6 ms·
Canada is basically just an economic extension to the US. I find it funny when people talk about us developing our own industry for X. We don't do that. Our app
by belval 6y ago
Canada is basically just an economic extension to the US. I find it funny when people talk about us developing our own industry for X. We don't do that. Our approach is to be a pool of specialized and culturally similar people for the US to use as cheaper labor (when the loonie is low).
- steve_adams_86 6y agoYou’re not wrong, but this actually illustrates why we need to establish industry to counteract this problem. What you’re describing will always be true if we don’t have the initiative to correct it. This stuff seriously concerns me because apart from natural resources, we have very little to leverage. I worry for my kids and their kids. Canada is in a very precarious economic and political position from my perspective.
- bushbaba 6y agoCanada has lots and lots of fresh water. And global warming will open lots of farm land. Could easily see Canada become the agricultural leader of North America.
- vkou 6y ago> Could easily see Canada become the agricultural leader of North America. The agricultural leaders of <anything> are countries that are nearly universally dirt-poor.
- kenhwang 6y agoThen there's California, arguably North America's current agricultural leader.
- vkou 6y agoCalifornia isn't rich because of agriculture. It's a rich state that happens to do some agriculture.
- systemBuilder 6y agoIllinois is 100% agriculture. All the tech from Schaumburg and Naperville (W. Chicago) has been hollowed out. It's still relatively rich as a state ... You are forgetting that until recently in Brazil the USA had double the agricultural productivity of any place else on Earth...
- refurb 6y agoChicago GDP = $619B IL GDP = $897B Agriculture is a small fraction of what IL produces.
- eru 6y agoThe Dutch disagree. (Not just now, but also historically.)
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoExcept that the Netherlands aren't rich because of their agriculture. They're rich and happend to be good at agriculture on the side as an added bonus.
- eru 6y agoSounds like we are moving the goalposts now? In any case, have a look at https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-dutch-economy-in-the-golden-age-16th-17th-centuries/ https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-dutch-economy-in-the-golden-... Agriculture has been important for the Dutch for a long, long time. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Agricultural_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Agricultural_Revolutio... which arguably allowed Britain to become the wealthiest place on the planet for a while.
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoOk, my mistake.
- foobiekr 6y agoDid you know that the northeast of the United States was once quite agriculturally productive? The current situation is the result of economics and will benefit long before Canada does and to a much greater extent.
- eru 6y ago> You’re not wrong, but this actually illustrates why we need to establish industry to counteract this problem. Who is we?
- steve_adams_86 6y agoSorry - we is Canada in this case. I didn’t make that clear.
- rhodozelia 6y agoCanada used to count Avro and Bombardier in their aerospace industry. We used to have Nortel and blackberry as leaders in telecommunications. We can have our own industry for X and we can be competitive world leaders in it.
- NonEUCitizen 6y agoYou have (present tense) Shopify.
- kenhwang 6y agoI think it's even more degrading than that. Canada basically exports healthy, educated, wealthy people to the US for little in return (well, other than being best friends with the world superpower anyway). As long as there's favorable compensation and tax policies on the US side, Canada's brightest, healthiest, and wealthiest will just hop over to benefit from the more favorable conditions there after reaping the expensive taxpayer funded social benefits (healthy upbringing, affordable higher education).
- spir 6y agoIt's true and sad.
- david-gpu 6y ago> Canada's brightest, healthiest, and wealthiest will just hop over to benefit from the more favorable conditions there after reaping the expensive taxpayer funded social benefits The bulk of Canadian taxes are paid by the "brightest, healthiest and wealthiest" [0], so the expensive social benefits Canadians enjoy are largely funded by extracting taxes from these people, not the other way around. Thus, I can hardly blame them for moving to a place where they don't have to subsidize others as much. [0] https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1110005501&pickMembers%5B0%5D=1.1&pickMembers%5B1%5D=3.5&cubeTimeFrame.startYear=2014&cubeTimeFrame.endYear=2018&referencePeriods=20140101%2C20180101 https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=111000...
- BeetleB 6y agoNice argument, but when you look at the data, it doesn't make sense. According to your link, the top 10% of Canadians pay about 50% of the taxes in Canada. In the US, the top 10% pay a larger share: 70% (although this is only federal data).[1] So moving to the US to avoid subsidizing others is probably not the best rationale. [1] https://taxfoundation.org/summary-of-the-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2020-update/#_ftn1 https://taxfoundation.org/summary-of-the-latest-federal-inco...
- kenhwang 6y ago