Before we investigate both sides of this intriguing suggestion, it is said that it deserves serious consideration, and not just because the president-elect of the United States suggested it. It also deserves our access to our own property. That more than 3000 miles boundary between the two countries is not dedicated by the man above; It is an artificial, human, building that can be deconstructed. It requires more than purely laughter that too many neighborhoods has come.
What is the yes side of this? Canadians would win economically. There would be no fickle rates for the export of goods to the south, as threatened by President Trump. Neither would there be such barriers to act, such as now. (I once thought NAFTA was set up to achieve this element of the philosophy of free trade, but that was not worked out …) There would be zero such legal commercial obstacles between the US state of Canada and the 50 other political areas of jurisdiction, in the same way, For example, such as, for example, Iowa and all other forty -nine. This would improve the specialization and division of work, Adam Smith style and immeasurable Canadian prosperity. The current United States would also win in this respect, but less, because they already have a gigantic internal free trade area (one of the important sources of great wealth in this country). On the other hand, there are economic illiterates who want to set up and maintain internal Rates in Canada.
Others who would win are the American Democratic Party. Canada is much more awake, socialist and egalitarian than the United States. Adding this country to the American collection of states would be related to counting another California. The Democratic Party has long wanted to grant the US state to Washington DC and Puerto Rico to improve their voting totals. Why Cavil in Canada?
Who would lose? It is clear that the American Republican Party. Does the president not realize that he will open the box of a Pandora with this suggestion of him? The president specifically placed every military attempt to swallow Canada. But he endangered economic sanctions. If a rate of 25% did not bring this northern country to its economic knees, one of 100% would probably do that. Certainly, a total ban in trade with the US would greatly reduce Canadian economic prosperity.
So, should Canada close a different kind of deal with the United States, if something like this threat ever comes by? An offer would be to enter the country to the south, not as one, but as eleven: every province, plus the North West Territories, the Yukon and Nunavut combined into one. The argument against this last idea is that the latter three have hardly any people, even all together. Well, Wyoming is also not overcrowded. The case against the first is that Prince Edward Island is so small and hardly earns the honor of the state. But Rhode Island is also not a giant. Furthermore, the Canadian population is about one tenth that of the US. Because the latter has 50 states, Canada has to join the Union, not as a single state, but as a compromise, as five of them.
There is another reason to resist this fusion. Sometimes we can see the true effect of the complicated situation by expanding it. If Canada came to the United States, there would be a country less on earth. Let’s extrapolate. Suppose Amalgamation became the order of the day. After the United States had imposed Canada, it would continue with Mexico and Central America. China would definitely swallow Taiwan. Continue, each of South America, Europe, Asia and Africa would each become one country. There would now be five countries, one per continent. Does anyone remember a novel with something like that, only three nations? Yes, in Orwell’s Ninetien Eighty-four, the world is divided into three super states: Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia. Do we really want to go in this direction?
Let’s go one step further: world government. If this entity were performed democratically, the world would assume the political economy of China and India or, perhaps even worse, the United Nations (God forbid: Israel has been charged as much as possible for various crimes as all other nations together as much as possible !). As a Jew I wouldn’t like this. My people are constantly being chased from one country after the other. With a One World Government there would be no place to run. Mars is not yet open to the scheme.
No, the optimum number of provinces is not one, nor three nor five, nor, even, the current number of them, 195. If there is something, we have to move in the opposite direction, more of them, no less. We have to encourage Alberta and Quebec to separate from Canada (for very different reasons); The Basques from Spain; Greenland from Denmark; I dare to say it, the south from the north (well, at least the coasts from the central part of the United States).
Well, maybe better to leave all this alone. Here is slowness, Mr. President.
It is clear that Canada will not accept such a deal. But Waitasec. Why are so aloof? Why don’t you demonstrate the much praised Canadian welcome mat? This country should offer the American provincial status! “Province for the United States” should be the motto for this new initiative.
Walter E. Block is Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics at Loyola University New Orleans.