149
150

Trudeau criticizes ‘divisive, fearful rhetoric’ of anti-globalization forces as leaders gather for G20 (canada.com)

Canadianman22Ontario が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 225
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]SirToxalot 115ポイント116ポイント  (10子コメント)

I don't think that Trudeau has got the concerns about trade agreements quite right. The concern is not so much globalization (free trade) as it is about Corporatization of our public agenda.

The very fact that there was a B20 meeting attached to the G20 shows just how much corporate interests are taking over the government agenda.

[–]vlad--- 62ポイント63ポイント  (8子コメント)

The concern is not so much globalization

I think there are several legitimate concerns about globalization as well, and it is disingenuous to dismiss it as "divisive rhetoric".

If country A has a high standard of living, high minimum wage, high worker protections such as unions, a myriad of public services such as health care and education, and this country engages in "free trade" with country B, that has no enforced minimum wage, no worker protections, no public services, and extremely low standards of living - what happens?

Companies from country A will exploit the low cost labour in country B, which will inevitably erode salaries and the standard of living in country A. Who benefits? Largely the owners and executives of the companies who exploit this difference. They might try to tell you that the public benefits from cheaper prices, but what good are cheaper prices if your salary is being eroded through these uneven trade deals?

I agree there are xenophobic under currents to the current anti globalization movements, and by the same token there are xenophobic under currents to the foreign investment problems in Toronto and Vancouver - but just because extremist voices exist in both camps doesn't mean there isn't a problem that we need to recognize and address.

[–]frenris 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your list is incomplete. The ownership class of country A benefits massively. Everyone in country B benefits massively. The working class in country A is hurt.

If you quantify the total effect in dollars it's on the whole generally positive - but redistribution is required for the workers in the note advanced country to not fall backwards.

[–]lightweights [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The fact that these issues exist, and are being ignored, and any dissenting opinions are shut down as 'fearful rhetoric' or 'bigoted', pushes people to the groups that will listen to their complaints. It turns moderates into extremists.

They rally against extremism, while literally making the perfect breeding ground for it with their policies and ignoring peoples concerns.

Globalism has benefits, but as you stated, free trade agreements are only good for the working class in prosperous countries when they are made with other countries on a similar footing.

I also do not want Canada to be like areas of the world that have backwards laws, no respect for women, and constant guerrilla insurgencies.

I know it's not a popular opinion on here, but countries that are like that, are specifically like that because of the environment their citizens grew up in and were shaped by. Importing them to Canada is going to import a lot of their issues as well. Some people may be okay with that, I personally am not. Has nothing to do with any ones skin colour, and everything to do with me prioritizing Canadians over everyone else.

コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

    [–]OccamsTrimmer 21ポイント22ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Exactly. Patently domestic issues that our government has failed to deal with properly due to corporate influence are now used as bargaining chips in the TPP while introducing unrelated concessions that hurt consumers (and citizens in general) further.

    [–]DarkPrinnyAlberta 21ポイント22ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Canada's story with globalization.

    We use to manufacture products with our raw materials at one time. But globalization has made it more cost effective to send our raw materials to another country.

    We try to rely on technology, innovation and IT but we are outclassed in every aspect in that field and because the USA is so close to us, everyone who comes out of that field, ends up going to the USA for work (better money, better environment for it).

    Literally all we have is raw materials and agriculture as our biggest industries including manufacturing but NAFTA has made us lose so much auto manufacturing to Mexico, it is a losing battle.

    So what has Globalization done for Canada? It has helped those who deal with raw goods make more money from opening up markets to their products. But on the downside it has outsourced much of our manufacturing to countries with lower labor standards and lower currency.

    Now the problem is since globalization is now open, it is impossible to close it or regulate it without market disruptions. Closing the door to your raw goods won't mean more manufacturing jobs will come back. Countries just won't buy the manufactured goods from you as long as someone else is open for business. And the IT pipe dream is too little two late. The American powerhouse is too close to us and our infrastruture barely allows us to be capable of 3g (we don't have true 4G networks).

    Canada is just fucked unfortunately. In the future we will either become a Chinese tourist hotspot or a cesspool for US corporations to extend their arm into different markets with raw materials. Right now we are a little bit of both.

    [–]CommanderMoneyLest We Forget 15ポイント16ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Urgh... Trudeau apparently does not understand why the public is so against globalization. It's so funny how he lists all the benefits of it but does not disclose what could possibly bad about it and good leaders do this to keep themselves in check. I don't mind globalization but there needs to be heavy rules in set so that companies don't just have another freebie or flexibility to avoid paying in general. If the government should ever do something like this it should always should be made to the public and put to a referendum (In these actions the public would know what is best). Also, if the government (Trudeau) can't explain this to the public it should not even be on the table of talks to begin with as it outright affects everyone.

    [–]moeburnOntario [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

    Urgh... Trudeau apparently does not understand why the public is so against globalization.

    Sure he does. He's just trying to change that, because he's been bought and paid for.

    [–]greenslope [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    I also do not want Canada to be like areas of the world that have backwards laws, no respect for women, and constant guerrilla insurgencies.

    Does anyone really think Trudeau has put a great deal of thought into any of this? I sure don't.

    [–]sjthrowaway4 239ポイント240ポイント  (119子コメント)

    It's easy for a man like Trudeau to support globalization, being one of the very most privileged people in the country. He was born wealthy, with a name that ensured that even if he didn't have a dime, he would never have to compete for a job with the common man.

    He doesn't know what it's like to work 40 hours a week for $10 an hour, with no hope of a raise because employers are importing easily exploitable temporary foreign workers to keep wages down.

    He doesn't know what it's like to have to pay rent while trying to get through university. He doesn't know what it's like to have to save for a down payment on a house, to wonder how many years the mortgage will be and if you will even live long enough to pay it off.

    Globalization hurts Canadians. It forces Canadians to compete with quasi slave labor, in places where safety and environmental protections are secondary at best, and inconsequential at worst.

    He'll happily drive our wages down and lower the quality of life in the name of equality. He'll bring in unskilled, unnecessary foreign labor with drastically different cultural values, and live in a nice rich neighborhood full of white people where him and his family never have to come into contact with them.

    His big business buddies, born privileged like him, will encourage him for their own ends. When his children come of age, he will use his connections and his name to ensure they never have to compete with their skills, never have to earn their own way, never have to fight for a few bucks above minimum wage against the influx of unskilled, foreign labor brought in by their father.

    Remember that Trudeau, for all his "it's 2015" statements, gay pride parade marching, and historical atrocity apologizing, lives a charmed life, and was always going to live a charmed life. And it's because of that that he'll happily drive down our wages and fill other peoples neighborhoods with immigrants. It's so very, very easy for him to do that because he has never had to struggle like the common man has had to struggle. He thinks he made it. He thinks he earned it. And when a poor bastard is fighting for $2 above minimum wage, he thinks that's that guy's own fault.

    [–]Beaver_Tears 52ポイント53ポイント  (6子コメント)

    ya but he rode the bus that one time and peter mansbridge was there to document the whole thing. he's totally in tune with the common folk

    [–]moeburnOntario 28ポイント29ポイント  (5子コメント)

    Even that bus is a nice looking bus. Try getting on the TTC with the black gum stained seats.

    [–]PopsicleJesus 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

    He should ride regina transit late at night next to an uncomfortably talkative yet unfriendly drunk homeless man who is going womewhere for what can only be described as reasons. Also, the homeless man is native, and he would have to face that reality too, on top of the fact that regina transit is pretty shit.

    [–]thedrivingcatOntario -5ポイント-4ポイント  (3子コメント)

    When was the last time you took a TTC bus? They're not like that at all.

    [–]Canadian_Infidel 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Where was the last time you took a TTC bus?

    [–]thedrivingcatOntario 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I take the 52 Lawrence from Yonge & Lawrence Stn to my job quite frequently, the bus seats are not stained black with gum.

    But yeah, this thread is about hating on Trudeau so anything not in-line with the circlejerk is going to be downvoted I guess.

    [–]Canadian_Weatherman 29ポイント30ポイント  (60子コメント)

    Writing a defense of globalization is an uphill battle on reddit, but here it goes.

    You can pick at clauses of individual free trade agreements, like some in TPP, but globalization is a benefit to most people in both first world and third world countries. Economists are basically unanimous in supporting this point, at least broadly. It's really just basic division of labour. As a guy who studied climate science, I'd like people to pay attention when something like 97% of experts in a field say something.

    Globalization has been one of the chief driving economic forces of the last 50 years. Thanks largely to it, global inequality has decreased while global incomes have increased. Canada's incomes have increased for most people as well. It's just the bottom 20% of Canadians who don't have a valuable skill who have fallen behind. You can't make a great living doing what some completely uneducated guy in rural China can learn to do in 1 week. That's life. I'll point out again that thanks to globalization, even these folks have cheaper and more diverse range of products to purchase.

    If Canada cut foreign trade and immigration off with the rest of the planet, its economy would suffer badly. We would lose jobs in the natural resources sector. 30 million people only need so much copper, diamonds and oil. Farming would take a hit. We only need so much wheat also. Other products would also either get far more expensive (the computer you posted on) or completely unaccessible (lots of food). This is actually something that hurts the working class more, since they spend more of their income on physical products.

    There's other benefits to trade also, like promoting world peace. Hard to attack a country you're so interdependent with.

    [–]xhiggy 29ポイント30ポイント  (19子コメント)

    It's just the bottom 20% of Canadians who don't have a valuable skill who have fallen behind.

    Yes, 'just' one in five. The liberal middle class's fear/hatred of the poor continues.

    [–]QueenLadyGagaQuébec 0ポイント1ポイント  (7子コメント)

    It's true that you can't expect much if you can be replaced by some random chinese farmer in a week

    [–]NWmba 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

    I'd just like to point out that between just China and India, there are 3 billion people, and both countries are industrializing, meaning more skilled labor, more education. If they get, say, 1% of their population educated, they will have a skilled labor force larger than Canada's population.

    It might not just be the unskilled who are threatened at this point.

    [–]Canadian_Infidel 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    And they are more than happy to live 20 to a home and don't care about the environment or workplace safety and will happily take bare minimum wages with no overtime pay.

    [–]greenslope [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Currently skilled labour is a bit more protected as there are ways to keep others out in the form of licensing, regulation etc. Once this erodes though, watch out. And why as a country do we want to help a rural Chinese farmer rather than a guy in Burlington?

    [–]Canadian_Infidel 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

    Or a random Chinese IT specialist. Or a random Chinese computer programmer. Or electrician. And so on.

    [–]QueenLadyGagaQuébec -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Then you're really bad if they make a chinese dude with language barriers come from halfway around the world to replace you.

    [–]Canadian_Infidel [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

    There are 1.2 Billion Chinese. You think none speak English and even less can learn?

    [–]QueenLadyGagaQuébec [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    None of them will be native speakers, few of them will truly be fluent and have a good accent. It's your native language. If the guy who speak teo chinese dialects and then English is shipped in to replace you, you probably suck hard

    [–]Rules_are_for_fools [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    just one in five

    [–]JakeTheSnake0709Alberta -3ポイント-2ポイント  (2子コメント)

    What are we supposed to do? Make them go to college/trade school?

    At least the liberals support basic types of welfare.

    [–]xhiggy 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I agree, the Liberals are in favor of making these people dependent on government programs that can be changed suddenly.

    [–]JakeTheSnake0709Alberta -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Ha! You're being facetious, right?

    [–]barkusmuhl 49ポイント50ポイント  (12子コメント)

    You are setting up a straw man by implying that the alternative to globalization is isolationism. Many people want a return to more protectionist trade policies. Put reasonable tariffs on goods that are imported in order to level the playing field and encourage 'shopping locally.' It's not a radical change, it's what was done since the inception of our country until NAFTA.

    [–]jtbcLest We Forget -2ポイント-1ポイント  (10子コメント)

    The problem is that almost all of the people who study this stuff for a living conclude that protectionism and tariff barriers suppress economic growth and result in less efficient economies and markets.

    The issue is a lot older than NAFTA. "Trade vs. mercantalism" has been around since around Adam Smith's time.

    [–]sjthrowaway4 32ポイント33ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Maximizing economic growth is not the only factor to consider. That is another straw man that globalists love to use.

    Economic growth includes the scenario where the top 1% get richer while the bottom 30% fall further into despair. On paper that's still growth. But it doesn't mean that it is the best outcome for Canada.

    I'll happily trade a little "growth" for a healthier middle and lower class, and an economy that isn't so dependent on exploited foreign labor.

    [–]snowback 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Obama Admin Downplays Malaysia Slavery To Grease TTP

    https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/07/27/blocked-trade-pact-failure-trafficking-malaysia-suddenly-gets-passing-grade/

    "The administration knows that the TPP will have trouble in Congress, but turning a blind eye to Malaysia’s grave human rights violations in order to include Malaysia in the pact because it’s one of the few TPP countries we don’t already have a trade deal with and keeping the TPP on Fast Track so Congress’ oversight is limited is shameful. If the Obama administration is willing to ignore people-smuggling camps in Malaysia, why should we believe it would not also ignore TPP member Brunei’s criminalization of homosexuality, TPP member Vietnam’s widespread child labor or TPP member Peru’s rollback of environmental protections?"

    http://org.salsalabs.com/o/1034/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=18158

    Brendan Duke examines the connection between wage growth and worker productivity, and makes the case that the former may lead to the latter:

    The 1929–1950 increase in wages was at first a result of several policies that directly raised workers’ wages, including the first federal minimum wage, the first federal overtime law, and the National Labor Relations Act, which made it easier for workers to join a union and bargain with their employers. The entry of the United States into World War II further drove investment higher, as the economy converted into what Gordon describes as a “maximum production regime.”

    It is striking that during this period of rapid productivity growth, wages for production workers grew even faster than productivity growth did. The current debate about whether a typical worker’s compensation has kept track with the economy’s productivity typically envisions productivity growth as the precondition for wage growth. But Gordon’s research implies that the relationship can go both ways: Not only can productivity growth raise wages, but higher real wages also can boost productivity growth—the main reason for slow gross domestic product growth—by giving firms a reason to purchase capital.

    Can higher wages raise productivity growth in 2017? Basic economic theory and common sense suggests that an increase in the price of labor—wages—achieved through higher labor standards will cause firms to invest in more capital, raising the economy’s productivity.

    https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2016/09/02/142040/to-raise-productivity-lets-raise-wages/

    [–]jtbcLest We Forget [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Economic growth includes the scenario where the top 1% get richer while the bottom 30% fall further into despair.

    In a growing economy, individual governments can decide to address inequality through other means like progressive taxation, wealth and inheritance taxes, low income supports, and investments in education and training.

    Protectionism only affects inequality in that it makes everyone poorer, with the rich feeling the biggest bite.

    [–]snowback 20ポイント21ポイント  (1子コメント)

    No one is suggesting no trade. Just fair trade..

    Just as the world is coming to recognize globalism, the beating heart of neoliberal ideology, as a failed concept that fuels inequality and economic stagnation, Justin Trudeau charges to its defence.

    Even the high temple of neoliberalism, the IMF , has retreated from the promotion of globalism http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=http://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2016/06/05/even-the-imf-sees-30-years-of-neoliberalism-as-a-mistake/&refURL=https://www.google.ca/&referrer=https://www.google.ca/ .

    John Ralston Saul proclaimed it a dead man walking in 2005 10 years ago when he wrote, "The Collapse of Globalism." . A recent analysis by Harvard prof, Dani Rodrick , found that “democracy, national sovereignty and global economic integration are mutually incompatible: we can combine any two of the three but never have all three simultaneously and in full.”

    http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2007/06/the-inescapable.html

    Nobel laureate economist, Joe Stiglitz, has been warning of the same thing for years. James Galbraith has written a book about neoliberalism's hellspawn, "The Predator State." Philip Mirowski has dissected this malignancy to show how neoliberalism survived the 2008 financial meltdown in "Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste."

    Globe and Mail business writer, Eric Reguly, wrote about it in two recent articles. One explored how globalization has turned governments against their own blue and white collar middle class citizens.http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/us-business/immobile-middle-class-is-shouldering-most-of-the-tax-burden/article30192200/

    In a companion piece he makes the case for the free trade revolt now beginning to erupt.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/the-case-for-a-free-trade-revolt/article30154210/

    Prof Lawrence Summers of Harvard, who has argued that “international agreements [should] be judged not by how much is harmonised or by how many barriers are torn down but whether citizens are empowered”. Trade brings gains but cannot be pursued at all costs."

    While the intricacies of the Trans Pacific Partnership are beyond the scope of this post it is plain that Mr. Wolf and professors Summers and Rodrik, make compelling arguments for rejecting the TPP.

    Globalized free trade was sold to an anxious public on the promise it would create more jobs and higher wages. Instead, jobs disappeared and wages stagnated. Rather than bringing modest but uniform prosperity to the many, it has delivered enormous wealth along with commensurate political power to a privileged few. One need look no further than America's "bought and paid for" Congress and the ascendancy of illiberal, transactional democracy to see what global economic integration spawns.

    For the sake of our children and theirs, we must stop this - now.

    https://www.ft.com/content/15598db8-4456-11e6-9b66-0712b3873a

    While the intricacies of the Trans Pacific Partnership are beyond the scope of this post it is plain that Mr. Wolf and professors Summers and Rodrik, make compelling arguments for rejecting the TPP.

    Now comes Justin Trudeau, to defend the honour of the tainted globalism .

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-g20-opening-address-1.3664569

    [–]Shit-Just-Got-Epic 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Fantastic post. Great reading. Thank you.

    [–]2IRRC 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yeah having to pay someone, let alone look after them, that previously went by a number instead of a name tends to be less efficient.

    Yeah that's an extreme example but a real one. The rest aren't that far from that extreme example either.

    So please lets drop the pity party for efficiency before we turn the whole goddamn world into a quasi concentration camp.

    [–]Canadian_Infidel 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

    The people who study this sort of thing are simply following dogma. If everyone but one family lost everything they owned and that one rich and powerful family scooped it all up and made one dollar on top of it that would be "economic growth".

    [–]jtbcLest We Forget [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    I find it hard to believe that the overwhelming majority of academic economists are "just following dogma". I suppose they could be. like the overwhelming majority of climate scientists that believe that humans cause climate change, or the overwhelming majority of astronomers that believe a spherical earth orbits the sun.

    They could all be wrong, I suppose. Copernicus turned out to be right, after all. If you can point out the economic Copernicus that has a theory for how protectionism can increase overall prosperity, I'd have a look.

    [–]VinnyCidCanada [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    But protectionism isn't "fair" - by definition, policies like subsidies and tariffs are meant to tilt the playing field towards certain domestic parties, at the cost of taxpayers/consumers (in the form of higher taxation and/or higher prices) and international competitors (in the form of higher costs).

    Historically speaking, Western countries practiced one-sided free-trade, so to speak - foreign markets were forcibly opened through colonialism, gunboat diplomacy, etc. while their own industry benefited from protectionist measures. To an extent, contemporary free trade has actually leveled the playing field for a lot of countries by reducing protectionist measures across the globe, giving more room for the most competitive firms to prevail rather than the most protected ones. Thanks to liberalization, you have countries like South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore who leapt into the developed realm while others like Malaysia, Chile and much of Eastern Europe are approaching that area; China's own awakening is also thanks to freer trade across the globe.

    Not that protectionism doesn't have its place, but generally speaking less trade barriers has meant greater prosperity across the globe.

    [–]Holos620 18ポイント19ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Globalization has been one of the chief driving economic forces of the last 50 years. Thanks largely to it, global inequality has decreased while global incomes have increased.

    Saying that is meaningless if you can't compare to what would have happened if other paths were taken.

    Do you know what is the biggest "chief driving economic force"? Competition. Competition is the heart of our economic success and technological advancement.

    Do you know what fucks up competition? A sea of free lunch slave labors. Why would a company invest to improve manufacturing technologies when they can just hire slave people from Asian countries?

    Large corporations were extremely conservatives in the last 30 years due making profits simply by employing less expensive human capital. This fact is clear when you look a what some new players do, like Musk's many companies, building giga factories and remodeling the world by themselves.

    The truth is that without globalization, we wouldn't have had to wait for the cost of full automation to be lower than paying people $5 a month. No. Instead, almost every goods would have been produce in lights-out factories by now, and the world would have been incredibly more rich for it.

    [–]Canadian_Infidel 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    That is a really interesting point. Imagine all the high tech jobs that would be created to maintain those facilities...

    [–]rudecanuck 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It's a bad argument though. Globalization has been a driving force also behind the tech boom, which is needed in the first place to even think about automation.

    You know all these people typing out their anti-globalization posts on their shiny MacBooks, iPhones, iPads, or Android phones? Those things likely wouldn't even exist, let alone be nearly as affordable without globalization.

    That doesn't mean any move made in the name of globalization is good, but its opponents like to gloss over the huge gains that have come from it. Or make wild assertion such as the one above.

    [–]butters1337Outside Canada 15ポイント16ポイント  (4子コメント)

    I'd like people to pay attention when something like 97% of experts in a field say something.

    Except economics is not a science, it's a pseudo science based mostly off opinion. Those in the 'coveted' schools basically make it all up. Anyone that tries to bring in credibility from the outside is shouted down.

    If Canada cut foreign trade and immigration off with the rest of the planet, its economy would suffer badly.

    You can be anti-globalisation without being anti-trade.

    [–]jamiesgAlberta -3ポイント-2ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Jesus. No, it is not a hard science as it is hard or nearly impossible to create control groups to test hypotheses, but to write the entire field off as idiots making uneducated guesses about stuff is, frankly, stupid.

    [–]butters1337Outside Canada 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Look at the history of economic decision making. It's all guess work. Look at Greenspan's comments before, during and after serving as Fed Chairman, having blown the biggest debt bubble the world has ever seen.

    [–]jamiesgAlberta -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yeah, and nearly all scientific theories get adjusted or discarded. That doesn't mean that we should discard all that they put forward. I also didn't realize that Greenspan was the only voice in economics.

    Edit: I guess we should ignore climate science because some of the models predicted higher temperatures by now.

    [–]ClarenceThomass 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Classic argument tactic. Argue agaunst the extreme position of the other perspective.

    This is actually something that hurts the working class more, since they spend more of their income on physical products.

    lol. Where is your math on that? I do this shit for a living. So please. Tell me again how the cost of physical products will increase more than wages? Can you source that for me?

    [–]OneBigBugManitoba -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Tell me again how the cost of physical products will increase more than wages?

    Can you provide an example where it hasn't?

    I mean...that shouldn't be a controversial possibility. If your plan is to tariff imports, imports cost more.

    An example of when that has been the case was the recent tariff America put on Chinese tires. Tire prices went up. Wages didn't.

    [–]Canadian_Infidel -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    When the big treaty is signed they say our lumber prices will skyrocket and therefore home prices will rise even more. Everything made at home will cost more because there will suddenly be a world of people that can pay more than we can for it.

    [–]mootieboo 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

    I support climate change efforts but it was 97% of scientists asked to weigh in saying it was man-made. Not 97% of all scientists in the field. It's an important distinction, particularly when you use that as basis to appeal to authority.

    [–]Canadian_Weatherman 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Actually, it's the opposite. The more expertise a scientist has in climatology in particular, the more likely it is they think climate change is real.

    [–]RCAVict0r 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'm still waiting. I'm sure humanity has contributed to global warming. But, what is the exact percentage of global warming that scientists agree is caused by humanity?

    [–]RCAVict0r 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Not trying to be a nay-sayer here but I look at the words used. It says:

    97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.

    It doesn't say how much. As in "all" global warming or a small percentage? It's just a question but I become suspicious when scientists, whose whole careers are about facts, aren't specific.

    <Edit: spelling

    [–]SWIMsfriend 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    d like people to pay attention when something like 97% of experts in a field say something.

    why are you anti-transgender?

    [–]RhumaldNew Brunswick -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

    If the problem is access to higher levels of education, then there are two areas we need to focus on: affordable college/university level education, and better preschool/highschool education.

    I spent my whole time in grade school absolutely bored out of my mind. It wasn't engaging, I learned next to 0 valuable life skills from it, it's completely, 100% theoretical with nothing practical. Nothing.

    College was like a breath of fresh air. Just the amount of people striving towards the same end goal, together, the amount of real practical shit you learn, the life lessons, everything. We need at least some, if not all of that in grade school.

    Edit: This is one of those posts I actually give a shit about; This is the future our our everything. Please explain why you disagree if you're considering hitting that downvote button.

    [–]Canadian_Weatherman 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    You're right. I'll add that trades are another important part of higher education. Not everyone is best at STEM stuff and I know a lot of people who went into trades who make great money.

    [–]Adhmad_Dubh -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Economically, sure the TPP makes sense in this particular time frame. The problem is the human factor. A middle class Canadian can expect a particular lifestyle because they are richer than the majority of the world population. It's worthwhile for companies to manufacture all our daily conveniences because they can turn a profit by using cheaper labor. If the Chinese demanded our wages, the prices of the products would have to increase to maintain profits, and then Canadians would not be able to afford them anymore.

    You need inequality to create profit. Without profit you remove incentive.

    Trade partnerships are simply chasing more favorable economic conditions, by opening doors between economic imbalances. Eventually the imbalance is reduced, and then we have to go open other doors, because you can't have an economy when everybody has what they want.

    [–]Canadian_Infidel 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I think people radically overestimate how much of a factor labour costs are in the production of goods. It is generally individual percentage points for mass produced goods.

    [–]somewhereovertheh 6ポイント7ポイント  (40子コメント)

    It almost like you had a chance to vote for a person who actually came from a working class background but you didn't because his smile was weird on tv and he wasn't pretty enough. We got what we deserved.

    [–]mostlypissed 7ポイント8ポイント  (16子コメント)

    It almost like you had a chance to vote for a person who actually came from a working class background

    Who was that, then? It sure as hell wasn't Harper. That thing never had to struggle for a single day in its entire life, and it sold us all out to the globalists without even batting an eye by signing the TISA. Don't even hope to pretend that it ever cared for Canada, because it didn't. It was a tool of the Koch brothers, and nothing more.

    [–]somewhereovertheh 18ポイント19ポイント  (12子コメント)

    Who was that, then? It sure as hell wasn't Harper.

    Maybe it was the guy who came from a working class family of 10 whose mother was a teacher and father small time insurance man? The man who put himself through school, had to borrow and pay back for his home, education, and even to run for office.

    Maybe just maybe there was more then 2 choices last election. You didn't vote for him though because he smiled weird right?

    [–]Bashful_Tuba 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Never in my life would I have thought I'd have voted NDP in a federal election until I did so last year. It's important to vote based on policy rather than party but the never Harper fear destroyed rational voting and we were left with Trudeau.

    [–]wasimwesleyManitoba 5ポイント6ポイント  (5子コメント)

    being fake is representative of your abilities and competencies.

    when people weren't buying Trudeau's BS, his handlers told him so and he got better. less and less cringey every time. he has pivoted multiple times. I can imagine the NDP flip flopping and going down in flames in the scenarios so far where the Liberals have been able to take the wind out of your sails and come out on top.

    [–]Maui-Five-O 6ポイント7ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Trudeau got some serious training to smooth over the rough edges. He's not stupid. He should have spent more on the vocal training, though. He still sounds af he's talking to us like little babies during his speeches. Please explain all of your big words to us, Mr Trudeau.

    His handlers couldn't get to him in time to prevent "elbow-gate".

    [–]wasimwesleyManitoba -4ポイント-3ポイント  (3子コメント)

    That incident galvanised me as a liberal supporter

    [–]somewhereovertheh 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

    That incident galvanised me as a liberal supporter

    And that right there is what is wrong with everything. Policy? No, just some stupid incident where everyone is wrong has "galvanised" you. Way to go, your country thanks you.

    [–]wasimwesleyManitoba -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

    What? No, it's when I stopped taking the NDP seriously and I realized that no matter my small doubts about the Liberals, at least they weren't trying to waste everybody's time. That incident proved bankrupt the NDP is and devoid of substance

    [–]somewhereovertheh 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Whatever floats your boat. Of course you can let the adults actually look at policy and direction because you are focused on bullshit.

    [–]moeburnOntario 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

    I voted for Mulcair, even though he was anti-universal post-sec education and didn't really know anything about legalizing pot. Every time I talked to the guy, he seemed like a conservative holding it back so that he could win the support of left-wing people.

    [–]somewhereovertheh 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I voted for Mulcair, even though he was anti-universal post-sec education

    I am not here to argue about the past because what is the point of that, but his plan is literally what Trudeau did.

    https://www.ndp.ca/news/college-university-to-be-more-affordable-under-ndp

    [–]UyhAEqbnpBritish Columbia -5ポイント-4ポイント  (1子コメント)

    voting for weed? Yeah, you're a write-off

    [–]ether_redditBritish Columbia -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I didn't vote for Mulcair because he wasn't running as a candidate in my riding.

    [–]mootieboo 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

    It was Harper. May disagree with his policies but he's the most normal politician we've had in decades in terms of background. Martin and Trudeau were born wealthy, and Chrétien was working on the cabinet for Pearson and Trudeau so he acclimatized to power over a few decades.

    Harper was a just a normal middle class kid. Like I said you might disagree with him but it doesn't change what's true.

    [–]Maui-Five-O 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Trudeau will be hated just like Harper near the end. Maybe even more so, because he's higher up on a pedestal.

    Farther to fall.

    [–]Coop569 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I don't think it'll take 10 years for the hate to grow though.

    [–]wasimwesleyManitoba 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

    he also wanted to cut corporate tax and balance the budget by cutting spending....

    [–]somewhereovertheh 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    he also wanted to cut corporate tax and balance the budget by cutting spending....

    Yep that is what the Liberals said but the Liberals don't really write the NDP policy book do they?

    He wanted to cut the small business tax yes but when the NDP did this in NS they cut the tax for smaller businesses but then lowered the threshold for what a small business was making it revenue neutral and helping Ma and Pa shops. Where was this cutting spending promise? From what I saw they wanted to created a childcare plan and grow the economy by putting more people in the work place.

    It is almost like you based the NDP's plans not on what the NDP said but what the Liberals said about the NDP. You got what you voted for though, this Trudeau guy is really working for the left here.

    [–]TexasNorthAlberta -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

    ....And?

    As opposed to the Liberal/NDP plan where we completely blow the fucking budget out with massive deficits that your children will be held responsible for paying back?

    The 'enlightened progressive-liberal' economic plan is to borrow or print as much money as we possibly can and fuck future generations over so that YOU and the 'enlightened' ilk that think like you can live as comfortably as possible right now.

    Not balancing the budget and controlling spending is literally the most selfish, dishonorable thing that we could ever do as a society, 'conservative' or 'liberal'.

    So tell me, Manitoba: How have high corporate taxes and massive budget deficits by the provincial NDP idiots benefited Manitoba over the last 20 years? Go ahead and fill us in on just how innovate and productive and dominating the fucking Manitoba economy is right now because of your bullshit 'progressive-liberal' policies -- /u/somewhereovertheh and myself are just fucking dying to hear this.

    Life pro-tip: Those from weak, indebted, have-not provinces should get their own fucking homes in order before trying to tell the rest of the country that we should be following your example.

    [–]wasimwesleyManitoba -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Hey, I'm LPC and provincially I've never been NDP.

    There's a difference between NDP structural deficits and what my side does. Liberals take flak for being centrist on economic issues (in my view, we act according to reality: when economy is up, cut spending - when economy is down, time to stimulate)

    [–]somewhereovertheh 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Hey, I'm LPC and provincially I've never been NDP. There's a difference between NDP structural deficits and what my side does. Liberals take flak for being centrist on economic issues (in my view, we act according to reality: when economy is up, cut spending - when economy is down, time to stimulate)

    Sure thing these none structural deficits don't really agree with the last Trudeau. Could it be that your side is a brokerage party that just does what is popular?

    [–]TexasNorthAlberta 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Who did you vote for in the last federal election?

    [–]wasimwesleyManitoba 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    i don't think he opposes minimum wage increases. where'd you get that?

    [–]polakfury 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Post of the damn century right here folks

    [–]literary-hitler 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I agree with most of what you say but I just wanted to comment that this isn't a problem specific to Justin Trudeau (or his father for that matter). All the points you highlighted could be about any prime minister in the past. AFAIK all the previous PMs have been privileged Canadians (or Britons if you go far back enough).

    [–]OneBigBugManitoba -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Globalization hurts Canadians. It forces Canadians to compete with quasi slave labor, in places where safety and environmental protections are secondary at best, and inconsequential at worst.

    No, facts force Canadians to compete with quasi slave labour in places where safety and environmental protections are secondary and inconsequential at worst. Does anyone who knows anything about economics think the quality of life of Canadians would go up if we increased tariffs and other protectionist policies? I haven't heard one. Competing with foreign workers may suck, but so does destroying the economic efficiency garnered by comparative advantage. Earning more money doesn't help you if your buying power goes down anyway.

    He'll bring in unskilled, unnecessary foreign labor with drastically different cultural values, and live in a nice rich neighborhood full of white people where him and his family never have to come into contact with them.

    I like the implication you're making there. Please expand on it. Let's not leave things unsaid.

    He thinks he made it. He thinks he earned it. And when a poor bastard is fighting for $2 above minimum wage, he thinks that's that guy's own fault.

    Can you provide any evidence to that effect? I am no particular fan of Trudeau. I think he's an attention whore with precious little else to offer besides a pretty face for the LPC, but your statement doesn't ring true to me. I've never heard anything but his appreciation of luck for his position in life. He may lack the perspective of the common man, but that doesn't mean he's spoken ill of, or talked himself up relative to anyone because of their financial situation.

    [–]Beam_MeUp_ScottyBritish Columbia -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Exports account for 60% of Canada's GDP. Like it or not, we're an exporting nation and globalization has, on the whole, been good for Canada.

    [–]SuperShibes -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It is true that if your basic needs are being met your society is much more ethical. Fear that our needs are not being met, whether real or imagined, really causes us to look inward. It's that very tribalism we see in Afghanistan.

    [–]xhiggy 15ポイント16ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Calling dissent about globalization 'divisive, fearful rhetoric' is divisive rhetoric.

    [–]World_Class_Resort 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Rather address the concerns of anti-globalists let just dismiss them as xenophobic fear-mongering crazies. You are a good person? So you have to support globalization.

    [–]barkusmuhl 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

    It's pretty much the same treatment UK voters got for Brexit.

    [–]AntiMage_II [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Its the same treatment that any non-liberal gets.

    [–]TiltoBaggins 20ポイント21ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Just towing the line his handlers gave him at the Dock Innovators Retreat.

    [–]RedSquirrelFtwOntario 26ポイント27ポイント  (8子コメント)

    He almost makes anti-globalization sound like it's a bad thing. Globalization is what is bad, it's what is causing the unemployment rate and the loss of our industry. Canada is not really known for anything anymore, because we just outsource and offshore everything.

    Our mayor was with him in China and that concerns me, because this is a mining town. Are they going to sell out all the mines to the Chinese now too? That would pretty much kill the city.

    Unfortunately this free trade stuff is only going to get worse. The rich corrupt are who run this world and this stuff favors them.

    I just wish more people would wake up and vote NDP, they are the only party that seems to be truly for the people, and would vote against this kind of stuff.

    [–]walker2238 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

    Is globalization bad or is it modern Capitalism?

    [–]FreudJesusGod 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Since both are infected (perhaps fatally) by regulatory capture, I don't see how you can talk about one without the other.

    Until "lobbyist" becomes a dirty word and is severely restricted (it won't be), and private money is completely ejected from the public political process (it won't be), I would suggest that the entire system is going to continue to be setup to favour Corporations and their multi-national reach.

    [–]c0reM 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I think both are broadly fine. The real issue is corporate socialism.

    [–]polakfury 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Globalization

    [–]canada_throws -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    No

    [–]canada_throws -4ポイント-3ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Globalisation is a good thing. The world a whole is better for it. Some people are just upset by change. You can't work in a factory banging rocks for union wage? Who gives a fuck, people in China and India now can see a doctor and have modern sanitation.

    [–]moeburnOntario 16ポイント17ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Oh come on who doesn't see right through this?

    [–]barkusmuhl 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

    I don't think Trudeau does. I think he's a true believer.

    [–]RCAVict0r 10ポイント11ポイント  (2子コメント)

    I think you meant corporate sock puppet.

    [–]barkusmuhl 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I think corporations love his naivety. As long as he can be convinced that globalism is a social justice issue he's on board.

    [–]RCAVict0r 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

    He may be naive but the corporations behind him and those who advise him are not.

    [–]The_Turbinator 14ポイント15ポイント  (6子コメント)

    I am... er was - I was - a lifelong Liberal voter; and I am not afraid to let everyone know that I've been conned in to voting Trudeau in to office.

    What they did, and how they conned us in to voting them in was a masterpiece of modern propaganda.

    Congratulations, you conned me real good. But never again.

    Never voting liberal after this, never, ever, ever, ever, ever again.

    They just bought the NDP a lifetime membership vote.

    [–]dittomuchOutside Canada 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

    What they did, and how they conned us in to voting them in was a masterpiece of modern propaganda.

    No it honestly wasn't it was 3rd grade and appealed to foolish people.

    I'm sorry but we have a very long history showing that this is exactly how the Liberals govern. You were told endlessly that this was exactly what was going to happen. A pile of dumb asses who refused to open their eyes because they were locked into a completely numb state of Harper is evil Trudeau is good acted like zombies.

    Iff you didn't see this coming you better be under the age of 20 if you are older than 30 please hold your damn head in shame.

    [–]Thucydides1987Outside Canada [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    As soon as the media started the "Anyone But Harper" bullcrap with so much emphasis and aggression, I knew it was all meant to set up JT as the only viable "alternative". I was trying to tell people at the time, but most wouldn't listen. It was like they were mesmerized by a messiah. A lot still are...gonna take more time till the illusion wears off.

    [–]aamro1992 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (3子コメント)

    Why?

    What will NDP do?

    [–]Shit-Just-Got-Epic 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    They will be at least an unknown. They represent your only hope if you don't want to vote corporate globalist oligarch number 1(CPC) or number 2(LPC).

    [–]dittomuchOutside Canada -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    exact same thing just paint it differently. The thing is everyone assumes the CPC acts like it does because they are evil the reality is that there is often few real choices and once in government everyone is forced to govern basically the same. The NDP likely wouldn't have borrowed as much money and run up the interest payments as much for the rest there would be little difference.

    [–]complexomaniac 18ポイント19ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Multi-national trade agreements give away our rights and enshrine profits for multinationals- who support the Liberals - who have historically supported such deals. Looks like JT is just doing what he is told.

    [–]barkusmuhl 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

    These multi-national trade deals are one of the few bipartisan issues in north American politics. Yet these deals generally unpopular with the people. Sure seems like other interests are being put before ours.

    [–]lipper2000 21ポイント22ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I don't care about his background....it's irrelevant. The issue is that he is either incredibly naive or just lying if he is truly saying this is about trade. Its absolutely not about free trade but rather about making sure the American multinationals keep their power at the expense of democracy and to keep China out

    [–]RCAVict0r 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    That's why it's taking place in China /s

    You read the article right?

    Trump has promised to build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico. He has also said if elected he will withdraw from the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership and renegotiate or scrap the North American Free Trade Agreement.

    Trudeau also cautioned against the protectionism that fuelled in part the United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union.

    [–]ebfasz 25ポイント26ポイント  (8子コメント)

    And you fools thought Trudeau would listen to us.

    [–]iprobablyneedahobbyNova Scotia 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

    If questioning the benefits of free trade agreements and thinking that they only benefit multi-national corporations and the top .01 percent is fearful and divisive than I will proudly wear that label. Now if he is talking about the hyper-nationalism and xenophobia that is gaining traction across the world than I fully agree with him. I hope he is talking about the latter but saying it at G20, instead of the U.N or something, makes me think he is talking about the former.

    [–]internetisnotreality 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I want to see a Trudeau selfie of him chained to a sowing machine after having pissed himself because he already used up his bathroom time.

    [–]LtCommanderWoof 11ポイント12ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I'm so mad that I voted for him.

    What a huge let down.

    [–]Raging_Dragon 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Of course he would, he's on the globalization gravy train while his citizens are not.

    [–]TexasNorthAlberta 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Low/no information Canadians voted for a 'chosen one' enlightened liberal to lead them, and fucking lead you down the path of 'enlightened progressive-liberalism' he sure as fuck will.

    You knew who this man was before you voted for him. You knew what he stood for and you knew all of the promises he had made to you before you marked your ballot for him. There will be no reasonable excuse that you will be able to use 3-5-10-20 years from now to try and justify your support for this man or his failed political ideology.

    I wont lie -- I am going to LOVE watching all of you little 'enlightened progressives' slam into a massive brick wall later on in life. There will be, as there always is, consequences for the vote you cast today. Those decisions you've made will have massive unintended consequences that I think the overwhelming majority of you have never bothered to consider.

    I hope I live long enough to see all of your children turn on you. You are currently creating a new generation of youth who are smarter and far more inquisitive than you'll ever be, and they wont tolerate being outright lied to by 'progressives' for much longer. When they begin to realize later on in life just how easily duped you've been by the likes of trust fund, silver spoon liars like Turdeau and his globalist 'progressive' agenda, they will turn their god damn backs on you so fucking quickly that it'll make your heads spin.

    The question at this point isn't if damage will be done to this country by 'big city thinking' liberal idiots, but how much damage will be done. Your children will grow up in a much weaker, much more indebted Canada because of your actions; but all is not lost -- generations not even born yet will salvage whatever ruins you know-nothing leftist bigots will have left for them, and they will rebuild this country into something you could have built if only you people had just opened your god damn eyes for a split fucking second.

    [–]JeNiqueTaMere -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Low/no information Canadians voted for a 'chosen one' enlightened liberal to lead them, and fucking lead you down the path of 'enlightened progressive-liberalism' he sure as fuck will.

    right... because harper was against all these free trade agreements, right?

    [–]Shit-Just-Got-Epic 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Right... Because the only choices were Trudeau and Harper.

    [–]jetplanze 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    There will be winners and losers as part of any trade agreement. It's the government's job to help out the losers, something that they have historically never done.

    What is JT's plan?

    [–]jaybee2284 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    In the reddit post above this one I learned recent university grads are fucked . In this post I learned the working class are fucked.......... We're all fucked

    [–]RytheX-PSN [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Meh same shit, different pile

    [–]UrbanZenMonk 9ポイント10ポイント  (9子コメント)

    Trudeau doesn't know what he is talking about. He treats tax payers like his personal bank account then tells others you've nothing to fear while even more politicians get access to your rights, freedoms, and finances.

    Anyone saying globalization is good should be put on a registry so we can keep track of such broken individuals who feel government grants them everything in life. Must be special to have so much faith in people labeled government that possess no more knowledge than anyone else but act like gods all knowing.

    Sad,to see others in here praising it but expected.

    [–]Aprime1 -3ポイント-2ポイント  (10子コメント)

    Why is it that so many people here favour protectionism over trade? Why do you think we should collectively continue to work menial jobs for little money? The increasing gap between upper and lower classes (middle class moving upward for the most part) isn't a result of the abolition of trade barriers.

    Economics aren't a zero sum game. We lose some, we gain some. Garment manufacturing has been moving around in the past two decades simply because costs are increasing in the nations (pro-labour (not necessarily unions, but sometimes just wage increases) movements are only invisible in hardcore dictatorships like North Korea). Increased Transportation costs have created an incentive for companies to relocate manufacturing in North America until fuel prices tanked again. My company ships material across the world and a business in India employs me to do UX design work.

    It's not trade that's fucking us, it's everything we protect. Our protected housing market creates moral hazards that favour situations like that we see in Vancouver. Our protected student loans allows cost to artificially inflate.

    Look at dairy.

    Look at telcos.

    Look at maple.

    Can't you fucking learn?

    Who do you think pays for all this shit?

    We do.

    Our economic woes are entirely our own fault, not a consequence of external competition. Of course there's something that should be done about the TFW situation, but that's not an external factor either, it's a consequence of regulatory conditions.

    [–]CallmeishmaelSancho 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Regulatory regimes and a tax/fee regime that increase faster than wages. I would add stagnant real incomes for lower/middle classes are a major factor in protectionism. Boosts in the economy are NOT leading to better wages but better returns to asset holders.

    [–]Aprime1 -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    And asset holders are everybody and governments investing for retirements. Again, not to say that the tax regime we have is perfect.

    Even if we're accounting for the fact that millennials have been dealt a shit hand, a lot of the fuss about stagnant incomes has been based on the household numbers.

    Households have been shrinking in size, do the math.

    [–]moeburnOntario 9ポイント10ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Why do you think we should collectively continue to work menial jobs for little money?

    Well because the evidence seems to suggest that free trade agreements force us to collectively continue to work for menial jobs for little money, at a greater rate.

    The increasing gap between upper and lower classes (middle class moving upward for the most part) isn't a result of the abolition of trade barriers.

    Oh but it is!

    http://citizen.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83452507269e201a3fcada444970b-pi

    Economics aren't a zero sum game. We lose some, we gain some.

    Right, the issue is that all of the free trade agreements we've seen proposed have been a net loss for the average citizen. We're not against the idea of free trade, it's just that the agreements drafted up always seem to benefit the richest, wealthiest, most powerful individuals first, with a couple of cookies thrown in to keep the poor rabble quiet, meanwhile we get robbed blind as a result.

    Garment manufacturing has been moving around in the past two decades simply because costs are increasing in the nations (pro-labour (not necessarily unions, but sometimes just wage increases) movements are only invisible in hardcore dictatorships like North Korea).

    Garment manufacturing has moved around because some countries are willing to let their people work for $30/month, and we're not.

    Increased Transportation costs have created an incentive for companies to relocate manufacturing in North America until fuel prices tanked again.

    I'm not sure what you think a free trade agreement is going to do to transportation and fuel costs.

    Our protected housing market creates moral hazards that favour situations like that we see in Vancouver.

    Isn't the situation in Vancouver a result of unrestricted international trading of houses? A result of too much free trade, and not enough protectionism.

    Our protected student loans allows cost to artificially inflate.

    And what does that have to do with the topic at hand? Are there foreign companies vying to get in to Canada and sell me a student loan, if only it weren't for protectionist anti-free-trade policies?

    Look at dairy. Look at telcos. Look at maple.

    Yeah these aren't the result of protectionism. They're the result of monopolization. It's not just that the CRTC is restricting foreign competition to compete with our national telco companies. It's that they are restricting everyone from competing with them - Canadian or not. Same goes for dairy and maple. And absolutely none of any of these 3 examples has anything to do with the free trade agreements at hand.

    Our economic woes are entirely our own fault

    Oh that is definitely true, but the cause is far from "Regulations are bad, free trade agreements are good".

    [–]Aprime1 -3ポイント-2ポイント  (3子コメント)

    Will answer in the same order:

    Menial work as far as I'm concerned is low skill manufacturing jobs which a lot of tenants of protectionism seem to cling to.

    This is an image from a blog citing not a specific study but two US professors?

    The garment comment referred matters like China seeing some of its manufacturing move to other countries because employees have increasing expectations for wages there.

    They're not super related, I'm just saying transportation costs are enough to bring back local manufacturing if that's something you care about.

    While external investors definitely have an impact on the prices, all the protections on our housing market greatly influence the prolonged foreign investment bubble we're witnessing.

    As a reference to moral hazards driving costs up for the common person. It furthers the point about the situation in Vancouver (you cannot bail out of a student loan). This generates incredible distortions leading to the crazy tuition fees we see now.

    You cannot be serious about this. If you don't see a link between the monopolies/oligopolies in question and protectionist policies, I can't help you. Do you not remember the last time a major foreign telco tried expanding into Canada? We still have banners near the Unifor offices reminding us of their campaign to stop Verizon from coming in because it could cost us jobs. Tell me about how the controlling the supply of maple syrup is working out for Quebec on the export end. We protect these industries by enacting barriers to entry.

    I'm not trying to say regulations are bad, either. It's all about design. I'd prioritize fixing the interprovincial situation before adhering to bullshit trade deals like the TPP personally.

    [–]ClarenceThomass 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Menial work as far as I'm concerned is low skill manufacturing jobs which a lot of tenants of protectionism seem to cling to.

    Those were the middle income jobs. Just because it's in a factory doesn't mean it is menial. Menial now is working in the service industry.

    [–]butters1337Outside Canada 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Menial work as far as I'm concerned is low skill manufacturing jobs which a lot of tenants of protectionism seem to cling to.

    What makes work 'menial'? The working conditions? How are manufacturing jobs low skill, compared to say janitorial or retail or fast food? Have you ever been on a factory floor?

    [–]Aprime1 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Actually worked a farm job and later worked in a meat plant.

    I guess it depends. I don't suspect aircraft assembly is anywhere near as straightforward and mind numbing as chopping meat. I'm definitely going with the typical assembly line work/chain stuff, though.

    [–]xhiggy 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I think most people want to have the life they've worked for preserved. If trade gets in the way of that then they are opposed to it. Most people know that they know little about 'trade' and how it effects the economy, so they just want a peaceful life, and see that it is being disrupted.

    It's about the life the government creates, affecting trade is a way to send a message, it's not a technical debate about the merits of trade. Quite frankly, such a discussion is well over 90% of the public's heads, and that's fine.

    [–]barkusmuhl -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Factoring inflation the Canadian worker's median income is pretty much the same as it was pre NAFTA. If the inflated housing market was properly included in the inflation numbers we make much less than we did 20 years ago.

    Many people don't think they are better off pre-globalization because we are not. Telling us that we are doesn't make it so.

    [–]dankmrbernke 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Are you sure? Real median wages for full time workers increased by nearly 10% just between 1998 and 2011.

    Canadians as a whole are quantifiably better off as a result of freer and more open trade.

    コメントをもっと表示する (9 返事)