How will America be in 2050

[ATFFL]

By 2050 Quebec would have voted to split from Canada.  this would lead to a chain of events:

1: Montreal, gritting its teeth in disgust, would split form the new nation and either become part of Ontario or, if the new Quebec nation looks to be violently upset, part of New York State.

2: WIthin 5-10 years Newfoundland and the Maritime provinces are part of the US.  The small pro-US movements there will pick up steam with them no longer being connected to the nation of Canada.

3: 15-20 years later the federal autority will have broken down and the provinces will split apart into seperate nations.  The Yukon territory becomes part of Alaska, followed by the Northwest Territory and Nunavut.  Alaska still only has 3 EVs.

4: 25-35 years after the split the remaining 5 provinces (now nations) will one by one join the US as their economies falter.  One or 2 may stay independent, but they will be functionally satellites of the US.  

This process may start soon, probably around 2010 would be my guess.  If the Conservatives win a majority government in the upcoming election it may start as soon as 2005.

[ATFFL]

By 2050 Quebec would have voted to split from Canada.  this would lead to a chain of events:

I doubt it. If they couldn't win in '95 whatwith Meech Lake, Charlottetown et al failing... they can't now.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Montreal would *never* join Ontario or NY

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Extremely unlikely. If the Maritimes ever left Canada, they'd be more likely to try to join with the U.K than anywhere else.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No chance.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No chance.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ha! Ha! Ha!
Idiot.

First, look at the trend line and the rise of nationalist parties in Québec.  The independence movement is getting stronger all the time.

Second, Montreal has no desire to be part of an independent Quebec, it votes overwhelmingly against separation, and is the only reason it has failed thus far.  It would not stay in after the split.  This leaves it three options.

The first is becoming an independent city.  Not going to work in modern times.

Second is joining NY.  This is possible, but not an appealing option.  A fall back position if Quebec looks to a military solution to force Montreal to stay, since Canada is not going to fight a war over this, or they would not be letting Quebec go in the first place.

Last is to become part of the Ontario province.  It happens by default.

None of them are happy options for Montreal, but all are better than staying in Quebec.

Next, all of the Maritime Provinces have political parties who advocate joining the US; they feel it would be an economic boon to the region.  With Quebec gone, there will be little to tie them to Canada, and they already feel abandoned by Canada.  With a big honking nation created between them, the national ties would diminish.  There is already a movement to join with the US, while no such movement exists with regards to the UK.  

Newfoundland is more iffy.  They might go as an independent nation instead of part of the US.

The rest of the prediction is from the Canadian governments assessment of what would happen if Quebec separation passed in 1995.  I lengthened the amount of time it would take for federal control to fall apart; they called for 20-25 years.  With the nation short its Atlantic ports government revenues would begin to drop.  Programs would have to be cut and the provinces would disagree on what goes.  Some would want to cut programs only in other provinces.  Provincial fighting is a huge problem now, with a major loss of revenue it would only get worse.

There was a politician in 95 who said something along the lines of: Canada is less a country than a group of people who like hockey, good beer and not being American.  If Quebec secedes we will have to give one up, and I am not giving up beer or hockey.

The secession movement would pick up steam under a Conservative government; a government that would spend less time kowtowing to Quebec and folding to their demands to keep the party in power.

Finally, as to your last line, you should have a higher opinion of yourself.  You are woefully uninformed and wrong-headed here, but I am sure you would do better on other topics.

[ATFFL]

First, look at the trend line and the rise of nationalist parties in Québec.  The independence movement is getting stronger all the time.

Uh-uh. The only reason why the BQ has risen in the opinion polls is because of Liberal scandels, and the only reason why the provincial PQ has risen in the polls is because of Charest's unpopularity.

So these factors have been around since the 1976?  What you mention is helping it get back into the headlines today, but says nothing about the historical trendline.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Totally unrealistic.[/quote]

Okay, you have just called every option totally unrealistic.  So what happens, Montreal simply disappears off the map?  All the other options I can think of are less realistic.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And how many votes do they get? Sod all. They are fringe parties.[/quote]

They don't run candidates, but raise issue awareness.  THey would never win today, but with even less government attention and an increasing sense of isolation, they would rise.  All the problems they have with the US go away if they join the US.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Er... Chretien was prepared to send the Army in. That was his back up plan... there was never any real chance that he would have let his home province leave Canada.[/quote]

That's right, Chretien regretted allowing it to come to a vote.  he predicted a 60-40 or worse defeat of seperation.      He would have used the military, because of the predictions of the report I mentioned earlier, but he is not likely to be PM again, is he?  Whoever is in charge may use the Canadian military, but that is in such sorry state there is no guarantee of success.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wrong. Very, very wrong. First of a majority conservative government is unlikely at the moment (this might change) and all the speculation is that they will try to strike a deal with the Bloq. Such a government would be utterly dependent on the whims of Gilles Duceppe.
[/quote]

For the Bloq to form a coalition governemnt they are going to want a concession.  I'll wager they will want another vote.

If the conservatives win a clear majority (I agree it is unlikely, but possible) the coddling comes to an end and the independence movement grows.

[ATFFL]

Al, my brother in arms, I've come in to save the day. Actually I'll like make the situation needlessly complicated.

Firstly I'd like to be very harsh and say that Tredrick has about as much sense in the matters of Canadian politics and current events as a bag of hair.

Firstly, on issue of Quebec separatisms. Try again. The Separatist party, Le Bloc Quebecois is not speaking AT ALL about separatism, and in fact is merely the official protest vote party of Quebec. Similar to the NDP or Greens across the nation. So NOOOOOO, there is no growing air of Quebec independence. Your logic of basing a Quebec separation on the 1995 referendum and the recent election is like saying after the Civil War, that the South is about to separate again, just because the Democrats win a lot of seats there.

The Maritimes has some of the highest levels of Anti-Americanism in this country; reason being is because much of the economy is stagnant. And in the 1970s and 80s when it looked like Canadian Lumber would be the future for the region the U.S. started all sorts of trade disputes, for example the soft wood lumber problems we have to this day. Canadian Nationalism is at some of its highest in that area.

Montreal is like New Orleans, no separating the two, like Canada and Quebec. The Nation of Quebec is not economically feasible. It would collapse on its own. Your whole independent province idea is laughable, and when I read it I laughed long and hard. Your prediction is amateurish at best! Were Quebec to get a 50%+1 vote, they’d negotiate more power within Canada not separatism, I.E. more autonomy, but not independence, and Canada may shift further towards Confederation and away from Federation.

Also, Canadian Nationalism grows every year across the nation INCLUDING Quebec.  Nice try, but by 2050 Canada will be the same as it is today, and may be larger, we might be annexing the Turks + Cacaos Islands.

Siege

P.S. Al, you could have told me about this guy, I’d have been here in a Montreal Minute.

Personal insults: Check
Statements without support: Check
A dtring of horrible analogies: Check

National unity is up, mainly because of the scare of '95.  Still, 40% of Quebecers are strongly tied to seperatist movements. and that has increased snice a dip dollowing the 95 failure.  It is less a sense of national unity, and more of an acceptance that seperation will nto come soon.

The Maritimes are deeply tied to national unity because if Quebec splits off they lose their connection to the rest of their nation, and they expect less and less influence in national politics; followed by less and less government funds.  

Quebec wasn't a viable economic nation in 95 was it?  Of course not.  Did that stop them from nearly voting for independence?  Not at all.

The Bloq has no shot at getting a reforendum today, so of course they don't talk about it much.  If hte chance arose in the future do you think they would pass it up?

Once again, I am basing my view of what would happen following Quebec independence off the Canadian governments own assessment from 95.

[ATFFL]

I'm going to ignore most of what you said since you are putting thoughts and opinions into me that are not there to prop up your arguments.

I will point out that Alaska does have an independence party, which has been quite strong at times and won numerous financial concessions and forced the US to strengthen the economic ties to the mainland to undercut its support.

You can learn more about them at their web page.  Look inteh history section and you can see they got almost 39% of the gubenatorial vote in 1990.

http://www.akip.org/

Hawaii also has a similar movement, but it has been much less effective.

If Quebec separated the federal government would have to give the Maritimes and Newfies the special treatment Quebec received to weaken the eperatist position.  The Candian economy sans Quebec will not be able to support this for long, and it will riase resentment in the west.

I'll agree that a 2005 referendum would likely fail, but I think the Bloq knows this.  2010 is a much better target for them.