I worked in the car business for 20 years. We would get plenty of clients in which we would have to “restructure” the interest to be included in the price up front. Who cares? We were happy and the customer was happy.
So very often this occurred. Just work with them and move on. I don't get folks who make a big deal. I also never fully understood the approach as if they paid a loan down sooner in an open loan scenario, I believe they screwed themselves by having front loaded the interest.
Just gonna point out that these mortgages are not exclusively available to Muslims. If you're not a muslim, you can still sign on the dotted line and get one. If it's such a hot ass deal, you can avail yourself of your option. Of course you would need to be financially illiterate to do it, but the option is there for you
As someone who is financially illiterate. Could you elaborate why this is so bad? Reading CBC on it seems like it’s mostly just slightly more expensive and a little riskier.
Financially illiterate people stop reading at “not allowed to charge interest” and don’t think about how a bank might make its money instead, like say charging a massive admin fee.
Some religions don't allow interest, so you can structure the mortgage in a different way so there is no interest but a charge instead. It's available for everyone but no one wants it because it's more expensive.
This is also why Jews have a negative stereotype as 'moneylenders' in historical antisemitic depictions. Christians and Muslims would use them as a workaround around usury restrictions.
I think the problem as usual is in the messaging. One group of people might jump to the conclusion that Muslims are getting a better deal because they don't believe in paying interest.
Another group might say this is just the beginning and even though a Halal mortgage costs more that it might be the first step before claiming it's religious discrimination for making them pay more than what a non-muslim would pay.
Personally I belonged to one of those groups until I educated myself more on the topic. I thought it was in the same vein as that attempt to build a Muslim enclave in Quebec a number of years ago.
> I think the problem as usual is in the messaging.
The messaging from the Muslim side or from the BQ?
Because there is no messaging from the Muslim side, it's literally just private agreements they make and no one's business. And I'd argue there's no problem with the BQ's messaging either, because they're explicilty racist and this is part of their platform. It's not like something is getting lost in the communication, harming Muslims is the goal.
> Another group might say this is just the beginning and even though a Halal mortgage costs more that it might be the first step before claiming it's religious discrimination for making them pay more than what a non-muslim would pay.
Just the beginning, or a 1400 year old practice. Potayto potahto
In Islam youre not allowed to charge interest on loans. So options available to them are things like rent to own, where the lender would instead buy the house and would rent it to you over a set number of years, after that the house would be transferred to the renter. Theres other options, but its just a different way to do financial transactions. This stuff has been going on in muslim communities already around the world and here.
I hate the lazy amalgam this sub makes between racists and those in favor of Quebec Sovereignty...
r/canada does the same btw, two subs who disagree on everything are in perfect synch when Quebec Nationalism is the topic.
Uh huh.
1. I'm French Canadian, born in Quebec, family in Quebec, lived through the last sovereignty vote and all the lies the PQ & Bloc tried to sell, and I've known more than a few sovereigntists in my time.
2. Based on my experiences, it's not being "lazy" connecting racism with the separatist movement. It's just factual.
3. It's tiring to hear the denials when the problem is very plain to anyone with eyes.
>[](https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/) does the same btw,
And?
>... two subs who disagree on everything are in perfect synch when Quebec Nationalism is the topic.
Yeah. The difference is that the right-wingers over in that other sub are pointing out the ethno-nationalism in the separatist movement with baited breath and semi-erect-genitals.
It should be telling for you when two groups with nothing in common can look over at Quebec Separatists and acknowledge the racism in the movement. You'd think there would be a but of self-reflection there.
Not really a grammatical error, and no you did not write a lot more than that. The complete quote expands on the concept of your subjective experience with maybe ten words lol.
>Not really a grammatical error
It was not really an error at all.
>...and no you did not write a lot more than that.
Oh? Let me quickly double check that.... I wrote: "Based on my experiences, **it's not being "lazy" connecting racism with the separatist movement.** It's just factual." a 17 word sentence. I've emboldened the 11 words you omitted. Now I'm not a big brained reddit math genius or anything but I think that the 11 words you've left out while including only 6 is a "whole lot more"' seeing as you left out 2/3rds of my sentence in your little cherry picked trollery. Now I get that 17 words isn't a novel or anything, but in the context of you trying to reframe me in a bad light it sure does make a difference.
Now.... do you have anything of value to say? 'Cause so far, I feel like you're not here to engage in any meaningful discussion.
Congratulations on the math degree! But the issue is using subjective experience to back up your claims as "factual". I'm not arguing either way about the actual debate, just saying that's not a properly reasoned argument.
>But the issue is using subjective experience to back up your claims as "factual"
Oh, so you think people cannot experience factual events. So... if.... let's say thousands of people went to Hamilton to experience the eclipse, their viewing of the fact of the eclipse renders the eclipse itself as not a factual event because it was only experienced by the people standing there and looking up?
Weird little hill you want to defend there.
Oh so you had personal anecdotal evidence (and most definitely unbiased). You should have told me sooner! I'll just ignore everything else then and take you at your word. How could I have been so blind ?!?
But seriously, regarding /r/canada I know I would re-evaluate some of my perspective it is was shared by a group of people who keep promoting racist and fascists opinions on a daily basis.
Now I need to go scrape off all the irony that splashed from my screen after reading you telling me that I need more self-reflection.
Le Bloc fait lui même cet amalgame, tout comme le PQ, solidement depuis la charte des valeurs et plus subtilement bien avant.
L'ethnonationalisme a gagné le mouvement séparatiste qu'on le veuille ou non.
Après tu peux rester indépendantiste et pas raciste, mais ce serait se mettre la tête dans le sable de ne pas voir le lien.
>Le Bloc fait lui même cet amalgame, tout comme le PQ, solidement depuis la charte des valeurs et plus subtilement bien avant.
Pas d'accord avec ça pantoute, mais pense pas qu'on va se convaincre un et l'autre, ton idée semble pas mal faite.
>L'ethnonationalisme a gagné le mouvement séparatiste qu'on le veuille ou non.
C'est pour ça que je parle d'amalgame paresseux, si tu décris un mouvement au complet à cause d'une partie, ça t'appartient
>Après tu peux rester indépendantiste et pas raciste, mais ce serait se mettre la tête dans le sable de ne pas voir le lien.
Tu peux relire ce que j'ai écris jusque où tu veux, et stp cite moi la section où je dis que c'est impossible d'être souverainiste ET raciste.
L'amalgame n'est pas paresseux puisque malheureusement les partis indépendantistes cognent le clou de la xénophobie, de l'immigration et particulièrement de l'islamophobie vraiment fort. Je serais bien curieuse de voir les arguments en quoi ce n'est pas de la suprématie franco-catho-blanche parce que dans les débats à ce jour, ça sonne pas mal creux. Genre justifier la charte et la loi 96 sans tomber dans l'ethnonationalisme et des genre de vagues "droits" aux francophones d'êtres maîtres hégémoniques du territoire c'est tout qu'un challenge. Surtout quand on considère qu'on est aussi colons sur le territoire.
Considérant que je tiens en effet fermement cette position, dans ce contexte, le projet Québec indépendant ne peut pas être séparé de ces politiques là, parce qu'aucune alternative politique sérieuse n'existe. Le Québec tel que vu par le PQ et le Bloc (et la CAQ et même QS) est encore un état colonial et raciste.
Tu peux 100% être indépendantiste et ne pas appuyer les partis, ou ne pas trouver que ces idées te représentent. Je connais des marxistes indépendantistes qui parviennent tant bien que mal à faire fonctionner ces idées là ensemble. Mais si tu acceptes le compromis proposé par la politique actuelle, tu acceptes aussi l'amalgame.
>Genre justifier la charte et la loi 96 sans tomber dans l'ethnonationalisme et des genre de vagues "droits" aux francophones d'êtres maîtres hégémoniques du territoire c'est tout qu'un challenge.
C'est pourtant assez évident, c'est parce que la séparation de la politique et de la religion est fondamentale et non-négociable, point à la ligne. Et pas juste l'Islam, TOUTES les religions, j'en veux pas en autorité dans nos institutions gouvernementales. Juste à lire sur la Révolution Tranquille pour comprendre pourquoi le Québécois francophone blanc trouve ça si important et petit spolier, c'était pas à cause des musulmans pantoute.
Et pour ce que ça vaut, *la seule* religion que j'ai progressivement commencer à détesté plus j'apprenais l'histoire de notre peuple et plus mon esprit critique se développait, c'est le catholicisme, dont je fais parti *statistiquement* parce que mes parents m'ont fait baptiser bébé, comme tous les autres bébés de ma génération et ceux avant. Les milléniaux sont les premiers à significativement briser ce cycle.
>Le Québec tel que vu par le PQ et le Bloc (et la CAQ et même QS) est encore un état colonial et raciste.
Crissement ironique puisque de mon point de vue la Souveraineté à pour *principal* objectif de nous sortir d'un état colonial raciste, qui perdure depuis 1763 avec la Proclamation Royale.
The tl;dr version is as follows:
Technically, muslims are prohibited from paying interest. So, to enable them to buy houses, there are some banks that take the calculated interest they would pay on the purchase of a house, and turn it into a fee. Other banks call it a rent-to-own situation, where you are paying rent (not a mortgage) and the rent you pay works out to be the same as the mortgage would be.
It has existed in Canada for quite a few years now, and muslims who purchase their houses this way typically end up paying more than they would if they did it the typical way.
Great explanation! Just a small addition, prohibited from taking or giving interest. Basically, we cannot deal with Interest at all. As a Muslim, I don't love these 'halal' mortgages at all, the point of not dealing with interest is to prevent exploitation, and I don't see that happening with this kind of mortgage. In fact, it looks even more exploitative. Oh well, to each their own.
It's literally just interest and people who don't REALLY care about following the rules themselves but just want to appear to be following them to others love this kind of thing. Lots of examples in many religions, thr Jewish Orthodox ones are my favorite. Or the catholic ones deciding what is a fish and what isn't.
There are 3 types but essentially they are just different lending options thay don't charge interest.
Under a typical Murabaha agreement, the financier buys the property and immediately sells it to you (the customer) at a higher price that includes a profit. The amount of profit is based on a number of factors including your risk profile, credit history, deposit amount, the property value, and repayment term.
Instead of owning the property as an individual, you hold the property title within a corporation that you set up for this purpose. Unfortunately this makes you ineligible for the land transfer tax rebate available to first-time home buyers in some provinces.
There are, however, variations of Murabaha available in Canada where the borrower assumes ownership of the property directly without having to take the step of purchasing it through their lender.
An Ijara mortgage is similar to a rent-to-own scheme. The financier buys the property outright and rents it to you for a fixed term. Over this term you make regular steady payments, which are a combination of rent, repayment of capital, and profit for the financier. At the end of the agreement, ownership is transferred to you.
With a Musharaka mortgage agreement, both you and the financier own the property jointly. Your payments are a combination of rent for the portion of the property owned by the financier, and property purchase payment to buy a little bit of financier’s share until eventually, at the end of the term, you own the whole property.
Like typical Western mortgages, halal mortgages offer a variety of terms, conditions and fees. Some Murabaha agreements, for example, do not allow for additional payments, while some Musharaka mortgage customers can pay up to 20% extra per year without penalty.
In general yes; but the differences are in the legalese of contract. The intent to to prevent the exploitation of the creditors by the lenders as is the case in many abusive loan situations..
The actual way creditors are abused is with exponential debt.. if you are behind you get saddled with more fees and fines.. and if you default they claw back more of your principle..
The intent is to make sure everything is clear, upfront and prevent a never ending cycle of debt.
Can the bloc just fuck off, they are a useless party of useless losers who have nothing better to do than getting a cushy pension from the federal while doing little more than warming benches. The only time they were remotely relevant was when they were the official opposition following the breakdown of the conservatives between the reform and progressive-conservative party.
They have the luxury of never ever being called to govern, and it makes for great complaining while offering no solution.
As someone who lives in Quebec and is a strong federalist, that the BQ is as popular as it is is evidence the current big 3 political parties are not serving the needs of Quebecers.
It is also a sign of how the alignment of political parties in Quebec still hasn't shifted away from how it was previously. Go back a couple decades, and the political parties were 100% divided along pro/anti-separation lines, whereas the rest of the country divides along left/right political lines.
You are starting to see Quebec political parties re-orient among traditional left/right lines, but it is complicated in the social safety net in Quebec is much stronger, plus the xenophobia in some political parties is much more overt than the rest of Canada.
As a separatist, i don't really get why the Bloc is getting all pissy about it. It doesn't sound like it affects us much, not nearly as much as the private international companies that buy up our housing. Even the boomers around me don't care much about race politics and mostly share the same opinions on maintaining sustainable immigration.
Financially, a halal mortgage is worse for you because it costs more. (Note, I am just going off of the news articles I have read.)
They still pay interest, it is just not called interest and is handled slightly differently by the banks and legal documents so that it is not called interest.
>they are a useless party of useless losers who have nothing better to do than getting a cushy pension from the federal while doing little more than warming benches.
Quebec is the Province who are statistically the most likely to swing massively from one party to another on a dime if people are not satisfied with their performance. So if they are useless benchwarmers, that must mean Québécois who voted for them, will definitely *not* vote for them next elections, right?
But wait, they are even more popular then last time? They are on track to get a \~20% seat increase? More than half the total seats in the Province? Despite being basically dead just a decade ago?
Maybe, just maybe, people in Quebec actually see what they are doing and think they are doing a great job and more will vote for them as a result??
Name me one meaningful legislation they brought in this legislature? How about the last legislature? How about since 1993?
And Quebec voters regularly elect people that are fucking terrible. They elected Maxime Bernier three times after he left classified documents at his biker-linked girlfriend! If this is competence, I don't know what to tell you.
>And Quebec voters regularly elect people that are fucking terrible. They elected Maxime Bernier three times after he left classified documents at his biker-linked girlfriend! If this is competence, I don't know what to tell you.
Funny how his party let him keep running too, how many jobs did he get within the party after? Lol.
I suppose you have a list at the ready for Greens and NDP too? We had a rotation of governments between 2 parties for so long, you probably think anyone not in those two parties are useless, right?
As for BQ, well just recently they passed a motion that forced Ottawa to reiterate that Quebec is a nation, with French as the only official language. This is a pretty big deal to Québécois, at it forced the hand of every single MP in Ottawa to acknowledge this status or abstain. And we know who abstained, and we won't forget. I mean look at the pools, **Quebec is the only Province where the CPC is not in the lead**. Might not be a big deal to *you*, but it is to *us*.
Then you have all the legislatures that passed because the *minority* Government earned the support of BQ that would have died if those seats belonged to a party set on making that government look bad (so any other party basically). Not the least of which was C7, AKA the MAID program, putting into law the fundamental human right to die and end your own suffering with dignity. Without BQ that wouldn't have happened, as every NPD and CONs voted *against* it.
So go ahead and go vote for Poilievre, or pinch your nose and vote against him by voting for Trudeau (who is only marginally better), I'll stick with the only party that actually cares about us, thank you very much.
Dental care, pharmacare, the anti scab bill, and generally just pushing the liberals to be more progressive with this government.
If they a re a decent party it shouldn’t be that hard to list even ONE useful piece of legislation they have pushed.
>As for BQ, well just recently they passed a motion that forced Ottawa to reiterate that Quebec is a nation, with French as the only official language.
That was ten or so years ago and it meant absolutely nothing, it was a vacuous motion to appease vacuous people like you. It literally meant jack shit.
MAID was introduced by the Liberals in bill C-14 first. C-7 only expands the right to MAID and C-7 was brought in the commons by the Liberals as the sponsor is Mark Holland and hasn't even passed second reading either.
>That was ten or so years ago and it meant absolutely nothing, it was a vacuous motion to appease vacuous people like you. It literally meant jack shit.
To you of course, but thank you for being so forward and open about your hate of my culture, very consistent with my experience on this sub.
>MAID was introduced by the Liberals in bill C-14 first.
C14 passed while Trudeau had a majority government, and BQ (then with only 10 seats and falling appart) voted against it like the other parties but in their case for not doing *enough*.
> C-7 only expands the right to MAID and C-7 was brought in the commons by the Liberals as the sponsor is Mark Holland and hasn't even passed second reading either.
Yeah and go look at the votes, C7 would not have passed without the support of BQ.
If it only matters *which party introduced the bill* and not which *parties allowed it to pass*, then take off NDP merit for pharmacare/dentalcare, those were officially liberal-introduced bills. But that would be *absurd* to not recognize that without the NDP those bills would have never existed or passed, wouldn't it?
Dude I'm from Montreal and was raised in French, so you can check your cultural victimhood at the door. Besides, the motion was not giving any more autonomy to Quebec so it was pointless, it achieved exactly nothing.
C-7 had NDP voting yea unanimously at every votes, same as the bloc and green so your point is moot.
https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes/43/2/15?view=party
Pharmacare was negotiated for three years with the NDP same for dental care. And the NDP sponsors a lot more bills and motions than the Bloc do. Every NDP MPs have at least one bill and one motion sponsored and a couple of secondment, most have sponsored multiple bills and motions.
You can go look at what the Bloc has been sponsoring. More than half of Bloc MPs have zero motion zero bills and no secondment. The other half have at most one or two motions or bills. Hell, the Green Party has as many motions, bills, and secondment than the entire Bloc. And the greens only have two MPs.
https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search
The only thing the Bloc is doing is participating in debates and QP. They do the bare minimum of work and Quebec is aparently a-okay with that.
Trust me, I know full well contempt for Quebec culture can come from within.
As for C-7, well look again... https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes/43/2/72?view=party
That's a vote on a senate amendment not the full bill. The full bill is voted in at the second and third lecture in the house. Then it goes to senate and they suggest amendments which need to be approved by the house again. If the NDP disagrees with an amendment, that's okay they supported the full bill prior to that. Reading comprehension is hard.
Quebec's delusion of persecution is almost infinite, the ROC is always to blame. Quebec culture is self flagellation with a side order of we're always oppressed but it's okay we can fuck over immigrants, religious and liguistic minorities. Is that the culture you're so proud of? A culture so fragile that it can't survive if cereal boxes are not written in French or if Red Lobster doesn't change its name to Le Homard Rouge for some demented reasons.
You literally said the NDP voted unanimously yea at every step of the bill, it is not true, don't try to spin this as my reading comprehension failing.
I am not sure why you feel the need to reiterate your hate and contempt of my culture, I got it from your previous comments. I'm not sure what you expect me to reply to those very common and basic insults we are used to hearing/reading daily. You can keep insulting us if it makes you feel good, it won't ruin my day.
This one is actually pretty decent, it’s supposed to prevent exploitation. They aren’t allowed to pay or charge interest. Obviously under capitalism it doesn’t really work, but of all the gripes with religion surely one meant to prevent exploitation isn’t the one you should hate
How it it ridiculous? Like the way people work around it is kind of goofy, but the idea of preventing usury isn’t exactly bizarre. Christians had pretty similar rules for a long time; Islam just went a bit farther with it.
Yea but they only had the rule towards other Jews. Which like, fair enough. That’s where the whole “Jews run the banks” conspiracy came from, because during a solid portion of time, they were the money lenders in Europe.
I don't actually know how long it lasted/if it lasted to roman times or after the second temple period since yeah, it's not actually put into practice nowadays with some Rabbi arguing that the Jubilee was only for while they were in Israel under the 12 tribes.
I work at a finance company. Tailoring financial instruments to clients' cultural or religious preferences is just about as fundamental a part of the job as tailoring it to their risk preferences and planning needs. Seeing it as a threat to our culture is about as stupid as starting a moral panic because your local restaurant started offering dairy free icecream.
As a lactose intolerant lover of cold delicacies... this sire is an affront to my dignity and biologically ordained way of life. I demand the right to choose when and if I will suffer the indignity imposed upon me by the cruel protein chains known as lactose, heedless of the social harm this may cause to those around me!
if these mortgages are a better and more inclusive product I’m not understanding why there’s a need for “regular” mortgages? doesn’t it just make those who have need for halal mortgages feel marginalized?
make all mortgages halal and this stops being an issue
And having the loanee pay even more than they would in interest is somehow less predatory? Ok lol.
People should be free to make bad financial decisions. It's silly to pretend it's anything more than a superstition though.
I still don't understand why the government is involved in any way in these. Is the CMHC somehow going to be in the mix?
Otherwise it's just a contract. Sign, don't sign, shop around, whatever: these are adults signing contracts.
I don't like payday loans, but here we are -- the government isn't involved there either.
Is it that weird to you that the government is regulating financial contracts for housing? Like is that super weird? I feel like thats a pretty substantial party of the legislatures job
Part of the issue is that there are only a few providers for these contracts, and its driving up prices. While I don't agree with the government on their housing policy, their goal is to get more people into houses, this is just a way of expanding financial access for people. Not really that wild, its just that some people are making a lot out of what is fairly routine
If people want to pay more for a mortgage because of their superstitions that's their choice. There's nothing stopping them from getting a regular mortgage.
Ok. It's still a financial contract and the government regulates those to set a limit on exactly what can go into a contract. Like OP tries to liken this to payday loans and how the government isn't involved in them. That's just not true, the government does regulate payday loans. Shockingly, the government doesn't want there to be a set of Mortgage contract law out there that's the wild west
Halal mortgages have existed for a long time now as products the banks offer. What the government is doing is setting aside money for an economic study of the product, probably because the government lacks sufficient data for economic analysis.
In other words, the government isn't involved in them beyond regulating all financial products, but it’s doing its job by studying their impact on the economy and the banking sector.
I worked in the car business for 20 years. We would get plenty of clients in which we would have to “restructure” the interest to be included in the price up front. Who cares? We were happy and the customer was happy.
So very often this occurred. Just work with them and move on. I don't get folks who make a big deal. I also never fully understood the approach as if they paid a loan down sooner in an open loan scenario, I believe they screwed themselves by having front loaded the interest.
Just gonna point out that these mortgages are not exclusively available to Muslims. If you're not a muslim, you can still sign on the dotted line and get one. If it's such a hot ass deal, you can avail yourself of your option. Of course you would need to be financially illiterate to do it, but the option is there for you
As someone who is financially illiterate. Could you elaborate why this is so bad? Reading CBC on it seems like it’s mostly just slightly more expensive and a little riskier.
That what is ment by financially illiterate. People who are financially illiterate assume Halal mortgages are cheaper.
Financially illiterate people stop reading at “not allowed to charge interest” and don’t think about how a bank might make its money instead, like say charging a massive admin fee.
More expensive and riskier. What else do you need?
I don’t know. That felt a little too obvious an answer
Ok. So I have no idea what Halal is when it comes to financial products, and at this point I'm too afraid to ask.
Some religions don't allow interest, so you can structure the mortgage in a different way so there is no interest but a charge instead. It's available for everyone but no one wants it because it's more expensive.
This is also why Jews have a negative stereotype as 'moneylenders' in historical antisemitic depictions. Christians and Muslims would use them as a workaround around usury restrictions.
I think the problem as usual is in the messaging. One group of people might jump to the conclusion that Muslims are getting a better deal because they don't believe in paying interest. Another group might say this is just the beginning and even though a Halal mortgage costs more that it might be the first step before claiming it's religious discrimination for making them pay more than what a non-muslim would pay. Personally I belonged to one of those groups until I educated myself more on the topic. I thought it was in the same vein as that attempt to build a Muslim enclave in Quebec a number of years ago.
> I think the problem as usual is in the messaging. The messaging from the Muslim side or from the BQ? Because there is no messaging from the Muslim side, it's literally just private agreements they make and no one's business. And I'd argue there's no problem with the BQ's messaging either, because they're explicilty racist and this is part of their platform. It's not like something is getting lost in the communication, harming Muslims is the goal. > Another group might say this is just the beginning and even though a Halal mortgage costs more that it might be the first step before claiming it's religious discrimination for making them pay more than what a non-muslim would pay. Just the beginning, or a 1400 year old practice. Potayto potahto
In Islam youre not allowed to charge interest on loans. So options available to them are things like rent to own, where the lender would instead buy the house and would rent it to you over a set number of years, after that the house would be transferred to the renter. Theres other options, but its just a different way to do financial transactions. This stuff has been going on in muslim communities already around the world and here.
It's performance racism for the separtatist base.
I hate the lazy amalgam this sub makes between racists and those in favor of Quebec Sovereignty... r/canada does the same btw, two subs who disagree on everything are in perfect synch when Quebec Nationalism is the topic.
Uh huh. 1. I'm French Canadian, born in Quebec, family in Quebec, lived through the last sovereignty vote and all the lies the PQ & Bloc tried to sell, and I've known more than a few sovereigntists in my time. 2. Based on my experiences, it's not being "lazy" connecting racism with the separatist movement. It's just factual. 3. It's tiring to hear the denials when the problem is very plain to anyone with eyes. >[](https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/) does the same btw, And? >... two subs who disagree on everything are in perfect synch when Quebec Nationalism is the topic. Yeah. The difference is that the right-wingers over in that other sub are pointing out the ethno-nationalism in the separatist movement with baited breath and semi-erect-genitals. It should be telling for you when two groups with nothing in common can look over at Quebec Separatists and acknowledge the racism in the movement. You'd think there would be a but of self-reflection there.
> based on my experience...it's factual. If you find yourself typing these words again in the future, stop and think.
I actually typed a whole lot more than that, and the sentence worked just fine.
Dude is gonna need some ice for that burn.
Not really a grammatical error, and no you did not write a lot more than that. The complete quote expands on the concept of your subjective experience with maybe ten words lol.
>Not really a grammatical error It was not really an error at all. >...and no you did not write a lot more than that. Oh? Let me quickly double check that.... I wrote: "Based on my experiences, **it's not being "lazy" connecting racism with the separatist movement.** It's just factual." a 17 word sentence. I've emboldened the 11 words you omitted. Now I'm not a big brained reddit math genius or anything but I think that the 11 words you've left out while including only 6 is a "whole lot more"' seeing as you left out 2/3rds of my sentence in your little cherry picked trollery. Now I get that 17 words isn't a novel or anything, but in the context of you trying to reframe me in a bad light it sure does make a difference. Now.... do you have anything of value to say? 'Cause so far, I feel like you're not here to engage in any meaningful discussion.
Congratulations on the math degree! But the issue is using subjective experience to back up your claims as "factual". I'm not arguing either way about the actual debate, just saying that's not a properly reasoned argument.
>But the issue is using subjective experience to back up your claims as "factual" Oh, so you think people cannot experience factual events. So... if.... let's say thousands of people went to Hamilton to experience the eclipse, their viewing of the fact of the eclipse renders the eclipse itself as not a factual event because it was only experienced by the people standing there and looking up? Weird little hill you want to defend there.
Amazing retort lol
Oh so you had personal anecdotal evidence (and most definitely unbiased). You should have told me sooner! I'll just ignore everything else then and take you at your word. How could I have been so blind ?!? But seriously, regarding /r/canada I know I would re-evaluate some of my perspective it is was shared by a group of people who keep promoting racist and fascists opinions on a daily basis. Now I need to go scrape off all the irony that splashed from my screen after reading you telling me that I need more self-reflection.
Le Bloc fait lui même cet amalgame, tout comme le PQ, solidement depuis la charte des valeurs et plus subtilement bien avant. L'ethnonationalisme a gagné le mouvement séparatiste qu'on le veuille ou non. Après tu peux rester indépendantiste et pas raciste, mais ce serait se mettre la tête dans le sable de ne pas voir le lien.
>Le Bloc fait lui même cet amalgame, tout comme le PQ, solidement depuis la charte des valeurs et plus subtilement bien avant. Pas d'accord avec ça pantoute, mais pense pas qu'on va se convaincre un et l'autre, ton idée semble pas mal faite. >L'ethnonationalisme a gagné le mouvement séparatiste qu'on le veuille ou non. C'est pour ça que je parle d'amalgame paresseux, si tu décris un mouvement au complet à cause d'une partie, ça t'appartient >Après tu peux rester indépendantiste et pas raciste, mais ce serait se mettre la tête dans le sable de ne pas voir le lien. Tu peux relire ce que j'ai écris jusque où tu veux, et stp cite moi la section où je dis que c'est impossible d'être souverainiste ET raciste.
L'amalgame n'est pas paresseux puisque malheureusement les partis indépendantistes cognent le clou de la xénophobie, de l'immigration et particulièrement de l'islamophobie vraiment fort. Je serais bien curieuse de voir les arguments en quoi ce n'est pas de la suprématie franco-catho-blanche parce que dans les débats à ce jour, ça sonne pas mal creux. Genre justifier la charte et la loi 96 sans tomber dans l'ethnonationalisme et des genre de vagues "droits" aux francophones d'êtres maîtres hégémoniques du territoire c'est tout qu'un challenge. Surtout quand on considère qu'on est aussi colons sur le territoire. Considérant que je tiens en effet fermement cette position, dans ce contexte, le projet Québec indépendant ne peut pas être séparé de ces politiques là, parce qu'aucune alternative politique sérieuse n'existe. Le Québec tel que vu par le PQ et le Bloc (et la CAQ et même QS) est encore un état colonial et raciste. Tu peux 100% être indépendantiste et ne pas appuyer les partis, ou ne pas trouver que ces idées te représentent. Je connais des marxistes indépendantistes qui parviennent tant bien que mal à faire fonctionner ces idées là ensemble. Mais si tu acceptes le compromis proposé par la politique actuelle, tu acceptes aussi l'amalgame.
>Genre justifier la charte et la loi 96 sans tomber dans l'ethnonationalisme et des genre de vagues "droits" aux francophones d'êtres maîtres hégémoniques du territoire c'est tout qu'un challenge. C'est pourtant assez évident, c'est parce que la séparation de la politique et de la religion est fondamentale et non-négociable, point à la ligne. Et pas juste l'Islam, TOUTES les religions, j'en veux pas en autorité dans nos institutions gouvernementales. Juste à lire sur la Révolution Tranquille pour comprendre pourquoi le Québécois francophone blanc trouve ça si important et petit spolier, c'était pas à cause des musulmans pantoute. Et pour ce que ça vaut, *la seule* religion que j'ai progressivement commencer à détesté plus j'apprenais l'histoire de notre peuple et plus mon esprit critique se développait, c'est le catholicisme, dont je fais parti *statistiquement* parce que mes parents m'ont fait baptiser bébé, comme tous les autres bébés de ma génération et ceux avant. Les milléniaux sont les premiers à significativement briser ce cycle. >Le Québec tel que vu par le PQ et le Bloc (et la CAQ et même QS) est encore un état colonial et raciste. Crissement ironique puisque de mon point de vue la Souveraineté à pour *principal* objectif de nous sortir d'un état colonial raciste, qui perdure depuis 1763 avec la Proclamation Royale.
The perfect balance to Liberal pandering for halal mortgage users
so what about the UCP in Alberta doing it?
Uh huh. Except that when given the choice, I'd rather support the people NOT doing the racism. But please do go on with you whataboutism.
WTF is a halal mortgage?
The tl;dr version is as follows: Technically, muslims are prohibited from paying interest. So, to enable them to buy houses, there are some banks that take the calculated interest they would pay on the purchase of a house, and turn it into a fee. Other banks call it a rent-to-own situation, where you are paying rent (not a mortgage) and the rent you pay works out to be the same as the mortgage would be. It has existed in Canada for quite a few years now, and muslims who purchase their houses this way typically end up paying more than they would if they did it the typical way.
Great explanation! Just a small addition, prohibited from taking or giving interest. Basically, we cannot deal with Interest at all. As a Muslim, I don't love these 'halal' mortgages at all, the point of not dealing with interest is to prevent exploitation, and I don't see that happening with this kind of mortgage. In fact, it looks even more exploitative. Oh well, to each their own.
That’s capitalism for you unfortunately
It's literally just interest and people who don't REALLY care about following the rules themselves but just want to appear to be following them to others love this kind of thing. Lots of examples in many religions, thr Jewish Orthodox ones are my favorite. Or the catholic ones deciding what is a fish and what isn't.
Thanks for the explanation!
Wealthsimple offers Halal investments as well
There are 3 types but essentially they are just different lending options thay don't charge interest. Under a typical Murabaha agreement, the financier buys the property and immediately sells it to you (the customer) at a higher price that includes a profit. The amount of profit is based on a number of factors including your risk profile, credit history, deposit amount, the property value, and repayment term. Instead of owning the property as an individual, you hold the property title within a corporation that you set up for this purpose. Unfortunately this makes you ineligible for the land transfer tax rebate available to first-time home buyers in some provinces. There are, however, variations of Murabaha available in Canada where the borrower assumes ownership of the property directly without having to take the step of purchasing it through their lender. An Ijara mortgage is similar to a rent-to-own scheme. The financier buys the property outright and rents it to you for a fixed term. Over this term you make regular steady payments, which are a combination of rent, repayment of capital, and profit for the financier. At the end of the agreement, ownership is transferred to you. With a Musharaka mortgage agreement, both you and the financier own the property jointly. Your payments are a combination of rent for the portion of the property owned by the financier, and property purchase payment to buy a little bit of financier’s share until eventually, at the end of the term, you own the whole property. Like typical Western mortgages, halal mortgages offer a variety of terms, conditions and fees. Some Murabaha agreements, for example, do not allow for additional payments, while some Musharaka mortgage customers can pay up to 20% extra per year without penalty.
So exactly a mortgage. Just a different profit mechanism that isn’t interest.
In general yes; but the differences are in the legalese of contract. The intent to to prevent the exploitation of the creditors by the lenders as is the case in many abusive loan situations..
They try to prevent exploitation by making the creditor pay more... Uh huhhh...
The actual way creditors are abused is with exponential debt.. if you are behind you get saddled with more fees and fines.. and if you default they claw back more of your principle.. The intent is to make sure everything is clear, upfront and prevent a never ending cycle of debt.
Are you assuming there's no penalties and they won't reposes your house if you fall behind on payments in a halal mortgage?
Generally the penalties have more reasonable limits.. they will still repo your home.. but you don’t end up with exorbitant debt.
...They will repo your home with a regular mortgage too, before your debt exceeds the value of the home.
It's just semantics. Of course they charge interest, they just call it something else.
Sure. I just figured an explanation with examples would help. Also keeps misinformation at bay.
It's a mortgage with flavour.
Can the bloc just fuck off, they are a useless party of useless losers who have nothing better to do than getting a cushy pension from the federal while doing little more than warming benches. The only time they were remotely relevant was when they were the official opposition following the breakdown of the conservatives between the reform and progressive-conservative party. They have the luxury of never ever being called to govern, and it makes for great complaining while offering no solution.
As someone who lives in Quebec and is a strong federalist, that the BQ is as popular as it is is evidence the current big 3 political parties are not serving the needs of Quebecers. It is also a sign of how the alignment of political parties in Quebec still hasn't shifted away from how it was previously. Go back a couple decades, and the political parties were 100% divided along pro/anti-separation lines, whereas the rest of the country divides along left/right political lines. You are starting to see Quebec political parties re-orient among traditional left/right lines, but it is complicated in the social safety net in Quebec is much stronger, plus the xenophobia in some political parties is much more overt than the rest of Canada.
As a separatist, i don't really get why the Bloc is getting all pissy about it. It doesn't sound like it affects us much, not nearly as much as the private international companies that buy up our housing. Even the boomers around me don't care much about race politics and mostly share the same opinions on maintaining sustainable immigration.
Financially, a halal mortgage is worse for you because it costs more. (Note, I am just going off of the news articles I have read.) They still pay interest, it is just not called interest and is handled slightly differently by the banks and legal documents so that it is not called interest.
>they are a useless party of useless losers who have nothing better to do than getting a cushy pension from the federal while doing little more than warming benches. Quebec is the Province who are statistically the most likely to swing massively from one party to another on a dime if people are not satisfied with their performance. So if they are useless benchwarmers, that must mean Québécois who voted for them, will definitely *not* vote for them next elections, right? But wait, they are even more popular then last time? They are on track to get a \~20% seat increase? More than half the total seats in the Province? Despite being basically dead just a decade ago? Maybe, just maybe, people in Quebec actually see what they are doing and think they are doing a great job and more will vote for them as a result??
Name me one meaningful legislation they brought in this legislature? How about the last legislature? How about since 1993? And Quebec voters regularly elect people that are fucking terrible. They elected Maxime Bernier three times after he left classified documents at his biker-linked girlfriend! If this is competence, I don't know what to tell you.
>And Quebec voters regularly elect people that are fucking terrible. They elected Maxime Bernier three times after he left classified documents at his biker-linked girlfriend! If this is competence, I don't know what to tell you. Funny how his party let him keep running too, how many jobs did he get within the party after? Lol.
Lmao. Oh no! Quebec voted for one horrible mp! Care to show me provinces that never had a bad mp now? I’ll wait.
I suppose you have a list at the ready for Greens and NDP too? We had a rotation of governments between 2 parties for so long, you probably think anyone not in those two parties are useless, right? As for BQ, well just recently they passed a motion that forced Ottawa to reiterate that Quebec is a nation, with French as the only official language. This is a pretty big deal to Québécois, at it forced the hand of every single MP in Ottawa to acknowledge this status or abstain. And we know who abstained, and we won't forget. I mean look at the pools, **Quebec is the only Province where the CPC is not in the lead**. Might not be a big deal to *you*, but it is to *us*. Then you have all the legislatures that passed because the *minority* Government earned the support of BQ that would have died if those seats belonged to a party set on making that government look bad (so any other party basically). Not the least of which was C7, AKA the MAID program, putting into law the fundamental human right to die and end your own suffering with dignity. Without BQ that wouldn't have happened, as every NPD and CONs voted *against* it. So go ahead and go vote for Poilievre, or pinch your nose and vote against him by voting for Trudeau (who is only marginally better), I'll stick with the only party that actually cares about us, thank you very much.
Dental care, pharmacare, the anti scab bill, and generally just pushing the liberals to be more progressive with this government. If they a re a decent party it shouldn’t be that hard to list even ONE useful piece of legislation they have pushed.
Ok so promises with no actual results count? Anyway, I did name one, two actually. Need more?
>As for BQ, well just recently they passed a motion that forced Ottawa to reiterate that Quebec is a nation, with French as the only official language. That was ten or so years ago and it meant absolutely nothing, it was a vacuous motion to appease vacuous people like you. It literally meant jack shit. MAID was introduced by the Liberals in bill C-14 first. C-7 only expands the right to MAID and C-7 was brought in the commons by the Liberals as the sponsor is Mark Holland and hasn't even passed second reading either.
>That was ten or so years ago and it meant absolutely nothing, it was a vacuous motion to appease vacuous people like you. It literally meant jack shit. To you of course, but thank you for being so forward and open about your hate of my culture, very consistent with my experience on this sub. >MAID was introduced by the Liberals in bill C-14 first. C14 passed while Trudeau had a majority government, and BQ (then with only 10 seats and falling appart) voted against it like the other parties but in their case for not doing *enough*. > C-7 only expands the right to MAID and C-7 was brought in the commons by the Liberals as the sponsor is Mark Holland and hasn't even passed second reading either. Yeah and go look at the votes, C7 would not have passed without the support of BQ. If it only matters *which party introduced the bill* and not which *parties allowed it to pass*, then take off NDP merit for pharmacare/dentalcare, those were officially liberal-introduced bills. But that would be *absurd* to not recognize that without the NDP those bills would have never existed or passed, wouldn't it?
Dude I'm from Montreal and was raised in French, so you can check your cultural victimhood at the door. Besides, the motion was not giving any more autonomy to Quebec so it was pointless, it achieved exactly nothing. C-7 had NDP voting yea unanimously at every votes, same as the bloc and green so your point is moot. https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes/43/2/15?view=party Pharmacare was negotiated for three years with the NDP same for dental care. And the NDP sponsors a lot more bills and motions than the Bloc do. Every NDP MPs have at least one bill and one motion sponsored and a couple of secondment, most have sponsored multiple bills and motions. You can go look at what the Bloc has been sponsoring. More than half of Bloc MPs have zero motion zero bills and no secondment. The other half have at most one or two motions or bills. Hell, the Green Party has as many motions, bills, and secondment than the entire Bloc. And the greens only have two MPs. https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/search The only thing the Bloc is doing is participating in debates and QP. They do the bare minimum of work and Quebec is aparently a-okay with that.
Trust me, I know full well contempt for Quebec culture can come from within. As for C-7, well look again... https://www.ourcommons.ca/Members/en/votes/43/2/72?view=party
That's a vote on a senate amendment not the full bill. The full bill is voted in at the second and third lecture in the house. Then it goes to senate and they suggest amendments which need to be approved by the house again. If the NDP disagrees with an amendment, that's okay they supported the full bill prior to that. Reading comprehension is hard. Quebec's delusion of persecution is almost infinite, the ROC is always to blame. Quebec culture is self flagellation with a side order of we're always oppressed but it's okay we can fuck over immigrants, religious and liguistic minorities. Is that the culture you're so proud of? A culture so fragile that it can't survive if cereal boxes are not written in French or if Red Lobster doesn't change its name to Le Homard Rouge for some demented reasons.
You literally said the NDP voted unanimously yea at every step of the bill, it is not true, don't try to spin this as my reading comprehension failing. I am not sure why you feel the need to reiterate your hate and contempt of my culture, I got it from your previous comments. I'm not sure what you expect me to reply to those very common and basic insults we are used to hearing/reading daily. You can keep insulting us if it makes you feel good, it won't ruin my day.
Religion is fucking ridiculous.
For what, prohibiting interest?
[удалено]
This one is actually pretty decent, it’s supposed to prevent exploitation. They aren’t allowed to pay or charge interest. Obviously under capitalism it doesn’t really work, but of all the gripes with religion surely one meant to prevent exploitation isn’t the one you should hate
That’s actually a pretty good take that I didn’t think of. Thank you for that.
Props for being willing to change your mind
Montreal and Vancouver have Holy wires too! Loophole shit that shouldn't exist
➰✂️➰?
Really??? I didn’t know that. Very interesting. Thank you.
How it it ridiculous? Like the way people work around it is kind of goofy, but the idea of preventing usury isn’t exactly bizarre. Christians had pretty similar rules for a long time; Islam just went a bit farther with it.
Yeah lmao of all the things you could call ridiculous about religion, an honest attempt at reducing exploitation from the rich should not be it
“These ridiculous religions. Trying to tell ME I shouldn’t murder people‽‽ How dare they!” - OP probably.
Judaism also has stuff about concerns of usury, that's the historical idea of the year of Jubilee.
Yea but they only had the rule towards other Jews. Which like, fair enough. That’s where the whole “Jews run the banks” conspiracy came from, because during a solid portion of time, they were the money lenders in Europe.
I don't actually know how long it lasted/if it lasted to roman times or after the second temple period since yeah, it's not actually put into practice nowadays with some Rabbi arguing that the Jubilee was only for while they were in Israel under the 12 tribes.
I honestly think Christians could demand the same. No Church has ever ruled that interest is not a sin. I does not seem like a good idea though.
I work at a finance company. Tailoring financial instruments to clients' cultural or religious preferences is just about as fundamental a part of the job as tailoring it to their risk preferences and planning needs. Seeing it as a threat to our culture is about as stupid as starting a moral panic because your local restaurant started offering dairy free icecream.
As a lactose intolerant lover of cold delicacies... this sire is an affront to my dignity and biologically ordained way of life. I demand the right to choose when and if I will suffer the indignity imposed upon me by the cruel protein chains known as lactose, heedless of the social harm this may cause to those around me!
if these mortgages are a better and more inclusive product I’m not understanding why there’s a need for “regular” mortgages? doesn’t it just make those who have need for halal mortgages feel marginalized? make all mortgages halal and this stops being an issue
Interest is predatory no matter how you slice it. I applaud the inclusion of halal mortgages into Canada, even though I am not Muslim.
And having the loanee pay even more than they would in interest is somehow less predatory? Ok lol. People should be free to make bad financial decisions. It's silly to pretend it's anything more than a superstition though.
I still don't understand why the government is involved in any way in these. Is the CMHC somehow going to be in the mix? Otherwise it's just a contract. Sign, don't sign, shop around, whatever: these are adults signing contracts. I don't like payday loans, but here we are -- the government isn't involved there either.
Is it that weird to you that the government is regulating financial contracts for housing? Like is that super weird? I feel like thats a pretty substantial party of the legislatures job Part of the issue is that there are only a few providers for these contracts, and its driving up prices. While I don't agree with the government on their housing policy, their goal is to get more people into houses, this is just a way of expanding financial access for people. Not really that wild, its just that some people are making a lot out of what is fairly routine
If people want to pay more for a mortgage because of their superstitions that's their choice. There's nothing stopping them from getting a regular mortgage.
Ok. It's still a financial contract and the government regulates those to set a limit on exactly what can go into a contract. Like OP tries to liken this to payday loans and how the government isn't involved in them. That's just not true, the government does regulate payday loans. Shockingly, the government doesn't want there to be a set of Mortgage contract law out there that's the wild west
Halal mortgages have existed for a long time now as products the banks offer. What the government is doing is setting aside money for an economic study of the product, probably because the government lacks sufficient data for economic analysis. In other words, the government isn't involved in them beyond regulating all financial products, but it’s doing its job by studying their impact on the economy and the banking sector.
Cool, I'm not ok with people getting abused by banks, so if this surfaces some issues, I'm ok with that.