Lion of the Blogosphere

What is Canada doing right?

There’s a chart at Steve Sailer’s blog which shows that Canadian GDP/per capita has shot up during the last fifteen years and Canada is now richer, on a per-capita basis, than the United States.

So it’s worth pondering what Canada is doing right.

It should be noted that Canada has nationalized healthcare, and that taxes at all levels of government are 38.4% of GDP compared to 28.2% in the United States, with Canada having much higher levels of tax on the rich (according to Wikipedia).

Thus we see that the Republican prescription to boost the economy, which is to repeal Obamacare and lower taxes on the rich, is not the right prescription if we want to reverse the trends and pull ahead of Canada. Now, I’m not saying that Canada is successful because of higher taxes and nationalized healthcare, but rather these factors are unimportant compared to more important factors.

Canada, however, does not have a budget deficit. Maybe this demonstrates that it’s better for the economy to raise taxes in order to balance the budget?

Canada has had massive immigration during the last two decades, much like the United States, and now 20% of Canadians are foreign born. But the demographics of Canadian immigration is a lot different. The majority of Canadian immigrants are Asian. And the second biggest category of Canadian immigrants are white people from the United States and Europe. It should also be noted that Canada is only 3% black, and two-thirds of Canadian blacks are from the Caribbean, and in the United States Caribbean blacks tend to be harder working and more pleasant than blacks descended from American slaves. And Canada never had slavery, so they don’t have the same white guilt about slavery that we do here in the United States.

Canada has the same amount of land as the United States, slightly more actually, but a lot of it is barren tundra so useable land is less. But nevertheless, with a population of only 35 million, Canada is a lot less densely populated than the United States and has far more natural resources per capita.

Thus, I think that the secret to Canada’s economic success is that the population of Canada is composed to a greater extent of demographic groups that are more successful in the United States (non-Hispanic whites and Asians), Canada isn’t overpopulated like the United States, and Canada has responsible government that doesn’t spend more money than it raises in taxes.

* * *

I was away all day, so sorry it took so long to approve the comments.

A lot of the trends talked about how Canada makes money by exporting natural resources to the United States. But that was the point of writing about Canada’s small population. I don’t know for sure, but I assume that Canada has about the same resources per square mile as the United States. Canada gets to distribute those natural resources to one-tenth the number of people, so natural resources per capita are ten times higher.

Both Republicans and Democrats seem to think the economy needs MORE people, but maybe the economy would prosper better with FEWER people. Less immigration plus lower birthrate is what the country needs.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

October 1, 2013 at 9:08 AM

Posted in Economics

131 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. There’s also the whole oil boom thing (which has outsized impacts on an economy 1/10th the size of the US) and the fact that the disproportionate imports to the US have caused their currency to rise by a third, which has led to a rapid and dramatic rise in their relative real purchasing power.

    Handle

    October 1, 2013 at 9:15 AM

    • Yes, Canada is far more natural resource intensive per capita than the United States, being a major exporter of oil, minerals, and agricultural products. The US has shale gas and shale oil, true, but the Canadian tar sands had a head start in time and are a much bigger deal per capita.

      A better comparison would not be so much the US vs. Canada but Australia vs. Canada. And, hey, Australia’s GDP per capita has gone up even more over the past 15 years than Canada’s. Probably because Australia is yet more natural resource intensive during the biggest commodity boom in decades, particularly in commodities used by China, such as coal and iron ore.

      d0jistar

      October 1, 2013 at 10:34 AM

      • you’re missing the point, the number of capita is not preordained but under our control

        vic

        October 1, 2013 at 9:10 PM

      • Yes there is the oil & gas boom, but Lion of the BS completely missed one key difference: the dramatic changes in direction over the last 7 years. Canada has had an evangelical Christian right-wing prime minister since Stephen Harper was elected in 2006, the same time Democrats won both houses of Congress in the U.S. Since then, Canada went from being one of the worst nations in the G-7 in terms of debt/GDP to the BEST and in the same time period we went from BEST to one of the worst.

        Canada is now more of a free market economy that the U.S.

        People on both sides of the debate drastically exaggerate the difference between healthcare in Canada in the U.S. In the U.S. 50% of all spending is public and in Canada it’s 70%, BUT that 50% amounts to more in dollars per capita in the U.S. than it does in Canada so in measuring $ spent per person, we actually have MORE “national healthcare” in the U.S. than Canada does and that’s prior to Obamacare.

        Also you quote a lower tax burden and that’s true, but the difference in SPENDING is 31% of GDP in the U.S. versus 35% in Canada and we do a lot more of our socialist redistribution using regulations and the legal system. In addition Wikipedia is wrong in saying that the rich pay more. It’s very complicated to make a comparison but basically Canada has much lower corporate tax rates and higher sales taxes.

        Add it all together and Canda and the U.S. have swapped places in the last 7 years since the Republicans were voted out of power in Congress in the index of economic freedom:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

        Canada #6
        USA #10

        Mercy

        Mercy Vetsel

        October 4, 2013 at 2:48 PM

    • Oil plays a big role in this. And it will continue to play a big role in this.
      While tech companies like Research in Motion wither, the Canadian oil boom wants more options for exporting oil. If it isn’t Keystone, then send it to the pacific coast for China. Or to Ontario, and ship it out via the St. Lawrence seaway.

      Half Canadian

      October 1, 2013 at 5:16 PM

      • The Natives and leftists are getting all hysterical about a pipeline going through British Columbia. They are being encourage in this by the Tide Foundation–an American leftist organization that launders money while pretending to do good work.

        Rosenmops

        October 2, 2013 at 10:27 PM

    • Right. More generally, Canada is extremely rich in natural resources (not just oil), and almost certainly richer in natural resources on a per capita basis than the US.

      Dave Pinsen

      October 1, 2013 at 5:24 PM

    • +1. This explains everything.

      As a frequent visitor to pre-oil boom Canada, the place was a dump. Even now… it is kind of dumpy.

      Buzzcut

      October 1, 2013 at 5:25 PM

      • Yeah, we should be more like Detroit.

        Samson J.

        October 1, 2013 at 11:08 PM

  2. Canadians aren’t exposed to the dumbest media on the planet 24/7 like US residents are.

    I want to believe

    October 1, 2013 at 9:17 AM

    • Oh yes we are. We have the leftist, government supported CBC.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 12:05 PM

  3. Thus, I think that the secret to Canada’s economic success is that the population of Canada is composed to a greater extent of demographic groups that are more successful in the United States (non-Hispanic whites and Asians)

    That’s the case most everywhere else in the world (IQ and Wealth of Nations, etc), so it’s not surprising that it would be the case in Canada.

    JayMan

    October 1, 2013 at 9:21 AM

  4. The main difference is how they handle immigration:

    Canada gives points for education attainment for immigration purposes. If you have a PhD for example, it’s very easy to immigrate to Canada. Some Europeans, especially from the east, immigrate to Canada if they can’t make it directly to the US, then from there they try to immigrate to the US.

    In contrast, US has policies good for uneducated/illegal immigrants, especially from Mexico. For skilled people, there’s a way of getting citizenship, but it’s a long path. This is in contrast with the short path one can take by just marrying an American. An unskilled person is much more willing to marry for paper than a skilled person, mainly because an unskilled has fewer options. However, this works well, and this is why you have a lot more people getting citizenship via marriage than via h1b

    Zack

    October 1, 2013 at 9:28 AM

  5. All Canada has to do to generate wealth is scoop up some of its vast natural resources and ship them across the border. The USA will borrow into oblivion to purchase and consume them. The question should be why Canada didn’t become richer than the USA long ago.

    steve@steve.com

    October 1, 2013 at 9:29 AM

  6. Try to separate out factors that are always true of Canada from factors that explain the current boom. Canada hasn’t always done better than the US.

    The current boom is a pure oil/ resource boom. There is nothing much to see here.

    Normally, Canada is simply better governed than the US -the nineteenth century version of the British system the Canadian constitution is modeled on is am improvement over the eighteenth century version the U.S. uses in just about every way that matters. This can translate over time in better economic performance, for example Canadian banks and regulators did not double down on shady mortgages nearly to the same extent as in the US. The current budget mess would be unthinkable in Canada or in any other country that uses a parliamentary system, though something like this is imaginable in 18th century Britain. And of course the national healthcare system is medicare-for-all (its even called “Medicare”) instead of whatever the ACA is, and the issue has been pretty much settled politically for decades.

    Ed

    October 1, 2013 at 9:33 AM

    • The mortgage fiasco in the States seemed to be the result of encouraging a lot of blacks and Hispanics with marginal credit to buy houses. This is not an issue in Canada. The only substantial racial underclass in Canada is the native Indians, and they have houses on reserves.

      The free health care in Canada was brought in during the sixties, when Canada was almost entirely white (except for the natives). All the other Western countries that brought in medicare after WW 2 were racially homogenous. It is a lot easier to get people to agree to higher taxes in return from free health care when you don’t have a large underclass of blacks and Hispanics who don’t pay into the system. Sure, there are poor white people who don’t pay into the system, but they don’t stand out the way blacks do.

      Now Canada has problems like Somali refugees and Gypsies trying to scam the system and get free health care, etc. People get really angry about this.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 10:41 PM

  7. Don’t forget the amount of money the US spends on defense, Canada has nothing comparable.

    Camlost

    October 1, 2013 at 9:37 AM

    • Yes, Canada gets a free ride on defense. But so does, say, Mexico. And at least Canada doesn’t cause a lot of problems the way Mexico does.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 10:44 PM

  8. So the formula goes like this:

    1. Low population density
    2. Lots of extractible resources
    3. Super-majority white, and if you must have immigrants, Asians and whites
    4. Don’t spend more than you can collect in taxes

    There are a lot of corollaries to 4, but I think the biggest one would be, don’t have a huge, wasteful military that picks an overseas war every decade just to have something to do.

    The Anti-Gnostic

    October 1, 2013 at 9:38 AM

    • If the US didn’t have a huge military then China, Russia or the Muslims would take over. It would not be pretty. As a Canadian I am very grateful for the US military.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 10:46 PM

      • As there will always be a hierarchy, and someone must be on top, I would prefer it to be us. And I would prefer we send drones instead of our sons as warriors to any overseas engagements. Our military would be best used patrolling our own borders.

        not too late

        October 6, 2013 at 10:33 PM

  9. Sales taxes are also a lot higher in Canada. Canadians are richer in pure $ terms, but their purchasing power after tax is still below the US. Canadians own fewer things and typically have smaller houses than people in the US. How important that really is to your “quality of life” is a judgement call. I think Americans tend to overconsume wildly. My experience is that life in Canada probably is generally nicer than life in the US on the whole, even if a little more boring and provincial. Ambitious people move to the US for a reason…

    Peter the Shark

    October 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM

    • Canada also don’t have 30-year fixed rate mortgagesor a mortgage interest tax deduction… US housing is heavily subsidized by anyone else’s standards.

      d0jistar

      October 2, 2013 at 2:18 AM

  10. Climate definitely has impact, even in 2013. Beautiful, temperate California has lured the homeless into tent-cities all over, such as the enormous shantytown in Fresno.

    Not a problem in Canada.

    I know someone with schizophrenia who refuses his meds and wound up homeless. After one winter in Maryland, he ‘moved’ to California.

    Dan

    October 1, 2013 at 9:49 AM

    • “who refuses his meds”……………Do you understand WHY schizophrenics refuse to take their meds? Have you ever discussed this with a schizophrenic?

      jz

      October 2, 2013 at 10:35 AM

    • It’s a problem on the west coast of Canada. The homeless people drift to Vancouver and Victoria, which while not as warm as California, are a lot warmer than the rest of Canada.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 10:49 PM

  11. What does Canada have so few blacks? Just ask the Wayan bros – because Canada has White people’s weather. It too darn cold for blacks to hang out in public and cause trouble.

    JS

    October 1, 2013 at 9:52 AM

    • Then why do African Americans live in Detroit?

      SC

      October 2, 2013 at 12:17 AM

      • Canada is much colder than Detroit.

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 11:31 AM

      • Because it’s the closest thing to an African environment the US offers?

        driveallnight

        October 2, 2013 at 12:38 PM

      • If we look at climate, the closest thing the United States offers to Africa would be middle-of-nowhere Florida or Lousiana. Hot, humid, lots of trees, just like in the African forests.

        SC

        October 2, 2013 at 11:45 PM

    • Don’t kid yourself, blacks will come to Canada no matter how cold it is, if they can get in. We let in far too many of them, mostly refugees from Africa, I think. There aren’t many blacks in Canada, but where ever a lot of them live together (e.g. Toronto) they cause a lot of problems. In my town we have students from Nigeria at the university. When I first moved to this town 20 years ago you never saw a black person, but now you see them all the time at the university (which is where I work). However, you don’t see them much anywhere else. For example, we took our little grand daughter to McDonald’s the other day and everyone there (including the staff) was white.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:04 PM

  12. Wasn’t this Charlton Heston’s theory in Bowling for Columbine, for which he was excoriated?

    Michael Moore made a point to then cross the border to Canada and film the swaths of black people.

    islandmommy

    October 1, 2013 at 10:18 AM

  13. Dangit, Handle, you beat me to the punch.

    Jefferson

    October 1, 2013 at 10:35 AM

  14. You’ve somehow got to incorporate into your analysis the fact that Canadians are a finer, nobler people.

    dearieme

    October 1, 2013 at 10:42 AM

  15. The proportion of money spent on the defense budge is much lower. Have you also noticed how Canadians tend to look at lot younger for their age than Americans? Consider many Canadian actors like Michael Cera who’s 25 but looks 15 and that girl in Juno who’s 26 but looks 14. Host Steve Paikin is in his mid-50s but looks late-30s. Justin Bieber is 19 but looks 14. look at most of the NHL players, they all look on average 10 years younger than most Americans. I think lower stress levels from lower crime rates and better social safety net, lower UV levels plus cold weather keeps many Canadians indoors away from UV rays, and a less contaminated food system (grain-fed meats, hormones, and other crap widely used in the US are banned) contribute to their slow aging.

    bobo

    October 1, 2013 at 10:59 AM

    • You are correct and I noticed this too. I once dated a Canadian expat here in NYC. She was in her late 20s, and she looked like a young college student with the same body mass at that age. An average American female in her late 20s, blown up and set to deflate in a few years.

      JS

      October 1, 2013 at 9:45 PM

      • Canadian girls are just better. They’re better looking, “nicer”, and the geopolitical status disparity that exists between the US and Canada and accompanying status advantage overrides any pseudo-feminist ideology that might have imprinted itself. The end result is a girl actually worth dating.

        QWERTY

        October 2, 2013 at 5:39 PM

      • You sound like hypocrite now because you said Canadians are betas. Alpha nations like America produces obnoxious men and women.

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 10:30 PM

      • Yeah. America= alpha. Canadian= beta. I like beta girls.

        QWERTY

        October 3, 2013 at 10:52 PM

    • When Michael J Fox was 21 he played high-schooler Alex P Keaton.

      ScarletNumber

      October 2, 2013 at 4:58 PM

      • Michael J Fox was around 20 in the film Class of 1984. But he looked and acted like he just started puberty.

        bobo

        October 2, 2013 at 8:38 PM

  16. > their currency to rise by a third

    Huh? Over what timeframe? CAD is ~unchanged since five years ago.

    Sam

    October 1, 2013 at 11:06 AM

  17. These things go in cycles. I’m old enough to remember when Canada’s economy wasn’t so hot – the late Trudeau years, I think it was. Their economy was a mess, and one U.S. dollar could buy about $1.40 Canadian in goods and services.

    But not to worry. The last 2 president of Mexico have offered to send Canada as many of their people as they want, or more. Give it a generation and Vancouver will look like L.A., only without the nice weather.

    Sgt. Joe Friday

    October 1, 2013 at 11:13 AM

    • Not going to happen. The overpriced real estate in Vancouver or “Hong Couver” will ensure the city never becomes Hispanicized. I heard the same story about San Jose, CA back in the 1980’s. All the liberals in mainstream academia were predicting, quite fondly, the city would become majority Hispanic (over 50%) by the year 2000. The dot com boom of the 90’s drove real estate prices through the roof, keeping latinos out, and city instead became Asian-ized. The city is 1/3rd white, 1/3rd asian, and 1/3rd hispanic. When it comes to overbidding for real estate nobody can compete against Asian people.

      Ode

      October 2, 2013 at 9:57 AM

    • Thanks, but we’ll take a pass on the Mexicans. We already have enough problems with the native Indians.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:08 PM

  18. I’d imagine its the boom in natural resources, especially given the proximity to Chinese ports.

    Back out the increase in oil, tar sands, gold and timber and how is the rest of the economy doing? Any correlation to immigrant population?

    Lion of the Turambar

    October 1, 2013 at 11:22 AM

  19. Canada benefits from being a small country with basically 3 major cities and a handful of moderately-size ones (Calgary, Halifax etc.). They have an active military but, unlike the U.S., they don’t maintain an endless number of bases worldwide or explode their budgets with billion-dollar wars.

    Speaking as someone who has lived there, the cost of living in Canada is higher than you think. Housing and food etc. are very high and rising. But education is a bargain and no one goes bankrupt due to healthcare costs. The quality of healthcare is spotty. For every day coverage and medicines, it’s good; for surgeries it’s every bit the nightmare the GOP shrieks about.

    The banks are also highly regulated in Canada. This made an enormous difference as they didn’t make the same negligent investments found in the U.S.

    The burden of social spending is higher and getting worse. However, Canada demonstrates that when you minimize your military commitments there’s money to spend on your own people (for better or worse).

    SWPL2

    October 1, 2013 at 11:53 AM

  20. Canada does nothing “right” except manage its luck at having a pile oil to sell to THE greediest oil consuming nation. Murka even makes a kwl shipping discount due to its close proximity.

    Then, Canada keeps its number of coloreds and minos below its stupider southern customer.

    Look up the stats on the percentage of coloreds in Canada. It’s easier to thrive with less of them. Look at Manhattan…

    Firepower

    October 1, 2013 at 11:54 AM

    • Yes, anyone who is sane and has the experience working with blacks regardless of their educational level, will tell you that they are emotionally charged, much more than proles who may be less educated.

      JS

      October 1, 2013 at 9:51 PM

      • It is my long-held view that the black is a perpetual child and must be treated as such
        OR
        we get what we have today.

        36 Million children with guns who vote to confiscate your wages
        for more FREE Doritos

        Firepower

        October 2, 2013 at 3:58 PM

  21. “It should be noted that Canada has nationalized healthcare”

    It should be also noted that the nationalization happened in 1984 – about when Canada dropped well below the US trend line.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada

    I think the export of commodities is the main explanation for Canada’s economic improvement. See the following for the run up in worldwide commodity prices.

    http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=commodity-price-index&months=300

    Nicely correlates with Steve’s graph.

    (Sanity check – commodities are a high percentage of Canadian exports – http://www.investorsfriend.com/Canadian%20GDP%20Canadian%20imports%20and%20exports.htm)

    Jody Neel

    October 1, 2013 at 12:04 PM

  22. Canada also has a highly regulated banking system. Canadian banks were not allowed to speculate or loan money to people that could not possibly repay it. There was no massive housing bubble in Canada and none of the big Canadian banks failed or needed to be bailed out.

    mikeca

    October 1, 2013 at 12:05 PM

    • “Canada also has a highly regulated banking system. Canadian banks were not allowed to speculate or loan money to people that could not possibly repay it. There was no massive housing bubble in Canada and none of the big Canadian banks failed or needed to be bailed out.”

      Total bullshit (promoted by the liberal press, btw) The Canadian banks actually had bigger problems (relative to their size) and needed a bigger bailout, which at the time was kept secret, as not to scare people. http://www.policyalternatives.ca/newsroom/updates/study-reveals-secret-canadian-bank-bailout

      Zack

      October 1, 2013 at 8:46 PM

      • There was no real estate bubble and collapse in Canada. I didn’t hear anything about the banks being bailed out. I think the only problem the Canadian banks had was their American investments. Banks are a lot different in Canada. We only have a handful of large banks — Royal Bank, Bank of Montreal, Bank of Nova Scotia, Toronto-Dominion, and Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. There are branches of these banks all across the country and almost everyone uses one or the other of them. There are basically no other banks, though there are some smaller credit unions that some people use.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_(banks)

        Rosenmops

        October 2, 2013 at 11:22 PM

  23. Canada’s Immigration policy is better.

    They are encouraging skilled workers and rich people to come to Canada. (One example might be the mass entrance of rich/smart/skilled Chinese into Vancouver just before the communist takeover of Hong Kong in 1997.). They are also discouraging unskilled drains from entering.

    USA immigration policy is bass/ackward. Skilled immigrants are limited to strict quotas. Immigrants from the first world are on even stricter quotas, but any unskilled worker willing to break the law can walk across the border or overstay a visa with zero negative consequences. As a result, immigrants in the USA might be the dregs of civilization and are assimilating into Ghetto welfare culture rather than into Protestant work ethic culture.

    Canada’s also had better tax laws and business climate for about 20 years now. After a budget crisis, they elected conservatives for the first time in forever and this put and end to some of the out of control excesses.

    Rotten

    October 1, 2013 at 12:21 PM

  24. The three areas you listed (demographics of the population, per capita natural resources, responsible government) are probably the keys to economic success. This was noticed in The Federalist. The author pointed out that the U.S. was blessed with a homogenous population of European origin and had lots of natural resources and the only other thing it really needed was a wise and responsible government. The Constitution was designed to bring that government into effect. The three together made the U.S. the wealthiest country in history. We don’t understand now why we were rich so that’s why we are becoming poorer.

    Mark

    October 1, 2013 at 12:48 PM

  25. Couldn’t live there, too cold.

    Not a bad write up though.

    I haven’t checked in a long time, but I think they have an unpoped housing bubble?

    asdf

    October 1, 2013 at 1:10 PM

    • It used to be a joke in NYC in the good old days, that wintertime in the city mean’t good policing. Miscreants are less likely to come out at night and cause trouble in the cold weather.

      JS

      October 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM

    • Couldn’t live there, too cold.

      I mistrust white people who want to live warm climates. It just seems wrong.

      Samson J.

      October 2, 2013 at 8:35 AM

      • With the exception of Southern Europe, any White person in the tropics is an anomaly. Look at the Whites in Australia and South Africa. They’re kind of off, even more off because they’re of British extract.

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 11:35 AM

      • I have a lot of health problems that get triggered by cold weather. I’ll often spend half the winter with flu symptoms.

        asdf

        October 2, 2013 at 7:55 PM

      • Well, by “warm climates” I mean south of, like, Pennsylvania.

        Samson J.

        October 2, 2013 at 7:57 PM

  26. Canada doesn’t have dozens of cities being driven into the ground by hordes of criminal and unproductive NAMs.

    Oswald Spengler

    October 1, 2013 at 1:15 PM

    • Canada would be a great place for Whites to run away from the liberal destruction of America.

      JS

      October 1, 2013 at 9:02 PM

      • Unless Trudeau’s idiot son Justin becomes our next prime minister (and he is already the leader of the Liberals and ahead in the polls). Then we will go down hill fast.

        Rosenmops

        October 2, 2013 at 11:27 PM

  27. The lack of population and the huge amount of land in Canada. . .would that make homes there pretty cheap? A 2000 sq. ft house in Los Angeles can easily cost a million or more. What are home prices like in or near major Canadian cities? Canada almost certainly has higher metrics when it comes to affordable family formation.

    fakeemail

    October 1, 2013 at 1:42 PM

    • Vancouver housing costs are backbreaking. one of the most expensive cities real estate-wise in North America. Vancouver affordable family formation is a joke.

      uatu

      October 2, 2013 at 1:32 AM

      • That’s because of the proliferation of Chinese in that city.

        Colmainen

        October 2, 2013 at 5:39 PM

      • As well as hoards of rich Chinese buying everything up, the problem in Vancouver is there is not much land. They are hemmed in on the north by the mountains, on the south by the US boarder, and on the west by the ocean. The only direction they can expand in is east into the Fraser Valley.

        Rosenmops

        October 3, 2013 at 2:09 AM

  28. Lion I agree with you. I am in favor of America having the exact same healthcare system as canada. I really think most americans are too dumb to navigate a complex health care system.

    arvind wen

    October 1, 2013 at 3:28 PM

  29. So Canada’s pretty nice, eh

    Jokah Macpherson

    October 1, 2013 at 3:30 PM

    • It is. Come visit.

      Samson J.

      October 1, 2013 at 11:14 PM

  30. They also have a seasonal program for agra workers (obv. b/c of the weather) that seems like a smarter way to get cheap labor for the jobs “the base of our party won’t do for below living wage”

    Monroe Ficus

    October 1, 2013 at 4:31 PM

  31. COMMODITIES: CANADA SELLS THEM

    And it’s not just oil that’s increased, it’s nickel, coal, grain, potash, etc. All that exporting has caused our dollar to rise to around parity, from prior 60 cent status. Also, our housing sector hasn’t collapsed yet, and probably won’t do so to such a great degree.

    Our demographic problems are not as radical, true, although we do have a larger percentage of native people who are empowered by a bleeding heart judiciary and are granted special privileges.

    Arable land per capita is fairly similar, resources per cap are certainly greater in Canada.

    Bert Derpski

    October 1, 2013 at 4:35 PM

  32. And if only AGW were true, they could turn the tundra into arable land and open the Nortwest Passage year round.

    If I spoke French, I could return to my greatgrandfater’s native Quebec.

    bob sykes

    October 1, 2013 at 4:53 PM

    • if you program, you could get a job at ubisoft or EA. Lots of game devs in Montreal. no french required. the Quebec Gov sends reps to top schools during career fairs touting this.

      uatu

      October 2, 2013 at 1:33 AM

  33. now *this* is why i read the lion. screw the PC analysis, hit me with the truth baby.

    rivsdiary

    October 1, 2013 at 5:17 PM

  34. Steps on how to be a wealthy country:

    1. Have lots of natural resources per person

    2. Have progressive taxation and a welfare state (and a high trust low corruption population) that assures those resources aren’t monopolized at the top

    3. Have a large spendthrift neighbor who will buy all of your stuff

    4. Have an intelligent immigration policy that focuses on productive, law abiding, and intelligent people that improve your ability to extract and utilize your natural resources

    Canada’s immigration policy good help or hurt them but as you can see it is only a minor factor in their success. 1-3 are way more important.

    Macho

    October 1, 2013 at 6:18 PM

  35. At the risk of sounding like a douche, the best barometer of whether a country is “better” than yours is to see how the women from that country react to you (stuck up vs. easy). Based on my experiences, Canadian girls, and especially Asian-Canadians, are much, much easier. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

    And honestly, I think it’s because we DO have blacks. I mean let’s be real, who is going to have more success hitting on women at the bar- Will Smith, or some eggheaded part-time (white) writer at the Huffington Post that borders on skinny fat and has never done a sport in his life. Who’s going to come across as more charismatic? Canada= nation of betas, Justin Bieber included.

    The “prole”, black elements that many commenters on this site have come to despise are often what makes Americans fun to be around and really what makes this country great. That’s where you get hip hop and Michael Jackson, and Elvis (grew up in black neighborhood) and creativity. It’s where you get soul and swagger, and nothing in Canada comes close. I’ll take that over a higher GDP/capita.

    tl;dr- I’d still rather be an American. Maybe an American living in Canada, but not a Canadian.

    QWERTY

    October 1, 2013 at 6:36 PM

    • Based on your book, a country with easy women means less dynamism and competition as in Canada, which is both beta and bad?

      I would agree with you to a certain degree. NYC certainly has more stuck up and hypergamous women than all the places in Canada, which causes men here to be competitive and overly aggressive. But having blacks in NYC adds an extra unnecessary and zero sum burden to the equation. Most of the blacks in NYC are neither Michael Jackson cool nor are they the creative types that you would want to associate it with.

      JS

      October 1, 2013 at 10:59 PM

      • But the African Americans in NYC are sooooo Alpha, which is what you want, right?

        SC

        October 2, 2013 at 12:22 AM

      • Alpha sucks when you have a lower IQ.

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 10:37 AM

      • I can see why someone that’s had a negative altercation with NAMs might be tempted to leave for greener pastures i.e. NAM-light developed countries (Canada, etc.) But let’s be honest, any sort of social advantage you’d have when you get there would largely stem from the fact that you were raised and represent a nation that has had blacks in the first place. No blacks, no Michael Jackson. No blacks, no global sport franchises. No blacks, no soul nor swagger.

        Charismatic, creative black entertainers are a conduit by which America mass culture has spread itself around the world. Go to Luxy in Taipei or Ferria in Tokyo and tell me what music they’re playing. Tell me why “African” expatriates (i.e. people actually from Africa and the same demographic that is often compared to African-Americans in ‘achievement studies) try to act “ghetto” and “African-American”. Why was the main role in “Hitch” cast to a black guy? Because they’re cooler. And anyone with more proximity to that cultural nexus wins.

        The way you tell an Asian-Canadian and rich international students from an “alpha” Asian-American is how they interact with NAMS. The Asian-American is well-acquainted with hip-hop/mainstream culture, has muscle mass, and “knows what’s going on”. The others talk about SAT scores and cower like girls when approached by a NAM. Guess who gets the girl? Real story.

        QWERTY

        October 2, 2013 at 5:17 PM

      • Who cares whether Asians are more beta in Canada or in America? And based on your observations, they are more beta when they live in a beta country.

        The Italian Renaissance was a very dynamic period, because of it had alpha men like Cesar Borgias and the different popes who messed around with their citizens, producing geniuses and artists in the process.

        What has American prole culture produce that can hold a candle to anything from that part of the world?

        That’s right, anything black is more alpha than Machiavelli!

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 10:57 PM

    • Blacks are 12% of the population and commit over half the violent crime, consume 35% of welfare handouts and have destroyed every city where they have taken control (Detroit, Birmingham, Gary, D.C.).. Whites have always had dynamic high and low cultures and it is no mistake that jazz, R&B, hip-hop and almost anything else credited to blacks was created in America and not Africa (in other words, whites had big roles in all of these).

      Bernie

      October 2, 2013 at 5:13 PM

      • “OMG IT WAS MADE IN AMERICAN THEREFORE IT WAS MADE BY WHITE PEOPLE”

        Please.

        Hip hop, Jazz, R&B was created by blacks and was largely a byproduct of the African-American experience, one that necessitated some sort of release from what was and continues to be a pretty inhumane existence. I’m pretty sure the white slave-owner wasn’t whipping the slave so that he could create music; he did it so that he could have slaves. God I have no idea why I even responded to that. Go back to Stormfront.

        And for the last time, African-Americans are different from Africans. They play better ball and win NBA championships over their African counterparts, often stomping on them. This must mean white people are better at playing basketball right? …right?

        QWERTY

        October 2, 2013 at 8:00 PM

  36. Canada never had slavery, so they don’t have the same white guilt about slavery that we do here in the United States.

    They must have white guilt about something, since they don’t care about remaining white.

    Tarl

    October 1, 2013 at 6:45 PM

    • Canada has plenty of white guilt. Canada is saturated with white guilt. There are the native Indians, remember.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:36 PM

  37. This reminds me of the endless liberal moaning about how America should be more like [insert name of small country, preferably Scandinavian]. Does whatever Norway is doing right scale up from 5 million people to 320 million people? Does what Canada is doing right scale up from 35 million to 320 million? I doubt it. Such comparisons are thus worthless.

    Tarl

    October 1, 2013 at 6:52 PM

  38. “It should also be noted that Canada is only 3% black…”

    Heaven.

    B. Gott

    October 1, 2013 at 7:27 PM

    • A low percentage of blacks and the high IQ immigration policy is the reason they have surpassed the U.S. What is a nation but the people?

      Bernie

      October 2, 2013 at 5:07 PM

    • When I was born in Vancouver in 1955 there were almost no blacks in Canada. Then Trudeau decided to import them. I think the idea was to show the Americans how well blacks could do without racism.

      Yah…didn’t work out.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:39 PM

  39. What thy did right was move their country a thousand miles north of the Mexican border.

    Toad

    October 1, 2013 at 8:00 PM

    • Bingo! Location. Location. Location.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:37 PM

  40. the flag wavers would like to think canada is like the uae or qatar.

    lion is on to it, but not there yet.

    the us is shit.

    neol-liberalism and anglo-saxon economics is an EMPIRICAL FAILURE.

    Hendrik Verwoerd

    October 1, 2013 at 10:24 PM

  41. lion is on to it, but not there yet.

    RACE TRUMPS all else. as brazil’s own fed chairman said, big govt works in scandinavia.

    so economists go ON AND ON about what distinguishes rich countries from poor countries but NEVER mention race..

    IT’S NOT AS IF the European ascendancy were something new. pace the sinophiles, europe has ALWAYS been THE most advanced, from ancient greece to the present.

    what is the OT to the infinitely more copious literature of ancient greece and rome? compare aristotle to confucius and confucius is a JOKE.

    VERY OBVIOUSLY, in the last 2000 years europeans have become dumber relative to jews.

    Hendrik Verwoerd

    October 1, 2013 at 10:39 PM

    • So true, I was really disappointed — almost shocked — when I went to Beijing and saw the Forbidden City and compared it to what Rome had in 100 AD.

      CamelCaseRob

      October 2, 2013 at 1:35 PM

      • The Chinese were very primitive when compared to the Ancient Greeks and Romans in art, architecture, philosophy and literature. They probably have a better cuisine. Everything else, the Asians are second rate to the Southern Europeans.

        I cannot think of any other structure more magnificent than the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence.

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 11:06 PM

    • Ancient Greeks and Romans, at least their elites, were intelligent. Your ancestors weren’t ancient Greeks or Romans. is there any reason to suppose that the ancient inhabitants of the British Isles were as smart as they were?

      nebbish

      October 2, 2013 at 6:58 PM

      • right!

        aristotle even said in his politics iirc that non-greeks should either pay tribute or be enslaved.

        the germanic world was illiterate, BUT it was advanced enough to overrun the romans. constantine was a german.

        so in ancient europe (before 450 ad) the germans were mexicans?

        of course rosenberg had an excuse for this in his myth of the 20th century, but it was lame.

        Hendrik Verwoerd

        October 2, 2013 at 10:32 PM

      • The industrial revolution started in the British Isles, so they must have had some smart people.

        Rosenmops

        October 2, 2013 at 11:42 PM

      • I wrote “ancient” inhabitants of the British Isles. It’s not inconceivable to me that 18th and 19th century Britons were on average smarter than pre-hisroric and Roman-era Britons.

        nebbish

        October 3, 2013 at 10:20 PM

    • Maybe dumber in the last 200 years, but not 2K.

      Europeans are the still the most productive and enterprising group.

      Who wants to be like the high IQ Asians, or worse the Finns, with their boring and unremarkable history?

      JS

      October 2, 2013 at 11:09 PM

      • Dude Scandinavians are awesome. Scandinavian women are beautiful and the men are productive and well-behaved.

        SC

        October 3, 2013 at 1:07 PM

      • They’re beta and boring, and the created nothing of significance. Basically, they are the Asians of Europe.

        The Southern Europeans were a lot more alpha than the Northern and Central Europeans, creating some of the greatest geniuses and literary men in the world.

        Remember what Orson Welles said of the Swiss in relation to the Renaissance Italians, as he was playing Cesar Borgia.

        In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love – they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.

        You need a balance to achieve greatness. The betaness of Asians and what you see in Scandinavia are a bane to progress. The over alphaness you find in the tropic zones, basically where blacks live, are also a bane to progress.

        JS

        October 3, 2013 at 3:20 PM

      • and why is argentina so poor? 85% european genetically and most of that from italy and spain.

        and btw, technically finland is not part of scandinavia. finnish isn’t even an indo-european language iirc.

        Hendrik Verwoerd

        October 3, 2013 at 6:47 PM

      • JS, you know that Orson Welles was full of sh8t, right? For most of the past 500 years the Swiss were the hillbillies of Europe, fighting each other constantly and serving in every mercenary army in Europe. Napoleon basically came in and laid down the law (and led a lot of Swiss youmg men to their deaths in his war on Russia). It’s only since about 1814 that the Swiss have been peaceful (and every citizen owns a rifle). Plus, what have the Swiss produced in the last 500 years – only Corbusier, Bernoulli, Jung, Einstein, numerous Nobel prizes in Chemistry, Medicine, Physics, etc. What exactly has Italy done the last 500 years, with 20x the population?

        Peter the Shark

        October 8, 2013 at 3:51 AM

  42. Like some others have pointed out, the cold weather keeps things organized. (Though I gather Russia’s kind of screwed up, but that might be due to other factors.)

    DelFuego

    October 1, 2013 at 11:52 PM

  43. Canadian here. Our famous points based immigration system is massively overrated. More than half of our yearly immigration total, which by design is 1% of the population per year, bypasses the points requirements by being refugees or family members of last years’ immigrants. On top of that we import hundreds of thousands of “temporary” foreign workers to work in our mines, farms and fast food outlets, then we wonder why teens, university students and less educated folks have constantly climbing unemployment rates.

    Canuckistani

    October 2, 2013 at 12:41 AM

    • Don’t forget all the foreign students pouring in, and people bringing over their elderly parents to exploit our free health care.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:44 PM

  44. Canada is basically evidence that Jason Richwine’s ‘Smart Solution to Diversity Dilemma’ was good advice.

    http://www.american.com/archive/2009/august/dealing-with-diversity-the-smart-way

    Julian

    October 2, 2013 at 12:43 AM

    • Good article. However, I’m not sure if Elite and upward mobile Whites are morally inclined, altruistic, and cooperative. They seem to act the contrary and love diversity.

      Cities such as NYC and Chicago are cesspools that most ordinary White Americans from other places do not want to replicate.

      JS

      October 2, 2013 at 10:36 AM

  45. Canada: Liberalism without diversity or environmentalism.
    (Remember when allowing the clubbing of baby harp seals was a major Greenpeace initiative?
    And it’s a commercial enterprise; not just the native indigenous using traditional methods.)

    WmarkW

    October 2, 2013 at 6:51 AM

    • Canada is thick with environmentalists. You can’t swing a cat without hitting one. Greenpeace started in Canada.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:46 PM

  46. What makes me laugh is that you sometimes read on the Internet some American raving on about how they freed themselves from living under the “tyranny” of the British Crown and yet Canada, New Zealand and Australia, three countries still living under the thumb of Queen Elizabeth and her evil henchman Prince Philip are the most desirable big countries in the world to live. And plenty of Americans emigrate there too. In fact, wherever you are in the world, Asia, Africa, the countries that are a little (or a lot) better off than their neighbours are all countries that were formerly part of the British Empire. E.g Singapore, Hong Kong, Kenya, Nigeria.

    martin

    October 2, 2013 at 9:02 AM

    • Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan seem pretty nice and they are non-White countries who were never colonised by England.

      SC

      October 2, 2013 at 1:19 PM

      • Generally speaking non-colonized Asian countries are nicer, but are harder to find “global employment” in. In other words, it’s very hard to find a job in Japan if you’re not Japanese because the corporate culture is uniquely bureaucratic in a very Japanese way and you’re going to get smoked as a Westerner. Same thing with Taiwan, and South Korea- you’re going to end up teaching English. That being said the living cost (SK;TW) is cheaper, the girls are both better looking and actually care less about money (funny right), and people are nicer. In the short-term, English teaching isn’t that bad as an extension of college. The only downside are the other teachers (largely low-class American rednecks that couldn’t find a job elsewhere).

        In Singapore and Hong Kong you can find a job trading derivatives or selling to hedge funds because these are global financial centres that pander to the entire world. The problem is the girls there are TERRIBLE (gold-digging, not as good looking, not nice), Cantonese sounds like a nail on a a chalkboard, and everyone there is really just there to make money. When I worked in HK we would fly to Taiwan/South Korea for the clubs- its just better quality.

        You’ll probably get just as much if not more quality ass as a smooth-talking English teacher in Hongdae or Taipei as you would doing convertible bond arbitrage in HK.

        QWERTY

        October 2, 2013 at 5:30 PM

      • I am not saying it is necessary for relative prosperity that a non-white nation should have been part of the British Empire, only that it might be sufficient. Anyway, Japan’s success is partly due to the Americans dealings after the Second World War.

        martin

        October 2, 2013 at 7:08 PM

      • Before WWII and during, the Japanese built their own airplanes and aircraft carriers. How many countries can do that, even today?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 2, 2013 at 7:23 PM

      • Name of a non-White country that has been successful after British rule. There aren’t any.

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 9:35 PM

      • Singapore is pretty successful.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 2, 2013 at 10:02 PM

      • Tokyo doesn’t come close to any world class European city. It does rate higher than any American dump.

        If Asians in the Western world could just return home and replicate their cities like Tokyo, then they don’t have to worry about White racism and the occasional black experience.

        JS

        October 2, 2013 at 9:41 PM

      • Most Japanese cities — I’m writing this from Tokyo — are just fine, people-wise, though aesthetically they can be concrete nightmares. The women are thin and dress better than in the Western world; the trains are spotless; there are convenience stores, staffed by well-spoken young people and cleaned to a standard that would make a bodega owner blanch, everywhere; many employers such as banks still have uniforms for their staff. It’s wonderful; it’s like America must have been in the 1950s and early ’60s. I’m not complaining.

        Kyo

        October 3, 2013 at 2:33 AM

    • If living under the crown is brilliant, why is the UK such a shithole for the average person?

      I believe that the US would’ve been better of it was under the crown for roughly another 75-100 years after Decl. of independence.

      But being in the commonwealth is stupid now.

      uatu

      October 2, 2013 at 7:16 PM

    • Japan, South Korea and Taiwan were greatly influenced by America.
      I think the main thing that makes these countries, and the former British Colonies, better than the rest of the world is a lesser degree of corruption. Corruption ruins everything.

      Rosenmops

      October 2, 2013 at 11:52 PM

    • Cannada NZ and Australia together consist of no more than 60 million people, fifth of the US population, which just shows what an amazing success the US is and how many more people the US economy sustains. Singapore and HK are hardly a “country”, more like an extended cities, compare it to Japan that manage to sustain a population of 120 million without any resources and to South Korea.

      Hashed

      October 3, 2013 at 2:59 AM

  47. Well, it now appears Lincoln was wrong and he should have let the South go. If he did the less than intelligent would have mostly have stayed in the CSA.

    Colmainen

    October 2, 2013 at 5:42 PM

  48. Canada’s most valuable natural resource, Canadian and French-Canadian Women. That is all.

    L

    October 4, 2013 at 1:03 AM

  49. As an ex-pat in Oz, I’d agree with all the points made (geography, resource, high trust/low corruption, vast majority Euro)… I’d add that smaller countries don’t have the latitude to make grand gestures (start wars, institute expensive social engineering, etc)– the margins are just too tight and failure can be catastrophic. It keeps them more tied to reality. That’s why the growth of public debt here still resonates in a way it hasn’t in the US for 30 years or more. Voters see a direct correlation between gov spending and taxation– Australia might try to borrow its way for a while (the left did this while they were most recently in power)… but we just don’t have the credit limit a USG has. People here want a budget SURPLUS and a balanced budget. Most are pretty confident that the new coalition gov will deliver too (they have before). does anyone think that if a republican was elected POTUS in 2016 that they could or would be expected to institute serious budgetary discipline? Australia, Canada, Singapore… etc… have long been planning for a post Pax Americana era.

    Ex-pat in Oz

    October 4, 2013 at 5:38 PM


Comments are closed.