Atlantica good for wages?

I am working on a project for a client and as a result have been reading that recent study on NAFTA and trade integration with the U.S.

Before you read this finding from the study, remember that the anti-Atlantica crown are deeply concerned that integration will dessimate wages, working conditions and labour standards.

Over the 1988 to 1999 period, increased trade integration was associated with real wage gains for manufacturing workers of 12.0% for Ontario, but only 1.0% for Quebec, 0.8% for Western Canada, and 0.4% in Atlantic Canada.

Now, anti-Atlantica Maude Barlow types will say that Statistics Canada has been poisoned by the American capitalist pigs.

Or maybe, they prefer to have Atlantic Canada in the economic crapper so they can have a whipping boy.

Bottom line?

If Atlantic Canada had better trade integration with the US (and no that doesn’t equate to cultural or political integration), we may have benefitted more.

Vive Atlantica.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Atlantica good for wages?

  1. MonctonLandlord says:

    Ask an economist…

    Well, reading your last blog on a statscan report, I attempted to answer a question that perodically jumps at me:

    What aren’t we raising more cattle in NB to sell to the USA? (The real question: Why can’t we have as many cattle exports as Alberta?)

    Here is some data from statscan, maybe the answer is there…

    Provincial farm cash receipts
    January to June 2006

    ($ millions)

    Canada
    17,996

    Newfoundland and Labrador
    43

    Prince Edward Island
    208

    Nova Scotia
    225

    New Brunswick
    230

    Quebec
    3150

    Ontario
    4230

    Manitoba
    1770

    Saskatchewan
    3083

    Alberta
    3889

    British Columbia
    1168

    Farm cash receipts measures the gross revenue of farm businesses in current dollars. They include sales of crops and livestock products (except sales between farms in the same province) and program payments. Receipts are recorded when the money is paid to farmers before any expenses are paid.

    Source:
    http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060824/d060824b.htm

  2. scott says:

    Good point lanlord. But if you look at the last decade, make that well over the last decade, the Liberal government never had the best interest of the farmers, nor rural Canada in mind. They even went as far as to snub Alberta in the 2000 election without thinking of the consequences. Chretien mused out east in St. John’s that Eastern politicians are better than those from Alberta, that both Clark and Day, who he was running against at the time, are from Alberta and are different. That remark and the fallout from the region definitely effected future policy decisions of the federal government of the day.

    As for the reform/Alliance/CPC, they did represent the farmers main concerns out west and, in turn, the Liberal policies were adjusted accordingly. Well, with the exception of the red mud and red political potatoes on the island. lol

    There is no question that regardless of the numbers, the political balkanization of this country and the manner in which policy follows is detrimental to the overall well being of the country. I think David touched on it with regards to the demonization, by Manley, of the eastern provinces pertaining to equalization and then doing an about face and throwing Millions into the Ontarion auto industry. Those kind of politics not only affect the bottom line, they rip at the fabric of this nation in which they pull the provinces further and further apart. In other words, we are more a federation of provinces than a strong political nation state. If we were the latter, then better decisions would be made out here to benefit all Canadians, especially our longterm economic health.