I agree with the sentiment on Gulf of Americas. But I think the singular (and referring to land of both continents) makes more sense. Firstly because it rolls off the tongue better. Secondly because the existence of the 'North America' and 'South America' both imply that those lands are parts of a larger body of land called America. North America being the Northern half of America. While South America presides in the Southern half.
'America' being the United States is only reinforced by the fact that the United States is the most significant nation in global politics East of the Pacific and West of the Atlantic.
Good on OP for seeking challenges to their existing view points and being open to changing them upon compelling enough thoughts. In a genuine way no less.
Off the top of my head the only European food product I consistently buy is Kerrygold butter. But I could use a domestic version. Other than that I'll on rare occasion buy a wine that'll be from Italy or France rather than a domestic.
The only international foods that really make up any significant part of my grocery list are fruits from the tropics.
Don't buy land with an easement you don't want on it. You can tell the seller to talk to the company and have them negotiate the removal of the easement as a condition of sale. They might be willing to buy back the mineral rights.
But barring that if this is a non-negotiable for you don't buy it.
Of the 14% of Americas imports that are from Canada under half are in energy or transport fabrication. The energy hits are much quicker to fix by importing more fuel from other nations.
I agree that the US auto sector hit will be harder but as for energy high enough tariffs will lead to a complete rejection of Canadian energy imports for US companies. This will be a loss for the US. But it will hurt Canada more. Tariffs are a zero sum game. The only way to win is to get everyone to agree to not play.
Canada is not going to damage the American. 74.5% of Canadian exports and 56.2% of imports are with the US. On the other hand Canada makes up 14% of US imports and 15.8% of exports.
If any plan killed the American economy every one else is going down too.
This is incredibly stupid as an economic counter plan for a nation whose number one import and export (>50% respectively) is the US. Compare that to the US's highly diversified trade portfolio. Trump would clap back with a 100% general tariff on Canada.
American trade can survive without Canada. But Canadian trade can't survive without America.
Your question asks more about the person answering than any country. What is and isn't a human right is debated matter many agreed upon but others are seen as archaic or political posturing. Are we talking positive and negative rights? Freedom of Contract? Right to Healthcare? A right to jury trials in civil cases? A right to selfdefense? The right to speak freely even unsavory words?
Then you'd have to weigh one right against another. Finally you'd have to figure out if those rights are simply paper promises.
The difference is that it'd allow the attribution of negligence which could be used for geopolitical gain.
E.g. "Government X's bad management of COVID wouldn't have been an issue if China wasn't leaking deadly diseases out of research institutions. So Government X deserves compensation for the harm China caused to the people of Government X. So X will institute trade sanctions of China."
It depends. Look at the usage license for the font you'd like to reproduce. It may be published with a very liberal license that allows reproduction. You can always ask for permission.
Realistically if we accept the idea of Canada joining the US they'd likely join as their current provinces (then states).
This would allow Canadians to have a voice in US elections which currently have large political implications for the nation.
I don't see Quebec joining the US. Current Canadian law grants them protections the US wouldn't be willing to match. They'd likely become independent.
Despite Canadian identity being based on not being Americans there are large cultural similarities (given English structural roots).
If it were to occur Canada would likely get some consideration like the preservation of their healthcare system (a point of national pride) and a period for other states to join in on it.
The US would be more blue politically but I would expect catering to northern provinces given they'd have disproportionately high representation.
FireTower @ FireTower @lemmy.world Posts 41Comments 1,262Joined 2 yr. ago
I agree with the sentiment on Gulf of Americas. But I think the singular (and referring to land of both continents) makes more sense. Firstly because it rolls off the tongue better. Secondly because the existence of the 'North America' and 'South America' both imply that those lands are parts of a larger body of land called America. North America being the Northern half of America. While South America presides in the Southern half.
'America' being the United States is only reinforced by the fact that the United States is the most significant nation in global politics East of the Pacific and West of the Atlantic.