Author Topic: US VS G7  (Read 55786 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #300 on: June 29, 2018, 10:12:54 »
The problem with all of this is, once the spiral of tariff/counter-tariff takes off and the economic damage begins to mount, positions will harden, not weaken.

No political leader on either side is going to be the one to admit that his tariff resulted in job loses on his own side- it is always going to be the other guy's fault.

It becomes a real war, where climb down becomes impossible.

If something doesn't change, this summer will be remembered as the start of the Great Depression of 2018 (at least).  I am not kidding.
Yes, and in all honesty, if it takes massive job losses and crippling economic contraction to stop the American Presidents protectionist agenda, then that's what it's going to take.

And I have a feeling that is exactly where we are heading. I can only hope people point the blame at the American leadership for dragging to globe down this road to ruin.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 178,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,054
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #301 on: June 29, 2018, 10:17:30 »
Yes, and in all honesty, if it takes massive job losses and crippling economic contraction to stop the American Presidents protectionist agenda, then that's what it's going to take.

And I have a feeling that is exactly where we are heading. I can only hope people point the blame at the American leadership for dragging to globe down this road to ruin.

The blame will always get pointed outside ones border.

Very soon, patriotism will take over, everywhere, and no politician will face much in the way of domestic criticism. Not when there is "the other" to blame.

You are will will to risk economic collapse in North America to "stop Trump"? Really?

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 186,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,398
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #302 on: June 29, 2018, 10:22:20 »
The blame will always get pointed outside ones border.

Very soon, patriotism will take over, everywhere, and no politician will face much in the way of domestic criticism. Not when there is "the other" to blame.

You are will will to risk economic collapse in North America to "stop Trump"? Really?

I don't get the argument that everyone should just turtle up and give in.  Or why any Canadian would side with Trump on this issue.
Optio

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #303 on: June 29, 2018, 10:23:43 »
The blame will always get pointed outside ones border.

Very soon, patriotism will take over, everywhere, and no politician will face much in the way of domestic criticism. Not when there is "the other" to blame.

You are will will to risk economic collapse in North America to "stop Trump"? Really?
Me? What power do I have?

Me? Am I hitting Americas allies with tariffs, inviting counter tariffs and dragging the worlds largest economies into a global trade war that no one can win, only lose the least?

Me? I have the power to wish for things, like, first of all, no trade war whatsoever. Or, if that doesn't come true, that america falls flat on its face and lose miserably. Or, failing that, that the entire world economy goes belly up and that people rightly point the finger at the Americans who started it. I can also wish for a billion dollars and the playboy mansion, but at the end of the day, these are all wishes and don't do squat.

So don't look at me. I mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

You point your attention at the American President who has his hands on the steering wheel of the largest economy on the planet as he does his best to play a game of chicken with the global economy.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 178,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,054
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #304 on: June 29, 2018, 10:29:37 »
I don't get the argument that everyone should just turtle up and give in.  Or why any Canadian would side with Trump on this issue.

I am not supporting Trump and you just proved my point. Being critical of the Liberals will soon become impossible.

The unserious nature in which they approached NAFTA negotiations; the manner in which they misjudged Trump; the illogical defence of Supply Management (which hurts low income Canadian worst of all)- all will get swept under the carpet as Trump gets the blame for everything in Canada.

But, hey, what are millions of unemployed Canadians? Small price to pay to "stop Trump", huh?

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #305 on: June 29, 2018, 10:39:07 »
I am not supporting Trump and you just proved my point. Being critical of the Liberals will soon become impossible.

The unserious nature in which they approached NAFTA negotiations
Even if that is true, those are not the issues holding up negotiations right now
Quote
; the manner in which they misjudged Trump;
Canada and every other country on the planet. Macron tried to befriend the american president, got hit with tariffs, Canada tried to befriend the american president, got hit with tariffs, mexico was downright rude and actively fought the US President, got hit with tariffs, Merkel stood up to Trump, got hit with tariffs, China and Xi tried to work with Trump, with both carrot and stick, getting hit with tariffs, Russia has been hot and cold with the American president, still being hit with Sanctions, who in the world isn't in the US crosshairs in some fashion?
Quote
the illogical defence of Supply Management (which hurts low income Canadian worst of all)- all will get swept under the carpet as Trump gets the blame for everything in Canada.
Both parties in Canada support supply management, Canada is rather united in that sense, America already sells a lot dairy in Canada and would have sold more under TPP, which they left. It also doesn't touch on the fact that the americans heavily subsidies their dairy farmers, and as such have such a oversupply of dairy that they are looking to dump it in Canadian markets in order to save themselves, so no, Canada shouldn't open up our dairy market simply to save american farmers from themselves and American policy makers from their own short nearsightedness.
Quote

But, hey, what are millions of unemployed Canadians? Small price to pay to "stop Trump", huh?
You make it sound like Canada has so many other options.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 186,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,398
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #306 on: June 29, 2018, 10:42:01 »
I am not supporting Trump and you just proved my point. Being critical of the Liberals will soon become impossible.

The unserious nature in which they approached NAFTA negotiations; the manner in which they misjudged Trump; the illogical defence of Supply Management (which hurts low income Canadian worst of all)- all will get swept under the carpet as Trump gets the blame for everything in Canada.

But, hey, what are millions of unemployed Canadians? Small price to pay to "stop Trump", huh?

No issues being critical of the liberals.  But for what exactly?

How is it unserious?  Serious question. Seems that they are being lauded for their efforts from all political sides.
Supply management...Scheer was elected leader on that.  It isn't just the liberals.

Scheer, Ford, Harper, Mulroney (Sr) are all on side.  Targeted asymmetrical tactics are being used.  Rona Ambrose is even on the advisory committee. 

If you want to criticise the Canadian Approach sure.  But this is a bi-partisan effort.

I doubt the Conservatives would be behaving any differently.  the only difference I would say, and I am being honest when I say it is that if the conservatives were running the show I have no doubt that the Liberals and NDP would be playing dirty politics with it to undermine their efforts. 



Optio

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 178,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,054
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #307 on: June 29, 2018, 10:54:07 »
The problem is that Canada doesn't have many other realistic options to the US market- many limitations are self created. We certainly won't get a better trade deal with China. Trudeau pretty much blew the TPP talks. He pretty much destroyed an additional trade deal with India after his disasterous "costume vacation" there this winter.

We could have had two additional pipelines pumping oil east and west for export by now, and earning all Canadians revenue from non-US sources, but...the Liberals and Climate change.

Why should I care if the US government is stupid enough to subsidize my grocery bill to the tune of $350.00 per year? Is economic collapse worth 15,000 dairy farmers?

None of this is a support of Trump. It is simply stating that we made our hand much, much worse.


Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 186,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,398
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #308 on: June 29, 2018, 11:07:14 »
The problem is that Canada doesn't have many other realistic options to the US market- many limitations are self created. We certainly won't get a better trade deal with China. Trudeau pretty much blew the TPP talks. He pretty much destroyed an additional trade deal with India after his disasterous "costume vacation" there this winter.

We could have had two additional pipelines pumping oil east and west for export by now, and earning all Canadians revenue from non-US sources, but...the Liberals and Climate change.

Why should I care if the US government is stupid enough to subsidize my grocery bill to the tune of $350.00 per year? Is economic collapse worth 15,000 dairy farmers?

None of this is a support of Trump. It is simply stating that we made our hand much, much worse.

We signed the TPP deal.  https://globalnews.ca/news/4069924/tpp-trans-pacific-partnership-signing-canada/  did something happen?

You know as well as anyone else that BC NDP/Green government is holding up the pipeline issue.  Mind you I agree that they are putting themselves in a corner with their green energy/environmental stuff. 


But, you are adding other issues to the plate. I thought we were talking about NAFTA.

I agree that we need to diversify.  no argument there .  But that does not mean caving to the US on NAFTA.
Optio

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #309 on: June 29, 2018, 11:13:16 »
The problem is that Canada doesn't have many other realistic options to the US market- many limitations are self created. We certainly won't get a better trade deal with China.
Yes, they are a tough nut to crack
Quote
Trudeau pretty much blew the TPP talks.
TPP is a go, what are you talking about?
Quote
He pretty much destroyed an additional trade deal with India after his disasterous "costume vacation" there this winter.
Sure, but it's not like there was one on the table
Quote

We could have had two additional pipelines pumping oil east and west for export by now, and earning all Canadians revenue from non-US sources, but...the Liberals and Climate change.
Moot point, as Canada is still getting 3 pipelines which will take care of most of Albertas current export capacity
Quote
Why should I care if the US government is stupid enough to subsidize my grocery bill to the tune of $350.00 per year? Is economic collapse worth 15,000 dairy farmers?
Why does America care about BC subsiding American Lumber? Because of domestic politics, and interests. No country want foreign nations dumping products in their market. Isn't that the reason why the American president has put tariffs on everyone for steel and aluminum? Can't have it both ways.
Quote

None of this is a support of Trump. It is simply stating that we made our hand much, much worse.
Canada and the rest of the world isn't left with too many options. Either hit back with tariffs or accept that america has tilted trade in their favor above yours, perhaps permanently.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 11:21:44 by Altair »
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 586,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,517
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #310 on: June 29, 2018, 11:26:18 »
If something doesn't change, this summer will be remembered as the start of the Great Depression of 2018 (at least). 

The last big one started with the 1929 stock market crash, (which actually began recovering after stock holders lost about $40 billion) before the rest of the dominoes fell over.  About 9,000 banks collapsed because deposits were uninsured, so they stopped lending money, so fewer expenditures... which meant people/businesses stopped purchasing items.  With US businesses failing, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff (1930) penalized imports, sparked economic retaliation, and quelle surprise....led to less international trade, further crippling economies.   /Hist 101   ;)

This depression will work in the other direction, starting  with tariffs and retaliation. 

Shame some people don't understand history or economics.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #311 on: June 29, 2018, 11:29:38 »
The last big one started with the 1929 stock market crash, (which actually began recovering after stock holders lost about $40 billion) before the rest of the dominoes fell over.  About 9,000 banks collapsed because deposits were uninsured, so they stopped lending money, so fewer expenditures... which meant people/businesses stopped purchasing items.  With US businesses failing, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff (1930) penalized imports, sparked economic retaliation, and quelle surprise....led to less international trade, further crippling economies.   /Hist 101   ;)

This depression will work in the other direction, starting  with tariffs and retaliation. 

Shame some people don't understand history or economics.
One would think it would be a requirement for the President of the United States, but alas...
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 178,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,054
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #312 on: June 29, 2018, 11:37:45 »
My apologies on TPP- I was mistaken.


Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #313 on: June 29, 2018, 11:53:48 »
My apologies on TPP- I was mistaken.
It shouldn't be overlooked, Canada is going to be well set up with CETA and TPP coming into effect in the next few years, both negotiated by the Harper Conservatives and the Trudeau Liberals.

NAFTA, while under threat, is not yet dead. All these negotiations mean nothing if

1) The American President cannot get a repeal bill through congress, not a done deal or;

2) Canada continues to stall until after the mid terms and the Democrats take control of congress.

Then NAFTA would simply continue on, negotiations would most likely die as America couldn't ratify a new deal, or kill the old one.

That leaves the tariffs. We might need to absorb a heck of a lot of economic damage, and try to do as much as we could along with Europe and China to make america feel enough pain to change course.

and before you say it, every article, from american sources, none of them have the american public pointing fingers at Europe, China, Mexico, or Canada.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #314 on: June 29, 2018, 13:56:31 »
I doubt very much China is going to "open" it's markets to use, for them free trade is full access for them and a little bit for us. Sort of like the US, but worse.
http://money.cnn.com/2018/06/28/news/economy/china-tariffs-india-south-korea-apta-us/index.html
Quote
Beijing will reduce tariffs on thousands of products from India and South Korea, as well as the smaller economies of Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Laos, China's commerce ministry said Thursday.

The reductions are due to take effect on July 1. They're part of an agreement between the six countries called the Asia Pacific Trade Agreement (APTA) that covers more than 10,000 goods in total, the ministry added.

China has identified more than 8,500 goods from the five countries on which it will "reduce or cancel tariffs," China's Ambassador to India Luo Zhaohui said on Twitter. They include soybeans, steel, aluminum as well as other agricultural and chemical products, he added.

#China will reduce or cancel tariffs on imports of 8,549 types of goods from #India, South Korea, Bangladesh, Laos & Sri Lanka. The goods include chemicals, agricultural & medical products, soybean, clothing, steel & aluminum products. Good news to help reduce trade imbalance.

— Luo Zhaohui (@China_Amb_India) June 27, 2018
Many of those products could help replace imports from the United States that will become more expensive in China if the two countries go ahead with tariffs on $34 billion of each other's exports next week.

Although the Asian trade agreement was planned before the US-China dispute escalated, some experts say Beijing is highlighting it now to send a message to the White House.

"This is basically a tactical measure to counter the Trump administration's tariff rise," said Srikanth Kondapalli, a professor of Chinese studies at New Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University. "They are trying to tap into other markets if the United States goes ahead with a trade war," he added.

The trade in soybeans is particularly important for both sides. Soybeans are America's leading agricultural export and China is its biggest customer, buying them from US farmers to use as a protein source in animal feed.

China plans to hit American soybeans with a 25% tariff in response for planned US tariffs on Chinese goods.

Government officials from India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh did not immediately respond to requests for comment, while officials in Laos and South Korea could not immediately be reached.

India has reportedly offered to step in if US soybean exports to China fall. A senior Indian official said at a meeting in Beijing in April that his country could "substitute for" products like soybean and sugar, according to Indian media.

India exported soybeans worth only $155 million last year, nearly 60% of which went to the United States, according to Indian government data. None went to China.

The five Asian countries could also benefit from Beijing's reduced tariffs by buying food products from the United States and selling them on to China.

"In addition to soy, the United States exports higher valued food products such as pork, wine, tree nuts, and fruits to China," Loren Puette, director of market research firm ChinaAg, told CNNMoney.

"The tariff concessions could benefit [the five countries] as re-exporters if they import US food products and export them to China at a reduced rate," he added..

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/6/29/...-soy-trade-war

Quote
China seems to be positioning itself to deal with the fallout of a bruising trade war with the US.

On Thursday, China’s commerce ministry announced that the country had agreed to lower or cancel existing tariffs, or border taxes, on thousands of goods from India, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Laos starting July 1.

Trade experts say that the move is plain evidence that China is looking for alternative sources for goods that it imports from the US. China is currently planning on imposing sweeping tariffs on numerous goods from the US, retaliating against Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods that are scheduled to begin next week.

For example, China plans to lower tariffs on soybeans imported from those five Asian countries — all of which are party to the Asia Pacific Trade Agreement (APTA). That should help Chinese consumers find alternatives to soybeans imported from the US, which are going to become much more expensive when China hits them with tariffs.

“There’s no question that China is preparing for a trade war,” Edward Alden, a trade scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations, told me.

China is currently planning on placing tariffs on $34 billion worth of US goods in response to Trump’s plan to hit $34 billion in Chinese goods with tariffs next week. Beijing is attempting to dissuade Trump from considering additional tariffs in the future by matching the scale of the US’s first batch of them.

While China and its Asian trading partners began to work on an agreement before the recent escalations in trade tensions between the US and China, analysts say the timing of the announcement is politically charged.

China’s plan to impose tariffs on soybeans is going to hit the US hard. China buys about a third of the US’s soybean exports, making it far and away the largest importer in the world for the American crop. The biggest soybean producers in the US include Ohio, Iowa, Missouri, and Indiana — states in the heart of Trump country where neither the president nor his party wants to see economic instability or job losses in the run-up to the 2018 midterm elections, or the 2020 elections.

Experts say that China’s move will also help it foster closer ties with its neighbors at a time when US influence in the region is ebbing.

“These tariff cuts will also help to strengthen China’s relations with its Asian neighbors, even as the United States has turned its back on the region economically, by walking away from the TPP,” Alden told me.

Trump pulled out of the TPP — a free-trade agreement with 11 other Pacific Rim countries — in his first week in office. At the time, trade analysts feared that China, which was not a member of the agreement, would have a unique opportunity to consolidate power in the region. That seems to be exactly what’s happening.

America makes a void, China fills a void.

How many times are we going to see this as a trade war drags on?

I'm betting on a lot of times.

Chinese influence is only going to continue to grow, especially as they will be see as a stable long term partner and America will be seen as at the mercy of the whims of whoever happens to be president at the time.

For example, how many international agreements/organizations  have been discarded or attacked by the American leadership since november 8th 2016?

the Paris accord.

 NAFTA

TPP

NATO

The G7

Outer Space Treaty

The Iran deal
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 14:09:37 by Altair »
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 186,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,398
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #315 on: June 29, 2018, 20:08:00 »
Optio

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 106,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,590
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #316 on: June 29, 2018, 21:26:25 »
>I don't get the argument that everyone should just turtle up and give in.

I don't get the argument that everyone should just turtle up and let Austria-Hungary have Serbia.

There is a remarkable amount of jingoism everywhere: tit for tat for tit for tat ...  Would people be so enthusiastic if military force were involved?  This is an economic conflict, not a military one, but there will be damage.  I'm sure the press will highlight anyone who stands up to support the tariffs in spite of personally taking a heckuva beating, but I suppose most people who support sticking it back to Trump have secure employment/benefits or don't think of themselves as being in a line of work potentially affected.

This all could have been stillborn with Trump's first round if everyone had just sucked up the limited damage and started working on Congress.

I suppose tunes will change if Trump pulls the trigger on auto tariffs.

That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #317 on: June 29, 2018, 22:05:26 »
>I don't get the argument that everyone should just turtle up and give in.

I don't get the argument that everyone should just turtle up and let Austria-Hungary have Serbia.

There is a remarkable amount of jingoism everywhere: tit for tat for tit for tat ...  Would people be so enthusiastic if military force were involved?  This is an economic conflict, not a military one, but there will be damage.  I'm sure the press will highlight anyone who stands up to support the tariffs in spite of personally taking a heckuva beating, but I suppose most people who support sticking it back to Trump have secure employment/benefits or don't think of themselves as being in a line of work potentially affected.

This all could have been stillborn with Trump's first round if everyone had just sucked up the limited damage and started working on Congress.

I suppose tunes will change if Trump pulls the trigger on auto tariffs.
Congress? Congress isn't doing anything,  for fear of the president destroying their chances of winning their primaries.

But canada from everything I've read,  has been working on congress,  both parties have.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 272,125
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,332
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #318 on: June 29, 2018, 22:50:02 »
So what should Canada have done?  Not invoke retaliatory tariffs, decommission dairy supply management and yield on removing NAFTA Chapter 19?

At the very least, is not negotiation iterative closure of differences between two parties?  How is it negotiation if Party 2 says to Party 1, “we don’t agree, but you’re way bigger than us, so we accept your initial offer.”

???

Regards
G2G

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 106,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,590
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #319 on: June 30, 2018, 11:22:09 »
Retaining NAFTA, perhaps with amendments, is what I see as the aim.  Trump could apply tariffs as part of his negotiating tactics to apply pressure; Canada could refuse to reply in kind without withdrawing from negotiations.  Not applying counter-tariffs is not equivalent to acceptance of any kind of offer.

>Congress isn't doing anything...

...because of the election.  Maybe nothing will change after the election, but I suppose with that pressure removed, members will have more attention to pay to trade and other foreign affairs.  Looking at all that is going on in the US right now, I see an immense amount of attention focused on balances of power; I am not surprised that the US appears distracted from outside.  Right now, nothing outside matters as much.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #320 on: July 01, 2018, 20:55:07 »
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/07/02/trump-team-reportedly-drafted-a-bill-that-abandons-key-wto-rules.html&ved=0ahUKEwjg1b-vmf_bAhVi94MKHeN9DMQQyM8BCCIwAA&usg=AOvVaw3TBoXQuRi8XRwy_D_tPfIl&ampcf=1

I don't even think the USA is trying to avoid looking stupid anymore.

If the president has his way,  the US would get the US Fair and Reciprocal Tariff act. Aka, the US FART act.

Quote
The bill, called the "United States Fair and Reciprocal Tariff Act," ignores fundamental WTO principles, said Axios, which reported that it obtained a leaked draft. Those principles include the prohibition of nations setting different tariff rates for countries outside of free trade agreements and the established tariff ceilings that WTO countries have agreed to.

If the bill were to be passed, "it would be the equivalent of walking away from the WTO and our commitments there without us actually notifying our withdrawal,"

This is really scary stuff coming out of this administration. Global economic collapse kind of stuff.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Online ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 133,276
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,530
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #321 on: July 01, 2018, 23:56:34 »
So what should Canada have done?

Well, we probably could have prevented a lot of trouble not saying "We'll be very happy to renegotiate NAFTA" before Donald Trump had even become President and was only thinking about Mexico. Everyone seems to have forgotten how our leader flying off the seat of his pants opened us up to all of this...

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rick-santorum-jeers-pm-trudeau-s-nafta-move-1.3165964

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was foolish to signal his willingness to re-negotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, former U.S. senator and Donald Trump insider Rick Santorum said Wednesday."

“When you’re negotiating, the first person who opens up the door creates an opportunity for the other side,” Santorum said. “I’m not too sure that’s a great negotiating posture for him but we certainly appreciate it.

 - November 16, 2016... 19 months ago or so...

Pretty bad when you make Rick Santorum look like a genius...

Also, supply management is a perfect bargaining chip. "We'll give up supply management as long as there is no sunset clause." Back behind close doors, "Perfect, two problems solved, what a bunch of suckers!"
« Last Edit: July 02, 2018, 00:01:14 by ballz »
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,123
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #322 on: July 02, 2018, 00:23:25 »
Well, we probably could have prevented a lot of trouble not saying "We'll be very happy to renegotiate NAFTA" before Donald Trump had even become President and was only thinking about Mexico. Everyone seems to have forgotten how our leader flying off the seat of his pants opened us up to all of this...

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rick-santorum-jeers-pm-trudeau-s-nafta-move-1.3165964

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was foolish to signal his willingness to re-negotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, former U.S. senator and Donald Trump insider Rick Santorum said Wednesday."

“When you’re negotiating, the first person who opens up the door creates an opportunity for the other side,” Santorum said. “I’m not too sure that’s a great negotiating posture for him but we certainly appreciate it.

 - November 16, 2016... 19 months ago or so...

Pretty bad when you make Rick Santorum look like a genius...

Also, supply management is a perfect bargaining chip. "We'll give up supply management as long as there is no sunset clause." Back behind close doors, "Perfect, two problems solved, what a bunch of suckers!"
Oh,of course. And then we would magically have been the one nation to avoid the wrath of the American president.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 272,125
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,332
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #323 on: July 02, 2018, 09:06:34 »
Well, we probably could have prevented a lot of trouble not saying "We'll be very happy to renegotiate NAFTA" before Donald Trump had even become President and was only thinking about Mexico. Everyone seems to have forgotten how our leader flying off the seat of his pants opened us up to all of this...

So just having heard Trump already say he would negotiate NAFTA at this point in the campaign, Trudeau should have: a) said no we won’t, or b) just ignored Trump?

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was foolish to signal his willingness to re-negotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, former U.S. senator and Donald Trump insider Rick Santorum said Wednesday."

“When you’re negotiating, the first person who opens up the door creates an opportunity for the other side,” Santorum said. “I’m not too sure that’s a great negotiating posture for him but we certainly appreciate it.

 - November 16, 2016... 19 months ago or so...

Pretty bad when you make Rick Santorum look like a genius...

Except when Trump formally first offers to talk to Kim Jong Un...then it’s okay, right?

Also, supply management is a perfect bargaining chip. "We'll give up supply management as long as there is no sunset clause." Back behind close doors, "Perfect, two problems solved, what a bunch of suckers!"

And upthread a ways we see the actual numbers that the US exports more physical volume/weight of dairy products to Canada than Canada does to the US, and that many US dairy produces have stated their desire for a supply management system to help them weather the global dairy production variance.  So you’re quite confident that Canada giving up the moderating function of its own supply management would remove the sunset clause?  Oh, and don’t forget retaining the impartial complaint adjudication clause...we’d get both those for sure, right?

Regards
G2G

Online ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 133,276
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,530
Re: US VS G7
« Reply #324 on: July 02, 2018, 11:26:29 »
So just having heard Trump already say he would negotiate NAFTA at this point in the campaign, Trudeau should have: a) said no we won’t, or b) just ignored Trump?

He came out of the gate with a weak opening stance. It was that time, early on in his tenure, when PM Trudeau still hadn't realized that every small quip out of his mouth gets analyzed to nth degree and he said something that undermined his goals on a weekly basis. It took him far longer to learn that than most, and he is still learning how not to put his foot in his own mouth. With one thoughtless response, he opened the door to President Trump taking a hard-line stance and Canada being on the defensive in NAFTA negotiations. It literally plays right into the President's negotiating strategy.

Except when Trump formally first offers to talk to Kim Jong Un...then it’s okay, right?

I'm not entirely sure how that is relevant to what PM Trudeau should have / could have done when first approached about NAFTA. Also not sure it's an accurate analogy given that POTUS had been taking a hardline stance towards NK for quite some time.

And upthread a ways we see the actual numbers that the US exports more physical volume/weight of dairy products to Canada than Canada does to the US, and that many US dairy produces have stated their desire for a supply management system to help them weather the global dairy production variance.

First off, the fact that *farmers* in the US want the gov't to give them their own cartel is pretty bad evidence that supply management is a good system. Exactly which profit-oriented person would argue against being part of a gov't enforced cartel support their business?

As for the trade surplus/deficit... who cares? Why can't people grasp that having another country's taxpayers pay for their groceries for them is a good thing? What other things would the US like to produce and sell to us for cheap? Please, open the flood gates already. Tobacco? Alcohol? What about inputs into businesses? The less money the consumer spends on sustainment, and the less money our businesses need for inputs, the more productive our economy is going to be. Once you take behaviour-controlling taxes out of the picture, it's just going to shift to industries where Canada is more efficient/competitive.

If protectionism is so good for us, why don't we put tariffs on the price of oranges. Make it $10 an orange so only Canadian oranges can be competitive in Canada? Why not sap the resources out of consumers and businesses, as long as they are only buying Canadian, right? POTUS wants to hurt his economy by putting tariffs on everything and making it harder for American consumers and businesses to thrive. We should let him hurt his own economy and citizens. Never interrupt your adversary when they are making a mistake. Don't match his stupidity with our own stupidity.

Aggressively exploring other free trade deals is the real medicine here. That's why we've been doing it for years. If we have free trade with numerous other countries, we have more bargaining power and less reason to give a rip when the POTUS starts taxing the crap out of his own people.

So you’re quite confident that Canada giving up the moderating function of its own supply management would remove the sunset clause?  Oh, and don’t forget retaining the impartial complaint adjudication clause...we’d get both those for sure, right?

We're in a thread that is purely speculation. Don't pretend anything else that's been said about NAFTA is anything more than speculation. I said it's a great bargaining chip because getting rid of it would help us anyway. I'd give it up for far less...
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?