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

751–760 of 823 posts

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#751

Post by wvenable »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #671
wvenable wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a fantasy. Those 90 returned people can spend their money anywhere in the world and do. Their relative ranking is multiple larger homes and those 10 working people paying them rent. Land value is not a product of labour -- in Canada it's an investment and a way to move/launder money from other countries. Many many properties being build that are not designed to be realistically lived in.

At a 90 working, 10 non working people ratio, there isn’t going to be much to export, and hence the local currency isn’t going to buy much elsewhere in the world. Also, at 90/10, the working people will surely start to wonder why they are paying rent (or tax) and who is going to stop them if they don’t. Same for invaders looking at obtaining the natural resources in Canada. I picked an extreme ratio to illustrate the…

> At a 90 working, 10 non working people ratio, there isn’t going to be much to export, and hence the local currency isn’t going to buy much elsewhere in the world.

Canadian currency at the lowest in years. But most of the wealth of Canadians is not held in cash and not entirely even in Canadian investments.

> It is sort of “land value is a product of labor from decades prior that has accumulated to the orderly, productive society today”. But that can gradually change.

I don't see the connection. The land I live on is worth well over a million dollars and increases at an significant rate every year but has no basis in reality other than demand for land outstrips the supply.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#752

Post by gmueckl »

_7acn wrote: post #670
gmueckl wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

EU countries aren't forced to stick to the union. If they dislike EU decisions, they are free to leave and do their own thing at any time. This is very unlike US states that aren't allowed to secede from their union.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#753

Post by tsimionescu »

sandworm101 wrote: post #668
tsimionescu wrote: post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Are Frist Nations people in Canada receiving recompense for their past terrible treatment?

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#754

Post by panick21_ »

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…

Right wing infighting is one reason. But not the only one. And claiming it is, is just distorting reality to make a political point. Turnout, Liberal Democrats and more, all those matter as well.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#755

Post by yhg56fgniyfv »

sneak wrote: post #699
yhg56fgniyfv wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all your neighbors no longer spoke English, you don't think that would affect you? Obviously that's an extreme example, but other cultural differences will affect you as well.

No, I don’t. This is already the case in many neighborhoods in the USA and the sky isn’t falling in those places. Also, I live in Germany half of the year, and there most of my neighbors don’t speak any English, and my neighborhood is fine. I don’t see the problem you are describing with your example. If that’s your “extreme” example, I am curious what your day-to-day ones would be. Perhaps it’s uncharitable but I am…

I didn't claim the "sky would fall". I just claimed it would affect you.

I think most would agree that it is easier to form connections with those who are more similar to oneself. Call it racism or tribalism if you want, but that's reality.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#756

Post by mardifoufs »

bobxmax wrote: post #298
Neonlicht wrote: post #295

Canada is more likely to be formally incorporated into the US- after the fall of the British empire there's nothing standing in Washington's way.

Well aside from 30 million angry Canadians ready to burn down the white house again.

I literally can't think of a single canadian population/group that would be willing to die for canada. Liberals don't care, conservatives (the group more likely to join the military) absolutely don't care about the Canadian identity anymore, Quebecers sure wouldn't, immigrants (me included) wouldn't either...

Like, this isn't 1812 where Upper and Lower Canada had an actual identity or link to the British throne, or were descended from loyalists. We are mostly just a country that is held together by economic interests and a lot of inertia.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#757

Post by vidarh »

argsnd wrote: post #647
OJFord wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes that's what GP is describing. Fractured Conservative party with splinters that can't command a majority.

The combined right did not get remotely close to a majority. The combined left did.

The Lib Dems are not considered left-wing. Growing parts of the UK left do not consider Labour left-wing any more, for that matter.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#758

Post by _7acn »

gmueckl wrote: post #752
_7acn wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

EU countries aren't forced to stick to the union. If they dislike EU decisions, they are free to leave and do their own thing at any time. This is very unlike US states that aren't allowed to secede from their union.

Whether one can opt out or not, whether someone likes it or not, and whether this state was reached voluntarily or by force, is irrelevant here - definition of sovereignty is pretty much clear

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#759

Post by vidarh »

gruez wrote: post #703
rayiner wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>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. The "a million fewer votes" is technically true, but misleading. It's en…

So in other words, whether or not you call it misleading, Labour has a massive problem, as replacing the historically unpopular Corbyn only caused Labour to increase 1.6 percentage point over the historically bad 2019 election.

No UK PM in modern times have had as little electoral support.

Re: Why Canada Should Join the EU

#760

Post by vidarh »

argsnd wrote: post #646
rayiner wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

There was an objective left-of-centre majority in the 2024 UK election if you combine vote shares of all left-of-centre parties. The combined right managed only 38% vote share.

Only if you - unlike most people in the UK - consider the Lib Dems, who have governed in coalition with the Tories - as a left-wing party. Something most of the UK left, and quite a lot of Lib Dems would find mutually offensive.
Post reply on HN