If there was a provincial election held today...

[CompletelyNumb]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Pretty much. Alberta's success or failure is heavily tied to out of positive hands. First it was agriculture, now O&G.

If only championing for "diversity" could yield alternative industries that both employ similar numbers, provide more than liveable incomes, and contribute to the GDP as much as oil has.

I'm 100% behind any plan for the province to get behind new initiatives, I just know it needs to be funded somehow. We should be leveraging our oil far more than we have in the past. That was one of Alberta's biggest failures these last few decades I think. (With every party in power)

Little too late now.

As per the poll, I am politically conservative. I don't align with the UCP, but no existing opposition could sway my vote.

[Brent.ff]

Ok so remember when everyone was like ‘oh aimco losing a few billion, no biggy, look at the market!’ Yet the CPP still makes a profit:
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5584730

Fuck these guys if they try to move CPP provincially

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ok so remember when everyone was like ‘oh aimco losing a few billion, no biggy, look at the market!’ Yet the CPP still makes a profit:
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5584730

Fuck these guys if they try to move CPP provincially

Yup, plus thats to March 31st which is below where the current market is. The dow jones is up 13% vs March 31st (though obviously CPP isn't just invested in that one market). Turns out when you don't bet it all on oil you can still do pretty good.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ok so remember when everyone was like ‘oh aimco losing a few billion, no biggy, look at the market!’ Yet the CPP still makes a profit:
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5584730

Fuck these guys if they try to move CPP provincially

But Quebec does it, so we'll have as much sway politically as they do if we increase our civil service to manage these things the federal government is already doing, because that's how it works.

[Masked Bandit]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ok so remember when everyone was like ‘oh aimco losing a few billion, no biggy, look at the market!’ Yet the CPP still makes a profit:
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5584730

Fuck these guys if they try to move CPP provincially

So a gain of 2.9% is supposed to be impressive? You could match that by putting all your money if Tangerine savings account for crying out loud!

[Tik-Tok]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So a gain of 2.9% is supposed to be impressive? You could match that by putting all your money if Tangerine savings account for crying out loud!

Better than the loss that Aimco took

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So a gain of 2.9% is supposed to be impressive? You could match that by putting all your money if Tangerine savings account for crying out loud!

Not sure if you're being serious.

If so, look at the broader market performance and then reconsider.

RE: your savings account, do you think that type of option would exist for a $410+ billion fund? lol

As an aside, CPP is performing pretty strongly considering its strategic objective, but I question if it needs 1,200+ employees and 10 offices. Surely some, if not most, of that can be trimmed down... no?

[Brent.ff]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So a gain of 2.9% is supposed to be impressive? You could match that by putting all your money if Tangerine savings account for crying out loud!

You’re kidding me right? Let me know how your investment strategy worked out in the same period, let alone Aimcos loss of 4 bill which I believe you stated was ‘anyone should be thrilled to be down only 3%). Aimco did a shit job, and the UCP threatening the feds to take their CPP to manage should terrify people.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You’re kidding me right? Let me know how your investment strategy worked out in the same period, let alone Aimcos loss of 4 bill which I believe you stated was ‘anyone should be thrilled to be down only 3%). Aimco did a shit job, and the UCP threatening the feds to take their CPP to manage should terrify people.

Well it is unprecedented times right now, so I wouldn't get wildly hung up by a temporary market loss right now. Whether Aimco would be the right manager for the fund or not is a topic of its own. But having a smaller less corrupt government managing things should in theory be better than the feds managing it. At the least those astronomical overhead costs should drop significantly.

[dirtsniffer]

I mean any government will likely consume all the same over head cause that's what they do. But we have the youngest, and highest earning workforce out of any province, so we could likely design a system to better suite us.

[kertejud2]

Some fiscal geniuses here thinking that paying people to do a job the federal government is already paying people to do will be more efficient and result in less overhead for taxpayers.

'If we had our own Department of Redundancy Department we could save on redundancies!'


EDIT: Because people love numbers, even if Alberta's revenue department was less than half the cost of Quebec's proportional to population, we'd be looking at adding ~2,500 provincial government employees and over $250M to the provincial budget, without adding any actual revenue to pay for it. Add to that because the system would be so efficient, the corresponding operational savings in the federal system from having to deal with a province less of people (assuming there were any, but that's an interesting level of optimism from people so adamant about the inefficiency of the system) wouldn't cover it, so Albertans will be paying for two sets of civil servants providing the same service (three if you want to throw in the equalization payments).

Sheer lunacy.

[ExtraSlow]

I think a more accurate way to estimate the size required would be to take (costs to manage) / ($ in assets) for current AIMCO, CPP, QPP etc. Hell, could call it a MER like commercial mutual funds?

I think taking a snapshot of performance for ANY time period and trying to back-calculate management efficiency and skill is madness. You wouldn't/shouldn't do that for the mutual funds your bank sells.


Although, maybe dissolving CPP and putting it all in VGRO would make sense..... Hmmmm......

[killramos]

Alberta taking over CPP has little to do with saving money and more to do with aligning the pension and premiums with the realities of Albertas populace relative to the rest of Canada. It’s about getting as far away from the unsustainable clusterfuck that is CPP as soon as possible, CPPIB is a great investment/PE firm. Doesn’t change the fact that CPP is never going to work long term. Cherry on the top is the people we are paying to managing it will at least be in Alberta, paying Alberta taxes, contributing to albertas economy. We are paying for those people either way, they might as well be here.

I don’t think I know anyone my age or younger who thinks CPP will be around in any real form by the time we retire. Certainly not with premiums at their current order of magnitude.

AIMCO made a bad bet last deal and it made the news , BFD, shit happens. Historical performance of a fund manager is no prediction of future performance. Thats investment management 101. That goes for good or bad.

[arcticcat522]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Alberta taking over CPP has little to do with saving money and more to do with aligning the pension and premiums with the realities of Albertas populace relative to the rest of Canada. It’s about getting as far away from the unsustainable clusterfuck that is CPP as soon as possible, CPPIB is a great investment/PE firm. Doesn’t change the fact that CPP is never going to work long term. Cherry on the top is the people we are paying to managing it will at least be in Alberta, paying Alberta taxes, contributing to albertas economy. We are paying for those people either way, they might as well be here.

I don’t think I know anyone my age or younger who thinks CPP will be around in any real form by the time we retire. Certainly not with premiums at their current order of magnitude.

AIMCO made a bad bet last deal and it made the news , BFD, shit happens. Historical performance of a fund manager is no prediction of future performance. Thats investment management 101. That goes for good or bad.

Nailed it

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

...

I don’t think I know anyone my age or younger who thinks CPP will be around in any real form by the time we retire. Certainly not with premiums at their current order of magnitude...

"Everyone" has been saying this and believing this for at least 30 years. When do we find out who the fuck is right? because a few decades sure make "everyone" look wrong.

The counter argument I've always heard is "the higher population bubble in the contributing segment end up supporting those in the retired segment".

I don't know, either way. I'm just concerned that it's become so commonplace to say "oh that'll never be around when we need it" that no one thinks about what they're saying anymore.

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Alberta taking over CPP has little to do with saving money and more to do with aligning the pension and premiums with the realities of Albertas populace relative to the rest of Canada. It’s about getting as far away from the unsustainable clusterfuck that is CPP as soon as possible, CPPIB is a great investment/PE firm. Doesn’t change the fact that CPP is never going to work long term. Cherry on the top is the people we are paying to managing it will at least be in Alberta, paying Alberta taxes, contributing to albertas economy. We are paying for those people either way, they might as well be here.

I don’t think I know anyone my age or younger who thinks CPP will be around in any real form by the time we retire. Certainly not with premiums at their current order of magnitude.

AIMCO made a bad bet last deal and it made the news , BFD, shit happens. Historical performance of a fund manager is no prediction of future performance. Thats investment management 101. That goes for good or bad.

AIMCO made a hilariously irresponsible bet, not just a "bad bet". Way overweight in O&G, some of it almost certainly for political reasons, and ignored the trends in the broader market. You don't bring ideology to your investment strategy when you're managing the pension of thousands of people.

But they did, and they lost a big chunk of change because of it. Very stupid. I'm not sure how anyone would find that acceptable in their portfolio manager.

RE: your 100% incorrect thoughts on the long-term viability of CPP, consider that it is audited every 3 years to review and ask that exact question. It needs to see around 5% ROI per year to beat inflation and meet its obligations. It's 10-year historical performance is around 10%, and it is fully funded to meet its obligations for the next 75 years.

The above information, by the way, is very easy to find. You probably should have looked into that shit before posting, no?

I am very curious, though, as to why you believe that "CPP was never going to work" and why you think it's an "unsustainable clusterfuck", especially considering that the evidence and data don't support your argument. So I'd love to hear where those claims come from.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nailed it

Not even close. Dude missed by a country mile and you went along for the ride lol.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I mean any government will likely consume all the same over head cause that's what they do. But we have the youngest, and highest earning workforce out of any province, so we could likely design a system to better suite us.

Oh yea? You mean, a provincially run investment organization? Something like AIMCO, perhaps? lol

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well it is unprecedented times right now, so I wouldn't get wildly hung up by a temporary market loss right now. Whether Aimco would be the right manager for the fund or not is a topic of its own. But having a smaller less corrupt government managing things should in theory be better than the feds managing it. At the least those astronomical overhead costs should drop significantly.

The MER tied to CPP is around 0.7%, and while it's not cheap by the context of index-tracking ETFs, that is hardly "astronomical overhead". I do agree that overhead can and should be reduced - I don't think CPP needs ~1,300 employees and 10 offices, for example - but let's not venture into the land of hyperbole here.

Also, your "smaller, less corrupt" government totally fucked up this past quarter. I fail to see how that's a superior option.

But hey, ideology over ROI. I hope you didn't actually have all your investments in O&G because of it, because the past few years have not been kind to you and the future is looking pretty uncertain as well.

- - - Updated - - -

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't know, either way. I'm just concerned that it's become so commonplace to say "oh that'll never be around when we need it" that no one thinks about what they're saying anymore.

This is exactly the case. Nobody has done any due diligence on their position re: CPP and it's pretty obvious in this thread who needs an education.

[sabad66]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"Everyone" has been saying this and believing this for at least 30 years. When do we find out who the fuck is right? because a few decades sure make "everyone" look wrong.

The counter argument I've always heard is "the higher population bubble in the contributing segment end up supporting those in the retired segment".

I don't know, either way. I'm just concerned that it's become so commonplace to say "oh that'll never be around when we need it" that no one thinks about what they're saying anymore.

And if it's true that CPP won't be around when we retire, what makes anyone think this theoretical Alberta-CPP would somehow be more sustainable long term?

[Brent.ff]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Way overweight in O&G, some of it almost certainly for political reasons, and ignored the trends in the broader market. You don't bring ideology to your investment strategy when you're managing the pension of thousands of people.

This is the main issue of mine with the UCP and why people shouldnt want AIMCO to touch a cent of CPP. UCP has shown time and time again to bet on potential losers (KXL is definitely a full on "bet" on the US election). You can't tell me they wouldnt lean on AIMCO to send some investments that way as well..

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This is the main issue of mine with the UCP and why people shouldnt want AIMCO to touch a cent of CPP. UCP has shown time and time again to bet on potential losers (KXL is definitely a full on "bet" on the US election). You can't tell me they wouldnt lean on AIMCO to send some investments that way as well..

Oh yea, the same people upset that Trudeau "blew" $9B+ on a pipeline (that is actually being built as we speak) lauded the UCP's $1.5B "investment" in a pipeline where they don't control the outcome. If Biden gets in, kiss that $1.5B goodbye... and the pipeline along with it.

Regardless, it blows my mind that people would advocate for an Albertan government agency managing their pension vs. a federal one. I don't see the improvement. I can see the logic in moving to private management of your pension funds (IE- you contribute the same amount per cheque as you currently do for CPP, but you choose how those funds are managed, though I'd advocate that self management be taken off the table and instead that you would need to use either private management or vetted funds).

Replacing one "corrupt" public entity with another "somewhat less corrupt" (allegedly) entity is assinine. If you're going to upend the system, why wouldn't you go private?

[Masked Bandit]

I'm not for or against a provincial vs. federal pension fund but you can't look at a tight snapshot like a few months or even a year and pass judgement on an overall investment strategy and effectiveness. To my knowledge we don't know what AIMCO did overall for the same time frame that CPP reports (year end of March 31st) and if I really think about it I don't know that over the next 100 years taking a public pension fund to a provincial level vs. federal is a terribly great idea anyway but come on, does anyone really think that CPP is some industry beacon of perfection when it comes to efficiency, management and long term returns vs. the broad market? No...bloody...way. The fact that in their press release CPP chose to include the new contributions of $5.5B to fatten up the sensationalized headline of "CPP adds $17B to assets" is political spin at best and bordering on intentionally misleading it's customer (the tax payers) at worst.

I don't think CPP will go broke, they'll just raise the mandatory contributions from the taxpayer but to take the position that the CPP is beyond equal is just foolish.