Monday, February 12, 2007

SUSTAINED DEVELOPMENT A GENERAL PLAN FOR THE COLONIZATION OF NORTHERN CANADA

The word “Sustained Development” is considered evil by many Conservatives when associated with the Communist movements of the Soviet Union & Mao’s China. However Canada is a vast nation of resources, landmass, & one of the few countries with the claim of underpopulation. Considering the bitter hard cold fact that man is a huge contributor of global warming using fossil fuels instead of green based resources the colonization & development of northern Canada must be within a system of sustainable development. That means the protection of the surrounding environment must become a necessity with any colonization plan centralized in one location at a time.
When we talk about “sustained development” lets not get this confused with “sustainable economics.” Economically the regions must continue to be unchecked & unregulated in order to allow encourage growth locations to create employment opportunities, & higher Gross Domestic Products. However there is one fundamental problem with the creation of Sustainable Development, Taxes! Addressing this issue of over taxation is a major component of the debate, when addressing it cost effective methods must focus on current social programs, for example is Public Health Care really as effective as government leads us to believe? Is Daycare a good idea? Are there better solutions to develop Northern Canada within a controlled environment? Should government take the responsibility to reduce taxes in one area, raise it in others? Or perhaps should the economy of North America be unified? Never the less the issue of economics is debatable on what course of action is necessary.
Immigration is another issue that should be addressed in regards to the colonization plan of Northern Canada. The current immigration model may have to be modified to determine who gets in & who does not. For example should the immigration model focus on bringing the poor as the America once proclaimed? Or should the future model focus on the rich, & educated? Or perhaps a mixed model. The following diagram is an example:
Immigration Preference
  • Class One — English Speaking First World; French Speaking for Quebec
  • Class Two — Wealthy First World Countries (non English)
  • Class Three — other non warring nations

The preference example of preferred immigrants focuses on both English & French speaking democracies. Nations such as China & Iran are excluded from the mentioned list because of the lack of democracy & human rights.

Ultimately the one of the aims of sustained development is the creation of new smaller political units. Each new political unit should be created democratically giving the designated zone of development a voice by voting to form a new province or state in the case of an expanded United States, the system must be agreed upon by both the ratio of people in that zone & the provincial/state boundaries in accordance to the Constitution. However eligibility requirements must be made by both them federal level & the smaller political units such as total population, required land size, & wealth potential of the perceptive candidate. Here’s an example of planned population ratio’s:

  • State Capital — 300,000 people with room up to 500,000
  • Metropolitan — 400,000 people with room up to 750,000
  • 10 Townships — 10,000 to 15,000 people in each town
  • Other — under 1,000 each in pockets near resources

Moreover the Sustained Production of Northern Canada requires that interstate type highways & other transportation networks such as railroad cars become more a reality within system of a environmentally free society.

4 comments:

Matt Bondy said...

May I ask why a blog advocating that Canada concede its sovereignty is listed with the Blogging Tories?

I do not speak for the Blogging Tories, but it seems wildly inappropriate that you seek refuge with Canadian conservatives.

Is there not a more appropriate outlet for your radical views?

M

http://dominionpages.blogspot.com

James said...

Agree or disagree with United North America I'm a right leaning Conservative who believes in free speech. However I'm disappointed that you feel that's inappropriate for the existence of this site, however we on United North America do not support the North American Union nor do we support a forced annexation of Canada, but rather we support a democratic alternative where Canadians are given the right to decide if we want to join the United States.

I would suggest you visit Jonathan Wheeler's UNited North Ameria: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org & make the decision yourself what the movement is all about.

James said...

One more thing Matt, did you know one of the founders of Blogging Tories is a somewhat of a supporter of "United North America?"

Nancy said...

I don't normally respond to ravings of an American, who appears to think Canada is for the taking, and your arguments are based on faulty historical misconceptions plus you do not have a full understanding of how our political system works. Why don't you start discussing the serious problems of the US where many the so-called American dream is just that, a dream rife with living from one pay check to the next. Or the 68 million people including US children born in the good old US who do not have any medical coverage what so ever. Canada is not for the taking, and the last thing we want is another bigot from United States telling us our system is broken and we need the Americans and their system to help us. The American track record is not a very good one when it comes to helping out other countries. As to your other article regarding Atlantic Canada, Atlantic Canada is still rich in resources especially Newfoundland and Labrador. The only trouble Atlantic Canada has is that the federal government will not allow the provinces to have total control of our non-renewable and renewable resources, because the federal government needs the money to support the rich provinces of Ontario, Quebec and to finance the trade deals with countries like China. Like our Newfoundland fish which is being process in countries like China. I hope you do look next time buying food, and do yourself a favour and the American people buy North American. At least people who work in the food processing in North American do not put in chemicals in their wheat and rice gluten, unlike China who is still doing this to this very day. If you want to start something, start talking of how our food we eat including our pet food, beef cattle, dairy, pork, fish farms, and so on are being made. From the look of it, we may have a lot more to worry besides transfats.
So long, from a tenth generation Canadian who is proud that Canada was founded without a drop of blood spill - unlike the US