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.
Guess we will see how this repeat pushback works out. Claiming subsidies hasn't ever been a FACT proven for over 200 years... what make one think anything has changed? Yes, Canada is far more into conservation than the US is, so take very seriously cutting down our Forests. The Forests can't be arbitrarily cleared as the Government owns most of them and decides just how much can be cut down.
I would dispute that. The Canadian government has no problem flooding those forests regardless of the damage to the fish and the impact on the native peoples to produce electricity for the cities. That isn't conservation.
And I would dispute your other claims that the U.S. is "depleting" our timber resources. Our commercial timberlands are capable of producing timber infinitely into the future. Canada's forests are far more boreal and have less diversity of species and lower quantities of high quality timber (i.e., eastern white pine, red pine, and hardwoods like sugar maple, hickory, oak, walnut, etc.). We have a lot more people than Canada but they are still largely confined to a handful of dense urban areas. We have a lot of wild and undeveloped land.
Depends. Does Trump have facts on his side on this. Just because Trump does something, doesn't mean it's wrong.
As a Forester that worked in the states and attended grad school in Canada....Trump is right.
The Canadian governments (BC in this case since they are the prime exporters of Canadian wood) do NOT make a distinction between the government and Canadian corporations.
In British Columbia, the government literally gives away government timber to the timber corporations. In the United States timber is sold at auction by the Federal, state and local governments and private firms. The environmental regulations are very lax in Canada....not sure if Trump raised that issue under NAFTA.
In fairness to the Canadians....they do NOT see a problem with giving away government resources to the private sector. So they do not view as a unfair trade practice. It is the way they manage their public lands.
I would dispute that. The Canadian government has no problem flooding those forests regardless of the damage to the fish and the impact on the native peoples to produce electricity for the cities. That isn't conservation.
And I would dispute your other claims that the U.S. is "depleting" our timber resources. Our commercial timberlands are capable of producing timber infinitely into the future. Canada's forests are far more boreal and have less diversity of species and lower quantities of high quality timber (i.e., eastern white pine, red pine, and hardwoods like sugar maple, hickory, oak, walnut, etc.). We have a lot more people than Canada but they are still largely confined to a handful of dense urban areas. We have a lot of wild and undeveloped land.
Okay then, but (I do think you have very little understanding how Canadian Government and economy works) IF USA had such an abundance of Forestry products.. Why have they been purchasing our Soft wood products for hundreds of years???
BTW~~ CDN funds are about 25% average lower than American USD. Could it be that Canadian charge for product is already 25% less than American product? That should be a boon for the construction industry.. But slap on 20% tariff... will only affected the consumer. Let the consumer decide. Personally, it doesn't affect me.. but the constant challenges to allies is becoming tiresome and speaks volumes!!!
Yell, bullying and blaming allies will reap it's own rewards in the end. Pleasing his base ( Trump) will backfire sooner rather than later when the going gets tough.
Lol. yes basic economics...in theory. Not in reality.
Ok honey our new house will be $220,000. We're prepared for that. Oh wait now it might be $223,000? Never!!!!!
Actually happens all the time. But in economic terms it is a question of how elastic the market is. In a highly elastic market it can make a big difference. In an inelastic market little.
But it pretty much always makes a difference.
And when you are a first time home buyer and the $3,000 pushes the house over your limit you don't buy it...simple as that.
Now as your post has make it clear you don't understand this stuff why don't you simply stop replying.
Lyndarn, as a professional Forester for 40 years and having attended graduate school in British Columbia. Trust me, Canadian forestry practices are DISMAL.....they are also most likely NOT SUSTAINABLE.
My quote after seeing Canadian forestry practices and this was in the 1970's......."why are they using their number one industry Forestry to destroy their number two industry fisheries?" The British Columbia forestry practices have not improved over the years. I just traveled across British Columbia last summer....why do the Canadian people tolerate the destruction of THEIR land!! It is public land!!!
I left. No way could I work for a country with such a lack of environmental ethics.
BTW....my observations are limited to British Columbia forestry practices and to a lesser extent Alberta. I have no knowledge of Canadian forestry practices in hardwood forests.
The Canadians will still supply the lumber, but going forward, the US government will take a much bigger piece of the action. All of a sudden Republicans think funneling our money to the government is a great idea.
Actually they do. Everyone has a point where they wont spend money to build, and this shifts that point. It really is basic economics..
Not anymore. The trend today has turned away from the McMansions. Fewer materials used in a new home always brings down the price.
In a tiny house, the difference in cost between US and Canadian lumber is next to nothing, and the home of tomorrow is looking a lot more like the past, when an 800 sq.ft. home was the norm. That's the big trend.
Not anymore. The trend today has turned away from the McMansions. Fewer materials used in a new home always brings down the price.
In a tiny house, the difference in cost between US and Canadian lumber is next to nothing, and the home of tomorrow is looking a lot more like the past, when an 800 sq.ft. home was the norm. That's the big trend.
Average house size has not dropped that I have seen.
Got any link to indicate it has?
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.
Just not worthy of a response....just nonsense.
