[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

peck420 peck420:

I wish you and yours the best, Bart.

And likewise I can only hope that Canada will someday soon have a leader who appreciates what it is to be Canadian and why that is such a special and precious thing in this world.

What do we need one for? I don't need anybody to tell me I'm special.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

peck420 peck420:

I wish you and yours the best, Bart.

And likewise I can only hope that Canada will someday soon have a leader who appreciates what it is to be Canadian and why that is such a special and precious thing in this world.

What do we need one for? I don't need anybody to tell me I'm special.

That's okay Zippy...we all think you're special!

[DrCaleb]

I saw that coming.

[Sunnyways]

martin14 martin14:

Sunnyways Sunnyways:

Trump has made us a target. Trudeau has been extremely restrained in this dispute, actually. Tell me about the massive trade surplus we are runnng with the US. This should not be a partisan issue.

No, Mexico and China are the target. We are collateral damage.
For now.

Trudeau is running a big risk by whining so loud over something
that can be cleaned up pretty quickly.

Expanding the tariffs to TP and kegs is a mistake.

There was no need for Trump to go after us as well but he chose to do so. Trudeau is merely standing up for our country here. That is not ‘whining’.

[DrCaleb]

Sunnyways Sunnyways:

martin14 martin14:

Sunnyways Sunnyways:

Trump has made us a target. Trudeau has been extremely restrained in this dispute, actually. Tell me about the massive trade surplus we are runnng with the US. This should not be a partisan issue.

No, Mexico and China are the target. We are collateral damage.
For now.

Trudeau is running a big risk by whining so loud over something
that can be cleaned up pretty quickly.

Expanding the tariffs to TP and kegs is a mistake.

There was no need for Trump to go after us as well but he chose to do so. Trudeau is merely standing up for our country here. That is not ‘whining’.

And Martin is wrong. China and Mexico are not the only target, the US is realizing it's decades old position at the top of the economic heap is vulnerable. So instead of going world wide with it's 'free trade' message that got it to the top of the heap, it's been laying the rhetoric thick about things like 'trade deficits' that have never been shown to have an economic downside.

Instead, the 'free trade' mantra has been retracted and protectionism rules. Now the US is focused on using it's economic might to rewrite 'bi-lateral' trade deals with countries that have an unequal and therefore inferior bargaining position, to force better deals for the US and keep them on the top of the economic heap.

Remember that, as Trump tries to make the term 'bi-lateral deal' as common as 'no collusion' has become. He knows that Canada + Mexico have a stronger bargaining position than either one alone. And we aren't fooled.

[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And Martin is wrong. China and Mexico are not the only target, the US is realizing it's decades old position at the top of the economic heap is vulnerable. So instead of going world wide with it's 'free trade' message that got it to the top of the heap, it's been laying the rhetoric thick about things like 'trade deficits' that have never been shown to have an economic downside.

Instead, the 'free trade' mantra has been retracted and protectionism rules. Now the US is focused on using it's economic might to rewrite 'bi-lateral' trade deals with countries that have an unequal and therefore inferior bargaining position, to force better deals for the US and keep them on the top of the economic heap.

Remember that, as Trump tries to make the term 'bi-lateral deal' as common as 'no collusion' has become. He knows that Canada + Mexico have a stronger bargaining position than either one alone. And we aren't fooled.

I didn't say China and Mexico were the ONLY target.
The EU is getting caught in it as well.
Sunny is sad about the tariffs to Canada, not realizing that everyone gets tariffs.
Can you imagine the hullabaloo if everyone EXCEPT Canada was hit with tariffs ?

That would make you wonder what Justine was doing in between holiday trips.

So, crossfire. Nothing more. And we could eliminate it easy with our own bilateral deal.
Like what this all started out as.

And the US didnt get to the top by free trade. No one has 'free trade, it is just
more globalist leftist shilling to destroy the US even further.

China doesn't have completely open trade with anyone.
Neither does India.
The EU has it only inside their own circlejerk, and then it is only of benefit to Germany.
You should see some of the external tariffs the EU imposes.

The US got to the top by not having to rebuild absolutely everything after 1945,
and in addition financing all the recoveries as well.
has very little to do with free trade, which is only a new thing anyway.
The US hasn't really been at the top for quite a while now.

And Canada + Mexico is just a recipe for disaster.
Corruption on one side, gender issues and oh we have to raise the minimum wage for Mexico,
that's the solution to the troubles.

Jesus, how can people be so unbelievably ignorant ?

We should cut our own deal. Being first, we'll get a sweet discount,
and some extra perks from it.

[DrCaleb]

martin14 martin14:

And we could eliminate it easy with our own bilateral deal.
Like what this all started out as.

No, this started out as a three country trade deal that was benefiting everybody. Negotiating with an unequal partner is a wolf and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

martin14 martin14:

And the US didnt get to the top by free trade. No one has 'free trade, it is just
more globalist leftist shilling to destroy the US even further.

Sorry, no. I've been reading quite a bit of economics lately on this trade war, and most of them I've read point to the same reason Trump has gone down this path. China is rising, and since WWII the US beating the drum of reduced tariffs has switched the US from being the fastest growing economy to China being the fastest in the last decades. The only way the US sees to counter it, is to sign bilateral trade deals that keep the cheap goods flowing into the US.

martin14 martin14:

We should cut our own deal. Being first, we'll get a sweet discount,
and some extra perks from it.

Like lube, instead of the dry rape.

[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

No, this started out as a three country trade deal that was benefiting everybody.

Wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2 ... _Agreement

Just so wrong.

$1:

The only way the US sees to counter it, is to sign bilateral trade deals that keep the cheap goods flowing into the US.

Wrong.
The argument is to get US industry restarted, not to keep free stuff coming in.

You have a lot more reading to do.

$1:

Like lube, instead of the dry rape.

If you prefer the dry rape, go for it.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

(The US) 'free trade' message that got it to the top of the heap...

Exsqueeze me? The US GDP has been on the skids since all this faux 'free trade' shit came along.


Here's a few facts for you:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton ... fecf2d5e9e

$1:

With the exception of a few brief periods, America’s contribution to the global economy has been falling. In 1960, U.S. GDP represented 40% of global GDP. By 2014, America’s economic contribution had been cut in half.

[Zipperfish]

I like the idea of a bilateral deal.

[bootlegga]

The interesting thing is Trump's actions have cost him all kinds of support that may affect both him and the Republicans long term:

$1:

Don’t just take my word for it. Read last week’s unequivocal judgment from the conservative editorial page of the Wall Street Journal: “So much for Donald Trump as genius deal-maker. We are supposed to believe his tariff threats are a clever negotiation strategy, but on Thursday he revealed he’s merely an old-fashioned protectionist. His decision to slap tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Europe, Canada and Mexico will hurt the U.S. economy, his own foreign policy and perhaps Republicans in November.”

A new survey of major CEOs by the Business Roundtable found that 95 percent of the corporate chieftains believe “foreign trade retaliation leading to lower U.S. exports” was a moderate or serious risk to the economy.

Charles and David Koch — the billionaire brothers whose lavish spending helped create Republican congressional majorities — have decisively broken with the Trump administration on trade. Even as David Koch steps aside for health reasons, Koch-funded organizations like Americans for Prosperity have announced a multiyear political drive to promote free trade.

Even by Trump standards, that is an impressive array of self-inflicted wounds. To lose the Wall Street Journal editorial page, the nation’s CEOs and the Koch brothers with one impulsive gesture represents a level of political ineptitude unmatched since GOP leaders like Reince Priebus naively believed they could tame the 45th president.

And Trump was warned.

At White House meetings, virtually every Republican senator from the Midwest cautioned about interfering with business supply chains with Canada. Others warned about retaliatory tariffs against agricultural exports.

Put another way, five potentially vulnerable Democratic senators on the ballot in 2018 represent states that neighbor Canada: Jon Tester (Montana), Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota), Tina Smith (Minnesota), Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin) and Debbie Stabenow (Michigan). It is a safe bet that the Trump tariffs and their ramifications will be highlighted in Democratic campaign ads.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/ca ... -trade-war

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I like the idea of a bilateral deal.

The unconditional surrender of France was a bilateral deal.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I like the idea of a bilateral deal.

The unconditional surrender of France was a bilateral deal.

Never made much sense to me to throw Mexico into the mix. The issues important to us, with respect to trade with the US, aren't the ones that are important to Mexico. I guess the tripartite deal was probably driven by the manufacturing sector to get cheap Mexican labour,

[martin14]

bootlegga bootlegga:

A new survey of major CEOs by the Business Roundtable found that 95 percent of the corporate chieftains believe “foreign trade retaliation leading to lower U.S. exports” was a moderate or serious risk to the economy.

if 95% of them are against it, you just know it has to be good for the country.

$1:

Put another way, five potentially vulnerable Democratic senators on the ballot in 2018 represent states that neighbor Canada: Jon Tester (Montana), Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota), Tina Smith (Minnesota), Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin) and Debbie Stabenow (Michigan). It is a safe bet that the Trump tariffs and their ramifications will be highlighted in Democratic campaign ads.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/ca ... -trade-war[/quote]

If anyone in Ottawa has any brains, this will be over long before November.

Shouldn't make it past Labour Day.

It's a big IF.

[martin14]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I like the idea of a bilateral deal.

The unconditional surrender of France was a bilateral deal.

Never made much sense to me to throw Mexico into the mix. The issues important to us, with respect to trade with the US, aren't the ones that are important to Mexico. I guess the tripartite deal was probably driven by the manufacturing sector to get cheap Mexican labour,

Exactly, which we don't have anyway.
The original FTA was a big expansion of the Autopact, fair work between equals.
The real draining of America got rolling with Mexico, and China.