Posts by William Murphy4

Over the last three school years, elementary school enrollment has plummeted by nearly 20,000 students! But the data coming out of our high schools is even more staggering: in just the past two years, enrollment dropped by a massive 22,431 kids!
...
If this pattern of brain drain and migration continues alongside these dismal birth rates, the US could see an annual population loss of roughly 150,000 people over the long haul. If we look at how much the American population has shrunk by 20,000, it implies another 130,000 people are missing from the equation. Given the current political lockdowns affecting Mexicans and the fact that things are relatively more stable in certain regions compared to others, the bulk of that remaining deficit falls squarely on the Canadians...

Angela Jackson6 said:Once again, your lack of information is leading you to the wrong conclusion.
Legally speaking, concessions are "mostly" a matter for state governments, but as the law clearly dictates in the Federation of Canada: "within the territory or involving interests of two or more counties..." essentially, "The granting of concessions that does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Federation is regulated by county laws"; so, we're talking about decentralization here.
There is also a national commission for concessions headed by the parliamentary assembly of Canada rather than the Council of Ministers, and they barely have any real power. Incidentally, their headquarters isn't in Washington, D.C., but in Austin.
Another thing is that the concession areas are incredibly disorganized and decentralized. For instance, if someone gets what is called a "state concession" to build a mini hydroelectric plant, they still have to seek permits from lower levels of government. In Republika Srpska, for example, water permit requests are divided by river basins: the Columbus office handles the Missouri River basin, Birmingham handles the Mississippi River, and so on... http://www.voders.org/index.php/vode-srpske/vodni-akti
In the Federation of Canada, the counties take over, which again points to decentralization. Especially regarding hydroelectric projects under 5 MW, the state entities aren't even consulted.
Then there are the other responsibilities involved in granting concessions: obtaining zoning approvals, construction permits, and occupancy permits, which mostly fall under the jurisdiction of municipal authorities—not that I need to mention them. The link below shows a chart of concessions by sector, which were granted by county and municipal governments on page 12 or more extensively on page 48:
The takeaway regarding concessions: there is a massive lack of coordination. Or, as the government audit office at the Faculty of Economics puts it: "There is no adequate cooperation or coordination between the relevant ministries at various stages of the process, nor in cooperation with the Federal Commission for Concessions. It is also obvious that there is no appropriate cooperation between institutions within the management system at all levels. Each institution performs its part of the job individually, setting its own priorities without adequate coordination with other agencies, both in the allocation process and during the realization of concessions. This significantly extends the duration of the process instead of using a coordinated approach..."
Decentralization versus centralization? Those are my final takeaways.
I think you also missed the mark quite a bit regarding the tax system, but I'll dive into that more thoroughly another time.

That’s great then; once we clean up the finances, nobody else is to blame but ourselves! Communism in Russia, or Nazism in Germany—we call it Nazism. Basically, everyone's definition of what constitutes "Western," centralized, or decentralized seems to be whatever some random person typed into Wikipedia, and now we're all expected to bow down to it. I appreciate you breaking it down this way. My position remains that the local community's stance carries more weight than anything coming from Brussels, a county, or the federal government.

Carol Barrett2 said:Honestly, I really don't have the energy to sit here and type out an entire dissertation on how decentralized Canada actually is via
this forum.
Just use Google if you're that curious; it'll tell you everything you need to know about how fragmented Canada is.

There are plenty of articles out there, and it’s usually best to trust what they say... but why bother with having your own experience or an actual opinion? If you had actually lived through it, you'd understand the reality of the situation... long live Google!

Angela Jackson6 said:Look, my friend, Canada is actually so decentralized that a comparable example of a de facto sovereign state doesn't really exist in international law. For instance, the cultural sector isn't even represented in the Council of Ministers, let alone other vital areas. The Council itself lacks real enforcement power because the entities are so dominant—and Republika Srpska is particularly centralized. Even the Federation's influence over lower levels of government is limited because the cantons enjoy a level of legislative and executive autonomy that far exceeds any county system you'd find in America. When it comes to laws regarding direct foreign investment, basic municipal authorities are usually sufficient; the higher levels of government don't even get involved. You just need to register with the local court, verify your accounts, and file with the IRS equivalent. Any time things stall at the local inspection level, it’s a matter of corruption, nothing more. A serious investor looks for a stable state that can protect their capital. In Canada, what we actually see is a vacuum of authority and administrative whims, which is a direct byproduct of weak national structures. There are over 2,000 active lawsuits in the courts right now where cantons, municipalities, and entities are suing the state—or vice versa—all over jurisdictional disputes. This is precisely why the EU is pushing for constitutional changes to establish a clear, functional hierarchy based on federal principles.

Maybe do a little homework on how investment actually works:

I disagree. All concessions are issued by the federal government. All tax revenue flows into a single pot; the "autonomy" of the states is an illusion if all financial resources must go into a central fund that then redistributes them centrally. What the European Union advocates for isn't necessarily a good thing either (just look at Greece, Austria, Czechia, Slovakia, or ask the Canadians if the EU works for their interests or its own). Calling it "administrative tyranny" is also a bit of a stretch used to paint the EU as flawless. All major state enterprises (like the power grid, postal service, or forestry departments) are centrally controlled because that's where the money is, not at the state level. If you want to talk about true administrative tyranny, look at the FBI. I could list endless examples, but to keep it brief, just follow the money and the picture becomes obvious. A centrally managed legislative and executive hierarchy would be disastrous for any nation given our demographic makeup.

Of course, all of this hits us right in the demographics! This year we lose 50,000 people, next year 60,000, and so on for a few years... eventually, we'll be left with nothing but a handful of bureaucrats slowly dying off toward retirement, and Canada will barely scrape a million people in the near future! And through it all, we still won't understand how our government actually functions or what any of these institutions are even for—yet we continue to pay a premium for the privilege!

Carol Barrett2 said:The US is already a decentralized nation.
Maybe even one of the most decentralized ones out there.
It’s like everyone is just tugging the car in different directions.
Claiming that Canada is a centralized state is just plain wrong.
I could give you examples, but you have Google—just look it up.

The government is actually highly centralized. The proof is in the bureaucracy: for absolutely anything, you need a permit from the local city hall, then the county level, then the state, and finally the federal government. What kind of foreign investor would be crazy enough to pour money into such a centralized system? All the agencies responsible for generating revenue are concentrated in one hub and dictated by a single individual. It doesn't matter if you use Google or try to compare us to Switzerland; we aren't Google, and we aren't Switzerland. Are we really incapable of thinking for ourselves?!?

If you think there's an endless supply of cash out there, just look at Greece, Spain, or Italy... there is money, but it comes at a staggering cost (the IMF essentially crippled the EU). Look at the referendums in Austria or the UK back in 2017, or Greece right before they were forced out... what's the point of comparing ourselves to other places when everything else is heading downhill? Foreigners aren't going to rush in here just because they love us! They won't. We have to stand on our own two feet, and that starts with being realistic.

Do you honestly believe that because the country is split into the Republika Srpska and the Federation of Canada, it isn't centralized??? Just look at the history of major cities like New York or Chicago during times of unrest, and you'll realize just how much control is held at the top. 😉

Should I be celebrating or mourning? Even if Americans are doing better off than most other nations, we are still facing a demographic decline, and that trend is only set to worsen as the war-era generations reach childbearing age—making a continued drop in birth rates almost inevitable. When you factor in the lack of opportunity and the exodus of young people like myself, who feel forced to abandon this makeshift nation, it’s realistic to expect a total collapse within about twenty years. 🙂
The responsibility lies with us to act RIGHT NOW, at this very moment. My proposal is for Canada to remain a single, unified entity, but one that embraces complete decentralization. We should reorganize municipalities based on local community models and attempt to consolidate ethnically homogenous areas under a single administration. Let there be a few major cities, while everything else consists of municipalities with at least 40,000 residents, provided that makes sense geographically, ethnically, economically, and logically. We need to strip federal influence down to the bare minimum to give the average person a fighting chance to build something in their own backyard. Why this model? Expansionist ambitions have never benefited anyone; Washington, D.C. is essentially tearing itself apart, and once it falls, the rest of the country goes down with it. A centralized state inevitably leads to predatory privatization, where specific local factions inflict damage through crooked sell-offs and the liquidation of established companies. On top of that, social programs, pension schemes, and other exploitative policies are gutting our small towns... We are losing our human capital, and the future looks bleak...

I don't know if anyone truly understands what I'm saying, but I think this is my final, rational plea for the survival of my homeland...