Free Trade - Good or Bad?


mentalfloss
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Over Canada's 145 years, which public funded investments haven't been sold off to private interests?

Lots.

But even private industry can still be regulated to respect sovereignty, isn't it?

Otherwise, we wouldn't have these FIPA agreements that all parties sign on to before they throw their resources to the will of the market.
 
petros
+1
#32
Lots? Like?

There is no economic sovereignty in a global economy.
 
mentalfloss
#33
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Lots?

Yes, there are plenty of public organizations that still exist.


Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

The is no economic sovereignty in a global economy.

FIPA doesn't exist?
 
petros
#34
There will be all sorts of paper pacifiers until everyone gets used to it.
 
mentalfloss
#35
You concede.

Now, about the oil thing.. there have been quite a few economists predicting that exporting unrefined bitumen is not good for our economy. Is this the right thing to do?
 
petros
#36
Sell it all off as far as I'm concerned we have 200X more crude than bitumen.

You've obviously heard of the massive Bakken, but have you heard about the other oil deposit that sits below it and is bigger?
 
mentalfloss
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Sell it all off as far as I'm concerned we have 200X more crude than bitumen.

You've obviously heard of the massive Bakken, but have you heard about the other oil deposit that sits below it and is bigger?

Yes, but the markets will raise the price as demand increases without consideration of reserves.

A new report says the Northern Gateway pipeline would boost crude oil prices $2 to $3 per barrel annually over the next 30 years, causing significant damage to consumers, businesses and the Canadian economy.

The economic assessment of the $5.5-billion project by former Insurance Corporation of British Columbia CEO Robyn Allan says the price shock will have "a negative and prolonged impact on the Canadian economy by reducing output, employment labour income and government revenues."

Allan, an economist who researched the effect of the pipeline proposal out of curiosity, says it has been touted by proponents as a nation-building enterprise, but it really represents a "serious economic risk" to the Canadian economy.

Northern Gateway pipeline will hurt economy: report (external - login to view)
 
petros
#38
Read closer. It's the oil earmarked for export that has the $2-$3 additional tag on it. Domestically we'll utilize our sweet and heavy crude stocks which BTW are worth more than what is to be exported, "greener", and cheaper to refine.
 
lone wolf
#39
It's great for investors but lousy for the guy whose job gets traded away
 
petros
#40
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

It's great for investors but lousy for the guy whose job gets traded away

Canada has choice to make. Jobs in resources or jobs in manufacturing. We don't have the manpower to fully develop both.
 
mentalfloss
#41
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Canada has choice to make. Jobs in resources or jobs in manufacturing. We don't have the manpower to fully develop both.

This is the first honest thing you've said in this thread.

But we need to balance both so that we have a sustainable economy.
 
EagleSmack
#42
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

I don't understand what you mean by "regulate"? Is that the same as what we've been doing all along by not taking advantage of our vast wealth?

That sounds pretty familiar to what is going on down here.

Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

This is the first honest thing you've said in this thread.

But we need to balance both so that we have a sustainable economy.

I think Canada does have a sustainable economy. Look how they fared when all the other western nations were/are falling apart.
 
mentalfloss
#43
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

I think Canada does have a sustainable economy. Look how they fared when all the other western nations were/are falling apart.

That mostly had to do with some strong federal banking regulation during the subprime mortgage lending crisis. The real estate industry had some heart burn again last month when CIBC shut down loans with low down payments.
 
EagleSmack
#44
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

That mostly had to do with some strong federal banking regulation during the subprime mortgage lending crisis. The real estate industry had some heart burn again last month when CIBC shut down loans with low down payments.

Which was smart. As I way saying, Canada managed it better than the US and many others. I could be wrong but I bet they were in good shape before the crisis. They gave loans to people who could afford them. Whereas our banks sold mortgages and bundled them all up and sold them again. I saw it happen all around me.

Heartburn is better than total collapse.
 
petros
#45
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

This is the first honest thing you've said in this thread.

But we need to balance both so that we have a sustainable economy.

The only resource shortage Canada has is a human resources. Our manufacturing days are over and we've gone full circle right back to being resource based which we should have remained all along.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#46
Resource based industry? Like cod fisheries off the east coast?
Free trade benefits like when the best of BC timber goes overseas leaving poorer quality stuff here?
Selling off public assets to foreign interests? Like Bill Gates owning most of CN Rail?
 
Bar Sinister
+1
#47
Free trade between nations is always accompanied by a few problems. Theoretically free trad allows the trading partners to maximize what each nation does best. In Canada's case, for example, free trade with nations that produce tropical or subtropical crops makes good sense as Canada is at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to growing bananas. However, Canada leads the world in the efficiency of its grain farmers who could export their crops in return for warm weather crops.

The trade does not only have to be in the form of raw materials either. Nations that see themselves only as hewers of wood and drawers of water will find that they are trading cheap raw materials for expensive manufactured goods. In the long term this is a trading strategy that will ultimately backfire. Until the recent increase in oil prices Canada's most important exports were manufactured goods. Long term focusing on manufactured goods and technological innovations is a much better strategy than relying on the export of raw materials; especially as raw material exports tend to fluctuate with demand and tend to take care of themselves anyway.

Canada's greatest mistake in terms of trade has been the policy that has encouraged foreign multinationals to develop Canada's most important resources. This has led to a situation in which there are very few large Canadian companies engaged in extractive industries and has resulted in huge amounts of money being transferred out of the country in the form of profits to foreign shareholders.

It is interesting to note that in the free trade agreement negotiated with the Americans in the 1980s, the Americans were very careful to make sure that they had unimpeded access to Canada's raw materials. This has not worked out all that well so far as Canada is concerned, resulting in a level of foreign ownership that few other modern nations would tolerate.
 
Angstrom
+1 / -1
#48
I say Bad cause the other country usually don't respect there agreement and still tax our resources like wood and the USA.
 
mentalfloss
#49
Quote: Originally Posted by Bar SinisterView Post

The trade does not only have to be in the form of raw materials either. Nations that see themselves only as hewers of wood and drawers of water will find that they are trading cheap raw materials for expensive manufactured goods. In the long term this is a trading strategy that will ultimately backfire. Until the recent increase in oil prices Canada's most important exports were manufactured goods. Long term focusing on manufactured goods and technological innovations is a much better strategy than relying on the export of raw materials; especially as raw material exports tend to fluctuate with demand and tend to take care of themselves anyway.

I've been hearing this as well.

It appears that shipping out raw materials is a decent short term strategy, but if we want to have a sustainable economy, we're better off exporting manufactured goods.
 
EagleSmack
#50
Quote: Originally Posted by AngstromView Post

I say Bad cause the other country usually don't respect there agreement and still tax our resources like wood and the USA.

The USA is your resource?
 
mentalfloss
+1
#51
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

The USA is your resource?

The U.S.A. is always used as a punching bag these days.

It's a shame.
Last edited by mentalfloss; Feb 14th, 2012 at 11:29 AM..
 

Similar Threads

37
We Need Consumer/Retail Free Trade
by dumpthemonarchy | Dec 31st, 2009
0
Why no consumer free trade?
by dumpthemonarchy | Aug 12th, 2007
11
Softwood Lumber and Free Trade
by #juan | Apr 1st, 2006
8
Free Trade: Not for America
by Jersay | Mar 12th, 2006
13
Free Trade of the Americas Agreement
by American Voice | Nov 18th, 2005
no new posts