security and prosperity partnership

[bush_cheney2004]

Foreign investment is somewhat different from trade issues though both tend to collapse back to control of resources. Do you have some insight that American investment is what's driving the SPP?

None that isn't readily available elsewhere. American investment...indeed any multinational's investment in the Americas wants to be competitive by leveraging market size, efficiencies, currency stability, political stability, standards, etc. In fact, one Texas senator wants to directly fund investment in Mexico to help stop the flood of illegal immigrants and bring Mexico up to US/Canadian standards.

[Wilber]

Wilber,

Far be it for me to pass judgement like that on our political leaders. We should be kind and merely assume that they assumed the risk to our business people would be less if we could con the Americans into doing the investing. Our financial and political leaders, often one and the same, no doubt have benefitted greatly from the practise. I think it's time to review that direction.

Don't blame it on our leaders, business goes where business feels it is welcome. The reality is that the US is our next door neighbour and the biggest market in the world. It's only logical that it should be our biggest trading partner and it is only logical that we would be interested in investing in each other. Stable governments, common language, short transportation routes that are not vulnerable to third parties. We occasionally have our differences but what could be better.

[Catchme]

Wilber,

Far be it for me to pass judgement like that on our political leaders. We should be kind and merely assume that they assumed the risk to our business people would be less if we could con the Americans into doing the investing. Our financial and political leaders, often one and the same, no doubt have benefitted greatly from the practise. I think it's time to review that direction.

Don't blame it on our leaders, business goes where business feels it is welcome. The reality is that the US is our next door neighbour and the biggest market in the world. It's only logical that it should be our biggest trading partner and it is only logical that we would be interested in investing in each other. Stable governments, common language, short transportation routes that are not vulnerable to third parties. We occasionally have our differences but what could be better.

Not having a trade partner trillions in debt?

[geoffrey]

There are actually trade partners who would love to access many of the Canadian markets that are currently tied up with the USA. Manufacturing may be hit, but not resource extraction products, the back bone of the Canadian economy.

That'd be excellent, Ontario would continue to lose influence and the West will hold the economic power. Mmm mmm good. I'm in.

Not having a trade partner trillions in debt?

What does that matter?

[margrace]

If that means putting you out of a job so you cannot afford even the cheap stuff. Then go fot it.

I'll move on, there will be something, somewhere for anyone that's willing.

Yes like riding the freight trains as the umemployed did in the 30's. Sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about. Growing our own food for instance would be a start.

[margrace]

yes, geoffery, single people like you can, and do move along, families on the other hand cannot so easily do so, if at all. Nor should they have to, children do not do well constantly shifting schools, communities and friends.

Canada could lose the USA right now for a trade partner and still survive more than handily. There might be a blip in manufacturing job/exports, but that is a small portion of the GDP. The trade partners increases eleswhere would more than cover it, in not too long of time.

The USA wants our resources end of story, if they do not get them, well......look at their debt. Those who are advocating deep integration are not doing so out of the belief that it is good for Canadians. Because it isn't, under any circumstance.

Yes people and if you think we are not under the thumb already just recall what happened to the Avro Arrow under a conservative gov.t. If you lived in the Toronto area at that time it was devestating to many people.

[Wilber]

Yes people and if you think we are not under the thumb already just recall what happened to the Avro Arrow under a conservative gov.t. If you lived in the Toronto area at that time it was devestating to many people.

The Arrow has been beat to death. It was a technical masterpiece but was obsolete before it went into service because the ICBM had replaced the manned bomber as the big strategic threat. The purpose for which it was designed was no longer important enough to justify the expense. The same thing happened to the Concorde, it was only national pride which saw a few of them go into service with government owned airlines and they cost the governments which backed them a fortune. The Americans would likely have canceled the Arrow as well if they had been building it.

[speaker]

...indeed any multinational's investment in the Americas wants to be competitive by leveraging market size, efficiencies, currency stability, political stability, standards, etc. In fact, one Texas senator wants to directly fund investment in Mexico to help stop the flood of illegal immigrants and bring Mexico up to US/Canadian standards.

bush_cheney2004,

I think that any multi-national oil company is way more interested in making a profit than in being competitive. The more they can get the public to subsidize through lower employment standards, reduced royalties, non-existent environmental regulations or enforcement, or direct cash handouts, obviously the happier they will be. The trouble with the SPP is that they are trying to harmonize our regulations with advice from the various kinds of leveraging multi-nationals, and not from people who care one way or the other about the future or this country. It's bound to end bad.

Don't blame it on our leaders, business goes where business feels it is welcome. The reality is that the US is our next door neighbour and the biggest market in the world. It's only logical that it should be our biggest trading partner and it is only logical that we would be interested in investing in each other. Stable governments, common language, short transportation routes that are not vulnerable to third parties. We occasionally have our differences but what could be better.

Wilber,

Our business and our leaders are pretty much the same thing, they are the liberalconservatives, fundraisers and investers. Why shouldn't I blame them, between them they don't have the foresight of a one eyed dog with it's head in the food bucket. Certainly there is trade between neighbours, even investment, find a place where I said differently, we are agreed. The SPP is going beyond that. It is attempting to make over North America in the corporate image, "What's good for Chrysler is good for NorAm." "Government should be run like a business." That is so far out in Right field that it is leaving reality. We should drop this process and decide in a national debate whether we want to be members of the borg or be ourselves.

[GostHacked]

Back in the bad old days of the sixties when the Canadian dollar was worth more than the American, When we knew that our worth was more than our dollar represented, when a worker had to have experience before being able to get a job, when we spent a higher proportion of our income on things we needed rather than conumer throw aways, and when the national debt was way, way, way smaller than it is now? From those perspectives it's not obvious that American investment has been either necessary or benevolent.

And now you see the US is having an ecomonic crunch and the CND dollar is climbing. It is over 90 cents US, highest it has been in 25 years. So the US economy is making our dollar stonger.

The Arrow has been beat to death. It was a technical masterpiece but was obsolete before it went into service because the ICBM had replaced the manned bomber as the big strategic threat. The purpose for which it was designed was no longer important enough to justify the expense. The same thing happened to the Concorde, it was only national pride which saw a few of them go into service with government owned airlines and they cost the governments which backed them a fortune. The Americans would likely have canceled the Arrow as well if they had been building it.

So why have not all fighter/intercepter/air superiority planes been cancelled?? And now ICBMs are basicly obsolete because they do not take into account of a different delivery system. (September 11, 2001)

Let's see, now we have the F-22 Lightning Bolt II and the F-35 strike fighter. Seems like these planes, as soon as they are in full production are obsolete. If the plane is obsolete, why are countries still trying to develope more aircraft? Simply put, it was Canadian shortsightedness and US posturing politics that signed the end to the Avro. That plane would only need minimal upgrades to be comparable to anything the US Military has used up to this date. The Avro would have had a long life, and many countries would have been wanting to purchase it.

We need less integration, not more with the US. The governments are being quiet about all this as coporations hammer out all the details so then they can present it to the governments of North America and say, this is how it is going to be now.

Why not build a kick ass rail line?? I am sure it would be more efficient than building a huge ass hiway that carries thousands of trucks a day, more pollution, more resources being uses, more more more more... the American Way. I'd say it costs less to build a solid rail line than to build thousands of miles of 8 lane hiways.

But what do I know.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Let's see, now we have the F-22 Lightning Bolt II and the F-35 strike fighter. Seems like these planes, as soon as they are in full production are obsolete. If the plane is obsolete, why are countries still trying to develope more aircraft? Simply put, it was Canadian shortsightedness and US posturing politics that signed the end to the Avro. That plane would only need minimal upgrades to be comparable to anything the US Military has used up to this date. The Avro would have had a long life, and many countries would have been wanting to purchase it.

The Avro Arrow has taken on mythical status not because of a technical design or performance envelope that would be competitive today with "minimal" upgrades.....surely this would not be the case. No, the Arrow is the mythical poster boy for a Canada gone missing long, long ago....and appropriately, destroyed by Canada itself.

Blaming the Americans is foolish, since the Arrow's initial development was directly assisted with P&W engines, fire control, missile, and even a B47E bomber:

http://www.vectorsite.net/avarrow.html

[GostHacked]

Blaming the Americans is foolish, since the Arrow's initial development was directly assisted with P&W engines, fire control, missile, and even a B47E bomber:

Preasure from the US Government and the $ell of everything-is-missiles-now to a weak minded, selling-out-Canada of a crooked Prime Minister. Canada is more to blame for the downfall of the Avro than the US, no contest there.

You still have not explained why countries are STILL developing manned fighter/bomber/interceptor/air-superiority aircraft? I thought it was all missiles now? If these were so obsolete, why are they still in production? They are definately being used around the world in many conflicts, but I thought the missile would render these obsolete??

[bush_cheney2004]

You still have not explained why countries are STILL developing manned fighter/bomber/interceptor/air-superiority aircraft? I thought it was all missiles now? If these were so obsolete, why are they still in production? They are definately being used around the world in many conflicts, but I thought the missile would render these obsolete??

It was never my intention to explain such things, but I can see it is important to you. It is well documented that the shift to longer range stand-off weapons and lack of a gun seriously impacted dogfighting capabilities and contributed to the erosion of pilot combat skills. Missions drive platform and weapons system design, and these are not static.

My only point vis-a-vis the excellent Avro Arrow is that if such pride is exhibited for its design and prototype manufacture, then equal responsibility must be taken for its demise. And so it is with the SPP....using American subsystems and testing facilities made the Arrow possible. The Americans also test on Canadian bases and ranges....I've spent many days at Nanoose for this purpose.

[speaker]

My only point vis-a-vis the excellent Avro Arrow is that if such pride is exhibited for its design and prototype manufacture, then equal responsibility must be taken for its demise. And so it is with the SPP....

Well said bush_cheney2004 ,,, If Canadians who have pride in our country, it's culture, social and environmental wealth, or it's political and international affairs, allow the SPP agenda to cause the demise of our freedom and opportunity then those losses are most certainly our responsibility.

[Remiel]

It would be rather lopsided to point out that the Arrow used some American parts, without pointing out how many American planes used some of the Arrows engineering innovations.

[bush_cheney2004]

It would be rather lopsided to point out that the Arrow used some American parts, without pointing out how many American planes used some of the Arrows engineering innovations.

Indeed, just as it is lopsided to point out the first controlled, powered and heavier-than-air human flight on December 17, 1903. Or that the now unemployed Avro engineers readily found work in another nation that just happened to have a multi-billion dollar space program. Perhaps this was the start of the now famous "brain drain".

[speaker]

... Or that the now unemployed Avro engineers readily found work in another nation that just happened to have a multi-billion dollar space program. Perhaps this was the start of the now famous "brain drain".

I'm not sure that anyone heading from Canada to the USA in search of a better life is going to qualify under the term brain drain. That said, both our countries are actively trying to suck the best and the brightest out of whatever country they are resident in, a sort of nationalist headhunting operation, partly because it is cheaper to import talent than to train our own. It's standards like these that the SPP elitists are missing out on.

[White Doors]

yes, geoffery, single people like you can, and do move along, families on the other hand cannot so easily do so, if at all. Nor should they have to, children do not do well constantly shifting schools, communities and friends.

Canada could lose the USA right now for a trade partner and still survive more than handily. There might be a blip in manufacturing job/exports, but that is a small portion of the GDP. The trade partners increases eleswhere would more than cover it, in not too long of time.

The USA wants our resources end of story, if they do not get them, well......look at their debt. Those who are advocating deep integration are not doing so out of the belief that it is good for Canadians. Because it isn't, under any circumstance.

we have resources - why not sell them to the highest bidder? if that is the US then who cares? We should be getting top dollar for them and the market ensures that we do. your hate USA campaign clouds you to everything. what a delightfully strange life you must lead.

[White Doors]

... Or that the now unemployed Avro engineers readily found work in another nation that just happened to have a multi-billion dollar space program. Perhaps this was the start of the now famous "brain drain".

I'm not sure that anyone heading from Canada to the USA in search of a better life is going to qualify under the term brain drain. That said, both our countries are actively trying to suck the best and the brightest out of whatever country they are resident in, a sort of nationalist headhunting operation, partly because it is cheaper to import talent than to train our own. It's standards like these that the SPP elitists are missing out on.

You obviosuly don';t think the USA is a good place to live? that's fine.

But you shouldn't let it bleed into everything you have an opinion of. The USA is a large country and so is Canada. I'd rather live in Cincinatti than say, Regina.

I'd rather live in Denver than Winnipeg.

Simplistic thinking does your argument no favours.

[guyser]

I'd rather live in Cincinatti than say, Regina.

I'd rather live in Denver than Winnipeg.

Ya know, I would rather a Porsche than a Yugo.

[jdobbin]

I'd rather live in Cincinatti than say, Regina.

I'd rather live in Denver than Winnipeg.

Simplistic thinking does your argument no favours.

Do you have experience living in any of the cities mentioned or are you just making noise?

[Drea]

Some people see the US and Canada as interchangeable.

Living in both countries is part of their lives.

Allthough I would find it difficult to compare, city to city or even province to state.

Canadians and Americans are different. Philosophically and socially.

The people that do travel back and forth (the Canadians, the ones I know) tend to be more conservative than the average Canadian. I suppose it's their direct exposure to more wide-spread conservatisim while in the states.

[scribblet]

The people that do travel back and forth (the Canadians, the ones I know) tend to be more conservative than the average Canadian. I suppose it's their direct exposure to more wide-spread conservatisim while in the states.

That's a joke right - I can't believe you said that seriously.

I spend 4.5 months of the winter down there, and as far as I'm concerned there is little difference between us, the biggest difference would be the attitude towards gun control and socialized health care, that's about it I think the Liberal canucks who go down there would be a bit taken aback at your comments. And dang, when we all go out for dinner, happy hours or go to dances you can't tell us apart, heck, we even all look alike.

[speaker]

we have resources - why not sell them to the highest bidder? if that is the US then who cares? We should be getting top dollar for them and the market ensures that we do.

That's a strange argument, I have a house as a resource, should I sell it to the highest bidder? What if the offered price is less than I think it is worth? Market force pressure for the best price is exerted upon both ends of the deal, buyer and seller. If we tie ourselves too tightly to one market, which deep integration with the US would do and which the security and prosperity partnership would do to us, we remove our ability to negotiate on equal footing with other markets.

If I agree to sell my house to my neighbour using his system of evaluation and his market value estimates he might just have the inclination to take advantage of the situation. We are better to leave our options open.

[Drea]

That's a joke right - I can't believe you said that seriously.

what did you consider that an insult? It wasn't. It was a simple observation of the people I know who spend a portion of their lives in the states.

[ spend 4.5 months of the winter down there,

Exactly. And you are more conservative than the average Canadian... you certainly are no lefty LOL.

and as far as I'm concerned there is little difference between us, the biggest difference would be the attitude towards gun control and socialized health care, that's about it I think the Liberal canucks who go down there would be a bit taken aback at your comments. And dang, when we all go out for dinner, happy hours or go to dances you can't tell us apart, heck, we even all look alike.

Of course. Did I say we look different?

We DO have differing philosophies and differing social constructs -- gun control, our social safety net, and healthcare, and abortion (no provinces have made abortion illegal -- some states have) level of religious involvement, debt per household -- see lots of differences.

But that is not an insult to either country, simply an observation.

[bush_cheney2004]

....and abortion (no provinces have made abortion illegal -- some states have) .....

But that is not an insult to either country, simply an observation.

This is false, unless you can name the US states in which abortion is illegal. Abortion was legalized in the USA at the federal level before it was legal in Canada (criminal code). Third trimester abortions for Quebecers are sent away to be performed in the USA.