Yaro

Actually the exact opposite is true, I don't know if there is a group that has done as much economic damage to a region in the history of the planet as the North American conservative movement has done in the last 30 years. I certainly can't think of a single example of a region with the kind of massive resource advantage that Canada in particular has had that has seen living standards drop. Ah yes, the productivity agenda, the new mindless buzzword. As soon as someone can explain to me why they expect wages to rise in the future in parallel when for the last 25 years the relationship between the two has been the inverse we may actually be able to have a discussion over such a ridiculous notion (and yes I understand the underlying reasons, but quite frankly don't care to point it out unless someone else does as well or at least has an idea). OMG, it’s the great Satan, imagine that a party that will include opposition ideas which they consider to be good... WTF is wrong with you people? Perhaps we have a different definition of democracy, and communism? Perhaps someone will explain to me someday how communism and democracy are mutually exclusive? Of course the difference was that the conservatives were budgeting for 60 billion in surplus and the liberals for 40 billion. Where did the budget surplus come in? Somewhere in the middle, so what would have happened? Oh ya the conservatives in there first budget would have had the country back in debt. The PM didn't beg for anything, he stated his intentions. Not that its at all relevant, why anyone would not want to give 30 days after the Gomery report for the parties to beat each other up over implementing the recommendations instead of doing it right before so that whatever party gets in can safely ignore it all together isn't a very bright person quite frankly. I agree, the bend towards supression of free speech in Canada has been disturbing over the last 20 years. This was moronic.

err and canuck cat, I think you owe moderateamerican an apology, clearly you misunderstood what they said. And yes it is just plain old democracy, its the kind of thing that should happen far more often. When public opinion is widely known and accepted then it should be short hop to implementation (so long as constitutional standards are met) baring very significant cause (information not available to the public).

Actually GM has many problems, uncompetitive contracts, irresponsible funding practices, massive bonuses and insane benefits packages at the top, top heavy management, piss poor engineering etc... quite frankly I could go on for some time here. At the end of the day however its hardly difficult for employees to not want to make less then there parents made for the exact same job. Productivity has been rising for 25 years, and wages have been falling for just as long... May you live in interesting times... (old Chinese curse)

You must truly despise Mulroney then?

What disgusts me (if they are guilty) is that nobody else at the school said or did anything about it because there no way in hell a group of boys did this for this long without other students knowing about it. I am not sure what I would have done but it would have involved blinding violence on an unprecedented level.

We have had this discussion before, neither side was right. Would I rather have had the USSR win? No. Would I rather have had a far more mature and intelligent resolution that didn't leave both countries in horrific shape? Yes. Of course it was a mistake, what was the point? All we did was pave the way for the communists to be able to legitimately point to the west and say "see they aren't on your side, there a bunch of psychos". Why would we help them along in this? If communism was so bad then they would have drifted away from it naturally as the Chinese are.

Grammatically this statement is meaningless, and what it implies is explicitly untrue. But I am beginning to see the tact that the hard right is taking to cover for the fact that standard of living is dropping despite the hard right changes and free trade. Interesting stuff.

No, they weren't fighting for Canada and the Vietnam war was a sad mistake that a good 95% of the population now recognize as such. If they want to be honored for going to fight in a country they never should have been in on behalf of a foreign power then they can go to the US and receive whatever honors are due them. Those idiots didn't do anything but give us all a black eye internationally, and encourage/perform a great number of atrocities.

Sorry it took so long for a reply... Oil Prices are not gas prices, while they are linked is far from direct or absolute. As I said before the price of gas SHOULD have risen, however it should not have reached anywhere near the levels that it did. This shouldn't have been governed by the futures market it should have governed by the competitive nature which currently does not exist. First off let me say what a pleasure it is to meet someone who takes an interest in the world outside there borders. Venezuela is a fascinating place at a fascinating time, such a pure contrast of far right vs. far left. Next let me first say that Chavez has OVERWELMING support in Venezuela, the only group of people of which this is not true is a very powerful aristocracy (maybe the most powerful in south America). The latest figures put his approval rating at north of 70%, in a country with an 80/20 economic split and a private media industry that is virtually complete opposed to him that is a truly extraordinary number. Chavez is viewed as nothing short of a national hero. There is a great deal of untruth to many of the statements on both sides of the fence in Venezuela, and certainly Chavez is no angel as there are very credible reports that he has both blocked protests and some reports that he may have ordered police to fire on protesters to disperse crowds. Chavez is a hard leftist, always has been and I certainly don't agree with many of the things he has done. However what is undeniable is that what he has done has been good for the average citizen of his country, this despite the massive opposition from the corporate sector oil and media interests. I think that any valuable discussion should be prefaced by a little bit of background on Venezuelan politics. First let’s define our major players, there is of course Chavez and his cabal which consists of a significant portion of the military (he is ex military) and a congress that is almost in its entirety his (he threw out the democratically elected congress and replaced it with his cronies in order to push through a new constitution). Then there are the Oil interests, there are too many to start listing individuals here but let’s just look at the general milieu of what they comprise. The oil pumped out of Venezuela before Chavez was pumped under a rather sweetheart deal that was negotiated by Clinton, As an addendum to the Oil interest lobby it should be pointed out that there is no significant labour movement in Venezuela, this really isn't surprising considering the poverty that has been the norm in that country for most of its existence. Any time you hear "labour" its best just to take it as the corporate front that it is. All of the senior positions within the labour movement also hold high positions within the oil industry and most of the workers themselves are poorly educated and poorly paid, far to poorly to organize in any meaningful way. Then there is the third party, the most interesting group imo because it shows just how powerful an influence a directed media can be. The largest and most powerful media group in Venezuela is the Cisneros Group, not only is it one of the largest in Venezuela its one of the largest in the world. It’s run by the man considered by most to be the second most powerful man in the country, Gustavo Cisneros. There is also Andrews Mata owner of the second largest media group in the country El Universal, a close personal friend of Cisneros. Gustavo Cisneros is the most important player to the far right by some distance however. Although there are major players really those are the main ones for a number of reasons. The military is to split among the factions to be considered a cohesive group, and has preformed heinous actions on each of there behalf at least one time within the last decade. Let me point out a few things about your list. troops were called in by Chavez to combat brood squads that had been hired by the oil companies, this was an incredibly dark day in Venezuelan history. If you don't know what a brood squad is, it’s a group of people hired by a company (in this case a broad coalition of companies) to quell massive unrest among a workforce. They are a pretty prominent and reoccurring theme in history and this was just a Venezuelan occurrence. Calling it quelling protests is wholly inaccurate. Business groups locked out there workers gathered groups of engineers and managers formed "unions" and went on strike trying to damage the economy enough to get Chavez to bargain. Completely untrue, this was an attempt by the oil and media industries to force Chavez from office using a completely trumped up set of circumstances and maybe the most singularly focused attack by media in a country ever. I am not even sure where they are getting some of this information from as it’s utterly ridiculous. Many many things are afoot in Venezuela currently, but none of them are signs of an unstable government or country. The economy is growing despite the strikes and the only people being hurt are the oil executives who have been using the stoppages in order to try to leverage Chavez. However this may have backfired because Chavez recently launched accusations of tax/royalty evasion at several oil companies in Venezuela which may drive them into bankruptcy (several have already gone bankrupt because of the strikes they induced themselves). This may very well play right into Chavez's hands as its always been obvious that he wants direct control of the oil and he may very well wind up with it if he can seize control of these companies assets for the trumped up tax/royalty evasion charges. Then there is the emergence of the state run media which trades blows daily with the corporate media. Really there is too much to cover in one post on the subject but I would enjoy a discussion on any specific topic concerning Venezuela. Sure, if you concede that it is a monopoly because only monopolies work the way you are suggesting. You’re ignoring a monopoly on the grounds of a secondary effect that you find desirable. While I won't argue against society moving to more fuel efficient cars this is not the right mechanism for that. Principled changes should come from government not corporate malchavianisms. Untrue, the media in Venezuela is VERY free and extremely powerful. They have media interests all over the world and would literally be impossible to silence. During the last coup they instigated for several days leading up to it with radio adds every 10 minutes. Chavez is a left wing hardliner, he is not by any reasonable definition of the word a dictator, dictators do not have 70% support and do not disband the government and go into an election because of a petition. Development costs are another name for infrastructure costs, they are not the costs associated with finding new oil they are associated with developing the infrastructure to exploit that oil. The statement is true, just not saying what you think its saying. This is just plain misleading. Oil Companies throughout this entire period were busy establishing oil projects all over the world (not that’s oil recovery projects) and invested huge sums in infrastructure to in order to insure future oil supply. I never even argued this point however and it is irrelevant, what the oil industry did was ensure that it was not there supply of crude that was threatened and there is indeed a great deal of competition in the search for new sources of crude while simultaneously ensure that there would be a shortage of refined gas. They did this by closing refineries, they did this in concert to drive up gas prices. Why would they not fight for crude supply? It’s to each companies benefit to do so, and why would they not collude on gas prices when it is again in there interest to do so? People seem to be confusing two different aspects of the same business. Crude and refined oil are two separate commodities, and while they are linked they are separated by the refining process. It serves well the interests of the oil companies for there to be a large supply of oil (and so they fight viciously and do there best to create such a supply) and it is simultaneously in there interest for there to be a shortage of refined oil and so they do again whets in there best interest to create that. untrue, even if you take the estimated 20% of total price pump for refining cost it is a very lucrative business. Several refineries were shut down in the early 90's at the same time others were upgraded, the overall capacity to refine in the US has fallen however. Once again, this is includes infrastructure costs and in no reasonable way could be held under the title of exploration which was the topic we were discussing. There is little doubt that worldwide infrastructure costs in the coming decades will be enormous however the vast majority of that will come from governments not companies. Yes and no, Venezuela is a very important exporter of oil to the US, and while the recent agreement with China goes a long way to freeing Venezuela from its dependency on the US it certainly remains a two way street. If Chavez is successful in getting the totality of the oil industry under his control and continues to hold such widely held popularity? There are several other countries in the reason that have "Chavez's" of there own (or at least self described Chavez's) attempted to do the same thing in there own countries (allegedly). Take for instance the Chevron-Texaco operations in Columbia which are wildly unpopular, if a Chavez were to arise there and kick out CT? The ripple effect could be enormous. Also considering the US's history in the region and the brand new DOD's ID hungry for some action... But I think it unlikely because Chavez screams about it so much that if he actually gets assassinated the US is automatically blamed for it and that could create an even worse situation.

I have already twice posted links to articles discussing the memo's leaked from various oil companies concerning both the collusion and price fixing. No, I would have you believe they are smart enough to do whats in there own best interest but apparently you would have us believe that they are morons who compete despite the obvious self interest involved in doing otherwise. Yes it is, some would say that prices fluctuating in concert would be the hallmark of a cartels behaviour. Oil values are largely illogical, they are based upon the same principles as most current markets which are based on emotional runs. I don't see what this has to do with gas prices however or the point of this discussion which was oil company profits. Don't try to condescend to me, or quite frankly I will just embarrass you. I am the one who is defending the market system here, it is you that is using some kind of psychotic anarchy.

Oil Prices are based on the futures market, they have little real relation to current oil supply. Its largely emotionally driven and illogical. Oil prices haven't been at an all time high, during the 70's fuel hit more then $3 dollars/liter (when adjusted for). China's demand is indeed a large issue, as there demand will keep rising we could very well soon see ourselves in a genuine shortage rather then a manufactured one. However it should be noted that China has largely stopped domestic oil production, not because there is no domestic supply, but simply because they are saving it for the difficult transition to the post-oil world (whenever that comes). Actually you have it slightly off. The government did run it, then it was taken over by the military and a group of private individuals tried to sieze it, brought in there own people, excuse the expression fucked everything up. Then the government came back in and fired all the people who helped the military (many of them senior managment). Now they brought back in a bunch retires who they have to retrain on the new equipment, and even worse now they have to redrill some of the wells that were killed by the military when they realized they were going to have to leave. Your right that its a giant cluster.... but internally at least Veneuzuela is quite stable (far more then the media we get here suggests).

Sorry but infrastructure costs are not exploration costs. So what? Have you suddenly turned over a leaf and now your a big supporter of good wages for labour? Going to join the NDP? Regardless saying the average income in Fort McMurray is 91k is largely meaningless, how much does the average worker there make? Not that any of that even matters, the mechanic which has so openly been supported by conservatives (you know that pesky market system) is broken and 99% of Canadians are suffering for it. Regardless of whether it would be a particularly efficient idea or is a "good idea" in an ideal environment it is the unfortunate reality that it is the only solution currently available to us. Not that there has ever been one iota of evidence suggesting that it wouldn't be just as efficiently run as private sector enterprises. Not that its what I "want" to do mind you I just don't see another way out. Your understanding on the reasons for lack of refining capacity in north America is wrong. There have been several memos internal to several large oil companies which have revealed in the last few years that there was deliberate collusion in order to reduce worldwide refining capacity. It is no assertion, it is accepted fact at this point that the oil companies have been acting in collusion. Most high cost industries act as cartels through 3rd parties in the modern world, competition is bad for business. Considering there was very little incentive for exploration and there was no need for exploration and there is still a minimal need (relatively) the answer would be no. Also this is irrelevant, the chosen system is a market one. The competition mechanic is clearly broken and that is what has caused the extreme gouging that we have seen. The gas prices at the pump should never have hit a dollar, even 90 cents is borderline according to most analysis. Again, it is irrelevant who owns shares and who does not. The roll of the die that is investment economics is meant to operate on certain principles they are currently not working and regardless of who it is that's benefiting (and make no mistake my personal portfolio is benefiting greatly) and who is not, the system is broken. Wow, that's quite a statement. I didn't realize you were so completely willing to abandon capitalism in the face of logic. Actually no its not, Venezuela is a pet of mine. Its in a fascinating circumstance and I keep a rather close eye on it. There is little doubt that Venezuela's production is lower then announced as it always has been, and incidentally as it always has been in virtually every major oil producing nation not in OPEC. It should also be noted that less then 6 months ago Venezuela signed a major funding and oil deal with China. Also just a word on researching Venezuela, its important to note that most of the media reports that come from Venezuela make things sound much worse then they actually are primarily because the vast majority of Venezuelan media is owned by a group who not so long ago backed a failed coup attempt and who are intimately involved with the same group that attempted to use the military to take over the oil industry (the cause of the issues your speaking of). It is not oil supply that is tightened, it is refining capacity (which was also hit by the very heavy hurricane season). Again oil prices should significantly affect the price at the pump, it should not however cause more then a mild rise in profits. That is what a competitive market is supposed to insure.

This is rather facetious reasoning; there are two major factors that determine the retail price of goods, landed cost and market competition. Landed costs haven't changed at all, and competition is non-existent in this market. The prices are pure gouging, as much gouging as your local convince store charging $20 for a bottle of water after a hurricane. Wow were do I start; there is no shortage of oil right now. OPEC is at full production and there is raw oil aplenty. What is in short supply is refining capacity, refining capacity was shortened intentionally in order to drive give the big oil companies the ability to raise the price of gas without a rise in cost and the best part for big oil is that people are so uninformed on this topic (for some reason) that they blame it largely on lack of oil. Venezuela is extremely stable; in fact they are subsidizing heating oil for much of the US poor. Not only have no new refineries been built, some have actually been closed. Drilling off the BC coast would do nothing to aid this problem, it would just add yet more supply to a market already overproducing. Completely irrelevant. No matter which side of the fence you sit on this isn't even remotely relevant. Costs for exploration are not mammoth, there actually fairly small. Your mistaken on the spending by Shell. There is a great deal of competition between big oil companies in finding new supply streams but there no chance they spent in the hundreds of billions and its far more likely it was in the hundreds of millions. The mechanism for determining this is the market, which as of right now is not being allowed to work. It is being warped and twisted by anti-competitive behavior and favorable laws created by powerful lobby groups. I don't know about you but I don't go through 4 litres of milk a day... At the end of the day there really is only one solution for Canada, and that’s to open government run refineries. Really we are incapable of putting significant pressure on either the US or the Oil companies directly to clean up there act so the best course of action would be to provide competition.

Where is this information coming from, under these circumstances the chances of someone doing this being taken alive are about ohhhh 0% so if possible I wouldn't mind seeing a source.

Not that I have ever made such a statement, but I am not the one that abandoned the high ground so I get to if I want to. Its nice being morally superior, the view is great... And where exactly is America's Intel? America's Microsoft? America's IBM? Its Walmart? Those are all multinationals, just because there headquarters are for the time being in the US doesn't mean that they are American, any investor anywhere can own any of them to any extent. Canadians own a great deal of all of those companies. Ignore it all you want, your the one who shows a significant lack of understand of basic principles of business and economics. There is no measure by which the US is leaving either Canada or Europe, even the ultra optimists in your camp are admitting that there looking at a massive recession... But that’s ok it’s not like you have ever made a point on economics that could be successfully argued, for that you would have to actually make a point. I don't deny the problems in my country actually, I examine them with a critical eye on an ongoing basis-and this may surprise you that we agree about the existence of substantial problems in our country. The difference between you and I is that I actually know something about the US, have lived and spent a great deal of time there and am aware of the substantial problems they have (allot more then we have right now). You on the other hand are clearly so out of your mind with rage at your own inability to succeed that trying to find something upon which to blame it has become a full time job. Of course if you read more and ranted less you would probably at least be able to point the finger in the right direction because you and people who more successfully espouse your primitive philosophies are your own worst enemies. Once again you embarrass yourself; the USSC is universally considered a right leaning court. There is exactly 1 left leaning and 1 centrist judge and the centrist is about to leave. Of course if you were a little smarter you would have realized that the decision was strictly constitutional, the problem wasn't with the courts it was with the politicians who didn't immediately rush in to fix the problem with the gaping hole in the constitution. But to understand that you would have to understand the role of the judiciary, and that has in the past simply proved too much for you. The Fundamentalists who created the Taliban are the same group who occupied a temple in Mecca in 1979, they are the same group who declared dozens of holy wars against Saddam, and they are the same group that now resides with virtual impunity in Pakistan. The Taliban were one of a network of organizations who had as there sole purpose the borderless unification of the Muslim world, the same organization that has been active for almost 100 years. As for the Neocon's attachments to Saddam, well believe what you will they were there in their original Reaganist form, they were there until Bush Sr realized what a group of psychopaths they were and they are there now. In Politics there are no friends just allies that can shift and change at a moments notice, for example how Bin Laden was a great ally... I could go on, but I will just give you some light reading on the topic and move on. Killing Hope Ghost Wars Each written by a very well respected Washington insider. Why would I argue against the US? I argue facts not for or against anything; you seem to be incapable of separating the US from specific points as they relate to the US. What exactly would you like to see me argue against? US military intervention? US economic tactics? US political hackery? What exactly? Yup you just love to thump your head against a wall don't you? So who exactly said that Iran calling for the extermination of Israel was good again? And who again blamed it on the US? Oh that’s right only in your continuing and impressive game of self delusion. As for your devastating argument on softwood, well na na na na Do you even know what Nazism is? There can, by definition, never be Islamic Nazism, and if you’re talking about the Islamic fundamentalist problems that have been blown so far out of proportion that they would be the laughing stock of the planet if it weren't so sad how many people grip them so tightly well then I am forced to wonder why you don't live in cave, there nice and safe I hear, and you should definitly not drive because thats thousands of times more dangerous. Why can't people get over the fact that Islamic fundamentalists aren't a serious threat to anyone? Well when you have other people dealing with imaginary issues like Islamic Nazism (good god that’s stupid), you have to fill your time with whatever is actually an issue. Canada is a joke in the eyes of the international community? What group of people on the entire planet has a higher opinion of the US then they do of Canada? I will tell you which one, NONE, ZERO, ZILCH. Not only that the US isn't even in the same league as we are on this point. Of course the WTO has never said that Canada was a better place to live then the US that was the UN. But I will digress for a moment, you see within the purview of the WTO absent the NAFTA they will rule according to there rules. There decision does mean something, if and only if the rules that we agreed to with the US doesn't exist. Let me try and break this down for the slow with an example. There are minimum employment standards where you live, there is a minimum you can get paid there is a maximum you can be worked, certain rules which govern the relationship possible between you and your employer. Now lets say that you had some skill that meant that you could reasonably demand more for your time then the average worker and so you agree to a contract with a company, this contract gives you certain rights and benefits, more pay, better vacation etc... Now some time goes by everything is operating according to the agreement and there are no problems. Then all of a sudden your employer tells you that you will now be operating under the basic law which governs your rights, so your pay goes down, your vacation disappears etc... But he also says to you that you can't leave because the contract is still binding. You see, life is allot more complicated then your simple minded WTO = NAFTA weighting. You know what might help you? Actually making a point, instead of the constant blah blah blah droning that is your trademark. You know actually coming up with something that has some reasonable chance of standing up in a debate? That would be novel.

Really, that’s interesting do you have any more details? I would love to be able to examine such a case because I have found the fact that Canadian and British disputes with the US have gone virtually unreported in the US and I always assumed that the reverse would be true but I couldn't remember any examples. Ya, I found the article its a projection. I must have read it while I was tired, my bad.

An accurate assessment of society as a whole rather then the government in particular but certainly relevant.

Or maybe the conservative policies aren't liked by the majority of Canadians? Na couldn't be that simple.

No can't say as I do, I remember it sounding odd to me as well so you may very well be right.

Yes we would have, probably early, and it would have stayed. It’s the delusional Western attitude that somehow the world is slanted against us that makes people who have lived in both places ignore us. BC seems to be the home to the Canadian counter culture as we just simply seem to disagree on everything just for the sack of it and Alberta is home to the countries smallest intellects.

I understand very well the nature of season brown outs not that it has anything to do with anything. I read an article recently that stated Canada as a whole imports more energy from the US then it exports, although it might have been specifically electrical energy. The article never made much of an impact. And it shows Spain as having 1/7th, and Russia as having 1/14th and the rape capital of the planet (Brazil) isn't even on the list. In fact you will notice that the countries at the top of the list are the ones that rape is actually likely to be reported. Rape being one of the most underreported crimes on the planet it’s hardly surprising. That’s a fine position to take, just don't ever pretend to have the moral high ground again. Not that I would expect you to know this but Canadians are on average among the worlds largest holders of fortune 500 stock. Canada as represented by Canadians does have many, many, MANY major corporations. Yes I am sure you have a very good view of what is in Canada's economic interest from your van down by the river. Not that I would expect you to even understand anything that Ed Clark says but the reason has focusing on the US is because (as every big league investor knows) large collapses like the one coming to the US are perfect opportunities for foreign investors to sweep in and buy up all sorts of goodies at rock bottom prices. Hell I know that when the US housing market collapses I will be investing millions if not tens of millions in US housing. I certainly won't defend some of the more ridiculous things that have happened in Canada but this mashed set of paragraphs displays with startling clarity the fact that you have no idea what your talking about. I guess you missed the recent rulings on eminent domain, on the SS investigations into a high schoolers report, and the nature of CIA operations overseas. I understand that you love to insult Canada and I really don't have a problem with you doing so, but again I am forced to ask why you don't do it from the US side of the border? Oh that’s right; they only want someone who actually has a useful skill set. Has Canada breached a free trade agreement that I am unaware of? Sure if the WTO ruling had any relevance, but seeing as how the WTO only has relevance in disputes not covered by NAFTA its just another case of you blowing smoke out your ass. Once again nobody brings together the non-consequential and the downright ludicrous like our beloved Mr. Burns. I tend to think that if you spent half as much energy on improving your life as you do on whining you might actually get somewhere but I doubt it.

Completely untrue. Again completely untrue. Overhead in the private sector is virtually without exception higher then the public sector.

Yes that's the way it works but certain preconditions have to exist before a country can supply that much wood and Canada is one of the only places on earth were those conditions exist. And even in Canada with all of our space and all of our natural tree-growing environment is lowering sustainable wood production, specifically the old growth production that is for all intents and purposes not a renewable resource (as it takes 100 years to produce true old growth standard hardwood). There simply isn't an country that can "turn on" the wood production it would take a minimum of 20 years for a country to start producing even the lowest quality pulp and soft fibre woods.

This is completely irrelevant, unless your planing on arguing that society is able to maintain a higher level of social wealth despite a less efficient system then the actual cost of goods is irrelevant, it is only the cost compared to average income. As I said before, your operating on economics 101 logic, higher levels of efficiency are the only way to make a wealthier society and while there is often a significant correlation between productivity and efficiency they are not the same thing and tend to diverge when forced to peak levels of productivity. The theory is called comparative advantage, it is one of the hallmarks of the argument for free trade. Basically the theory that goods should be produced and distributed from the point at which they are the cheapest. Unfortunately while the simplistic mathematics of the theory are sound the conditions for it to be at all useful simply do not exist. A few of the issues which create our current delima. The inability for labour to move, without the ability to move the labour pool to the point at which production becomes logically cheapest literally 1/2 of the value of contemporary comparative advantage becomes pointless. Industrialization, it is important to note that the theory of comparative advantage is pre industrial. When Torrens developed the idea in the early 1800's the methods of production were often still small home/shops where individuals created specialized goods in small volumes. Industrialization changed the methodology and the value of specialized areas, for instance it was no longer possible to produce most textiles cheaper in areas that had previously specialized in it. The advantage of producing these kind of local specialties and how they relate to overall efficiency disappeared overnight. Transport of raw goods is virtually without exception more expensive then the transport of finished goods. This is important to note because the availability of natural resources is one of the only remaining areas in which competitive advantage still holds any actual weight. However since raw goods are in almost all cases more expensive to transport then finished goods, production should occur close to resources. It is however important to note that I have not argued that free trade when analyzed in isolation is a bad thing only that in the modern world because of outside factors it is misused and creates a great deal of inefficiency. The single largest issue is that of wages, because wages are not an efficiency issue and in any economic model free trade is an absolute unifying factor it is a principle mistake that people from one market should believe that they are separate from any other market. For example the way that we discuss our economy and the US's economy, or by extension our economy and China's economy. Free trade creates a single economic entity, and so when we discuss wages in China we are really discussing wages in Canada as they are by any measure and any economic system or related theory directly and inexorably linked. Unfortunately because of the natural advantages that countries like China have been able to gain through there lack of IP law enforcement and slave labour camps free trade serves only to lower living standards everywhere. Only the most incredibly delusional among us are unwilling to admit that the US star is setting. They show every sign of economic collapse and other economies are growing rapidly. The US will undergo a massive shift, it will lose most of its productivity as IP production moves to other nations with better education systems and higher populations, its trade imbalances and debt will suffocate it. The US has nothing going for it other then a very substantial natural resource base, but when the capital shift to the much more profitable Asian markets is complete it wont even have its headquarter base anymore. China hasn't don't anything more hostile then the actions of the US when it comes to trade and it should be noted that the US is the #3 importer from China behind the EU and Japan so the notion that China's economy is so dependent on the US is rather farcical. Wood grows everywhere does it? you should probably do more research before making such a stupid statement. The US does not produce anywhere close to enough domestically to supply itself and there are very few places left on earth that actually have whats necessary to grow large amounts of wood. Wood takes allot longer to grow then you realize. Of course not, but we do have a say in who we sell it to and how much for.

I'm pretty sure that Canada is a net importer of American power at this point. We may ship them oil, but we import electricity to make up for it.