News   Sep 17, 2019
 290     0 
News   Sep 17, 2019
 483     3 
News   Sep 17, 2019
 446     0 

North American union

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
8,245
Reaction score
1,349
Location
The Junction, Toronto
It would be Washington calling the shots if it happened in North America. A union of the Americas would have enough population to counterbalance Washington, but that would be the kind of union that the US wouldn't be a part of. Canada would sooner become a part of the European Union ;).
 

EnviroTO

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
3,946
Reaction score
55
Location
Yonge & Mt.Pleasant
I don't see any way to EU-ize NAFTA as long as US politicians paint the world as "us" vs "them", the aliens, job stealers, and potential threats. The US is trying to increase the barrier between Canada and the US. It seems like someone with a cosmopolitan thought in Washington would be labelled unpatriotic.
 

jn_12

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
1
can we post 5,000 word essays on here? I wrote a paper about the prospects of a North American Union for a 4th year class last year. In Canada, there's a very secretive push by our leaders (goes back a long way, even to the late 1800s) behind the scenes towards an NAU. In the US, they don't give a shit about us. They've never cared about Canada's role in NAFTA, only Mexico's. You hear murmurs of Obama wanting to get rid of NAFTA (whether true or not, who knows) but there are people in the US that would rather see the continent policed by themselves, than having to worry about who the Canadians and Mexicans are letting in. Hence the term "Fortress North America"

As I said, I wrote 5000 words on the thing so I could ramble for a while. If you have a chance, you should try and read Mel Hurtig's "The Vanishing Country." It's quite the eye opening read.

junctionist said:
Canada would sooner become a part of the European Union
like they'd want anything to do with us.
 

MisterF

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
1,233
What I'd like to know is what's behind the push for a union? Canada doesn't gain anything by becoming part of the United States. Are the high ups so in the pockets of big business that they're willing to sell out the country to make a buck? I can't think of another country whose leaders are actually trying to get taken over by their neighbour.
 

jn_12

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
1
Sadly, big business runs this country. All you have to do is look at all the statistical comparisons pre and post NAFTA. Things like annual personal income increases were growing steadily from the 1970s (maxing at 13%) until NAFTA came into being. Now there's no difference between what someone made 30 years ago compared to what someone makes today in actual dollars not adjusted for inflation. This was just announced last week and was front page news everywhere. Foreign direct investment in this country is something like $600billion per year. Name most of Canada's most well known companies and brands and odds are they're foreign (re:American) owned. Defensively, we're essentially under American rule with over 80-treaty-level defense agreements, 250 memoranda of understanding, and 145 bilateral defense discussion groups.

We're pretty much an American state. The only thing that prevents our politicians from getting too close publicly is the fear of appearing too close publicly.
 

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
8,245
Reaction score
1,349
Location
The Junction, Toronto
like they'd want anything to do with us.
Interestingly enough, they have a website dedicated to their relations with Canada. It calls us one of their "oldest and closest partners".

I think your conclusion on Canada being essentially a part of the US is overly extreme, for the US influences every country. The refusal to participate in the invasion of Iraq and the softwood lumber crisis are recent examples of Canadian sovereignty. As for business, it's clearly true that businesses are strong forces in the country, but what is the alternative of the current situation, the nationalization of large industries?
 

Coruscanti Cognoscente

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
7,734
Reaction score
221
Location
Imperial City
I'm sometimes shocked at the level of anti-Americanism and cynicism toward an EU-style union for NAFTA. There were, and are, Eurosceptics or whatever they're called about the whole EU idea. But look at how much easier it is traveling in Europe now. That's priceless.
 

MisterF

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
1,233
I'm sometimes shocked at the level of anti-Americanism and cynicism toward an EU-style union for NAFTA. There were, and are, Eurosceptics or whatever they're called about the whole EU idea. But look at how much easier it is traveling in Europe now. That's priceless.
North America isn't Europe. NAFTA is dominated by one huge country that calls the shots while Europe has five fairly large countries that balance each other out. No single country dominates Europe. That alone is enough reason to avoid an EU-style union here. Why is it that whenever someone points out that a union is inappropriate for North America and bad for Canada, they're labelled anti-American? :rolleyes:
 

ShonTron

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
9,969
Reaction score
2,849
Location
Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
I'm sometimes shocked at the level of anti-Americanism and cynicism toward an EU-style union for NAFTA. There were, and are, Eurosceptics or whatever they're called about the whole EU idea. But look at how much easier it is traveling in Europe now. That's priceless.
Mister F gives such a good answer that I don't feel like I need to repeat much of it. But North America, with one hyperpower, isn't Europe, with 3-5 large powers in a group of many.

The EU headquarters is in Brussels, in one of the smaller EU member nations. Could you imagine a NAFTA-Bloc headquarters being anywhere but Washington?

And even only some countries are part of the Schengen zone, you still need a passport to travel between France and the UK. Switzerland, not a EU country, is joining as well.

Sorry, I like Canadian independance. I guess that makes me "Anti-American" in your distorted argument.
 

Transportfan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,521
Reaction score
297
I'm sometimes shocked at the level of anti-Americanism and cynicism toward an EU-style union for NAFTA. There were, and are, Eurosceptics or whatever they're called about the whole EU idea. But look at how much easier it is traveling in Europe now. That's priceless.
I find it understandable why some ppl want some sort of union with the US. They don't like the idea of being some little known third party, with limited freedom of movement, and want to be part of a more dynamic system.
 

MisterF

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
1,233
I'm continuing the conversation about a North American Union here, since it was getting off topic in the Windsor bridge thread. I'm sure you all know my position, for the life of me I just can't figure out how anyone could support forming a union with the United States. It's not anti-Americanism, as some have suggested, it's what's best for Canada. A couple quotes from the other thread:

I find it understandable why some ppl want some sort of union with the US. They don't like the idea of being some little known third party, with limited freedom of movement, and want to be part of a more dynamic system.
Limted freedom of movement? Last time I crossed an international border it's wasn't exactly difficult. If we got swallowed up by the US we'd be even less known, and we'd be completely irrelevant. We'd be the laughing stock of the world because we let ourselves get annexed by a larger power. I just don't get how people think we'd somehow become more "known" by joining another country. We're a lot more known by having our own voice - any kind of union means giving up what voice we have.

Just think how easy and faster it would be to cross the boarder if Ontario became 51st state.

You would not have to spend any money to improve the flow of traffic since there would be no stopping requirement anymore.

We will be part of the US down the road.

That $1.6 B looks good for transit right cross the board.

Waving hand as I drive over the bridge saying Hi as I drive by.
You want to sell out your country for a measly $1.6 billion? I'd argue that we'd lose money by joining the States. We'd be tying ourselves to their backward banking system, an economy that's doing worse right now, gigantic budget deficits, a falling currency, and a far more expensive health care system. And that's not even touching the social and legal issues they have.
 

whitestone7

Banned
Member Bio
Joined
May 16, 2008
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
My contribution about the Security and Prosperity Partnership

Hello People:

I'm new here and will join in discussions occasionally

I want to make it clear - I am not anti-U.S.

My rants should be viewed with a grain of salt

That being said my contribution about the so-called North American Union
is at:

http://whitestone7.110mb.com/index.html

By the way it is called The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

It is not something that is in the future, it has already happened

It goes way back to Mackenzie KIng era

Anyway the website lays out my position on it quite clearly
 

Coruscanti Cognoscente

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
7,734
Reaction score
221
Location
Imperial City
We don't need to be as integrated as the EU countries, we just need to open up the borders so that crossing the border is as easy as traveling from Germany to Austria, i.e. you drive right through. Our economies are already as integrated as they need to be for now. I think everyone is overestimating the Americans' economic clout. The United States is knee deep in red ink from the Iraq war. Really, the only things we'd have to give up to get an uncontrolled border are surrendering the protection of our borders to the Americans, and possibly immigration policy.

Personally, I would have no problem whatsoever with Americans taking over responsibility for the ports of entry into Canada. I know a lot of people would see that as taking away some of our sovereignty, which it is, but it would make everything easier for everyone. We might not do the same thing on the Mexican side, but they could, and then the Americans could watch the Mexican border with, erm, whatever is on the south side of Mexico.
 
Top