Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Apparently the Wall Street Journal thinks the US and Canada should do the Fusion Dance.

[Lord Shonus]

It's a good idea, and one I've advocated for quite awhile.  There's zero economic downsides, and huge potential gains to be made. On the political end, there's very few critical issues in conflict. Of those, all should be handleable at the state (or province) level. The sole sticking point would be national identity, which is something cherished on both sides of the border. If that can be addressed, a US-Canada merger would be a wise decision.

[10ebbor10]

I'm pretty sure the law systems are not completely compatible. Major law changes would be problematic for most of the economy, in either Canada or the US. And it's not like such a merger would be problematic internationally.

The U.S. has capital*, manpower**, technology and the world's strongest military**; Canada has vast reserves of undeveloped resources.

*More like a massive debt. Sure private corporations have capital, but the US sees it debt rise by 5% of it's GDP/year.
**These are the same

[Owlbread]

It sounds like a lot of tosh. I have no idea why she keeps bleating on about the US military. Hell, if I was a Canadian the last thing I'd want is for all of my beautiful resource revenue pouring into the abominable money sink that is the US army, or for my federal government to be decided by the fucking American electorate of all people. No offense meant by that of course, I'm sure you liberal types know exactly what I mean there.

It seems like a bit of a daft article written by someone who thinks stuff like the Russians (who are stuck in the 1980s) planting flags under the North Pole actually matters. She should understand that in the modern world countries that can distribute the revenue from vast natural resources among a smaller, older, wiser population without having to worry about bullshit like military spending or flag planting tend to be happier, more livable and generally successful countries. If your definition of success is the happiness of your people of course, not military might or "influence" or even pure economic power.

China is undoubtedly the main economic power of the century and yet economic power has not necessarily made the common Chinese people any better off than a Canadian or Norwegian.

[10ebbor10]

Well, the North Pole kinda does matter. There's massive resource reserves down there.

[Owlbread]

Well, the North Pole kinda does matter. There's massive resource reserves down there.

Maybe so but Canada has more than enough to keep its people happy.

[Lord Shonus]

I'm pretty sure the law systems are not completely compatible. Major law changes would be problematic for most of the economy, in either Canada or the US. And it's not like such a merger would be problematic internationally.

That isn't nearly as great a problem as it may seem. In terms of actual laws, they already diverge vastly between US states. In addition, very few of the laws would HAVE to change right away, as most of Canada's laws are legal* in the US (and vice-versa). Now, you'd have to rework legal systems to some degree, as Canadian and US courts don't exactly hold to identical legal procedures and exact guarantees, although the spirit of the laws are essentially the same.

The U.S. has capital*, manpower**, technology and the world's strongest military**; Canada has vast reserves of undeveloped resources.

*More like a massive debt. Sure private corporations have capital, but the US sees it debt rise by 5% of it's GDP/year.
**These are the same

The growth of the US national debt is solely due to the ridiculously low tax rates. In any case, government capital doesn't mean shit when it comes to economic development.






*Can't think of a less cluttered way to say this. My meaning is that, if the laws existing in one country were passed in the other, nearly all would hold up to any legal challenge.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

The U.S. has capital*, manpower**, technology and the world's strongest military**; Canada has vast reserves of undeveloped resources.

*More like a massive debt. Sure private corporations have capital, but the US sees it debt rise by 5% of it's GDP/year.
**These are the same

* Due to an incredibly easy to rig tax system, resulting in the rich paying next to nothing in comparison to their annual incomes. Yet, somehow, our growth of public debt and government debt to GDP is tortoise-slow compared to such modern marvels as the UK, showing how you can shove all your debt burdens to the populace of working poor. I don't think the UK and other blessed countries have such lenience to be able to raise taxes once their fake bank-economies explode. Example:  UK is pushing people to buy houses for subprime rates again and actively encouraging them to saddle up with debt before the housing bubble there bursts. I'd worry more about your governments shifting the entirety of their debt woes onto the little guy, atleast in the US the rich have only rigged the system. As opposed to being completely pardoned from having to participate in it thanks to the magic hand of Thatcherism-let's-bailout-the-people-ruining-the-working-economy Reagonomic capitalism which helped result in the 'too big to fail'-ism.


** North Korea has plenty of manpower and no military might.

[BlackFlyme]

I have to admit, I'd love to see the reactions from the Quebecers on this one.

They have enough to rile them up as it is.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Perhaps, but they could also potentially negotiate a new deal for themselves thanks to the mass political change.

[Lord Shonus]

Wasn't there a fairly vocal annexation party in Quebec a few years ago? I seem to remember reading something about that.

[USEC_OFFICER]

Wasn't there a fairly vocal annexation party in Quebec a few years ago? I seem to remember reading something about that.

Wait, what? I'm not exactly up to date with Quebec politics, but I'm pretty sure most Quebecers would prefer to stay with Canada than be annexed by the US.

[Lord Shonus]

I can't find anything now, but I certainly remember something of that sort interrupting hockey games a few years ago.

[FearfulJesuit]

One thing I could definitely see happening if the US and Canada are united (let's assume we keep the American political system) is that we'd start having a serious conversation on getting rid of or at least redefining the composition of the Senate. If every Canadian province becomes a valid state, then that's twenty extra Senators- a fifth of the body- controlled by a tenth of the population, ie Canuckistan.

Also, the Republican downward spiral would become a black hole- I would be surprised if they won a single House seat north of the 49th, and they definitely won't win a Senate seat. Maybe one district composed of Calgary's rich suburbs, but even that's stretching it. It would be nice to import the NDP, though.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I don't even think Harperland would vote Republican.