For those critics of the C-17 moaning about the offsets..............

[Kirkhill]

According to the US Foreign Trade Statistics

In Jan of 2006 we sold over 8 BUSD more to them than they sold to us.
In Nov of 2006 we sold over 6 BUSD more to them than they sold to us.

From Jan to Nov of 2006 we sold over 65 BUSD more to them than they sold to us.

In 2005 we made 78 BUSD off of the Americans
In 2004 we made 66 BUSD off of them.
In 2003 we made 52 BUSD off of them.
In 2002 we made 48 BUSD off of them.
Between Sep 2001 and Dec 2001 we made about 16 BUSD off of them.

Since 9/11 2001 we have relieved Americans of something like 325 BUSD.

At the current rate of exchange of 84 cents US on the Canadian dollar that equates to 385 BCAD.

Since September 11th.

I think we can afford to spend 3.4 BCAD of their own money on their kit for our military.

That still leaves 99.1% of what we made from their economy to service our social programmes and buy beer.  And that is before they are considerate enough to kickback an additional 1.1 BCAD in buying stuff from us.

Bad day for Canadian industry?  I would say it has been a bad couple of decades for American industry.

The FTD statistics go all the way back to 1985 and the closest we have come to equally balancing with the Americans was about a 6 BUSD overage.  In all that time we have NEVER bought more from them than they have bought from us.

In fact all through the Chretien years they progressively bought more and more from us than we bought from them.

The Americans have been subsidizing Chretien's social policy at the same time as he found them so unaccomodating.

We can afford to buy 4 aircraft from them.  With their own money.

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c1220.html

 

[Flip]

Thanks for that!

Can you provide a little more detail and perhaps
email this to NDP HQ?

I really like the beer part.  ;D

 

[DocBacon]

So... if I understand this, there's a little room left over from out balance of trade to buy a few Chinooks?  Maybe some Blackhawks?

I'm good with that.

 

[Ippocalyptica]

Thank you - you have taken a look at the whole picture, rather than at the small slice that most media outlets have chosen to overly scrutinise.  Furthermore, it is not as though the entire purchase cost is a sunk cost - in strictly economic marginal terms, Canada is not losing anything with this purchase, but the CF, as we know, is gaining a whole lot.

I would also add to your point that, beyond simple trade statistics (which are ultimately the easiest to calculate and so most often catch the public eye), there are other benefits of the Can-American relationship that provide our nation with numerous economic advantages, some of which are seemingly so intangible so as to avoid the public eye.  However, consider foreign direct investment, tourism, and the continental security guarantee, to name but three, and then it becomes clear that narrow-minded, penny-pinching critics who examine the C-17 deal on the merits of the deal itself are in fact missing the bigger picture, which is the only picture that matters.

 

[Flip]

There are three things that I think bug the critics most.
( mind you, from my purely civvy perspective )

1. It's more politically correct to buy european.

2. It's more politically correct to buy out of Quebec.

3. It's more politically correct to bum a ride, because it requires international
consent for us to send our military wherever. Not everyone is going to agree
with where we send our military. I would rather not have to ask for the support
of the Russians or even our great neigbour to the south.

I guess this is more important in the context of the Arctic rather than the current
missions but all the same, the C17 is big leap forward for Canada