Canada should drop energy and focus on agriculture trade with China instead


mentalfloss
#1
Not that any of this really matters, but for the people who really care...


Canada’s next big economic pitch: to feed a hungry world

The search for ways to shore up Canada's struggling economy is an increasingly urgent exercise, as the oil sector continues to sputter, non-energy exports stall and the country's labour market shrinks.

Among the proposed drivers to spur economic growth is the agriculture and food-processing sector, an unlikely yet important powerhouse that employs one in eight Canadians. Canada is the fifth-largest agricultural exporter in the world, and the sector is undergoing a technological revolution, from the use of drones and satellites that monitor soil moisture and indicate optimum planting times to smart machinery and transportation networks to make and distribute food products.

Story continues below advertisement

Canada's Dominic Barton, chair of the Canadian Minister of Finance's Advisory Council on Economic Growth, thinks that this kind of innovation in agriculture and food – combined with new free-trade agreements with hungry markets such as China – will help Canada find its next niche in the global economy.

The council's first recommendations in October dealt with setting up an infrastructure bank, increasing immigration levels by 50 per cent, and spurring foreign direct investment in Canada.

Mr. Barton, who is global managing partner of McKinsey & Co. in London, says the council is now working on its second, and likely final, wave of recommendations, focused on innovation, skills and particular growth sectors for Canada. He expects they will be released by the end of the year.

What are the major concerns about Canada's growth and productivity that you're trying to address?

What we're most worried about is the long term. If you look out 10 to 20 years, because of demographics and the aging population, we're one of the fastest-aging OECD countries on the planet. We will see our GDP growth rate literally halved, just because we'll have fewer workers in the market. We've enjoyed about a 3.1-per-cent growth rate in the past 50 years; we think that will literally be cut in half. The good news is that we've got a lot of things that we can do to unlock more growth. But if we sit back and do nothing, it would be a pretty ugly picture.

What can we unlock?

Story continues below advertisement

There's a range of things we can do. One of the reasons we picked infrastructure is because it is one of the most powerful ways of improving GDP growth and inclusive growth rates. Innovation is another one, because with all of the changes going on in technology, in particular, but also in biotech, it's probably going to be the most rapid source of good service jobs. Canadian universities and researchers are world-class in invention, but we're not as good as we could be in scaling up those inventions into commercial companies. And then we have sectors where we have some inherent strengths and really good niches where we could get much more growth.

What are these sectors and niches?

We're picking one in particular, which is agriculture and food, because it can employ a lot of people, there's a lot of innovation technology around it and huge demand. Also Canada is well-positioned. In health care, we have one of the biggest, most comprehensive databases on health in the world, but we're not leveraging that to figure out what we could do to innovate health-care delivery. There's also natural resources and fintech. There's tourism, where there's 400 million Chinese tourist trips going on a year and we don't capture much of that share. And then there's free-trade agreements. We're very keen on free-trade agreements.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/rep...service=mobile
Last edited by mentalfloss; Dec 7th, 2016 at 07:34 PM..
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
+1
#2  Top Rated Post
Is it struggling or rebounding? I can't keep up with your nonsense.
Last edited by Cannuck; Dec 7th, 2016 at 07:45 PM..
 
Machjo
#3
Why such micromanagement? Agriculture, energy, something else? instead of having bureaucrats trying to micromanage everything, why not let the market decide what it needs?


And environmentally speaking, why ship so much food to China when we can let the Chinese move to Canada closer to Canadian farms? The body weight of one person is far less that the weight of the food he can eat over a life span.
Last edited by Machjo; Dec 7th, 2016 at 07:54 PM..
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
+1
#4
That wouldn't make Canada white again
 
Mowich
Conservative
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Not that any of this really matters, but for the people who really care...


Canada’s next big economic pitch: to feed a hungry world

The search for ways to shore up Canada's struggling economy is an increasingly urgent exercise, as the oil sector continues to sputter, non-energy exports stall and the country's labour market shrinks.

Among the proposed drivers to spur economic growth is the agriculture and food-processing sector, an unlikely yet important powerhouse that employs one in eight Canadians. Canada is the fifth-largest agricultural exporter in the world, and the sector is undergoing a technological revolution, from the use of drones and satellites that monitor soil moisture and indicate optimum planting times to smart machinery and transportation networks to make and distribute food products.

Story continues below advertisement

Canada's Dominic Barton, chair of the Canadian Minister of Finance's Advisory Council on Economic Growth, thinks that this kind of innovation in agriculture and food – combined with new free-trade agreements with hungry markets such as China – will help Canada find its next niche in the global economy.

The council's first recommendations in October dealt with setting up an infrastructure bank, increasing immigration levels by 50 per cent, and spurring foreign direct investment in Canada.

Mr. Barton, who is global managing partner of McKinsey & Co. in London, says the council is now working on its second, and likely final, wave of recommendations, focused on innovation, skills and particular growth sectors for Canada. He expects they will be released by the end of the year.

What are the major concerns about Canada's growth and productivity that you're trying to address?

What we're most worried about is the long term. If you look out 10 to 20 years, because of demographics and the aging population, we're one of the fastest-aging OECD countries on the planet. We will see our GDP growth rate literally halved, just because we'll have fewer workers in the market. We've enjoyed about a 3.1-per-cent growth rate in the past 50 years; we think that will literally be cut in half. The good news is that we've got a lot of things that we can do to unlock more growth. But if we sit back and do nothing, it would be a pretty ugly picture.

What can we unlock?

Story continues below advertisement

There's a range of things we can do. One of the reasons we picked infrastructure is because it is one of the most powerful ways of improving GDP growth and inclusive growth rates. Innovation is another one, because with all of the changes going on in technology, in particular, but also in biotech, it's probably going to be the most rapid source of good service jobs. Canadian universities and researchers are world-class in invention, but we're not as good as we could be in scaling up those inventions into commercial companies. And then we have sectors where we have some inherent strengths and really good niches where we could get much more growth.

What are these sectors and niches?

We're picking one in particular, which is agriculture and food, because it can employ a lot of people, there's a lot of innovation technology around it and huge demand. Also Canada is well-positioned. In health care, we have one of the biggest, most comprehensive databases on health in the world, but we're not leveraging that to figure out what we could do to innovate health-care delivery. There's also natural resources and fintech. There's tourism, where there's 400 million Chinese tourist trips going on a year and we don't capture much of that share. And then there's free-trade agreements. We're very keen on free-trade agreements.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/rep...service=mobile

So we are going to increase our agricultural exports by setting up a bank, increasing immigration and bringing in more foreign investment. Not, as I mistakenly first thought, by actually increasing the number of crops we grow - not a word about that.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#6
They'd never afford Ontario produce. Carbon tax and Hydro makes growing veggies and livestock more expensive than growing Chevies
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#7
Yup, carbon taxes are gonna make it tough to export anything except carbon. Good thing we got keystone in the works.
 
Machjo
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

That wouldn't make Canada white again


And when in Canadian history outside of mythology has Canada ever been truly white?


Culturally, Canada was just as diverse prior to confederation as it is today. Wawa served as the main lingua franca between indigenous, English, French, Chinese, Spanish, Russians, and others on the Canadian West Coast up until around the late 1800s. In fact, Wawa was still used as a lingua franca in some industries in Seattle WA up until the late 1920s. Why do we think we needed the B&B Commission in the 1960s and the residential school system right up until the 1990s along with discriminatory immigration policies based explicitly on ethnicity prior to the 1960s and then education and immigration policies based on language as a proxy for ethnicity after the 1960's right up until today? Why did we revoke the right of German and Ukrainian Canadians to send their children to German and Ukrainian schools after WWI and never returned it? Why did we change the name of Berlin ON to Kitchener ON? The fact is, a White Canada is a myth that Canadian policy since confederation right up until today has been trying to build.

Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Yup, carbon taxes are gonna make it tough to export anything except carbon. Good thing we got keystone in the works.


I actually support a carbon tax, but it is different from tariffs in some ways.


Firstly, while tariffs discourage imports, a carbon tax encourages more local importation and exportation. For example, a tariff between Canada and the US might encourage more trade between Halifax and Vancouver or NYC and Seattle, whereas a carbon tax would encourage more trade between Montreal and Toronto and Seattle and Vancouver BC. It's like a tariff, except that it encourages trade not so much within artificial state boundaries but rather as locally to the source as possible independently of state boundaries.
 
mentalfloss
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Is it struggling or rebounding? I can't keep up with your nonsense.

It will be fine for the next 20 years, but we'll need to transition to renewables so there will have to be a supplementary industry during that transition.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
+1
#10
It took you all that space to say nuttin? You should go into politics
 
Mowich
Conservative
#11
I was looking into foreign investment in Canada's agricultural lands to see how a big a role it played and my first discovery was that currently there is no method available to track the percentage of Canadian land either owned or leased by foreigners. This also applies to pension funds and non-farm investors - no single database that details in whose hands our farmlands are held.

There are reasons given for that lack of scrutiny, one being that each province has jurisdiction over their own land and set their own regulations which vary widely from province to province. I can see how that would be a problem were we still limited to archaic methods of compiling data. As such is not the case, one wonders why we have yet to see a single registry that records and updates ownership of our farmlands. Surely some bright young student skilled in coding could design such a program.
 
JamesBondo
#12
I notice that mentalfloss failed logic 101 because he thinks in exclusive-OR. If he really wanted diversity, then our economic policy would be very inclusive. It would include agriculture and energy, not just agriculture. He's implying that we need to choose 1 or the other, not both,. And, he is most certainly wrong.
 
mentalfloss
#13
Nuance isn't your strong suit.

I'm talking about what to do during our transition period in a decade or so.
 
JamesBondo
+1
#14
Nope, you are always talking about starting your plans with a wrecking ball.

Solar power is not enough, you want to see oil suffer. You've said it many times. Your stupidity looks good on you. Get over it.

Seriously, dude. Don't even try to ****ing deny it. All we have to do is read your title to this thread "Canada should drop energy and focus on agriculture trade with China instead"
 
MHz
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

Is it struggling or rebounding? I can't keep up with your nonsense.

It is struggling to rebound.
With OPEC cutting back that means there is a glut, we have oil but no customers and nobody is looking for new suppliers. Grain and textiles is something that could be produced and a market found for it that isn't the US. We may even take a hit there depending on how self-sufficient Trumps wants them to be.
 
mentalfloss
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by JamesBondo View Post

Nope, you are always talking about starting your plans with a wrecking ball.

Solar power is not enough, you want to see oil suffer. You've said it many times. Your stupidity looks good on you. Get over it.

Seriously, dude. Don't even try to ****ing deny it. All we have to do is read your title to this thread "Canada should drop energy and focus on agriculture trade with China instead"

I realise you only read the titles and that explains a lot.
 
Angstrom
No Party Affiliation
#17
Whatever mentalflake says is usually the perfect opposite of what we should .do
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#18
They have to cook the agricultural produce you know.

Are you sure you're ready to run a country or advise government? Sell them both stupid.
 
MHz
#19
If they don't have both already they are dead.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#20
We could precook and freeze before we ship.Trillions of TV Dinners for the to busy to cook Chinese markets.

Instead of raiseing beef we would be raising the Chinese.
 
Curious Cdn
No Party Affiliation
#21
Back to the farm, all you Cowgarians!
 
mentalfloss
#22
Trump and China on collision course

If it comes to it, China could make life difficult for the Trump administration.

It could refuse to help slow the nuclear program of close ally North Korea, impose tariffs on US goods or make it more difficult for American businesses to operate in China. Weiss said Beijing could also hold military maneuvers to show the US and Taipei "that China's resolve is unshaken."

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.cnn....?client=safari
 
Locutus
#23
nu-males becoming quinoa farmers...funny story.

those pesky weaklings will be waving their arms about until they die out in the next couple of decades.
 
Remington1
#24
I agree with increasing our agricultural trading power, but I would say preferably make a deal with the US vs a communist country. I say that mainly for the trust factor.
 
mentalfloss
#25
China is becoming more trustworthy than the US.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#26
China is becoming more trustworthy than Canada
 
mentalfloss
#27
Canada is more trustworthy than the US.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#28
So who do we trust - your propaganda or the other guy's
 
Jinentonix
No Party Affiliation
+1
#29
Oh this ought'a be good. With Gerald "Humping Our" Butts wanting to do to Canada what he did to Ontario, there's going to be a lot less usable farmland with which to produce food for export.