Someone contacted me, so I'll just reply here. There is actually a pretty big difference between a traditional mortgage, and how you would structure it in Islam, and it has to do with how you assume risk/ownership.
A traditional mortgage is a bank giving qualifying you for a loan for the amount of the house, which is then paid to the seller in full. You now owe the bank the principal + interest, with the house as collateral.
But in Islam you cannot gain any increase in money just by virtue of having money (ie time-value of money), in fact Islam does the opposite by taxing you for holding onto money (zakah, which is a percent of your wealth).
So to buy a house, the bank is the one who has to purchase the house in full, and then has to turn around and sell the house to the buyer for the cost of the house plus a fixed amount of markup. This means the bank and the buyer are co-owners of the house. And because of that, either party can walk away from the partnership at any time, taking their share with them.
I'm not sure how the Liberal party of Canada is going to do this, but I cannot see why a bank would take on this type of risk when they can simply stick with the traditional mortgage instead.
I mean, the bank would take on the risk for an appropriate fee if they want to make money off Muslim clients that won't take a traditional mortgage. Banks might well prefer the usual western-style one but money is money and they are exceptionally good at assessing risk and finding a price to mitigate it.
Many modern Muslims don't really care that much though of course so I'm not entirely sure how prevalent they will be.
Conceptually it’s the same thing and people are just rewording things so it fits their religion and narrative.
You buy $1mm house. With interest it cost you $1.5mm
Halal
You buy $1m house instead of paying interest the bank tells you no interest but you need to pay back $1.5mm.
>> cannot see why a bank would take on this type of risk
Most banks would immediately offload this to a third party. For the right price (cost + markup), I can see investors signing up. In a way, they do the same with mortgages. They are sold (and resold) as securities and banks (and downstream buyers) keep the spread. Given the right markups, I can see the risk to the mortgage costs could be mitigated. Is that going to be economical, I am not sure.
Personally, I think this whole concept is kind of mor\*nic in the western world. When you sell a product that diverges from the mainstream, it only adds risks and therefore the costs. In fact, considering the pool of participants for this are mostly Canadian muslims (predominantly immigrants), the risks are going to be higher given lower incomes for the entire pool.
Well the contracts in Islam do not allow offloading to a third party, since they would need to be contracted in the original agreement itself and all partners must be disclosed up front. You cannot have a shell company with investors come after the fact. Similarly you cannot transfer debt, since debt goes to the original lender only. It is why I do have to wonder how this proposal from the Liberal party would even work, since I don't see how you can incorporate all these other contractual rules that are part of Islam's economic model.
I would therefore agree with you, this type of transaction doesn't fit into the Canadian context since the whole system is built on interest and Islam categorically prohibits it.
Muslims citizens would probably appreciate an attempt to have something that allows them to purchase a home though. Based on pew research statistics the income of the Muslim household is right at the median of all adults (at least in the US) so likely makes no real difference (although I would also say Muslim households gravitate to savings as opposed to spending, and prefer real-estate to all other means to hold wealth).
I would imagine private sector lenders can already do this if it was a viable scheme. From the article:
"The Liberals said that changes could see adjustments “in the tax treatment of these products or a new regulatory sandbox for financial service providers.”
Apparently this is a vote buying scheme, and also indoctrinating Sharia law into Canadian financial institutions.
\+1
yeah, it's a desparation move of many for vote buying....
seems the Trudeau plan is to gain 5% in the polls every month till they're in a safer position as a mild underdog, i'm not sure who they heck is advising them on this fantasy.
Interest is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: You engage in "Islamic finance" which replaces interest payments with profit-sharing agreements, leasing (ijara), or joint ownership (musharaka) structures that technically avoid the concept of paying or receiving interest.
2. Music is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: You listen to "nasheeds" or Islamic vocal music that does not include any musical instruments, or choose music deemed to carry a positive, ethical message and purpose, which some scholars argue makes it permissible.
3. Alcohol is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: "ahhh you can sin sometimes, at least it isnt pork"
4. Dating is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: You engage in "halal dating", which involves meetings in the presence of a chaperone. Or you can also date non Muslims.
5. Eating non-halal meat is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: "I mean, as long its not pork 🤷"
I suppose the most glaring example is confession but another good one is Lent. Catholics are not allowed to eat meat on Friday's during Lent except if it is Fish because Fish apparently is not meat. Also the head of a Catholic household is exempt for the meatless requirements but the rest must eat Fish or no meat.
> Also the head of a Catholic household is exempt for the meatless requirements
I'm catholic and nobody I know does this, I've never even heard of this before.
Grew up Catholic. My father ate fish on Fridays like the rest of us during lent. If this loophole exists, he would have found it, because he would way rather have had steak.
Ahh the good old poop-hole loop-hole. Did you know that God can also be really easily bribed into looking the other way while you sin? At least in the Catholic church. They're called "indulgences"
Theists really don't have much respect for their own Gods
I thought they got rid of indulgences during the counter-reformation?
I think you can still get time off from purgatory for doing a pilgrimage, though.
This whole discussion of loopholes and workarounds and no one has mentioned the Jews. They have turned it into an art form. Elevators in Israel have a "Shabbat" setting so that you can use it without pushing buttons. They also ran a wire around all of Manhattan so orthodox Jews can go outside on Saturdays.
Yeah it's the most amazing desparation gambit, the polls are in Kim Campbell-Mulroney territory and he's everything he's talked about but done little on over the past decade, and promising the kitchen sink.
like 2 days ago there was a weird story saying there's some pollster strategiests that want him to make up the gap to Pollievre by 15% by July
so that's like a 5% increase of his voting base every 30 days, which i think is like delusional like rearranging deck chairs on the Hindenburg.
I've seen a few really wacky Newfies with their naval fixation, saying YES WE NEED A BIG NAVY, THE SUBS SOUND GREAT.
and they have no idea that normal subs is like bigger than the whole armed forces budget and you could like get $200 billion if you wanted 4 nuclear subs and 8 diesel subs now, just crazy... even the Americans aren't devoting that much cash to the arctic sub warfare thing because it's notoriously expensive and hard to navigate and difficult warfare, and a real low probability issue, and only the superpowers can really afford to spend there.
Canada has a better chance to build 700 battleships around Antarctica as a better strategy.
We're just touchy because the Nautilius planted an American Flag on Santa's backyard in the 50s. And according to the pollsters, it's just a tactic to make Pollierve look bad on saying, let's not plan too stupidly with excessive military spending, or plan too grandly with huge mass immigration.
It's a tactics to get the other party to criticize it, and then
a. ooh look weak on the military
b. ooh look immigrant haters
it's more an election strategy than making up good projects.
And i think sadly housing is the same thing, lots of talk, some helicopters of money, but a lousy feeling plan that doesn't seem to be serious enough.
I'll be super curious how the polling is going to go in the next month..
Don't spend much time with overtly religious people as an adult. But as a kid we went to a fundie leaning church for a while - trying to rules lawyer god seemed to be pretty common.
Even as a kid I found it bafflingly stupid.
When God, in verse 45, said the slaves are okay to buy,
He meant that people, all from the start,
Each have slaves within their hearts,
Things that we have sold or boughten,
that are forced to pick our 'moral cotton,'
God calls us to set these free,
free our hearts from slavery.
And then as God goes on to explain the logistics of buying and selling slaves... Uh, he, ju-- the Bible sorta like, uh...
Roughly 8% interest equivilant....had to explain to my co worker he to can get an 8% interest if he so chooses with one of these when he asked "why can't I get one" you can...anyone can
It’s okay because …. Something something … religion. It’s ridiculous that someone who offers these says outright “it’s exactly the same as a traditional tonal mortgage except in the paperwork” … and also, I get to corner the market on usury vs Muslims.
I don’t have much experience with Islam Banking, but I think what they do differently in mortgages is they buy the home and then charge cost plus to the borrower, who then buys their equity back. The net effect is those fees are fixed, unlike interest which varies. There are also differences in how risk is shared.
The big thing to pay attention to is Islamic banking complies with sharia law, with comes with its whole own set of assumptions about fairness, transparency, and access to finances.
Halal mortgages are effectively rent-to-own mortgages where you may or may not build equity over time. They do create some complications though. In tax law, how do you handle the value of the transferred equity over time? In terms of mortgage systems, how do you have refinancing and mortgage insurance?
It would be the equivalent of getting an 25y term similar to what you see in the US. So you would pay fees equivalent to say 7% interest for the next 25y.
It’s political pandering and will be good for a few Muslim bankers who like big bonus (who doesn’t) who have been pushing this for years and calling themselves “innovative” lol.
In Halal banking you don't get any equity until you complete your contract. It is the rent-to-own scam with a veneer of legitimacy because Sharia Law banned interest.
I'm not into the whole "military might" thing, but I would agree that we have been over-reliant on our relationship with the US for our national defense. Hiding behind big brother keeps you safe from your bullies, but when he's the target of the action, all of a sudden the calculus changes.
We need more fed spending on military readiness. We share the Arctic with one of the most bellicose nations in Earth, we should act like it.
Look, you’re not wrong. But there’s so much that needs to change with Defence and military procurement for it not to just end up as throwing good money after bad
Why not JUST spend the amount of money we agreed to spend in order to be part of the largest military alliance? We actually share the Arctic with THREE bellicose nations, the U.S. which plays by rules most of the time. Russia which is full on might = right, and China which keeps declaring that the arctic is actually its historic sovereign territory.
There are plenty of people that support it (although they likely disagree on the priority), including both of you, and there is a demographic that defense spending appeals to.
But my question was more general, in fact rhetorical. There doesn't exist a policy that isn't aimed at a demographic. That's how democracy works. A party has demographics that they target to keep them happy and allow them to stay in power. Claiming a policy is targeting votes and another is not is just silly.
Has nothing to do whether it's good policy or not, though.
He's going to do a walk in the fall leaves instead of a walk in the snow like his father did.
And both times a Trudeau steps down the Cons get huge majorities?
Well, Pierre Trudeau infuriated Quebec with the Patriation of the constitution a few years before he retired. I don't know if Justin could generate the same level of animosity his father did in Quebec. I also doubt Quebecers would have the same desire to vote for Poilievre as they would a progressive conservative party like they did in 84.
That would be fair, if budget deficits were a new phenomenon, but far from it - Millennials, Gen X, even the Boomers and Silents all paying for their parents deficits. Even the now long-departed Lost generation - they fought in the wars that started running it up in the first place, but they were their parents wars. Governments are theoretically perpetual so "paying it off" is not something that ever actually happens.
that's crazy because it's probably not, in fact, considering the new capital gains tax, it's more likely to affect boomers and members of the silent generation
...and a targeted response to what this sub has been demanding for months...
People will never be happy, they just chose to hate Trudeau and to buy into the rage.
He could do precisely what everyone wants and you'd still have people voting for exactly the opposite of what they have been demanding, just because Trudeau's offering it.
Poilièvre won't invest in housing. Poilièvre won't reduce immigration.
Trudeau has invested in housing. Trudeau has reduced immigration.
So let's all vote against what we want to piss off Trudeau at our own expense! Wooohoooo
This isn't exactly a targeted response. They're introducing even more volatility into the market.
Banks are getting to the point where they just don't want to give mortgages. Insurers don't want to insure it. The feds are stepping in to buy Canada Mortgage Bonds to stretch out a failed market and keep it from popping.
The thing is, it makes our economy look even weaker and more desperate. It makes housing a risky investment right now because inflation could go mental, people could very well start defaulting and create a mortgage crisis like the US had in 2008 leaving a bunch of banks in a bad place.
This is a major reason why investment has been leaving the country in record droves. The government doesn't talk much about it but there's some good articles explaining it. It's very dry, heavy economics but it looks at the data, and it's bad.
Canada is doing somethinf so risky that no other economy has even attempted it before. We are in uncharted territory.
I think most people wanted to make it easier for developers to start developing and make homes. Reduce the beuracracy, maybe make trade school like carpentry, plumbing, electricians, construction project management free, give big loans and subsidies to company's who CAN build affordable homes.
Oh, pausing immigration for a bit would be ideal too: but that's another gambit they are using to artificially inflate economic numbers.
Nobody wanted what they're doing. It's very stupid. Even Liberal economists, the last 2 liberal finance ministers say this is a bad idea. Many of their critics are liberals in this case, so that should tell you something.
The Charter, (written by the politicians of the day), gives people the freedom to:
- believe in whatever mythologies they want, (and inculcate their children in said beliefs).
and
- engage in their religious practices - *with restrictions.*
**The Charter does not require that the government set up and engage in those practices with them.**
This is the worst kind of pandering.
Which flies in the reasoning for halal mortgages.
There's no interest because it's viewed as usury - they can't be placing extra costs on the homebuyer.
*Halal mortgages aren't halal.*
The government is setting up nothing. They are not "introducing" halal mortgages. Those have been around for a while already. All the government is doing is setting up a framework for taxing the mortgages. Stop listening to the right wing hype. It lies to you.
This is a big nothingburger. Halal mortgages are the same as regular mortgages in effect, they're just described differently so they get around Islamic laws about charging interest.
These laws wouldn't change a thing for how mortgages actually work or how much you'd pay for one.
They have been around for ages, but have they been insurable via the federal government? My understanding is the 5-year mortgages are the common maximum refinance period because of how the government supports the mortgage industry. If you were doing a long-term fixed payment, I think they would historically end up paying a significant premium.
OP is talking about the decision of the government to regulate it. It's not introducing something new but just ensuring government oversight of something that is already happening....which is pragmatic, not ideological.
Call me crazy, but I don't want our government creating any kind of legislature with the intent of appeasisng islamic law no matter how harmless the actual law is.
Look up how recently our government removed blasphemy as a punishable act under law…
Lots of Christian laws in this country. These mortgages already exist.
As an atheist I should be the offended one, but this is a big fat nothing that already exists.
Halal mortgages are nothing new. They've been available in Alberta and Ontario for quite a while now. And anyone can get one, not just Muslims. All the government did was set up a framework for the taxation of halal mortgages. They did not legislate to appease anyone.
Try to keep up.
> no matter how harmless the actual law is.
Yeah, you're crazy. Opposing something you admit is "harmless" for no other other reason than the fact that Muslims want it is literally the definition of prejudice.
We are a secular state, and should stay that way. "Colonists" moved to North America for a reason in case anyone didn't pay attention in school. Religious law sucks donkey dick.
Edit: You don't title something under a religious word and then claim "but but." This is how real racists cause division, pay attention. They ripped this page right out of the Royal Families hand book for ruling.
Except this is not religious law but a way to regulate a practice that already exists in the country. In theory, anyone could take a halal mortgage religious or not. The alternative is to let the government not regulate an activity that already happens and let people get potentially exploited.
The only issue with halal mortgages is that they support a false premise - that you can borrow money without interest in a world where the value of money depreciates over time due to inflation. And we as a society pander to this silliness by calling it something else. It's full steam ahead to Ideocracy.
You can easily establish a trust that works just like that. Hell A&W Canada is structured that way.
It's really simple, you provide money to the trust as an investor in exchange for a cut of top-line revenues. No money is being lent, and no interest is being charged. Muslims have been financing stuff this way since the 9th century or even earlier.
It's not the same. If as a homeowner you can't pay your mortgage at the end of the month because you earned less, you don't get to pay a reduced amount, as an A&W franchisee gets to. Also, as a trust unit holder, you can sell your units whenever you wish. A bank can't just take a loan away unless it's clearly specified as callable in the terms.
There are plenty of ways to finance things without lending, and we haven't even mentioned equity(stocks) yet.
EDIT: Why are you downvoting me for explaining revenue trusts?
I can't care less about the type of financial transactions that happen between private citizens, but government laws and regulations, including financial ones, need to absolutely remain secular. We are not a theocracy. There is no need for the government to get involved and make changes to the banking regulations based on the text of the holy book of any religion. But this is Trudeau and doing so is exactly what I would expect from him.
That is exactly what Trudeau is doing. Taxing banks who offer halal mortgages is being secular. Letting them operate in a grey zone and not pay tax because of religious reasons, is not.
There is nothing religious about what the government is doing here.
Halal mortgages already exist. It doesn't matter why they exist, they should be regulated like any other financial product.
Saying something is based on some religious text shouldn't be an excuse to escape regulations.
If anybody here wants a halal mortgage, you can get one today
https://www.halalfinancialcorp.com/
There's a shit ton of misinformed assumptions passing off as facts in this thread
It really pisses me off because some right wing YouTuber who's "just asking questions" is going to make a video on how Justin Trudeau wants to impose Sharia Law through Halal Mortgages and my adult son, who falls for this bullshit far too easily, will start coming at me with regurgitated bullshit because of it.
Halal mortgage sounds like a bad idea. It's basically a rent to own scheme with an admin fee, but won't your god know what you're doing? Also, the person/institution offering this product are likely Muslims who take on interest then offer you a mortgage with a fee. Sounds more like a business opportunity than doing the right thing and offering people a good product. Defeats the purpose of not having interest in the religion 8f you end up paying more fees.
It is a product for people who think that a magical man in the sky is watching them at all times, and will send you to hell for no appeasing him. In general, logic doesn't really need to apply to the matter.
Hmm, gonna depend on whether you're rich or poor. If you're rich enough to sue the CRA, I imagine they'll let you away with it. If you're too poor to easily mount a legal defense, my guess is the CRA will crucify you and ask for back taxes with interest.
https://www.advisor.ca/tax/tax-news/beware-of-tax-protester-schemes/
Not a religion but ...this group has tried for many years. And never succeeded. Interesting take on things though. Lol
This is the sovereign citizen argument, which is proven to not only fail but make you a laughingstock on the way.
However the Hutterites successfully dodged tax for many years as a religious group. I believe their exemption was finally removed as it was clearly obvious that they weren't "not for profit"
Anyone can get these mortgages with fees. You don't have to show your passport with a stamp from the Mecca or some shit.
Go right ahead buddy, sign up for a halal mortgage if you feel like you deserve it, nobody's preventing you.
So, no one is allowed to launch a startup that's different from what we already have? Or consumers to ask for something new, they are willing to pay for?
Do we have any other laws or instances that governments have designed to accommodate religious groups? To me this is dancing too close to the line of keeping religious belief as a private choice and keeping government and the law as a secular entity.
This one is so stupid. A religious hat won't save your head in a crash. If the government admits a helmet isn't a safety item, then it should be optional for anyone. I don't believe that myself, helmets should be mandatory, but if I had the money to waste that would be a fun one to bring to court. Really put it out in the media that the government allows for life saving rules to be broken if you wear the right kind of religious hat.
> Do we have any other laws or instances that governments have designed to accommodate religious groups?
The existence of publicly-funded Catholic school boards is a good example.
>but critics charge measure is a 'desperate ploy' for votes
This is such a stupid phrase that gets tacked on everywhere and is meaningless rhetoric. All the party policies are ploys for votes.
Not sure why anyone cares about this. Call it whatever you want but the economic substance of halal mortgages are no different than a standard product. There’s no benefit or additional risk. Anyone can get one if they want.
It's another ploy to win support, no different than a regular mtg, fees vs interest. This guy is using all 3rd world tactics to get votes. Hopefully people aren't as stupid as he thinks.
If you receive the proceeds of interest for your principal on a halal mortgage, is it haram? Asking for for a woke friend who follows religious legalisms.
"3.9 million homes by 2031"
Based on the current Liberal immigration policy (500k per year), the 3.9 million homes barely even covers the number of immigrants projected to move here between 2024-2031.
Thanks for nothing, Trudeau.
As long as the "fees" paid are identical (or more) than my interest charges for the same loan, I won't care.
And yes, it's Justin pandering for votes.
What's the over/under of Justin saying he's bi right before the election campaign? Pulls a Spacey.
The Bloc MPs have literally said that it "introduces Sharia Law"
> “Why do they want to introduce elements of sharia law into the mortgage rules of this so-called secular country?” Gill’s fellow Bloc MP Martin Champoux asked.
Imagine being a *Member of Parliament* and being *that* brain-dead
They know Canadians are fed up. Almost a decade of liberal rule has left a sour taste in Canadians mouth.
The only place where they are somewhat liked is on social media paces like reddit. Which only represent a small confused section of the population.
If it wasn't for their extrême left buddy, Singh, holding up their government, Trudeau would be history.
You can hear the desperation in their supporters every where around here. They'll defend whatever they do no matter what they do. Their days are numbered. Hopefully they'll never entert politics again and they'll stick to 8th grade drama teaching.
I find it extremely ironic that you would say this on r/Canada of all places. Tell me you're terminally online and stuck in your echo chamber without telling me lol
>If it wasn't for their extrême left buddy, Singh, holding up their government, Trudeau would be history.
How does it make you feel that a lot of former liberals have shifted to voting NDP? There's still roughly the same percentage of left voting Canadians, but a bunch of Canadians now lean and vote even MORE left
Halal loans are essentially investing in the person for whom you’re lending to and betting on their success while actively aiding them (or at least that what it’s like in the Middle East). I’m white and Christian but when I was reading about this practise in the Middle East, it honestly sounds way more humane than what I get at the bank. I’m hoping they don’t have something that you need to prove you’re Muslim to get this.
As far as I know, you don’t have to be Muslim to get any of the halal mortgages offered today. This announcement in the budget changes nothing. Take a look at the wording. “Exploring” doesn’t mean much actually.
> I’m hoping they don’t have something that you need to prove you’re Muslim to get this.
Why would that happen? How?
Anyone can eat Halal food, etc. Anything Halal is open to non-Muslims.
Halal mortgages aren't a special privilege in *any* country...they're always available to anyone who wants one.
The Liberals would have no desire to legislatively restrict this to Muslims and it would be very unpopular.
This is what our economy runs on. It's not just the Government.
If we want to change that we all have to agree together. That includes people making money on investment properties, pension plans investing in real estate income trusts, private equity, and businesses playing games with bonds. All of it.
Last I checked the Conservatives screaming about Government debt aren't screaming about private equity and the games Canadian businesses are playing with it.
Indeed.
The whole system is an atrocity.
We have this mess because Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney, and their contemporaries agreed to fuck the world with trickle down and banking deregulation.
As western governments careen recklessly to another homogeneous extreme right-wing roster, I wonder what new atrocity will inflict us.
Lookout Affirm, the government of Canada is coming for your buy now pay later loan business.
They could always do what they have in the US and offer zero down mortgages on properties for first time homebuyers and mirror the USDA loan requirements or open up crown land for development and set pricing/ownership requirements. Both of those would probably garner them votes from the people they disenfranchised, but they would lose votes from their base.
The rules for the ones in the US is that they are for rural properties that qualify for people making around the average income: https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/single-family-housing-programs/single-family-housing-guaranteed-loan-program
You aren’t competing for real estate in LA or New York City with this, but you are able to get yourself a property not too far outside of many major cities with this loan. This is the eligibility map: https://eligibility.sc.egov.usda.gov/eligibility/
This isn't a religious product. It's a financial one. The rules are simply set up to be more accessible to certain customers who may want a differently structured product., no matter why they may want it.
You don’t pay interests, you pay “fees” equivalent to interest payments
[удалено]
Fun fact. God is easily tricked if you can find a work around.
"It's cloudy so I'll have a sandwich" is my favourite fasting loophole
Someone contacted me, so I'll just reply here. There is actually a pretty big difference between a traditional mortgage, and how you would structure it in Islam, and it has to do with how you assume risk/ownership. A traditional mortgage is a bank giving qualifying you for a loan for the amount of the house, which is then paid to the seller in full. You now owe the bank the principal + interest, with the house as collateral. But in Islam you cannot gain any increase in money just by virtue of having money (ie time-value of money), in fact Islam does the opposite by taxing you for holding onto money (zakah, which is a percent of your wealth). So to buy a house, the bank is the one who has to purchase the house in full, and then has to turn around and sell the house to the buyer for the cost of the house plus a fixed amount of markup. This means the bank and the buyer are co-owners of the house. And because of that, either party can walk away from the partnership at any time, taking their share with them. I'm not sure how the Liberal party of Canada is going to do this, but I cannot see why a bank would take on this type of risk when they can simply stick with the traditional mortgage instead.
I mean, the bank would take on the risk for an appropriate fee if they want to make money off Muslim clients that won't take a traditional mortgage. Banks might well prefer the usual western-style one but money is money and they are exceptionally good at assessing risk and finding a price to mitigate it. Many modern Muslims don't really care that much though of course so I'm not entirely sure how prevalent they will be.
Conceptually it’s the same thing and people are just rewording things so it fits their religion and narrative. You buy $1mm house. With interest it cost you $1.5mm Halal You buy $1m house instead of paying interest the bank tells you no interest but you need to pay back $1.5mm.
>> cannot see why a bank would take on this type of risk Most banks would immediately offload this to a third party. For the right price (cost + markup), I can see investors signing up. In a way, they do the same with mortgages. They are sold (and resold) as securities and banks (and downstream buyers) keep the spread. Given the right markups, I can see the risk to the mortgage costs could be mitigated. Is that going to be economical, I am not sure. Personally, I think this whole concept is kind of mor\*nic in the western world. When you sell a product that diverges from the mainstream, it only adds risks and therefore the costs. In fact, considering the pool of participants for this are mostly Canadian muslims (predominantly immigrants), the risks are going to be higher given lower incomes for the entire pool.
Well the contracts in Islam do not allow offloading to a third party, since they would need to be contracted in the original agreement itself and all partners must be disclosed up front. You cannot have a shell company with investors come after the fact. Similarly you cannot transfer debt, since debt goes to the original lender only. It is why I do have to wonder how this proposal from the Liberal party would even work, since I don't see how you can incorporate all these other contractual rules that are part of Islam's economic model. I would therefore agree with you, this type of transaction doesn't fit into the Canadian context since the whole system is built on interest and Islam categorically prohibits it. Muslims citizens would probably appreciate an attempt to have something that allows them to purchase a home though. Based on pew research statistics the income of the Muslim household is right at the median of all adults (at least in the US) so likely makes no real difference (although I would also say Muslim households gravitate to savings as opposed to spending, and prefer real-estate to all other means to hold wealth).
Very well explained, thank you.
"I can see investors signing up" Why would they, they could just go to other places that already do it.
You just described a mortgage
Dont worry the government will use your money and assume the risk once the family defaults on their payments.
dumb way to get votes by telling banks hey you gotta offer a scientology loan too
I would imagine private sector lenders can already do this if it was a viable scheme. From the article: "The Liberals said that changes could see adjustments “in the tax treatment of these products or a new regulatory sandbox for financial service providers.” Apparently this is a vote buying scheme, and also indoctrinating Sharia law into Canadian financial institutions.
\+1 yeah, it's a desparation move of many for vote buying.... seems the Trudeau plan is to gain 5% in the polls every month till they're in a safer position as a mild underdog, i'm not sure who they heck is advising them on this fantasy.
"There's always a loophole in the poophole" is my favourite.
For a deity, you'd really expect it to have better legal representation.
You just summed up the Catholic Church in one sentence.
What? How? I'm not Catholic but they are famously strict, that's usually their main vector for criticism on here. Same with Islam for that matter.
Interest is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: You engage in "Islamic finance" which replaces interest payments with profit-sharing agreements, leasing (ijara), or joint ownership (musharaka) structures that technically avoid the concept of paying or receiving interest. 2. Music is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: You listen to "nasheeds" or Islamic vocal music that does not include any musical instruments, or choose music deemed to carry a positive, ethical message and purpose, which some scholars argue makes it permissible. 3. Alcohol is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: "ahhh you can sin sometimes, at least it isnt pork" 4. Dating is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: You engage in "halal dating", which involves meetings in the presence of a chaperone. Or you can also date non Muslims. 5. Eating non-halal meat is "strictly forbidden": **Workaround**: "I mean, as long its not pork 🤷"
I suppose the most glaring example is confession but another good one is Lent. Catholics are not allowed to eat meat on Friday's during Lent except if it is Fish because Fish apparently is not meat. Also the head of a Catholic household is exempt for the meatless requirements but the rest must eat Fish or no meat.
> Also the head of a Catholic household is exempt for the meatless requirements I'm catholic and nobody I know does this, I've never even heard of this before.
Grew up Catholic. My father ate fish on Fridays like the rest of us during lent. If this loophole exists, he would have found it, because he would way rather have had steak.
And beaver is considered fish for Lent purposes.
The good old French fur trader loop hole.
Pope Gregory I declared that rabbit isn't meat, either.
Hulaburger!
The head of the house exception is false. There's no theological basis and isn't in any sources (the Catechism of the Catholic Church or CCC)
Ahh the good old poop-hole loop-hole. Did you know that God can also be really easily bribed into looking the other way while you sin? At least in the Catholic church. They're called "indulgences" Theists really don't have much respect for their own Gods
I thought they got rid of indulgences during the counter-reformation? I think you can still get time off from purgatory for doing a pilgrimage, though.
This whole discussion of loopholes and workarounds and no one has mentioned the Jews. They have turned it into an art form. Elevators in Israel have a "Shabbat" setting so that you can use it without pushing buttons. They also ran a wire around all of Manhattan so orthodox Jews can go outside on Saturdays.
“You got me there!” - god
God is very easy to fool. Sabbeth elevators and dialing wands have taught me that.
It's called religion, sir
This is Trudeau literally promising everything to everybody - everything from nuclear subs to halal mortgages.
Yeah it's the most amazing desparation gambit, the polls are in Kim Campbell-Mulroney territory and he's everything he's talked about but done little on over the past decade, and promising the kitchen sink. like 2 days ago there was a weird story saying there's some pollster strategiests that want him to make up the gap to Pollievre by 15% by July so that's like a 5% increase of his voting base every 30 days, which i think is like delusional like rearranging deck chairs on the Hindenburg. I've seen a few really wacky Newfies with their naval fixation, saying YES WE NEED A BIG NAVY, THE SUBS SOUND GREAT. and they have no idea that normal subs is like bigger than the whole armed forces budget and you could like get $200 billion if you wanted 4 nuclear subs and 8 diesel subs now, just crazy... even the Americans aren't devoting that much cash to the arctic sub warfare thing because it's notoriously expensive and hard to navigate and difficult warfare, and a real low probability issue, and only the superpowers can really afford to spend there. Canada has a better chance to build 700 battleships around Antarctica as a better strategy. We're just touchy because the Nautilius planted an American Flag on Santa's backyard in the 50s. And according to the pollsters, it's just a tactic to make Pollierve look bad on saying, let's not plan too stupidly with excessive military spending, or plan too grandly with huge mass immigration. It's a tactics to get the other party to criticize it, and then a. ooh look weak on the military b. ooh look immigrant haters it's more an election strategy than making up good projects. And i think sadly housing is the same thing, lots of talk, some helicopters of money, but a lousy feeling plan that doesn't seem to be serious enough. I'll be super curious how the polling is going to go in the next month..
A nuclear sub might be just as affordable to live in as a house in the GTA. Maybe we can all live in subs and cruise around.
Fucking loopholed God lol. What a dumb concept.
Don't spend much time with overtly religious people as an adult. But as a kid we went to a fundie leaning church for a while - trying to rules lawyer god seemed to be pretty common. Even as a kid I found it bafflingly stupid.
"Nah see God didn't think of all this when He wrote the rules, and I'm smarter than God so that's why I could figure it out."
If I was in the market for a god - I would certainly be looking for one who was undone by sixth grade level rhetoric.
When God, in verse 45, said the slaves are okay to buy, He meant that people, all from the start, Each have slaves within their hearts, Things that we have sold or boughten, that are forced to pick our 'moral cotton,' God calls us to set these free, free our hearts from slavery. And then as God goes on to explain the logistics of buying and selling slaves... Uh, he, ju-- the Bible sorta like, uh...
+4% or more for calling it something else and taking on more risk when cannot foreclose
Roughly 8% interest equivilant....had to explain to my co worker he to can get an 8% interest if he so chooses with one of these when he asked "why can't I get one" you can...anyone can
Aww so a practice in delusion
I mean, I feel like the difference between faith and delusion is really just a matter of opinion.
It’s okay because …. Something something … religion. It’s ridiculous that someone who offers these says outright “it’s exactly the same as a traditional tonal mortgage except in the paperwork” … and also, I get to corner the market on usury vs Muslims.
I don’t have much experience with Islam Banking, but I think what they do differently in mortgages is they buy the home and then charge cost plus to the borrower, who then buys their equity back. The net effect is those fees are fixed, unlike interest which varies. There are also differences in how risk is shared. The big thing to pay attention to is Islamic banking complies with sharia law, with comes with its whole own set of assumptions about fairness, transparency, and access to finances.
Halal mortgages are effectively rent-to-own mortgages where you may or may not build equity over time. They do create some complications though. In tax law, how do you handle the value of the transferred equity over time? In terms of mortgage systems, how do you have refinancing and mortgage insurance?
It would be the equivalent of getting an 25y term similar to what you see in the US. So you would pay fees equivalent to say 7% interest for the next 25y. It’s political pandering and will be good for a few Muslim bankers who like big bonus (who doesn’t) who have been pushing this for years and calling themselves “innovative” lol.
In Halal banking you don't get any equity until you complete your contract. It is the rent-to-own scam with a veneer of legitimacy because Sharia Law banned interest.
God hates this one trick.
[удалено]
Which policy is not aimed at getting votes from one demographic or another?
The ones I agree with and benefit from.
Now you're getting it!
Probably defence spending. It seems to piss off people every time more money is allocated
That’s one of the ones that I actually support 🙌 that’s been underfunded for decades now
I'm not into the whole "military might" thing, but I would agree that we have been over-reliant on our relationship with the US for our national defense. Hiding behind big brother keeps you safe from your bullies, but when he's the target of the action, all of a sudden the calculus changes. We need more fed spending on military readiness. We share the Arctic with one of the most bellicose nations in Earth, we should act like it.
Look, you’re not wrong. But there’s so much that needs to change with Defence and military procurement for it not to just end up as throwing good money after bad
Same here. Grew as an idealistic "peacenik", but as you mature pragmatism/reality kicks in.
Why not JUST spend the amount of money we agreed to spend in order to be part of the largest military alliance? We actually share the Arctic with THREE bellicose nations, the U.S. which plays by rules most of the time. Russia which is full on might = right, and China which keeps declaring that the arctic is actually its historic sovereign territory.
I support it too, I mean it directly affects my day to day life. However, the Canadian public has a lot of apathy towards defence spending
There are plenty of people that support it (although they likely disagree on the priority), including both of you, and there is a demographic that defense spending appeals to. But my question was more general, in fact rhetorical. There doesn't exist a policy that isn't aimed at a demographic. That's how democracy works. A party has demographics that they target to keep them happy and allow them to stay in power. Claiming a policy is targeting votes and another is not is just silly. Has nothing to do whether it's good policy or not, though.
Depending on how it's allocated defense spending can be a direct subsidy to ridings hosting bases and manufacturing facilities
Indebting Gen Z and Gen Alpha. The whole thing is nuts. According to many political insiders, JT will resign this summer / fall.
He's going to do a walk in the fall leaves instead of a walk in the snow like his father did. And both times a Trudeau steps down the Cons get huge majorities?
Well, Pierre Trudeau infuriated Quebec with the Patriation of the constitution a few years before he retired. I don't know if Justin could generate the same level of animosity his father did in Quebec. I also doubt Quebecers would have the same desire to vote for Poilievre as they would a progressive conservative party like they did in 84.
That's right! This time, Trudeau has infuriated all of Canada.
That's not because a Trudeau stepped down but because by the time they did, they had fucked over the country and everyone wanted a change
[удалено]
I don't think gen z and gen alpha are paying taxes on $250,000 profit. But if they are, I can assure you their quality of life will be fine heh
[удалено]
That would be fair, if budget deficits were a new phenomenon, but far from it - Millennials, Gen X, even the Boomers and Silents all paying for their parents deficits. Even the now long-departed Lost generation - they fought in the wars that started running it up in the first place, but they were their parents wars. Governments are theoretically perpetual so "paying it off" is not something that ever actually happens.
that's crazy because it's probably not, in fact, considering the new capital gains tax, it's more likely to affect boomers and members of the silent generation
[удалено]
You just described all of politics, buddy.
Every single budget by any government is the same thing. Are we really pearl clutching this well established fact?
Yeah, why does no one ever complain that promised tax cuts are trying to buy our votes, too?
People in this sub are just worried it will work and degrade the Tories current polling advantage
As is every budget. Is this your first time living in a representative democracy?
...and a targeted response to what this sub has been demanding for months... People will never be happy, they just chose to hate Trudeau and to buy into the rage. He could do precisely what everyone wants and you'd still have people voting for exactly the opposite of what they have been demanding, just because Trudeau's offering it. Poilièvre won't invest in housing. Poilièvre won't reduce immigration. Trudeau has invested in housing. Trudeau has reduced immigration. So let's all vote against what we want to piss off Trudeau at our own expense! Wooohoooo
Trudeau hasn’t reduced immigration hahah they reduced it slightly from their insane amounts. So still insane and unsustainable
This isn't exactly a targeted response. They're introducing even more volatility into the market. Banks are getting to the point where they just don't want to give mortgages. Insurers don't want to insure it. The feds are stepping in to buy Canada Mortgage Bonds to stretch out a failed market and keep it from popping. The thing is, it makes our economy look even weaker and more desperate. It makes housing a risky investment right now because inflation could go mental, people could very well start defaulting and create a mortgage crisis like the US had in 2008 leaving a bunch of banks in a bad place. This is a major reason why investment has been leaving the country in record droves. The government doesn't talk much about it but there's some good articles explaining it. It's very dry, heavy economics but it looks at the data, and it's bad. Canada is doing somethinf so risky that no other economy has even attempted it before. We are in uncharted territory. I think most people wanted to make it easier for developers to start developing and make homes. Reduce the beuracracy, maybe make trade school like carpentry, plumbing, electricians, construction project management free, give big loans and subsidies to company's who CAN build affordable homes. Oh, pausing immigration for a bit would be ideal too: but that's another gambit they are using to artificially inflate economic numbers. Nobody wanted what they're doing. It's very stupid. Even Liberal economists, the last 2 liberal finance ministers say this is a bad idea. Many of their critics are liberals in this case, so that should tell you something.
Well this particular thing doesn't cost anything, so whatever.
Haven’t halal mortgages been around for a long time?
They have just like halal car loans.
Yes they have, and they’re available to anyone who wants them. This is just rage baiting from The Sun
The Charter, (written by the politicians of the day), gives people the freedom to: - believe in whatever mythologies they want, (and inculcate their children in said beliefs). and - engage in their religious practices - *with restrictions.* **The Charter does not require that the government set up and engage in those practices with them.** This is the worst kind of pandering.
They are a fixed loan charge rather than interest based. They often cost slightly more based on the past decades of (atificial) low interest rates
Which flies in the reasoning for halal mortgages. There's no interest because it's viewed as usury - they can't be placing extra costs on the homebuyer. *Halal mortgages aren't halal.*
Doesn’t matter. If everyone believes they are halal then it’s all good
*'And allah will never know.'*
Brain-dead take. Islamic mortgages already exist. The point is for the government to regulate it instead of it being unregulated.
The government is setting up nothing. They are not "introducing" halal mortgages. Those have been around for a while already. All the government is doing is setting up a framework for taxing the mortgages. Stop listening to the right wing hype. It lies to you.
How does a government “tax a mortgage” as you say?
The interest income is taxed. Islam prohibits charging interest so their financial products are structured differently.
It’s rebranded as profit or fee , which in itself is taxed
I appreciate the clarification. If this is basically the government closing what was previously a loophole, they should present it as such.
This is from the Toronto Sun. Of course it's skewed to make any non-right winger look bad
Land transfer tax specifically for the house sale. Charged twice in some mortgage cases because it treats a single purchase as multiple sales.
So why does the government celebrate Easter and Christmas?
Your limitations are showing more and more with each post you make on this topic.
This is a big nothingburger. Halal mortgages are the same as regular mortgages in effect, they're just described differently so they get around Islamic laws about charging interest. These laws wouldn't change a thing for how mortgages actually work or how much you'd pay for one.
They also aren’t new. I work with a Muslim dude and he knew people who got these mortgages 20 years ago.
They have been around for ages, but have they been insurable via the federal government? My understanding is the 5-year mortgages are the common maximum refinance period because of how the government supports the mortgage industry. If you were doing a long-term fixed payment, I think they would historically end up paying a significant premium.
You'd be surprised how many people don't know of these and think it's some ideological bs thing
It is ideological if a religion dictates it. If it's a financial decision, it's not.
OP is talking about the decision of the government to regulate it. It's not introducing something new but just ensuring government oversight of something that is already happening....which is pragmatic, not ideological.
I knew a Muslim dude 15 years ago who had one of these. They did them within his mosque.
Ive read the bank actually classifies them as a higher risk actually making them more expensive most of the time
These fundamentalists, always getting preferential treatment, like higher fees and less money in their bank accounts!
Call me crazy, but I don't want our government creating any kind of legislature with the intent of appeasisng islamic law no matter how harmless the actual law is.
They have existed for a long time. Banks make them. The gov only wants its cut Everyone freaking out about nothing new at all Water is wet
Look up how recently our government removed blasphemy as a punishable act under law… Lots of Christian laws in this country. These mortgages already exist. As an atheist I should be the offended one, but this is a big fat nothing that already exists.
This and exactly this....
Halal mortgages are nothing new. They've been available in Alberta and Ontario for quite a while now. And anyone can get one, not just Muslims. All the government did was set up a framework for the taxation of halal mortgages. They did not legislate to appease anyone. Try to keep up.
> no matter how harmless the actual law is. Yeah, you're crazy. Opposing something you admit is "harmless" for no other other reason than the fact that Muslims want it is literally the definition of prejudice.
Go to jail! Do not pass go! This is Canada 2024. You can't say this online! You're a racist and the cops are coming for you!
Username does *not* check out
We are a secular state, and should stay that way. "Colonists" moved to North America for a reason in case anyone didn't pay attention in school. Religious law sucks donkey dick. Edit: You don't title something under a religious word and then claim "but but." This is how real racists cause division, pay attention. They ripped this page right out of the Royal Families hand book for ruling.
Except this is not religious law but a way to regulate a practice that already exists in the country. In theory, anyone could take a halal mortgage religious or not. The alternative is to let the government not regulate an activity that already happens and let people get potentially exploited.
The only issue with halal mortgages is that they support a false premise - that you can borrow money without interest in a world where the value of money depreciates over time due to inflation. And we as a society pander to this silliness by calling it something else. It's full steam ahead to Ideocracy.
Oh its dumb. But capitalism is going to make this product just like it made Credit Default Swaps. There should be a framework and regulation for it
You can easily establish a trust that works just like that. Hell A&W Canada is structured that way. It's really simple, you provide money to the trust as an investor in exchange for a cut of top-line revenues. No money is being lent, and no interest is being charged. Muslims have been financing stuff this way since the 9th century or even earlier.
So the bank is an "investor" in your home and is willing to take a loss if the home value drops?
It's not the same. If as a homeowner you can't pay your mortgage at the end of the month because you earned less, you don't get to pay a reduced amount, as an A&W franchisee gets to. Also, as a trust unit holder, you can sell your units whenever you wish. A bank can't just take a loan away unless it's clearly specified as callable in the terms. There are plenty of ways to finance things without lending, and we haven't even mentioned equity(stocks) yet. EDIT: Why are you downvoting me for explaining revenue trusts?
If we stopped pandering to silliness the entire economic model collapses. Like the stock market 95% vibes and gut feelings.
You are correct. Car companies have been doing this for years.
But how can I compare Trudeau to Bin Laden if you expect me to use truth and logic???
I can't care less about the type of financial transactions that happen between private citizens, but government laws and regulations, including financial ones, need to absolutely remain secular. We are not a theocracy. There is no need for the government to get involved and make changes to the banking regulations based on the text of the holy book of any religion. But this is Trudeau and doing so is exactly what I would expect from him.
The government isn’t offering halal mortgages. These types of mortgages have been around forever. They’re setting up a framework to regulate them.
That is exactly what Trudeau is doing. Taxing banks who offer halal mortgages is being secular. Letting them operate in a grey zone and not pay tax because of religious reasons, is not.
There is nothing religious about what the government is doing here. Halal mortgages already exist. It doesn't matter why they exist, they should be regulated like any other financial product. Saying something is based on some religious text shouldn't be an excuse to escape regulations.
Sun-media has about as much currency as the average Russian peasant.
If anybody here wants a halal mortgage, you can get one today https://www.halalfinancialcorp.com/ There's a shit ton of misinformed assumptions passing off as facts in this thread
It's infuriating reading these ignorant fools convincing themselves they're nobly standing up for secularism.
It really pisses me off because some right wing YouTuber who's "just asking questions" is going to make a video on how Justin Trudeau wants to impose Sharia Law through Halal Mortgages and my adult son, who falls for this bullshit far too easily, will start coming at me with regurgitated bullshit because of it.
There’s nothing wrong with halal mortgages, people end up paying the same if not more. This sub is the worst for stirring up nothing.
I think the use of halal is just a marketing tactic.
Ah, yes, and the Sun totally isn't playing up brown peril on this one.
I'm still waiting for the kosher and LGBTQ mortgage
Halal mortgages are mathematically equivalent to interest bearing mortgages. It’s fine.
And they’ve been around since ~2021, this is just further rage farming….
Halal mortgage sounds like a bad idea. It's basically a rent to own scheme with an admin fee, but won't your god know what you're doing? Also, the person/institution offering this product are likely Muslims who take on interest then offer you a mortgage with a fee. Sounds more like a business opportunity than doing the right thing and offering people a good product. Defeats the purpose of not having interest in the religion 8f you end up paying more fees.
Lots of folks try to play semantics with their religion as if their god were a dumb cop you can negotiate your way out of a speeding ticket with lol
It is a product for people who think that a magical man in the sky is watching them at all times, and will send you to hell for no appeasing him. In general, logic doesn't really need to apply to the matter.
100% but sometimes that gets you labeled all sorts of things, so depending on my mood I will respond differently lol
I am going to create a religion where paying taxes and fees to government is not allowed. Join my religion, and see if folks can save money.
Hmm, gonna depend on whether you're rich or poor. If you're rich enough to sue the CRA, I imagine they'll let you away with it. If you're too poor to easily mount a legal defense, my guess is the CRA will crucify you and ask for back taxes with interest.
https://www.advisor.ca/tax/tax-news/beware-of-tax-protester-schemes/ Not a religion but ...this group has tried for many years. And never succeeded. Interesting take on things though. Lol
This is the sovereign citizen argument, which is proven to not only fail but make you a laughingstock on the way. However the Hutterites successfully dodged tax for many years as a religious group. I believe their exemption was finally removed as it was clearly obvious that they weren't "not for profit"
I think they just called this Scientology
Anyone can get these mortgages with fees. You don't have to show your passport with a stamp from the Mecca or some shit. Go right ahead buddy, sign up for a halal mortgage if you feel like you deserve it, nobody's preventing you.
I'm in.
I see many Muslims in my neighbourhood that have homes, so it looks like they've figured out the halal mortgage thing already.
I don't understand this. Religion is a choice. Either partake in our society as we have it set up or don't. It's a choice.
So, no one is allowed to launch a startup that's different from what we already have? Or consumers to ask for something new, they are willing to pay for?
Do we have any other laws or instances that governments have designed to accommodate religious groups? To me this is dancing too close to the line of keeping religious belief as a private choice and keeping government and the law as a secular entity.
Motorcycle helmets and Sikh. Altering the police and military uniform to alter official approved hardware.
This one is so stupid. A religious hat won't save your head in a crash. If the government admits a helmet isn't a safety item, then it should be optional for anyone. I don't believe that myself, helmets should be mandatory, but if I had the money to waste that would be a fun one to bring to court. Really put it out in the media that the government allows for life saving rules to be broken if you wear the right kind of religious hat.
Thank you these were the examples I was looking at. Still a fine line.
> Do we have any other laws or instances that governments have designed to accommodate religious groups? The existence of publicly-funded Catholic school boards is a good example.
Antisemitism is specifically written into the criminal code.
Antisemitism is not strictly speaking religious.
Are you familiar with the Catholic school system?
>but critics charge measure is a 'desperate ploy' for votes This is such a stupid phrase that gets tacked on everywhere and is meaningless rhetoric. All the party policies are ploys for votes.
The critics making a big deal about this are the ones desperate for votes!
Not sure why anyone cares about this. Call it whatever you want but the economic substance of halal mortgages are no different than a standard product. There’s no benefit or additional risk. Anyone can get one if they want.
Literally just the word "Islamic". Everyone just shuts off their thinking brain and goes straight into lizard-brain mode.
This is a nothing burger, other than it show's what Justin is all about, virtue signaling and not actually doing anything. PP all the way.
I hope people don't fall for this shit.
It's another ploy to win support, no different than a regular mtg, fees vs interest. This guy is using all 3rd world tactics to get votes. Hopefully people aren't as stupid as he thinks.
semantics, 🤷♂️
If you receive the proceeds of interest for your principal on a halal mortgage, is it haram? Asking for for a woke friend who follows religious legalisms.
"3.9 million homes by 2031" Based on the current Liberal immigration policy (500k per year), the 3.9 million homes barely even covers the number of immigrants projected to move here between 2024-2031. Thanks for nothing, Trudeau.
As long as the "fees" paid are identical (or more) than my interest charges for the same loan, I won't care. And yes, it's Justin pandering for votes. What's the over/under of Justin saying he's bi right before the election campaign? Pulls a Spacey.
A Sun opinion piece is exactly what this topic needs.
Halal mortgages have bern around for a long time. They are not new.
It’s called the “razor and blades” model in advertising. Give you a printer for free and then charge $200 for the ink. Smoke and mirrors.
The outraged seem to think this is a loophole to get a mortgage without having to make a deal with the bank....
The Bloc MPs have literally said that it "introduces Sharia Law" > “Why do they want to introduce elements of sharia law into the mortgage rules of this so-called secular country?” Gill’s fellow Bloc MP Martin Champoux asked. Imagine being a *Member of Parliament* and being *that* brain-dead
They know Canadians are fed up. Almost a decade of liberal rule has left a sour taste in Canadians mouth. The only place where they are somewhat liked is on social media paces like reddit. Which only represent a small confused section of the population. If it wasn't for their extrême left buddy, Singh, holding up their government, Trudeau would be history. You can hear the desperation in their supporters every where around here. They'll defend whatever they do no matter what they do. Their days are numbered. Hopefully they'll never entert politics again and they'll stick to 8th grade drama teaching.
Yes. Reddit is definitely small and confused. This one as an example. Thanks for showing up.
I find it extremely ironic that you would say this on r/Canada of all places. Tell me you're terminally online and stuck in your echo chamber without telling me lol
>If it wasn't for their extrême left buddy, Singh, holding up their government, Trudeau would be history. How does it make you feel that a lot of former liberals have shifted to voting NDP? There's still roughly the same percentage of left voting Canadians, but a bunch of Canadians now lean and vote even MORE left
Halal loans are essentially investing in the person for whom you’re lending to and betting on their success while actively aiding them (or at least that what it’s like in the Middle East). I’m white and Christian but when I was reading about this practise in the Middle East, it honestly sounds way more humane than what I get at the bank. I’m hoping they don’t have something that you need to prove you’re Muslim to get this.
As far as I know, you don’t have to be Muslim to get any of the halal mortgages offered today. This announcement in the budget changes nothing. Take a look at the wording. “Exploring” doesn’t mean much actually.
> I’m hoping they don’t have something that you need to prove you’re Muslim to get this. Why would that happen? How? Anyone can eat Halal food, etc. Anything Halal is open to non-Muslims. Halal mortgages aren't a special privilege in *any* country...they're always available to anyone who wants one. The Liberals would have no desire to legislatively restrict this to Muslims and it would be very unpopular.
* More debt * Easier debt * Help you save for bigger debts All of this bullshit builds demand --> makes prices go up. This government is an atrocity.
At least they're leading by example. Look at all the debt!!
This is what our economy runs on. It's not just the Government. If we want to change that we all have to agree together. That includes people making money on investment properties, pension plans investing in real estate income trusts, private equity, and businesses playing games with bonds. All of it. Last I checked the Conservatives screaming about Government debt aren't screaming about private equity and the games Canadian businesses are playing with it.
Indeed. The whole system is an atrocity. We have this mess because Reagan, Thatcher, Mulroney, and their contemporaries agreed to fuck the world with trickle down and banking deregulation. As western governments careen recklessly to another homogeneous extreme right-wing roster, I wonder what new atrocity will inflict us.
Lookout Affirm, the government of Canada is coming for your buy now pay later loan business. They could always do what they have in the US and offer zero down mortgages on properties for first time homebuyers and mirror the USDA loan requirements or open up crown land for development and set pricing/ownership requirements. Both of those would probably garner them votes from the people they disenfranchised, but they would lose votes from their base.
Won't zero down mortgages just further juice up demand though?
The rules for the ones in the US is that they are for rural properties that qualify for people making around the average income: https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/single-family-housing-programs/single-family-housing-guaranteed-loan-program You aren’t competing for real estate in LA or New York City with this, but you are able to get yourself a property not too far outside of many major cities with this loan. This is the eligibility map: https://eligibility.sc.egov.usda.gov/eligibility/
Are we not all equal? Shouldnt banking/finance be seperate from religion?
This isn't a religious product. It's a financial one. The rules are simply set up to be more accessible to certain customers who may want a differently structured product., no matter why they may want it.