Canada

I’ve been guest-blogging at Andrew Sullivan’s place this week where, somewhat to my surprise, I ended up refighting the War of 1812 with Jonathan Rauch. I meant to post this here earlier but forgot, so here it is now. My word, that jackanape Jonathan Rauch does severely provoke me. First blogging, now the War of 1812. I surmise he aspires to nincompoop status. The War of 1812, upon which many American myths now seem to depend, was a foolish and futile enterprise from the start, rested on a policy of ignorance and needless aggression, and was founded on the erroneous assumption that Napoleon Bonaparte would prevail in the epic, global

Meanwhile, elsewhere in whimsy the nice folks at Foreign Policy asked me to write a piece about Prince William’s engagement. Somehow this ended up with another modest proposal: the United States should ditch the Presidency, join the Commonwealth and become a parliamentary democracy. You know, like Canada. They have the trappings of royalty already, but none of the benefits: Last year, Peggy Noonan, the American conservative commentator and former presidential speechwriter, complained that President Barack Obama lacked some of the presence that a good head of state requires. She imagines “a good president as sitting at the big desk and reaching out with his long arms and holding on to

The other day, writing in the New York Times, Tyler Cowen suggested: The received wisdom in the United States is that deep spending cuts are politically impossible. But a number of economically advanced countries, including Sweden, Finland, Canada and, most recently, Ireland, have cut their government budgets when needed. Most relevant, perhaps, is Canada, which cut federal government spending by about 20 percent from 1992 to 1997. […] To be sure, the spending cuts meant fewer government services, most of all for health care, and big cuts in agricultural subsidies. But Canada remained a highly humane society, and American liberals continue to cite it as a beacon of progressive values.

It first aired a couple of nights ago but, as Benedict Brogan says, this ITN news feature on how the Canadian government cut public spending by 20 percent in the late-1990s is well worth watching: P.S. I doubt we’ll be seeing repeats of the hospital demolition which comes at 2:19. P.P.S. Perhaps the most striking part of the film is Tom Bradby’s conclusion: “We [in Britain] are almost certainly going to have to make this journey.  But have British politicians – any of them – really even begun to prepare us?”  Why so striking?  Well, because it’s another sign that the media are countenancing even greater cuts than the politicians

There are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of the Scottish government’s desire to set alcohol prices. Not the least of them is that, in addition to the usual health police, the measure is backed by big business. And why wouldn’t it be? The SNP seem to think that Molson Coors’ support for similar measures in Canada and the brewer’s suggestion that the Canadian experience be copied in the UK represents a major breakthrough for the idea. Well, perhaps it does. But Molson Coors is, I think, Canada’s biggest brewer and they also make Carling – the most popular lager in the UK. So of course they recognise that increased

Andrew Coyne defends Stephen Harper from his critics. Or at least, from some of them: While this laissez-faire, do-nothing government contents itself with spending more than any government in the history of Canada — 25% more, after inflation and population growth, than at the start of the decade — and pumping tens of billions of dollars into the banking system, what Canadians demand is “stimulus.” And stimulus, we all know, in a sophisticated, 21st century economy, can be delivered in only one way: by hiring large numbers of unionized men to dig holes in the ground (see “infrastructure.”) Loosening monetary policy doesn’t count. Tax cuts don’t count. It only counts