Someone objectively interested in making the country better says: "Hey let's fix this obvious thing that is wrong."
Someone whose entire massively overcompensated livelihood depends on not fixing that thing responds: "Wooah, there, hold up, are you sure you've considered all the angles? Here's a lively counter-argument. Who cares if it's a tiny edge case and/or entirely made up, it's not like most people can tell the difference. Here's an article I wrote for the Globe and Mail arguing that the change you proposed is based purely on exaggerated misinformation. Here's one by a friend of mine arguing that this change could result in scary outcomes, even ones like they have in America. America! We don't want to be like them! What kind of Canadian even are you? At the very least we can form a Crown committee and get some white papers done, then in a few years we can be properly informed about How to Proceed. That's how we do things in a civilized nation like Canada. Also just for suggesting this change you are probably a right wing lunatic whose views are totally illegitimate and worth less than the dirt on the ground."
Media: "There are two very compelling sides to this issue, and therefore there's no way to tell who should prevail."
Public: "I'm confused and don't care anymore. I wonder what Trump is up to today?"
For second there I thought you were talking about Albertan anti separatists. They use the exact same "fear what is behind the curtain" and abusive spouse type language.
More like supply management, military procurement, use of consultants, government contracts and building physical infrastructure, redundant departments and studies, funding media, enforced / protected monopolies, and many more.
"But wait, there's a good reason my very lucrative racket that actively makes society worse needs to exist! Let me baffle you with highly technical sounding disingenuous nonsense!"
It's all one big racket. Immigrants are the product and the Canadian business establishment are the consumer. Heck, even telecom profits and stock prices track Canada's immigration rates, lol.
My opinion is that the reason nothing ever changes is not due to a lack the courage to try, it is because those who benefit from the Status Quo, people with family names like Demerais or Irving (and more), are too deeply entrenched.
Canadians just want the complexities of life to be taken care of on their behalf. It's a big reason why a plurality of Canadians identify Canadian identity as universal health insurance and the nanny state.
We are a colonial people, only run out of Bay St instead of Whitehall.
Canadians are just not a bold people. We self selected to not be bold risk takers. We are a settler colony nation of worker bees and immigrants are the product to be consumed by our oligopolies.
I can't in good conscious advise young people with choices to settle and raise a family in Canada. I wish I could but I can't.
So let me get this straight. We want more free trade in Canada, right? But apparently we don't want free trade within Canada, between provinces. We'd like more choice in different and cheaper cheezes, and milk. But we can't get rid of the milk marketing board. Why not? We did get rid of the wheat marketing board. Oh, lets get rid of the chicken and egg marketing boards too. Please? We say we want more free trade, but our government isn't really serious about it.
Getting rid of the Wheat Board was easy because primarily western Canada was affected which had very little political clout. Of course after all the bluster from the Chicken Littles of the era it turned out to be a good thing. Big difference if you decide to rock Ontario and Quebecs boat.
Canada has had a very strong protectionist streal ever since Sir. John A. MacDonald's National Policy in the 1870s. The world has changed, but our old instincts are still there.
In addition to the air transport, telecommunications, financial services and agricultural (supply management) sectors, I would point to occupational licensing. We are extremely reluctant to recognize foreign credentials. A doctor qualified in France can be required up to six years of extra training in Canada before we let them practice. Why?
Skilled Trades the same,within our own country. I wrote the exam for the Red Seal on my journeyman tickets,and it’s not recognized in other provinces. What was the point?
I literally know a doctor who was partly educated at Oxford and can't get a license within six months to practise in Canada. They say he isn't qualified enough. He's in Switzerland now, a country that beclowns Canada in every way possible when it comes to health care.
Start with supply management vis a vis the US if Canada wants to deconstruct protectionism that is a net cost to the Canadian economy
It will be a huge cost to Canada to align with the EU with its fundamentally over-regulated, extreme climate policy objectives, and fundamental anti-Americanism.
Carney cannot overcome geography or competitive advantage.
My concern with EU "Associate Membership" is whether Canada gets pulled into the tangled web of European regulation. I have to deal with European regulatory compliance as part of my job - we sell products in Europe, it's the price of doing business. However, it's not a trivial amount of overhead: every European regulation is well-meaning; its proponents are sure they're solving a very important problem! However, the presumption is always that more bureaucracy and more regulation is the answer, and there seems to be little consideration given to the cumulative weight of all the regulation.
For example, there's the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation: 124 pages prescribing recyclability and material contents intended to reduce the amount of waste in packaging. That's a lot of regulation that a company has to handle when the packaging is not the actual product they're selling! There also doesn't seem to have been much consideration granted to something like applying a tax on landfills to encourage companies to reduce waste.
On top of this burden, the regulations are set by a bureaucracy that's a step further removed from democratically-elected governments than Canada, and decisions are made by agreement of 31 states instead of 10 provinces and 3 territories.
I've got to deal with this anyway, but I wouldn't want to see this regulatory sclerosis added to Canada's current tangle of bureaucracy. I also think that any government that would subject Canadians to this type of regulation would quickly find they'd triggered the same sort of popular backlash that helped push Brexit, but with a population that's far less tolerant of bureaucracy than the British.
Until we can fix our own stuff, rather than just talk about how somebody should fix it, we need to cool our European aspirations for real fear that we add at least two more layers of nonproductive bureaucracy into the mix.
The comment on red seal Journeypersons is spot on, Red Seals were intended to be a Pan Canadian certification but various provincial governments (Ontario the most egregious but none are clear and open) have allowed protectionism in apprenticeship and industry processes to create additional barriers that all 13 Premiers said they would eliminate. Still waiting.
Fuck Europe! Take care of Canada first,please. “Build Back Better Stronger Not seen in Generations!” Bullshit! Just laid off 350 poor souls in Hamilton at our last standing Steel Mill. What do we build with now? Recycled words? Sad state of affairs. Wait! We can import steel from Germany?!? Poland!?! China!?! It’s cheaper
Getting Canadians to think of having some European banks, a few European airlines, and opening the market to European telecoms is a great approach to tearing down our monopolistic walls. European trains too, please.
Ottawa has European trains. Because the light train development contract was mysteriously awarded to the Quebec firm SNC Lavalin even though they failed the technical tender requirement. They selected French trains (surprise surprise). The whole system including train sets has been a disaster.
Okay obviously I meant European train system. And completely with you on loathing SNC Lavalin corruption and the Trudeau government's overt role in that.
Classic economics is a wonderful theory, as a science the Chinese Communist Party has studied it well. World Trade has been turned upside down by the entry of China into the World Trade Organization. When you have an entity the size of China, governed by an internationalist communist party whose entire focus is world economic domination the game has changed. They are playing a totally different game using capitalism and the concept of free markets to economically dominate. Western consumers have become the proverbial frog in the slow boiling pot of water. Cheap goods at the expense of economic and ultimately national sovereignty. Consumerism maybe one of the worst of all the “isms”. Worse than protectionism. The CCP are playing a different game. A long game. Communism on a global scale by any means necessary, including deception. Membership to the WTO was the beginning. We left “Kansas” along time ago.
Yes, the oligopolies should be torn down, and the wrecker in question is the federal government. Provincial governments must also work to tear down their own protectionist policies, and even here the federal government has a role to play.
If Ottawa really got serious about encouraging the dismantlement of provincial trade barriers, it could very easily stop providing transfer payments until the provincial governments in question start to take serious actions to tear down those barriers.
Given that nobody does mewling and yowling better than provincial premiers, doing so would certainly raise the noise level in our confederation. Nonetheless, who has ever seen a demolition site that was not a little noisy?
Companies, which are based in countries that respect ratified trade deals, should be granted access to our protected industries. Our unprotected industries are also our most productive industries. It is almost like economic nationalism is bad.
At some point Canada is going to have to address the degree to which it will support food security. This is part of the debate on supply management that is often overlooked. There are many food items that could be imported at a lower price than the same item grown or produced in Canada because they would come from countries with lower labour costs, lower environmental standards and lower food safety standards. Canadian farmers would not able to compete price wise with those low cost imports. If tariffs and other protectionist measures were removed less and less food production would occur in Canada. In pursuit of cheaper food prices for consumers, how far would Canada go in terms of being dependent on foreign countries for the food Canadians consume? To what degree do consumer's care if their food is produced in Canada?
Supply management if anything makes food security weaker in Canada. By design is does not allow competitors and additional supply into the market. Less slack means less room to move when supply becomes strained.
Former PM Harper has offered support to Carney's ambitious plans to grow and diversify the Canada economy by advising him to remover the obstacles to investment that exist in no country outside Canada but Carney shows no signs of doing that. Instead he promises to navigate through these obstacles in one year instead of decades. The clock is ticking.
I commend the author for his courage, and his persistence.
I am in my sixty-fourth year. I studied economics in the late Seventies, and very early Eighties.
The very real concerns expressed by this author were basically our second year policy course.
We opined on these subjects then, and ever since.
Nothing changes in this Country, not because we don’t know the proper polices to follow; we know the optimal courses of action.
Nothing changes in this Country because Canadians lack the courage to try.
Our own apathy and unaccountability are our greatest enemies.
A tip of my cap to the author, but we’ve heard the song before.
Someone objectively interested in making the country better says: "Hey let's fix this obvious thing that is wrong."
Someone whose entire massively overcompensated livelihood depends on not fixing that thing responds: "Wooah, there, hold up, are you sure you've considered all the angles? Here's a lively counter-argument. Who cares if it's a tiny edge case and/or entirely made up, it's not like most people can tell the difference. Here's an article I wrote for the Globe and Mail arguing that the change you proposed is based purely on exaggerated misinformation. Here's one by a friend of mine arguing that this change could result in scary outcomes, even ones like they have in America. America! We don't want to be like them! What kind of Canadian even are you? At the very least we can form a Crown committee and get some white papers done, then in a few years we can be properly informed about How to Proceed. That's how we do things in a civilized nation like Canada. Also just for suggesting this change you are probably a right wing lunatic whose views are totally illegitimate and worth less than the dirt on the ground."
Media: "There are two very compelling sides to this issue, and therefore there's no way to tell who should prevail."
Public: "I'm confused and don't care anymore. I wonder what Trump is up to today?"
For second there I thought you were talking about Albertan anti separatists. They use the exact same "fear what is behind the curtain" and abusive spouse type language.
More like supply management, military procurement, use of consultants, government contracts and building physical infrastructure, redundant departments and studies, funding media, enforced / protected monopolies, and many more.
"But wait, there's a good reason my very lucrative racket that actively makes society worse needs to exist! Let me baffle you with highly technical sounding disingenuous nonsense!"
It's all one big racket. Immigrants are the product and the Canadian business establishment are the consumer. Heck, even telecom profits and stock prices track Canada's immigration rates, lol.
I do not want Albertans to separate from Canada, but, every day that passes, I understand a little better why they may.
I understand your argument, and you presented it really well.
Actually, such an accurately sad commentary was a great joy to read.
I suppose, my reply would be that everything you listed- every event and development- is the result of Canadian apathy and unaccountability.
We have done this to ourselves, and we have no one else to blame; we are the authors of our own fate.
My opinion is that the reason nothing ever changes is not due to a lack the courage to try, it is because those who benefit from the Status Quo, people with family names like Demerais or Irving (and more), are too deeply entrenched.
I get that angle, and I understand what you are saying.
There is always an engrained interest in this Country saying “ whoa: not so fast.”
And the very reason those interested can get away with it is the apathy and unaccountability of the Canadian people.
Canadians just want the complexities of life to be taken care of on their behalf. It's a big reason why a plurality of Canadians identify Canadian identity as universal health insurance and the nanny state.
We are a colonial people, only run out of Bay St instead of Whitehall.
This is the song FYI
"Welcome back my friends, to the show that never ends
I am so glad you could attend
Come inside, Come inside "
Credit - ELP circa 1980
Circa 1974, if I recall correctly. A fabulous live album.
I am 59 next week. Canada is ever thus.
Canadians are just not a bold people. We self selected to not be bold risk takers. We are a settler colony nation of worker bees and immigrants are the product to be consumed by our oligopolies.
I can't in good conscious advise young people with choices to settle and raise a family in Canada. I wish I could but I can't.
So let me get this straight. We want more free trade in Canada, right? But apparently we don't want free trade within Canada, between provinces. We'd like more choice in different and cheaper cheezes, and milk. But we can't get rid of the milk marketing board. Why not? We did get rid of the wheat marketing board. Oh, lets get rid of the chicken and egg marketing boards too. Please? We say we want more free trade, but our government isn't really serious about it.
Getting rid of the Wheat Board was easy because primarily western Canada was affected which had very little political clout. Of course after all the bluster from the Chicken Littles of the era it turned out to be a good thing. Big difference if you decide to rock Ontario and Quebecs boat.
Here's the thing: that's how 'not really serious' our governments are about *everything*.
Very well said.
Canada has had a very strong protectionist streal ever since Sir. John A. MacDonald's National Policy in the 1870s. The world has changed, but our old instincts are still there.
In addition to the air transport, telecommunications, financial services and agricultural (supply management) sectors, I would point to occupational licensing. We are extremely reluctant to recognize foreign credentials. A doctor qualified in France can be required up to six years of extra training in Canada before we let them practice. Why?
Skilled Trades the same,within our own country. I wrote the exam for the Red Seal on my journeyman tickets,and it’s not recognized in other provinces. What was the point?
I literally know a doctor who was partly educated at Oxford and can't get a license within six months to practise in Canada. They say he isn't qualified enough. He's in Switzerland now, a country that beclowns Canada in every way possible when it comes to health care.
Start with supply management vis a vis the US if Canada wants to deconstruct protectionism that is a net cost to the Canadian economy
It will be a huge cost to Canada to align with the EU with its fundamentally over-regulated, extreme climate policy objectives, and fundamental anti-Americanism.
Carney cannot overcome geography or competitive advantage.
" fundamentally over-regulated, extreme climate policy objectives, "
Agreed on this - and as for joining the EU - this another fake MOU
I will take - " Things that will never happen for $ 500 Alex "
https://finance.yahoo.com/energy/articles/repsol-warns-90-crude-supplies-180445934.html
Carney doesn't have to overcome it, he (and the cheerleading media) just have to convince a majority of Canadians it is the better option.
My concern with EU "Associate Membership" is whether Canada gets pulled into the tangled web of European regulation. I have to deal with European regulatory compliance as part of my job - we sell products in Europe, it's the price of doing business. However, it's not a trivial amount of overhead: every European regulation is well-meaning; its proponents are sure they're solving a very important problem! However, the presumption is always that more bureaucracy and more regulation is the answer, and there seems to be little consideration given to the cumulative weight of all the regulation.
For example, there's the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation: 124 pages prescribing recyclability and material contents intended to reduce the amount of waste in packaging. That's a lot of regulation that a company has to handle when the packaging is not the actual product they're selling! There also doesn't seem to have been much consideration granted to something like applying a tax on landfills to encourage companies to reduce waste.
On top of this burden, the regulations are set by a bureaucracy that's a step further removed from democratically-elected governments than Canada, and decisions are made by agreement of 31 states instead of 10 provinces and 3 territories.
I've got to deal with this anyway, but I wouldn't want to see this regulatory sclerosis added to Canada's current tangle of bureaucracy. I also think that any government that would subject Canadians to this type of regulation would quickly find they'd triggered the same sort of popular backlash that helped push Brexit, but with a population that's far less tolerant of bureaucracy than the British.
As you say in Europe the attitude is “more bureaucracy will solve the problem”. In that aspect we are well on our way to being European.
Until we can fix our own stuff, rather than just talk about how somebody should fix it, we need to cool our European aspirations for real fear that we add at least two more layers of nonproductive bureaucracy into the mix.
The comment on red seal Journeypersons is spot on, Red Seals were intended to be a Pan Canadian certification but various provincial governments (Ontario the most egregious but none are clear and open) have allowed protectionism in apprenticeship and industry processes to create additional barriers that all 13 Premiers said they would eliminate. Still waiting.
Fuck Europe! Take care of Canada first,please. “Build Back Better Stronger Not seen in Generations!” Bullshit! Just laid off 350 poor souls in Hamilton at our last standing Steel Mill. What do we build with now? Recycled words? Sad state of affairs. Wait! We can import steel from Germany?!? Poland!?! China!?! It’s cheaper
Not the US! Heaven for bid! As I clutch my pearls!
Appropo, as the demographic supporting this current Govt is the one still wearing pearls...
Excellent observations. Let's see what happens if we can somehow eliminate trading protectionism in our own country between provinces.
Which, of course, will not happen.
Getting Canadians to think of having some European banks, a few European airlines, and opening the market to European telecoms is a great approach to tearing down our monopolistic walls. European trains too, please.
Ottawa has European trains. Because the light train development contract was mysteriously awarded to the Quebec firm SNC Lavalin even though they failed the technical tender requirement. They selected French trains (surprise surprise). The whole system including train sets has been a disaster.
Okay obviously I meant European train system. And completely with you on loathing SNC Lavalin corruption and the Trudeau government's overt role in that.
Classic economics is a wonderful theory, as a science the Chinese Communist Party has studied it well. World Trade has been turned upside down by the entry of China into the World Trade Organization. When you have an entity the size of China, governed by an internationalist communist party whose entire focus is world economic domination the game has changed. They are playing a totally different game using capitalism and the concept of free markets to economically dominate. Western consumers have become the proverbial frog in the slow boiling pot of water. Cheap goods at the expense of economic and ultimately national sovereignty. Consumerism maybe one of the worst of all the “isms”. Worse than protectionism. The CCP are playing a different game. A long game. Communism on a global scale by any means necessary, including deception. Membership to the WTO was the beginning. We left “Kansas” along time ago.
Yes, the oligopolies should be torn down, and the wrecker in question is the federal government. Provincial governments must also work to tear down their own protectionist policies, and even here the federal government has a role to play.
If Ottawa really got serious about encouraging the dismantlement of provincial trade barriers, it could very easily stop providing transfer payments until the provincial governments in question start to take serious actions to tear down those barriers.
Given that nobody does mewling and yowling better than provincial premiers, doing so would certainly raise the noise level in our confederation. Nonetheless, who has ever seen a demolition site that was not a little noisy?
Companies, which are based in countries that respect ratified trade deals, should be granted access to our protected industries. Our unprotected industries are also our most productive industries. It is almost like economic nationalism is bad.
At some point Canada is going to have to address the degree to which it will support food security. This is part of the debate on supply management that is often overlooked. There are many food items that could be imported at a lower price than the same item grown or produced in Canada because they would come from countries with lower labour costs, lower environmental standards and lower food safety standards. Canadian farmers would not able to compete price wise with those low cost imports. If tariffs and other protectionist measures were removed less and less food production would occur in Canada. In pursuit of cheaper food prices for consumers, how far would Canada go in terms of being dependent on foreign countries for the food Canadians consume? To what degree do consumer's care if their food is produced in Canada?
Supply management if anything makes food security weaker in Canada. By design is does not allow competitors and additional supply into the market. Less slack means less room to move when supply becomes strained.
Former PM Harper has offered support to Carney's ambitious plans to grow and diversify the Canada economy by advising him to remover the obstacles to investment that exist in no country outside Canada but Carney shows no signs of doing that. Instead he promises to navigate through these obstacles in one year instead of decades. The clock is ticking.