What would be the downsides to a US-Canada trade/travel union similar to the EU? We wouldn’t need a currency union, nor would we need to merge health care systems, as is demonstrated by various circumstances within the EU (UK still has the pound, countries still use their own health care systems).
I can think of very significant upsides – chiefly easier commerce and tourism between the two countries and broader opportunities for job matching for both employers and workers.
What would be the downsides? I’m sure there are some, but they aren’t readily apparent to me.
I think the big one would be immigration. Open borders between Canada and the US means that immigration laws in all areas will default to the least common denominator. Given that the US can’t even agree with itself as to how to handle immigration, I doubt that it will be able to easily find a policy that satisfies both the US and Canada.
It might be a good idea but the politically-over-represented paranoid xenophobes in the US would block it and Canadians are not likely to want tighter integration with the US for a while.
Canada, the EU, Australia and New Zealand, on the other hand, might be good. The US can join when it’s done throwing its tantrum.
While that is potentially useful, the upsides are maybe one twentieth as appealing. Indeed, the benefits of less red tape and nonsense on the US/Canada border are sufficiently worthwhile that it would NOT be worth having open borders with anyone else if it made it hard to have open borders with the USA.
Obviously this cannot happen while Trump is polluting the White House.
But are there countries in the EU free travel system that don’t have a form of UHC? Because that would be a huge incentive to travel to Canada for those with no health care.
Also, if it would mean open borders, there would be the problem of gun smuggling into Canada.
For the US, it might mean housing in otherwise cheap places near the border might become more expensive, as some people might buy second homes or decide to commute from the US as the housing is so expensive there. The rest of the country would probably not be affected as much as the population of Canada is so relatively low.
However, overall, I would neither support nor oppose this, especially as it would not be a political union of any sort. I’d support a complete political union because it would shift America into UHC and other sane policies, but would oppose a halfway political union such as the EU because it would have the downsides of giving up some of your sovereignty but not the upsides of harmonizing your crappy policies with the policies of your neighbors that work.
If I understand correctly, EU countries still have health ID cards and things like that – ensuring the Canadian system had a robust ID card system should eliminate this concern.
This could absolutely be a significant problem that I didn’t think of.
I don’t see very many actual downsides, but I do see certain factions in both countries opposing it. Those in the US currently in the grip of xenophobic paranoia might fear losing control of border security, imagining Canada being used to funnel Mexicans and the usual other fearsome boogeymen into the US. Some Canadians might fear losing more cultural autonomy since such a union would likely include freer exchanges of movies and TV, perhaps even common broadcast rights, and the undermining of Canadian content rules on TV. Another fear – and perhaps a legitimate one – might be over the potentially easier entry of US guns into Canada.
Personally I’d probably be very much in favor of it, depending of course on the details.
Sort of; there’s what’s called anEHIC, which is free to most EU citizens, but it’s not always considered necessary. Some places will require a photo ID as well, others might just not ask at all, depending on the treatment and place. The basic idea is that all bearers are entitled to medically necessary treatment during their stay in all EU countries, under the same terms as citizens of that country.
The UK in theory allows NHS access to all tax-paying residents, and emergency treatment to all. We have no card, and for emergency treatment, they just ask for a name and address. There’s currently a rather stupid attempt to tighten up on this, which by all accounts is costing far more to administer than it’s saving on fraud, while missing the biggest fraud source (non-resident citizens who ‘come home’ for free treatment), and harassing legal immigrants.
I will note that as well as (at time of posting) membership of this scheme, the UK also has reciprocal agreements with some other countries, including Australia and New Zealand with a passport being the only required evidence.
In addition to the Guns&Healthcare problems, we also have the recent legalization of marijuana here in Canada. The US has already made noise about banning people who have bought legal weed in Canada, or who have invested in weed businesses, from entering the US. I can’t imagine they’d be keen to adopt an open border so long as pot stays legal in Canada.
That may well be a factor, but both countries already make it illegal to transport weed across the border. As for “so long as pot stays legal in Canada”, if one is anticipating change, it might be more reasonable to say that all kinds of problems will persist – including crazy domestic state-federal inconsistencies – so long as the US federal government irrationally classifies it as a Schedule I narcotic, deemed exactly the same as heroin.
The US border attitude to participants in legal pot in Canada seems to be all over the map and is best described as chaotic and schizophrenic. At one point they declared that those involved in the legal cannabis business in Canada would be banned, then changed their minds and said they would be admissible provided they were not traveling on cannabis-related business. Which is all rather odd because, taken at face value, it means that former Prime Minister of Canada Brian Mulroney would be banned from traveling to New York where he is a board member of Acreage Holdings – one of the largest cannabis companies in the US – along with fellow board members John Boehner and former Massachusetts governor William Weld, neither of whom, to the best of my knowledge, are dangerous drug addicts.
This isn’t how the health insurance system works. You don’t just walk in and see a doctor for free; you have to have a health card that shows you’re a resident of the country (well, it’s specific to a province, but other provinces honor them) and entitled to health care.
The downsides that come with some of these managed trade arrangements are usually in the details. Every interest group lines up begging for this or that carve out. Regulations are “harmonized” meaning they are increased. Basically there are a bunch of anti-capitalists measures thrown in and it’s hard to tell what the net effect will be.
The US should adopt an index-card trade policy. They should unilaterally abolish all impediments and subsidies to trade across borders. There is no grand deal needed despite what Trump and Obama will claim.
There is already a problem with smuggled weapons, the weapons that potentially would arrive after an agreement are people bringing them across openly and probably having them confiscated at some point, if we no longer retain the actual border crossings and simply turn them into weigh stations and truck inspection points.
Not sure which side of the current border your talking about, population drift is going to ebb and flow as people sort out whats best for them, there is nothing magical about Canada that you wont find currently in Minnesota or one of the other northern states.
Sorry, but a political union is not gonna happen. We (Canada) get annexed or we apply to join, we simply dont have the population base to seriously adjust US politics to make a deal possible. Expanding Norad to something more encompassing, doable but nothing political.
We have legal weed in Colorado and a couple of other states and no internal checkpoints. I don’t see how adding Canada would be that different. Plus it isn’t like it is that hard to get anyways or ever was.
Healthcare has been addressed. You only get Canadian healthcare with an ID card.
Guns. I thought that Canada allowed almost all types of guns, it is just that a permit was required to own one. If you find someone possessing a gun without a required permit in Canada, then arrest them. Much like how they do in New Jersey, NYC, and Washington D.C.
Sure, but your Federal government has been causing them headaches too. Why would they agree to a new deal that would increase the prevalence of something they already oppose in their own states?
There’s also much greater limitations on what you can do with guns, particularly handguns. You can own a handgun in Canada, with the proper paperwork, but actually carrying it anywhere outside your home is basically illegal. You can transport directly between home and a gun range and back, but that’s about it. Even people who have permits for work reasons like armored car drivers can’t carry when not on the job.
We also have magazine size limits that would bar lots of the most popular guns in the States. 10 rounds for handguns, 5 for most long guns. You’d have to buy magazines specifically for going to Canada, or modify the current ones to comply.