Variations of our relationship with the US across the country

[someone123]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Pick a list of the most well-managed countries in the world. Chances are that they are small states, whether you believe in progressive social democracy (Denmark, Sweden, Norway), progressive conservatism (yes, that can actually be a legit term) (Switzerland), or even free market authoritarianism (Singapore). Even in poor parts of the world, the countries that seem to be the most egalitarian are small (Uruguay, Bhutan, etc.).

The US is pretty decentralized and there are a lot of differences between states. I think there's an advantage simply to having some diversity, particularly if there is also some degree of mobility. Different states can try out different ideas and people can pick a place that suits their own personal preferences. I think the fact that Europe is made up of a bunch of little countries is an advantage, not a liability.

I think this narrative about dominant countries (which might have originated as propaganda) also tends to seriously overestimate how important they are. The US represents less than 20% of the world economy. There is no dominant country, really. Rome wasn't a dominant global power either in the sense of representing a large percentage of the world economy or population.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by RWin

The border between Canada and the USA near Abbotsford BC. I wouldn't want to try crossing here in secret but I think it says something about our relationship with the US.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.00247...bjABT_Jnbw!2e0

As a fellow SSPer recently reminded me via PM...

I see your Abbotsford border and raise you this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9999.../data=!3m1!1e3

[casper]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

That's the thing with superpowers: big states are usually terrible at meeting the needs of their general population.

Pick a list of the most well-managed countries in the world. Chances are that they are small states, whether you believe in progressive social democracy (Denmark, Sweden, Norway), progressive conservatism (yes, that can actually be a legit term) (Switzerland), or even free market authoritarianism (Singapore). Even in poor parts of the world, the countries that seem to be the most egalitarian are small (Uruguay, Bhutan, etc.).

Giant states and empires are too large and unwieldy to manage, and breed corruption, venality and a general disconnectedness of government from its citizens. The disparity between the rich and the poor, or the empowered and the unempowered can be enormous. The US* might actually be the best of the very large countries in creating a good quality of life for all its citizens, and that's not saying much. China, Russia (and the Soviet Union before it), India, Indonesia, Brazil and Nigeria are all various levels of disaster.

*Unless you think of Japan as one of the "very big" countries.

I think that comes down to finding the best way of allocating responsibilities between the different levels of government.

In Canada, the municipal governments have been given more and more responsibility for service delivery as well as local service agencies (i.e. Health Regions). Some things are a good fit for a federal government.

In the US, certain functions work well in the federal government, e.g. Defence. The uS Department of Energy, and NASA are two federal entities primarily focused on innovation, science and research. Something the US excels at. Health Care is the one area where the US is still trying to figure it out.

Here on the west coast I think there is pretty good ties between Washington State, Oregon and BC.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by lio45

As a fellow SSPer recently reminded me via PM...

I see your Abbotsford border and raise you this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9999.../data=!3m1!1e3

I've been there once, this is a strange place. The cars on the Canadian side of the border all have NY State plates.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by someone123

The US is pretty decentralized and there are a lot of differences between states. I think there's an advantage simply to having some diversity, particularly if there is also some degree of mobility. Different states can try out different ideas and people can pick a place that suits their own personal preferences. I think the fact that Europe is made up of a bunch of little countries is an advantage, not a liability.

Federalism certainly helps, although the Federal government still has a profound effect on the wellbeing of regions that may govern themselves. The highest level of government still sets economic and foreign policies that may go against the interests of its constituent regions. Atlantic Canada and Greece, within the EU, have learned this the hard way.

A genuinely small state avoids this sort of a pitfall. Regional stagnation and regional interests are not really a factor in a place like Singapore which you can cross on an hourlong subway ride.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lio45

As a fellow SSPer recently reminded me via PM...

I see your Abbotsford border and raise you this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9999.../data=!3m1!1e3

That's in the middle of the Akwesasne reserve for the Mohawk people. It's a reserve that is in both countries, about 5,000 Mohawks on each side. They have special treaty rights regarding crossing the border.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Federalism certainly helps, although the Federal government still has a profound effect on the wellbeing of regions that may govern themselves. The highest level of government still sets economic and foreign policies that may go against the interests of its constituent regions. Atlantic Canada and Greece, within the EU, have learned this the hard way.

A genuinely small state avoids this sort of a pitfall. Regional stagnation and regional interests are not really a factor in a place like Singapore which you can cross on an hourlong subway ride.

Have you ever noticed that smaller European countries seem to have far fewer "forsaken" areas than the larger ones? (Sometimes they have almost none.)

[hipster duck]

^Yup. The exception is Belgium, where the Walloons sort of languish in a French-speaking rustbelt while the Dutch-speaking Flemish are quite affluent just 30 km away.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

^Yup. The exception is Belgium, where the Walloons sort of languish in a French-speaking rustbelt while the Dutch-speaking Flemish are quite affluent just 30 km away.

The "small is beautiful" argument is something that is occasionally trotted out by Quebec separatists.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The "small is beautiful" argument is something that is occasionally trotted out by Quebec separatists.

Small may be beautiful, but it is not always prosperous. Just look at PEI....

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Acajack

The "small is beautiful" argument is something that is occasionally trotted out by Quebec separatists.

I think they would be right, except that the Pequistes never wanted to go all the way.

IIRC, the idea in the 90s was to separate from Canada, but maintain the Canadian dollar and Canadian passports (so, by extension, some shadow of Canadian foreign policy). This would have been the mistake. Quebec should have been able to set at least its own monetary policy.

Bringing this post back to the original thread topic, one of the reasons why Canada has been so successful in history is that it benefits form being a small state that sets its own monetary and foreign policies, but ties itself economically to a large market across its border. It's sort of the same with non-Eurozone/non-EU Western European countries like the Nordic countries.

The debacle of EU states like Portugal, Ireland or Greece is that they are independent states that don't have their own currency or set their own monetary policy. I don't think Quebec would have been as badly off as Greece, but it's never good to have another country that doesn't have to answer to your electorate set the conditions upon which you can do trade.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Small may be beautiful, but it is not always prosperous. Just look at PEI....

But PEI isn't an independent country. In order to make a true comparison based on what Hipster Duck was saying, it kinda would have to be.

[1overcosc]

Quebec the state would still be a pretty big country.