HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2001  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 3:09 AM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Monsieur Sainte-Nitouche
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 34,750
Governments weren't always as big as they are today, and certainly weren't agents of social change and progress. It will take time and it likely won't go all the way, but it looks to me like Trump is the beginning of back-to-basics style of governance, and the era of the western nation-state trying to be all things to all people (well, as much as possible, anyway) is likely over.

This trend is definitely not what's in the air in Canada right now, but my sense is that it will reach us too eventually.
__________________
Vous n'êtes pas écoeurés de mourir, bande de caves?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2002  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 3:15 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
This trend is definitely not what's in the air in Canada right now, but my sense is that it will reach us too eventually.
There's absolutely nothing pointing that way at the moment in Canada. Of course, that can change.

All we have with Trump so far is chaos. There's really nothing basic about that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2003  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 3:22 AM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Monsieur Sainte-Nitouche
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 34,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
There's absolutely nothing pointing that way at the moment in Canada. Of course, that can change.

All we have with Trump so far is chaos. There's really nothing basic about that.
And pretty darn good economic numbers. Seems like the economy does not mind the chaos. Or is perhaps indifferent to it.

As much as I hate to say it, Trump may become the most extreme example of how you don't have to be of strong moral character to be a good president.

And this may make sense. After all, his candidacy wasn't about becoming your dad or your daughter's boyfriend. It was about running the country.

So far, he doesn't look like he is going to run it into the ground. Its federal administration might another story. But maybe that's precisely the point.
__________________
Vous n'êtes pas écoeurés de mourir, bande de caves?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2004  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 3:43 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
And pretty darn good economic numbers. Seems like the economy does not mind the chaos. Or is perhaps indifferent to it.
As economic indicators are time lagging, we have no evidence of that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2005  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 3:49 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 20,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
As economic indicators are time lagging, we have no evidence of that.
Well, the "lag" in response to events like Brexit or the election of a Trump or a Le Pen is usually just a matter of hours - i.e. until the markets open on the next day.

Trump won months ago, and the indicators have reacted pretty well to him (DJIA hitting record highs, US dollar performing well, etc.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2006  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 4:23 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Well, the "lag" in response to events like Brexit or the election of a Trump or a Le Pen is usually just a matter of hours - i.e. until the markets open on the next day.
The markets are not directly related to the economy in cases like that. It's also worth noting that major stock indices actually started their precipitous rise before the election and have been rising for quite some time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2007  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 4:30 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 20,395
I don't buy it. The "lag" for the instant reduction in TM's market cap when Trump tweeted that any U.S.-bound Corollas from the new Guanajuato plant would be subjected to tariffs was a matter of seconds, maybe minutes, tops.

If Trump was considered to be currently messing stuff up on a broader scale, the markets would be reacting to it, no doubt about that. But they have instead demonstrated they were fine with Trump's current stated direction and plans.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2008  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 4:32 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,304
As I already said, the markets are not the economy. You not buying it is irrelevant.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...t-the-economy/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2009  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 4:38 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 20,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
As I already said, the markets are not the economy.
Actually, they're pretty well correlated. But you can choose to think what you want - that a less invasive government is good for the markets yet bad for the economy, if it makes you feel better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2010  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 4:42 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Actually, they're pretty well correlated. But you can choose to think what you want - that a less invasive government is good for the markets yet bad for the economy, if it makes you feel better.
Chaos is generally not good for an economy. You can't make wide prognostications about Trump's success (there hasn't been any) based on a few weeks of failed policy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2011  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 4:57 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 20,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
Chaos is generally not good for an economy. You can't make wide prognostications about Trump's success (there hasn't been any) based on a few weeks of failed policy.
Actually, his ill-advised travel ban had a cooling effect on the markets, so I would tend to say that you can indeed see the reaction to what he plans and does, and it goes both ways.

The prospect of less regulations, lower corporate taxes, more infrastructure spending, more defense spending = positive reaction generally

Making it more complicated to attract talented workers = negative reaction

Chaos is also a negative factor, whose effect is definitely there, BTW.

But if the so-called chaos is merely at the level of irrelevant drama ("does he own a bathrobe?") while the actual policies are markedly business-friendly, then the chaos won't dwarf policy in terms of impact on the economy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2012  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 5:12 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
But if the so-called chaos is merely at the level of irrelevant drama ("does he own a bathrobe?")

It's gone far beyond that:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...08293516632065

I'll be surprised if Trump makes it to 2018, never mind 2020.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2013  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 5:22 AM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 9,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
but it looks to me like Trump is the beginning of back-to-basics style of governance, and the era of the western nation-state trying to be all things to all people (well, as much as possible, anyway) is likely over..
This is not a good thing, IMO. In the modern age, the decline of government can only bring about the rise of corporate power as its replacement. And as shitty as governments can be, large corporations are immeasurably worse. At least governments are accountable to all of us through the democratic process. Corporations are accountable only to their shareholders.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2014  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 5:31 AM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 9,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipster duck View Post
If California left the US, I'm not sure that the US would give California a favourable arrangement. Germany has a favourable arrangement in the EU because Germany is the largest member state and largely wrote the EU playbook..
To be fair, Germany as leader of Europe has only really been the case since the Fall of Communism and the expansion of the EU into the former Eastern Bloc. Before that, Europe was led by a sort of three-way cohort of Britain, France, and West Germany, with a "Franco-German core" often spoken of.

The Iron Curtain cut off ties between the two halves of Europe. West Germany traded with and had ties to France, Italy, Britain, etc. while East Germany had ties to Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, etc. When Germany unified, it became the only country that contained within it links to both halves of Europe and as the EU expanded into the former Soviet satellite states Germany naturally became not only the geographic centre of the EU but also the junction of trade.

What's interesting is that as Germany prepared to reunify, France & Britain knew this was going to happen and they actually tried to stall German unity. Margaret Thatcher spent much of late 1989 and early 1990 insisting that German reunification should not happen "before 1995 at the earliest."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2015  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 6:18 AM
geotag277 geotag277 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Governments weren't always as big as they are today, and certainly weren't agents of social change and progress. It will take time and it likely won't go all the way, but it looks to me like Trump is the beginning of back-to-basics style of governance, and the era of the western nation-state trying to be all things to all people (well, as much as possible, anyway) is likely over.

This trend is definitely not what's in the air in Canada right now, but my sense is that it will reach us too eventually.
It is more accurate to probably say that Canada doesn't have this trend as much because Canada's model is already state's rights on steroids and we never descended into the bloated bureaucratic cesspool that is the United States Federal government.

People who casually follow politics in Canada might not understand how much of an abject failure institutions like the Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Labor, HUD, etc. etc. Or at least why these institutions receive billions and billions with not much to show for it.

Many departments in the United States federal government are designed to make a lot of people a lot of money firstly, and secondly provide a service to the American people that may or may not provide long term tangible benefits.

It is considerably more complex than is generally assumed, and again, it gets back to lio's question: how does everybody feel about our federal minister of education?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2016  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 6:22 AM
geotag277 geotag277 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
This is not a good thing, IMO. In the modern age, the decline of government can only bring about the rise of corporate power as its replacement. And as shitty as governments can be, large corporations are immeasurably worse. At least governments are accountable to all of us through the democratic process. Corporations are accountable only to their shareholders.
This seems like an absurd false equivalence. No one is talking about the decline of government, and it is theoretically possible for government budgets to decrease while increasing corporate oversight and regulations.

Corporations will always be held accountable to the laws of the land, and the laws of the land will always be dictated by governments. No one is suggesting any fundamental change to this process. Back to basics governance can simplify regulations - which by the way is not logically opposed to "strengthen", in other words you can simplify & strengthen laws at the same time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2017  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 6:23 AM
geotag277 geotag277 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmt18325 View Post
It's gone far beyond that:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...08293516632065

I'll be surprised if Trump makes it to 2018, never mind 2020.
Left leaning individuals trying to argue for the impeachment of Trump over his twitter account.

The amazing thing is how people are not self aware of how stupid they look.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2018  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 6:24 AM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 9,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by geotag277 View Post
It is more accurate to probably say that Canada doesn't have this trend as much because Canada's model is already state's rights on steroids and we never descended into the bloated bureaucratic cesspool that is the United States Federal government.

People who casually follow politics in Canada might not understand how much of an abject failure institutions like the Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Labor, HUD, etc. etc. Or at least why these institutions receive billions and billions with not much to show for it.

Many departments in the United States federal government are designed to make a lot of people a lot of money firstly, and secondly provide a service to the American people that may or may not provide long term tangible benefits.

It is considerably more complex than is generally assumed, and again, it gets back to lio's question: how does everybody feel about our federal minister of education?
So to summarize, you believe the main issue with the US is over-centralization, and devolution of power to the states is the solution?

I hope you're right. Decentralization is an easy fix.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2019  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 7:21 AM
jmt18325's Avatar
jmt18325 jmt18325 is offline
Heart of the Continent
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by geotag277 View Post
Left leaning individuals trying to argue for the impeachment of Trump over his twitter account.

The amazing thing is how people are not self aware of how stupid they look.
Yes, it is amazing when people don't realize that what they're saying makes them look stupid.

Everyone can take cheap shots.

Not everyone has the power to cause violence whilst attacking the first amendment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2020  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2017, 9:23 AM
BretttheRiderFan's Avatar
BretttheRiderFan BretttheRiderFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,667
The same right wingers who spent the last four years complaining that the stock market's success wasn't being reflected by the economy are now claiming the economy is booming based on the continued success in the markets.
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 8:13 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.