Windsor-Detroit Bridge

[Argus]

Yes...I think this is very obvious. Michigan hasn't exactly gotten rich importing Canadian garbage to its landfills

Michigan needs the bridge to get auto parts back and forth across to Canada, because the US/Canadian auto industry is intertwined. Not to mention a shitload of imports go back and forth across that bridge and that flow, through Michigan, makes money.

Canada wants to end the private ownership and revenue of the current Ambassador Bridge; Michigan would have to relocate hundreds of homes and businesses for the DRIC project.

Give me a break. I could probably buy up most of that land myself by cashing in the loose change around my house. Real estate prices in Michigan are in the toilet.

Canada wants the new bridge to take all those big rigs directly to a highway, not through the middle of Windsor. The only thing standing away is corrupt American politics. The bridge owner has bribed a lot of people to go along with his schemes over the years, and sued any who refused.

[bush_cheney2004]

Michigan needs the bridge to get auto parts back and forth across to Canada, because the US/Canadian auto industry is intertwined. Not to mention a shitload of imports go back and forth across that bridge and that flow, through Michigan, makes money.

Nevertheless, Canada wants a new bridge more than Michigan, which has a lot higher priority items to spend dwindling state revenue on. Canadian politicians will roar about abbrogating NAFTA come election time, but really want to blow their wad on a new (competing) bridge with toll revenue.

Give me a break. I could probably buy up most of that land myself by cashing in the loose change around my house. Real estate prices in Michigan are in the toilet.

Even all of your loose change will not buy away the political problems associated with condemning property.

Canada wants the new bridge to take all those big rigs directly to a highway, not through the middle of Windsor. The only thing standing away is corrupt American politics. The bridge owner has bribed a lot of people to go along with his schemes over the years, and sued any who refused.

Like we said...Canada wants the bridge far more than Michigan! Thanks for proving it!

Edited April 30, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

Michigan needs the bridge to get auto parts back and forth across to Canada, because the US/Canadian auto industry is intertwined. Not to mention a shitload of imports go back and forth across that bridge and that flow, through Michigan, makes money.

Yet Canada is the one that's desperate to get the deal through. And it rests with Michigan's vote.

Give me a break. I could probably buy up most of that land myself by cashing in the loose change around my house. Real estate prices in Michigan are in the toilet.

And Canada is the U.S.'s poor relation to the North.

Does that give you any idea of how stupid you sound?

Canada wants the new bridge to take all those big rigs directly to a highway, not through the middle of Windsor.

Yes. "Canada wants." Exactly as I said.

The only thing standing away is corrupt American politics.

Ummmmm. No. The only thing standing in the way is Michigan may not vote the way Canada would like it to.

The bridge owner has bribed a lot of people to go along with his schemes over the years, and sued any who refused.

And your point is..... ??

Edited May 1, 2010 by American Woman

[Wild Bill]

Yet Canada is the one that's desperate to get the deal through. And it rests with Michigan's vote.

And Canada is the U.S.'s poor relation to the North.

Does that give you any idea of how stupid you sound?

Yes. "Canada wants." Exactly as I said.

Ummmmm. No. The only thing standing in the way is Michigan may not vote the way Canada would like it to.

And your point is..... ??

Perhaps you're right, AW. We should stop worrying about increased trade with the USA. If it's not that important to Uncle Sam then we shouldn't fret about it either.

There are other countries that are rapidly overtaking the US in terms of trade. China is one obvious example and India is another. China would dearly love to make a deal for our oilsands oil. They could easily lock up the entire production if they were allowed to do so! They already have been buying up huge portions of our mining and smelting industries to get all the metals and such for themselves.

I guess we Canadians are living too much in the past and should look elsewhere for our future. I don't think the Chinese would need us to build their bridges for them!

[bush_cheney2004]

Perhaps you're right, AW. We should stop worrying about increased trade with the USA. If it's not that important to Uncle Sam then we shouldn't fret about it either.

Well, that's exactly what Canada's politicians say come election time. Who needs NAFTA! Damn 'Merkins!

There are other countries that are rapidly overtaking the US in terms of trade. China is one obvious example and India is another. China would dearly love to make a deal for our oilsands oil. They could easily lock up the entire production if they were allowed to do so! They already have been buying up huge portions of our mining and smelting industries to get all the metals and such for themselves.

No can do...see NAFTA. Indian and Chinese capital didn't develop tarsands oil....it was largely Amerikanskis.

I guess we Canadians are living too much in the past and should look elsewhere for our future. I don't think the Chinese would need us to build their bridges for them!

Correct...Canada should diversify...if it can. Figure out a way to move oil east and west without asking the Americans to refine it.

Edited May 1, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

Perhaps you're right, AW. We should stop worrying about increased trade with the USA. If it's not that important to Uncle Sam then we shouldn't fret about it either.

Who said trade with Canada wasn't important to the U.S.? Because this bridge isn't the biggest deal we have going, that translates to not wanting to increase trade with Canada? There are other options to this bridge. Canada is the one pushing for this option. That's what I said. Canada doesn't want a second span added to the Ambassador Bridge, another option, because they don't want more traffic/congestion in Windsor. Yet many people will lose their homes with this deal. But getting back to Canada not supporting that option: Does that mean Canada doesn't want to increase trade with the U.S.? By your way of thinking, it does. Like I said, this bridge is the deal that Canada wants, for Canada, and that's why Canada is making the offer.

There are other countries that are rapidly overtaking the US in terms of trade. China is one obvious example and India is another. China would dearly love to make a deal for our oilsands oil. They could easily lock up the entire production if they were allowed to do so! They already have been buying up huge portions of our mining and smelting industries to get all the metals and such for themselves.

Yet according to your Infrastructure and Transportation Minister: "This is the most .... important infrastructure project across Canada today and is one of the most important in our history." Evidently he's not dismissing us for trade with China and India.

I guess we Canadians are living too much in the past and should look elsewhere for our future. I don't think the Chinese would need us to build their bridges for them!

You mean the way Canada "needed" the U.S. to foot Canada's portion of the bridge between Port Huron and Sarnia, and wait for toll revenues to recoup its investment?

[dizzy]

Who said trade with Canada wasn't important to the U.S.? Because this bridge isn't the biggest deal we have going, that translates to not wanting to increase trade with Canada? There are other options to this bridge. Canada is the one pushing for this option. That's what I said. Canada doesn't want a second span added to the Ambassador Bridge, another option, because they don't want more traffic/congestion in Windsor. Yet many people will lose their homes with this deal. But getting back to Canada not supporting that option: Does that mean Canada doesn't want to increase trade with the U.S.? By your way of thinking, it does. Like I said, this bridge is the deal that Canada wants, for Canada, and that's why Canada is making the offer.

Yet according to your Infrastructure and Transportation Minister: "This is the most .... important infrastructure project across Canada today and is one of the most important in our history." Evidently he's not dismissing us for trade with China and India.

You mean the way Canada "needed" the U.S. to foot Canada's portion of the bridge between Port Huron and Sarnia, and wait for toll revenues to recoup its investment?

Pwned! The americanos are right in this thread and AW summarizes why in this post.

[Wild Bill]

Who said trade with Canada wasn't important to the U.S.? Because this bridge isn't the biggest deal we have going, that translates to not wanting to increase trade with Canada? There are other options to this bridge. Canada is the one pushing for this option. That's what I said. Canada doesn't want a second span added to the Ambassador Bridge, another option, because they don't want more traffic/congestion in Windsor. Yet many people will lose their homes with this deal. But getting back to Canada not supporting that option: Does that mean Canada doesn't want to increase trade with the U.S.? By your way of thinking, it does. Like I said, this bridge is the deal that Canada wants, for Canada, and that's why Canada is making the offer.

Yet according to your Infrastructure and Transportation Minister: "This is the most .... important infrastructure project across Canada today and is one of the most important in our history." Evidently he's not dismissing us for trade with China and India.

You mean the way Canada "needed" the U.S. to foot Canada's portion of the bridge between Port Huron and Sarnia, and wait for toll revenues to recoup its investment?

Looks like I pushed some buttons with you and BC, AW!

[Smallc]

Who said trade with Canada wasn't important to the U.S.? Because this bridge isn't the biggest deal we have going,

\

If it isn't as big of a deal, it probably should be. It seems all the players are ready to move except Michigan. I'm not sure if you realize, but this is the largest trade corridor for both the US and Canada. You would think that would be a big deal for both sides.

[Guest American Woman]

Looks like I pushed some buttons with you and BC, AW!

Looks more like you can't refute anything that I said.

Not that I thought you would be able to.

Edited May 1, 2010 by American Woman

[Argus]

Yet Canada is the one that's desperate to get the deal through. And it rests with Michigan's vote.

I'm not sure why you and the Cheney insist on making it sound like Canada is frantic for this bridge. It wants a new bridge, certainly, but it's not exactly a top national issue. It's simply trying to take care of business here.

And Canada is the U.S.'s poor relation to the North.

Does that give you any idea of how stupid you sound?

Given your country has a massive, out-of-control deficit, huge, completely unfunded liabilities for pensions, and no idea how to address either of that I don't think you can really call Canada a poor relation.

Yes. "Canada wants." Exactly as I said.

That would be where the term "stupid" comes in.

Ummmmm. No. The only thing standing in the way is Michigan may not vote the way Canada would like it to.

Why you want to make this some kind of political issue or pissing contest is beyond me. A new bridge is needed. Both sides agree on that. Both sides want to build it away from the present bridge. The only party standing in the way is a ruthless billionaire - who you and Cheney seem to think is more important than the people of Michigan and Canada combined.

And your point is..... ??

Your politicians usually don't work for you and don't care what's in your best interest. They work for whomever has bribed them last.

Edited May 1, 2010 by Argus

[Guest American Woman]

If it isn't as big of a deal, it probably should be. It seems all the players are ready to move except Michigan. I'm not sure if you realize, but this is the largest trade corridor for both the US and Canada. You would think that would be a big deal for both sides.

Of course I realize it, but that doesn't mean this is the biggest thing we have going on. Also, as I said previously, going for this option is a bigger deal to Canada. This is the option Canada prefers, and therefore this option is a bigger deal to Canada. Thus the offer, as I pointed out.

So yes, I'm fully aware of the fact that this is the largest trade corridor for both the U.S. and Canada, but we aren't going to automatically do it the way Canada wants it done. Since a number of Michiganders are the most affected by it and there are other options, there's no reason for Michigan to jump into it as willingly as all the other players are. Michigan residents losing their homes and having to be compensated for it is a concern for Michigan, same as more traffic congestion in Windsor is a concern for Canada.

We have until June lst to make a decision. Chances are it'll pass the vote, I'd be surprised if it didn't, but there are reasons why Canada is making the offer to pay for Michigan's share. That's been one of my main points. And as I pointed out, the U.S. paid Canada's share when the Port Huron-Sarnia bridge was built, same as Canada is offering to do now.

Edited May 1, 2010 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

I'm not sure why you and the Cheney insist on making it sound like Canada is frantic for this bridge. It wants a new bridge, certainly, but it's not exactly a top national issue.

According to your Infrastructure and Transportation Minister it is.

Given your country has a massive, out-of-control deficit, huge, completely unfunded liabilities for pensions, and no idea how to address either of that I don't think you can really call Canada a poor relation.

I never have. Just pointing out that your statements are as stupid as those who do.

Why you want to make this some kind of political issue or pissing contest is beyond me. A new bridge is needed. Both sides agree on that. Both sides want to build it away from the present bridge. The only party standing in the way is a ruthless billionaire - who you and Cheney seem to think is more important than the people of Michigan and Canada combined.

Perhaps reading comprehension isn't your strong point, so I'll just let that slide.

Your politicians usually don't work for you and don't care what's in your best interest. They work for whomever has bribed them last.

Is that what your politicians do? Thanks for the insight.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm not sure why you and the Cheney insist on making it sound like Canada is frantic for this bridge. It wants a new bridge, certainly, but it's not exactly a top national issue. It's simply trying to take care of business here.

Sure isn't a big issue for me....wasn't even aware of the DRIC project until this OP showed up from Canada!

Why you want to make this some kind of political issue or pissing contest is beyond me. A new bridge is needed. Both sides agree on that. Both sides want to build it away from the present bridge. The only party standing in the way is a ruthless billionaire - who you and Cheney seem to think is more important than the people of Michigan and Canada combined.

There are other options and political considerations besides the only solution that Canada wants.

Your politicians usually don't work for you and don't care what's in your best interest. They work for whomever has bribed them last.

....yea, the politicians in Canada would never do that! LOL!!!!!!!!

[bush_cheney2004]

\

If it isn't as big of a deal, it probably should be. It seems all the players are ready to move except Michigan. I'm not sure if you realize, but this is the largest trade corridor for both the US and Canada. You would think that would be a big deal for both sides.

The US has other large "trade corridors".....I am amused by this dust up and proud support for a "corridor" that leads to a Detroit & Michigan area declared a rotting slum on this very same forum by some Canadians.

[Smallc]

And as I pointed out, the U.S. paid Canada's share when the Port Huron-Sarnia bridge was built, same as Canada is offering to do now.

Where can I find that information? I don't see it here, on the history of the bridge.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/constrhistory_16062_7.pdf

[Smallc]

The US has other large "trade corridors".....I am amused by this dust up and proud support for a "corridor" that leads to a Detroit & Michigan area declared a rotting slum on this very same forum by some Canadians.

Canada also has other large trade corridors. None are as large as this, on either side of the border.

[bush_cheney2004]

Where can I find that information? I don't see it here, on the history of the bridge.

If you can't find that, please check out the history of the AlCan Highway instead! I wonder who built that?

[bush_cheney2004]

Canada also has other large trade corridors. None are as large as this, on either side of the border.

The US has many "corridors" and ports....this one is "largest" for Canada because of Ontario.

[Smallc]

The US has many "corridors" and ports....this one is "largest" for Canada because of Ontario.

Canada has ports too...It's also the largest corridor for the US. I guess that's because of Ontario too...

[Guest American Woman]

Where can I find that information? I don't see it here, on the history of the bridge.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/constrhistory_16062_7.pdf

While the Canadian offer is unique, it isn't without precedence, said Kirk Steudle, director of the Michigan Department of Transportation.

"Seventy years ago, the Blue Water Bridge between Port Huron and Sarnia was paid for in the same manner," he said.

"Only then it was the U.S. that paid for the Canadian half, which was then paid off with the tolls they collected. This time, Canada would pay our portion of the project upfront." link

Governor Granholm: "....we are all grateful to Canada for offering to do what we did on the Blue Water Bridge when it was constructed. We paid for the full thing then and the Canadian government is returning the favor." link

[bush_cheney2004]

Canada has ports too...It's also the largest corridor for the US. I guess that's because of Ontario too...

I'm not convinced of that...a lot but not all CanAm trade goes through this corridor. Clearly it is more important to Ontario/Canada than (pick another large port/United States).

[Smallc]

I'm not convinced of that...a lot but not all CanAm trade goes through this corridor. Clearly it is more important to Ontario/Canada than (pick another large port/United States).

'I'm convinced that you're not sure what you're talking about.

[Smallc]

While the Canadian offer is unique, it isn't without precedence, said Kirk Steudle, director of the Michigan Department of Transportation.

"Seventy years ago, the Blue Water Bridge between Port Huron and Sarnia was paid for in the same manner," he said.

"Only then it was the U.S. that paid for the Canadian half, which was then paid off with the tolls they collected. This time, Canada would pay our portion of the project upfront." link

Governor Granholm: "....we are all grateful to Canada for offering to do what we did on the Blue Water Bridge when it was constructed. We paid for the full thing then and the Canadian government is returning the favor." link

Thank you. I wasn't doubting you, I was simply trying to find the info.

[Guest American Woman]

Thank you. I wasn't doubting you, I was simply trying to find the info.

Your welcome. I ask for information when I can't find it too, so no problem.