Thanks for nothin, Canada

[CDNBear]

Very good and strong coffee!!!

Been up since 5 anyways, lol, I had to get some paper work done before I came out to play.

How ya bin WC? We haven't bumped into each other for a while, I've missed ya.

 

[Curiosity]

Hey Bear

Been working - playing catch up!! Have a good weekend!

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

You don't like Harper that's fine, but let's not credit him with things he doesn't deserve. The agreement we got was largely hammered out by Emerson, which was begun when he was a Liberal. It's not perfect but most companies are behind it because if finally gives some stability to the industry. We may have won many challenges at the various trade organizations but we didn't win them all, and this disagreement could have gone on for many more years. Considering this agreement only lasts seven years we'll probably be at this again very soon. If you remember the softwood lumber agreement that the Liberals signed before this, it wasn't any better.

Nope, I don't like Harper for some of the same reasons I don't like Cretien. They're both arrogant jerks IMO.

The thing that bothers me about the softwood deal is that it seemed to be done to help Bush, not the Canadian industry. Canada was getting close to the end of the process, the U.S. lumber lobby could only bend the law so much and they were pissing off a lot of people in America too. They were driving up the cost of new homes there. I just find it odd that the Bush White House got over $500 million to spend as they like and the U.S. lumber lobby gets another $500 million. They're going to have a huge warchest to come after the Canadian industry in a few years. I do think that given a little more time we would have gotten a much better deal, I just think Harper jumped in here to help his friends in Washington out.

 

[CDNBear]

You may actually have a point, hindsight is always 20/20 though. It would be interesting to have had a glimpse at the future, but I think what Harpo and Emmi did was what they felt was going to be the best possible deal, the issue wasn't new and the Feds are not likely to change the subsidies to the lumber industry in Canada, so they took the path of least and most accomidating resistance. They still stepped in shyte, but the grass was real tall, the Liberals cut the funding for lawnmowers.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

You may actually have a point, hindsight is always 20/20 though. It would be interesting to have had a glimpse at the future, but I think what Harpo and Emmi did was what they felt was going to be the best possible deal, the issue wasn't new and the Feds are not likely to change the subsidies to the lumber industry in Canada, so they took the path of least and most accomidating resistance. They still stepped in shyte, but the grass was real tall, the Liberals cut the funding for lawnmowers.

I still think it was done for political reasons and not to help Canadian producers. Canada was nearing the end of a long process and a success would have reflected well on the previous government. Harper stepped in to make it look like he was the one who did all the work and at the same time he gave Bush a half billion dollar windfall. Its just being spun to look like a good thing IMO.

 

[CDNBear]

I still think it was done for political reasons and not to help Canadian producers. Canada was nearing the end of a long process and a success would have reflected well on the previous government. Harper stepped in to make it look like he was the one who did all the work and at the same time he gave Bush a half billion dollar windfall. Its just being spun to look like a good thing IMO.

Oh it was a good thing, it just looks and smells like shyte.

Politically, it was good move. In some instances, it is good to fold up the lawn chairs and go home. This would be one of those times. There are many processes and such that are at work. The subsidization of Canadian stumpage fees is a valid concern of the US. If we had pushed them on this issue, they could start taking a closer look at other areas of trade.

So as much as you are correct and justified in your opinion, there is always a lil wiggle room.

 

[RUEZ]

I still think it was done for political reasons and not to help Canadian producers.

How does one argue that. You have no proof it was, and I can't prove it wasn't. I can say that Canada under the Liberals had no better luck in striking a deal. This is just another stop gap attempt at a few years of peace. I wonder if people scrutinized the Liberals so much when they were cutting deals with the Americans? The Liberals sent us to Afghanistan, maybe they did it just to win some points with 'ol George?

 

[darkbeaver]

Oh it was a good thing, it just looks and smells like shyte.

Politically, it was good move. In some instances, it is good to fold up the lawn chairs and go home. This would be one of those times. There are many processes and such that are at work. The subsidization of Canadian stumpage fees is a valid concern of the US. If we had pushed them on this issue, they could start taking a closer look at other areas of trade.

So as much as you are correct and justified in your opinion, there is always a lil wiggle room.

Bear the WTO disagrees with virtually everything you said about the softwood lumber deal, politically it was paying the pricks a billion bucks for the privilage of kissing thier butts.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

How does one argue that. You have no proof it was, and I can't prove it wasn't. I can say that Canada under the Liberals had no better luck in striking a deal. This is just another stop gap attempt at a few years of peace. I wonder if people scrutinized the Liberals so much when they were cutting deals with the Americans? The Liberals sent us to Afghanistan, maybe they did it just to win some points with 'ol George?

Relax. I'm just stating my opinion.

It doesn't take a genius to see that most of what has been going on with our government in the last year is focused on gaining a Conservative majority in the next election. IMO that includes the softwood lumber deal. If a softwood agreement had been successfully concluded in the courts and trade orgs. part of the credit would have gone to the previous government. Harper made a shrewd political move but one that benefits him and his party more than the people he's supposed to represent.

As for the Liberals, they did take a long time to get off their duffs and do something. No one can claim to be effective on this issue.

I'm just getting tired of hearing in the press how decisive Harper is when most of what he's doing is just window dressing(or worse). No one knows the long term results of agreements like this.

And considering some of the nasty stuff Bush has been up to, I don't like to think what he has planned for the $500 million dollars Harper gave him.

 

[Avro]

The hypocracy is baffling around here Colpy!!!???

Ya free trade only lost us certain lower wage jobs, but brought higher wage, skilled and technical jobs up north, increasing both the economy and our standard of living.

The lumber dispute was over Canada's subsidized stumpage fees, they are and the US was rightly annoyed by that.

Perhaps as a result of the rather unfeeling and uncaring attitude of your dear leader Cretin!!!??

Yep there is a reason, short sighted people that think the Liberals actually increased the economy. For more scroll back, I already answered the rest of your post.

Yep yep yep!!!

The dead Canadian Soldiers? Bush didn't kill them, the Afghan insurgents did. Besides that, I highly doubt you have one ioda of an idea as to what our Troops are thinking, while still alive. All my friends curently serving, a couple of which are going back soon, have expressed that they are in fact facing considerable opposition, but what is growing in their wake, is better then what was there, when they arrived.

Yes they are Toro, can you smell the hypocracy where you are too?

Washington? Lopez? Curious George? lmao!
Stop telling the truth RUEZ, the short sighted rarely remember anything beyond Mulroney's deficit.


rotflmffao!!!

Why do you cons always go way over the top to defend Bush?

It's simple, why are our efforts not relised by your hero?

Seems you like Mr. Bush for ignoring the efforts of our fine men and women.

 

[RUEZ]

Why do you cons always go way over the top to defend Bush?

It's simple, why are our efforts not relised by your hero?

Seems you like Mr. Bush for ignoring the efforts of our fine men and women.

Typical Avro, if you don't agree with him you must be a Bush supporter. Then if you say you're not you better be prepared to prove it to him.

 

[Avro]

Tell me something RUEZ...

What day did you join this site and why?

 

[CDNBear]

Why do you cons always go way over the top to defend Bush?

It's simple, why are our efforts not relised by your hero?

Seems you like Mr. Bush for ignoring the efforts of our fine men and women.

I'ld like to see you prove I support Bush Avro, you obviously have no idea who I am, so I'll just ask and leave out my usual smartassed remarks for now.

I can quickly prove the opposite of your claim my friend.

Typical Avro, if you don't agree with him you must be a Bush supporter. Then if you say you're not you better be prepared to prove it to him.

You have no idea how typical this crap is RUEZ.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

Jeez...could you please try and keep the abuse down a bit. If I'm not mistaken this is a discussion forum, not an S&M site.