Here's a question I'd like to pose to everyone (to get this board active again)

Do you people think that, with the U.S. currently experiencing a huge loss of manufacturing and service jobs to countries like India, and multinational corporations destroying the concept of long term economics, do countries like Canada need to step in and deal with this BEFORE it becomes a problem?

Sadly, I don't see what we can do to keep such jobs in Canada. If it is more economically advantageous to outsource the jobs to other nations, then I can't see what Canada can do to stop this from happening...

well bweezy, there ARE some somewhat (short term) harsh solutions to keeping those jobs...


1) getting rid of NAFTA, and encouraging domestic manufacturing and industry in Canada

2) Giving incentives to keep the jobs here...(I don't like giving things to companies, but if it keeps jobs here, then I'll stomach my pride and do it)

3) Keeping out large amaerican corporations (axing Wal Mart. I don't like Wal Mart anyways)

these solutions however, on the short term, can be damaging. But, ast this rate, the only people that wil lbe able to get a decent job are people with university degrees, and perhaps construction/high risk jobs.

there will be no middle class. only the rich/well off, and the working poor


we might have communism yet at this rate

Well, keeping out large American corporations, to me, seems like a knee jerk reaction. Wal-mart creates many jobs for Canadians, and is immensely popular (which is beyond me - my blood pressure goes through the roof with each visit to that place).

I'm also not the biggest fan of bribing enterprises from leaving. I don't mind targetting grants to businesses so that they can achieve some socially useful purpose (grants to provide daycares at work, grants to do some R&D in alternative energy, etc.).

But, the one think I've learned in the last four years is that grants to keep jobs here seldom work. Here in Manitoba, MCI was going to pull out of Manitoba. The Government gave them several million to keep the plant here and save a few hundred jobs. Less than two years later, the plant has slowed down again, and a bunch of "temporary" layoff notices were handed out. I'm always suspicious of such grants.

Pulling out of NAFTA, in my view, would get rid of more jobs than it would create. Lets face it, the world is becoming a global village, with interconnected and interdependent trade relationships. To suddenly become a protected and isolated country would cause massive economic upheaval, that would not create short term gain, but rather, would create short term chaos. Further, Canadians would see their purchasing power eroded by the higher prices they'd have to pay on goods, thereby cycling less money into the economy, and slowing down Canada's economic performance.

By and large, I think Canada is in great shape. We are one of the most competitive countries in the world. Our unemployment rate, while a little high, is still pretty good by global standards. I think we've struck a good balance here, and I think it will serve the people well in the long term.

The cost of doing business in Canada is reasonable, people get access to cheap land, cheap electricity, cheap resources - this alone will keep manufacturing jobs in Canada. You just can't recreate those conditions anywhere else in the world. Despite having "high" wages and "high" taxes, Canada has a distinct competitive advantage in many areas, which, in and of itself, will keep jobs here.

I agree bweexy, that things are good NOW, but, with so many corporations geting larger, and larger, it may turn out that even our domestic companies will have to outsource, or we'll ALL have to take a lot less in wages to keep our jobs.

Let's face it...If it's cheaper elsewhere, that is where the jobs will go. To say that we'll be in this good balance forever is folly.

Wal Mart creates hardly any GOOD jobs. It creates a lot of really bad jobs, and a few good ones. Just like McDonalds (I hate shopping there too. considering how little they pay their employees, the prices aren't that much lower than the unionized grocery stores, other stores).


I think one of the root problems lies in the practice of profit mongering. Today CBC reported that Insurance comapnies in Canada are recording RECORD PROFITS, but is the consumer seeing that benefit? no. In Alberta it is the worst its been in ever. Rates continue to go up, even for good drivers. I can't even DRIVE!

I don't have a license because it's too much cost for too little gain. Even if i drove the same vehicle my mother does- and she has a top notch insurance rating, the highest possible scores- it would still be almost 2 grand my first year, and it could go up still after the freeze period

and, I firmly believe that we need to refocus our economy on manufacturing job creation. I mean, opening more production plants in more than just Ontario where most of the manufacturing is centred around.

And, what about the Atlantic provinces? If we don't invest some serious economic capital there, they'll have a lot of long term problems, as fish levels are still extremely low, and jobs are hard to come by

we are on the right track, but I really think we need to take a hard look at how we do things, and maybe take a little more initiative to bring oppurtunities to every corner of our country, and try and stop the regional focus of industries when it's not necessary.

We do have an advantage, but we need to convince people it's worth the effort, and get more money circulating BACK into the system.

aapprox. 45% of Canada's income is in the hands of less than 5% of the population. That is 3% higher than 10-15 years ago. that is huge given our global buying power.

In many respects, you're preaching to the converted, CC.

What Canadians need to do is not buy into any particular ideology. The market works in some respects, and fails in others. We need a balanced approach and we need to keep all options open with a view to the most efficient delivery of goods and services.

You bring up the insurance industry. Funny, how in Manitoba, where Auto insurance is the domain of a single non-profit Crown Corporation, insurance rates have gone up 3.6% over the last 6 years (that's 0.6% per year over that span, far under the rate of inflation).

Yep, an "evil non-profit government monopoly" is absolutely killing the private sector when it comes to delivering value in the auto insurance industry.

We need to investigate all options when delivering goods and services. Auto insurance in Manitoba is a key example of how the market does not solve all problems, and is not necessarily the most efficient means to deliver goods and services.

Over the last fifteen years, a culture has emerged where it has become "politically incorrect" to suggest that there are viable alternatives outside the free market to deliver goods and services. It is that kind of closed minded thinking that will do us in.

any unecessary increase is bad bweezy, I only referred to Alberta's situation because I'm heavily involved in it.


I realize that a balance between market and controlled economic policies must be struck, but from an economically leftist person, I don't see enough being done for the long term prosperity of the consumers, but rather the short term profitability is the forucs, which is far more destructive for both sides.

certainly however, suc ha change must come from within the market...because the government doesn't have the economic controls to make that decision (which, is a good and bad)

so, I must ask then, what will it take for these companies to change? perhaps another depression?


I'm not sure, but I DO see a problem, but the problem's solution is beyond someone such as myself.

on another note, I don't agree with a full monopoly in some sectors by crown corporations. the competition in some cases brings MORE value than in other cases, that much I can agree on, which if it's necessary, can include auto insurance. The problem is (for Alberta anyways), that the deregulation did NOTHING to help the market, but rather hurt us further. If those companies can report record profits in fiscal years, then they can't justify rate increases across the board.

Lol, here's the arch conservative with his two cents.

First, (perhaps for the first time) I agree with bweezy that auto insurance is much more affordable and viable when provided by a Crown Corporation. In BC, under ICBC, insurance premiums have remained fairly low vis a vis the rest of Canada, and ICBC has constantly returned modest profits to the taxpayer for the last decade.

About the issue of jobs going overseas (or outsourcing, which it is called), the trend seems inevitable and advantageous to Canadians, Americans, and the Chinese and Indians. A similar movement of jobs from the West to the East occurred in the 1960's and 1970's when the 'little Tiger' economies of South East Asia and Japan rapidly industrialized. At that time, many textiles and small consumer items jobs were outsourced to Asia, with little damage to Western economies and many advantages to those particular Asian economies. (Note, this trend would have included China and India in the 1960's and 1970's if both nations had less socialist economic policies and more market oriented policies)

The reason that this first wave of outsourcing did not cause long term damage to the West is because new jobs were constantly created in our economies. Thirty years ago, there were few computer technicians, web site designers, and radiologists. As new technologies and new social trends emerge, new jobs that one could not have imagined before will surface. This churning of jobs is what allows dynamic economies to provide high standards of living; trying to 'freeze' our economy at one particular moment is more akin to feudalism and its ancillary substandard levels of living.

Finally, although I too despise Wal-Mart (it's an excellent concept, but I prefer shopping at the smaller neighbourhood stores) and the McJob trend, the reality is that consumers enjoy shopping at fast food chains, and at large mall-like stores. If the government were to somehow punish these businesses for their success, it would only cause a loss in tax revenues, in jobs in the service industry, and a loss in the consumer's range of choices.

In order for Canada to step out of NAFTA, a concept of wich I'm in full support, we must first develop discreet trade deals with the worlds othe nations. These agreements need to be on a product specific basis, and should only take effect after the announcement that Canada will be stepping out of NAFTA. ( that will help prevent Cappies from pointing to massive growth do to these deals combined with american trade).

The only way for the world to bring America to their knees and end their deplorable intl. human rights record. Is to cripple their market of which we are the largest contributer.

We should not only end NAFTA on morale grounds but economically they have used this right wing document to attempt to gain footholds in Canadian education and Health care, looking at their country we can assert this would be bad for us.

They have also held up NAFTA in order to gain increased access to our natural recouces. Going as far as claiming export rights on Southern Alberta water. Hoping to ship it to California from Canada's driest region.

On softwood lumber, grain, and a plethera of other commodities they have practiced protectionism determined under NAFTA to be illegal. If they're not willing to uphold their end of the agreement why should we. <_< :angry:

Before we get on our high horse and criticize America's human rights record, Canada needs to get its own house in order.

Once our shameful record in dealing with Aboriginal peoples is adequately dealt with, once Aboriginals are not living in third world conditions, once the damage done to Aboriginal culture by genocidal programs like residential schooling has been reversed, then, and once the rest of Canada's human rights skeletons have come out of the closet and been given a proper burial, only then should we worry about others.

We have no right to complain about the human rights abuses of other nations. We have plenty of our own that need to be resolved.

The idea of secret trade deals frightens me to no end. Our government should not keep secrets from us. The process must be open so that we see it coming. There is no point to electing open governments if they are going to go down the slippery slope of hiding economic policy from the masses.

Second, free trade on a product specific basis would be fruitless. As a lawyer, I can tell you that such a deal would be very difficult to enforce. THere would be loopholes all over the place. We'd spend more time in international trade tribunals then we would reaping the benefit of free trade.

I feel, that if anything, we should keep NAFTA, and then try to join the EU. Then we can let the two free trade zones compete for our goods. Whichever zone gives us the best prices would get our business. I think that would be far more effective than turning back the clock, erecting trade walls and secret deals, and causing economic chaos domestically.

Having said all this, MJ brings up a very good point on Grain and Lumber. We have a natural advantage in Lumber exports, the Americans should not be putting up tarrifs on them. All that does is hurt our forestry industry, and make Americans pay 150% more when building housing. Similarly, agriculture is another huge sore spot. The Americans have one of the most highly subsidized farming industries on the planet, which runs contrary to the spirt of free trade.

Then again, if we were in other Free Trade zones, it might not much matter. We could be trading with other nations if the US doesn't want to abide by the spirit of NAFTA.