Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
betsy

Was It Practical To Kill The Negotiations Over The Sunset Clause?

Recommended Posts

On 6/9/2018 at 6:03 AM, Michael Hardner said:

1) 'Things' ... the devil is in the details.  Do you need a bucket of foreign money to get a fence painted ?  No.  How about to invest in a massive private infrastructure project ?  Yes.  Of course there are limits to these things.

How much foreign investment was involved in the American freeway system? I believe it is still the biggest infrastructure project ever. 

On 6/9/2018 at 6:03 AM, Michael Hardner said:

2) That is the nature of all investment, yes.  The investor class 'exploits' the resources and produces consumer product while hiring Canadians.  That is life.

... While slowly bleeding Canada dry. 

Our children will be proud. 

On 6/9/2018 at 6:03 AM, Michael Hardner said:

3) Are you really arguing with my logic that Canada has fewer resources than the world itself ?  

It does by the simple fact it's part of the world. I'm not sure how that's "your logic". 

On 6/9/2018 at 6:03 AM, Michael Hardner said:

4) Resources are priced on a world market.  Exports help our trade balance and bring wealth into the country.  It's not "my" thinking it's macroeconomic practice followed since Trudeau Sr.'s era.  And... what "mess" ?

Why does Canada have to have a percentage removed from that world based price? If we produce what we import we wouldn't need to put so much effort into trade balance. 

The mess is Canadian elected officials running around the planet trying to secure trade deals instead of running the country and doing something about our runaway debt. 

On 6/9/2018 at 6:03 AM, Michael Hardner said:

5) Given that you are promoting ideas from the 1970s I don't see you as being in a position to cast aspersions on the practices of world trade. 

Well, what was Canada's provincial and national debts back then? Our quality of life? People's opinion of life? 

On 6/9/2018 at 6:03 AM, Michael Hardner said:

But keep thinking outside the box, at least you are expressing a ground's-eye-view of problems as fodder for discussion.

Keep following the the thinking that got us here and see what the future brings... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

A sunset clause would make the deal unworkable for Canada. Sensible US free traders agree with that too. Just google and find out. 

Its fair to argue that perspective but its also in the details of the negotiation that wasn't perfect. I'm pretty sure the sunset clause was there to accommodate for some supply management issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 7:27 PM, SpankyMcFarland said:

A sunset clause would make the deal unworkable for Canada. Sensible US free traders agree with that too. Just google and find out. 

Yes but is their not a clause that says that each country can give 6 months warning to opt out or renegotiate, kind of makes the sunshine clause mout does it not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Yes but is their not a clause that says that each country can give 6 months warning to opt out or renegotiate, kind of makes the sunshine clause mout does it not...

I don't agree. One might never happen - the other always will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supply management is a tiny economic factor and Canada's dairy industry is minuscule. The way Trump has gone on about it you'd think it was a massive part of the deal and that the US had no subsidies whatsoever for its own farmers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Looks like the 'US-Mexico' deal has dropped the automatic expiration clause for a review every six years. 

 

It's a 16 year expiration with review every 6 years.   Any partner nation can still leave after six months notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Supply management is a tiny economic factor and Canada's dairy industry is minuscule. The way Trump has gone on about it you'd think it was a massive part of the deal and that the US had no subsidies whatsoever for its own farmers. 

 

Why would Trump tolerate any Canadian cheating on trade if he wants leverage to change NAFTA ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

It's a 16 year expiration with review every 6 years.   Any partner nation can still leave after six months notice.

As discussed above, 'can leave' is very different from inevitable renegotiation and means businesses will not be deterred from investing in Canada. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

As discussed above, 'can leave' is very different from inevitable renegotiation and means businesses will not be deterred from investing in Canada. 

 

Investment was already leaving Canada because of low oil prices, Trump tax cuts, and Trudeau's carbon taxes.

Canada needs FDI more than the U.S. does because of lower access to domestic capital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2018 at 4:59 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

Why would Trump tolerate any Canadian cheating on trade if he wants leverage to change NAFTA ?

What cheating?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless U.S. negotiators conduct themselves fairly, Canada should walk away from negotiations.  Let NAFTA fall apart and let Trump go big on tariffs.  Canada will respond with counter tariffs.  If that's the game, so be it.  It will be costly for both countries and Canada will emerge with a completely reoriented trade and foreign relations policy, probably much closer to Europe, Britain, South America, Africa and Asia, with stronger political ties to Britain, Europe, and China.  It's all unnecessary pain, but we're prepared to do it if there isn't an agreement with the U.S. worth signing.  That precedent is everything.  Trump is on a timer and trade is just one of many concerns for the beleaguered President.  NAFTA is better for America than no NAFTA and anyone with half a brain in Trump's own administration knows it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...