Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

washingtonstatestandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 355 posts

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#201

Post by maujun »

123pie123 wrote: post #184
kube-system wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why should we be borrowing all this money from foreigners when we’re a rich country? The crazy thing is, most of the money that the US borrows from is from their own citizens... not foreigners. I don't know why everyone presumes that US debt is mostly or entirely owed to other countries. It isn't.

Why doesn't the US just print money instead of having to borrow money then print it? does any other country do it this way?

It is related to the general definition of inflation.

Those with existing assets (including retired folks in the US) theoretically "lose" in this situation.

You can split the US and see inequality arise from printing: (1) US federal govt vs non-govt entities (2) US citizens with assets vs US citizens without assets, (4) people who received money first vs people who last bits of the "trickle down".

In various cases, certain people "win" and others "lose"

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#202

Post by [deleted] »

ianburrell wrote: post #187
kube-system wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't China currently address this by having two currencies, with one dedicated to offshore use?

China only has one currency, the renminbi or yuan. There are capital controls so it isn't fully traded on international markets. It has only been internationally traded since 2015, and I think there were various schemes before that.

[deleted]

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#203

Post by ygjb »

riku_iki wrote: post #189
ygjb wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to be too glib, but rather than citing a theoretical need to stage an uprising, why not measure something more direct and practical, like the number of mass shootings. Some stats - https://www.healthdata.org/news-events/insights-blog/acting-... Yes, a tyrant could take over, but the only credible threat Canada has had of that since the second world war has been our most powerful ally 'joking' about annexing us. A…

> like the number of mass shootings. Some stats I think your link doesn't have actual mass shootings number, my bet is that majority of fire arm homicides are commited by some small caliber hangguns (unlikely to be restricted) in domestic violence setting. Wikipedia says that massshooting casualties are only 0.2% of gun deaths in USA.

My point was really that American style gun rights are not popular in Canada, and the theoretical tyrannical government isn't an adequate justification.

You can argue the merits for or against, but more than 60% of Canadians support outright bans on firearms, and more than 80% support bans on 'assault' weapons.

This is not a hugely controversial topic in Canada; personally I support hunting, and recognize the utility of firearms as someone with a rural upbringing. I also support very strict gun controls and regulation, and I don't agree that there should be a right to bear arms - it's a privilege that should be earned, and well defended through testing and responsible ownership.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#204

Post by kps »

phkahler wrote: post #127
kps wrote: post #6

Should also toll the ‘shortcut’ between Detroit and Buffalo for foreign high-axle-weight vehicles like transport trucks and maybe some electric cars.

>> Should also toll the ‘shortcut’ between Detroit and Buffalo for foreign high-axle-weight vehicles like transport trucks and maybe some electric cars. Nah, Canada ships too much trash to Michigan to go after one of those crossings. Yes it's weird that part of the US is used as another first world countries garbage dump. I've never looked in to why this is happens. Maybe we could put a tariff on trash?

> I've never looked in to why this is happens.

Toronto. Low bidder. We're sorry.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#205

Post by kube-system »

ianburrell wrote: post #187
kube-system wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't China currently address this by having two currencies, with one dedicated to offshore use?

China only has one currency, the renminbi or yuan. There are capital controls so it isn't fully traded on international markets. It has only been internationally traded since 2015, and I think there were various schemes before that.

Aren't CNY and CNH effectively two different currencies, despite having the same name and being somewhat linked?

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#206

Post by ForTheKidz »

thomassmith65 wrote: post #166
ForTheKidz wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well we've only been a true "liberal democracy" for the past sixty years or so. Before that we were a de-facto apartheid state. Maybe at a stretch you could say 105 years if you go by the 19th amendment. And frankly i'm still skittish to call America pre-Trump a democracy with my full chest given the electoral college, completely bonkers division of the country into states, the senate, complete lack of a right to vot…

It's history: if a person doesn't grade on a curve, every page of the textbook looks the same (ie: people being jerks). In order to deny that England, America, and France spearheaded the modern democratic system (albeit inspired by Ancient Greece), a person needs to explain who did?

> In order to deny that England, America, and France spearheaded the modern democratic system

That doesn't mean these governments make any political sense as a democracy today relative to the status quo. Hell, Britain is probably the only government on earth more dysfunctional than America's. At least France refreshed relatively recently; what the hell is Britain's excuse? Even North Korea and Eritrea seem to maintain more dignity internationally than any of the three of us and they barely even attempt to come across as "democratic".

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#207

Post by anon84873628 »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #159
blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US is the only country that has ever invaded us. Who is “us”? Surely we need to acknowledge that Europeans invaded Canada in the first place? The “us” that can make claims about having been invaded likely is just the indigenous people of that land. Of course, this applies to America as well. I do wonder what causes all of us to view a certain set of borders as the “correct” one. I also do the same thing. > Yes,…

I actually share general skepticism about the US-Canada border and the structure of the Canadian state generally. But I also have deep skepticism of the US project generally. I think northeastern US states have more in common with us than their own southern states. I think the Canadian political class -- both conservative and liberal -- are really parasitical awful people overall, and our own business community are o…

>And that there is an "alternate path" for governance in North America is in fact I think the precise thing that actually enrages people like Trump.

Haven't heard anyone quite put it like this - thanks.

Trump is also such an egomaniac that he wants territorial expansion of the US to be part of his legacy. He admires conquerors and invaders.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#208

Post by rchaud »

0xffff2 wrote: post #197
curt15 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about 3. Climate change renders large swaths of the US uninhabitable, leading to an exodus into Canada?

Phoenix and Las Vegas are already major metropolitan areas. With enough money invested in desalination (expensive, but cheaper than migrating a whole country) it's doubtful that any part of the US will be rendered uninhabitable.

> With enough money invested in desalination

Cheaper to nullify meteorological services and browbeat media into silence and simply tell Americans everything is fine.

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#209

Post by jpambrun »

hintymad wrote: post #181
yatopifo wrote: post #4

That makes perfect sense. It puzzles me why supporters of the current US regime think Canada won’t resist the US. Be it a trade war or a military invasion, Canada will make the cost so great that it may eliminate the US from the world arena. Canada has been cornered and has nothing to lose at this point.

An honest question: what is wrong with reciprocal tariff? Wouldn't that be fair to both countries? I understand that there were many compromises when the countries signed trade deals like NAFTA, so we got some protective tariffs here and there, but I was wondering in general why reciprocal tariff is considered unfair.

I guess it could be fair, but those are unilateral. The official justifications such as considering sales tax, are bogus. The unofficial justification (or official depending on time of day..) is annexation. Surely, you see how this isn't perceived as fair from up North?

Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska

#210

Post by anon84873628 »

hintymad wrote: post #181
yatopifo wrote: post #4

That makes perfect sense. It puzzles me why supporters of the current US regime think Canada won’t resist the US. Be it a trade war or a military invasion, Canada will make the cost so great that it may eliminate the US from the world arena. Canada has been cornered and has nothing to lose at this point.

An honest question: what is wrong with reciprocal tariff? Wouldn't that be fair to both countries? I understand that there were many compromises when the countries signed trade deals like NAFTA, so we got some protective tariffs here and there, but I was wondering in general why reciprocal tariff is considered unfair.

The trade isn't necessarily perfectly balanced, is it? In negotiations you have more flexibility if you can increase the size of the pie. Things like transit tolls or cruise ship stops are examples of that.
Post reply on HN