Right. And if each country thought in the same self-interested way you do, each country would be stabbing each other country in the back, thus costing them all.
Don't forget, what goes around comes around. If we want to benefit from foreign economies, then we must open ourselves up too. It's a two way street. Also, as far as I'm concerned, we ought to encourage automation and economic efficiencies as much as possible, and simply retrain those affected for the new jobs to maintain the new tech.
Also, as for money going abroad, remember that that also deflates the value of the Canadian dollar, thus encouraging exports later on. So it does balance out in the end.
I should have mentioned something I keep taking for granted to be common knowledge but which keeps coming back to bite like your post here.
Yes indeed barriers to trade can backfire on economies of nations not self-sufficient in all the stuff an economy needs to be industrial and middle class.
In fact most nations need trade in order to be industrial and hopefully middle class.
In fact there are only two nations on the planet where, if the rest of the planet were blown away such that only their nation was left standing, they'd have *all* the resource elements to maintain a self-sufficient industrial economy.
One is Russia. It has one of those bubbling outcrops of rare-earth elements caused by an up-swelling from the earth's core combined with a temperate climate with lots of oil and coal and agricultural land yadda yadda in order to sustain an industrial economy even though the US et al had them surrounded and blocked for decades.
The only place they fell flat was when that gargoyle from hell, Stalin, forced collectivization of agriculture, the effect being that farmers started treating their skilled labour like a 9-5 job, when everyone knows that farming is a situation of working 24 hours a day in the spring to till and plant, work a normal day in the summer, work 24 hours a day at harvest time, and stay inside with lots of food and beer under warm covers with your darling in the winter. Stalin allowed each collectivized farmer to work one acre of land for themselves. That one acre per farmer worked out to 3% of the arable land of the Soviet Union, and from that 3%, they grew half their food, mostly of the vegetable variety, such that they had to import grain. Lenin never wanted to collectivize farms. His target was industrial ownership.
Anyway, the point is, Russia is one of the two countries self-sufficient in all resources required to run a standalone economy, not necessarily dependent on trade to be industrial and middle class. The fact that they were able to hold out for so long in spite of a botched agricultural policy and in spite of being the main fighters and blood-letters against Hitler demonstrated that.
The other is Canada.
In fact, Canada doesn't need to trade with anyone, and the only reason it ever did was because Canadians were lazy.
The people who want to do Canadian trade are Canadians sitting on a pile of ore too lazy to smelt it themselves, whence comes along people from an industrial economy like China, willing to do the work if they can just get the ore.
So... getting back to tax reform... if you really want to get Canadians working again and get the economy rolling again... *because* Canada can run self-sufficient, it's a place where you *can* get the economy cooking by some very excellently targeted tax cuts.
You cut them to the bone for people who are buying from local suppliers, and are hiring local workers.
For the multinationals doing rape and pillage... tax them. Consider it a cost of being allowed to walk away with Canadian resources.
What are they going to do other than maybe try to organize a coup? Go somewhere else and cause the mines, forest, coal beds, tar-sands and wheat lands to magically teleport to where-ever will let them operate with impunity?
Did you know that in Saskatchewan, 85% of all family owned farmers have had to find part-time jobs in the towns to balance their budgets, while around them the robotic Monsantozoid monocultralists conducted by gel-haired Armani-suited MBA brats from NY mow up mega-acres of cheep, low-nutrient food while probably secretly trading in vitamin-supplements on the side?
What would happen if it was the Canadian family farm owners to get the tax cuts, and the robotic Monsanto monoculturalists to pay taxes as they leave with their booty? Family farm owners create jobs. My best paying summer jobs came from hiring myself out to the local farmers. Their pay beat the pants off working for a Dairy Queen, and all I had to do was show up and work.
What wrecks my brain is that one would expect that to be a natural policy for Reformists, from whence is derived the likes of Stockwell Day and Stephen Harper. They're supposed to be supporting the hardworking, conservative grass-roots.
But they're not, and that's just wrong. If you're going to be a party of Reformist ideology, then *be* a party of Reformist ideology, so at least people know what they're voting for!
