HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2018, 5:57 PM
wave46 wave46 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
We didn't ignore the rising power of China, we abetted it. Or rather, western multinational companies did. Faced with having to follow environmental and labour regulations in the West, they decided to outsource the pollution and jobs to China. The Reagan/Thatcher era brought in the attacks on the labour movement and successfully sought to end labour's power by exporting the jobs overseas.

After the Tianenmen Massacre it should have been clear the West would have to force the Chinese Communist Party to give up power in return for trade, instead corporate greed won the day.
The mistake Western leaders made is that they equated capitalism with democracy. The thinking was: introducing capitalism would naturally lead to democratic reforms, as private enterprise would require the protection of individual property rights. This would lead the population to demand increased personal rights.

That was false. As long as government didn't actively obstruct private enterprise (indeed, the government of China simply got into bed with corporations on its own terms), capitalism was happy to flourish without inconveniences such as individual freedom.

As long as corporations had the freedom to make profit and people the freedom to be consumers, all other 'freedoms' were irrelevant. Indeed, some corporations may have enjoyed the relative predictability of government in China - no messy democracy to upset business plans. This works well as long as living standards are rising and the government of China's (indeed, all governments) concern for economic growth.

So, you end up with a weird hybrid: totalitarianism-capitalism/corporatism. To wit: Cadillac's most important market today is China, not the US. If you had a time machine and went back to the 1950s and said that, they'd think you were a lunatic.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2018, 6:05 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaws View Post
I agree on all counts. I'm still mystified as to why the federal government didn't kick Huawei to the curb months ago especially given the fact that our "allies" with the Five Eyes had already banned them from supplying telecom infrastructure. We don't owe a foreign company any burden of proof as to why they're being banned.
More on Huawei from today's Globe & Mail. I suspect (hope) they will be barred from Canada's 5G, but only after Meng's extradition to the USA (or release).

Five Eyes spy chiefs warned Trudeau twice about Huawei national-security risk

Spy chiefs from the Five Eyes intelligence network briefed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on two occasions this year about the national-security risk from Chinese high-tech giant Huawei − meetings that took place months before Canada’s arrest of a top Huawei executive severely strained relations with Beijing.

Sources say Mr. Trudeau met the spy directors at a Five Eyes meeting in mid-July in Nova Scotia and at secret intelligence talks on the sidelines of the Commonwealth summit in London in April, where Huawei and its ties to the Chinese government dominated discussion.

The Five Eyes network is made up of Canada, the United States, Britain, Australia and New Zealand, which co-operate to combat espionage, terrorism and global crime.

During the discussions in Halifax and London, sources said the spy chiefs stressed that their countries cannot become dependent upon Huawei’s 5G technology because they view the Shenzen-based company as beholden to the Chinese state. Under Chinese law, the country’s companies must work with China’s intelligence agencies if requested...

....The Australia-based Sydney Morning Herald reported Friday that the Halifax meeting led to a Five Eyes decision to launch an unprecedented campaign to block Huawei from supplying equipment for next-generation 5G wireless technology.

The campaign has been led by U.S. national-security officials who have briefed allies and telecom executives, warning that Huawei is too closely connected to the Chinese state and that the company’s network equipment may contain back doors that could open the countries up to cyberespionage.

The global lobbying effort appears to be paying off among many of Canada’s allies.

In August, Australia announced that it would join the U.S. and bar Huawei equipment from their nascent 5G network and, in late November, New Zealand blocked the first request from one of its wireless carriers to install the Chinese firm’s equipment on a coming 5G network.

On Wednesday, Japan’s three major telecom giants decided to exclude Huawei’s gear in their 5G networks while the country plans to ban the Chinese conglomerate from bidding on government contracts.

France’s wireless carrier Orange announced on Friday that it would not hire the Chinese telecom giant to build its 5G network and Germany’s Deutsche Telekom – Europe’s largest telecommunication company – said it is reviewing its relationship with Huawei...


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/poli...chinas-huawei/

I would urge people to email their MP to press for a ban, as well as Telus and BCE if you're a customer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2018, 6:06 PM
MonctonRad's Avatar
MonctonRad MonctonRad is offline
Wildcats Rule!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 17,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post
So, you end up with a weird hybrid: totalitarianism-capitalism/corporatism.
Hey, we've been living with this in NB for the last 60 years or so (Irving). They own about half the province, and it doesn't really matter much who is in power (Liberal or Conservative), sooner or later they all have to bend the knee to the Irving corporate elite.

The NB variant of this could be considered "sham democracy-capitalism/corporatism"
__________________
Go 'Cats Go
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2018, 6:09 PM
Dengler Avenue's Avatar
Dengler Avenue Dengler Avenue is online now
Transit Geek
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: see profile picture
Posts: 2,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad View Post
Hey, we've been living with this in NB for the last 60 years or so (Irving). They own about half the province, and it doesn't really matter much who is in power (Liberal or Conservative), sooner or later they all have to bend the knee to the Irving corporate elite.

The NB variant of this could be considered "sham democracy-capitalism/corporatism"
We are digressing, but no wonder whenever I drove down Highway 2, I always saw Irvings and not Petro Canada.

Speaking of sham democracy, Russia?
__________________
I had to substantially resize the photo so that I could use it for my profile picture on SSP. It said “408 RIVERPORT” on the direction panel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2018, 6:54 PM
CityTech CityTech is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Westboro, Ottawa
Posts: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post
The mistake Western leaders made is that they equated capitalism with democracy.
Definitely. Replacing the command/central-planning economy with capitalism and replacing authoritarian/totalitarian governance with democratic ones are two separate reforms. After 1990 the Soviet bloc attempted to do both with varying degrees of success.

China did the former without the latter.

The Prague Spring in 1968 was an attempt by Czechoslovakia to do the opposite: move towards democratic/non-totalitarian governance while retaining the command economy. I wonder where that would have gone if the USSR hadn't intervened to stop it. It seemed to be going well for them but of course it was only ever in its early stages.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2018, 11:21 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,857
From today's Washington Post:

China is holding two Canadians as hostages. It’s not even denying it.

Last week, China detained two Canadians, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, on criminal charges of endangering state security. But these charges are a pretext. China is taking innocent people as hostages to pressure Canada not to extradite Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of Huawei (and daughter of Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei). Meng was detained in Canada on Dec. 1 at the request of the United States, where she faces charges of bank fraud. (She is now free on bail pending the outcome of extradition proceedings.)

To call this is a hostage-taking and not a regular criminal investigation is a serious charge. Here it is justified. The critical element of a hostage-taking is that the hostage-taker must tell you that it’s a hostage-taking and what his demands are, otherwise the whole point of taking hostages is defeated. In this case, official and quasi-official Chinese sources have been clear. The Chinese ambassador to Canada has not just admitted it; he has also proclaimed it in an op-ed in the Globe and Mail, saying that those who object to the Kovrig detention should reflect on Canada’s actions. Obviously, if there were no connection, those who object should no more reflect on Canada’s actions than they should reflect on the actions of, say, Saudi Arabia...

...But some methods of retaliation are off target and off limits. You cannot just go around arresting innocent people and holding them hostage. That is the mark of a thuggish state, not a permanent member of the Security Council. If detaining two Canadians is an acceptable response, how about 20 or 200? Would it be acceptable for Canada to change its law to allow for the detention of random, innocent Chinese citizens until its own citizens are released?

If you want respect, act respectably.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.e9597a5711f5
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2018, 11:34 PM
acottawa acottawa is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,963
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post

So, you end up with a weird hybrid: totalitarianism-capitalism/corporatism. To wit: Cadillac's most important market today is China, not the US. If you had a time machine and went back to the 1950s and said that, they'd think you were a lunatic.
I agree with that.

It remains unclear however whether these totalitarian capitalist states can generate any innovation, which is pretty important for longer term growth and prosperity. I can’t off hand think of a single (modern) Chinese invention, or any significant (mainland) Chinese cultural exports (especially when compared with Japan, Korea, Hong Kong or India) whereas when Britain, the US or Japan were the world’s second largest economies they were generating considerable innovation and culture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2018, 12:56 AM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
I agree with that.

It remains unclear however whether these totalitarian capitalist states can generate any innovation, which is pretty important for longer term growth and prosperity. I can’t off hand think of a single (modern) Chinese invention, or any significant (mainland) Chinese cultural exports (especially when compared with Japan, Korea, Hong Kong or India) whereas when Britain, the US or Japan were the world’s second largest economies they were generating considerable innovation and culture.
Whaddya mean, cars like China's Geely GE are the height of originality and technical prowess:

https://goo.gl/images/hMyPzJ
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2018, 1:03 AM
240glt's Avatar
240glt 240glt is offline
HVAC guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: YEG -> -> -> Nelson BC
Posts: 11,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Whaddya mean, cars like China's Geely GE are the height of originality and technical prowess:

https://goo.gl/images/hMyPzJ
Don’t forget about the stylish, luxurious Landwind X7 that has a powerful 160hp 4 cylinder Mitsubishi engine and costs a third of the car it’s knocking off

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landwind_X7
__________________
Short term pain for long term gain
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2018, 5:47 AM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
Interesting comment from PM yesterday that GofC is looking for a way to stop exporting armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. I assume he means looking for some way that doesn't punish Canada for Saudi's misdeeds.
Yet another example of amateur hour in Ottawa. Either Trudeau is going to block the sale or he shouldn’t even make mention. What is to be gained from “thinking” about blocking the sale besides creating uncertainty? Canada should also have stayed away from the Huawei arrest. Trump will likely drop the charges in return for trade concessions, so he looks like the hero and Canada the villain.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2018, 6:50 AM
itom 987's Avatar
itom 987 itom 987 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
Yet another example of amateur hour in Ottawa. Either Trudeau is going to block the sale or he shouldn’t even make mention. What is to be gained from “thinking” about blocking the sale besides creating uncertainty? Canada should also have stayed away from the Huawei arrest. Trump will likely drop the charges in return for trade concessions, so he looks like the hero and Canada the villain.
If I could see into the future I would be making all the right choices as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 3:42 AM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by itom 987 View Post
If I could see into the future I would be making all the right choices as well.
I don’t understand your point. No hindsight is required. Getting involved in US-China relations is a losing prospect no matter the outcome. The Saudi deal is signed and that cannot be changed without incurring a penalty. If the decision is to cancel, then cancel. If it isn’t, stay quiet.

Last edited by Doug; Dec 19, 2018 at 4:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 3:47 AM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 15,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
I don’t understand your point. No hindsight is required. Getting involved in US-China relations is a losing prospect no matter the outcome. The Saudi deal is signed and that cannot be changed without incurring a penalty. If the decision is to cancel, then cancel. If it isn’t, stay quit.
Indeed, and make no effort whatever to see if there's a way to stop deliveries while minimizing the penalties to Canada. That would be, like, needlessly thorough ...

Actually, I think Scheer has this one right - leave the vehicle contract in place and prohibit oil imports from Saudi. It makes no sense to me to punish Canadians for Saudi misdeeds.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 4:17 AM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,268
[QUOTE=kwoldtimer;8413570]Indeed, and make no effort whatever to see if there's a way to stop deliveries while minimizing the penalties to Canada. That would be, like, needlessly thorough [\QUOTE]

Sure maybe. But that assessment is a private discussion. Public statements only complicate matters. Trudeau tried to think for himself again and landed foot in mouth as would be expected of a spokesmodel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 4:22 AM
once once is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by wave46 View Post
The mistake Western leaders made is that they equated capitalism with democracy.
If you are talking about China, it seems to me the point of increasing relations with China was to isolate them from Soviet Union/Russia, to give them an autonomous economy that does not resemble modern day Russia/Belarus.

The strategy was largely successful. China has been propped up and now far over-shadows Russia. Between the two outcomes we were staring down during the cold war years, the modern geopolitical situation is far preferable to a China/Russia combined economically isolated behemoth.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 4:26 AM
itom 987's Avatar
itom 987 itom 987 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
I don’t understand your point. No hindsight is required. Getting involved in US-China relations is a losing prospect no matter the outcome. The Saudi deal is signed and that cannot be changed without incurring a penalty. If the decision is to cancel, then cancel. If it isn’t, stay quiet.
Canada is under an extradition treaty with the US. The US requested Canada to make the arrest and, like the Saudi deal we are obligated to comply. The agreement goes both ways as Canada can request the US to arrest someone on their soil for crimes committed in Canada, the US would have to comply.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 3:29 PM
Dengler Avenue's Avatar
Dengler Avenue Dengler Avenue is online now
Transit Geek
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: see profile picture
Posts: 2,625
A third Canadian has been detained in China. This is really out of hand.
__________________
I had to substantially resize the photo so that I could use it for my profile picture on SSP. It said “408 RIVERPORT” on the direction panel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 3:54 PM
milomilo milomilo is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by itom 987 View Post
Canada is under an extradition treaty with the US. The US requested Canada to make the arrest and, like the Saudi deal we are obligated to comply. The agreement goes both ways as Canada can request the US to arrest someone on their soil for crimes committed in Canada, the US would have to comply.
Except if we asked for an extradition that was politcally unfavourable to the US, they would refuse and there would be nothing we could do. As with any deal with the US, it's only Canada that has to play by the rules. In the recent event, it would have been wise for us to have delayed, feigned incompetence or otherwise got out of arresting the executive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 4:09 PM
MonctonRad's Avatar
MonctonRad MonctonRad is offline
Wildcats Rule!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 17,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
Except if we asked for an extradition that was politcally unfavourable to the US, they would refuse and there would be nothing we could do. As with any deal with the US, it's only Canada that has to play by the rules. In the recent event, it would have been wise for us to have delayed, feigned incompetence or otherwise got out of arresting the executive.
Indeed, former foreign affairs minister John Manley even stated that this whole debacle could have been avoided if Canada had simply employed some "creative incompetence", and allowed the Huawei executive to slip the country.

Instead, we are stuck with JT inspired actual incompetence and look at the mess we're in..........
__________________
Go 'Cats Go
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2018, 5:54 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad View Post
Indeed, former foreign affairs minister John Manley even stated that this whole debacle could have been avoided if Canada had simply employed some "creative incompetence", and allowed the Huawei executive to slip the country.

Instead, we are stuck with JT inspired actual incompetence and look at the mess we're in..........
Manley has become a sad corporate shill. The fact that a former minister of the crown would advocate shirking our legal responsibilities to make a few bucks is disgusting.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:15 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.