CAN-USA Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)

[Fabius]

So a single railway/highway/pipeline/power line/fibre optic cable corridor all built at once? Love it!

It’s basically an updated and expanded vision of the CPC’s policy of developing a National Energy Corridor from 2019.
Imagine if we had started such a project 6 years ago, with a sense of purpose and urgency.

https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/28103239/196864d0c220d7e.pdf

 

[Fishbone Jones]

We could cut costs and time by building it in sections all at the same time and then just link them. Thousands of jobs. Work for lots of engineering firms, surveyors, constructors, material suppliers, lumber, etc.

We could be using vast amounts of our own metals, chemicals and other resources. Imagine the O&G that would be used. New industry to supply the vehicles and equipment. No doubt we'll have a healthy R&D initiatives spinoff. Airlines moving workers, similar to oil patch workers. There are so many more things that can come out of a project like this besides the initial intent.

Think of Roosevelt's Works Progress Administration and the New Deal.

Ahh, the dreams.

 

[QV]

We could cut costs and time by building it in sections all at the same time and then just link them. Thousands of jobs. Work for lots of engineering firms, surveyors, constructors, material suppliers, lumber, etc.

We could be using vast amounts of our own metals, chemicals and other resources. Imagine the O&G that would be used. New industry to supply the vehicles and equipment. No doubt we'll have a healthy R&D initiatives spinoff. Airlines moving workers, similar to oil patch workers. There are so many more things that can come out of a project like this besides the initial intent.

Think of Roosevelt's Works Progress Administration and the New Deal.

Ahh, the dreams.

Who pays? Without significant regulatory reform, we won't get capital investment back. Which, again, goes against the LPC/NDP grain.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Who cares what the red and orange liberals think.

How about we put a $1 surcharge (or whatever) on everything we export.

I think the returns, once it's up and running, will put a big hole in the debt created.

There0 user fees. No more foreign oil at world prices, LNG to Europe, potash, aluminum, nickel and titanium to world defence contractors.

The whole idea of the corridor is to make our currently unattainable products available to the world.

You know who I can see it hurting? The Laurentien Elites who have stymied our production, sale and trade to expand their own foreign oil stock and shares as well as their other off shore investments on the backs of Canadians.

 

[foresterab]

We could cut costs and time by building it in sections all at the same time and then just link them. Thousands of jobs. Work for lots of engineering firms, surveyors, constructors, material suppliers, lumber, etc.

We could be using vast amounts of our own metals, chemicals and other resources. Imagine the O&G that would be used. New industry to supply the vehicles and equipment. No doubt we'll have a healthy R&D initiatives spinoff. Airlines moving workers, similar to oil patch workers. There are so many more things that can come out of a project like this besides the initial intent.

Think of Roosevelt's Works Progress Administration and the New Deal.

Ahh, the dreams.

So being quite intimate with the joys of living in oil and gas boom towns....and crashes...I would also caution against "rushed" work.

It's great to be able to mobilize 2-5,000 men to work on a job...but if it's only going to 9 months or seasonal work it's tough to build any sort of community out of it. Instead now you have a wave of folks overloading local resources and both short and long term social issues.

When I look on Google maps it appears there is road from Thompson to Sundance/ Fox Lake Cree Nation on the north side of the Nelson River...just upstream of Port Nelson itself. It's also where the railway seems to split off to connect a bunch of communities? stops? reserves? towards the north and Churchill and to the south towards The Pas. So there's actually more there than I had figured....quality of infrastructure to be determined.

Now I've also heard...and I don't work railways to be certain...that the old Churchill line was badly built resulting in limited weight limits and car sizes. So it's not so much as fix the line up as rebuild whole segments. Not honestly sure which would be cheaper...just know it's a high price tag. But building a pipeline(s)? beside the road should be a relatively easy task and there may be the opportunity to create several trained crews, working out of the local communities towards each direction...over a series of smaller project segments to reduce the boom impacts.

Looking at the imagery though I'm also thinking what a crappy job it would be and it better be a damn good paycheck.

There's also the James Bay Road that goes north to Radisson, Quebec (east of Fort George on the east side of the bay ) that at least has some preliminary access. No idea what the bay or shipping options look like but actually impressed at how many roads are in northern Quebec.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Hey, I'm the Idea guy! Not the Plan or Execute guy!

For lots of the length, there probably won't be local resources. What about ATCO camps? Same rules as the oil patch. Booze, drugs, gambling. Cede the camps to CP Rail and let their cops patrol them?

 

[Remius]

Who cares what the red and orange liberals think.

How about we put a $1 surcharge (or whatever) on everything we export.

Alberta will separate and declare war on Canada. They’ve been very clear on their position on export taxes.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Alberta will separate and declare war on Canada. They’ve been very clear on their position on export taxes.

That's their current position with their landlocked, we can only sell to the US for peanuts, products.

The whole thing is basically designed to expand Alberta's profits and exports. Make their O&G readily available to both (three?) coasts and allowing them to compete on the world market.

If they balk at this reasoning, it sounds a little short sighted on their part, to me.

I'm sure we could work something out.

 

[ModlrMike]

Pipeline to Churchill!

 

[Kirkhill]

Alberta will separate and declare war on Canada. They’ve been very clear on their position on export taxes.

As opposed to Canada declaring economic war on Alberta?

Trudeau 1 wanted to lock our oil and gas into the Canadian market to subsidize the East when the international market was offering the prospect of significant revenues. As is regularly pointed out fossil fuels are not renewable so it is best to sell when the market is high.

Trudeau 2 has locked our oil and gas out of the international market.

In both cases any revenues entailed to Alberta were effectively treated as windfall revenues that Alberta was required to share with the rest of Canada.

What is Alberta's share of Hydro revenues from BC, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec? I would add in Newfoundland but they have a raw enough deal as it stands.

...

There is a reasonable argument to be had for equitable sharing but we always seem to end up talking past each other.

....



....

We've been here before.

 

[Remius]

As opposed to Canada declaring economic war on Alberta?

Trudeau 1 wanted to lock our oil and gas into the Canadian market to subsidize the East when the international market was offering the prospect of significant revenues. As is regularly pointed out fossil fuels are not renewable so it is best to sell when the market is high.

Trudeau 2 has locked our oil and gas out of the international market.

In both cases any revenues entailed to Alberta were effectively treated as windfall revenues that Alberta was required to share with the rest of Canada.

What is Alberta's share of Hydro revenues from BC, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec? I would add in Newfoundland but they have a raw enough deal as it stands.

...

There is a reasonable argument to be had for equitable sharing but we always seem to end up talking past each other.

....

View attachment 91283View attachment 91284View attachment 91287View attachment 91285View attachment 91286

....

We've been here before.

All Very nice and all. Back to the question posed by FB.

Will Alberta accept export taxes yes or no? That was what FB proposed. If the answer is yes then it can work if the answer in no then it would be a min starter no? I’m leaning that they will go with no.

 

[Good2Golf]

You know, especially with the latest with Trump and Putin’s coziness, a lack of any regard for Ukraine, one can’t help but consider whether the US can actually be considered a trustful nation, and *while I hadn’t some close to considering it before, can’t not consider that the effort to deliberately globalize Canada’s development, particularly resource-heavy, towards transitioning America to a minority export recipient. Maybe America deserves to be in the 25-35% of Canada’s exports, or even less, category. Maybe it’s time to have a serious and transparent talk with China, India, Asia and also Europe and determine if Canada can find some fortitude and improved productivity and global economic attractiveness to a diverse trade partner portfolio. The challenge would be addressing the not insignificant hardship in the pivot period (probably a 5-8 year effort to take a big chunk out of the CAC>US goods and services flow).

 

[Remius]

You know, especially with the latest with Trump and Putin’s coziness, a lack of any regard for Ukraine, one can’t help but consider whether the US can actually be considered a trustful nation, and whileminhandy some close to considering it before, can’t not consider that the effort to deliberately globalize Canada’s development, particularly resource-heavy, towards transitioning America to a minority export recipient. Maybe America deserves to be in the 25-35% of Canada’s exports, or even less, category. Maybe it’s time to have a serious and transparent talk with China, India, Asia and also Europe and determine if Canada can find some fortitude and improved productivity and global economic attractiveness to a diverse trade partner portfolio. The challenge would be addressing the not insignificant hardship in the pivot period (probably a 5-8 year effort to take a big chunk out of the CAC>US goods and services flow).

We’d be looking at 10 years minimum and this sort of exercises needs to transcend party lines. Strike while the fire is hot with Canadians feeling threatened and patriotic, premiers seemingly willing and almost all level of gvts with new mandates and soon to be new mandates.

 

[Kirkhill]

All Very nice and all. Back to the question posed by FB.

Will Alberta accept export taxes yes or no? That was what FB proposed. If the answer is yes then it can work if the answer in no then it would be a min starter no? I’m leaning that they will go with no.

Will Canada deliver Alberta Oil and Gas to Tidewater? If so why wouldn't Alberta expect to pay for that service? Mutually beneficial investments.

BC got a railway on the understanding that it would ship prairie produce - to include minerals like coal, oil, gas, potash and sulfur.

And seeing as how Trump has reintroduced Reciprocity to our trade vocabulary...



A 1911 Conservative campaign poster warns that the big American pig will gobble up the benefits of reciprocity, proposed by the Liberals.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/reciprocity

Reciprocity was a free trade agreement between the United States and Canada. It mutually reduced import duties and protective tariffs on certain goods exchanged between the two countries. It was in effect from 1854 to 1866 and was controversial at times on both sides of the border. It was replaced in 1878 by the Conservative Party’s protectionist National Policy. It involved levying tariffs on imported goods to shield Canadian manufacturers from American competition. A narrower reciprocity agreement was introduced in 1935 and expanded in 1938. However, it was suspended in 1948 after both countries signed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).

 

[Good2Golf]

We’d be looking at 10 years minimum and this sort of exercises needs to transcend party lines. Strike while the fire is hot with Canadians feeling threatened and patriotic, premiers seemingly willing and almost all level of gvts with new mandates and soon to be new mandates.

I think we could see some notable changes in less than 10 years, TBH, especially if Trump keeps up with the tariffs. It would probably take 12-15 years to hit 50-50, and maybe 20-25 to bring exports to the US into the 25-30% range, but honestly, it shouldn’t be considered a bad thing…some pain yea? But America can’t be trusted for the next almost half decade. Time for Canada to decide…

 

[brihard]

Anyone got a feel for how much per year our military procurement is sending to the U.S.? Just in the sense of what it contributes to the trade balance Trump is so pissy about? We’re procuring some items that aren’t exactly cheap.

 

[Good2Golf]

Anyone got a feel for how much per year our military procurement is sending to the U.S.? Just in the sense of what it contributes to the trade balance Trump is so pissy about? We’re procuring some items that aren’t exactly cheap.

Probably 1-1.5B a year at the moment, but more when the cash flow for F-35, P-8, SPY-7 and other major projects kicks in, probably then closer to 4-5B/year….or about 2.5-3% of our oil and gas exports in the same periods.

 

[brihard]

Probably 1-1.5B a year at the moment, but more when the cash flow for F-35, P-8, SPY-7 and other major projects kicks in, probably then closer to 4-5B/year….or about 2.5-3% of our oil and gas exports in the same periods.

Thanks, I figured you’d have a good read.

 

[Remius]

Will Canada deliver Alberta Oil and Gas to Tidewater? If so why wouldn't Alberta expect to pay for that service? Mutually beneficial investments.

Danielle Smith has said as much about export taxes on energy.

 

[Kirkhill]

Anyone got a feel for how much per year our military procurement is sending to the U.S.? Just in the sense of what it contributes to the trade balance Trump is so pissy about? We’re procuring some items that aren’t exactly cheap.

88 F-35s at ~100 MUSD apiece = 9 BUSD once every 40 years
16 P8s at ~175 MUSD apiece = 5.9 BUSD once every 40 years
15 CH-47Fs = 1.15 BUSD once every 40 years
17 CC-130J-30s = 1.4 BUSD once every 40 years.

15 Aegis Spy Radars = 2.2 BUSD once every 40 years.

500 Oshkosh TAPVs built in Canada
LAVs built in Canada for use in the US...

Our defence budget has been in the 10 to 20 BUSD for the past 20 years or so.
Less than 20% of that has been spent on capital so 2 to 4 BUSD per annum.
And that includes trucks and vehicles built in Canada and Germany and Britain.

I would be surprised if we spent 1 BUSD annually in the US, overall.