Is it time for Ontario to be split up into new Provinces?

[wave46]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

You're overestimating the variability. What you say may be true if they only extracted a single mineral but there are multiple minerals being mined. While a region may be harmed by price variations, Northern Ontario as a whole is pretty immune to them.

And we are nowhere near having extracted everything.

For gold prices, the variability between 1997-2017 is here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_a...ice_in_USD.png

In 1998, gold was trading at <$400 USD/oz. and nickel was <$2 USD/lb. Copper was approximately $0.70 USD/lb. Commodity prices tend to move in tandem - a big rise occurred in the mid-late 2000s as the Chinese economy expanded rapidly.

While I do agree that Northern Ontario has more mineral diversity than oil-dependent regions of our country, our big mineral products are nickel, copper, zinc and gold. Everything else is fairly small in comparison to those.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by wave46

The stock market is composed of shares of companies from across Canada that produce goods or services. These shares have an intrinsic value based on the profitability and value of assets of each company, plus a percentage of speculation on expected profits in the future.

Now, if you think the stock market is overvalued (I certainly do, right now), that's certainly an opinion you can hold. But to say that it's all 'magic money' is quite a leap.

In another vein, the value of the minerals produced in Northern Ontario can fluctuate hugely based on international commodity prices. For instance, in the last 20 years, gold has fluctuated from $350 USD/oz. to close to $2000 USD/oz. Commodity prices were very low from 1985-2000.

So, while $68 billion of mineral value was produced in Canada this year, it could be $40 billion next year or $120 billion. The idea behind being part of a larger jurisdiction is to limit those swings. The highs aren't so high, but the lows aren't so low.

Also, what did it cost to mine that $68 billion of minerals? Certainly no one stumbled upon a bunch of gold bricks perfectly cast sitting in an open field in Timmins. The net profit was certainly not $68 billion in the mining companies operating here. That's what seems to get lost in the Ring of Fire debate - there might be $100 billion of minerals in the ground, but if it costs $200 billion to get them all, it's a money loser - effectively a destruction of wealth.

The additional problem is that once the resource is extracted, you can't make more. There's minimal value add in Northern Ontario - the reason companies like General Electric or Toyota or Google turn large profits year after year is by keeping ahead of the game by producing a product that is useful for something. They're not dependent on commodity prices for profit - they produce something that requires intellectual know-how (where the real money is) and sells on superiority over competing products.

Lets say I own $1000 in Vale stock, a company here that mines nickel.

Can I go spend that $1000? Nope! There for, its magic money. Tomorrow it could be worth $100. Then, can I go spend that $100? Nope!

The only way to spend that money is if I sell the stock.

The amount I quote is is the money that the company gets now that it is out of the ground. It is not magic money. The magic money is the stuff still in the ground or still not purified.

So, that money is money we can spend NOW.

Please, tell me you do not have a degree in any financial field.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Lets say I own $1000 in Vale stock, a company here that mines nickel.

Can I go spend that $1000? Nope! There for, its magic money. Tomorrow it could be worth $100. Then, can I go spend that $100? Nope!

The only way to spend that money is if I sell the stock.

The amount I quote is is the money that the company gets now that it is out of the ground. It is not magic money. The magic money is the stuff still in the ground or still not purified.

So, that money is money we can spend NOW.

Please, tell me you do not have a degree in any financial field.

You're behind the times. In the 21st century, value comes from the intangible.

[vid]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

You're overestimating the variability. What you say may be true if they only extracted a single mineral but there are multiple minerals being mined. While a region may be harmed by price variations, Northern Ontario as a whole is pretty immune to them.

And we are nowhere near having extracted everything.

Mines actually do have lifespans, and the lifespan given for the Cliff's Chromite mine in the Ring of Fire was 15 years if I recall correctly. After that point, the mine, like so many others before it, will no longer be profitable to operate and it will shut down. North American Palladium's Lac des Îles mine is expected to exhaust within about 10 years, after which time it will cease to exist and the 300 jobs it provides will be gone.

Mining is temporary. That's why Atikokan has only a fifth of it's peak population, Geraldton has half, Marathon has a third, why Elliot Lake is now a retirement village instead of a mining town, and numerous other towns are dead. Silver Islet used to one of the richest mines in the world, and now it's a flooded hole.

Mineral resources are finite and all mines come with an expiry date. If minerals were inexhaustible, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The same thing happened to us with paper. It happened to the Maritimes with fish. It is going to happen soon to Alberta with oil. Newfoundland was a have province for a while thanks to its oil; commodity prices changed and now they have the highest taxes in the country by far and they're going right back into have not status, they're even more of an economic basket case than we are.

Mining isn't going to be the future, at best it's going to be a bridge to the future, but if we don't know what that future is going to be, why rush to build the bridge?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by wave46

The stock market is composed of shares of companies from across Canada that produce goods or services. These shares have an intrinsic value based on the profitability and value of assets of each company, plus a percentage of speculation on expected profits in the future.

Now, if you think the stock market is overvalued (I certainly do, right now), that's certainly an opinion you can hold. But to say that it's all 'magic money' is quite a leap.

In another vein, the value of the minerals produced in Northern Ontario can fluctuate hugely based on international commodity prices. For instance, in the last 20 years, gold has fluctuated from $350 USD/oz. to close to $2000 USD/oz. Commodity prices were very low from 1985-2000.

So, while $68 billion of mineral value was produced in Canada this year, it could be $40 billion next year or $120 billion. The idea behind being part of a larger jurisdiction is to limit those swings. The highs aren't so high, but the lows aren't so low.

Also, what did it cost to mine that $68 billion of minerals? Certainly no one stumbled upon a bunch of gold bricks perfectly cast sitting in an open field in Timmins. The net profit was certainly not $68 billion in the mining companies operating here. That's what seems to get lost in the Ring of Fire debate - there might be $100 billion of minerals in the ground, but if it costs $200 billion to get them all, it's a money loser - effectively a destruction of wealth.

The additional problem is that once the resource is extracted, you can't make more. There's minimal value add in Northern Ontario - the reason companies like General Electric or Toyota or Google turn large profits year after year is by keeping ahead of the game by producing a product that is useful for something. They're not dependent on commodity prices for profit - they produce something that requires intellectual know-how (where the real money is) and sells on superiority over competing products.

The lack of understanding on basic economics abounds. These people think digging stuff out of the ground will automatically make them rich. Doesn't sound to me like any of them have actually worked for a miner and seen a business plan.

Despite this, if people really think separation is viable, than I wish them well and wholeheartedly support it. From where I sit in Southern Ontario, the North is a massive net drain. If they think they can correct that with separation, I fully support them leaving. Worst case scenario for us? The costs to support them get spread around all of Canada, instead of Southern Ontario bearing most of it today. Best case scenario? They actually stop being a net dependent.

I just want a guarantee that if they leave, there not be a merger if commodities tank or they create a massive environmental disaster from all that mining. No takebacksies!

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

You're behind the times. In the 21st century, value comes from the intangible.

Well, the minerals are intangible till they come out of the ground.

Originally Posted by vid

Mines actually do have lifespans, and the lifespan given for the Cliff's Chromite mine in the Ring of Fire was 15 years if I recall correctly. After that point, the mine, like so many others before it, will no longer be profitable to operate and it will shut down. North American Palladium's Lac des Îles mine is expected to exhaust within about 10 years, after which time it will cease to exist and the 300 jobs it provides will be gone.

Mining is temporary. That's why Atikokan has only a fifth of it's peak population, Geraldton has half, Marathon has a third, why Elliot Lake is now a retirement village instead of a mining town, and numerous other towns are dead. Silver Islet used to one of the richest mines in the world, and now it's a flooded hole.

Mineral resources are finite and all mines come with an expiry date. If minerals were inexhaustible, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The same thing happened to us with paper. It happened to the Maritimes with fish. It is going to happen soon to Alberta with oil. Newfoundland was a have province for a while thanks to its oil; commodity prices changed and now they have the highest taxes in the country by far and they're going right back into have not status, they're even more of an economic basket case than we are.

Mining isn't going to be the future, at best it's going to be a bridge to the future, but if we don't know what that future is going to be, why rush to build the bridge?

We will always need material to make products out of. Recycling will never make mining disappear.

Elliot Lake turned into a retirement community not because uranium ran out. Protectionist laws from places like USA, and various nuclear export laws in Canada has brought the fission material mining in Canada almost to a standstill. It is not that there is not the need, it is that the laws prevent the need from being filled by Canadian mines.

Sudbury is a great example of mining. They are constantly updating how long the mines have left. Now, they are saying about 50 more years. 50 More Years!

Timmins is saying 20 years.

The real problem in Ontario when it comes to the mines is not what is in the ground. It is refining it. That is why many of the gold mines are sending their ore to Quebec. It is cheaper to refine the product in Quebec due to low electricity prices.

Those other areas are suffering from the same problem. That is why it is not profitable. If electricity pricing dropped, we would see more mining operations happening.

I really wish people would learn the facts.

[vid]

Where is the guarantee that separation will drop electricity prices?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by vid

Where is the guarantee that separation will drop electricity prices?

Just like Quebec, Northern Ontario has an abundance of hydroelectric stations, and has other places where hydroelectricity could be developed.

That is cheaper than nuclear, gas, or even coal. That is also cheaper than wind or solar.

I would not guarantee it, but if I were a betting man, I would be that Southern Ontario would have higher prices.

[blacktrojan3921]

Honestly, even after all this time, I still think splitting Ontario into three provinces based upon geography (NW Ontario, NE Ontario, and Southern Ontario) will be a good idea in the long run.

And I'm still looking for some sponsors for the petition I have on the Canadian government website.

[FFX-ME]

One of the biggest issues there is that the northern Ontario land mass is so huge and sparsely populated, it it was separated from southern/eastern Ontario how could roads be maintained etc.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by blacktrojan3921

Honestly, even after all this time, I still think splitting Ontario into three provinces based upon geography (NW Ontario, NE Ontario, and Southern Ontario) will be a good idea in the long run.

And I'm still looking for some sponsors for the petition I have on the Canadian government website.

Share the link here. We can get it more widely distributed.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

One of the biggest issues there is that the northern Ontario land mass is so huge and sparsely populated, it it was separated from southern/eastern Ontario how could roads be maintained etc.

Well, without the south sucking us dry, we could pay for it. I bet Highways 11, 17 and 69 would be twinned within 25 years of the North having control of their purse strings.

[Doady]

Even if Northern Ontario was a separate province, it would still be sending its wealth to Southern Ontario in the form of equilization payments. The only way to finally stop Southern Ontario from sucking Northern Ontario dry is for it to separate from Canada and become its own country. As its own country it will finally have control over the revenue from its vast mineral resources, instead of that revenue being diverted and being used to fund programs and infrastructure in other places.

If you think about it, it's not really Southern Ontario sucking Northern Ontario dry, its the Greater Toronto Area that's sucking the rest of the province and the rest of Canada dry. Without the ROC propping up the GTA, it's fake economy and fake wealth from the magical stock market would surely collapse, but the ROC would be much better off. So maybe instead of Northern Ontario becoming its own province, maybe it's would be much simpler for the GTA to be separated from the ROO or the ROC.

[blacktrojan3921]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Share the link here. We can get it more widely distributed.

It's not officially posted, as it requires at least 5 sponsors (maximum being 10) to have it be approved, so essentially I have been asking for email addresses and full names of people I know and on forums, with little luck. XD

[north 42]

This thread is full of delusional people make ridiculous claims!

[vid]

Originally Posted by FFX-ME

One of the biggest issues there is that the northern Ontario land mass is so huge and sparsely populated, it it was separated from southern/eastern Ontario how could roads be maintained etc.

Have you ever heard of "Newfoundland"?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Doady

Even if Northern Ontario was a separate province, it would still be sending its wealth to Southern Ontario in the form of equilization payments. The only way to finally stop Southern Ontario from sucking Northern Ontario dry is for it to separate from Canada and become its own country. As its own country it will finally have control over the revenue from its vast mineral resources, instead of that revenue being diverted and being used to fund programs and infrastructure in other places.

If you think about it, it's not really Southern Ontario sucking Northern Ontario dry, its the Greater Toronto Area that's sucking the rest of the province and the rest of Canada dry. Without the ROC propping up the GTA, it's fake economy and fake wealth from the magical stock market would surely collapse, but the ROC would be much better off. So maybe instead of Northern Ontario becoming its own province, maybe it's would be much simpler for the GTA to be separated from the ROO or the ROC.

You've got it backwards. It's the GTA that has all the wealth. Northern Ontario is not a wealthy region. In the short and medium term they would certainly lose money from separating. However, while they would have less revenue available, they could spend it in ways that are more suited to their needs. They would also probably pursue better economic development strategies (because they would be forced to, as opposed to the current situation where they can hitch onto the success of development strategies in the south) which could make them wealthier in the long term

In the separation scenario, The South would benefit from no longer having to pay the high cost of services in the North.

It would be a messy split but in the long run it would arguably be a net benefit to both sides.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Doady

Even if Northern Ontario was a separate province, it would still be sending its wealth to Southern Ontario in the form of equilization payments. The only way to finally stop Southern Ontario from sucking Northern Ontario dry is for it to separate from Canada and become its own country. As its own country it will finally have control over the revenue from its vast mineral resources, instead of that revenue being diverted and being used to fund programs and infrastructure in other places.

If you think about it, it's not really Southern Ontario sucking Northern Ontario dry, its the Greater Toronto Area that's sucking the rest of the province and the rest of Canada dry. Without the ROC propping up the GTA, it's fake economy and fake wealth from the magical stock market would surely collapse, but the ROC would be much better off. So maybe instead of Northern Ontario becoming its own province, maybe it's would be much simpler for the GTA to be separated from the ROO or the ROC.

Nonsense. Bit old but these stats are still very relevant:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...article743713/

The GTA funds this country with massive outflows. This is why I'm all for the separation of the North. If they think they can be net producers, we should support them. Now, they'll just to have convince 9 other provinces, that they won't be one more "have not". And that will require hard numbers, not "We have resources."

[wave46]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

You've got it backwards.

I think he was trying to be humorous there, judging by the hyperbole.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by vid

Have you ever heard of "Newfoundland"?

Newfoundland is an apt comparison to Northern Ontario - a relatively huge hinterland with occasional pockets of population whose economy is dominated by natural resources.