Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Quebec implemented pharmacare, 5$ a day daycare, low tuition, etc. all initially without federal support and as a Canadian province where half of our tax dollars go to Ottawa for spending on priorities that may or may not line up with Quebec's.

I realize it's the second-biggest province so it's not PEI but it's true that all provinces are probably not viable as hypothetical independent countries.

So maybe we shouldn't ask the question of whether the independent nation-state of PEI could do it, but rather if the independent nation-state of Atlantica (NS-PEI-NB-NL) could do it.

Quebec, Ontario, BC and Alberta all definitely could on their own.

Whether as part of Canada or not, Quebeckers won't get to have more entitlements than they already have now.

The cost of Quebec's cradle-to-grave social programs is some of the highest income taxes in the Americas + equalization payments + an $11B deficit (1.8% of GDP). Quebec has a median age 2 years higher than Canada as a whole and less of an appetite for immigration.

You might be able to direct your country's resources towards maintaining a European-style welfare state if you were part of a trade bloc and you didn't have to worry about national security/defense because you could outsource that to a reliable superpower on your doorstep. Both of those indicators are flashing "red" right now.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by elly63

Is the future of Canada going to come down to choosing Alberta over Quebec. If Quebec is accepting transfer payments and will not allow pipelines, I have to pick Alberta over Quebec and I haven't been a fan of the way Danielle Smith is handling things. Quebec has no options, they're obviously not joining the US and without an association with the ROC I don't know if they can go it alone. I'm not facile on this subject I'd like to hear other opinions.

Not sure if I am answering your question but I think that in that situation, "Canada" would probably pick Quebec over Alberta.

(A major part of the reason being that they'd think calling Alberta's bluff is less of a risk than calling Quebec's.)

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by someone123

These discussions are typically zero-sum with people assuming that, say, independent PEI would be like today except minus equalization. But it would be such a big change that it's hard to say what PEI would be like.

They'd be a tax haven (at the expense of ROC). That's what small Anglo jurisdictions do generally. For some reason small Franco jurisdictions never do that (which is stupid in my opinion). Haiti could have been rich long ago if they had turned into a tax haven.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Not sure if I am answering your question but I think that in that situation, "Canada" would probably pick Quebec over Alberta.

(A major part of the reason being that they'd think calling Alberta's bluff is less of a risk than calling Quebec's.)

I think this is correct. Quebec is also a lot more important to Ontario and Atlantic Canada than Alberta.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Not sure if I am answering your question but I think that in that situation, "Canada" would probably pick Quebec over Alberta.

(A major part of the reason being that they'd think calling Alberta's bluff is less of a risk than calling Quebec's.)

My reasoning didn't include any Quebec animus, in fact I'd say I have some for Alberta right now. But I see Quebec as being unreasonable, all the while expecting Alberta to come through for them. This is one time I wouldn't want to try Alberta and see if they are bluffing because I don't think they are. And if Alberta goes, it could all crumble out west.

I don't think they want to leave Canada, but I also think, that they think this is their chance for change.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by someone123

If we're talking about the Maritimes being on their own, I don't think they are materially that different from Quebec or Ontario. There is a lot they could do on their own like focusing more on developing their natural onshore and offshore resources.

Following the Anschluss, if Trump doesn't want Quebec, and he is only really interested in the material riches of Ontario and the West, I suppose there might be the opportunity for an independent Atlantic nation composed of the four Atlantic provinces. With a population of about 2.6M people, it wouldn't be that much different from European Nordic countries. I think we could make a go of it on our own. Certainly we would be poorer than we are right now, but, I think we could still be a viable country.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I think this is correct. Quebec is also a lot more important to Ontario and Atlantic Canada than Alberta.

Agree with this, though I also think that "Canada" wouldn't want to lose either.

It would be a bit of a gambit based on the perception (accurate or not) that deep down Alberta was less serious about independence than Quebec.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by elly63

My reasoning didn't include any Quebec animus, in fact I'd say I have some for Alberta right now. But I see Quebec as being unreasonable, all the while expecting Alberta to come through for them. This is one time I wouldn't want to try Alberta and see if they are bluffing because I don't think they are. And if Alberta goes, it could all crumble out west.

I don't think they want to leave Canada, but I also think, that they think this is their chance for change.

I think that if Alberta goes, it's not just out West that things crumble.

Though this may be true of Quebec going as well, but for different reasons.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Whether as part of Canada or not, Quebeckers won't get to have more entitlements than they already have now.

The cost of Quebec's cradle-to-grave social programs is some of the highest income taxes in the Americas + equalization payments + an $11B deficit (1.8% of GDP). Quebec has a median age 2 years higher than Canada as a whole and less of an appetite for immigration.

You might be able to direct your country's resources towards maintaining a European-style welfare state if you were part of a trade bloc and you didn't have to worry about national security/defense because you could outsource that to a reliable superpower on your doorstep. Both of those indicators are flashing "red" right now.

I know this is the Quebec thread but I shouldn't necessarily have just focused on Quebec.

I think that all of the provinces (the larger ones on their own and the smaller ones in new national blocs) would be viable as developed western countries.

What that would look like more concretely in terms of economies, social programs, etc. is anyone's guess of course.

[elly63]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think that if Alberta goes, it's not just out West that things crumble.

That's true but I'd rather see Quebec go. Then it would be a shorter drive to Ontario. Bada bing!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by elly63

That's true but I'd rather see Quebec go. Then it would be a shorter drive to Ontario. Bada bing!

An old joke from my childhood about Newf... aw, forget it!

[Acajack]

One thing I have to say...

While I am totally in solidarity with the Team Canada effort to counter the threat from Trump, I have what I think is a different reaction than most when it comes to how I now feel about Canada being a "safe port" or a "larger buffer" from threats, for my province (and any province really).

I actually used to be a fairly strong believer in that, but my confidence in that has been shaken by this entire episode.

At this point I am not really sure that entities of 5 million, 10 million, 15 million people would automatically fare worse than an entity of 40 million against this guy.

But guess I'll reserve judgement for now until when all of this is (hopefully) over.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Acajack

One thing I have to say...

While I am totally in solidarity with the Team Canada effort to counter the threat from Trump, I have what I think is a different reaction than most when it comes to how I now feel about Canada being a "safe port" or a "larger buffer" from threats, for my province (and any province really).

I actually used to be a fairly strong believer in that, but my confidence in that has been shaken by this entire episode.

At this point I am not really sure that entities of 5 million, 10 million, 15 million people would automatically fare worse than an entity of 40 million against this guy.

But guess I'll reserve judgement for now until when all of this is (hopefully) over.

There are alternatives to Aluminum and electricity. Without Alberta's oil and the integration of the auto industry in Ontario (and white goods and others but mostly cars) we'd be toast.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I know this is the Quebec thread but I shouldn't necessarily have just focused on Quebec.

I think that all of the provinces (the larger ones on their own and the smaller ones in new national blocs) would be viable as developed western countries.

What that would look like more concretely in terms of economies, social programs, etc. is anyone's guess of course.

I think Quebec is totally viable as an independent country, but I don't think the spending priorities of Quebecers, or the Quebec that the PQ envisions, is viable.

An independent Quebec next to an antagonistic, disintegrating US will probably need to spend 5% of its GDP on defense. There won't be much room for social programs.

An independent Quebec shouldn't have an economic model where it doesn't specialize in anything, and everybody outside of Greater Montreal basically just cuts each other's hair and cleans each other's pools. There has to be some specialization in a strategic industry, especially if you border a beligerent superpower. Take a page from Taiwan or Israel. And, generally speaking, a country that has its population spread over 1.5 million square kilometers should have several areas that are economic outperformers, rather than just one city that does it all. You want to avoid a London-in-the-UK situation, especially since London can still exist as a global city that's bigger than the sum of its country, but Montreal can't.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

They'd be a tax haven (at the expense of ROC). That's what small Anglo jurisdictions do generally. For some reason small Franco jurisdictions never do that (which is stupid in my opinion). Haiti could have been rich long ago if they had turned into a tax haven.

I do think you can look at places like English-speaking Caribbean islands, Ireland, or New Zealand for some rough ideas of advantages smaller countries can have. Maybe to some degree also a country like Finland which does well despite not having extreme levels of natural resources.

The most common Canadian viewpoint seems to be that Canada brings nothing but positives to a region with nothing going for it and a solo Atlantic region is whatever is there today minus the fiscal inflows from Canada. But Canada's had a mix of positive and negative impacts, often with negative policies traded off for financial support. The national economic and trade policy hasn't exactly been crafted with Atlantic Canada in mind and a lot of the federal spending has been inefficient or maybe even counterproductive. The postwar norm was to implement harmful economic policies destroying industry in the region (de facto offshore bans, bad trade regimes for Atlantic industries) and then provide white elephant funding for things like the heavy water plant in Sydney, better unemployment benefits only for the rural areas, etc. It seems to have improved in recent years but the current situation reflects policies of past decades.

There must be a lot of underperforming hinterland areas in many countries that would be better off separating, while the dominant areas are generally better off with larger hinterlands, even though on paper in many cases the finances seem to flow outward. I bet on paper Moscow is subsidizing Siberia.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Medicare required national leadership. Very doubtful we'd have universal free coverage without a federal backstop. Pensions. Maternity benefits. Child benefits. But yes Quebec introduced affordable daycare and kept University tuition low on their own.

So provinces can instore programs (social or otherwise) without Ottawa. The problem when Ottawa gets involve is that they will make a one size fits all program that (coincidentally, I am sure...) fits perfectly Ontario but not the rest of the country. Let provinces create the programs they need the way they want to and let Ottawa minds it own business.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by elly63

Is the future of Canada going to come down to choosing Alberta over Quebec. If Quebec is accepting transfer payments and will not allow pipelines, I have to pick Alberta over Quebec and I haven't been a fan of the way Danielle Smith is handling things. Quebec has no options, they're obviously not joining the US and without an association with the ROC I don't know if they can go it alone. I'm not facile on this subject I'd like to hear other opinions.

Energy East was design to supply the East Coast of the U.S. in oil, not something we should want to do now. I am not sure there are that many customers for that type of oil around the Atlantic.

Natural gas might be another story with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and even so, with the time it would take to build the whole infrastructure, Europe might have found alternate energy sources (which they want to do anyway).

[someone123]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

Energy East was design to supply the East Coast of the U.S. in oil, not something we should want to do now. I am not sure there are that many customers for that type of oil around the Atlantic.

The general goal of trying to get all Canadian regions on Canadian rather than imported oil has merit though.

(It doesn't only come down to an obvious cost-benefit accounting calculation because bad actors may deliberately break the economics, whatever they are.)

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

So provinces can instore programs (social or otherwise) without Ottawa. The problem when Ottawa gets involve is that they will make a one size fits all program that (coincidentally, I am sure...) fits perfectly Ontario but not the rest of the country. Let provinces create the programs they need the way they want to and let Ottawa minds it own business.

This is Quebec viewpoint for sure. What program perfectly fits Ontario but doesn't fit Quebec?

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

This is Quebec viewpoint for sure. What program perfectly fits Ontario but doesn't fit Quebec?

Few years ago, Ottawa wanted to create a National (well, federal) Securities Commission to oversee to regulate stock markets and how companies are incorporated. Of course, that new agency would have been set in Toronto and all provinces would have been required to transfer their power to that new agency. Québec refused (and Alberta too at first but they might have given up).

The excuse was that it would make it easier for companies to deal with just one regulator. Québec proposed a "passport" system to permit a company registered in one province to be "accepted" in other provinces too, but it was refused. The point was to increase the power of Toronto finances in Canada.


Another example of Ottawa (not necessarily a program, but still) Ontario-centric view of Canada is with immigration. For the last few years, Québec complained that too many illegal immigrants were crossing the border into Québec. Or course, Québec was then called racist (that is par for the course in Canada...). But when Ontario started to be affected (especially when migrants were moved to Ontario), it became a "national" problem and Ottawa started to act. It bothers Québec, no bid deal, or bother Ontario, RED ALERT...