Update timeline on North American Union (NAU)

[serryjw]

quote.....
This plan goes by various names and euphemisms, such as "deep integration", "NAFTA-plus", "harmonization", the "Big Idea", the "Grand Bargain", and the "North American Security and Prosperity Initiative". Regardless of which name your prefer, the end goal of all of these plans is to create a new political and economic entity named the North American Union (NAU) that would supercede the existing countries. Theoretically, it would be similar to and competetive with the European Union (EU). The individual currencies of each country would be replaced by a common currency called the "Amero" and everything from environmental regulations to security would be brought in line with a common standard.


end quote.......
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=5493&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

[Greyhound]

1. Here it is again, hiding in plain sight.

Want to take any bets that this thread sinks into obscurity? I mean, after all it isn't about anything that might directly effect any of us, just the dissolution of our respective countries in favor of global corporatism. :eyes:

[applegrove]

2. I know. It is so scary I hide from it as topics go. Though one dollar

ain't so bad for us Cannucks..since Alberta will be petrol centre in another 20 years and our dollar will be so high all other good jobs & expertise will fail unless we tie our currency to yours.

Environmental standards? Supercede?
I think it will turn out like NAFTA. That is what "supercede" means. Where when the US government doesn't like a ruling..they just ignore it. But hold us to all trade rules that benefit them. We've seen * in action.

Fortunately..I don't think Harper will be re-elected. So that leaves either Bob Rae (aka Norma Bob Rae at one time) or Ignatieff (of the Human Rights Centre at Harvard) as the PMs at the time.

[Greyhound]

4. It's not even the governments, it gives corporations superior status

to (supposedly) sovereign nations.

[applegrove]

5. Count me out of that. I didn't get that from scanning briefly. That's the

Chapter 11 thing from NAFTA on steroids? Where is a link?

[serryjw]

3. Sorry, I won't take this bet

I have posted this way to many times and no one pays attention. Thanks for responding.

[Cerridwen]

6. Should I take a guess at whose environmental

regulations will most influence the "common standard"?

Considering the unpopularity of the Bush administration and its policies in the U.S., Canada, and around the world we believe that erasing the borders between our countries and adopting U.S. policies at this time is a bad idea and will create economic, political and military insecurity in this country.

And may I just say, "adopting U.S. policies" at any time is a bad idea. We don't have a bright, shiny record throughout our history, in spite of what many people may think.

[nealmhughes]

7. I'm unsure. I have no problems with Canada at all, and I don't think they

would over an Americo -- we could put Mackenzie King on a fiver and Jefferson gets to stay on the two. Liz Glucksburg on a C-note, perhaps? Or get really Euro and put Truman Capote on a $Am 1000, Mordecai Richler on a c-note and Neil Young on a fiver, alternating with Robby Robertson and Levon Helm?

I do not want Mexico in -- not right now. Mexico has to rectify its socio-economic position and even more, its politics. No problem with Costa Rica and Bahamas or Cuba eventually.

Screw the corporations, this needs to be an EU thing or nothing at all. It also means that the US will have to go metric: currently we have no problems with the liter, as one merely multiplis by 3.785 -- 4 for fast math to get gallons and we know what 1.5 L and 750 ML of hooch are and 2 L of soda...

But can we divide 2.2 to get kilos into pounds? That is the burning question, can we divide?!

[serryjw]

8. You want to give up US sovereignty to

Costa Rica?

[nealmhughes]

9. Not at all, I want to give over no sovreignity to noone.

An economic union with CR and Canada the Bahamas and the US, though, I could support. They have to import most of their goods now, and they are a stable democratic country with a great human rights record.

I hate NAFTA and CAFTA, it is corporate kowtowing at its worst.

[serryjw]

10. Any 'economic union'

will mean cheap labor for the US corpotocracy