Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 10:54 am    Post subject: NAFTA negotiations set-back Reply with quote

Quote:
NAFTA deal in hand, Trump pulled the rug from under his own team
By LES WHITTINGTON MAY. 30, 2018

OTTAWA—Canada, the United States, and Mexico had a new NAFTA agreement in hand but U.S. President Donald Trump changed his mind about what should be in the deal and nixed it.

After nine months of gruelling negotiations, the outlook for the overhaul of the 24-year-old free trade pact took a turn for the better in the spring.

With the U.S. and Mexico facing procedural and political deadlines, negotiators were reportedly ready to compromise on key auto sector measures. The U.S. in particular softened its position on the crucial issue of where, and how much, automotive content would have to be sourced from the three countries to qualify for duty-free treatment.

Despite wide differences on a host of serious trade issues, solving the rules on autos had long been seen as a potential breakthrough that could allow Canada, the U.S., and Mexico to move forward toward a deal.

“There is very much an imminently achievable outcome that will be good for the United States, good for Canada, good for Mexico—and we’re very close,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told a Calgary news conference on May 15.

U.S. officials had been working from what they understood to be Trump’s negotiating goals, but when the preliminary agreement was put before the president for his approval, he said he actually wanted something else, according to a person with knowledge of the talks who spoke to me. A new version taking into account Trump’s revised view was later rejected outright by Mexico.

Afterwards, in another demonstration of Trump’s aggressive use of American economic might to try to impose his will on other countries, the president announced he would employ the administration’s favourite instrument—the obscure Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act—to investigate whether vehicle imports constitute a threat to U.S. national security. This tactic has the benefit of permitting the implementation of tariffs by the administration without having to actually prove substantive damage to American interests. Trump cited the same provision when he unveiled tariffs on aluminum and steel imports earlier this year, which have yet to be enforced on Canada and Mexico but could be as early as June 1.

“I am—even more than I was with steel and aluminum—trying to figure out where a possible national security connection is,” Trudeau responded. “Taking that a step further into autos seems to me to be on even flimsier logical grounds,” the prime minister told Reuters.

Speaking on the phone with Trump on Friday, Trudeau raised concerns about the latest Section 232 probe, “given the mutually beneficial integration of the Canadian and American auto industries,” an account of the call from the Prime Minister’s Office said. Trudeau also talked to the president about bringing the NAFTA talks to a “timely conclusion.”

In response to Trump’s latest Section 232 investigation, there was a lot of debate among U.S. business and trade experts about whether it was a NAFTA negotiating tactic or just another protectionist move by the White House. But there was no debate about the inanity of the decision, which was widely condemned by industry, analysts, and some legislators. One former official told Inside U.S. Trade there were 232 reasons why it was a stupid idea.

Although Trump, as everyone knows, is erratic and totally unpredictable, it now seems unlikely the NAFTA talks will be completed for many months. This raises fresh uncertainties regarding a successful renegotiation, as Mexico will choose a new president on July 1 and the Republicans may lose control of the House of Representatives in the November midterm elections in the U.S.

Some believe Trump switched from wanting a quick “win” with the early completion of the NAFTA talks to a preference for pushing the negotiations past the midterm elections. The latter would avoid exposing the Republicans to criticism by Democrats who would likely make the new NAFTA measures an issue in congressional campaigns where Trump’s party is already facing intense opposition as a result of the backlash generated by the president’s performance.

Keeping the three-country deliberations going through the rest of the year also preserves Trump’s ability to follow through on his many threats to blow up NAFTA, a card he might want to play in hopes of animating his base in the run-up to the November voting.

Les Whittington is an Ottawa journalist and a regular contributor to The Hill Times
https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/05/30/close-nafta-deal-trump-pulled-rug-team/145565


The idea (in the article) that the US is using its might in some illegitimate way is crazy. We are bargaining access to their (huge) market in return for their access to ours. Our main asset is resources, as far as they are concerned. We have a partially integrated economy and we probably export jobs with our resources. We could export those resources at a higher level of refinement, for example.

Mexico is now in a Presidential election race. NAFTA is a main issue.

The question for Canadians -- is this a time to try for a quick two-nation deal?
queenmandy85





Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 332
Reputation: 108.9
votes: 2
Location: Saskatoon

PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The scope of unintended consequences in a two way deal and stiffing Mexico, is broad indeed.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 8101
Reputation: 323.8Reputation: 323.8
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 11:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sort of feels like the next chapter in Art of the Deal?

If you have someone across the table working with a hard deadline you use that in order to move the negotiations to a point of near completion to the relief the of folks across the table only to threaten to walk away at the last minutes unless you get additional concessions.

Despite opinion to the contrary the President isn't an idiot as it pertains to negotiations;
Even if he feels he will retain both houses come November, why risk it?

It will be hard more challenging to get any deals passed if he loses either house or even if the composition changes.

The Democrats campaigning against a "better" NAFTA deal after years of refusing to having any willingness to renegotiate the last NAFTA deal isn't exactly a firm campaign plank which makes me question the Presidents preference to wait till after November.

Mexico's General Election is July 1st.
MORENA is polling ahead in the double digits and Ricardo Anaya needs a home run for PAN to stand a chance.

Trump isn't going to do much better with AMLO as President of Mexico and he likely knows that.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Thu May 31, 2018 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Canada Unleashes Retaliatory Tariffs On US: Here Is The Full List Of Affected Products
by Tyler Durden
Thu, 05/31/2018 - 15:07

And so, the trade wars have begun...

In slightly more than a strongly-worded email Canadian PM Justin Turdeau exclaimed his indignance at the Trump administration's decision to impose tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum imports, saying it is an "affront":

“Let me be clear, these tariffs are totally unacceptable,”

Trudeau said “Canada is a secure supplier” of metals to the U.S. military, and the idea of a security threat “is inconceivable.” He called the tariffs “punitive” noting that US has a $2billion steel trade surplus with Canada.

With that he announced retaliatory tariffs against the US.

Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland announced “dollar-for-dollar tariffs for every dollar levied against Canadians by the U.S.,” starting July 1 that will remain in place as long as U.S. tariffs do.

The tariffs cover Whiskey, Orange Juice, and other food products as well as steel and aluminum.

Measures will apply to up to C$16.6 billion dollars of products.

Canada's full list of actions includes 25% tariff on the following...

[in pdf form at the site, below.]

As Goldman explains, the decision to impose tariffs on Canada and Mexico (and now seeing Canada's response) suggests that prospects for a NAFTA agreement in the near-term are fading.

The Administration’s negotiating stance is often unpredictable so there is a risk of over-interpreting any single event. That said, this represents another signal that prospects for a near-term NAFTA deal are fading, just a few weeks after it had appeared fairly likely that a “skinny” agreement involving the auto sector might be reached.

However, Goldman note that the incremental inflation effect of these tit-for-tat tariffs should be small. We estimate that adding Canada, Mexico, and the EU to the countries facing a tariff of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum could boost core PCE by roughly 1bp. Imports from NAFTA and EU countries make up just under half of steel and aluminum imports.

Finally, in his Q&A Trudeau made it clear that "Canada's relationship with US is deep and complex" but warned that "US will harm its own people with such measures."[i]https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-31/canada-unleashes-dollar-dollar-retaliatory-tariffs-us


Why did Canada takes sides with Mexico? They are far more serious offenders than we are, and could involve us in the inflaming issue of immigration. In fact, we are the small fry in terms of balance of trade, considering the volume of it. Why did we tie ourselves to them? Another serious policy error.

We should make a private deal, 'for ourselves, and quickly. My opinion.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is an interesting interview of Paul Martin on Bloomberg.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-01/trump-appeasement-fails-so-trudeau-takes-the-gloves-off

The new narrative being hatched is that Justin Trudeau is the tough guy, our new defender, allied with Mexico against America ... dumb move. They have already blown their opportunity. This is turning into a disaster.

Quote:
Future NAFTA talks face uphill battle as Mexico, Canada carry on after tariffs
By Mike Blanchfield — Jun 1 2018

WASHINGTON — Now they put their noses to the grindstone and get back to the North American Free Trade Agreement. But it is shaping up to be a complicated, uphill slog.

Mexico and Canada have renewed their commitment to the bare-knuckled NAFTA renegotiation after absorbing the blow of the Trump administration's decision to impose potentially debilitating new tariffs on steel and aluminum imports.

The dragging on of the NAFTA talks was a key reason behind the U.S. move to target Canada and Mexico, but given the importance of that trade agreement to the continent's economy, neither U.S. neighbour was deterred.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto made their commitment in a Thursday phone call, following Trump's decision not to exempt their countries from import duties of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminum.

Canada retaliated with $16.6 billion worth of "countermeasures" that hit a range of products from flat-rolled steel to playing cards, while Mexico also plans tariffs on a variety of U.S. products, including flat steel.

"The leaders expressed their strong concerns and deep disappointment with the imposition of U.S. tariffs on Canadian and Mexican steel and aluminum exports," Trudeau's office said in a summary of the phone call with the Mexican leader.

"They also discussed the North American Free Trade negotiations and agreed to continue working toward a mutually beneficial outcome."

Late Thursday, U.S. President Donald Trump sent a very sharp warning — directed at Trudeau — over the pending the NAFTA negotiation.

Trump said in a statement the days of the U.S. being taken advantage of in trade deals "are over."

On NAFTA, Trump said: "Earlier today, this message was conveyed to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada: The United State (sic) will agree to a fair deal, or there will be no deal at all."

A fair deal is the furthest thing from Trump's mind, something that Thursday's sweeping tariffs decision demonstrates, according to business leaders and trade analysts.

Some question whether there might actually be a negotiating table to return to given the reality of the political calendar. Mexico's presidential election is one month away and the U.S. Congressional midterms follow in the fall.

Trump's latest move amounts to "blackmail" in the NAFTA renegotiation, but it doesn't kill chances of carving out a deal, says a veteran of Canada's free trade battles.

Perrin Beatty, the president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said Canada should not walk away from the NAFTA table.

"We should not ever agree to blackmail of the nature that was proposed here," said Beatty, who was a federal cabinet minister at the time of the original Canada-U.S. free trade negotiation that was NAFTA's precursor.

"We should remain at the table as long as there is a table to remain at, and look for a deal in which everyone wins."

Beatty said future negotiations have been altered by Trump's "classic bully techniques" which are designed "to extort the conditions that Donald Trump wants to see in NAFTA."

Eric Miller, of the Washington-based Rideau Potomac Strategy Group, said it is possible to move forward with NAFTA on a separate track from the tariff dispute. That's not unprecedented because when the original Canada-U.S. free trade talks were happening, the two countries were mired in the softwood lumber dispute.

But this time it's different, he said.

The key is for Canada to move forward with NAFTA while keeping the "damage done" in steel and aluminum contained in its own separate lane. After parsing the statements of Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland and U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Miller said it is clear the two countries want to do that.

"If the U.S. thinks this, in some way, will soften up Canada's position or make it want to give concessions to resolve the NAFTA, they are misunderstanding the situation," he said.

"Canada knows this is the big ball game and they have said from the very beginning they're not going to yield to pressure tactics."

A leading American trade lawyer says the window for serious NAFTA negotiations has simply closed for the year because it has been overtaken by the political calendar.

"I believe the real challenge on NAFTA will be Mexico. I do not believe we can proceed in any significant way on NAFTA before the July 1 election," said Dan Ujczo, of the firm Dickinson Wright PLLC.

Others say there's no way NAFTA's negotiators can look each other in the eye after Thursday's developments.

"It's hard to imagine how you negotiate with a knife to your throat," said Jean Simard, president of the Aluminum Association of Canada.

"I would break it off. That's not good faith."

Mike Blanchfield, The Canadian Press;
https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2018/06/01/future-nafta-talks-face-uphill-battle-as-mexico-canada-carry-on-after-tariffs/#.WxE4bkgvzIV
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Trade war? Trump blasts Canada on Twitter
CTVNews.ca Staff
Published Friday, June 1, 2018 9:29AM EDT
Last Updated Friday, June 1, 2018 12:09PM EDT

OTTAWA – U.S. President Donald Trump has taken to Twitter criticizing Canada for being "highly restrictive on trade."

In a 274-character comment on Friday, Trump took aim at Canada, imploring his neighbour to the north to open their markets and take down its trade barriers.

"Canada has treated our Agricultural business and Farmers very poorly for a very long period of time. Highly restrictive on Trade! They must open their markets and take down their trade barriers! They report a really high surplus on trade with us. Do Timber & Lumber in U.S.?" he tweeted.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during an event on tax policy in the Rose Garden of the White House, Thursday, April 12, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Trump's tweet comes a day after the U.S. levelled steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada, among other countries, and Ottawa retaliated with its own dollar-for-dollar countermeasures, including new taxes on steel, aluminum, and various other American products.

Canada's $16.6 billion in countermeasures included slapping surtaxes aimed to hit major industries in some high-profile Republicans’ districts, such as gherkins from Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan's Wisconsin stomping ground, to whiskies from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's home state of Kentucky.

In announcing the retaliatory measures, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called it "a turning point in the Canada-U.S. relationship," and expressed hope that "common sense" will prevail, despite seeing no sign of it from the U.S. administration.

Speaking to reporters on her way into question period on Friday, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland didn’t comment on Trump’s tweet, but said she’s heard from many Canadians in the last 24 hours that back the federal government’s position.

In an interview on BNN, former Conservative foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay said that the exchange of words and trade action yesterday puts “a lot of ice under the relationship.”

MacKay said that like with any war, there will be collateral damage, and classified this week’s events as “friendly fire.”

“Now we’re into an era where the United States, as has been aptly said before, has no friends and enemies, only interests and that creates such uncertainty and volatility across so many markets,” MacKay said.

Quote:
Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
Canada has treated our Agricultural business and Farmers very poorly for a very long period of time. Highly restrictive on Trade! They must open their markets and take down their trade barriers! They report a really high surplus on trade with us. Do Timber & Lumber in U.S.?

9:18 AM - Jun 1, 2018

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trade-war-trump-blasts-canada-on-twitter-1.3954972


This is the way I look at this -- there is no way we win a trade war. A third of our economy is dependent on trade to the USA. How dependent are they on us? It conjurs up visions of fleas in bed with elephants.

Our best game was to sidle up to Trump with a way he appears to win for a fast deal in which the auto pact is secured, and perhaps we get access for softwood lumber. And what is clear -- they want to compete in our food markets.

Instead, Trudeau postured, imagining that, in alliance with Mexico, Canada could effectively resist this. It's been stupid. it had no realistic evaluation of the costs. Instead, he took a pose of standing up to the bully.

Canada and Mexico have possibly missed their chance to be treated in a special way. Now we are in a category with te EU. Stupid beyond belief.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1219
Reputation: 120.6
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those who know how trade negotiation works , and have commented, know that Trump is being an idiot.

He can wear the 146,000 jobs lost thru his latest actions.

When a deal is on the table and all parties are satisfied, one does not then deny the deal to go through.

Thats rule #1 of ' not how things work.'
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What should the "flea" do, under the circumstances?

My guess is that the impact of 'these tariffs are only the first squeeze. It's pressure to make 'us take the deal. We should have done it a long time ago, if we weren't led by a guy who was more interested in carbon taxes and legal weed.

Now we're in a category with 'everybody else' -- except Asian countries.

Explain to me, if you please, how that's a good thing.

=========================

A separate matter, but I can't help but wonder how a guy like you -- a loyal Liberal who feels that an association with Doug Ford would be stigmatizing -- are you tempted to vote NDP? Just curious.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1219
Reputation: 120.6
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
What should the "flea" do, under the circumstances?

Who is the flea?

There are/is a group of smart people who know these negotiations are not easy and they (all sides) have worked hard to come to a deal that the US originally wanted.

When that was achieved, the idiot decided he didnt want to approve it.

This is part and parcel of what he could do when he was a developer. He negotiated (well his team did) terms of building his casino and condos etc, then when it came time to pay the trades he would tell them No...but I will pay 40% of it or some such. In other words , he reneged on the deals already made. He knew the trades were smaller companies and couldnt afford to say no to the BS payment offer.

Same thing here. If enough Americans open their brains instead of being complete dumbasses they will come to see this as wrong. Of course they are trumpers so brains are in short supply all around.
Quote:

My guess is that the impact of 'these tariffs are only the first squeeze. It's pressure to make 'us take the deal. We should have done it a long time ago, if we weren't led by a guy who was more interested in carbon taxes and legal weed.

Stupid post of the day. Congrats.
[/quote]
Now we're in a category with 'everybody else' -- except Asian countries. [/quote]
I guess if Ivanka wanted her access to our market succeed and we approved then we would be in the same camp as the Chinese.
And .... some people dont see this , which is amazing.


=========================
Quote:

A separate matter,

Put it in the correct thread.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see you are up to your usual standard of commentary. You often yammer on about the smart people ... implying that you know these people.

I suppose you mean by that people like Justin Trudeau and the staff tries their best to keep him from running off the rails. But did you detect some kind of negotiating strategy here? Hmmm?

Because what I noticed was a lot of posturing -- surely you remember, around the time when Justin crowned his career as a celebrity by appearing on the cover of the Rolling Stone.

Then he seemed to duck out, when the photo ops were over.

Tell me, how does a PM of Canada justify trying a settlement to settling with Mexico too? Why was that a good idea? If we had cut a deal on our own, we'd probably be over this hurdle now.

==================

ReL a separate matter. Sorry, I didn't see the TC thread. If you don't want to answer, you certainly don't have to. I didn't think it'd be that embarrassing. Nobody knows your real name, after all ...
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1219
Reputation: 120.6
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
I see you are up to your usual standard of commentary. You often yammer on about the smart people ... implying that you know these people.

Nope, dont know any of them personally.

But they are a smart group, all sides of this, US MEX and CDN.
Quote:

I suppose you mean by that people like Justin Trudeau and the staff tries their best to keep him from running off the rails. But did you detect some kind of negotiating strategy here? Hmmm?

NOt sure what you are on about.

The strategy was to negotiate, come to an agreement, and get the damn thing done.

The teams all did. Except one particularly idiotic member decided he would run this like his biz back in New York.
But now hes a guy who hasnt a f*****g clue that...
1) Gave Canada $600M due to his lack of brains from aluminum sales since CDA alum sellers factored in the raise before ti cam into effect
2) Orrin Hatch, Ben Sasse and Paul Ryan all know this is a dumb thing to do and are openly fighting the idiot on this one.
3) Yearly increase to an America will be $210. Yeah....idiot
4)50% of steel and aluminum come from Canada, so layoffs will happen, and happen to the estimated tune of hundreds of thousands. (in USA)
5)CEO of the US Chamber of Commerce estimates (if NAFTA cancelled) 2.6M jobs lost.
6) Soybeans sales...gone. Enjoy poverty Illinois Iowa Minnesota Nebraska and N Dakota!
7)Harley Davidson (already in trouble)- sorry to see you are closed for good.
8) telling his allies they are a threat is confoudingly stupid...or ya know, par for the course. At the same time, China is now a less threat than CDA, Mex or EU. Bullshit

Quote:


Because what I noticed was a lot of posturing -- surely you remember, around the time when Justin crowned his career as a celebrity by appearing on the cover of the Rolling Stone.

What has this to do w trade.

Ah right, nothing.

This is not a LIberal nor PC issue. This is an issue for all of us. Trudeau is not doing the negotiating, he has a good team on this, we should support them.

Quote:


Tell me, how does a PM of Canada justify trying a settlement to settling with Mexico too? Why was that a good idea? If we had cut a deal on our own, we'd probably be over this hurdle now.

Oh fer fuck sakes, do you even know what NAFTA stands for ? We cannot make a deal on our own. Its all three or nothing, all out on the table.
==================

Quote:
I didn't think it'd be that embarrassing. Nobody knows your real name, after all ...

No but you keep trying.

I cannot decide where I am parking my vote.

Fords an idiot, and he will be the next Premier. We've suffered idiots before and will again in the future.

To that end, he seems to have changed and is making far less gaffes than I expected. So thats wonderful news.

I dont think we can afford his platform on the simple reason that he is cutting too much.

We cannot afford Wynne so that option is out.

We cannot afford the NDP unless we want poverty , but moreso is that she has no one with any experience in govt and that is a huge problem. No one of any gumption from the NDP would know how to spell Finance Minister let alone be one.

So that option is out.

So I go back and consider my options. I am 99% sure PC will get my vote.

I would be 100% if there was anyone but Ford. PB, Christine, Mulroney.....
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, I was curious -- the lesser evil choice must be difficult when there are two greater evils and a man who (one suspects) might not have the best table manners, etc.

I concede the point about Ford, up to a point. He does seem dull. But focussed. I don't have your fear that he'll cut so much that it will have deleterious effects.

========================

You know, TC, you won't discuss the issues behind trade. Any of the smart people involved would probably wish that their glorious leader (the very embodiment of white male privilege) wasn't trying to help mobilize woman to resist Trump as a way to stick his thumb in Trump's eye, politically.

You don't think it affected Trump much because it was such a failure? Now that he's an international laughing stock, it probably seems trivial, but a lot of politicians -- I don't say Trump -- would figure there's no point in doing favours for a guy like that.

What are our goals? If ending supply-management ends up as a "price" of a new deal, would you concede we have lost? And how are we going to sustain a special deal for us when the main focus of the tariff threat is the EU?

I think the best strategy for Canada was to face up to the further integration of our economies, and want something in exchange -- say on softwood lumber. We should have given Trump an early 'win' on trade and help set the pattern for others. That's my view, and how I score it. I'd be fascinated what you think Canada's strategy was under the Liberals.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is some American coverage ...

The thing is -- are we one of the violators? Or are we just competing in a market where prices are depressed due to imports?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oW5DCnTEi2w

As this is lining up, Canada could still be in a position to give Trump an early trade ;win' -- at a price. It seems to me the reason we're joining the Resistance is because we have;t thought through a plan, a set of counter-demands to trade off with the Americans. We thought the present NAFTA would go on forever.

I only hope that the government is not motivated by a desire to stop Trump ... because, you know ... it's 2018.

Somewhere along the way, here, we should look for a chance for a quick deal that would give Trump an early victory. I'll give you supply management in return for the auto pact, and softwood lumber. And maybe a side deal on upgrading our military.

This is why TC is wrong. Trump served notice of his intention to end NAFTA, which started negotiations. There are no 'rules' here. Only timetables. Canada went into this with gender and environmental demands on Mexico! What utter bullcrap.

When the tariffs were announced, Canada and Mexico were given time to make a deal. They didn't. Now we will be a thow-in on a global deal with the rest of the first world -- even though we are not a violator.

Nice going, team! That's what TC wants you to accept on his puffed up authority.

We have wasted that time, when we could have made a different deal before the US squared off 'with the EU. It's a failure that it has come to this.

If we had half a brain in this country, we'd understand that America is the new Rome, and ... to switch illustrative empires ... we are like Scotland to England. We want to be as big a part of their economy as we can get, and keep our political independence as much as we can.

Am I wrong?

Or do we want to lose x% of our GNP for however long it takes? To win what? Answer me that -- what do we win?
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is this the alternative?

Quote:
Government bailouts could be coming for steel, aluminium industries
CBC Radio · 2 hours ago

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland says the government is looking at offering support to steel and aluminum workers impacted by U.S. tariffs.

On Thursday, President Donald Trump announced tariffs of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminum that would apply to Canada, Mexico and the EU.

To minimize the harm done to those sectors, Freeland said she wanted to assure workers that the government will come to their aid — though she didn't say how or when.

When asked if the help would resemble the $867 million in loans offered during the U.S.-Canada standoff over softwood lumber, Freeland wouldn't say.

She called the two situations "very different, but the principle is the same."

Since the tariffs are different, she said the impacts and subsequent government response will be unique to the steel and aluminum workers.

In August the government threatened legal action against the U.S. if negotiations on softwood lumber continued to be stalled. The Conference Board of Canada estimated at the floated duties on softwood lumber duties would cost Canadian producers $1.7 billion a year and result in the reduction of 2,200 jobs.

"The end game is for the United States to remove its illegal and completely unjustified tariffs," Freeland told The House.

Canada is countering the United States' move by imposing dollar-for-dollar tariffs of its own on everything from steel products to maple syrup, scheduled to take effect July 1.

The duties represent $16.6 billion on some steel and aluminum products and other goods from the U.S. — including beer kegs, whisky, toilet paper and "hair lacquers."

But Freeland made it clear the goal is to get the tariffs repealed.

"I believe common sense will prevail," she said.

"People don't do things that hurt themselves for that long."
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehou.....-1.4685496


I couldn't make a better argument myself. This is the path ahead if we want to go into a financial war with the USA. It ends up in financial ruin, if it goes to the end. The companies we are keeping afloat are probably foreign-owned anyway. Not only that, but the Americans will impose countervailing tariffs on us. It goes nowhere.

It illustrates that they have no plan B, they don't know what Canadian trade interests are, and that they have been acting on ideological grounds, rather than dealing with the practical possibilities.

Wake up folks, we are the Letterkenny people, not the audience of the Munk Debates!
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 6018
Reputation: 290.3
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Background ...

This is a 'futurist' -- a guy who makes a nice living using social science and history to predict the future. The first eight minutes explains why the US is less dependent on trade than any of the US's trade partners.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feU7HT0x_qU
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 4

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


NAFTA negotiations set-back

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB