Marine Le Pen causes a stir on Marr

[Blackleaf]

2016 is the year of Brexit and Trump. Will 2017 be the year of Marine Le Pen, who vows to take France out of the EU?

The Front Nationale leader appeared on BBC One's The Andrew Marr Show this morning...

Coffee House

Marine Le Pen causes a stir on Marr

Katy Balls

Katy Balls
13 November 2016
The Spectator

It’s Remembrance Sunday and Marine Le Pen has just appeared on the The Andrew Marr Show to hail a new world order. The timing of the interview has opened the BBC to some criticism, with the National Front leader attacking NATO, discussing her father’s Holocaust comments, and waxing lyrical about Putin on a day the nation remember those who sacrificed themselves to secure our freedom.

In the interview, Le Pen said that Donald’s Trump win ought to be seen as ‘an additional stone in the building of a new world destined to replace the old one’. She drew parallels with the Brexit result and said if there were more referendums across Europe tomorrow, she was ‘absolutely convinced the elites would be in for another surprise’. Le Pen said she hoped the recent victories of ‘the people against the elite’ would help propel her, too, to victory in the French elections next spring.

While this is still seen to be a long shot, she gave some insights into what a Le Pen led France would look like. When asked whether Muslims were welcome, she said they were not going to welcome any more people full stop. She praised Putin’s protectionism and queried why NATO even existed when the danger has passed. However, for many her comments today will have suggested quite the opposite. No doubt her bid will be on the agenda tonight when EU foreign ministers (with the exception of Boris Johnson, who has decided not to attend) gather for an emergency meeting on what Trump’s victory means for Europe.

Marine Le Pen causes a stir on Marr | Coffee House

 

[Machjo]

Trump, Farrage, Le Pen, and their ilk will throw the world into another worldwide economic depression. Lest we forget? We've forgotten.

The opening of borders started soon after the end of WWII, and for a reason. We're now closing them off, for what reason?

As for leaving NATO, I tend to agree with that, I'll admit. But not the closing of borders. Free trade and free movement of people allow us to build international friendships more easily, and that promotes international peace.

 

[Blackleaf]

Trump, Farrage, Le Pen, and their ilk will throw the world into another worldwide economic depression. Lest we forget? We've forgotten.

The opening of borders started soon after the end of WWII, and for a reason. We're now clowing them off, for waht reason?

As for leaving NATO, I tend to agree with that, I'll admit. But not the closing of borders. Free trade and free movement of people allow us to build international friendships more easily, and that promotes international peace.

 

[Machjo]

Does the idea of befriending a foreigner give you nightmares?

 

[Blackleaf]

Does the idea of befriending a foreigner give you nightmares?

The idea of foreigners flooding into my country and taking our jobs and putting pressure on the NHS and schools and housing and picking from our pockets and buggering our children gives me nightmares.

 

[Machjo]

The idea of foreigners flooding into my country and taking our jobs and putting pressure on the NHS and schools and housing and picking from our pockets and buggering our children gives me nightmares.

That gives me nightmares too. But what about the other 90% who pay taxes to support Frarrage's smoking habit?

 

[Blackleaf]

That gives me nightmares too. But what about the other 90% who pay taxes to support Frarrage's smoking habit?

Smoking isn't illegal in Britain. It's a pleasurable thing enjoyed by many millions of Britons, young and old. His smoking is his own decision and nothing to do with you or anyone else.

 

[pgs]

Trump, Farrage, Le Pen, and their ilk will throw the world into another worldwide economic depression. Lest we forget? We've forgotten.

The opening of borders started soon after the end of WWII, and for a reason. We're now closing them off, for what reason?

As for leaving NATO, I tend to agree with that, I'll admit. But not the closing of borders. Free trade and free movement of people allow us to build international friendships more easily, and that promotes international peace.

Macho trade is a personal thing , you can start a company and trade with whomever you want , what you can't do is force a public company to trade with who they don't want to .

 

[Machjo]

Macho trade is a personal thing , you can start a company and trade with whomever you want , what you can't do is force a public company to trade with who they don't want to .

Tariffs and other trade barriers make trade more difficult and so push prices up for the end consumer.

 

[Blackleaf]

 

[pgs]

Tariffs and other trade barriers make trade more difficult and so push prices up for the end consumer.

So why should you care if you are making a profit .Start your company , make some cash trading in whatever country you can turn a profit and use that cash to lobby government . You will find of course that the easiest profit is right here at home or next door in the U.S. .

 

[Machjo]

So why should you care if you are making a profit .Start your company , make some cash trading in whatever country you can turn a profit and use that cash to lobby government . You will find of course that the easiest profit is right here at home or next door in the U.S. .

Canada might trade less with far-flong countries. On that front, it makes sense to not promote free trade with other states at the expense of trade with the US. Let's not copy the UK's error.

However, we do trade with far-flung states none-the-less, and so raising tariffs against them will merely push prices up for the end consumer. Should they retaliate, then it can also cost Canadian jobs. Why do you want to promote higher prices in the Canadian consumer economy? Are you trying to make the poor poorer?

 

[pgs]

Canada might trade less with far-flong countries. On that front, it makes sense to not promote free trade with other states at the expense of trade with the US. Let's not copy the UK's error.

However, we do trade with far-flung states none-the-less, and so raising tariffs against them will merely push prices up for the end consumer. Should they retaliate, then it can also cost Canadian jobs. Why do you want to promote higher prices in the Canadian consumer economy? Are you trying to make the poor poorer?

No I am trying to get it through to you that Canada does not trade , companies trade . They will trade despite whatever barriers politicians put in their way .

 

[Machjo]

No I am trying to get it through to you that Canada does not trade , companies trade . They will trade despite whatever barriers politicians put in their way .

But Canada can make trade inefficient by introducing tariffs and other trade barriers. For example, some US products can't be sold in Canada wihout being labeled in English and French. If a shop owner in BC concludes that it's not worth the effort or can't find a translator, he'll just not import it. Many trade barriers exist besides just tariffs. With that, consumer choice is significantly reduced.

 

[pgs]

But Canada can make trade inefficient by introducing tariffs and other trade barriers. For example, some US products can't be sold in Canada wihout being labeled in English and French. If a shop owner in BC concludes that it's not worth the effort or can't find a translator, he'll just not import it. Many trade barriers exist besides just tariffs. With that, consumer choice is significantly reduced.

Well I don't know about were you live , but as a consumer I have never had more choice than I have now .

 

[Remington1]

Our FTA deal with the US dates back pre-NAFTA, and as far as I know is still in place. So even if NAFTA should be shelved, the FTA would kick in.

 

[Machjo]

Well I don't know about were you live , but as a consumer I have never had more choice than I have now .

That's because we've been promoting free trade for the last few decades. Expect your choices to diminish in the next few.

Our FTA deal with the US dates back pre-NAFTA, and as far as I know is still in place. So even if NAFTA should be shelved, the FTA would kick in.

Actually, according to NAFTA rules, if the US leaves NAFTA, NAFTA remains in effect for Canada and Mexico.

You can bet that Mexico will retaliate against the US while building closer economic ties with Canada. Both Canada and Mexico will still hurt though as US products become more expensive.

 

[Remington1]

So, it would work better for Canada as a whole, since we already have a back-up; the FTA and we would get a bigger piece of the pie with Mexico.

 

[Machjo]

So, it would work better for Canada as a whole, since we already have a back-up; the FTA and we would get a bigger piece of the pie with Mexico.

The US leaving NAFTA would hurt Canada and Mexico, and the US. Sure we'd get a bigger piece of the pie, but it would be a smaller pie. Of course the US would be hurting itself too. But hey, who says Trump has thought about that. Mexican exporters to Canada that need access to imported parts from the US would now have to pay tariffs on them. Canadian exporters to Mexico that need to import parts from the US might then have to conform to new Canadian-content rules that Mexico would probably impose since the US would not be out of NAFTA. Canadian exporters to the US that depend on imported parts from Mexico would then have to abide by Canadian-content rules and so would have to produce its own or import parts from the US probably more expensively.

How does promoting economic inefficiency benefit anywone?

 

[pgs]

That's because we've been promoting free trade for the last few decades. Expect your choices to diminish in the next few.



Actually, according to NAFTA rules, if the US leaves NAFTA, NAFTA remains in effect for Canada and Mexico.

You can bet that Mexico will retaliate against the US while building closer economic ties with Canada. Both Canada and Mexico will still hurt though as US products become more expensive.

What part of renegotiate means shelved ?