News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

I don't see why the distance between Europe and Canada would be that problematic. After all, London to Halifax distance-wise isn't that much greater than the Halifax to Vancouver distance. And the US had China not that many years ago surpass Canada as its largest trading partner even though it's an ocean away. There are many countries in the world whose largest trading partner isn't necessarily their geographically closest neighbour too.

While it's understandable that logistically, closer neighbours will trade more than distant countries, here's no reason why Canada has to be so lopsided towards one neighbour when it could diversify with so many other countries (even just in the western, industrialized world).

Personally, I agree with your assessment. I was just bringing up the existence of a mathematical formula that I've read about that shows the amount of loss based on distance. It isn't necessarily that great.

I've been bothered by our reliance on the US for trade since I was old enough to know anything about it.
 
How about fully free trade with countries with meat and dairy standards (in terms of health factors like use of antibiotics, hormones etc.) as strict as, or stricter than Canada's, but not with countries with lower standards.

The problem - we are often not strict enough for said countries.

AoD
 
Last edited:
No problem at all. If other countries’ health and safety standards are stricter than ours and they don’t subsidize, then they get tariff and quota free access to our market. The case for the 37 million or so Canadian consumers of dairy and poultry products is compelling.

But AoD’s comment seems to be directed at the welfare of our supply managed farmers. If our producers want to export to these countries, subsidy-feee please, they can comply with their higher standards. Australia exports a lot of halal-certified lamb to the Middle East without bitching and moaning about how the Arabs should just drop their standards. So there’s a precedent for, you know, one country’s producers complying with another country’s regulations.
 
No problem at all. If other countries’ health and safety standards are stricter than ours and they don’t subsidize, then they get tariff and quota free access to our market. The case for the 37 million or so Canadian consumers of dairy and poultry products is compelling.

But AoD’s comment seems to be directed at the welfare of our supply managed farmers. If our producers want to export to these countries, subsidy-feee please, they can comply with their higher standards. Australia exports a lot of halal-certified lamb to the Middle East without bitching and moaning about how the Arabs should just drop their standards. So there’s a precedent for, you know, one country’s producers complying with another country’s regulations.

On point.

I would add, I'm not clear on where Canada's dairy in health sense would not meet EU standards. We don't all BGH in dairy cattle, we've moved to restrict antibiotic use.

Now, would they accept our butter in terms of quality? No. Because we use lower levels of butter fat, typically 80% vs 82-84% throughout the EU, also we're much less likely to 'culture' our butter, though you certainly can get that here, but that is much more normative in Europe. But that wouldn't be a trade barrier per se, its just that no one would want to eat it! LOL

Our good cheeses are really quite good, but our 'mass market' stuff would not be up to standard in much of Europe.

The trade barrier on cheese that would be injurious to us as is the European insistence on linking product name to place.

So Cheddar is a specific cheese from England, not a general kind of cheese.

We would have to come up with new naming conventions for many products to export into the EU market.

I personally think they over do that sort of thing, its a non-tariff barrier that should be used more sparingly. That said, they aren't going to give it up for Canadian producers.

That being the case, its really important that we begin to do something similar to protect premium products originating in Canada.

While there are fewer, there are some, and we would EU recognition for those.

!
 
No problem at all. If other countries’ health and safety standards are stricter than ours and they don’t subsidize, then they get tariff and quota free access to our market. The case for the 37 million or so Canadian consumers of dairy and poultry products is compelling.

But AoD’s comment seems to be directed at the welfare of our supply managed farmers. If our producers want to export to these countries, subsidy-feee please, they can comply with their higher standards. Australia exports a lot of halal-certified lamb to the Middle East without bitching and moaning about how the Arabs should just drop their standards. So there’s a precedent for, you know, one country’s producers complying with another country’s regulations.

Except Halal is a fairly predictable matter related to ritualistic slaughter; not so when it comes to BSE-free beef or GMO-free grains (it's on the news today) - which may or may not be used as a pretext.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Now, would they accept our butter in terms of quality? No. Because we use lower levels of butter fat, typically 80% vs 82-84% throughout the EU, also we're much less likely to 'culture' our butter, though you certainly can get that here, but that is much more normative in Europe. But that wouldn't be a trade barrier per se, its just that no one would want to eat it! LOL

Our good cheeses are really quite good, but our 'mass market' stuff would not be up to standard in much of Europe.

To be fair, even my nationalistic inclinations don't prevent me from avoiding mass-produced butter and cheeses from here. Poor ain't even strong enough a word.
 
The CPC just flipped a seat in a by-election tonight, but it has nothing to do with the party or anti-Trudeau sentiments. Many people didn't even know who Andrew Scheer was when he showed up. Richard Martel is the most successful QMJHL coach ever and people would have voted for him no matter what party he ran for.
 
Who cares what Canadians think of Trump. Should we ask what Herzegovinans or Fijians think of Trudeau? Trump need only care about what his people think of him.
It does really highlight why Trudeau doesn't really care about the Canadian economy and is planning his 2019 campaign to be how much opposes Trump.
 
7iGDFkdP_normal.jpg
Katie Simpson
1 hour ago
Trudeau says the new recreational pot “regime” comes into force October 17th, says provinces needed more time to prepare for transition.

What transition? Were they expecting all of a sudden that Canadians will start smoking weed overnight when it becomes "legal"?

Wait a minute.......Canadians already smoke weed willy nilly.

They couldn't even promise to pardon all the convictions that so many "criminals" picked up over the years for smoking a plant.
Call me when they get serious.
 
Pfft, yeah, maybe once they legalise all tryptamines and phenethylamines.......ok, even just psilocybin should do the trick.

Definitely for psilocybin - is fairly harmless - and have been shown to create some of the most enduring spiritual experiences and demonstrated effectiveness against depression in research. Not a bad trade considering some of the most commonly prescribed SSRI anti-depressants actually increases risk of suicide and comes with a host of side-effects - and are used fairly indiscriminately in some quarters. It certainly shouldn't be discounted as "bad" by default.

AoD
 
Last edited:

Back
Top