Machjo Posted October 10, 2018 Report Share Posted October 10, 2018 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: Ah no. If you want to do business in Canada, it's French or English and bilingual labels. What's it like to do business in Belgium with two languages or Switzerland with four languages? You don't make a population give up their language because some people find it inconvenient. Canada has to produce export goods in whatever language the target market speaks. So what? The solution in Europe is often to provide multiple language labels: German, French, English, Spanish, and Italian, for example. How many companies won't sell into Europe just because many languages are spoken there? Print off labels in the language of the market country. Done. It's not just packaging and labeling and it's not just immigrants and foreigners. Statistically around half of working-age Canadians is functionally literate in neither official language. For indigenous Canadians, it increases to around 60%. So again, we're not talking about immigrants here but rather internal trade itself. That's why I'd given the example of trade even between Quebec and Ontario, two provinces within Canada. Small businesses can't always afford translation and interpretation. Heck, even Parliament needs to recess for the day when their interpretation system breaks down. Why expect a higher standard for our small entrepreneurs than we do for our lawmakers? Also, the EU is a bad example. Whereas Canada is based on the personality principle, Belgium and Switzerland are based on the territoriality principle. In other words, individual regions within their states are officially unilingual with only the legislature that's really officially bilingual. In other words, they expect the individual and not the state to be bilingual. We can look at Indonesia and Tanzania too. They're both bursting with languages but at the national level have but one official language, Indonesian and Swahili respectively, even though few actually speak them as a first language. They chose these languages for their comparative ease of learning, not because many citizens speak them as first languages. Canada in many ways is like Indonesia with its multiple languages. Even Nunavut alone has four official languages and the NWT has twelve regional official languages too. Edited October 10, 2018 by Machjo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted October 10, 2018 Report Share Posted October 10, 2018 1 hour ago, Machjo said: It's not just packaging and labeling and it's not just immigrants and foreigners. Statistically around half of working-age Canadians is functionally literate in neither official language. For indigenous Canadians, it increases to around 60%. So again, we're not talking about immigrants here but rather internal trade itself. That's why I'd given the example of trade even between Quebec and Ontario, two provinces within Canada. Small businesses can't always afford translation and interpretation. Heck, even Parliament needs to recess for the day when their interpretation system breaks down. Why expect a higher standard for our small entrepreneurs than we do for our lawmakers? Also, the EU is a bad example. Whereas Canada is based on the personality principle, Belgium and Switzerland are based on the territoriality principle. In other words, individual regions within their states are officially unilingual with only the legislature that's really officially bilingual. In other words, they expect the individual and not the state to be bilingual. We can look at Indonesia and Tanzania too. They're both bursting with languages but at the national level have but one official language, Indonesian and Swahili respectively, even though few actually speak them as a first language. They chose these languages for their comparative ease of learning, not because many citizens speak them as first languages. Canada in many ways is like Indonesia with its multiple languages. Even Nunavut alone has four official languages and the NWT has twelve regional official languages too. But the nation has two official languages. That's the deal. Why fight this, so we can further balkanize the country by simply letting go of the official languages of our government institutions? I don't see who that serves apart from maybe new immigrants who don't want to learn the country's languages. Are we expected to change all of our traditions to meet the needs of one specific new group? Also, Esperanto was a failed experiment. I remember talk about that becoming a new international language. Of course it died. Where does one travel to have the Esperanto immersion experience? Idioms and slang are part of the fun of learning a new language. Language is culture. Shutting down the official language is shutting down that culture. It's not on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 10, 2018 Report Share Posted October 10, 2018 18 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: But the nation has two official languages. That's the deal. Why fight this, so we can further balkanize the country by simply letting go of the official languages of our government institutions? I don't see who that serves apart from maybe new immigrants who don't want to learn the country's languages. Are we expected to change all of our traditions to meet the needs of one specific new group? Also, Esperanto was a failed experiment. I remember talk about that becoming a new international language. Of course it died. Where does one travel to have the Esperanto immersion experience? Idioms and slang are part of the fun of learning a new language. Language is culture. Shutting down the official language is shutting down that culture. It's not on. I know both official languages fluently, so yes, they form parts of my culture. Official bilingualism with MPs sticking earphones into their ears like UN ambassadors has nothing to do with culture. That's just expensive bureaucracy. I'd rather our MPs lead by example by actually sharing a common language among themselves rather than act like UN ambassadors in Parliament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted October 11, 2018 Report Share Posted October 11, 2018 3 hours ago, Machjo said: I know both official languages fluently, so yes, they form parts of my culture. Official bilingualism with MPs sticking earphones into their ears like UN ambassadors has nothing to do with culture. That's just expensive bureaucracy. I'd rather our MPs lead by example by actually sharing a common language among themselves rather than act like UN ambassadors in Parliament. I think that’s a petty concern. We have much bigger issues to worry about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 11, 2018 Report Share Posted October 11, 2018 13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: I think that’s a petty concern. We have much bigger issues to worry about. Like that the lack of a common language costs taxpayers around 2.4 billion dollars a year according to the Fraser Institute and that it probably accounts for the single greatest trade barrier between Ontario and Quebec and that official bilingualism can prevent many indigenous and other Canadians from accessing much employment in the Government of Canada and that it contributes to high rates of functional illiteracy due to both languages being among the more difficult ones to learn which imposes a further drain on our economic resources? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 8 hours ago, Machjo said: Like that the lack of a common language costs taxpayers around 2.4 billion dollars a year according to the Fraser Institute and that it probably accounts for the single greatest trade barrier between Ontario and Quebec and that official bilingualism can prevent many indigenous and other Canadians from accessing much employment in the Government of Canada and that it contributes to high rates of functional illiteracy due to both languages being among the more difficult ones to learn which imposes a further drain on our economic resources? Most Canadians, the vast majority, function very well using only one of the official languages. The 99% literacy rate says it. Technical language specific to an industry will always require additional learning. Translation is necessary from one official language into the other any time you’re doing national business. That’s where learning the other official language as a second language comes in. That’s why it’s mandatory to learn FSL into early secondary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: Most Canadians, the vast majority, function very well using only one of the official languages. The 99% literacy rate says it. Technical language specific to an industry will always require additional learning. Translation is necessary from one official language into the other any time you’re doing national business. That’s where learning the other official language as a second language comes in. That’s why it’s mandatory to learn FSL into early secondary. Just today I had an English-speaking colleague serve a Federal-Government worker. To try to reduce the language barrier, officially-unilingual English-speakers serve only English-speakers. However, she found herself needing to call a business in Quebec. The contact in Quebec did know some English but at first misunderstood some of the information which caused a delay and almost resulted in an error which could have cost us a few hundred dollars. You might say the solution is to hire more officially-bilingual staff, but we're not a dime a dozen. And even if we all knew English and French, I've sometimes found myself struggling when serving between a Government worker and a business in Austria or Brazil for example. There exist more languages in the world besides just English and French and ever more businesses need to interact internationally. On one occasion, I literally could not help the person even though that was supposed to be my job. Luckily for me, he knew Portuguese, was understanding, and offered to deal with the situation himself. Had he made a complaint, I could easily have defended myself by simply saying that I contacted the business he wanted me to contact and that my contact didn't know enough English for me to understand and I knew no Portuguese. I don't know Spanish either. Strictly speaking, according to our contract with the Government of Canada, it was our responsibility to deal with the situation even though we might have had to search for a Portuguese-speaking staff member or figure out another solution. Again, luckily for us, he just took it upon himself. Also, that we need to hire more English-French-speaking staff actually reduces the linguistic diversity among us which makes it harder for us to find staff who may know other languages. Just think DFATD, DND, the RCMP, and many other departments interact internationally in North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Oceania. The Government of Canada does not function just within Canada's own borders. You'd be surprised at just how many Federal Government workers are working outside of Canada at any given time and how much Ontario and Quebec need to interact with one another and even BC and Quebec. As far as official bilingualism goes, one could say that I'm working in the belly of the dragon. I'm immersed in it each day and so can tell you all kinds of stories because I live it. For most people, official bilingualism is just something you show off when ordering a meal at a restaurant and then listen to through earphones in Parliament, not something you use for any more complex interaction than that. Edited October 12, 2018 by Machjo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 Trump leads...Trudeau follows...but he can't admit it for political reasons. Trudeau is the...apprentice. Canada will impose surtaxes on certain types of steel imports starting on 10/25: Canada introduces new surtaxes to curb flood of steel imports Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 (edited) 11 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Trump leads...Trudeau follows...but he can't admit it for political reasons. Trudeau is the...apprentice. Canada will impose surtaxes on certain types of steel imports starting on 10/25: Canada introduces new surtaxes to curb flood of steel imports And businesses will pass that tax onto poor Canadian consumers. And then we wonder why the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. Worse yet, this will raise the cost of Canadian production and so make Canada less competitive on world markets. It would have been far preferable for Trudeau to negotiate a deal that would have allowed Trump to impose a reasonable tariff on Canadian steel while allowing Canada to trade freely with the world. While Canada would pay higher tariffs to export to the US, as long as the US tariffs are fair, they would just counter-balance the lower cost of Canadian products. Meanwhile, Canadian consumers would enjoy lower-cost products on our side and Canadian businesses could export more competitively to other countries. Edited October 12, 2018 by Machjo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Machjo said: And then we wonder why the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. There's no mystery, its due to in-camera lobbying followed by governments tilting economic playing fields towards the lobbyists employers. Edited October 12, 2018 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turningrite Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 2 hours ago, Machjo said: And businesses will pass that tax onto poor Canadian consumers. And then we wonder why the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. Worse yet, this will raise the cost of Canadian production and so make Canada less competitive on world markets. It would have been far preferable for Trudeau to negotiate a deal that would have allowed Trump to impose a reasonable tariff on Canadian steel while allowing Canada to trade freely with the world. While Canada would pay higher tariffs to export to the US, as long as the US tariffs are fair, they would just counter-balance the lower cost of Canadian products. Meanwhile, Canadian consumers would enjoy lower-cost products on our side and Canadian businesses could export more competitively to other countries. Trump's steel and aluminum tariffs have negatively impacted manufacturers and consumers throughout North America. The big U.S. automakers are complaining about reduced profits and as much as it is possible to do so extra costs are generally passed down to consumers in the form of higher prices, a reality that impacts consumers and undermines manufacturers throughout North America. The principal logic behind Trump's tariff strategy is to counteract dumping, particularly of steel, into developed economies by developing world producers. The U.S. would have been better off to explicitly deal with this issue and Canada would have been better off to work with the U.S. to develop a common tariff strategy to counteract the practice. Ultimately, the WTO is the logical body to encourage fair practices and develop and enforce anti-dumping rules but the institution is deeply flawed and the Trump administration appears to have given up on it altogether. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 Presumably Trudeau’s new tariffs to prevent dumping are there to remove the U.S.’s excuse for imposing steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada. I hope Trump’s team recognizes the lengths we’ve gone to to prevent dumping and that these tariffs on Canada are hastily removed. The Canadian government has already collected almost 300 million dollars in counter tariffs on the US. The impacts on U.S. and Canadian exports are real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: Presumably Trudeau’s new tariffs to prevent dumping are there to remove the U.S.’s excuse for imposing steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada. I hope Trump’s team recognizes the lengths we’ve gone to to prevent dumping and that these tariffs on Canada are hastily removed. The Canadian government has already collected almost 300 million dollars in counter tariffs on the US. The impacts on U.S. and Canadian exports are real. Right now, the Trump team only recognizes that Trudeau didn't do anything about dumping and transshipments until Trump imposed the tariffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 26 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Right now, the Trump team only recognizes that Trudeau didn't do anything about dumping and transshipments until Trump imposed the tariffs. And protectionism can only beget more protectionism. 1920's all over again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 Just now, Machjo said: And protectionism can only beget more protectionism. 1920's all over again? No, because there are major structural differences between now and the 1920's. The current "trade war" only impacts about 3% of global trade. Trump is the leader.....Trudeau is the follower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 34 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Right now, the Trump team only recognizes that Trudeau didn't do anything about dumping and transshipments until Trump imposed the tariffs. Well Trump didn't do anything either until he imposed the tariffs on China and multiple countries, including allies. Tariffs are a very blunt instrument. I don't really understand your argument. If Trudeau is following the leader, where is that leader taking us? It feels like off a cliff. Trudeau's hands are tied by U.S. trade volumes and policies that impact our exports. The path he's following is not of his choosing, nor should it be. It's been imposed. We're basically cutting our losses. In the bigger long-term picture, so are the Americans as they wake up to the reality that they are no longer the dominant market in the world. The centre of gravity is shifting. I don't say this mockingly. It's worrisome. I think the U.S. is salvaging what it can of industry and a way of life that probably isn't sustainable. I don't think living standards have to get worse, but they have to change. There's a ton of resistance to change. That's what Trump and Brexit are bucking, but it's a losing battle. Britain is paying a price for leaving the trading block. The U.S. is paying a price by raising protectionist trade barriers and threatening allies that supported a world order in which the U.S. held a dominant and privileged position. It's a dangerous game, because as the U.S. turns inward, China is expanding economic development, especially in Asia and Africa. Russia is taking advantage of U.S. frustrations about the costs of maintaining the post-WW2 order. Trump's policies look like they're reversing trade flows and reducing imports. That hasn't transpired. He's also made many countries, including allies, wary of trade reliance on the U.S. The tax cuts mask the problem because they pump dollars into the economy, but it's really borrowed money. A wiser move than having a trade war with low-cost jurisdictions would be to insist on international minimum labour standards and wages. Instead we're into tariffs and quotas that pit the U.S. against the world. How will that end? I know why he's doing it, but I question his method. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: Well Trump didn't do anything either until he imposed the tariffs on China and multiple countries, including allies. Tariffs are a very blunt instrument. I don't really understand your argument. There is no argument...Trudeau was quite happy to continue the globalist status quo, including fun and games with Chinese exports. Trump has been the change agent...the leader...not Trudeau. Tariffs are kryptonite for the globalists. Lead, follow, or just get out of the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 12, 2018 Report Share Posted October 12, 2018 53 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: There is no argument...Trudeau was quite happy to continue the globalist status quo, including fun and games with Chinese exports. Trump has been the change agent...the leader...not Trudeau. Tariffs are kryptonite for the globalists. Lead, follow, or just get out of the way. Tariffs are kryptonite for globalists and provincialists alike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted October 13, 2018 Report Share Posted October 13, 2018 1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said: There is no argument...Trudeau was quite happy to continue the globalist status quo, including fun and games with Chinese exports. Trump has been the change agent...the leader...not Trudeau. Tariffs are kryptonite for the globalists. Lead, follow, or just get out of the way. Bring on globalism. International rules have improved the world. Tariffs are a return to feudal mercantilism. Don’t worry, no one will take your militia weapons and put you in FEMA camps. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2018 Report Share Posted October 13, 2018 27 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said: Bring on globalism. International rules have improved the world. Tariffs are a return to feudal mercantilism. Don’t worry, no one will take your militia weapons and put you in FEMA camps. Don't worry....America will not close the border and starve your economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 13, 2018 Report Share Posted October 13, 2018 1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said: Don't worry....America will not close the border and starve your economy. Unfortunately, it appears that Canada will do it to itself judging how we're choosing to now raise fortress North America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2018 Report Share Posted October 13, 2018 13 minutes ago, Machjo said: Unfortunately, it appears that Canada will do it to itself judging how we're choosing to now raise fortress North America. No sympathy here...Canada has inter-provincial trade barriers that Trump has nothing to do with....fortress Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted October 13, 2018 Report Share Posted October 13, 2018 Canada is trying to eliminate barriers, but in a way that protects Canadian values and culture. I know those are quaint notions to some, but they matter to most Canadians, or else we would’ve joined the U.S. a long time ago. Using economic pressure to gain unfair advantage on trade certainly isn’t any way to win us over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 13, 2018 Report Share Posted October 13, 2018 11 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said: No sympathy here...Canada has inter-provincial trade barriers that Trump has nothing to do with....fortress Canada. Unfortunately many of our politicians are fools. Trump is just inciting the more foolish of our politicians so he's not helping any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted October 13, 2018 Report Share Posted October 13, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said: Canada is trying to eliminate barriers, but in a way that protects Canadian values and culture. I know those are quaint notions to some, but they matter to most Canadians, or else we would’ve joined the U.S. a long time ago. Using economic pressure to gain unfair advantage on trade certainly isn’t any way to win us over. I totally agree that Trump is making matters worse for his country and ours. That said, just what are these 'Canadian' values? The PQ was slammed two elections ago over its Charter of Quebec Values. The incoming Quebec government wants to keep a crucifix over the speaker's chair in the National Assembly while of course preventing public servants from expressing themselves, Ontario defends the separate school system even though it discriminates on the basis of religion and violates an international covenant to which Canada is a signatory member-state. I don't believe that Canadians have any clear agreement on what precisely our values are. Edited October 13, 2018 by Machjo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.