[KevinGagnon]

<strong>Written By:</strong> KevinGagnon
<strong>Date:</strong> 2005-02-11 12:05:12
<a href="/article/140512881-time-to-shove-back-ottawa-ready-to-inflict-pain-on-us">Article Link</a>

[hoopoe]

<blockquote>"I hope the prime minister will obtain from the [U.S.] president the assurance that the U.S. will meet its obligations under NAFTA, abide by its rulings when they are in the U.S. favour and when they are not," de Jong said. </blockquote> What a pile of idiots!!! They don't even understand that NAFTA in no way obligates the US to abide by any ruling by a NAFTA arbitration panel; rather it is entirely voluntary. This shows the fundamental weakness of the NAFTA agreement, which is that Canada is still subject to the same US trade laws, ie. protectionism, as we were before we signed the agreement. This agreement was initially sold to the Canadian public as a means of securing us special access to the US market when in reality any country in the world can have such access as long as they are willing to ante up the required tarrifs. <p>In the end, we now see that it will be a ruling of the WTO that will determine the fate of softwood lumber (and of other trade disputes with NAFTA rulings in Canada's favor I'm sure). Can someone please explain the logic in all of this to me? Where is the sense in signing an agreement to export a guaranteed percentage of our energy production to the US and to give US corporations the de facto right to overturn sovereign decisions of our country when in the end we have to go back to the international trade body (WTO) and its rules to settle trade disputes?<p>I'm sure the rest of the world must be looking at Canada and shaking their heads in wonderment that we not only signed such a ridiculous agreement in the first place but that we don't abrogate it immediately with the required six months' notice to get out of it.

[4Canada]

I hope you're writing letters too hoopoe because you're good at it.

I listened to CBC Radio call in show today on this subject and one woman had an inciteful thought. She said why put tarrifs on food and wine? Those goods come from states that didn't vote for Bush so they're lobbying to get the trade back on track would have little effect on Bush. We need to tax the things coming into Canada from Jesusland. (my use of that word)

About half the people were against shoving back because they thought the war could get uglier than it would be worth it for Canadian businesses which they think NAFTA *is* working for? There were people actually saying Canada is benefiting more from NAFTA than the US is?

Of the others some thought we should not be exporting our raw resources at all, which I tend to agree with. And there was a general concensus that Canadian businesses are lazy in looking for other markets because hey they're right next door, it's so easy.

And others in this same group said yes slap taxes on them, delay building the natural gas pipelines into the states.

P.S. B. C. is having an election in May and De Jong is certainly posturing now rather than 4 years ago because of that. He along with these newspapers would like to see the entire crown land given over to private companies and they have made an exerted effort to make that start happening. The Province and the Vancouver Sun are *Liberal*? government mouth organs and a very small step above the National Enquirerer.

---
"Yeah, well, [Mr. President] we used all five fingers because that's the way our mittens are made." Antonia Zerbisias

[Guest]

no. no. no. you canadians go right ahead and fantasize more racist hate against americans. it will give me further fuel to continue the drum beat against racist anti-american canadian nationalists that has gotten so much of your film work returned to the good old us of a. you have no power in your country, your grandiosity, narcissism and greed will be your downfall. i will help you.

an x-friend in the good old us of a.

[Guest]

Roflamo

I'm sure you will be just as effective as your boycott of France was...

[Guest]

I was at the gas station the other day and saw a little sign the gasoline company had taped to the gas pump listing a breakdown of the taxes, production costs, and profit which makes up the total price of gas. I know very little about this but was wondering if the taxes on the finished product could be shifted directly back to well-head royalties. Here is a rough list of what citizens pay for gasoline at the pump in oil exporting Nations:
(US dollars per liter in 2002)
Algeria .22
Indonesia .27
Iran .07
Iraq .02
Kuwait .20
Libya .10
Nigeria .20
Qatar .16(1998)
Saudi Arabia .24
U.A.E. .29
Venezuela .05
Canada .51
(Data from EarthTrends)
All of the countries listed, except Canada, belong to the Organization of Oil Exporting Countries. Perhaps we should be participating in this organization as Canadian citizens have a stake in this issue. Anyone know why we are not involved as a member of OPEC? Does anyone know why the taxes cannot all be shifted to well-head royalties?

[Guest]

Me again. After extensive reading of Canada's National Energy Policy I have the answer to the two questions posed above:
1. Canadians are idiots.
2. Canadians are idiots.

[Guest]

anyone notice what Brascan bought from Weyerhauser?

see CBC.Duh

"Conglomerate Brascan Corp. will pay $1.2 billion to buy five softwood sawmills and two finishing plants from Weyerhaeuser Co., the companies said Friday.

"The deal includes 258,000 hectares of private timberlands and the annual harvesting rights to 3.6 million cubic metres of public land timber in British Columbia.... "



Anyone wanna bet Brascan "Neocons" flip these properties to Chini? lol

remember what I said about the China immigration tide coming to Canada....? YUP, but they have to buy all the industry first, so that when they do come, they got work.

Same thing will happen in the oil and gas patch, and later, the farming and tourism industries.

whitey can look forward to being good slavie!!!

[canuck]

So what if a Chinese company can compete against the Americans for control of the Canadian economy? Unless it is resulting in an overall decreased percentage of Canadian ownership in Canada, I consider the possible competition between Chinese and American enterprises to be benign... or do you prefer being a slave/worker for American conglomerates only?

[Guest]

Its not benign. The Americans are horrified that they may have competition for C. resources. Forget the free market stuff about anybody being able to purchase the resource product once its on the market because if you control production and distribution to point of sale, you can control who buys it. Further, in the case of energy, the sale to non U.S. buyers does not fall under NAFTA so the agreement about dwindling supply and equal cutbacks does not apply. Essentually, this would be an end-run around U.S. policy on energy security- very important stuff right now. Further, oil sands production costs could go as low as $8/bbl which would put it in the same range as offshore drilling and the oil product is very good quality. A big problem is still environmental but most Albertans are looking south and sending their kids north. So it goes.