Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, it's a very interesting perception. There were discussions on how to restructure Canada in a satisfactory way for all its constituent groups, the Meech Lake Agreement for example, but such talks always failed for one reason or the other. Maybe that's because it just isn't possible to find an adequate compromise position. But it's not because "Canada" has always given "Quebec" what they asked for just to have the goal posts moved in front of them. That's patently false.
Not just false. It's a lie that apparently they tell like a fact in anglophone Canada. You need knowledge of both languages to understand.
Not just false. It's a lie that apparently they tell like a fact in anglophone Canada. You need knowledge of both languages to understand.
I see Canada not bowing to every silly demand as a plus. The worst thing we can do is destroy the entire country just to MAYBE placate Quebec's ethnonationalism. If we have to choose between Quebec and the ROC I choose saving the ROC.
I see Canada not bowing to every silly demand as a plus. The worst thing we can do is destroy the entire country just to MAYBE placate Quebec's ethnonationalism. If we have to choose between Quebec and the ROC I choose saving the ROC.
Can you please provide one example of a "silly demand" made by the Quebec government?
GDP (PPP) per capita in Mississippi is 25,044. In Quebec it is $26,376. Quebec's GDP (PPP) per capita is lower than every American state except for Mississippi, and lower than every Canadian provinces except for New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and PEI. The GDP (PPP) per capita of several states and Alberta isn't just higher than Quebec, it is about double that of Quebec. Quebec isn't even in the top quintile of OECD regions, while just about every American state and more than half of Canada's provinces are in it.
I don't know how many times I've written it on this forum, but you cannot apply a country-wide PPP adjustment to meaningfully compare regions. Mostly because of housing, the cost of living in Quebec is lower than in the rest of Canada, so its 'true' discount from raw to PPP is smaller than appears in the OECD list. By how much, who knows.
I don't know how many times I've written it on this forum, but you cannot apply a country-wide PPP adjustment to meaningfully compare regions. Mostly because of housing, the cost of living in Quebec is lower than in the rest of Canada, so its 'true' discount from raw to PPP is smaller than appears in the OECD list. By how much, who knows.
Not only that, but a PPP comparison of a place like Quebec (which has subsidised Universities, universal health care, etc) to a place like Mississippi (which has none of that) doesn't take into account the differences in what a typical person has to spend money on in Quebec vs. Mississippi, or any other state or province in the US or Canada.
I don't know how many times I've written it on this forum, but you cannot apply a country-wide PPP adjustment to meaningfully compare regions. Mostly because of housing, the cost of living in Quebec is lower than in the rest of Canada, so its 'true' discount from raw to PPP is smaller than appears in the OECD list. By how much, who knows.
If you read the links, the OECD compares Quebec as a distinct region of Canada, to Mississippi to an individual state of the US. It is not Canada compared to Mississippi.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lexdiamondz1902
Not only that, but a PPP comparison of a place like Quebec (which has subsidised Universities, universal health care, etc) to a place like Mississippi (which has none of that) doesn't take into account the differences in what a typical person has to spend money on in Quebec vs. Mississippi, or any other state or province in the US or Canada.
It also doesn't take into account Quebec's tax-rate (easily the heaviest taxation in North America). UT did a pretty interesting study on this a while back. The conclusion? That for many if not most of the population, social welfare is more of an illusion than a reality, and for large segment, being forced to pay for social programs is be a financial burden, and this includes the poor.
If you read the links, the OECD compares Quebec as a distinct region of Canada, to Mississippi to an individual state of the US. It is not Canada compared to Mississippi.
It also doesn't take into account Quebec's tax-rate (easily the heaviest taxation in North America). UT did a pretty interesting study on this a while back. The conclusion? That for many if not most of the population, social welfare is more of an illusion than a reality, and for large segment, being forced to pay for social programs is be a financial burden, and this includes the poor.
That's something that scares me about Quebec. When presented with solid evidence that they are the poorest industrialized region on the continent, they sidestep it with a load of excuses instead of ideas on how to fix it. Until they take responsibility for their economy, they will only get poorer and poorer (like they are) regardless of if they are independent or part of Canada.
If you read the links, the OECD compares Quebec as a distinct region of Canada, to Mississippi to an individual state of the US. It is not Canada compared to Mississippi.
It also doesn't take into account Quebec's tax-rate (easily the heaviest taxation in North America). UT did a pretty interesting study on this a while back. The conclusion? That for many if not most of the population, social welfare is more of an illusion than a reality, and for large segment, being forced to pay for social programs is be a financial burden, and this includes the poor.
Don't bother, most Quebec nationalists actually believe Quebec is the most progressive place in North America. It is without competition the most backwards part. It's hard for ROCanadians and Americans to understand just how backwards Quebec really is, because they spend most of their time in west Montreal and in touristy areas of Quebec City.
Don't bother, most Quebec nationalists actually believe Quebec is the most progressive place in North America. It is without competition the most backwards part. It's hard for ROCanadians and Americans to understand just how backwards Quebec really is, because they spend most of their time in west Montreal and in touristy areas of Quebec City.
I do not see Quebec as so backwards. Perhaps the richest but we strive to tolerate everyone. I see Quebec being more advanced than Ontario.
I do not see Quebec as so backwards. Perhaps the richest but we strive to tolerate everyone. I see Quebec being more advanced than Ontario.
Quebec the richest? More like the poorest and getting poorer fast. There is no way Quebec is more advanced than Ontario.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
