[BartSimpson]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... ade-deals/

$1:

Trump to Canada: 'We are straightening out these horrible trade deals'

President Trump said Wednesday that he won’t back down in trade talks with Canada, as the two countries face a new Oct. 1 deadline to salvage a three-way North American Free Trade Agreement.

The talks to remake NAFTA resumed after hitting an impasse last week over Canada’s high dairy tariffs and U.S. moves to eliminate a dispute resolution system known as Chapter 19 that potentially favors Ottawa.

“Look, we have a very strong position and we are the ones people want to come in and take advantage of,” said Mr. Trump. He later adding, “We are straightening out these horrible trade deals.”

At another White House event, Mr. Trump said Canada needs the deal more than the U.S. needs it.

“If it doesn’t work out that is going to be fine for our country. It won’t be fine for Canada,” said Mr. Trump.

Canada and the U.S. exchanged more than $670 billion in goods and services in 2017, according to the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.

The grueling talks are aimed at getting Canada to join a tentative U.S.-Mexico agreement to replace the 24-year-old NAFTA.

Mr. Trump repeated his threat to proceed without Canada if they don’t get on board.

“I love Canada. I love the people of Canada. But they and other countries have been taking advantage of the United States for many years and this is a president who has stopped it,” Mr. Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “The deal is a much more fair deal between the United States and Mexico.”

After four days of intense negotiations last week, the two teams failed to strike a deal before Mr. Trump’s Friday deadline.

Without Canada, the U.S.-Mexico deal faces a steeper climb and big pitfalls in Congress. But Mr. Trump insists he’s ready to jettison Canada, which he accuses of “decades of abuse” on trade.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he wanted a deal that protects his country from Mr. Trump.

“We need to keep the Chapter 19 dispute resolution because that ensures that the rules are actually followed. And we know we have a president who doesn’t always follow the rules as they’re laid out,” Mr. Trudeau told Edmonton radio station 630 CHED.

In Washington, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland stepped out of the high-stakes talks to say that the dialogue inside was “constructive.”

“We continue to work hard,” she said. “The atmosphere continues to be constructive and positive. There is good faith and good will on both sides.”

The negotiating teams face a new deadline in October when the text of the deal must be submitted to Congress.

Mr. Trump notified Congress last week that he was moving ahead with a U.S.-Mexico deal to replace NAFTA, possibly without Canada.

If Canada is out, Mr. Trump said he would hit them with a 25 percent tariff on cars.

In the tense talks, Canada wants a guarantee that Mr. Trump won’t proceed with auto tariffs and relief from recent tariffs the U.S. slapped on steel and aluminum.

The U.S. is pushing for Canada to lower high tariffs on dairy, which can run up to 270 percent, and changes to the dispute resolution mechanism in NAFTA’s Chapter 19.

The U.S.-Mexico deal nixed Chapter 19 and Canada wants it back to challenge U.S. tariffs on lumber, newsprint, steel and aluminum.

[llama66]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

llama66 llama66:

To be fair, its a process that didn't need to happen. NAFTA was fine as is. Was it perfect? no. Was it broken? also no.

NAFTA was fine for Canada maybe. But not for us.

Why wasn't it fine for you? Please elaborate.

[Robair]

The dairy thing is especially annoying as it is just Trump wanting a sound bite.

It will do pretty much nothing to help american dairy, and would eliminate Canadian dairy altogether.

So we are to eliminate our dairy sector for Trump's soundbite?

Love to see him jailed at some point. Would make my week.

[Thanos]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

llama66 llama66:

To be fair, its a process that didn't need to happen. NAFTA was fine as is. Was it perfect? no. Was it broken? also no.

NAFTA was fine for Canada maybe. But not for us.

Your job exodus because of free trade all went to Mexico for the cheap labour, not to Canada where things cost more. So how about blaming your own elite who made those decisions, decisions done solely to increase short-term shareholder profit and to gut your own labour unions, instead of putting Canada in your cross-hairs as another one of your entirely imaginary enemies. Are you guys so desperate for your "win" in this zero-sum game your Dear Leader has promised you that you've already gotten the history of the trade deals re-written in your heads and (once again) refuse to take any responsibility at all for what your very own corporate and financial sectors have done to America over the last four decades? Why is it so difficult for Americans to ever look in the mirror to see the true authors of their own misfortunes, misfortune that starts and ends with willingly falling under the economic thrall of merciless & cold-blooded free-for-all anarcho-capitalism, instead of going on this endless fantasy quest to track down some outsider that's "ripping us off"?

Robair Robair:

The dairy thing is especially annoying as it is just Trump wanting a sound bite.

It will do pretty much nothing to help american dairy, and would eliminate Canadian dairy altogether.

So we are to eliminate our dairy sector for Trump's soundbite?

Actually yes, according to them the perfect outcome will be for Canada to literally lose everything in order for Trump to win. This is something they all genuinely believe. It's called a zero-sum game, where one side wins all and the other side loses all, and this is the outcome they really want to see happen to Canada, and to all Canadians. This isn't free-market business or competition or any of the other horseshit that capitalists like to babble on about. This is effectively religious cult-like mania.

$1:

Love to see him jailed at some point. Would make my week.

Next to a heart attack or stroke the asshole being dragged off in handcuffs to prison would be the second-best possible outcome.

[llama66]

I felt page 25 was a good page for a Goodwin's law moment.

[DrCaleb]

Thanos Thanos:

It's called a zero-sum game, where one side wins all and the other side loses all,

Point of order: A 'zero sum game' is where no one wins and no one loses.

That's the exact opposite of what the US wants.

[BartSimpson]

llama66 llama66:

Why wasn't it fine for you? Please elaborate.

Here's an essay from 2003 that speaks to why I do not care for NAFTA:

https://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp147/

The high price of ‘free’ trade

$1:

NAFTA’s failure has cost the United States jobs across the nation

Report • By Robert E. Scott • November 17, 2003

[Thanos]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Thanos Thanos:

It's called a zero-sum game, where one side wins all and the other side loses all,

Point of order: A 'zero sum game' is where no one wins and no one loses.

That's the exact opposite of what the US wants.

Either way we're on their list to be annihilated. Like I said, we'll be their Czechoslovakia to practice on while someone else, most likely Mexico, will someday get to play Poland for them.

Oddly enough the same thing would be happening right now even if none of the trade deals even existed. If we had the same high tariffs and union-friendly protectionism today that we did back in the 1970's and 80's that fucker Trump would still be doing the rant for his moron stooges about us robbing them. None of the actual facts of the trade deals matter to him or his cultists at all. We're just an enemy to them that deserves to be wiped out for whatever maniac reasons they've cooked up inside their dead little brains. Carthago delenda est! Same now as it was in the Roman republic, just opponents to be eliminated because that's the only way they think their rightfully-due "greatness" can be achieved.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

llama66 llama66:

Why wasn't it fine for you? Please elaborate.

Here's an essay from 2003 that speaks to why I do not care for NAFTA:

https://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp147/

The high price of ‘free’ trade

$1:

NAFTA’s failure has cost the United States jobs across the nation

Report • By Robert E. Scott • November 17, 2003

Weren't you just touting to us how the US was growing at an amazing rate, just yesterday?

And:

U.S. Jobless Claims Declined to Fresh Post-1969 Low Last Week

[BartSimpson]

Yes, the US economy is doing better under Trump and jobs are coming back because of Trump.

In part because Trump is renegotiating NAFTA.

Canada can join in on the new agreement or not. That's up to you folks. But the old agreement is dead and it ain't coming back.

Trudope posturing and getting all stompy-foot over it isn't going to change anything.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Yes, the US economy is doing better under Trump and jobs are coming back because of Trump.

In part because Trump is renegotiating NAFTA.

Canada can join in on the new agreement or not. That's up to you folks. But the old agreement is dead and it ain't coming back.

Trudope posturing and getting all stompy-foot over it isn't going to change anything.

As has been pointed out, Trump is not the Decider. Congress is. Also, the US economy has been on an uphill swing since Obama. The only indicator of Trump is that he hasn't hurt the economy yet, but there are portents on the horizon.

And why should Trudeau do any less for Canada than Trump is for the US?

[llama66]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Yes, the US economy is doing better under Trump and jobs are coming back because of Trump.

In part because Trump is renegotiating NAFTA.

Canada can join in on the new agreement or not. That's up to you folks. But the old agreement is dead and it ain't coming back.

Trudope posturing and getting all stompy-foot over it isn't going to change anything.

Canada is a part of the agreement, that or Trump has to dissolve NAFTA and create the MEXUSFTA or whatever you are going to call it... That's the thing with TRILATERAL agreements.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Trudope posturing and getting all stompy-foot over it isn't going to change anything.

I'm pretty sure it's been Trump throwing all the hissy fits. Canada has been remarkably restrained, given the puerile taunts of Trump.

[martin14]

llama66 llama66:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

NAFTA was fine for Canada maybe. But not for us.

Why wasn't it fine for you? Please elaborate.

Actually, at this point is it doesn't matter if it was or wasn't.

US politicians fed the public a steady diet of anti NAFTA stuff,
partially maybe to deflect from all the jobs being lost over the years.

Obama complained, did nothing.
Bush complained, did nothing.
Well, it changed now.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Trudope posturing and getting all stompy-foot over it isn't going to change anything.

But it is.. it's making things a lot worse.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

As has been pointed out, Trump is not the Decider. Congress is. Also, the US economy has been on an uphill swing since Obama. The only indicator of Trump is that he hasn't hurt the economy yet, but there are portents on the horizon.

In 2016 the possibility of better than 3% GDP growth was considered ludicrous by most American analysts. Now even Nate Silver is conceding that Trump's goal for seven and eight percent growth just might happen. So you have a good time with your portents of doom and we'll have a good time with a healthy economy.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And why should Trudeau do any less for Canada than Trump is for the US?

That's a question you really need to address to JT: WHY is he doing less for Canada than Trump is doing for America?

Where is Canada's industrial and manufacturing renaissance?

Where is Canada repatriating wealth from overseas like the US is doing under Trump?

Where is the pride in simply being Canadian? Your PM denies that such a thing even exists.