North American integration - second North American Forum

[jimmoyer]

Absolutely, Wednesday's Child !!

If Mexico could become the manufacturing engine
China has become, NAFTA would sure become a
benefit to all 3 trading partners.

Instead of the giant sucking sound big floppy eared
Ross Perot spoke of in 1992.

 

[#juan]

America is Canada's biggest threat because at some point in time, someone might just come along and say, well what's the point in having a larger nation with a smaller population up north from us. And we have such an expanding population, some of that room would be nice for Americans to settle.

It is something in America called Manifest Destiny where they should believe their flag should fly all the way to the North Pole, and since America tried to invade in 1812 and failed, attempted to support the Fenians in 1860s and failed and had invasion plans in the 1930s to invade Canada, even though terrorism may be apart of the threat level, America will always be a threat for Canada to be a nation.

I don't think Americans generally see any threat in Canada but American big business, and that is who runs America, would like to see everything in one package, with one set of laws, one set of rules.

Right now the big bad guy is big oil. In a few years it might be big water. Our governments, Liberals and Conservative, have watched while so-called "free trade" has allowed American companies a free hand buying out Canadian businesses. This is every bit as effective as sending their army in. Probably more effective, given the aqpparent incompetence of the U.S. military in Iraq, or previously, in Viet Nam.

Manifest Destiny will always be attractive in the U.S. because the "super patriots" in that country see it as their God-given right. Just like they thought it was their right to kill millions in Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos, Korea, etc.

Canada's problem is that there is no painless way of reversing the damage that has already been done. Ending the "free trade" agreement would be a good start. Free trade is only free if the Americans like it, as evidenced by the softwood lumber "deal".

There are people who will say Free trade is making us rich. It isn't. Any resource based economy is doing well these days, and we didn't need free trade to do it. We sure as hell didn't need free trade to give American big business all the advantages.

 

[Toro]

RE: North American integr

Saying that the US is Canada's biggest threat is silly paranoia.

 

[Curiosity]

Re: RE: North American integration - second North American F

Absolutely, Wednesday's Child !!

If Mexico could become the manufacturing engine
China has become, NAFTA would sure become a
benefit to all 3 trading partners.

Instead of the giant sucking sound big floppy eared
Ross Perot spoke of in 1992.

Thank you Jim for your affirmation

I makes plain ole sense to me because I see the impact of the cost of supporting the migrant workers who come to California (I am not familiar with this in other states - only California).

Nobody in his/her right mind would want to make that journey the migrants do - and would not if they could find work in their own land - to their benefit and ours.

I believe it could never work however under the present Mexican government system, it would have to be an American democratic system wherein the people established their own support system for education and health thus relieving the U.S. of their support.

The monies the migrants send home to their families could stay in Mexico to offset a payroll deduction to accomplish these benefits....

Seems more humane.... but nobody asked me. :wink:

 

[Karlin]

Re: RE: North American integr

Saying that the US is Canada's biggest threat is silly paranoia.

Silly paranoia eh ?

Our WATER is attractive to the Americans, our OIL is too, and another 30million consumers/workers paying taxes to that huge war machine would help them too.

Here are links from Vive le Canada organisation that help explain:

Say No to Deep Integration with the United States!
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/staticpages/index.php/ribbon

Canadian, U.S., and Mexican elites, including CEOS and politicians, have a plan to create common North American policies and further integrate our economies into a North American Union.

The end goal of the plan is to create a North American Union (NAU) by 2007, a new political and economic entity that would supercede the current countries of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.

Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union
http://tinyurl.com/kbtbg

Canada’s Independence Threatened by Task Force Recommendations:
http://www.bcpolitics.ca/int_canadathreatened.htm

In a report released on May 17, the Task Force recommends that the Canadian government make a number of changes to speed further economic integration of Canada and Mexico with the United States. Those recommendations include reviewing excluded sections of NAFTA, such as water, and removing any existing barriers to energy, which critics say would threaten Canada’s own domestic energy security.

K - the phrase "removing any existing barriers" means making it easy for corporations to export our oil to the USA - for example with less royalties paid to the Canadian government for our oil, which belongs to the people {"the crown"] until it is extracted.
It also means having less or zero environmental protections and restrictions for those corporations in taking our oil, and water. No emissions controls, no remediating damage to rivers and lakes and natural habitat.
It could also mean that protestors will not be allowed to "bother" those corporations that Canadians feel are going against our national and personal interests. In this, there can be an allowance for AMERICAN troops to enter Canada to crush any rebellions.

So, Toro, what do you mean by saying the USA is "not a threat" to Canada ? - are you saying that Canadians will love everything the American corporations and government backers may choose to do here if given free reign over our resources and economy? I doubt that.

Perhaps you could point out where other nations that have been taken over by the USA are all happy about it...

Karlin

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: North American integr

Silly paranoia eh ?

Yes.

This next quote is exactly what I mean.

Our WATER is attractive to the Americans, our OIL is too, and another 30million consumers/workers paying taxes to that huge war machine would help them too.

The conclusions of the Far Left is that because oil and water are attractive to the US, there always MUST be a deep, hidden conspiracy to take over the country, and that's the end of Canada. There can be no other option.

Paranoia about American annexation of Canada is as old as Canada itself.

The simple fact is that since Canada has come into being, Canada is drawing closer to the United States and will continue to do so, with or without trade barriers, with or without barriers to investment, etc.

And the reason for that is simple - technology.

Here are links from Vive le Canada organisation that help explain:

Say No to Deep Integration with the United States!
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/staticpages/index.php/ribbon

Canadian, U.S., and Mexican elites, including CEOS and politicians, have a plan to create common North American policies and further integrate our economies into a North American Union.

The end goal of the plan is to create a North American Union (NAU) by 2007, a new political and economic entity that would supercede the current countries of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.

ViveleCanada! What, GlobalResearch didn't have a link? :lol: :lol:

Timeline of the Progress Toward a North American Union
http://tinyurl.com/kbtbg

Canada’s Independence Threatened by Task Force Recommendations:
http://www.bcpolitics.ca/int_canadathreatened.htm

In a report released on May 17, the Task Force recommends that the Canadian government make a number of changes to speed further economic integration of Canada and Mexico with the United States. Those recommendations include reviewing excluded sections of NAFTA, such as water, and removing any existing barriers to energy, which critics say would threaten Canada’s own domestic energy security.

K - the phrase "removing any existing barriers" means making it easy for corporations to export our oil to the USA - for example with less royalties paid to the Canadian government for our oil, which belongs to the people {"the crown"] until it is extracted.
It also means having less or zero environmental protections and restrictions for those corporations in taking our oil, and water. No emissions controls, no remediating damage to rivers and lakes and natural habitat.
It could also mean that protestors will not be allowed to "bother" those corporations that Canadians feel are going against our national and personal interests. In this, there can be an allowance for AMERICAN troops to enter Canada to crush any rebellions.

So, Toro, what do you mean by saying the USA is "not a threat" to Canada ? - are you saying that Canadians will love everything the American corporations and government backers may choose to do here if given free reign over our resources and economy? I doubt that.

Perhaps you could point out where other nations that have been taken over by the USA are all happy about it...

Karlin

Scare-mongering. It is a common tactic of the Left in Canada to use the boogeyman of American annexation to promote their agenda of class warfare, higher taxes and more government control in your lives.

So go to the web site and see for yourself.

http://www.spp.gov/

In fact, there is so much chatter on the FoilerSphere about this, they've even added a link answering the myths.

http://www.spp.gov/myths_vs_facts.asp

Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.

Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.

Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.

Fact: The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

Myth: The SPP infringes on the sovereignty of the United States.

Fact: The SPP respects and leaves the unique cultural and legal framework of each of the three countries intact. Nothing in the SPP undermines the U.S. Constitution. In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States.

Myth: The SPP creates a NAFTA-plus legal status between the three countries.

Fact: The SPP does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA. It creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.

 

[I think not]

Yes yes. We want your water, and your oil, and your breakfast cereal, and your maple syrup (not the shelf version, the one you sell in Parliament), and your Labatts Blue, and [insert natural resource here]. So, chop chop.

 

[Sassylassie]

Christ is this tread still going, dah ITN take the water, god you can have our beer, our oil is already owned by the Americans, Exon Mobile is an American Company? Who do the children think owns the companies drilling in Canada are? Dah American. Off shore oil in NS, NFL provide jobs and help the economy grow. Thank you USA.

 

[I think not]

Works both ways.

In 2004, U.S. direct investment in Canada was worth more than $228 billion, while Canadian direct investment in the United States was close to $165 billion, which makes Canada the 7th largest investor in the U.S., accounting for 7.6% of all Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in that country.

http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/can-am/washington/trade_and_investment/trade_partnership-en.asp

 

[Hotshot]

It's only a matter of time before we take over and have you all saying "y'all" instead of "eh". Muahahahaha! :lol:

If you believe that, you are an idiot. Perhaps we should have kept yankeeland when we burned down the whitehouse during the war of 1812, EH??

 

[I think not]

It's only a matter of time before we take over and have you all saying "y'all" instead of "eh". Muahahahaha! :lol:

If you believe that, you are an idiot. Perhaps we should have kept yankeeland when we burned down the whitehouse during the war of 1812, EH??

It wasn't your call as evidenced by history. Or do you get all your history from Arrogant Worms?

 

[Toro]

RE: North American integr

You don't get the Arrogant Worms!

Look, its one thing to oppose free trade and all that, its quite another to say its going to be "the end of Canada." That's what the opponents of the FTA were saying in 1988. Shockingly, Canada is still around.

 

[Gonzo]

America doesn't want to take over Canada. Our biggest threat is not from the States. It's from our own government. We need to be careful as to what we allow our government to do, or who we elect. Canadians elected Mulroney twice, our worst PM ever! We have free trade because of him. The GST was to cover the money lost from duties we charged American companies at the border. So we pay taxes for American companies to sell to us. It's not Americas fault, it's ours because we elected Mulroney.

 

[Toro]

America doesn't want to take over Canada. Our biggest threat is not from the States. It's from our own government. We need to be careful as to what we allow our government to do, or who we elect. Canadians elected Mulroney twice, our worst PM ever! We have free trade because of him. The GST was to cover the money lost from duties we charged American companies at the border. So we pay taxes for American companies to sell to us. It's not Americas fault, it's ours because we elected Mulroney.

This is a perfect example of anti-American Leftist hogwash that has filtered into the Canadian psyche. This isn't Gonzo's fault per se because he/she is merely regurgitating the central Leftist theme of: Conservatives = American = bad = inaccurate facts

The GST did not replace duties on American goods. It replaced an excise tax on manufactured goods.

The purpose of the national sales tax was to replace the 13.5% Manufacturers' Sales Tax (MST) that the federal government imposed at the wholesale level on manufactured goods. Manufacturers were concerned that the tax hurt their international competitiveness. The GST also replaced the Federal Telecommunications Tax of 11%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goods_and_Services_Tax_(Canada)

Also

http://www.canadianeconomy.gc.ca/English/economy/1991gst.html

EDIT - though I will point out that Gonzo was gracious enough to point out its not America's fault.

 

[#juan]

This is a perfect example of anti-American Leftist hogwash that has filtered into the Canadian psyche. This isn't Gonzo's fault per se because he/she is merely regurgitating the central Leftist theme of: Conservatives = American = bad = inaccurate facts

You've learned very well Toro. Anything that disagrees with the accepted American position is "leftist", and anti-American. Hogwash, I can say for a fact that Bush has been bad for the world in general.

 

[Toro]

This is a perfect example of anti-American Leftist hogwash that has filtered into the Canadian psyche. This isn't Gonzo's fault per se because he/she is merely regurgitating the central Leftist theme of: Conservatives = American = bad = inaccurate facts

You've learned very well Toro. Anything that disagrees with the accepted American position is "leftist", and anti-American. Hogwash, I can say for a fact that Bush has been bad for the world in general.

You're being silly.

When I see Pat Buchanan criticizing the war in Iraq, I hardly think he's beong leftist and un-American.

 

[#juan]

When I see Pat Buchanan criticizing the war in Iraq, I hardly think he's beong leftist and un-American.

You watch Pat Buchanan? The guy who wanted to assassinate Chavez? Buchanan is a looney. On the other hand, he has a lot of company.