News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 6K     0 

Trump’s domestic policies were/are likely to lead to American economic and inflationary issues all in their own. This lets him blame it all in Canada, Mexico and China all while distracting conversation away from nonsense like withdrawing from the WHO…
 
So were Fort McMurray and Jasper asking for it as well?
I wouldn't bother engaging on this "Hollywood was asking for it" deal. (A note on dealing with trolls, from Jean-Paul Sartre: "They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words.")
 
I wouldn't bother engaging on this "Hollywood was asking for it" deal. (A note on dealing with trolls, from Jean-Paul Sartre: "They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words.")
It's also not a political issue. It's an environmental and public safety issue, unless you're talking about wildfire management policies.
 
For perspective today, it's interesting to read a statement on free trade from a previous American President:

"Statement on the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement
October 4, 1987

"Last night, I notified the Congress that I intend to enter into a free trade agreement with Canada on January 2, 1988, contingent upon a successful completion of the negotiations. The essential elements have been agreed to, and we expect that final details can be hammered out in the next few days.

"This historic agreement will strengthen both our economies and over time create thousands of jobs in both countries. It will serve as an important model for other nations seeking to improve their trading relationships. In many respects it will also serve as a model for the Uruguay round of multilateral trade negotiations.

"The people of the United States and Canada have had a long and harmonious friendship that is the envy of the world. Now, in addition to sharing the world's longest undefended border, we will share membership in the world's largest free trade area. This agreement will provide enormous benefits for the United States. It will remove all Canadian tariffs, secure improved access to Canada's market for our manufacturing, agriculture, high technology and financial sectors, and improve our security through additional access to Canadian energy supplies. We have also gained important investment opportunities in Canada and resolved many vexing trade issues.

"I congratulate Prime Minister Mulroney for his courage and foresight in seeking this free trade area. It will strengthen the bonds between our nations and improve the economic performance and competitiveness of both countries. The agreement will provide an enduring legacy of which both nations can be proud.
"Date 10/04/1987"

This was delivered by President Ronald Reagan. Interestingly enough, Reagan and Mulroney - both considered right-wing politicians - also signed many agreements internationally and domestically advancing numerous issues that would today be considered quite left-wing in today's polarized climates on both sides of our border.

Personally, I find the difference between this desire to create an enduring legacy and the current "lets just tear it apart because we can" (and this is not limited to the US) both disturbing and sad.
 
I am presenting an idea to the local Democratic leadership today -- a governmental organization that would lie between State/Provincial Governments and Federal Governments. I am giving it a name -- Union Pacificus ("Peace-loving Union" but also with the name intention of dealing with Pacific Rim countries, a double entendre). It would look at the U.S. states of California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii, the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Alberta plus all 47 prefectures of Japan (perhaps reduced to 3 or 4 jurisdictions) plus all 16 provinces of South Korea (again, perhaps reduced to 3 or 4 jurisdictions, all 82 provinces of the Philippines, plus both Provinces and 6 Municipal districts of Taiwan (the latter two also possibly reduced in number, but that would rely totally on their local governmental input) and finally the two states of Baja California, Mexico. I could see UP jointly tackling some heretofore non-defined issues -- 1. a Resource Protection Force, an elite highly trained and superbly equipped permanent force with the task of mitigating natural disasters in the UP region (forest fires, earthquake damage, and floods); 2. Uniform Healthcare Administration supported by a direct tax to all participating jurisdictions that covers Disease, Disability, Mental Illness, Dental, and Eyecare; 3. Sustenance and Housing Administration, again supported by a direct tax that would ensure proper meals and housing is provided to all of the participating jurisdictions and the people residing therein.
I am starting with the Democratic party, not because of an ideological bent, but because they represent the governing authorities in the four named American States and the NDP government of BC -- Alberta is an anomaly politically from this norm but I think the UPC government would be attracted to the economic strength of the union (we shall see) and its inclusion would underscore the non-political nature of the union. All existing State and Province jurisdictions in the three areas of concern would be ceded to the new Governing Body. UP bureaucratic centre could be Honolulu, Hawaii (near the geographical centre of the new formation).
This could lessen Trump's perceived power on the Federal level and honor a sensibility alignment that has always run north-south in North America, not east-west. I think these would be core constituents allowing others to join as membership rules and regulations are defined and offered out to other constituents -- similar to the EU starting with 6 founding members (Germany, France, Belgium, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands) and eventually expanding to the 27 members today with applications from an additional 9 or 10 under consideration.
 
Last edited:
^
Canada, the US, Japan and others are already dialogue partners in ASEAN whose charter already allows for the development of "friendly relations and mutually beneficial dialogues, cooperation and partnerships" with "sub-regional, regional and international organisations and institutions" (which includes "external partners, ASEAN entities, human rights bodies, non-ASEAN Member States Ambassadors to ASEAN, ASEAN committees in third countries and international organisations, as well as international/regional organisations"). I'm not sure what you expect of Union Pacificus that couldn't already be pursued/accomplished through ASEAN and/or other existing groups.

What's lacking is political will, not potential organizations.
 
Canada, the US, Japan and others are already dialogue partners in ASEAN
No kidding! This is a different approach; I can hardly wait to hear all the reasons you believe this won't work and is a "bad" idea. And your argument about ASEAN is the very reason that something like this could work.
 
No kidding! This is a different approach; I can hardly wait to hear all the reasons you believe this won't work and is a "bad" idea. And your argument about ASEAN is the very reason that something like this could work.
Good luck with your “different approach”!

I’ll look forward to your reporting on your progress in implementing it and the results achieved by Union Pacificus.
 
This is behind a Globe and Mail paywall:

"Mr. Hassett said personal experience had convinced him that Canada is bad actor in drugs. He described travelling to Alberta last summer fora fishing trip, with a stop in Edmonton. There, he walked out of his hotel and saw "an ambulance there helping somebody who had OD'd, sadly, on fentanyl. And then and I'm walking to my restaurant two people get in a fight with cops over drugs." His conclusion: "Canada is like San Francisco, and it's spreading to the U.S.. And it needs to stop.""

 
Sounds about right, making decisions that will decimate entire economies and alienate your country from its closest allies based on an anecdote.

Facts before feelings am I right?
 
I just spoke with the local Democratic rep for our area and she thinks the idea described above is brilliant. Gavin Newsom is term-limited and so won't be running for Governor next year, but he can organize the meeting of Governors and Premiers and lean on one of the Democratic ticket-seekers to pick up the California race. I'll keep all posted on up-dates; it will at least get heard by the California State Assembly which is super-majority Democratic.
 

Back
Top