Talk:Atlantica (trade zone)/Archives/2013

Opposition

There is no record that the boy was tasered. This simply did not happen. He was, on the other hand, injured due to police violence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duanarchy (talk • contribs) 05:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think this is a free trade zone exactly

It seems hard to understand how some U.S. states and some Canadian provinces could really create a free trade area just among themselves. Reading their website, it seems like what they are really pushing for is 1. more free trade generally between the two countries and 2. increased cooperation between regional governments.--Pharos 07:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought about this a bit. Basically they're saying that even within the structure of NAFTA there are regulatory barriers to free trade across the Atlantica zone. The benefit to New England is intended to be access to the Port of Halifax, and the benefit to Nova Scotia et al. is access to US markets without looping through Montreal or shipping to US ports. So the idea really is aimed at the wider NAFTA market. I'm not sure how to describe this more precisely, unless we're just to call it a business association or chamber of commerce, and I think it's much more than that. They want specific US and Canadian laws changed. --Dhartung | Talk 16:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I've been looking about a bit, and it seems a euroregion is the closest analogue I could find to this sort of arrangement. What do you think?--Pharos 02:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Map

Minor quibble: for some reason they explicitly include the island of Newfoundland, but exclude Labrador. Well, I think I know the reason -- Labrador has land access through Quebec, whereas Newfoundland is still connected culturally and economically to Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and PEI. Anyway, a quick paint fill command should fix that. ;-) --Dhartung | Talk 16:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so. The most detailed and explicit map seems to be at www.atlantica.org, which I've modeled mine on.--Pharos 19:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Nah, you're right. This map seems more definitive. They really should be more consistent if they're trying to promote a whole new geographical region. Anyway, so it's back to MS Paint...--Pharos 19:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's their inconsistency. I'll note that in the article. --Dhartung | Talk 19:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Weird, it isn't showing up for some reason. I thought it was my browser cache, but I've restarted ... --Dhartung | Talk 20:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

It hasn't been working for me either. Maybe it's a server thing...--Pharos 23:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it was just a formatting thing before– the image is showing fine now. I've also updated the map now to show the ambiguity.--Pharos 10:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

POV - Why and why not?

Hi all, this is a fairly hot subject in Atlantic Canada, but I have been looking into this a bit more. I can not find much information to prove or disprove things such as reduction in minimum wage, or bringing off shore labour when there is plenty of local labour. Those are claims of those against it, But can anyone find info regarding both sides: Why would Atlantica be good? and why would it be bad?

Thanks Magu 19:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that short of an independent academic study, all you're going to find are claims. The good: larger regional markets, reduced transport/tariff expenses, more foreign trade through Halifax. The bad: more competition, lost jobs and closed businesses somewhere, higher pollution and highway costs. I think it's fascinating that the vaunted "most open border in the world" isn't open enough for some, heh. --Dhartung | Talk 04:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)