Originally Posted by BlackArcher101
My viewpoint from a non-finance average joe and likely one of the progressives he's talking about.
"There is a take on an AB Pension Plan I have NOT seen in the debate square"
Pretty sure this take has already been said? Jerbs?
"In that vein and if AIMCO managed the money in a truly independent (governance) and effective way (outcomes), then we would be crazy to not want to have those jobs based here"
What are "those" jobs exactly? How many jobs will be needed to manage the APP? How big is AIMCO now and how big will they become?
"Knowledge economy clusters"
Had to look this one up. Would this really be enough to spur on a local knowledge based financial economy to the point we could compete outside of Alberta? Would we accept less returns in our fund to create this economy?
"The larger the Assets Under Management (AUM) in an entity like AIMCO or CPP, there are multiple obvious benefits
1) Scale of overhead costs which reduces management fees, net performance over time
2) Attraction of global financial talent.
3) A financial cluster attracts secondary and tertiary innovation and investment opportunities"
All this reads to me is we'll leave a massive fund that has all these benefits, to make a smaller fund, all because points 2 and 3 then support alberta not toronto or another city.
"but if everything was equal, we would hugely benefit having the capital controlled and centred here over downtown Toronto or Ottawa"
Why does it matter where it's controlled? He fails to show what this huge benefit is, other than some knowledge economy.
"I am really trying to understand why we WOULDN'T want to bring this business home for Albertans benefit, especially Edmonton's."
Because he dismisses nearly everything else, by saying
"if AIMCO managed the money in a truly independent"
- Big IF
"No matter the size of the amount that would be transferred to Alberta control, (that's just math and will be easy to determine)"
- The amount doesn't matter? But he alluded that it's the size of the fund that will make the difference.
"I recognize that there is a perceived political risk of government interference in investment decisions, so that risk must not be allowed to come to fruition"
- Is it really perceived at this point? I almost expect it. Do we rely on the UCP to create a law that prevents themselves from directing funds? Would they even obey it? We know they skirt rules and there is no accountability anymore.
"We have to talk about this as part of the debate, because lord knows the political flamethrowers are on full blast against the idea, and not strangely it seems to be from the bureaucratic classes, unions, citizens who for some reason trust the Federal CPP framework and not one we would have greater citizen control over. IMO it's mostly political spin and if governance and independence policy was maintained, bring the money home."
For some reason trust the Federal CPP.... Um, do we have a reason not to?
One that would have greater citizen control over.... How exactly does an APP give citizens greater control? Because federally our party doesn't get voted in but provincially it does? But that shouldn't matter, if the independence part of AIMCO he touts is true.
"bring the money home." Sounds like TBA verbage. Money would be coming home only if it's invested within Alberta, which I rather have a very diverse fund investing in other places as well.
"We as Albertans have disproportionately greater say in the leadership of our Province than we do of our Country. Central Canada has the power in federal electoral politics. "
Ah yes, so that's the point then. What does this matter if we truly want our leadership to not be making decisions in our fund?
"Hold our government accountable, to be sure, but don't just hand it over to another level of government we have much less ability to hold accountable"
So the big final say here is not jobs, not economy, but we simply can't trust those damn feds because we don't have any say in the federal election and can't hold them accountable. Someone tell me what's wrong with the CPP again that we have to hold the feds accountable to?
"Like I said. If everything is equal - it makes sense to me to have those assets closer to home and where we have greater political control over."
OH BOY, the whole point is to NOT have political control over, you know, the thing he alluded to earlier on?
"I want a pension manager that is just concerned about making $ for the pension fund not funnelling it to govt projects. If AB businesses aren’t making $ for the benefit of pensioners, then it needs to be invested elsewhere. The point is make $ for retirees to live comfortably.
That's always the point."
If that's always the point, then we should be happy where we are currently with the CPP.
Bottom line for me, is the CPP has only one goal, and that is to provide pensions to Canadians. Not prop up jobs or an economy. That's it, I want it to be there when I retire, and currently there is more risk for my pension by leaving the CPP. I see no need to rock the boat.
|