you have to look individually. How are they being managed? What's their prospects? The whole list. But I still think in the end, they're devaluing our currency's purchasing power. There's no sign. That's the debate in the States with that new big,

blue bill, whatever, big, beautiful bill, you know, but I mean, to what degree? I don't disagree with them, by the way, that the way they get out of their debt problem is inflation.

devaluing the value of that debt and economic growth. You know, so, I mean, that's another whole subject. And, you know, of course, at Border Gold, you're hearing about that on a nonstop basis because that's been one of the motivators for gold. You know, there's been other issues, but it's one of the biggies, you know, with that. So, yeah, I just think there's so much more to come. That's what this was for me, Rob, is a reminder that, oh my gosh, if we were sort of dreaming the uncertainty and some of the environment was gone, it's not.

No, no. And it was just a, it's a ready yourself because, you know, what do we know? What do we not know? And what do we not know that we don't know? And it's almost, you know, that reminder of what we don't know of what's not, is what's going to come in the months ahead is, you know, this avenue might be taken away from them. What's the next trick up their sleeve? Well, good stuff as always, Rob. I want to remind people to go to bordergold.com, bordergold.com. Rob writes a weekly kind of treaties and what's going on in the gold market. I love it because it's

It's also, you know, I mean, what's going on macro, but it's also his experience with people coming in and out, what they're saying, all of that stuff, informing his opinions. Rob, thank you. Thanks for having me, Mike. Nice to be with you. Volatility creates opportunity, particularly when you're looking at individual stocks that in many cases are now much less expensive than the overall market. Hi, I'm Neil McIver, founder of McIver Capital Management at CG Wealth.

This is one of the key investment ideas behind the public launch of our Vancouver growth portfolio. The VGP is a hedge fund-like 100% growth-orientated portfolio that prioritizes long-term capital appreciation. The VGP has been offered to existing McIver clients since 2017 and has exceeded our 10% net annual return target every year. Now it's available to you and your family.

If you'd like to know more about the Vancouver Growth Portfolio, including the low initial entry level, same day liquidity and direct ownership structure, you can book a call at vancouvergrowthportfolio.ca. That's vancouvergrowthportfolio.ca. Thank you.

No kidding, Sherlock. There's so much going on in the real estate market these days. But one of the things that I'm getting and more and more people coming up or sending an email or what have you,

It's a really difficult time because there's a distinction between do we have an affordable housing market and can you afford to live in the place you've got? And that's what I want to talk to Ozzy Jurek about. Ozzy has a chance, literally hundreds and hundreds of people owning real estate, plus in the development industry, that kind of thing. Ozzy, that's the story I'm getting. It's not just as simple as I can't afford to get in the market. I can't afford to stay in the market. And I'm thinking, you know, stuff that you talk about all the time, but, you know, I've got my

My property tax increases. Gosh, I had to have somebody come in and do repair to my deck. And I know as an investor in real estate, the numbers don't seem to make sense anymore. And it starts with those mortgage renewals.

Well, mortgage renewals, property taxes, insurance costs, all the maintenance, all the expenses, you're going to say, wow. But the big one, as you point out, is the mortgage renewal. We now have 1.2 million Canadians that are set to renew their mortgages just this year. And there will be almost a similar amount next year. And then 85% of these mortgages, and that's the key, they were initially obtained when the Bank of Canada interest rate was at or below 1%. And we still have people believe that go back there. But it will not go back there.

And so here we have a boom with the Bank of Canada that lowered interest rates by 175 basis points, but it's still 3.75%, which, compare that to 1%, Mike, that's a huge increase in the monthly payments.

Yeah. And again, I've got to come back to it because I guess I've heard people say this. I've experienced myself owning an investment property. Man, if you have to bring somebody in to do some maintenance, I mean, those numbers have changed dramatically or you get your property tax bill. So you get that mortgage shift. And as you say, the huge percentage coming this year and next year, you know, it's going to add hundreds of dollars to their monthly payments and that becomes unworkable for some people.

According to Equifax, even in 2024, which wasn't as dramatic a shift because it went from about 2.5% to 4%, but 6% of Canadians have now paid in 2024 some 500 or more. That's going to be dramatically higher as mortgage amounts increase. And when you take a look at the Royal LePage survey, they say that 57% of homeowners expect their monthly mortgage

payments to go substantially higher, and 81% anticipate that will financial strain on their households.

Yeah, it's incredible. And one thing we just skipped over, but yeah, I would have skipped over if you hadn't, but is the insurance, you know, has gone up so dramatically. I mean, again, it's this another 100 here, another 200 there, you know, and it becomes unaffordable, especially it makes no sense, by the way, in some of the rental markets. It depends. But I mean, they've capped the rate increases. It's one thing if you've got a new build and you can set the rate. But if you've got one in there, you know, that 2.5% just hasn't even come close to covering

inflation. Well, and that's the problem. So what do people do? Well, you can extend the amortization period. Most of them were 25 years. They could go to 30. You could also switch from, if you have a bi-weekly mortgage, you go to monthly payment because you actually have making 26 bi-weekly payments instead of

instead of the 12 monthly payments and you actually save a little there. You could rent out some of your property or you could downsize. And when I look around, Mike, I see signs everywhere. And I'm sure there's quite a few of them where people are saying, I just cannot afford the renewal of these mortgages. Then I've got to sell.

Let me say the other side of this completely, that you've got a lot of people who are not in the housing market, maybe wanted to be in. I mean, this is a far better market to be out there shopping. You know, as you always say, Ozzy, make a bid. You know, it doesn't matter. All they can do is say no. So I just want to remind there is that other side of the coin that creates some opportunity. It doesn't stop me feeling for those people who've been caught at this point and are going to get caught. But it does create some opportunity if you say if they've got a downsize, etc.,

You are so right. And people forget that, you know, the good market is just where you make a good deal, not, you know, some other measure. Look at today, the Belvedere in Surrey has reduced all of its initial inventory by 25%. That's a huge increase. So for somebody that's looking for their own home, hey, it's a finished building. They have a few building units left. They'll drop it by 25%. I understand the Aquilini's

maybe bring out a deal at a 30% discount. So there are, this stuff is in the marketplace and people are backing off when they should be buying.

And one last thing, you know, because you are going to hear more and more stats about mortgages in arrears, for example, or as you said, people feeling that pressure. But Canadians have a fabulous record of protecting their mortgage payments. What will happen is in other areas of the economy, I'll pay my mortgage, but that means I've got $200 or $300 less discretionary spending. So you're going to feel it in other areas of the economy.

Yeah. And in fact, the statistics show that 60% plan to reduce or eliminate discretionary spending, 43% no more travel, 36% eliminate saving, and so on and so on. So it just, you know, maybe even have to find a second job. This is a serious issue. Unfortunately, I don't see it at 3.75% or say 4%. That's a

traditionally a very good fixed rate. I mean, remember you and I, we know markets that were 13% for five years. I was on national TV a long time ago and I said, 11% is a good rate for the family. And I believed it, right? We came out of 16. So 4% is not bad. It's just when you lock yourself in at 1% and it's coming to you now, the difference is painful.

Plus all the other increases due to the inflationary push of the cost of living. That has been an unusual period that way too. So it's the combination for sure. And people can get more by just simply going to ozbuzz.ca. You get your weekly update there. You've got to tell them where to send it, so put in your email address. But ozbuzz.ca. Ozzy, go out and have a terrific week.

Thank you very much, Mike. And I just thought I'll share this with you. I made a speech the other day to a large real estate company, and they introduced me. And Ozzy Jurek is the only Canadian who doesn't speak either one of the official languages. So I do apologize. I speak fast with enthusiasm and hard to understand. Well, the other thing that people say all the time, Ozzy Jurek has that very sexy accent. So there you go. There's a win there. Ozzy, have a great week. Take care. Bye-bye. Bye-bye.

I want to go live to the trading desk now. I've got Victor Adair with me, victoradair.ca. You can find him, especially, you've got to do it every weekend because he put up these charts and analysis, et cetera. And as I always use the cliche, a chart's worth a thousand words. Victor, let's start with something, and I know you've been saying it, but I have felt it. And that is kind of a blah about these markets.

Well, yeah, absolutely, Mike. It really feels like, I don't know, where do we go from here? There's not a lot of enthusiasm. There's not a lot of love, not a lot of hate, whatever. We're just kind of, it seems like going sideways. I'm going to put a lot of it down to just tariff fatigue. I mean, these tariffs have just been beating the hell out of everybody one way or another. And, you know, they're on again, they're off again. You know, Trump's ramping it up and then he's taking it back and forth.

Now, you know, the short term traders in the market kind of love this chop. OK, but I think in a way, like the real economy is really struggling with this uncertainty that's out there. I don't know how that's actually showing up in markets, but maybe it's just this sideways action we're getting. Well, I think that's how it does, actually. I was I was thinking of gold as you were saying that oil's been sort of in a smaller trading range recently.

And again, for a trader, these are, you know, significant ranges. But I'm saying as an investor, I sit back and go, well, I don't really care. It goes from here to here, to here, to here. It's not a, it's not a big trend change, you know, so it's nothing for me to really pay close attention to.

Speaking of the oil, I mean, we were 120 bucks back in 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. We've traded down to half of that. We're around $60 or so in the recent range. And like that goes back to 2020, I guess, or 2021 when we had prices back around $60. When I looked at my long term charts on crude, I'd say the average price

for the last 10 years has been about 60 bucks. So, you know, here we are again, you know, at this level, it's certainly a supply demand story.

Gold, Mike, I'm going to make the point. I think the price of gold is being discovered in Shanghai, not New York, not London. That's where the demand is, is over there. I look at open interest in the New York gold market. We're down at seven year lows. It's like nobody cares. Nobody's buying it. Nobody's selling it. You know, it's just the prices are chopping around for sure. We

We can have a $100 per day range in the gold market, but there's nothing really significant going on. We've been in a $200 range for the last, I don't know, six weeks, two months. Vic, I still want to get to a couple of things. Well, interest rate related, those 10-year bonds we talked about in the U.S., sort of showing a little bit of an inflation bias still, despite some of the underlying stats not supporting, but we're still up there pretty good in the interest rates for a 10-year bond.

Yeah, the 10-year U.S. Treasury is around a 4.5% yield. You got to go back to, I think it was 2007, you know, when we saw that. So that kind of gives you some idea as to where we're at. I think the bonds are, like everything else, struggling a bit with this tariff fatigue. I see the actual inflation metrics that we get out are trending a little bit lower, but inflation expectations are

are higher. And these expectations, it's all about, again, tariffs. When you're going to put a 25% tariff on Apple products coming into the United States, if they're not made in the USA, who's going to pay that? Well, ultimately, it's going to be the consumer. And people know that intuitively. And I think that's why they've got these inflation expectations rising.

It's the same with retaliatory tariffs, I'm going to add. And we boast about, look at our retaliatory tariffs. I'm going, even with all the changes, they're still thinking we'll pay 10 to 15 billion Canadians on our retaliatory tariffs. I'm going to finish with one quick one, though, Vic. It's interesting to see...

Allie, your theme that is kind of blah in there is we had our GDP number coming out, you know, for April higher, you know, 2.2 percent higher than the 1.5 percent. Well, now we've got this our rate meeting coming up June 4th. You know, and again, people are saying, yeah, probably steady she goes. You know, the percentage are saying we're not going to get a change.

Well, yeah, the market right now is voting, it looks like, for no change from the Bank of Canada at the next meeting. But they're doing the same thing with the Federal Reserve. Canada, I think, was pushed a little lower because the market thought Canada was going to be lowering rates while the U.S. was going to be staying steady. Now, the Canadian dollar here, we finished this week at an eight-month high. But I will say, I think that really is more a function of

weakness in the U.S. dollar against all currencies rather than, you know, the Canadian dollar being super mad. Well, as I say, lots of stuff going on still. You'll be following it at victoradare.ca. Vic, you go out and have a great weekend. Thank you, Mike. And just a reminder, I got the Goofy Award coming up. Stay with us. Get on the edge of your chair so it's not that big a fall. The Goofy. And now for this week's Goofy Award.

Canada Post CEO Doug Edinger reported to Parliament this week that Canada Post had a pre-tax loss of $841 million. Now, about $200 million of that is attributed to that 32-day strike last fall. But why should we care? Well, you know what? Because we as taxpayers are ultimately on the hook for the financial losses.

And it's not a new story. I mean, Canada Post had an operating loss every year since 2018. It lost $748 million pre-tax last year, $538 million in 2022. And by the way, you know, people are concerned about their cost of living. Well, the federal government increased the cost of domestic letter delivery by 35% in the last year, $0.92 to $1.24 per letter.

The Canadian Postal Service Charter is the other side of this story that you should know about. It states that Canada Post must operate, in quotes, in a secure and financially self-sustaining manner.

Well, obviously that hasn't been happening for years. But here's the goofy part. Everyone in government and the post office says that massive changes are required. No kidding. But they haven't been happening. As CEO Edinger says in quotes, Canada Post needs urgent changes to its operating model, collective agreements and regulatory and policy framework to improve its financial situation. Well, that's been the case for years.

It's clearly not been enough to change because of the losses, though. We haven't seen that change. And now the union is on strike and has rejected a 14% wage increase over four years, along with a $1,000 signing bonus.

It's hard to see how that offer doesn't put further pressure on Canada Post. They already got unworkable finances. I mean, the Industrial Inquiry Commission reported in May, they concluded the post office was, in their words, effectively insolvent or bankrupt.

Which part is that hard to understand by the parties involved? Meanwhile, the government provides no leadership and certainly no protection for taxpayers who are, as I said, ultimately on the hook. I mean, the drop in both mail volumes and package delivery is well chronicled. What's not so certain is what does the future of Canada Post look like in this kind of a financial model? How do they make it sustainable?

Cup W national president Jan Simpson says Canada posts is playing hardball in these negotiations.

Maybe that's just code for wanting major changes to secure financial stability. But how that can't be the case. I mean, it's got to be the case with Canada Post effectively bankrupt. As CEO Edinger states, though, to stem these losses, in quotes, there must be first a breakthrough, the strong resistance to change that has led the national postal system to the brink of insolvency.

The goofy part, only in government can the response to the relentless losses with a continuing decline in market share be greeted with a strong resistance to change. Oh my gosh, can we absorb the losses forever? I think the single word to sum all this up is hopeless.

That's all the time we have this week. And a reminder, please go to Mike's Money Talks.ca. I think even more so, tell people to join us on Money Talks tweets, Michael Campbell's Facebook, and Mike's Money Talks.ca. I can't, I say this all the time because it's true. There are so many facts, figures, things going on out there that do not make the mainstream media, but are key to understanding what's going on in this country. So Mike's Money Talks.ca and join up with five minutes with Mike.

In the meantime, hey, I hope you go out and have a fabulous week.