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

241–250 of 355 posts

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

#241

Post by cmrdporcupine »

kolanos wrote: post #186
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US already has heavy agri subsidies, so it's a completely hypocritical comparison. And a pointless one, as you pointed out. It's fascinating to watch the spread of official propaganda talking points through online media. This one started two-three weeks ago, presumably from Trump. People who knew nothing about the Canadian dairy market suddenly "experts"

Canada has its own agricultural subsidies, in fact they're almost double that of the U.S. [0] > The OECD estimated the subsidy equivalent in 2012 (producer support estimate) in all Canadian agriculture represented 18% of the value of the industry with most of this amount going to supply managed sectors which represent only a percentage of Canadian agriculture. Critics say that this results in a "much higher effective…

... "for supply managed industries"

In the end Canada is a net importer of US agricultural products. By far. Or at least was until last month. The stuff is rotting on the shelves now.

So what's the gripe? We import more food products than we export, and we overwhelmingly consume US agricultural goods.

Just not dairy and eggs (or poultry, I guess)

Is the concern that the US dominance of our economy is not total enough?

Sounds like a justification for annexation, for sure.

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

#242

Post by soperj »

a-priori wrote: post #155
epa wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is silly. US is Canada's biggest trading partner and one of the largest borders in the world. 80% of people live within 1 hour of the border. Free trade has allowed both economies to prosper. Canada has everything to gain with free trade. You are right on over reliance, but free trade benefits everyone.

We had free trade. The US has, in a very short period of time, squandered what was a highly profitable and mutually beneficial trading relationship. There was already a sentiment of distrust in Canada about being so dependent on American goodwill. You can see this in the debates from the 1998 federal election ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyYjRmM7RDY ) on the establishment of CUSFTA, the precursor to NAFTA and la…

You've mixed up the two debaters (Brian Mulroney and John Turner), and the year (1988).

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

#243

Post by a-priori »

soperj wrote: post #242
a-priori wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had free trade. The US has, in a very short period of time, squandered what was a highly profitable and mutually beneficial trading relationship. There was already a sentiment of distrust in Canada about being so dependent on American goodwill. You can see this in the debates from the 1998 federal election ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyYjRmM7RDY ) on the establishment of CUSFTA, the precursor to NAFTA and la…

You've mixed up the two debaters (Brian Mulroney and John Turner), and the year (1988).

Ugh, yes you're right, I typed too fast and mixed things up. Thanks for the corrections.

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

#244

Post by cmrdporcupine »

dc396 wrote: post #215
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,…

> Who is “us”? Canadians, of course. > Surely we need to acknowledge that Europeans invaded Canada in the first place? No. Europeans (and others) "invaded" North America. The sovereign country called "Canada" didn't exist until the mid-1800s. Even the name didn't appear on maps until the mid-1500s and the indigenous peoples who lived in North America at the time certainly didn't consider themselves a part of a unifie…

Yeah. It's all such a mess, and if anything the European colonists (French and British) in what became Canada -- while murderous and genocidal to the first nations -- were strategically "softer" on them than their American counterparts who were openly officially genocidal.

e.g. When the treaty of Ghent was signed ending the War of 1812, the chief (and really only) "victory" for the Americans was the fact that the British gave up defending/supporting the indigenous people in the midwest who had (under Tecumseh and with the support of the British to some degree) fought off American settlers. And so the Americans were free to go in and massacre and wipe out the remaining pockets of indigenous resistance in the Americas.

& Iroquois/Mohawk under Brant fled north to Canada, where the British granted them land along the Grand River valley here in Ontario.

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

#246

Post by soco »

ForTheKidz wrote: post #157
soco wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be fairly difficult to be similar to any other country in North America, innit

Most countries in north america are more similar to each other than they are to the US or Canada, yes. That is precisely what I am saying. Canada is basically the colony that didn't bother.

My comment was meant to be ironic, but only now I learned that all those countries below the US are not "central america" the way I thought.

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

#247

Post by rich_sasha »

andy_ppp wrote: post #7

I’m surprised all the countries the US is trying to bully aren’t considering moving to the Euro as the reserve currency (even China might go along with this). It would be so damaging for the US they might actually understand they have been benefiting from a win-win situation since the end of the Second World War.

The US dollar is just so, so, so incredibly ingrained into the global economy, it just ain't that simple. You can or course hold whatever else instead of USD, but then you'll find yourself just exchanging back and forth to/from USD.

It's a bit like coming up with a realistic scheme for a computer with no RAM, only hard drive and CPU caches.

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

#248

Post by bryanlarsen »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #107
bryanlarsen wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only Kenora to Nipigon that's vulnerable, there's a decent road between Nipigon and Ottawa. Some prefer it because it's flatter.

Being from southern Ontario near Toronto, I naturally can't even imagine going that way ;-)

You'd do it if the road was blocked between the Sault and Nipigon and you couldn't go through the States.

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

#249

Post by bdangubic »

a-priori wrote: post #155
epa wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is silly. US is Canada's biggest trading partner and one of the largest borders in the world. 80% of people live within 1 hour of the border. Free trade has allowed both economies to prosper. Canada has everything to gain with free trade. You are right on over reliance, but free trade benefits everyone.

We had free trade. The US has, in a very short period of time, squandered what was a highly profitable and mutually beneficial trading relationship. There was already a sentiment of distrust in Canada about being so dependent on American goodwill. You can see this in the debates from the 1998 federal election ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyYjRmM7RDY ) on the establishment of CUSFTA, the precursor to NAFTA and la…

it is 2025, nothing takes a generation any longer unless you are implying donny and his apostoles will rule america for a generation. otherwise new administration will repair this fairly quickly

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

#250

Post by hmmm-i-wonder »

riku_iki wrote: post #227
hmmm-i-wonder wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and what would data tell why guns have to be restricted? We have banned, restricted, and unrestricted classifications. There are good arguments for fully automatic weapons, concealable shotguns and handguns being at least restricted, and for fully automatic and concealable weapons to be completely banned. I'm not going to rehash the arguments, because frankly we're likely going to disagree on most of them and neithe…

> and equipment vastly outclasses what any civilian can and will have even in the US. not really. In urban setting, it is still the same soldier on foot with rifle, unless military decides to level all cities in the country.

We will have to disagree on this.

>unless military decides to level all cities in the country.

See Gaza, most of eastern Ukraine. The existence of armoured equipment, air support, satellite monitoring and encrypted/EW resistant communications means civilian resistance is all but irrelevant.

Civilians co-operating with an organized, funded and supplied military is one thing, but on their own its a laughable concept at best.

Post reply on HN