Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Canada the next venezuela.


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, turningrite said:

Australia, Switzerland, New Zealand, Norway, Finland...

Australia is an island in the South Pacific.  It is a less tolerant society, more chauvinist, with a higher cost of living.  They have invested more in their military.  Don’t even talk to me about Switzerland.  Neutrality is a false value that basically means looking the other way.  The banks there certainly made money during the Holocaust.  New Zealand is lovely, but again, that’s a much smaller country.  They’ve worked much better with the Maoris than we have with Indigenous groups, so yes, something to learn there.  Norway is a very socialist society that has benefited hugely from nationally owned oil production.  Canada should learn more from Norway, but again, Norway in Canada is one province (Alberta), though the resources in the far north (the territories) are huge and largely untapped.  Finland isn’t preferable to Canada.  It has higher education test scores, but a much smaller and more culturally homogeneous population than Canada’s.  Our public education system is the best in the English speaking world.  So really we need to capitalize better on our resources like Norway and strike better relations with indigenous people like New Zealand, and beef up our military like Australia.  We are trying to do all three, though our contexts are different from these other countries and Canadians have their own priorities (for example, Australia defending itself on the other side of the planet versus Canada defending itself on the North American continent beside the biggest military superpower).  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 243
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Nor Justin Trudeau and the Sunny Ways fascism of the Liberal Party of Canada and associated CBC propaganda arm.

We need to get rid of these fools once and for all. This is not funny anymore, this kid is a real danger.

Idealpolitik they are the world's First Post Soviet Marxist State. Realpolitik, it's just Liberal Elites from Toronto and Montreal stealing the NDP's Post Soviet Marxist platform, to box the NDP

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Australia is an island in the South Pacific.  It is a less tolerant society, more chauvinist, with a higher cost of living.  They have invested more in their military.  Don’t even talk to me about Switzerland.  Neutrality is a false value that basically means looking the other way.  The banks there certainly made money during the Holocaust.  New Zealand is lovely, but again, that’s a much smaller country.  They’ve worked much better with the Maoris than we have with Indigenous groups, so yes, something to learn there.  Norway is a very socialist society that has benefited hugely from nationally owned oil production.  Canada should learn more from Norway, but again, Norway in Canada is one province (Alberta), though the resources in the far north (the territories) are huge and largely untapped.  Finland isn’t preferable to Canada.  It has higher education test scores, but a much smaller and more culturally homogeneous population than Canada’s.  Our public education system is the best in the English speaking world.  So really we need to capitalize better on our resources like Norway and strike better relations with indigenous people like New Zealand, and beef up our military like Australia.  We are trying to do all three, though our contexts are different from these other countries and Canadians have their own priorities.  

Canada is flailing economically. Its relative standing in the world, as measured by per capita GDP, has declined precipitously over the past few decades. If our productivity growth rate over the past three decades had kept up with the American productivity growth rate, it's estimated that our per capita GDP would be roughly 15 to 20 percent higher than is the case today. We have an entitled business sector that in general eschews investment in innovation and seeks monopoly and/or oligopoly and seeks protection of its "right" to profits from a bought-and-sold, self-serving political class. It's not a "good news" story.  As for our education system, our "best and brightest" continue to flee the country in droves (as apparently a young nephew who will soon graduate university with STEM qualifications is considering, according to his mother), heading to places like the U.S. and Australia, where their skills are recognized, utilized and appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, turningrite said:

Canada is flailing economically. Its relative standing in the world, as measured by per capita GDP, has declined precipitously over the past few decades. If our productivity growth rate over the past three decades had kept up with the American productivity growth rate, it's estimated that our per capita GDP would be roughly 15 to 20 percent higher than is the case today. We have an entitled business sector that in general eschews investment in innovation and seeks monopoly and/or oligopoly and seeks protection of its "right" to profits from a bought-and-sold, self-serving political class. It's not a "good news" story.  As for our education system, our "best and brightest" continue to flee the country in droves (as apparently a young nephew who will soon graduate university with STEM qualifications is considering, according to his mother), heading to places like the U.S. and Australia, where their skills are recognized, utilized and appreciated.

Yes we have a productivity lag, but not because of public policy.  It relates mostly to over reliance on resources and companies failing to reinvest profits in more efficient production.  Basically they’ve turned those profits over to shareholders despite Canada’s low corporate tax rate and tax shelters for reinvestment in equipment, though the latter policy might take a while to show its impact.  

Our federal debt is much lower than America’s and still lower than the other G7 countries. You could argue that government policy prevents business failures that need to happen to allow market forces to direct businesses to meet demands, but we’re less economically polarized than the US. 

I’m sure more can be done for the economy in Canada, but we still have record low unemployment and continuing economic growth.  It’s a safer society.  So you have to look at the whole package.  

Would most Canadians prefer for Canada to maintain its own separate policies from those in the US rather than to be given a minority interest as a state of the US?  Yes.  I personally think that both countries would benefit from some form of loose union, but the two countries are too far apart ideologically right now for that to happen.    

Canada is consistently rated one of the best countries in which to live and work.   Love it, try to change it, or leave it.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites

The markets don't reinvest because it is broken, Canada doesn't work, it's a failed state, and there are no property rights.

Ergo; the only purpose it serves is commodities extraction, it's like a third world country, which just happens to be propped up by the Americans as a protectorate.

Otherwise known as Puerto Rico North.

Edited by Dougie93
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

The markets don't reinvest because it is broken, Canada doesn't work, it's a failed state, and there are no property rights.

Ergo; the only purpose it serves is commodities extraction, it's like a third world country, which just happens to be propped up by the Americans as a protectorate.

Otherwise known as Puerto Rico North.

Move to Puerto Rico.  Canada’s quality of life speaks for itself.  Full property rights and protections in Canada under rule of law.  Crown property is federal and provincial property, period.  Stop your irresponsible disinformation.  Right now the US has more to learn from Canada in many ways than the reverse, but they aren’t listening.  Well half the country isn’t. Be more worried about US civil war than Canada, which remains a thriving progressive democracy, less polarized than the US.  Both countries are great and benefit each other, but there’s much more learning to do, and there are best practices from many countries that we can adopt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Move to Puerto Rico.  Canada’s quality of life speaks for itself.  Full property rights and protections in Canada under rule of law.  Crown property is federal and provincial property, period.  Stop your irresponsible disinformation.  Right now the US has more to learn from Canada in many ways than the reverse, but they aren’t listening.  Well half the country isn’t. Be more worried about US civil war than Canada, which remains a thriving progressive democracy, less polarized than the US.  Both countries are great and benefit each other, but there’s much more learning to do, and there are best practices from many countries that we can adopt. 

I don't have to move anywhere, I'm living in my country, the House of Windsor, the Potemkin Village of Canada grinds on around me, but I don't rely on it for anything, all I need is Liz Windsor.

And my people have been here since before it was Canada, somebody tries to drive us out, better bring an army, because I will kill and die for Elizabeth Windsor.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That being said, it is not you who are going to invade us, we are going to invade you, by way of our strategic alliance with the American republic, and an army of market forces.

The only thing you have to do now, is decide how your Potemkin Village is going to end, are you going to surrender, or go down with the ship?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I often wonder if the Spanish-speaking countries of South-America had formed some Estados Unidos De America Del  Sur instead of there being several different countries would that one big country be better off than the present different countries. 

Reversely, if all the Canadian provinces were different countries would most of them be better off compared to what is now?

After all, nine Canadian provinces are geographically larger than France, the geographically largest country in Western-Europe. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

Reversely, if all the Canadian provinces were different countries would most of them be better off compared to what is now?

 

 

Yes.  Not a panacea, just Australia and New Zealand.

Who work fine as separate Dominions, but would not work in a confederation, because Australia would dominate it the way Ontario dominates Canada resulting in a similar failed state.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Yes.  Not a panacea, just Australia and New Zealand.

Who work fine as separate Dominions, but would not work in a confederation, because Australia would dominate it the way Ontario dominates Canada resulting in a similar failed state.

You’ve yet to explain what is failed about Canada.  What is your idea of success?  A more violent and economically polarized country is not what most Canadians want. We have it good here.  Yes there are indicators where we need to improve, but look at the whole picture.  I’m glad we have national railways, bilingualism and other national programs that help bind us. I don’t see the upside of balcanizing Canada into separate states.  It would be hardest for the territories, Atlantic provinces, and Prairies to manage without a federal government.  Quebecers would feel more isolated.  

There’s no apparent upside to your scenario.  If each province and each territory became a US state, at least there would be equity among US states, but in terms of supporting the French language, Indigenous rights, and public safety (gun control), it would be harder.  I believe the best scenario for Canada and the US is a loose union of two separate countries with free and unlimited movement of residency and labour, basically an economic and security partnership wherein all other matters of law remain separate.  Whatever country you live and work in, respect the local laws and taxation.  

Voting rights can either come after a number of consecutive years of residency or through a standard application for citizenship.  Such a union would be very powerful.  Retain the Canada/US border as a kind of weapons, safety and immigration checkpoint, so that each country can maintain its own immigration, gun control, and food and drug filters.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites

Success is sayonara Quebec, F**k Alberta, Governor General at Queen's Park in Toronto, Ontariostralia moves on without you, do you what you want with your own New Zealand's.

Same thing Quebec is doing, I'm just doing what they are doing, because they have the right idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Success is sayonara Quebec, F**k Alberta, Governor General at Queen's Park in Toronto, Ontariostralia moves on without you, do you what you want with your own New Zealand's.

Same thing Quebec is doing, I'm just doing what they are doing, because they have the right idea.

That seems to be Bernier’s theme, power to the provinces.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zeitgeist said:

That seems to be Bernier’s theme, power to the provinces.  

It's the theme of the rendered judgement of the SCC which has ruled that, yes, Marge, Canadian Confederation is in fact optional, and provinces are free to leave anytime they please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both the USA and Canada are artificial countries. However, the USA has the excuse of being the economic and military super-power of the world. 

If the USA disintegrated and every state became an Independent country it would be very unlikely that any of those states would single-handedly become a world super-power. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

Both the USA and Canada are artificial countries. However, the USA has the excuse of being the economic and military super-power of the world.

 

...then all nations are artificial.

 

Quote

If the USA disintegrated and every state became an Independent country it would be very unlikely that any of those states would single-handedly become a world super-power. 

 

Some of them are already economic superpowers, with economies that dwarf many other nations (e.g. California, Texas, New York).

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

1.) Yes we have a productivity lag, but not because of public policy.  It relates mostly to over reliance on resources and companies failing to reinvest profits in more efficient production. Basically they’ve turned those profits over to shareholders despite Canada’s low corporate tax rate and tax shelters for reinvestment in equipment, though the latter policy might take a while to show its impact.  

2.) I’m sure more can be done for the economy in Canada, but we still have record low unemployment and continuing economic growth.  It’s a safer society.  So you have to look at the whole package.  

 

1.) Our reliance on natural resources is a matter of public policy. In other words, it's a choice our leaders have made. In the globalized environment, where "comparative advantage" is supposed to govern economic decisions, our leaders have apparently determined that the only area in which we have a clear advantage is natural resources, which we had nothing to do with putting here in the first place. In fact, if you'll recall the debate in the late 1980s, "free trade" was touted by economists and politicians as a way to eliminate our productivity gap with the U.S., but things haven't worked out that way, have they? In fact, the situation has worsened. As for the sorry investment record Canada has experienced over the past couple decades, our corporations are voting non-confidence in this country with their choices but in the meantime expect to be coddled with market protection, industry-friendly regulatory regimes, guaranteed profits and, of course, a beneficial tax structure. And their bought-and-sold political allies have given them all this and expected shockingly little in return, ensuring that mediocrity continues to be the abiding characteristic of our economic landscape. In 2014, based on a rational and objective analysis, the PBO reported that there's no evidence of general or emerging labour shortages in Canada, except in a few very limited sectors and geographical locales, suggesting that much of the basis of the government and private-sector immigration propaganda campaign is aimed at - you guessed it - lowering business costs (i.e. wages) and boosting profits, a strategy that actually disincentivizes investment in innovation and productivity enhancement. Our politicians have decided that profits are more important than the collective economic well-being of Canadians.

2.) The record low (official) unemployment rates being reported in Canada and some other countries don't actually mean much. I read an article not long ago about why even in a recessionary environment the official unemployment rate will no longer be an effective indicator of the actual state of the economy because of the growing impacts of the "gig" economy, whereby it's estimated that perhaps 20 percent of workers - a percentage that's constantly increasing, particularly in Canada which has among the weakest labour protection laws among developed countries - don't have regular full-time employment but are still considered to be employed and are not effectively reflected in the un/employment stats, whether or not they're actually working. These are the people most likely to quickly lose work in a recession and yet we won't know it unless we start to look at other indices like welfare stats (which remain quite high in parts of Canada) and bankruptcy rates, which reportedly are currently on the rise. As for Canada being a safer society, that's a bit of a red herring. Many parts of the U.S. are as safe as is most of Canada. I have many relatives, including two siblings, who live in the U.S. and to my knowledge none has ever reported experiencing or witnessing a serious crime.

Edited by turningrite
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, turningrite said:

1.) Our reliance on natural resources is a matter of public policy. In other words, it's a choice our leaders have made. In the globalized environment, where "comparative advantage" is supposed to govern economic decisions, our leaders have apparently determined that the only area in which we have a clear advantage is natural resources, which we had nothing to do with putting here in the first place. In fact, if you'll recall the debate in the late 1980s, "free trade" was touted by economists and politicians as a way to eliminate our productivity gap with the U.S., but things haven't worked out that way, have they? In fact, the situation has worsened. As for the sorry investment record Canada has experienced over the past couple decades, our corporations are voting non-confidence in this country with their choices but in the meantime expect to be coddled with market protection, industry-friendly regulatory regimes, guaranteed profits and, of course, a beneficial tax structure. And their bought-and-sold political allies have given them all this and expected shockingly little in return, ensuring that mediocrity continues to be the abiding characteristic of our economic landscape. In 2014, based on a rational and objective analysis, the PBO reported that there's no evidence of general or emerging labour shortages in Canada, except in a few very limited sectors and geographical locales, suggesting that much of the basis of the government and private-sector immigration propaganda campaign is aimed at - you guessed it - lowering business costs (i.e. wages) and boosting profits, a strategy that actually disincentivizes investment in innovation and productivity enhancement. Our politicians have decided that profits are more important than the collective economic well-being of Canadians.

2.) The record low (official) unemployment rates being reported in Canada and some other countries don't actually mean much. I read an article not long ago about why even in a recessionary environment the official unemployment rate will no longer be an effective indicator of the actual state of the economy because of the growing impacts of the "gig" economy, whereby it's estimated that perhaps 20 percent of workers - a percentage that's constantly increasing, particularly in Canada which has among the weakest labour protection laws among developed countries - don't have regular full-time employment but are still considered to be employed and are not effectively reflected in the un/employment stats, whether or not they're actually working. These are the people most likely to quickly lose work in a recession and yet we won't know it unless we start to look at other indices like welfare stats (which remain quite high in parts of Canada) and bankruptcy rates, which reportedly are currently on the rise. As for Canada being a safer society, that's a bit of a red herring. Many parts of the U.S. are as safe as is most of Canada. I have many relatives, including two siblings, who live in the U.S. and to my knowledge none has ever reported experiencing or witnessing a serious crime.

Okay you've said a lot.  A big problem with the many matters you mention is that in some cases the fix for one problem exacerbates other problems.  For example, when you tighten labour protections, a leftist position that I mostly support, you always run the risk of saddling small businesses with too many costs and responsibilities to be light on their feet.  Wynne in Ontario had introduced quite radical labour protections that included not being able to pay part-time workers any less than full-time ones, increasing the numbers of days off (without a reason, such as illness), and of course, raising minimum wage.  Canadian provinces have some of the highest minimum wages on the continent.  

In terms of reliance on resources, that isn't really coming from government policy, except perhaps in Alberta.  Most of the provinces have made tech a focus, funding universities/colleges and research chairs/work/facilities.  Government has to tread lightly in these areas to avoid skewing the market and creating winners and losers.  Ontario, Quebec, BC, and others have invested heavily in green energy, but that's been criticized as propping up expensive energy.  Canada has many bright spots in non-traditional sectors (telecom, A.I., biotech, e-commerce, etc.).  But we're also sitting on the second or third largest oil reserves on the planet.  There are so many other untapped resources and unexplored lands/waters.  Immigration continues because we need to draw talent in unique sectors, but also because unless we get population to these areas, they remain untapped.  The Immigration Minister has just introduced a new policy to target immigration to remote communities, but it's a small measure requiring towns with less than 50000 people or less than 200000 people (if far from any larger cities) to provide job invitations in advance.  Canada is trying to be all things to all people with 38 million people spread across a massive territory.  Perhaps our biggest challenge is finding ways to push immigration and domestic settlement northwards.  Business and individuals will invest where they can make money.  Resources continue to generate wealth.

The "gig economy," like the "share economy," is an international phenomenon related to global communication and the "just in time" high speed supply chain that has forced all companies to upscale or downsize at the drop of a hat to remain competitive.  Job security is increasingly a thing of the past, all the more reason for countries to consider a guaranteed basic income.  Automation is only making matters worse, no matter what countries do to prevent offshoring, and there's only so much we can do to stop that, because tariffs bring their own problems in terms of raising costs for consumer goods and the input costs for manufacturers.  I think the best safeguard for manufacturing jobs is legislation that ties a company's sales within a jurisdiction to that company's production within the same jurisdiction.  

I have a big family and some of my cousins are living and working overseas as I did for a while, but the places that these educated young people have moved are not where you might think.  Only two of them worked for a while in the US.  One is still there, but it's not a permanent gig.  Almost all of them are in South Korea and China.  Years ago I worked with an American organization in Russia.  So what does all this say about where work is flowing?

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Jobs are a thing of the past.  It's a good thing tho, as work is bullshit and jobs are jails.

Someone has to get the food from farm to table.  Okay drones and robots.  Someone has to program them.  I do think we need to look at the whole notion of work and realize that most people won't be able to put in a 40 hour work week as an "employee", nor should they.  Work will not disappear completely.  All I can say is either learn coding, get a profession, or be highly creative in your craft.  For everyone else it's McJobs.  Hope your minimum wage is high and your safety net thick. 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Someone has to get the food from farm to table.  Okay drones and robots.  Someone has to program them.  I do think we need to look at the whole notion of work and realize that most people won't be able to put in a 40 hour work week as an "employee", nor should they.  Work will not disappear completely.  All I can say is either learn coding, get a profession, or be highly creative in your craft.  For everyone else it's McJobs.  Hope your minimum wage is high and your safety net thick. 

Oh I'm quite sure people will be doing things to generate and amass capital, but the industrial age job is of the industrial age, did not exist beforehand, will not exist after.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Oh I'm quite sure people will be doing things to generate and amass capital, but the industrial age job is of the industrial age, did not exist beforehand, will not exist after.

Tell that to China.  I'm perhaps traditional in my belief in being self-sufficient.  Keep basic steel, manufacturing, military, transportation (including air and shipping), agriculture, and communications capabilities.  There's more to it than that, but that's it in broad strokes.  If the shit every really hits the fan, you need to be able to go it alone.  Don't count on help. 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Tell that to China.  I'm perhaps traditional in my belief in being self-sufficient.  Keep a basic steel, manufacturing, military, transportation (including air and shipping), agriculture, and communications capabilities.  There's more to it than that, but that's it in broad strokes.  If the shit every really hits the fan, you need to be able to go it alone.  Don't count on help. 

Canada is not capable of retaining ownership of these things because Canada must sell its capital in order to pay for the nanny socialist fake work make work jobs gulag.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...