No one ever clearly states what it is supposed to be because each option has some major fucking flaws.
>Is it just free trade agreements?
in which case why would britain prioritise free trade agreements which aren't even particularly economically beneficial with small markets far away in favour of more opportunistic and weighty ones?
>its also has freedom of movement
but why would New Zealand want to give 100m canadians and Brits unfettered access to their country? why did we win back control of our borders to lose it again
>It's also some sort of federation
and this is where tihngs get really whacky. If we have to make joint decisions on things like the EU, how do we ensure our interests are aligned? Australia, NZ and Canada are all resource extractive economies with much more important partners than the UK. The UK is a service based economy, with some manufacturing that requires intermediate goods from europe.
How are economic interests aligned? If we conflict over decisions, any anglo-brotherhood feeling we currently have would be mired in disagreements over which way decisions should go.
Additionally what would this look like - would 4 million kiwis have an equal say to 4 million mancunians and brummies (thus losing their sovereignty)? would they have a stronger say than 4 million mancuians and brummies (as a sovereign country)?
>yeah but anglo culture
what does this actually look like? parades? why does this need to be an economic-strategic priority for the UK?
>it will make our countries more powerful as a bloc
and this is where it gets even more vexed. Essentially the criteria for this bloc is
>has the queen as head of state
>and is majority white
because there are commonwealth realms that are richer than parts of the UK that are not even remotely considered part of CANZUK.
So by essentially racially discriminating against them, we could very easily lose clout with India and emerging commonwealth countries in Africa
I dislike CANZUK for multiple reasons
to finish this off:
In my estimation CANZUK is not an idea rooted in any vision of the future, it doesn't make economic sense and it hasn't ironed out a single detail abut things like how decision making would work.
It is an idea based on a nostalgia that many people today increasingly themselves do not even remember and nostalgia that is blind of practicality or any rational way that it could feasibly improve lives in reality is not what policies or strategy should be based on.
Bump
>t.Alex Salmond
I hate it because Canada is in it. Fuck Anglo Canadians and free Quebec.
yeah no shit Brexiters are autistic and delusional nothing new
There should just be an extension of 5 eyes that makes trading and starting a business in CANZUSAUK slightly easier. Something vaguely similar to NAFTA, rather than an outdated imperial larp.
I hate how Americans always wedge themselves in the commonwealth. Take Canada with you and fuck off.
Without Canada the whole thing makes even less sense.
So be it. Fuck Canada and fuck you.
>tf
>tp
That all makes sense to me but I’m just curious what you think about Americans and Trump making basically those arguments and getting shit from it from Europeans?
Are you okay?
>why would New Zealand want to give 100m canadians and Brits unfettered access to their country? why did we win back control of our borders to lose it again
All four countries have similar stats on economic indicators, like standard of living, employment, and so on. Most people don't have the money to just pack up and leave for NZ, and even if somehow they did jobs there would dry up very fast, meaning many would have to return and opportunities would open up in the other three countries.
As for losing control of our borders, that was only a particular problem in the EU due to the massive economic disparities between the member countries. Of course Poles and Romanians are going to flood to the UK and Germany since their own countries are a dead end with ultra low wages.
That's not the case though between, say, Canada and Australia, which both probably have similar wages for similar jobs, and free movement will mainly serve to fill gaps in the labour market.
Overall I think CANZUK is good as an area for free movement of goods, capital and imo labour too. However it is definitely true that turning it into an EU like superstate would only result in similar problems emerging to the ones that exist in Europe today, so anything like a combined parliament, currency union or whatever is out, at least in the way I envision it working.
hmmm alright
bump
i don't want the english to bring their bullshit here, and i doubt the kiwis want our bullshit either
I don't mind it per se but we just threw away EU membership and CANZUK is just a pointless union which achieves little but make it easier for people to travel
i agree with you op but it's mostly because im salty about the us being left out of the anglo sekrit klub
Anglos should work togeva simple as
not op mate but america is in the five eyes which is quite literally the anglo secret club
fine. i'm salty about the us being left out of the hypothetical non-secret anglo club
CANZUK is merely whiteboi commonwealth empire nostalgia. It has almost no practical, economic or political benefits.
The guy that runs the CANZUK advocacy group had the idea because he didn't like standing in line with thirdies at the airport. Not even kidding.
I think he's French that's upset that Canada forever demonstrates the superiority of the Anglo over the Gaul.
I hate CANZUK because it reminds me what we could have been.
Whats the point when the UK won't exist after this decade
RARE and WRONG
I'm not French. I am a Briton through and through. Did you know that Canada changed their flag to the shitstain it is today because they considered the union jack offensive and divisive? When Canada stabbed us in the back during the Suez Crisis, Egypt didn't want Canada to talk to them because they thought it was just talking to another British proxy. The frogs in Quebec were looking to gain independence. Their flag was made to cater to political correctness and cultural sensitivity. Fucking pathetic.
They threw us in the ditch not just during the Suez Crisis, but when they changed their flag. Fuck you for supporting those cunts too.
Good luck
>All four countries have similar stats on economic indicators, like standard of living, employment, and so on
not true because there are millions of brits who live in regions of the UK that are poorer than australia or new zealand.
>Most people don't have the money to just pack up and leave for NZ
exactly that would impel people to leave.
>even if somehow they did jobs there would dry up very fast
that's now really how it works. more people = more jobs need doing
>Canada and Australia, which both probably have similar wages for similar jobs
except the standard of living is appreciably better in canada, aus and nz than it is in vast swathes of the UK
>free movement will mainly serve to fill gaps in the labour market.
right so kiwis are going to come and pick potatoes and onions for us? (that was the gap romanians and poles were filling)
>Overall I think CANZUK is good as an area for free movement of goods, capital
why? surely the UK can seek out far more lucrative free trade agreements. Are CANZUK contries even complementary to what we export?
>imo labour too
why labour too? I don't really foresee any UK skill shortages being sufficiently filled by just australians and canadians, especially since our wages are lower.
shouldn't have listened to the boers.
GDP (ppp) per capita:
of non-canzuk commonwealth realms (ie the Queen rules them):
Bahamas - £26k
St Kitts and Nevis - £24.6k
Antigua and Barbuda - £23.2k
GDP per capita of fully fledged CANZUK members
Northern Ireland - £19.5K
Wales - £20.5k
so why is CANZUK a thing?
CANZUK is stupid.
But your comment is vacuous
explain to me why Bahamas, St Kitts and Antigua aren't considered part of the CANZUK project? They are richer than major parts of the UK and they share our Monarch.
why isn't it BANCUKA&BSTK&N?
Impressed to see well thought out posts om both sides! (Although saw OP's post in an earlier thread about this so it's either the same guy or copypasta)
did a good job pointing out why similar agreements like what was done with the EU would be different with countries on more equal footing. Many of the issues in the EU with freedom of movement and such may not be issues or at least not be as severe, both due to the more equal standards of living and also things like the difficulty of travel.
That being said, free trade agreements are much more likely and would be a better first step since it's better to make smaller, incremental changes than sudden huge changes. To address the points brought up in , free trade agreements tend to improve the prosperity of all the nations involved, so even if CANZUK doesn't have a large portion of trade with each other even making something like 1% of trade more profitable is still a benefit.
>free trade agreements tend to improve the prosperity of all the nations involved, so even if CANZUK doesn't have a large portion of trade with each other even making something like 1% of trade more profitable is still a benefit.
Except our government's analysis has shown that a trade deal with new zealand culd actually have a negative impact on our GDP.
>Overall I think CANZUK is good as an area for free movement of goods, capital
>why? surely the UK can seek out far more lucrative free trade agreements. Are CANZUK contries even complementary to what we export?
Although you're correct there could be more lucrative trade agreements for the UK, real life's not like a video game/EU4 where you're only allowed X number of diplomatic deals and have to optimize them. There's no reason there couldn't be an CANZUK deal alongside any number of other trade deals with the UK.
>free trade agreements tend to improve the prosperity of all the nations involved
maybe this is true for major trading partners, but the uk doesn't trade much with canada australia or new zealand.
>Except our government's analysis has shown that a trade deal with new zealand culd actually have a negative impact on our GDP.
Do you have a link to that analysis, or know what the logic is there? Since free trade deals generally involve remove tariffs/barriers to trade, that would seem to imply Britain makes some significant amount of money from tariffs on New Zealand imports, which would be contrary to your other point that the UK doesn't do much trade with Aussies and Kiwis.
>but anglo culture
>what does this actually look like? parades? why does this need to be an economic-strategic priority for the UK?
Ah yes, another concerned patriot.
Surprised that no one will address this.
We are the United States, bro. We are the club.