Canada Kicks Ass
USA distancing itself from Canada

REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next



Tman1 @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:35 am

Wullu Wullu:
IcedCap IcedCap:
Wullu Wullu:

Yank never said Minister...he said member of the government.


a backbencher isn't part of the government


Brush up on the system, any MP of the governing party is a part of the government. Minsters are part of the cabinet.

Indeed however that particular MP did not speak for the government and was also merely a personal opinion, wrong as it may be.

   



Yank-in-NY @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:36 am

Tman1 Tman1:
Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
RoyalHighlander RoyalHighlander:
There are many countries that are interetsed in our goods, but we deal with the US because they are "right there" we can deal with othrs if need be but it would mean shipping more over seas by ship than just down interstate 15 by truck...


You deal with the US because Economics 101 dictates it serves your interests.

Economics 101 also dictates we diversify our "interests".


Canada already has a number of trade agreements with many countries around the world (Israel, Korea and Europe come to mind), there is nothing stopping you from expanding your trade with those countries, except of course costs. The government did its job by establishing the trade agreements, now its economic interests and competition that take precedence.

   



Tman1 @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:42 am

Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
Tman1 Tman1:
Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
RoyalHighlander RoyalHighlander:
There are many countries that are interetsed in our goods, but we deal with the US because they are "right there" we can deal with othrs if need be but it would mean shipping more over seas by ship than just down interstate 15 by truck...


You deal with the US because Economics 101 dictates it serves your interests.

Economics 101 also dictates we diversify our "interests".


Canada already has a number of trade agreements with many countries around the world (Israel, Korea and Europe come to mind), there is nothing stopping you from expanding your trade with those countries, except of course costs. The government did its job by establishing the trade agreements, now it economic interests and competition take precedence.

Exactly, the costs. Which is also a primary reason why we trade primarily with the U.S is because of convienience which is what HL said. It helps of course to trade with the richest nation on Earth, that is a given but to say that it is in our "only" interests is misleading. It's up to the government of this country to dictate, not economics 101 sorry, on how our trade should go and if that means losing more markets in the U.S, which would be unlikely and unfortunate, then thats that. It also doesn't help when our primary interest proves to be more of a hinderance than a benefice hence more market diversification. IMO, I would want more diversification in our markets and not rely on 80% of the U.S but then again, I am not the government of this country.

   



Yank-in-NY @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:52 am

Tman1 Tman1:
Exactly, the costs. Which is also a primary reason why we trade primarily with the U.S is because of convienience which is what HL said. It helps of course to trade with the richest nation on Earth, that is a given but to say that it is in our "only" interests is misleading. It's up to the government of this country to dictate, not economics 101 sorry, on how our trade should go and if that means losing more markets in the U.S, which would be unlikely and unfortunate, then thats that. It also doesn't help when our primary interest proves to be more of a hinderance than a benefice hence more market diversification. IMO, I would want more diversification in our markets and not rely on 80% of the U.S but then again, I am not the government of this country.


Costs are not a convenience, the cost of your product to the end user will dictate where you sell your product. Try for example liquifying your natural gas and selling it abroad, the costs would be too high, granted there might be some market out there, but you can't compete with pipelines.

Can you explain to me how your government would drive Canadian companies to compete in other markets when your costs of manufacturing and mostly your costs of shipping make you uncompetitive?

   



bootlegga @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:04 pm

Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
bootlegga bootlegga:
As long as we provide 15% of their oil (more the Saudi Arabia BTW) and 90% of their natural gas imports, I can't see them distancing themselves too far...


You provide 8% of our oil and 16% of our natural gas, which both equal to 7% of our energy consumption.



I said imports, not total energy usage. Check out your own gov't websites if you don't believe my numbers

Dep't of Energy

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petr ... mport.html

Canada (1.493 million barrels per day)
Mexico (1.468 million barrels per day)
Saudi Arabia (1.180 million barrels per day)
Nigeria (1.094 million barrels per day)
Venezuela (0.909 million barrels per day)...

Total crude oil imports averaged 9.380 million barrels per day in October(2005)

1.493 Million divided by 9.380 million = 15.9168%. I guess I under-estimated by almost one whole percent...

More proof from the US Embassy...

http://www.usembassycanada.gov/content/ ... ons_102805

Overall, of course, Canada provides over 15% of net U.S. oil imports, over 90% of net U.S. natural gas imports, and 89% of net electricity imports. Canada also provides 27% of uranium used in U.S. power plants, a trade that is also likely to grow given strong U.S. support for nuclear, and its many clean air benefits.

   



Arctic_Menace @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:14 pm

DerbyX DerbyX:
Just found this. http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcanadawar.html

I may be mistaken about the dates but the sentiment is still there.


Wow. Talk about holding a grudge. :roll: Not to mention the whole manifest destiny thing........ That still creeps the shit out of me, that the mentality that your country should rule an entire continent(and with these new radicals, the world) was acceptable at the time, and still going....Just look at the expansionist party..........

   



Yank-in-NY @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:16 pm

bootlegga bootlegga:
Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
bootlegga bootlegga:
As long as we provide 15% of their oil (more the Saudi Arabia BTW) and 90% of their natural gas imports, I can't see them distancing themselves too far...


You provide 8% of our oil and 16% of our natural gas, which both equal to 7% of our energy consumption.



I said imports, not total energy usage. Check out your own gov't websites if you don't believe my numbers

Dep't of Energy

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petr ... mport.html

Canada (1.493 million barrels per day)
Mexico (1.468 million barrels per day)
Saudi Arabia (1.180 million barrels per day)
Nigeria (1.094 million barrels per day)
Venezuela (0.909 million barrels per day)...

Total crude oil imports averaged 9.380 million barrels per day in October(2005)

1.493 Million divided by 9.380 million = 15.9168%. I guess I under-estimated by almost one whole percent...

More proof from the US Embassy...

http://www.usembassycanada.gov/content/ ... ons_102805

Overall, of course, Canada provides over 15% of net U.S. oil imports, over 90% of net U.S. natural gas imports, and 89% of net electricity imports. Canada also provides 27% of uranium used in U.S. power plants, a trade that is also likely to grow given strong U.S. support for nuclear, and its many clean air benefits.


Actually you have to look at the overall picture. We consume 21 million barrels of oil per day. The total amount of oil imports from Canada represents 7 to 8% of our energy consumption. When you combine that with our natural gas consumption it is even lower.

The point I was trying to make was your oil and gas are significant, not detrimental.

   



Yank-in-NY @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:17 pm

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Just found this. http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcanadawar.html

I may be mistaken about the dates but the sentiment is still there.


Wow. Talk about holding a grudge. :roll: Not to mention the whole manifest destiny thing........ That still creeps the shit out of me, that the mentality that your country should rule an entire continent(and with these new radicals, the world) was acceptable at the time, and still going....Just look at the expansionist party..........


Gee Zuzz, start a thread on Manifest Destiny, you may learn a thing or two.

   



Arctic_Menace @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:21 pm

Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Just found this. http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcanadawar.html

I may be mistaken about the dates but the sentiment is still there.


Wow. Talk about holding a grudge. :roll: Not to mention the whole manifest destiny thing........ That still creeps the shit out of me, that the mentality that your country should rule an entire continent(and with these new radicals, the world) was acceptable at the time, and still going....Just look at the expansionist party..........


Gee Zuzz, start a thread on Manifest Destiny, you may learn a thing or two.



America starts to expand westward, and begin to accumulate territory rather quickly, They think it's a sign of God that he wants them to rule the continent. SO they start to think that way.


The End. :wink:






I'm just glad that the sentiment is not that widespread anymore. Phew.....

   



Yank-in-NY @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:23 pm

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Just found this. http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcanadawar.html

I may be mistaken about the dates but the sentiment is still there.


Wow. Talk about holding a grudge. :roll: Not to mention the whole manifest destiny thing........ That still creeps the shit out of me, that the mentality that your country should rule an entire continent(and with these new radicals, the world) was acceptable at the time, and still going....Just look at the expansionist party..........


Gee Zuzz, start a thread on Manifest Destiny, you may learn a thing or two.



America starts to expand westward, and begin to accumulate territory rather quickly, They think it's a sign of God that he wants them to rule the continent. SO they start to think that way.


The End. :wink:






I'm just glad that the sentiment is not that widespread anymore. Phew.....


Well if you say so.

   



Arctic_Menace @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:35 pm

Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Just found this. http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcanadawar.html

I may be mistaken about the dates but the sentiment is still there.


Wow. Talk about holding a grudge. :roll: Not to mention the whole manifest destiny thing........ That still creeps the shit out of me, that the mentality that your country should rule an entire continent(and with these new radicals, the world) was acceptable at the time, and still going....Just look at the expansionist party..........


Gee Zuzz, start a thread on Manifest Destiny, you may learn a thing or two.



America starts to expand westward, and begin to accumulate territory rather quickly, They think it's a sign of God that he wants them to rule the continent. SO they start to think that way.


The End. :wink:






I'm just glad that the sentiment is not that widespread anymore. Phew.....


Well if you say so.




:roll: The wink means I'm being sarcstic. You need to learn that about me, until an issue become truly serious, I will treat it with alot of sarcasm.

   



Yank-in-NY @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:49 pm

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
Yank-in-NY Yank-in-NY:
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Just found this. http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcanadawar.html

I may be mistaken about the dates but the sentiment is still there.


Wow. Talk about holding a grudge. :roll: Not to mention the whole manifest destiny thing........ That still creeps the shit out of me, that the mentality that your country should rule an entire continent(and with these new radicals, the world) was acceptable at the time, and still going....Just look at the expansionist party..........


Gee Zuzz, start a thread on Manifest Destiny, you may learn a thing or two.



America starts to expand westward, and begin to accumulate territory rather quickly, They think it's a sign of God that he wants them to rule the continent. SO they start to think that way.


The End. :wink:






I'm just glad that the sentiment is not that widespread anymore. Phew.....


Well if you say so.




:roll: The wink means I'm being sarcstic. You need to learn that about me, until an issue become truly serious, I will treat it with alot of sarcasm.


Actually I realized you were being sarcastic, I sometimes get lazy and don't add smilies :wink:

   



Arctic_Menace @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:54 pm

Ahh, mah bad. :oops: :wink:

   



Yank-in-NY @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:46 pm

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
Ahh, mah bad. :oops: :wink:


Bah, you're cool in my books, I like your posts :D

   



Ruxpercnd @ Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:00 pm

I am glad the Peace Arch is made of stone.... It will last a lot longer than any politician's words.

$1:
The American side of the Arch is inscribed with the words
"Children of a Common Mother;" the Canadian side, with the words "Brethren Dwelling together in Unity." Within the portal of the Arch on the west side are the words "1814 Open One Hundred Years 1914" and on the east side, "May These Gates Never Be Closed."


The International Peace Arch stands astride the international boundary between Surrey, British Columbia and Blaine, Washington. "The Peace Arch Rises", one foot anchored in American soil and the other in Canadian. Standing tall as a physical symbol of an imaginary line that stretches 3000 miles.

Poised above the international boundary of both countries the Peace Arch represents the longest undefended boundary in the world. Dedicated in 1921, it is the first Monument built and dedicated to world peace.

   



REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next