|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Bouboumaster
Forum Junkie
Posts: 679
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 2:49 pm
IlovUSandCanada IlovUSandCanada: @BouBouMaster Why? Closer, and both contries are already the biggest economy partner of each other. And we are on the same mass land. And slapping a member of the infmaous "Tea Party" wouldn't be anymore a diplomatic incident!
|
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:48 pm
@BouBoumaster Oh all right. But I thought that Canadians were fond of complaining of domination by the United States. Wouldn't a union be the ultimate form of that?
|
Bouboumaster
Forum Junkie
Posts: 679
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:55 pm
IlovUSandCanada IlovUSandCanada: @BouBoumaster Oh all right. But I thought that Canadians were fond of complaining of domination by the United States. Wouldn't a union be the ultimate form of that? I don't see why it would be worse to be with USA that with Great Britain...
|
Posts: 9956
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:57 pm
Why would New Zealand and Australia be a part of that union? They're literally 'worlds' apart. That defeats the purpose of a 'union'. Don't see any benefit there. Besides, Canada with strong growth of any G8 country, parity dollar with the U.S, why should Canada join any union? Perhaps some would want to join in in our example and join us?
|
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 12:56 pm
$1: Why would New Zealand and Australia be a part of that union? They're literally 'worlds' apart. That defeats the purpose of a 'union'. Don't see any benefit there. Besides, Canada with strong growth of any G8 country, parity dollar with the U.S, why should Canada join any union? Perhaps some would want to join in in our example and join us?
I said before, this is just a mass of theoretical musings.
|
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 12:58 pm
@BouBouMaster Well ... cause the United States has an economy and population 10 times larger than Canada's while great britain's each are only about 90% greater.
|
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:00 pm
$1: Why would New Zealand and Australia be a part of that union? They're literally 'worlds' apart. That defeats the purpose of a 'union'. Don't see any benefit there. Besides, Canada with strong growth of any G8 country, parity dollar with the U.S, why should Canada join any union? Perhaps some would want to join in in our example and join us?
Because they are both other members of the white commonwealth.
|
Posts: 7710
Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 5:06 pm
I took a drive along the border this weekend, and was sorta thinking how the United States can't even manage to secure its southern border, but has turned it's attention to the Canadian border recently... WHY? Do they think they can do a better job up north with 3 times the border to secure?? I think we need to create an NAU with ONLY Canada and the USA. (exclude Mexico) Canada and the United States share a common currency, economy, language and history. Get rid of the border, and make it like the EU. 2:
IMG036.jpg [ 93.37 KiB | Viewed 269 times ]
1:
IMG034.jpg [ 92.11 KiB | Viewed 238 times ]
0:
IMG035.jpg [ 99.31 KiB | Viewed 232 times ]
|
Brenda
CKA Uber
Posts: 50938
Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 5:15 pm
NO!!! Not the EU. The Benelux. Keep it small. The biggest problem with the EU is that it is too large and needed its own government, apart from the countries own governments. That, and it's a non-equal union.
|
Posted: Sat Apr 24, 2010 6:50 pm
Much like an NAU would be.
I don't mind closer economic integration, but the FTA has to be re-worked to allow true free trade. Basically, it costs nothing to buy something across eachothers borders. No taxes, no tarrifs.
To allow for this though most, if not all, rules and regulations that guide economic activity in both countries would have to be unified or close to unified. Basically both countries work to set target standards that then must be met. A country is welcome to exceed those standards if they so choose, but at the risk of causing economic stagnation.
For instance, the States had more liberal rules regarding banking than Canada did. Yes this allowed their banks to grow faster and make more money then ours, but ultimately ours won out. We all know why. under new rules we might establish standards that, while stricter for US banks than Canadian Banks, might not be as strict as our current rules. As such the US would have to reform their laws in order to meet the standards, while our could stay the same.
Of course, such a process woudl take years, and you'd have to have a very co-operative American President, Congress, and House of Parliment
|
Shilo2010
Newbie
Posts: 6
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:13 am
G'day fella's. How about letting and Aussie have a go?
I do not pretend to be an expert or even particularly bright but I have put my head around it and this is what I came up with.
The British Commonwealth consists of 54 sovereign states. Combined the commonwealth has an existing yet largely undeveloped national GDP of 10 trillion dollars (US) a year. 63% of this combined GDP is generated in the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The total population of the British Commonwealth is 1.975 billion which equates to just under 1/3 of the worlds population. Most of these nations are underdeveloped, many are third world and unstable.
In the case of the proposed 4 CANZUK states it breaks down like this.
UK - Population: 62 million, GDP: 2.43 Trillion Canada - Population: 34 Million, GDP: 1.74 Trillion New Zealand - Population: 4.5 Million, GDP: 145.2 billion Australia - Population: 22.5 Million, GDP: 1.37 Trillion
None of these countries are in comparatively high debt and each has survived the global debt crisis with ease, particularly the three colonies which retain their own currencies. Importantly, all four founding members of the proposed CANZUK treaty are democratic commonwealth nations. They are safe, stable, well adjusted, non aggressive and financially affluent. Each is an English speaking nation. They are bound together by both ancestry and history and share the same ideals and beliefs. They have similar political, legal, health and education systems. They have the same allies, Use the same units of measurement and share extradition treaties. Each is successfully multicultural and adheres to the UN charter of human rights. They have fought together as brothers many times in their histories including both world wars and already have a successful system to facilitate the smooth transition in the collaboration of their modern, well equipped armed services. Each is a maritime state with large a coast line and each boasts and effective high tech navy. As a group they are well situated geographically for strategic defense and perfectly placed across the globe to cover any contingencies in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans with easy access to the Mediterranean, red sea and the Gulf from either East or West (or both). The four proposed CANZUK nations share similar cultural dialogues. In the case of Canada and Australia Each was forged taming large, dangerous lands, all be it on opposite ends of the Celsius scale which conveniently lends its self to the specialization of their armed forces. We also very importantly share a rare unquestioning loyalty (No fear of knives in the dark amongst the CANZUK nations). The worth of this should not be undervalued and is possibly only witnessed to this degree between these nations (and the US) at this time in history. Moving into the new millennium, The emergence of China as a super power is shifting the balance of power across the globe. America with her own economic difficulties is struggling to keep her technological advantage, specifically relating to research and development of ballistics and military hardware. Examples of this can be seen in the F22 Raptor ( first of the generation 4 stealth fighters) with it’s thrust vectoring and Virginia class submarines. Both projects operated under severe budget cuts and while both where deemed highly successful both could have achieved much more had they been allocated pre millennium funding. In both cases the technology is being quickly copied and adapted by foreign powers, most notably France, china and Russia who of course regularly sell their technology to the highest bidders. As a side note, America refuses to share either the F22 or the Virginia class submarine with her allies.
Modern warfare has become less about brute force and more about technological superiority and intelligence and with regards to security has become the major defense factor.
So how do we deal with the increasing demands placed upon our economies when allocating funds for defense? One option would be for allied nations to bolster American research and development funding but that doesn’t really help us, its helps them help us and do we really want to rely solely on the whims of American congress in times of trouble and war? Do our ideals as independent nations reflect American foreign policy going back as far as the nineteen fifties and do we really want America dictating our own defense policies and controlling our strategies?
This is not meant to be an Anti American rant. I am nothing if not pro American. I have lived ALL over the united States over many years, am married to an American, until recently owned property in America and still pay American taxes. I was also in NY during the Twin Towers attacks. In the words of Canadian Gordon Sinclair, I believe America is possibly the most generous and least appreciated nation on earth. America is a fine ally, and we are lucky to have her but do we really want to lay forever in her shadow, quivering and seeking her dominance and conditional protection?
The other option is the formation of the CANZUK treaty. A treaty outlining the collaboration of state affairs between the CANZUK nations and the formation of a single currency. Any collaboration of state affairs between the CANZUK nations must be an ordered set of treaties and NOT a FULL amalgamation of state and each state must remain independently responsible for it’s own domestic affairs. The treaty would endorse strong trade ties between these states and promote strong economic growth. The exchange of social and cultural ideas and a closer working relationship between our sciences with particular emphasis on research and development of military hardware, the joint training of our armed services into a cohesive force with further emphasis on systems integration. The re-assertion of our own cultural identities and a move away from the muddy waters of “Americanism” (again, not an anti American sentiment but we do deserve our own cultural identities). The first stage of the CANZUK treaty would implement a common currency, open visa’s between countries, student exchange, general scientific collaboration and the integration of our intelligence communities. Some years would then be spent ironing out the inevitable teething problems and concentrating on fiscal growth and stability. The second stage would usher in a new age of collaboration between our armed services and the third stage would be the joint funding of military research and development and production of advanced new age weapons systems and ballistics. Special emphasis would be put upon increasing the operational capacities of our navies. Canada, the UK and Australia would be required to build and maintain two aircraft carriers while New Zealand would be required to supply one. This would put us only three carriers shy of the US.
Once the CANZUK nations had successfully integrated, were fiscally and socially stable, had merged the operational capabilities of their armed services and developed, produced and supplied cutting edge military hardware and the treaty was fluidly operational they may decide to jointly fund the development of the fifth most stable / affluent Commonwealth nation (to be decided). With a drawn out process of nurturing it’s economy and addressing any social or structural issues it would be raised to a point where it would eventually meet the requirements’ to be allowed admission as a treaty partner. Economies require continual growth and expansion to flourish. Within the 54 states of the commonwealth, CANZUK h as access to essentially unlimited growth as each new member is groomed, nurtured, developed and eventually accepted as member nation. Their economies would then be merged with the CANZUK currency ensuring perpetual growth. This application process would be extremely strict and stringent and would be available upon invitation only and require the full commitment of all the CANZUK states. .
Your thoughts?
EDIT: I would also like to add that I have traveled throughout the US as mentioned, Many times to Canada though not extensively, New Zealand and obviously Australia though to date not the UK.
Last edited by Shilo2010 on Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:23 am, edited 7 times in total.
|
Posts: 21610
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 4:12 am
Ugh.
|
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 9:57 am
This has come up before. I don't mind the concept of collaboration and eventual (re)integration between the Aussies, Canucks, Kiwis, and Pongos. But that's still a bit down the road.
|
Posts: 11362
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:48 pm
Bring Barbados and the Bahamas into it, then we'll have the US surrounded. We can then liberate them from their folly and bring them back where they can flourish, as was their destiny.....
|
Batsy
Active Member
Posts: 413
Posted: Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:34 am
I'd favour leaving the EU and forming closer ties with the other Commonwealth countries.
In June last year, the economy of the Commonwealth overtook that of the Eurozone. And whereas the Eurozone economy is predicted by the IMF to have no growth for the next five years the economy of the Commonwealth is predicted by the IMF to grow 7.3% annually over the next five years.
|
|
Page 6 of 8
|
[ 109 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests |
|
|