Computing and Politics

[Zoltan/ZEE4]

Marcus,

I think you've laid out the problems well. Trudeau did try this, but
unfortunately making these kinds of changes aren't something that can be
done overnight, it would take maybe decades of slow pressure to change
things. As you've pointed out, there are these natural trading areas
that evolved into trading blocks. I think his heart was in the right
place, but it wasn't something that could be done overnight. The next PM
was able to get the FTA deal done quicker, IMHO, because that trading
block already existed to a degree.

You've also pointed out some of the areas where we Linux-types can grow.
Along with a "information/knowledge based economy", there the
differences in Canadian/U.S. laws that could be used to attract people,
say the DMCA. In the area of copyright, for instance, some people on the
list know there's been some interesting supreme-court decisions that
sided with the user as opposed to the holder. This is the kind of stuff
that could be used to attract researchers from the U.S. who want to work
in areas that U.S. law makes it tricky. 

As far as a secondary economy, I'd say a lot of that has to do with 1)
encouraging more firms to concentrate on doing this work here. I mean a
country like China can compete by low-wages and shear size of the
workforce. We can compete on efficiency. The current dollar makes buying
the equipment needed more affordable. On the other hand, maybe we should
just get out out the whole manufacturing business altogether and raise
the price of raw-materials where we have a near-lock on :) 

Seriously, I tend to think that a lot of these problems can be overcome,
and the way things are going at the WTO and globalization in general
we're not going to have to do all the lifting either.

Sometimes the problem changes, sometimes the solutions change too.

Zoltan




On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 17:09, Marcus Brubaker wrote:
> This is precisely what Trudeau (unsuccessfully) tried to do.  He saw
> very well that Canada needed to diversify its trading partners and
> wanted to trade with Europe, Asia, etc.  Unfortunately, at the time the
> trend became for geographic regions to form exclusive trading blocs. 
> During the 70's and 80's Europe, South America and parts of Asia all
> formed trading blocs that (largely) excluded other geographic regions. 
> Unfortunately, this left Canada out in the cold and stuck, so to speak,
> with the US as the best bet for a trading partner.  It was then that we
> got things like the Canada-US Trade Agreement (I think was the name, my
> memory is a little fuzzy right now) and, later, NAFTA.
> 
> Unfortunately now, most developed markets have long-time trading allies
> and aren't exactly looking for new ones.  The un- (or under-) developed
> markets are forming a bloc of their own (e.g. Brazil/Mercosur, India and
> South Africa) and can domestically produce most of the goods Canada has
> to export (raw materials) cheaper.  Where Canada really needs to push in
> my opinion is in two directions:
> 
> 	1. An information/knowledge based economy.  Chretien and Martin both
> have at least paid lip service to the idea and put some money towards
> it.  This is one area where the playing field is tilted in our favor
> should we spend the resources to develop it.  It is something that we
> can export cheaply (as opposed to lumber for example...how much does it
> cost to ship several tons of softwood to China?) and won't face stiff
> local competition in developing markets.
> 
> 	2. Building up our secondary economy.  Primary economies are things
> like raw goods, tertiary economies are things like services, finance and
> IT.  Secondary is stuff in the middle, e.g. manufacturing.  This is much
> harder to do and would need to be done gradually.  As it is now, we
> export a large amount of resources to the US and elsewhere as raw goods
> where they are then processed and imported back into Canada as a
> completed product (such as a car).  If we can start building up these
> secondary industries we'll lower our dependence on raw goods exporting
> and hopefully begin to export more processed goods.
> 
> 	Unfortunately, Canada lacks the geography and economies of scale to do
> this easily, which is why we don't have much of a secondary economy. 
> During the 1960's and 1970's there were attempts to encourage these
> industries (both here and in many other countries around the world)
> which really boiled down to protectionism and severely contributed to
> western alienation in the particular case of Canada and many other
> similar problems elsewhere. Those kinds of policies are no longer an
> option and really the only way to bring about these kinds of changes are
> by spending money but this could, quite possibly, arise the ire of our
> neighbors to the south.
> 
> Anyway, this email has gotten longer than intended.  Long story short,
> the issue is far more complicated and a lot harder to solve than simply
> having a PM who is willing, although that is certainly necessary.
> 
> On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 10:12, Zoltan/ZEE4 wrote:
> > Sure aren't. I'm all for trading with the U.S., the E.U., China, trade
> > with South America (incl. Cuba) and anyone else. 
> > 
> > The problem in Canada is that 85% of our trade is with the U.S., The
> > U.S. doesn't do 85% of trade with us, it's probably closer to 30%. This
> > is where the problem comes in- because of our over-dependence on this
> > trade we lose room to maneuver without harming big chunks of our
> > economy. As I see it, we need to aim to trade more like Brazil: they do
> > roughly 30% of trade each with NAFTA countries, the E.U. and their
> > neighbors, plus a growing Chinese market.
> > 
> > Quite simply we need a PM who is willing to put into action that talk of
> > a "trading nation" and go out and diversify our trading partners.  So
> > that if things go bad in market (say softwood) it doesn't hamper our
> > ability to do what needs to be done. Instead of what we have now where
> > every time somethings goes bad we get surrender-monkeys running around
> > saying how we have to be good neighbors and lets negotiate about how
> > much of our money they should give back to us. :)
> > 
> > Last weeks news of opening trade talks with the E.U. (basically shared
> > standards, professional designations) is one small step along that road.
> > But there's got to be a lot more small steps. 
> > 
> > This is what I mean by putting our interests first. 
> > 
> > Zoltan
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, 2004-03-28 at 18:42, William Park wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 28, 2004 at 06:02:49PM -0500, Zoltan/ZEE4 wrote:
> > > > He was doing an interview where he said something like "The number 1
> > > > job of the Canadian PM is to be manage the relationship with U.S.". 
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry, but I thought the number one job was putting Canadian interests
> > > > first :)
> > > 
> > > So, you're saying managing Canada's export trade to US is not Canadian
> > > interest?
> > 
> > --
> > The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
> > TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> > How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml