|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:00 am Post subject: Should Canada unhitch its American wagon? |
 |
|
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080421.wcomment0421/BNStory/specialComment/home
| Quote: |
CANADA'S WORLD: PART 1
Should Canada unhitch its wagon from the United States? A growing number of Canadians seem to think so. Polls show that a striking number of us view our giant neighbour as an irresponsible, even dangerous, superpower. The war in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, Hurricane Katrina, President George W. Bush � all these have served to alienate Canadians (and others around the world) from a country that used to be an admired friend and ally.
Meanwhile, the economic troubles south of the border � corporate corruption, the subprime mortgage crisis, the rising threat of recession � have made the United States look like an unreliable economic partner, too. So if the United States is in decline, both as a world leader and a trading partner, shouldn't Canada think about hedging its bets by drawing closer to other countries and regions? The emergence of booming China and India as potential great powers has produced an apparent alternative to our traditional reliance on the Americans. Instead of always looking south, why not turn out gaze to the east?
As tempting as it is, Canadians should resist this line of thinking for two reasons. The first is that for all its troubles, the United States is not washed up yet. Far from it. Its global stature has been badly damaged by Mr. Bush's presidency, but popularity isn't everything.
Ronald Reagan was much loathed and derided outside his homeland too. The United States is bound to bounce back as a world leader when new leadership takes charge next year. In any case, there is no real alternative. In terms of sheer muscle � military, financial, diplomatic � no country can rival it.
Remember that, in the 1980s, it was widely assumed that the age of U.S. dominance was coming to an end. Historian Paul Kennedy, pointing to Washington's rising debts, among other things, said the country was suffering from "imperial overstretch" and would soon lose its superpower status. In the same vein, it was predicted that a rising Japan would overtake the United States as the world's top economic power, just it is predicted today that India and China will.
In the event, the U.S. economy came back to experience its longest postwar expansion while Japan went into a period of stagnation from which it has still not fully recovered. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Washington was heralded not just as one of the superpowers, but the world's only superpower. It still is. U.S. military spending is greater than that of the European Union, China and Russia combined. Its economy is still the locomotive of the world economy, and of course by far the biggest market for Canadians goods and services.
The second reason for not hitching up to new wagons is that, well, their wheels could come off. China's rise is a wonder to behold and India's dynamism inspiring, but both have immense problems. China has rural poverty, an export-addicted economy, epic pollution, restive minorities (such as the Tibetans) and, worst of all, an archaic political system ill-equipped to deal with these problems. India has corruption, crumbling infrastructure, a lacklustre education system and persistent divisions of caste, language and ethnicity.
Naturally, we should try to maintain good relations with both (while remaining free to criticize when we must). And of course, we should do everything we can to drum up more trade, improving on Canada's sorry record at penetrating Asian markets.
But, in values as well as in geography, we are still closest to the United States � still the best friend, ally and trading partner we have, and far from a spent force. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Isn't the horse before the cart in the thread title? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, I believe, it is not good to put all your eggs in one basket. The US doesn't really do it except with oil, perhaps, and so Canada shouldn't either. I know Trudeau was for diversifying Canada's trade as was the case with Diefenbaker. Some of that makes sense and for Canada's sovereignty some might argue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| What the hell is Canada still doing in 'fukganistan? $1 bill spent there this year, plus dozens of dead soldiers. oi vey. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| What the hell is Canada still doing in 'fukganistan? $1 bill spent there this year, plus dozens of dead soldiers. oi vey. |
If Al Qaeda ever defeated the US they would start making demands of Canada. If Canada didn't give in then Al Qaeda would attack them.
Canada is on Al Qaeda's list, not ahead of the US they aren't but they are on Al Qaeda's list.
But as for the rest the main strategic benefit Canada provides the US with is oil.
But you don't sound very pro US ( which is your choice).
but for the record even though you are not a US citizen you did send Ron Paul 25$
Now why would people who are anti US send Ron Paul money? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| What the hell is Canada still doing in 'fukganistan? $1 bill spent there this year, plus dozens of dead soldiers. oi vey. |
Well, Canada is part of NATO and NATO is there. France is there as well and backing Canadian troops, so Canada agreed to stay. Half of the Canadian public does not want to be there, and I understand that, but 35% of the students in school are girls as opposed to zero, the Taliban are gone, people don't live in fear as much as before. Why are you cursing the country? I do feel horrible that soldiers from any country including Dutch, Canadian, French, and American soldiers are dying. I don't want even one Canadian soldier to die. Anyway, there is a difference between Iraq and Afghanistan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| blaseblasphemener wrote: |
| What the hell is Canada still doing in 'fukganistan? $1 bill spent there this year, plus dozens of dead soldiers. oi vey. |
Well, Canada is part of NATO and NATO is there. France is there as well and backing Canadian troops, so Canada agreed to stay. Half of the Canadian public does not want to be there, and I understand that, but 35% of the students in school are girls as opposed to zero, the Taliban are gone, people don't live in fear as much as before. Why are you cursing the country? I do feel horrible that soldiers from any country including Dutch, Canadian, French, and American soldiers are dying. I don't want even one Canadian soldier to die. Anyway, there is a difference between Iraq and Afghanistan. |
What is the difference between what the insurgents in Iraq and the insurgents in Afghanistan fight for? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| When you have privileged access to the most powerful economy in the world AND they're right next door, you don't unhitch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| When you have privileged access to the most powerful economy in the world AND they're right next door, you don't unhitch. |
Furthermore, if Canada were going to unhitch, Canada should have done this back in 2002 or 2003. Wait, Canada didn't go to Iraq. The article is right. Seriously, if you're a Canadian, now is about the worst time to speak out against US foreign policy in a confrontational tone.
Should Canada diversify its trading partners? As much as it reasonably can. As much as it reasonably can. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| When you have privileged access to the most powerful economy in the world AND they're right next door, you don't unhitch. |
Furthermore, if Canada were going to unhitch, Canada should have done this back in 2002 or 2003. Wait, Canada didn't go to Iraq. The article is right. Seriously, if you're a Canadian, now is about the worst time to speak out against US foreign policy in a confrontational tone.
Should Canada diversify its trading partners? As much as it reasonably can. As much as it reasonably can. |
Canada should trade with anyone who can sell us things at the lowest possible price. We should trade with any nation that allows us to sell at the lowest possible price in their nation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mnhnhyouh
Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Location: The Middle Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:09 pm Post subject: Re: Should Canada unhitch its American wagon? |
|
|
| Quote: |
CANADA'S WORLD: PART 1
Instead of always looking south, why not turn out gaze to the east?
|
Wouldnt it be shorter to look west towards Asia?
h |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The article is a bit muddled in that it mixes two aspects of American-Canadian relations: foreign/defense policy and economic relationships. In the foreign policy arena, there is nothing wrong and no harm likely to be done in the long term to charting a more independent foreign policy. Canada decided not to participate in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and it did little long-term harm to the country's strategic situation.
Economically, while it makes basic sense to diversify exports, most of Canada's exports are in the form of raw materials, which are expensive to ship. As a result, Canada will always ship its exports to the closest available markets: the US. It's still much cheaper to ship wood products to the US than to Japan.
Arguably, a close economic relationship is also good for Canada's regulatory regime. It's no secret that Canada's securities and banking regulations are a joke, and the Canadian economy would be much better off if its regulatory regime was more like the US's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
| It's no secret that Canada's securities and banking regulations are a joke, and the Canadian economy would be much better off if its regulatory regime was more like the US's. |
I don't consider myself an economic naif, nor ignorant about Canada, but I've never heard this before. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Temporary
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry to burst your bubble guys but Canada is to insignificant of a trade partner with ASIA. Who would we trade with? Seriously? NK, China? Other third world crap?
If anything we should look to Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
| It's no secret that Canada's securities and banking regulations are a joke, and the Canadian economy would be much better off if its regulatory regime was more like the US's. |
I don't consider myself an economic naif, nor ignorant about Canada, but I've never heard this before. |
Have you ever heard of the Bre-X scandal? Swindle might be a better way to describe it...also, Conrad Black went to prison in the US for stuff that he got away with in Canada.
Canada has no centralized Securities and Exchange Commission like the US. Each province regulates the securities industry, and as a result there is a network of weak, poorly managed securities commissions across the country. The feds in have strongly criticized the provinces for this and called for a centralized national SEC like the US. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
