Montréal, métropole du Québec

[fmfranck]

il y a 10 minutes, andre md a dit :

Agreed to your point mark_ac wherever we go on the planet the countries are doing business primary with theirs neighbours. 

Mexico is a spanish speaking country and they are doing a lot of business with USA.

We got no choice we have to do business with the USA. 

The major point agaisnt Quebec wasn't the language but the idea of separatism.  Once this idea is out the minds. La Confiance revient.

How does that make sense? Hypothetically :  If we did seperate from Canada, how would that be interpreted as a wish to not trade with the US? Thats the spin that was put on the situation by some public figures because of a lobby to that effect by the federal (the US ambassador to Canada, but not so much Clinton), but in reality secession, or a desire for more autonomy, has nothing to do with protectionism. If you look at Québec's demands before and after the rapatriation of the Constitution that becomes all too clear : recognition of the status as a nation, veto for constitutionnal modifications, supreme court judges nomination powers, exclusion of federal programs with compensation. Nothing here has to do with trade, which would still be the responsability of the federal. 

Wanting to assess your existence as a nation does not mean you want to hide from the rest of the world. Its quite the opposite, you want to BE an acting player on the world stage. 

The reclusion/protectionnist argument was always a clever ploy by the no camp to show separatists as backwards and "non modern".

======================================

Anyways, back on topic. I think it's wise to wish to do more trade with the European union with the new free trade agreement we have with them, especially with the problems we are encountering with NAFTA and Trump protectionism atm. If anything, it's the US that are protectionnist, not Québec. That US protectionnism will hurt the ROC more than Québec (not by a significant margin mind you).  European trade is therefore key in this context. We will lose out on some aspects (mainly food industries : cheese, wine), so we have to seek an advantage in others. 

[fmfranck]

Il y a 3 heures, mark_ac a dit :

 

here's someone that gets it. Not this wishy washy pie in the sky let's deal with Belgium or Senegal if Americans don't want to deal with Quebec because we're not anglosphere. I 100% disagree with that point of view - and is symptomatic of the woes we've experienced for quite some time now.

Why diversy, amirite? Let's put all our eggs in the same basket, like that every time the US economy crashes, we feel the full effect of it on our side of the border. Leitao seeking investments/trade from the US does NOT mean we aren't seeking trade or shouldnt be seeking trade with the EU. You might give a reductionnist example by talking about Belgium, but the EU is 511M people with an economy that is pretty much the equal of the US. 

[andre md]

Juste a regarder la communautée europeene comment elle reagie a ce qui se passe avec la Catalogne le meme principe s'applique dans le relation USA-Quebec. 

Drole de coincidence que la confiance au Québec n'a jamais été aussi élevé et l'indépendance aussi loin meme au sein du PQ. 

Ceci dit il faut que l'on ai plus d'echange economique avec l'europe il n'y a pas de doute.  Mais il restera que l'on aura toujours plus de relation economique avec les USA simple question de géographie. 

[ToxiK]

Le ‎2017‎-‎10‎-‎03 à 04:54, mark_ac a dit :

There's no money or economic gain in that strategy. You're banking on countries that are marginal in economic standing. This is really a defeatist argument - like trying to convert someone into a new religion just can't see the forest for the trees 

look at leitao who will likely get voted out next October for doing a great job. He's in New York right now  trying to drum up American investment in our province on the basis of renewed economic performance by the province 

here's someone that gets it. Not this wishy washy pie in the sky let's deal with Belgium or Senegal if Americans don't want to deal with Quebec because we're not anglosphere. I 100% disagree with that point of view - and is symptomatic of the woes we've experienced for quite some time now.

On the contrary, there is a lot of money to be made in diversying out customers.  There is a world outside the Anglosphere.  Africa willl be the next booming market, and we can get an edge in French speaking countries.  As for the rest of the world, instead on trading with them in English, let's do it in their own languages.  Let's learn Spanish, Mandarin, Portugese and so on and go do business around the world.  In Québec, we know it is better to do business with people by speaking their own language and by respecting their culture.  We don't like in when a company just try to sell us their stuff believing we are just a carbon copy of Ontario or any other north american market.  Our future customers will appreciate our efforts to understand them.

We have a better chance to do good in the United States then in the ROC.  Canada mostly flies Under radar in the U.S., so the bad reputation we have in the ROC doesn't register that much.  Plus, our rejection of the British Monarchy or other things dear to Canadians won't be felt as personal to american eyes then it is in Canada.

One more thing about the United States, it is dangerous to put too many eggs in that basket.  The U.S. are becoming an unreliable customer.  They risk of becoming more and more proctectionnists, while of course expecting we keep our borders as open for their own products.  If we get too depenant to that market, even if they are our neighbours, we will pay the price someday.

[Né entre les rapides]

Money has no language!  --with the notable exception of English, however poorly spoken by myriads of foreign traders.  This is why we mostly see «Made in Germany», not «Hergestellt in Deutschland»,  and «Made in France», not »Fabriqué en France»  etc.

In theory, international trade is motivated by mutual interest, which is spurred by exploiting comparative advantages.  However, from to time in history, short sighted national interests lead to protectionism.

The practice is however a «little» more complicated.   Here is not the appropriate place to (merely attempt) to deal with this vast subject matter.  Nevertheless, in the spirit of the current discussions above, I shall make the following remarks:

1) Geographic proximity matters a lot: in Québec's case, this means the Rest of Canada and the USA.

2)  So do institional arragements (or, to the contrary, artificial political barriers, such as the former Iron Curtain in the middle of Europe) .  Again for Quebec,  this means the NAFTA area;  but it is also worth noting  that economic relationships with the ROC are significantly more intense than if predicted solely on the basis of distance and size of markets.

3) Diversification of both the sources of imports and  the destinations of exports is of course desirable.  For Quebec, whose economy is based on the free enterprise system,  diversification cannot be achieved through authoritarian measures by the Government;  but it is free to promote and facilitate exports, and it can also participate in discussions (whether bilateral or multilateral) aiming at removing or alleviating trade barriers (tarrif and non-tarrif); note that as a province of Canada, Quebec must play this role within the Canadian institutions.

4) The composition of  imports and exports is not fixed; it can change, because of domestic and external factors.  An example would be the development of scientific and technological capabilities leading to the creation of businesses capable of competing worldwide; another would be changes in global demand for, say, wheat, forest products and crude oil.

5) A significant portion of international trade is conducted by multinational companies (including but not limited to intra-company trade),  based on  their own considerations/calculations. (This point is made because it cannot be ignored in developping a strategy).

I wish this helps in separating realisistic goal setting, from whatever else you might call it!