What should Canada give up in new NAFTA

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
It's the wrong approach to ask.. "what should Canada give up".

Canada has been as industrially eviscerated as the U.S. has been by NAFTA, FTA, the WTO and the myriad of smaller regional Free Trade Agreements that the pathetic globalist shill governments of Mulroney, Chretien, Harper and J. Trudeau have brought in. Free Trade never has and never will work.

It is a shell game imposed by global trading and financial cartels to usurp the sovereignty of nation states in the interests of exploitation of labour, profiteering of consumers and imposition of a global imperial trading regime completely unresponsible to national governments.

It is fundamentally a tyranny of de facto slavery that gouges desperate captive work forces for the grotesque enrichment of a small cabal of oligarchs; virtually untaxed by way tax havens and regressive taxation regimes.

Trade is important and beneficial, providing it is Fair Trade, conducted under bilateral agreements, equitable to both in both dollar values and jobs supported and continuously flexible and responsive to changing technological and social conditions.

Canada should DUMP the Free Trade ideology that has engulfed it, and START with the goals of developing a sovereign, integrated, national industrial economy.. full, fairly compensated employment.. and a stable currency through fixed international exchange rates, as the platform on which Trade is based.

That existed prior the descent of Canada into the Free Market maelstrom of the last 50 years, which is failing catastrophically.
 
Last edited:

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,652
6,989
113
B.C.
Typical Canadian asked question. The question should be what progress
can we make in the relationship. The world has changed. Canada has a
lot of new opportunities to find new partners to trade with. American is a
protectionist country now and we can fill a big gap in the trade world. I used
to me more protectionist but I see some opportunity here.
First we should trade with those who can afford to buy and actually pay for
our product.
Two we should seek new trading partners and depend less on American trade.
Three we should use the products we have as leverage in the marketplace.
Here are a couple of examples. If our partners throw their weight around we
can cut our oil output to America and sell it elsewhere remember the agreement
is being negotiated. Oil is one how about power. We would not want to cause
water problems they don't have access in bulk to our water but we can say we
are no longer going to supply power automatically on the North American Grid.
Our advantage is we have more power than we need, if the Americans withdrew
power to our regions where its cheaper to buy theirs, we can fill our own needs
they don't have enough.
I prefer a win win in negotiating a deal but if we are to be bullied the time has come
to use our assets to bring pressure on the people at the table.
Some say what about food? Or what about manufacturing? They are more than
likely to close plants in Canada anyway lets look for new partnerships or encourage
Canadian young people to engage in growth here at home and abroad.
We have a chance to unshackle ourselves from an agreement we can improve
With the world changing we can find new partners and do just find
Once again this we you are talking about are independent companies who will trade wherever they have the most access to market , in Canada that happens to be the richest country in the world right next door . Many companies already trade worldwide however in most cases America remains their largest customer .
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
The demand destroying, regressive sales tax regimes should be completely replaced by progressive income tax systems.. that treats capital gains in equality with income, beyond primary residence, and a reasonable retirement fund. In fact corporate income tax could be elimiated providing all profit that wasn't productively reinvested was distributed as income, or taxed at 50% if it leaves the country.
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
The problem with a free trade agreement with Mexico is the vast difference in standard of living.Now if government employees were prepared to take a 90% cut in wages and zero bennies we might be able to level the playing field a bit. Probably have to cut pensions at least in half.Bring in a few million TFWs while we new at it to force wages downward. Yeah that should be good for the country.



I'm good with scraping taxpayer subsidies for all media. ANd supply management farming.

Hong Kong is a very open market yet its real estate is comparable to Vancouver's.

According to your logic, Hong Kong should be like Afghanistan.

Dump NAFTA.. and go with Fair Trade..

NAFTA has cost Canadians good jobs...

https://mowatcentre.ca/how-ontario-lost-300000-manufacturing-jobs/

"...supported by lower tariff barriers and transportation costs, has contributed to the rise of the Global Value Chain..."

Our population, our standard of living will either have to be lowered to that of 3rd world nations, or we need to start charging duties to push manufacturing back into Canada. Make it cheaper to produce here in Canada, than it is to ship here from another country.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_MR7tL7tWs

How has Hong Kong succeeded right next to a much poorer mainland China and very open borders? Are they just smarter than your average Canadian?

Just askin'.
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
The demand destroying, regressive sales tax regimes should be completely replaced by progressive income tax systems.. that treats capital gains in equality with income, beyond primary residence, and a reasonable retirement fund. In fact corporate income tax could be elimiated providing all profit that wasn't productively reinvested was distributed as income, or taxed at 50% if it leaves the country.

Well there's a recipe to discourage money from entering the country in the first place.

A moderate (and I stress moderate) wealth tax combined with various sin taxes (on alcohol, tobacco, tottery tickets, etc.) and resource extraction taxes would allow us to scrap all tariffs, VATs and income taxes.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,652
6,989
113
B.C.
Excuse me.... Did I say trade? Insanity is doing the same things over and over and expecting different results
Exacterly !

Hong Kong is a very open market yet its real estate is comparable to Vancouver's.

According to your logic, Hong Kong should be like Afghanistan.



How has Hong Kong succeeded right next to a much poorer mainland China and very open borders? Are they just smarter than your average Canadian?

Just askin'.
I will gladly trade my Vancouver unit straight up for a comparable property in Hong Kong .

Hong Kong is a very open market yet its real estate is comparable to Vancouver's.

According to your logic, Hong Kong should be like Afghanistan.



How has Hong Kong succeeded right next to a much poorer mainland China and very open borders? Are they just smarter than your average Canadian?

Just askin'.
Hong Kong was founded and built on trade with the British empire . Hong Kong was and still is the middle man .

Well there's a recipe to discourage money from entering the country in the first place.

A moderate (and I stress moderate) wealth tax combined with various sin taxes (on alcohol, tobacco, tottery tickets, etc.) and resource extraction taxes would allow us to scrap all tariffs, VATs and income taxes.
Maybe we can apply more tariffs and scrap alcohol , lottery and a bunch of other taxes .
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
Give up the US. Why go down with a sinking ship? Anybody who thinks Trump is going to make anybody but his billionaire friends great again are delusional.
 

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,297
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com
Well there won't be an African American Harriet Tubman on the $20 anymore.. Trump signs Executive Orders passing legislation this week to put his face on the $20.



FAKE NEWS!
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Trump’s trade pick urged by U.S. Senate to get tough with Canada


“I agree with President Trump that we should have an ‘America First’ trade policy.”

In a possible preview of upcoming NAFTA negotiations, U.S. lawmakers Tuesday urged a get-tough approach with Canada in several areas, including the supply-management systems that limit imports of poultry and dairy.

Lawmakers who will be involved in the negotiating process made clear at a confirmation hearing for Donald Trump’s trade czar that they envision more substantive changes than the minor “tweaking” the president recently spoke of regarding Canada.

Senators from both parties pressed trade nominee Robert Lighthizer on softwood lumber, intellectual-property protection and, with respect to the NAFTA negotiations, for freer trade in dairy and poultry.

What was notable about Tuesday’s event was that it was a rare public exchange between actors with a legal role in trade negotiations: American law says the U.S. trade representative must consult the Senate finance committee — before, during, and after trade talks.

https://www.thestar.com/business/20...ed-by-us-senate-to-get-tough-with-canada.html
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
Getting rid of supply management would help the poorest Canadians. That ought to be a no-brainer.

Canada should not retaliate against US softwood tariffs or quotas. It helps to protect our lumber anyway.
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Getting rid of supply management would help the poorest Canadians. That ought to be a no-brainer.

Canada should not retaliate against US softwood tariffs or quotas. It helps to protect our lumber anyway.

You need to explain your reasoning on how ditching the 'supply quotas' would help the poor.........

Make American Dairy Farms Great Again

So his problem with the “very unfair things” supposedly going on in Canadian agriculture’s supply-managed dairy, poultry and egg sectors may be that they offer a good, very good example to U.S. farmers that the agri-food lobby and its friends in Washington would very much like to eliminate forever.

On the other hand, speaking of desperate straits, with the end of his shambolic first 100 days in office fast approaching, President Trump may want desperately to look as if he’s doing something for the schmucks who voted for him when, despite his big talk, he hasn’t really done anything much at all since he was sworn in on Jan. 20.

Because when farmers are left to themselves, they can usually be counted on to produce themselves into poverty, it’s good to have something to blame for the problems you’ve created. As Wisconsin farmer Chris Holman observed in a recent blog post, “Sorry Canada, this time that thing is you!”

“Scapegoating Canadian trade policy is a brilliant move as morally flexible politics goes, but as is often the case with finger-pointing, anyone doing it in a situation like this looks suspiciously like a guilty four-year-old,” Mr. Holman wrote.

Since the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates about 163 million litres of heavily subsidized American milk were dumped in fields, manure ponds or otherwise went down the drain in the first eight months of 2016, U.S. farmers in financial trouble would dearly love the opportunity to dump it in Canada instead. Supply-managed Canadian dairy farmers, by the way, receive zero subsidies from our taxes.

And lots of American dairy farms are in big financial trouble. According to the USDA, and state agencies quoted by Mr. Holman, about 500 Wisconsin farms close every year as the dairy industry there grows ever more concentrated. And, believe me, this has nothing to do with Canada.

Of course, bad neoliberal economic policies have the same kind of friends on both sides of the Medicine Line, which may be why the Canadian supply management system, which supplies high-quality product to Canadians at a fair price while ensuring dairy, poultry and egg farmers earn a living wage, has been under attack by the same types in Canada.

This explains why the Usual Suspects, like the neoliberal propagandists in Thinktankistan and their publicity auxiliary in Canadian media where Postmedia and the Globe and Mail compete to outdo one another with hysterical denunciations of supply management, are positively gleeful at President Trump’s bombastic attacks on Canada.

As National Farmers Union President Jan Slomp cheekily advised Mr. Trump a few days ago, if he really wants to make American dairy farms great again, he should adopt supply management.

Alberta PoliticsMake American Dairy Farms Great Again! Adopt supply management - Alberta Politics
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Scott Sinclair writes that there's no reason for any party to NAFTA to see itself as being stuck with the existing agreement (or worse), while also mentioning a few ways to substantially improve the rules governing North American trade:
Canada should call Trump’s bluff by championing a fairer distribution of the benefits of trade — presumably the idea behind the Trudeau government’s ambitions to usher in a new generation of “progressive trade” agreements.

Anxiety about trade and globalization runs deep and goes beyond Trump’s core supporters.

Canada’s negotiating agenda will need to reflect that reality. It just so happens there are ways to redo or replace NAFTA to make it a better deal for workers in all three countries.

An obvious first step is to include strong, fully enforceable labour standards. Mexican workers, whose real wages have stagnated under NAFTA, and who are rarely free to join independent unions, would be the primary beneficiaries. But rising wages and improved working conditions in Mexico and many Southern U.S. states would provide support for the same in the rest of North America.
...
The Trump administration intends to bolster Buy American purchasing policies, which could side-swipe Canadian suppliers. But the government’s standard response — to seek an exemption for Canadian goods — has fallen short before and will fare much worse today.

Canada could instead propose reciprocal “Buy North American” policies for new public infrastructure spending. If this is rejected, Canada should maximize national economic spinoffs on its own planned public investments through Buy Canadian policies.​
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
It's the wrong approach to ask.. "what should Canada give up".

Canada has been as industrially eviscerated as the U.S. has been by NAFTA, FTA, the WTO and the myriad of smaller regional Free Trade Agreements that the pathetic globalist shill governments of Mulroney, Chretien, Harper and J. Trudeau have brought in. Free Trade never has and never will work.

That existed prior the descent of Canada into the Free Market maelstrom of the last 50 years, which is failing catastrophically.

Yes I was being facetious when I posed that question. I have absolutely no confidence in the Liberals protecting Canadians. Let's not forget they were all for the TPP. Trudeau is surrounded by big money people such as Morneau who is infamous for "Young people are right to be angry about Morneau's acceptance of 'job churn' "

Young people are right to be angry about Morneau's acceptance of 'job churn' - The Globe and Mail


And the big money guys get what they want....... http://forums.canadiancontent.net/c...-through-privatization-illusory-new-post.html