The November 3, 2009 issue of the Wisconsin State Journal, published in Madison, Wisconsin, featured in its business section a story on how Warren Buffett, the second richest person in the USA, wants to purhcase an American railroad system, the second largest in the USA. He is willing to spend over $32 billion to purchase it. This caught my attention, because Buffett has focused on real estate in the past, not transportation. Therefore, I "drilled down" in the article.
Toward its end two facts jumped off the page. One, Buffet forecasts a huge surge in the price of oil, which will diminish the value of trucking as a source of delivery. Two, his proposed railroad acquisition is one of the major backbones for transporting food from the USA to export to China.
How does this apply to Canada?
First, railroads are central to the history of Canada. For instance, the late Pierre Berton's National Dream told the story of the building of the trans-continental Canadian National Railway which "stitched" together the provinces of Canada from sea to sea. This infrastructure still runs east and west, and Vancouver, British Columbia is the logical terminus for this railway system. Vancouver is Canada's gateway to Asia. Canada also has surplus food for export to Asia. Note how this trade goes east and west, not north and south.
If Buffett thinks the future of the economy is with China, which has money galore to spend, unlike the bankrupted USA, Canada, too, because of its railroads can profit from this trend.
Second, Buffet's forecast for a surge in the price of oil ought to enhance the value of the oil in Canada, e.g. the Alberta tar sands. Canada can profit from this surge if the good people of the USA can somehow wrest control of its government from the vampires on Wall Street and in Washington. These vampires work for international oil corporations, not the US people, and are at the drivers of the endless American overseas wars for oil in the Middle East. Of course, China, too needs oil, and it can pay "cash on the barrel" for it. Canada has railroads to move the oil.
In short, the future of Canada's prosperity is east-west, not north-south, trade. Its railroads, food surplus and oil can service Asia as surely as Warren Buffet's proposed railroad system.
Canada has looked to its transcontinental railroad system to hold the country together politically. History is going to repeat. Canada will look also to its transcontinental railroad network to reinvent its economy and detach it from the U.S., which is an economic Titanic.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Order of Canada for Prof. Richard Jarrell
Each year, a select group of Canadians receive a special recognition for outstanding achievements. The recognition is the "Order of Canada." Persons who receive this award forever after can sign their names "O.C." in the tradition of honor awards in England.
On Thusrday October 15, 2009, your humble blogger, Paul Rux, Ph.D. , will nominate his lifelong friend Richard Jarrell, Ph.D. for an "O.C." award. It will start with a request to Manitoba Premier Gary Doer, the next Canadian ambassador to the U.S., when he visits Madison, WI.
Dr. Jarrell and Dr. Rux were classmates in graduate school at the University of Toronto, where they developed a lifelong friendship. Jarrell is Director of the Division of Natural Science at York University in suburban Toronto and an expert on Canadian science and technology.
Jarrell is currently on sabbatical to complete a book on the history of agricultural education in Canada. Rux did his M.A. thesis at the University of Toronto on the first Minister of Agriculture in Canada. Over the years they have shared a passion for Canada, its history and future.
Dr. Jarrell and his wife Martha have a tradition of celebrating New Year's Eve in Thornhill, Ontario, a suburb of Toronto with Dr. Rux and his wife Jane. "We look forward to celebrating the award of the Order of Canada to Richard in Ottawa, Canada in 2010," noted Rux.
On Thusrday October 15, 2009, your humble blogger, Paul Rux, Ph.D. , will nominate his lifelong friend Richard Jarrell, Ph.D. for an "O.C." award. It will start with a request to Manitoba Premier Gary Doer, the next Canadian ambassador to the U.S., when he visits Madison, WI.
Dr. Jarrell and Dr. Rux were classmates in graduate school at the University of Toronto, where they developed a lifelong friendship. Jarrell is Director of the Division of Natural Science at York University in suburban Toronto and an expert on Canadian science and technology.
Jarrell is currently on sabbatical to complete a book on the history of agricultural education in Canada. Rux did his M.A. thesis at the University of Toronto on the first Minister of Agriculture in Canada. Over the years they have shared a passion for Canada, its history and future.
Dr. Jarrell and his wife Martha have a tradition of celebrating New Year's Eve in Thornhill, Ontario, a suburb of Toronto with Dr. Rux and his wife Jane. "We look forward to celebrating the award of the Order of Canada to Richard in Ottawa, Canada in 2010," noted Rux.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
US Accuses Canada of Sending 9-11 Terrorists
Border comments spark diplomatic kerfuffle
Updated Tue. Apr. 21 2009 9:43 PM ET
CTV.ca News
Ottawa was rushing to defend its border security on Tuesday amid a diplomatic scuffle with the U.S., which erupted after Washington's homeland security chief suggested that the 9-11 terrorists entered the U.S. through Canada.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano made the comments during a media interview earlier this week, much to the chagrin of Canadians on both sides of the border.
In recent years, Ottawa has invested a great deal of effort into dispelling perceptions among Americans that Canada's border is an easy entry point for terrorists planning attacks on U.S. soil.
"Unfortunately, misconceptions arise on something as fundamental as where the 9-11 terrorists came from," said Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador in Washington.
"As the 9-11 commission reported in 2004, all of the 9-11 terrorists arrived in the United States from outside North America. They flew to major U.S. airports. They entered the U.S. with documents issued by the United States government and no 9-11 terrorists came from Canada."
Later, Napolitano's staff attempted to tamp down the controversy by blaming the comments on a simple misunderstanding, said Wilson, who was the keynote speaker at the Border Trade Alliance meeting in Washington Tuesday.
"Her comment from her people is that she misunderstood," Wilson said, adding that he was planning a personal meeting with Napolitano in the near future.
The furor began when Napolitano was asked to clarify statements she had made about equal treatment for the Mexican and Canadian borders, despite the fact that a flood of illegal immigrants and a massive drug war are two serious issues on the southern border.
"Yes, Canada is not Mexico, it doesn't have a drug war going on, it didn't have 6,000 homicides that were drug-related last year," she said.
"Nonetheless, to the extent that terrorists have come into our country or suspected or known terrorists have entered our country across a border, it's been across the Canadian border. There are real issues there."
When asked if she was referring to the 9-11 terrorists, Napolitano added: "Not just those but others as well."
However, Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan downplayed the comments and said that Napolitano is well aware that Canada was not the source of the 9-11 terrorists.
"We spoke about it back in March, and we were sharing a chuckle at the fact that the urban myth does circulate," he told CTV's Power Play.
"Ms. Napolitano understood quite clearly, then and now, that none of the September 11 terrorists came through Canada, as the 9-11 Commission found."
Still, that positive outlook wasn't shared by other Canadian officials.
On Tuesday afternoon, RCMP Commissioner William Elliot expressed frustration with the comments during an interview on CTV's Power Play.
"I was somewhat surprised and disappointed," he said, adding he hopes the misconception has been cleared up.
"I understand and am happy to hear that she has issued a statement acknowledging that that didn't happen."
But Thomas d'Aquino, president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, decried Napolitano's comments on Tuesday.
"I am a longstanding friend and ally of the United States, but sometimes failures in our two-way dialogue cause me to shake my head in sadness and dismay," he said in a press release.
"The claim that some of the 9/11 terrorists entered the United States from Canada is, quite simply, a myth - an urban legend that began with a handful of erroneous media reports in the days following the terrorist strikes."
With files from The Canadian Press
Updated Tue. Apr. 21 2009 9:43 PM ET
CTV.ca News
Ottawa was rushing to defend its border security on Tuesday amid a diplomatic scuffle with the U.S., which erupted after Washington's homeland security chief suggested that the 9-11 terrorists entered the U.S. through Canada.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano made the comments during a media interview earlier this week, much to the chagrin of Canadians on both sides of the border.
In recent years, Ottawa has invested a great deal of effort into dispelling perceptions among Americans that Canada's border is an easy entry point for terrorists planning attacks on U.S. soil.
"Unfortunately, misconceptions arise on something as fundamental as where the 9-11 terrorists came from," said Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador in Washington.
"As the 9-11 commission reported in 2004, all of the 9-11 terrorists arrived in the United States from outside North America. They flew to major U.S. airports. They entered the U.S. with documents issued by the United States government and no 9-11 terrorists came from Canada."
Later, Napolitano's staff attempted to tamp down the controversy by blaming the comments on a simple misunderstanding, said Wilson, who was the keynote speaker at the Border Trade Alliance meeting in Washington Tuesday.
"Her comment from her people is that she misunderstood," Wilson said, adding that he was planning a personal meeting with Napolitano in the near future.
The furor began when Napolitano was asked to clarify statements she had made about equal treatment for the Mexican and Canadian borders, despite the fact that a flood of illegal immigrants and a massive drug war are two serious issues on the southern border.
"Yes, Canada is not Mexico, it doesn't have a drug war going on, it didn't have 6,000 homicides that were drug-related last year," she said.
"Nonetheless, to the extent that terrorists have come into our country or suspected or known terrorists have entered our country across a border, it's been across the Canadian border. There are real issues there."
When asked if she was referring to the 9-11 terrorists, Napolitano added: "Not just those but others as well."
However, Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan downplayed the comments and said that Napolitano is well aware that Canada was not the source of the 9-11 terrorists.
"We spoke about it back in March, and we were sharing a chuckle at the fact that the urban myth does circulate," he told CTV's Power Play.
"Ms. Napolitano understood quite clearly, then and now, that none of the September 11 terrorists came through Canada, as the 9-11 Commission found."
Still, that positive outlook wasn't shared by other Canadian officials.
On Tuesday afternoon, RCMP Commissioner William Elliot expressed frustration with the comments during an interview on CTV's Power Play.
"I was somewhat surprised and disappointed," he said, adding he hopes the misconception has been cleared up.
"I understand and am happy to hear that she has issued a statement acknowledging that that didn't happen."
But Thomas d'Aquino, president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, decried Napolitano's comments on Tuesday.
"I am a longstanding friend and ally of the United States, but sometimes failures in our two-way dialogue cause me to shake my head in sadness and dismay," he said in a press release.
"The claim that some of the 9/11 terrorists entered the United States from Canada is, quite simply, a myth - an urban legend that began with a handful of erroneous media reports in the days following the terrorist strikes."
With files from The Canadian Press
Sunday, April 19, 2009
$1 and $2 coins coming to America from Canada
The email below is a response to an email about the coming of $1 and $2 coins in America:
Matthew,
Canada already has one and two dollar coins.
The reason is debasement of the currency there. As the government printed more and more money years ago, it took more and more nickels and quarters to pay the vending machines!
The emergence of these coins in America signals coming hyper-inflation here. It is the result of the criminal printing of money to offset the economic terrorism of the American Wall Street Banksters and their crime family allies in Washington, D.C.
At last, twenty years ago, "the lights went on" in Canada, and its government stopped printing money, got out of debt, balanced its books, and stabilized its currency. In contrast, the "lights went out" in America with Reagan's "revolution" that hass rationalized deficits and public looting.
The result is a rising value for the Canadian dollar against the debased US dollar. This is one reason why it pays to bank in Canada. Your money gains value there against the US dollar!
It also means the government-funded pension and medicare systems in Canada are solvent, unlike the situation in the USA. In contrast, Americans are losing pensions and healthcare.
Meanwhile, the American vending machine operators are taking their cue from their Canadian counter-parts. They are making sure the coinage of the realm keeps up with hyper-inflation.
Matthew,
Canada already has one and two dollar coins.
The reason is debasement of the currency there. As the government printed more and more money years ago, it took more and more nickels and quarters to pay the vending machines!
The emergence of these coins in America signals coming hyper-inflation here. It is the result of the criminal printing of money to offset the economic terrorism of the American Wall Street Banksters and their crime family allies in Washington, D.C.
At last, twenty years ago, "the lights went on" in Canada, and its government stopped printing money, got out of debt, balanced its books, and stabilized its currency. In contrast, the "lights went out" in America with Reagan's "revolution" that hass rationalized deficits and public looting.
The result is a rising value for the Canadian dollar against the debased US dollar. This is one reason why it pays to bank in Canada. Your money gains value there against the US dollar!
It also means the government-funded pension and medicare systems in Canada are solvent, unlike the situation in the USA. In contrast, Americans are losing pensions and healthcare.
Meanwhile, the American vending machine operators are taking their cue from their Canadian counter-parts. They are making sure the coinage of the realm keeps up with hyper-inflation.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Canada will sell oil to China, not the USA.
Read the following news item from my good friend Tom Jackson.
To me it says Canada will need to find new markets for its energy supplies.
This in effect means Canada will sell its oil to China, which will contribute to the overall orientation of Canada's economy away from the USA, a Titanic, ready to sink, to the rising economy of Asia - and the world for that matter.
Comments are welcome - as always.
From: Tom.Jackson@legis.wisconsin.gov to: paulrux@paulrux.net
Council of State Governments - Midwest http://www.csgmidwest.org
Dec 2008
Midwest - Canada Relations: Future of energy trade uncertain
Every year, tens of billions of dollars in energy supplies flow from Canada to the 11 Midwestern states.
This cross-border trading partnership has not only gone a long way toward meeting the region’s energy needs, it also has helped fuel the economy — on both sides of the border.
But what does the future hold for this energy relationship, and for the broader one between Canada and the United States?
That question has been on the minds of Canadian leaders lately, particularly with a new U.S. president expected to make significant changes in energy policy.
In November, The Globe and Mail reports, federal ministers in Canada announced plans to seek a joint climate-change agreement between the countries, one that, in part, would seek to address environmental concerns about Canada’s oil sands while also protecting the oil sands from any new U.S. emissions rules.
Currently, Canada accounts for 18 percent of U.S. imports of crude oil and petroleum products.
In the Midwest, for example, Illinois imported $16 billion worth of energy supplies in 2007, according to Canadian government data. In that state, like most others in the region, these supplies are mostly crude petroleum or natural gas.
Energy is one of the top three Canadian imports in Illinois (57 percent of total), Indiana (12 percent), Iowa (36 percent), Michigan (7 percent), Minnesota (63 percent), North Dakota (21 percent) and Ohio (8 percent). Energy is one of the top three exports to Canada in Michigan (6 percent of total) and Nebraska (20 percent).
Sources of U.S. petroleum imports (2007)*
Venezuela 10.1%
Canada 18.2%
Mexico 11.4%
Saudi Arabia 11.0%
Nigeria 8.4%
All other countries 40.8
* Petroleum includes crude oil and refined petroleum products. In 2007, imports accounted for 58 percent of U.S. consumption.
To me it says Canada will need to find new markets for its energy supplies.
This in effect means Canada will sell its oil to China, which will contribute to the overall orientation of Canada's economy away from the USA, a Titanic, ready to sink, to the rising economy of Asia - and the world for that matter.
Comments are welcome - as always.
From: Tom.Jackson@legis.wisconsin.gov to: paulrux@paulrux.net
Council of State Governments - Midwest http://www.csgmidwest.org
Dec 2008
Midwest - Canada Relations: Future of energy trade uncertain
Every year, tens of billions of dollars in energy supplies flow from Canada to the 11 Midwestern states.
This cross-border trading partnership has not only gone a long way toward meeting the region’s energy needs, it also has helped fuel the economy — on both sides of the border.
But what does the future hold for this energy relationship, and for the broader one between Canada and the United States?
That question has been on the minds of Canadian leaders lately, particularly with a new U.S. president expected to make significant changes in energy policy.
In November, The Globe and Mail reports, federal ministers in Canada announced plans to seek a joint climate-change agreement between the countries, one that, in part, would seek to address environmental concerns about Canada’s oil sands while also protecting the oil sands from any new U.S. emissions rules.
Currently, Canada accounts for 18 percent of U.S. imports of crude oil and petroleum products.
In the Midwest, for example, Illinois imported $16 billion worth of energy supplies in 2007, according to Canadian government data. In that state, like most others in the region, these supplies are mostly crude petroleum or natural gas.
Energy is one of the top three Canadian imports in Illinois (57 percent of total), Indiana (12 percent), Iowa (36 percent), Michigan (7 percent), Minnesota (63 percent), North Dakota (21 percent) and Ohio (8 percent). Energy is one of the top three exports to Canada in Michigan (6 percent of total) and Nebraska (20 percent).
Sources of U.S. petroleum imports (2007)*
Venezuela 10.1%
Canada 18.2%
Mexico 11.4%
Saudi Arabia 11.0%
Nigeria 8.4%
All other countries 40.8
* Petroleum includes crude oil and refined petroleum products. In 2007, imports accounted for 58 percent of U.S. consumption.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)