Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (60081)	6/18/2007 5:05:35 PM
From: goldworldnet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

This is the same guy talking to the Canadian House of Commons. Pastor also wrote the book "Toward a North American Community" in 2001. amazon.com INVITED TESTIMONY OF DR. ROBERT A. PASTOR Goodrich C. White Professor Department of Political Science Emory University Atlanta, Georgia 30322 BEFORE THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE HOUSE OF COMMONS - GOVERNMENT OF CANADA OTTAWA, CANADA FEBRUARY 7, 2002 Excerpt... Is a North American Community Desirable? Feasible? Is any of this feasible? Are North Americans prepared to give up their sovereignty? The term “sovereignty” is one of the most widely used, abused, and least understood in the diplomatic lexicon. Within the last two decades, the three countries have so completely redefined the term that one wonders whether any serious policy-maker could use it to defend any position. In 1980, Canada used sovereignty as a defense to prevent foreign investment in its energy resources, and Mexico used it maintain high tariffs and discourage foreign investment. Within a decade, both countries reversed their policies. In 1990, Mexico defended its sovereignty by rejecting international election observers; four years later, it invited them. Sovereignty, in brief, is not the issue. The question is whether the people of the three countries are ready for a different relationship, and public opinion surveys suggest that the answer is "yes" and, indeed, that the people are way ahead of their leaders. A survey of the attitudes of people in the three countries during the past twenty years demonstrate an extraordinary convergence of values – on personal and family issues as well as public policy. Each nation has very positive feelings about their neighbors. In all three countries, the public's views on NAFTA shifted in the 1990s. There is now modest net support, but a neat consensus: each nation agrees that the others benefited more than they have! The most interesting surveys, however, show that a majority of the public in all three countries is prepared to join a larger North American country if they thought it would improve their standard of living and environment and not threaten their culture. Mexicans and Canadians do not want to be incorporated into the United States, and they are ambivalent about adopting the American dollar, but they are more willing to become part of a single country of North America and of a unified currency, like the “Amero,” proposed by Herbert Grubel. The “Amero” would be equivalent of the American dollar, and the two other currencies would be exchanged at the rate in which they are then traded for the U.S. dollar. In other words, at the outset, the wealth of all three countries would be unchanged, and the power to manage the currency would be roughly proportional to the existing wealth. The three governments’ remain zealous defenders of an aging conception of sovereignty whereas the people seem ready to entertain new approaches. Canada has played a key leadership role in so many issues. I sincerely hope your government will take the lead in defining the path toward a more collaborative relationship. I cannot say that the United States government will respond positively, but I think Mexico would consider such an approach positively, and if the two neighbors of the United States were to make a persuasive case, influential sectors in the United States would encourage the Administration to take them very seriously. Four hundred million people live in our three countries, but few, if any, think of themselves as residents of North America. The three governments have devoted so much effort to defining their differences that the people have not seen what they have in common, or that they share a continent, values, and an agreement. I hope that is the conclusion of your deliberations and that, over time, we will begin to think of ourselves proudly as "North Americans." american.edu * * *