The former editor of the Vancouver Sun and the Ottawa Citizen, economist and G&B columnist Neil Reynolds is apparently also a complete dolt.
He first correctly notes a 'strange bedfellows' irony : public debate on the SPP and deep integration is a leftie concern about STAR WARS-driven, resources-hoovering, multinational corporate takeovers up here in Canada; while in the US the xenophobic racist rightwing sees it more in terms of brown people taking over their jobs and fucking their women while Canadians socialize their medicine.
Well, no surprises there.
And as Reynolds says :
"There is a cross-border risk here for Canada's histrionic left: You will be known by the company you keep."But after that it all "goes south", so to speak :
"In a rational world, the "NAFTA super highway" from Canada to Mexico might - based on cost-benefit analysis - be a good thing."
OK, if by "rational world", you mean one not dominated by multinational corporations, imperialistic Bushcos, quisling CCCE CEO's and their sockpuppet politicians, well then yes, I can imagine that rational world actually.
"A common currency (called the "amero" by the conspiracy clans) might be a good thing."
Just a quick note here, Neil. The term "amero" was coined by Alliance MP Herb Grubal for the Fraser Institute in a 1999 paper entitled, "The Case For the Amero : The Economics and Politics of a North American Monetary Union", but carry on :
"A common perimeter might be a good thing. Greater economic integration might be a good thing, too."Ummm, really starting to lose here, Neil. See, I generally think of "good thing" as meaning good for people, good for the environment, good for the soul, that sort of thing.
"Indeed, they would all be good things. But the convergence of far right populism and far left populism has put a silencer on public debate - even as it has fired off a double-barrelled political shot that will ricochet erratically around the continent for years to come with risk of serious injury to three countries that wanted merely to co-operate."Oh, I see - it's our fault newspapers are so silent on this, and if we'd all just shut up about it, everything could go according to plan.
Well, you know what, Neil?
On that last point, I think I agree with you.
Obviously a lot more noise is called for up here on our part.
But thanks for explaining your silence.
7 comments:
Is there any point even addressing Neil Reynolds? I mean, everyone realizes he's just a wingnut, right?
In a column just prior to the one you describe, he was falling for a long -debunked, obviously rigged 'study' which 'showed' that driving an SUV was better for the environment than driving a hybrid vehicle.
His column on why the Canadian and U.S. dollars should have the same value from a bit further back was even further out of touch with reality.
I think his primary purpose in the ROB is to provide comic relief, sort of like a Mark Steyn for business readers (the rest of the ROB columnists are generally pretty good), although it might be helpful of the Globe put some kind of notice to alert readers unfamiliar with his body of work that they shouldn't be taking what they read from him too seriously.
I am beginning to think that Liberals have a more educated mind.
Declan : So you're saying I shouldn't bother with him because he is a buffoon? I disagree.
If the G&M was covering this issue with any credibility at all I would agree with you but they aren't. So far their coverage AFAICS consists of this piece from Reynolds and
this one from Ibbitson back in July which does basically the same thing : mention Maude Barlow and the John Birch Society in the same sentence.
I smell framing.
Alison is right. It's a frame-up,
similar to the "Hitler was a vegetarian too" argument
No, no, I was just taking the opportunity to belittle Reynolds.
By all means, continue to do the same. When someone has been given a megaphone and credibility by the 2nd biggest paper in the country, ignoring them isn't really a good option.
Sorry, Declan, forgive temporary misplacement of humour chip.
This shit just gets me so riled...
Thing is - were it not for the big megaphone you mention, it should normally be ridiculous to bother debunking his asshattery.
Yup, you're right A.
And the more those with the chapeaus strapped onto their gluteals get it wrong, the more time and space they get for next time.
It really is infuriating.
Most importantly, it is also why they have to be taken to task over and over and over again.
Everytime.
Thanks.
_____
btw.....looks like there are more than a few hard-headed 'analysts' who are a little worried about the stability of a little bank named < Macquarie....
Which, of course, owns the MIG.
.
Post a Comment