Only person who is being absurd here is you. How hard it is to understand that something can be good for the Empire? Even your best argument boils down to Hans the trader can't eat imported spices this year and have to wait never mind that in a bit then he can eat more than ever.
The question isn't whether it's good for the Empire. It
was. If you handed me a sheet beforehand that said 'Is this a good idea for the Empire?' I'd say yes, tentatively, but that's my modern perspective. In retrospect? Yes, it was good, especially with no war. On the balance, in retrospect, the canal is good for the Empire. On that we agree.
If you ask me 'Hey, this person owns 33% of the EIC, should you trust their judgement on whether or not the EIC expanding is good for the Empire?'
I'd say no.
And no, Hans the trader doesn't get to eat imported spices next year because he earned his money carrying things by Route Y, and now that everything goes by Route X, he doesn't have money anymore. He would go trade on the canal, except he can't, because the EIC is a monopoly, and not so interested in hiring from
other trading companies.
Also most of those traders are explotive hacks that hurt people with their trade monopolies.
Sure they are. So are we. That is how the Empire works. It's just that now the people with the monopolies are us, and the people getting exploited are them.
I mean when you think about it the reason Empire is not hut by the canal is Marienburg has already crushed anybody who would. They took over and so there is no Empire Citizen left that would be hurt by this canal. Only Marienburg and its patsies. That is what Monopoly means.
Trading with a port that has the monopoly on imports doesn't mean you're their patsy. It means they have a monopoly. I mean, you can certainly declare them an enemy of the Empire. Arguably, a Grey Wizard has the ability to do so! It's just.
Convenient.
There are also routes that don't connect with Marienburg, overland routes, etc that may see a loss in traffic. Distribution centers that are no longer viable. Entire provinces whose entire trade balance has shifted.
We have just made a massive change to the Empire and we have become filthy rich for it.
there is not one line in the story about how canal would hurt anybody.
I'm pretty sure there were the Nordland? Ostland? Guys that opposed it, though we did end up working them in/convincing them. It might have been by buying them out, though.
My advice is accept you are wrong rather than doubling down on this like this. Even QM said you are wrong but it is like you can't accept being wrong and ignored him. So at this point you are just embarassing yourself. Not a good look.
... that wasn't one of the things the QM said I was wrong on. I tried to drop the whole subject. You wouldn't, and instead claimed that it is absurd that the canal hurt a
single person in the Empire, which is, frankly, just statistically impossible.
What exactly do you want? To say the canal benefited the Empire as a whole? Never suggested it didn't. To say that Mathilde has not been condemned for violating the Vow of Poverty? That's obvious. That Mathilde has only ever enriched herself while also intending to enrich the Empire? She's certainly tried, and pretty much succeeded. That the apparent terms of the 'Vow of Poverty' are a plausible thing to happen? Yeah, even if I think it's silly, silly things happen. That my view of the Vow of Poverty was more restrictive than it actually is? Probably. And that colored my opinion of whether Mathilde had in fact violated it unduly? Definitely. (That's
probably what I was off base with?)
What I won't agree to is that somehow
no one ended up worse off following a nationwide trade rearrangement. That just... happens.
I also don't see what seems to be the Quest reality of the Vow of Poverty as a
good idea, at least not without clarification, but that's an entirely separate question.