Russia Approaching Canadian Airspace!

DogOnPorch · August 5, 2010

Probably not, but it's wrong. Name me a rich authoritarian country.

Errrr...the obvious one? Imagine yourself on Wheel of Fortune...

R** Ch**a

I'd like to buy a vowel, Pat...

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

Do you recall the junket that included Canadian Internet security experts when China was building it's so-called Great Firewall? I wonder what that was all about? Probably a big national secret I bet.

So?

eyeball · August 5, 2010

Probably not, but it's wrong. Name me a rich authoritarian country.

Saudi Arabia.

eyeball · August 5, 2010

So?

Just sayin' is all.

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

Errrr...the obvious one? Imagine yourself on Wheel of Fortune...

I'd like to buy a vowel, Pat...

China is rich? They're developing, but they're by no means rich. Even then, signs of democratisation go along with the development. There was a full on uprising in Tibet in 2008. There are on average about 70,000 anti-government protests per year. These are all good signs. No?

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

Saudi Arabia.

Bahahahah this is a joke, right?

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

Just sayin' is all.

Then you should also be "just sayin" that along with the "great firewall" the other worst kept secret in China is it's remarkable inaffectiveness.

eyeball · August 5, 2010

Bahahahah this is a joke, right?

You're saying Saudi Arabia is a democracy?

eyeball · August 5, 2010

Then you should also be "just sayin" that along with the "great firewall" the other worst kept secret in China is it's remarkable inaffectiveness.

It's the attempt to build it and why Canada was apparently involved that should be the issue don't you think?

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

You're saying Saudi Arabia is a democracy?

No of course not, I'm questioning the fact that they're rich. The oil numbers skew the GDP numbers because it assumes that Saudi citizens benefit from it. There really is no industry in Saudi Arabia except for the oil industry. It doesn't have to expand and it doesn't have to compete and all the profits flow right into the coffers of the royal family. Only a few of the citizens really work and benefit from it. 99% of Saudi Arabia is dirt poor.

Compare that to China where different firms, though run by priveleged people, have to compete to supply the west. They have to expand, bring on new workers and that slowly but surely builds up wealth and improves living conditions.

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

It's the attempt to build it and why Canada was apparently involved that should be the issue don't you think?

Nope, if they can take our money and create jobs, whatever it is they're doing, it's a good thing.

DogOnPorch · August 5, 2010

I see...we're judging countries according to the Nicky Almanac. Rich is who Nicky say's is rich.

:lol:

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

I see...we're judging countries according to the Nicky Almanac. Rich is who Nicky say's is rich.

So you're saying that the average Saudi citizen isn't mired in poverty?

DogOnPorch · August 5, 2010

So you're saying that the average Saudi citizen isn't mired in poverty?

You're free to post a link to where I said such a thing. Me thinks you're talking to yourself. Stop it. People are starting to look.

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

You're free to post a link to where I said such a thing. Me thinks you're talking to yourself. Stop it. People are starting to look.

Well, considering your last post, it isn't hard to make the leap that that's what you're implying. For the record, who is starting to look?

eyeball · August 5, 2010

No of course not, I'm questioning the fact that they're rich. The oil numbers skew the GDP numbers because it assumes that Saudi citizens benefit from it. There really is no industry in Saudi Arabia except for the oil industry. It doesn't have to expand and it doesn't have to compete and all the profits flow right into the coffers of the royal family. Only a few of the citizens really work and benefit from it. 99% of Saudi Arabia is dirt poor.

So why on Earth did we invite them to the G20?

Compare that to China where different firms, though run by priveleged people, have to compete to supply the west. They have to expand, bring on new workers and that slowly but surely builds up wealth and improves living conditions.

I generally agree, however I think it's just as obvious that some of what other countries that we trade with do rubs off on us. China is clearly more rapacious than us and that's what we have to compete against and if some of our mining companies are any indication we are. We're falling for becoming meaner instead of smarter. We're accepting that economics trumps virtue.

So, getting back to what I was saying about investing our wealth and using it to leverage our selves off the planet and into space...that would be the virtuous and smarter thing to do than trying to arm ourselves against a greedy needy world.

GostHacked · August 5, 2010

Hmmm... let's see now. Russia has about 10 times Canada's population. That means it has ten times the taxpayers. That means for us to have as powerful a military force as the Russians, we'd have to spend ten times more per capita than the Russians would, thus putting a fair bit more pressure on our economy than the Russians would experience. And if we consider that Russia itself nearly bankrupted itself to build such a force, we'd certainly bankrupt ourselves in trying to match them with a tenth of the population (and thus taxpayer) base.

Russia went overboard and could not even pay it's military personnel.

We can draw a similar parallel to the US. Since the US too has about 10 times Canada's population, and has also sacrificed its economic well-being in achieving the military supremacy it has today, and that's with ten times the taxpayer base, it would be insane for us to try to match them.

The difference here is the US was able to pay for all it's military, and then some. That was not the case with the USSR. So no, there is no parallel.

The argument that Canada needs to have a military that can match any other is fallacious at best. An extreme equivalent would be like a country with the population base of the Republic of San Marino trying to have as big a military force as the US, when chances are the US military has more members than the Republic of San Marino has citizens.

We should have at least have a military that is proportional to our needs. Currently our needs are not met with the current state of our military.

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

So why on Earth did we invite them to the G20?

The West needs the oil.

I generally agree, however I think it's just as obvious that some of what other countries that we trade with do rubs off on us. China is clearly more rapacious than us and that's what we have to compete against and if some of our mining companies are any indication we are. We're falling for becoming meaner instead of smarter. We're accepting that economics trumps virtue.
So, getting back to what I was saying about investing our wealth and using it to leverage our selves off the planet and into space...that would be the virtuous and smarter thing to do than trying to arm ourselves against a greedy needy world.

Like I said, economics does trump virtue. Smarter is competing more aggresively across all sectors, which includes thing such as education which makes us smarter. As for being meaner, I'm not sure what you mean by that.

As for your last statement, soemthing tells me that's not really posssible.

All I can say is this. What has ever been accomplished by the notion of "let's not trade with them becuase they don't respect human rights." Cuba, North Korea, Iran have all withstood pretty much every sanction known to nation states and survived. Trade and freedom of information are much surer bets.

eyeball · August 5, 2010

Russia went overboard and could not even pay it's military personnel.

The difference here is the US was able to pay for all it's military, and then some. That was not the case with the USSR. So no, there is no parallel.

The U.S. has paid off it's debt? I guess I did miss the news last night.

Wow what a difference a day makes.

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

Russia went overboard and could not even pay it's military personnel.

Not to mention the fact that a lot of people don't pay tax in Russia

The difference here is the US was able to pay for all it's military, and then some. That was not the case with the USSR. So no, there is no parallel.

The USSR paid for it.

We should have at least have a military that is proportional to our needs. Currently our needs are not met with the current state of our military.

This is a statement which is certainly up for debate.

dre · August 5, 2010

The difference here is the US was able to pay for all it's military, and then some. That was not the case with the USSR. So no, there is no parallel.

The US wasnt able to pay for all its military. It was financed with debt, and theyre now saddled with a 14 trillion dollar tab.

eyeball · August 5, 2010

The West needs the oil.

Canada doesn't. This thread is about defending Canada, not the West.

Like I said, economics does trump virtue. Smarter is competing more aggresively across all sectors, which includes thing such as education which makes us smarter. As for being meaner, I'm not sure what you mean by that.

You can't grasp the analogy between a world of shrinking resources, a shrinking water-hole and the effect this has on the animals and people who depend on abundance not just to survive but to thrive?

As for your last statement, soemthing tells me that's not really posssible.

Well then something tells me we better conserve what we've got because the world is fast running out of resources.

All I can say is this. What has ever been accomplished by the notion of "let's not trade with them becuase they don't respect human rights." Cuba, North Korea, Iran have all withstood pretty much every sanction known to nation states and survived. Trade and freedom of information are much surer bets.

Again I generally agree however given the trade protectionism that is still extant within our own borders and the difficulty we still have in getting information out of our own government...I think you're living in a dreamworld if you think we're actually accomplishing very much if anything at all.

nicky10013 · August 5, 2010

Canada doesn't. This thread is about defending Canada, not the West.

Well, we're not the only country in the G20, so when you ask why they were invited to a global event, you're going to get a global answer.

You can't grasp the analogy between a world of shrinking resources, a shrinking water-hole and the effect this has on the animals and people who depend on abundance not just to survive but to thrive?

Ah, so in terms of mean instead of smart, you mean bad towards the environment.

Well then something tells me we better conserve what we've got because the world is fast running out of resources.

I don't disagree

Again I generally agree however given the trade protectionism that is still extant within our own borders and the difficulty we still have in getting information out of our own government...I think you're living in a dreamworld if you think we're actually accomplishing very much if anything at all.

What protectionism?

eyeball · August 5, 2010

Well, we're not the only country in the G20, so when you ask why they were invited to a global event, you're going to get a global answer.

That sounds like a political answer.

Ah, so in terms of mean instead of smart, you mean bad towards the environment.

No, that's not what I meant at all.

What protectionism?

Among the key internal barriers in Canada are policies and regulations that hinder interprovincial trade in goods and those that make it difficult for workers to move between provinces and have their credentials recognized.

Link

I realize efforts are underway to reduce these barriers but many do still exist. The term free is still just as ambiguous as it's always been with regards to trade or information.