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

Why Canada Should Join the EU

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 823 posts

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#661

Post by [deleted] »

tharkun__ wrote: post #422
jmb99 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quote from a Chinese friend of mine form over the holidays (currently in Canada on a work visa, applying for a PR shortly, started as an exchange student in highschool): “I really like coming back to [jmb99’s hometown], it’s all white people. Nice change from Toronto.” Definitely a common sentiment.

I hadn't been to Toronto in years until recently. We went to some parks (i.e. Parks Canada / Provincial Parks) around. Little did I know that you now have to register online to book your visit. You used to just go and pay cash at the entrance and that's it. This time you had to have an account and prove identity by logging in through your bank account for example, before they'd even let you purchase said ticket. We d…

[deleted]

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#662

Post by BlueTemplar »

zizee wrote: post #73

What are the benefits that cannot be obtained by signing trade agreements? Canada is already part of NATO for defence, so joining the EU does nothing for defence. Does Canada want freedom of movement of EU citizens into Canada? They already have a housing crisis. Greece's experience shows a single currency isn't really beneficial to all members of the EU, so Canada would be crazy to give that up.

NATO is probably even less solid than the EU : France historically not being all in, the very reason for the pact being under question between the fall of the USSR and Putin deciding to shot himself in the foot, and who knows what Trump will do... (last time he already siphoned NATO funding, including for the Ukraine ramp-up, to build his (strategically) stupid wall).

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#663

Post by mbivert »

zapperdulchen wrote: post #276
mbivert wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strictly speaking, you're correct, but practically speaking, I believe not so much. For example, France lost a key advantage ("competition rules") with nuclear energy essentially because it was considered unfair to other countries. But energetic independence is fundamental in part to economical independence: it's a key aspect of sovereignty. Another example would be the Euro ("monetary policy"): > Give me control ove…

Many perceive EU laws as imposed without democratic oversight, but this isn't quite accurate. The European Parliament, elected by EU citizens, is involved in most legislative processes. The EU Council, made up of ministers from elected governments, also plays a key role. It's not how national democracies work, but with no unified European public, this system might be the best compromise for now.

Let's look in practice[0]: there's 720 seats in total for 2024. France has 81, spread on its local political spectrum [1]; biggest group has 18 seats. So while there's some democratic oversight, the public perception remains reasonable: the representative weight of an individual is severely diluted (divide & conquer, yada yada).

As it plays on the democratic oversight perception as well, we could also look at the perception/quality of the locally elected bodies, and their general attitude towards the UE: a great example is [2] ("let's ask the people but do it anyway").

That's to say, I believe there are good reasons for people to perceive EU laws as imposed without democratic oversight. It's not 100% true, but overall, it's not an unfair qualification either.

[0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/infographic/meps-seats/index_...

[1]: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_d%C3%A9put%C3%A9s_eu...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_French_European_Constitut...

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#664

Post by franga2000 »

mike_hearn wrote: post #657
mmooss wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite the critics, many countries have signed up and would like to, and only one has left. Why is EU membership so much in demand?

[flagged]

> conditional on things like only voting in left wing parties

Thefuck? The EU has been making everything conditional on privatization, deregulation and generally adopting more capitalist models in practically every aspect of government. You're calling this left wing??

A few examples of the demands: sell off our largest and state-owned bank; decouple, deregulate and privatize electricity generation and sale; open the up publicly-owned railways to private operators; increase the minimum age of retirement...

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#665

Post by senko »

mardifoufs wrote: post #571
skissane wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canadian GDP per capita is 15 times that of Morocco. The EU would much rather admit a wealthy country than a relatively poor one. So there are clear economic reasons to treat the two differently. Canada is a longstanding liberal democracy with a distant and purely symbolic constitutional monarchy. Morocco is a constitutional monarchy in which (until recently at least) the monarch played an active political role, ther…

Yes, but why would Canada want the EU? it's just a complete fantasy from the economist, I don't see why a country that's already wealthy would want to join the EU, especially when it's a country that basically is completely dependent to the US. It makes as much sense as Norway wanting to join NAFTA when most of its trade is in Europe.

> it's just a complete fantasy from the economist

It's par for the course for Charlemagne (the column in The Economist). It's not meant to be an actual realistic analysis and reporting (the way their non-columnist articles are, even if they all have an editorial streak). Mostly it comments on the topic of the week/month in some irreverent way[0], or entertains a modest proposal[1] like this one, in a "ha ha wait a minute" sort of way.

[0] https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/12/19/we-need-to-talk-...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#666

Post by adammarples »

rayiner wrote: post #576
kypro wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The left-wing party in the UK has only just won its largest majority in history and we don't have another election for 5 years. That is largely because the right has split into populist right and centre-right parties though.

Labour won the election, but Starmer’s approval rating is already down to 27% after just six months. https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/dissatisfaction-starmer-reaches-... . That’s not surprising given that Labour got half a million fewer votes than it did in 2019, when it lost in a landslide, but won anyway because of infighting among the right wing. That’s what I meant when I said nationalists have rendered ruling parties…

This is nonsense. Labour have a huge majority, there is no coalition, and their fall from popularity is 100% their own making and largely down to their own left wing policies (increased taxation, lying about it, bungs to unions, increased workers rights) and perceived corruption due to freebies (clothes, glasses). Labour basically ignore the right wing as irrelevant, Reform are only currently a problem for the Conservatives, due to splitting the right vote.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#667

Post by Yeul »

remarkEon wrote: post #629
mensetmanusman wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is sad because the government knew and failed to act on 5x-ing the rate of housing production to keep up with new arrivals. Failing to do so has screwed over so many people due to housing costs that went up due to mass migration. This was all predicted though if that makes anyone feel better.

Housing isn't the only thing that "solves" immigration issues. The immigrants have to, you know, assimilate. For whatever reason this step has been deleted from the usual policy matrix, and as a result we've been running a great experiment over the last 20+ years in Canada, Europe, and the US.

Yes Indians come to Canada for jobs and money but keep their own culture.

I always find it slightly bizarre. I have tried to explain that culture and economy are interlinked. India's inequality and superstitious beliefs will keep the population poor.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#668

Post by sandworm101 »

tsimionescu wrote: post #640
sandworm101 wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irish. The scots. Basically everyone who wasnt related to the vikings after 1066. The welsh trying to protect thier language are basically quebec. The scots talking about leaving, but never actually doing it, are basically alberta. And thats just similarities in the british isles. Then there are all the little counties bordering giant countries (finland) that see parallels to the canada-us relationship.

Your assertion is that the Scots, the Irish, and the Welsh are treated less fairly in the UK today than the First Nations people are in Canada? Because the article was claiming that EU countries have a lot to learn from Canada today. I personally very much disagree with the concept that First Nations people in Canada are afforded more rights and are freer to practice their cultural identity than the Scots, Welsh, and…

Whether they are or they aren't treated fairly today is beside the point. They were treated badly in the past and now their descendants want recompense for those past wrongs. The wounds in Canada are likely a little more fresh, but many peoples in Europe still remember wrongs done to grandparents.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#669

Post by hkpack »

atmosx wrote: post #199
hkpack wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Russia agreed to Ukraine joining the EU Russia didn't agreed to that, it sabotaged any effort and any agreement between EU and Ukraine to the maximum of its abilities. Ukraine paid a huge price to be able to have an association agreement with EU.

Russian diplomacy tends to be straightforward – they make their positions clear and repeat them often to ensure their message gets across. Putin has explicitly stated he’s not opposed to Ukraine joining the EU. He has no trouble stating his views, no matter how controversial, publicly. However, he has repeatedly made it clear that Ukraine joining NATO is unacceptable to Russia. In the past discussions about Ukraine’s…

And yet, Russia started an aggression when there was no chance and no plan for Ukraine (or Georgia for example) to join NATO but agreement on the EU association was being prepared.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#670

Post by _7acn »

gmueckl wrote: post #110
_7acn wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of reading the documentation, let's answer three questions: 1. Can your country introduce any law without asking the EU for approval? 2. Can the EU mandate your country to implement a specific law? 3. Do you still believe your country is sovereign?

1. Yes, outside the areas where EU has sole responsibility. 2. Yes, within the areas where the EU has exclusive responsibility and to some extent when it shares responsibility with member states. 3. Yes. Any country is free to leave the EU at any time. See Britain.

In that case, I suggest taking a closer look at the definition of "sovereignty". When it comes to lawmaking, if you say that your country can basically do "almost everything" without the EU's permission, "BUT with certain exceptions" it simply means that it is not sovereign. This is not a matter of opinion but of facts. It's binary — either it is sovereign, or it is not.
Post reply on HN