Should Canada hold a referendum on free trade?

[darkbeaver]

Consumption, no Empire was built on Kraft Dinner and Veggy Burgers. Workers will be grown in labs, efficiently, the thought of reluctance will never enter thier minds.After x hours they will just collapse and be efficiently recycled. Of course this will eventually produce super humans. Evolution study requires signifigant investment, of course we want the best workers. Something has to done to correct education. Eynstyien must be burried at the very least. Fukkin coke head.

He bent time. hahahahahahahahahahaha and space hahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[CaptainTrips]

A tariff is a tax on your own country's consumers. How does it help our economy for example to tax tools and machinery that a Canadian business might import from abroad for example? Unilaterally dropping tariffs would give Canadian businesses cheaper access to the best tools to make them most competitive.

The same applies to non-business consumers. If we drop tariffs, we reduce the cost of living for consumers which in turn allows businesses to freeze wages without hurting their workers since prices would have dropped anyway. Think of a worker as machinery for a business. If we lower the worker's cost of living, we reduce the cost on his employer to maintain that workers which in turn makes that business more efficient.

Lowering the cost of living for our workers isn't going to do much good if they have no work. Who are they going to work for if virtually everything we need comes in cheap from countries with much lower wages, plus lower labor and environmental standards? Our manufacturing sector and a lot of our agricultural sector would disappear.

If we are going to grant open access to our market we need to get something equal in return. That's pretty basic.

 

[White_Unifier]

Lowering the cost of living for our workers isn't going to do much good if they have no work. Who are they going to work for if virtually everything we need comes in cheap from countries with much lower wages, plus lower labor and environmental standards? Our manufacturing sector and a lot of our agricultural sector would disappear.

If we are going to grant open access to our market we need to get something equal in return. That's pretty basic.

Why would other countries give us their goods in exchange for Canadian dollars that they don't intend to use? If their tariffs against us are so high that there is nothing they want to buy from us, then they won't sell to us either since our dollars would be useless to them. Either that or they'd expect more Canadian dollars in exchange for their product to compensate for the higher price of buying Canadian products. But if they ask for too many Canadian dollars for their product, then Canadians won't buy from them anyway. Tariffs against other countries have a funny way of just boomeranging back to their own consumers.

 

[CaptainTrips]

Why would other countries give us their goods in exchange for Canadian dollars that they don't intend to use? If their tariffs against us are so high that there is nothing they want to buy from us, then they won't sell to us either since our dollars would be useless to them. Either that or they'd expect more Canadian dollars in exchange for their product to compensate for the higher price of buying Canadian products. But if they ask for too many Canadian dollars for their product, then Canadians won't buy from them anyway. Tariffs against other countries have a funny way of just boomeranging back to their own consumers.[/QUOTE

Canadian dollars can be exchanged into other currencies, they don't have to be spent in Canada.

Access to our market has a value. Why would we give it away for nothing?

 

[White_Unifier]

Why would other countries give us their goods in exchange for Canadian dollars that they don't intend to use? If their tariffs against us are so high that there is nothing they want to buy from us, then they won't sell to us either since our dollars would be useless to them. Either that or they'd expect more Canadian dollars in exchange for their product to compensate for the higher price of buying Canadian products. But if they ask for too many Canadian dollars for their product, then Canadians won't buy from them anyway. Tariffs against other countries have a funny way of just boomeranging back to their own consumers.[/QUOTE

Canadian dollars can be exchanged into other currencies, they don't have to be spent in Canada.

Access to our market has a value. Why would we give it away for nothing?

True enough. If country X has high tariffs against Canada but not against country Y, Country Y has no tariffs against Canada, and Canada has no tariffs against anyone, then a business in country X might be willing to sell a product to Canada at a low price because it knows that it could exchange those CAD for products from country Y which country Y could then use to buy products from Canada.

Alternatively, if both Countries X and Y raise tariffs against Canada, then neither of them will want to buy anything from Canada either. They might want to visit Canada though and so Canadian dollars could be useful for tourism to Canada but not for much else. As a result, due to the Canadian dollar being of more limited use to them, they will ask for more Canadian dollars in exchange for the goods they sell to Canada (they're not running a charity after all), which in turn will make their products less attractive to Canadian citizens.

Again, tariffs have a funny way of boomeranging back. Just look at how some of Trump's tariffs hurt US consumers independently of whether other countries retaliated and even Canada's retaliatory tariffs have hurt Canadians too.

 

[CaptainTrips]

True enough. If country X has high tariffs against Canada but not against country Y, Country Y has no tariffs against Canada, and Canada has no tariffs against anyone, then a business in country X might be willing to sell a product to Canada at a low price because it knows that it could exchange those CAD for products from country Y which country Y could then use to buy products from Canada.

Alternatively, if both Countries X and Y raise tariffs against Canada, then neither of them will want to buy anything from Canada either. They might want to visit Canada though and so Canadian dollars could be useful for tourism to Canada but not for much else. As a result, due to the Canadian dollar being of more limited use to them, they will ask for more Canadian dollars in exchange for the goods they sell to Canada (they're not running a charity after all), which in turn will make their products less attractive to Canadian citizens.

Again, tariffs have a funny way of boomeranging back. Just look at how some of Trump's tariffs hurt US consumers independently of whether other countries retaliated and even Canada's retaliatory tariffs have hurt Canadians too.

That's not how it works. Nobody has a problem with Canadian currency. It does not have to be spent in Canada or any other country. It can be taken to the FOREX - foreign exchange market, and exchanged for whatever currency you want.

 

[White_Unifier]

That's not how it works. Nobody has a problem with Canadian currency. It does not have to be spent in Canada or any other country. It can be taken to the FOREX - foreign exchange market, and exchanged for whatever currency you want.

But the purpose of CAD is to buy Canadian products or services. So unless it has a value to someone, then no one will want to buy CAD. CAD have no value to someone who's panning to just sit on it or sell it around in circles.

Now that being said, since Hong Kong, Singapore, and New Zealand have unilateral free trade, I suppose that a protectionist state could sell its product to Canada in exchange for CAD, sell its CAD to one of the free-trading countries in exchange for goods, and then that country could buy goods or services from Canada using those CAD. But even that is conditional on that country not being protectionist against those countries too otherwise they won't be interested in buying anything from any other country either.

So yes, money can boomerang back, but that country has to then be willing to trade with someone at least. CAD are useless unless you can exchange it for goods or services eventually.

 

[CaptainTrips]

But the purpose of CAD is to buy Canadian products or services. So unless it has a value to someone, then no one will want to buy CAD. CAD have no value to someone who's panning to just sit on it or sell it around in circles.

Now that being said, since Hong Kong, Singapore, and New Zealand have unilateral free trade, I suppose that a protectionist state could sell its product to Canada in exchange for CAD, sell its CAD to one of the free-trading countries in exchange for goods, and then that country could buy goods or services from Canada using those CAD. But even that is conditional on that country not being protectionist against those countries too otherwise they won't be interested in buying anything from any other country either.

So yes, money can boomerang back, but that country has to then be willing to trade with someone at least. CAD are useless unless you can exchange it for goods or services eventually.

You are confusing yourself unnecessarily. As I stated, CAD can be exchanged for whatever currency you want at the FOREX.

Again, why would Canada give away free access to our market without getting anything in return? I'm all for free trade with the right countries, but it has to be two-way. Free access to our market in exchange for free access to theirs.

 

[White_Unifier]

You are confusing yourself unnecessarily. As I stated, CAD can be exchanged for whatever currency you want at the FOREX.

Again, why would Canada give away free access to our market without getting anything in return? I'm all for free trade with the right countries, but it has to be two-way. Free access to our market in exchange for free access to theirs.

Let me understand you correctly. To simplify things, let's imagine two countries in the world. So Country X imposes tariffs on Canada. If Country X sells goods and services to Canada in exchange for CAD but then just sells CAD around in its country for ever, then Canada would be getting a sweet deal. We'd just have to print CAD and, in exchange for that paper, would get goods and services from that country while never needing to give anything back other than CAD that they would never use in Canada again.

As for the FOREX, why would anyone at the FOREX want to buy CAD if they can't use it to buy actual goods and services sooner or later?

Let's look at the US and Canada. Had Canada not retaliated against Trump, the CAD would just have depreciated somewhat since any US citizen who previously wanted to buy a product that Trump now tariffs would lose interest in buying CAD.

As a result, CAD would depreciate in value. This in turn would make Canadian gods and services that aren't being tariffed more attractive to US buyers. It's a little like the Dutch disease. The more a country sells, the more its currency appreciates. The less it sells, the more its currency depreciates. The market adapts.

Even if Trum raised tariffs against every Canadian product, then the CAD would so drop in value as to make Canada a very attractive tourist destination.

Add to that that it's difficult to impose tariffs at the border on software being sold online for example.

If Trump succeeded in banning US travel to Canada and cutting US access to the Canadian internet, then Americans would have no interest in buying CAD anyway. While they would no longer buy Canadian products, Canadians could not afford to buy US products either. Again, the market will adapt. A tariff is just a tax on your own consumers.

 

[CaptainTrips]

Let me understand you correctly. To simplify things, let's imagine two countries in the world. So Country X imposes tariffs on Canada. If Country X sells goods and services to Canada in exchange for CAD but then just sells CAD around in its country for ever, then Canada would be getting a sweet deal. We'd just have to print CAD and, in exchange for that paper, would get goods and services from that country while never needing to give anything back other than CAD that they would never use in Canada again.

As for the FOREX, why would anyone at the FOREX want to buy CAD if they can't use it to buy actual goods and services sooner or later?

Let's look at the US and Canada. Had Canada not retaliated against Trump, the CAD would just have depreciated somewhat since any US citizen who previously wanted to buy a product that Trump now tariffs would lose interest in buying CAD.

As a result, CAD would depreciate in value. This in turn would make Canadian gods and services that aren't being tariffed more attractive to US buyers. It's a little like the Dutch disease. The more a country sells, the more its currency appreciates. The less it sells, the more its currency depreciates. The market adapts.

Even if Trum raised tariffs against every Canadian product, then the CAD would so drop in value as to make Canada a very attractive tourist destination.

Add to that that it's difficult to impose tariffs at the border on software being sold online for example.

If Trump succeeded in banning US travel to Canada and cutting US access to the Canadian internet, then Americans would have no interest in buying CAD anyway. While they would no longer buy Canadian products, Canadians could not afford to buy US products either. Again, the market will adapt. A tariff is just a tax on your own consumers.

I am not arguing that Canada should never drop all trade barriers. I'm saying we should never do that without getting the same access to other markets. We can't just import, we need to produce and export as well, so equal access to other markets is crucial.

 

[White_Unifier]

I am not arguing that Canada should never drop all trade barriers. I'm saying we should never do that without getting the same access to other markets. We can't just import, we need to produce and export as well, so equal access to other markets is crucial.

If we do nothing but import, the Canadian dollar would drop which in turn would make our products and services more attractive on the world stage with or without reciprocity. Hong Kong and Singapore have unilateral free trade in addition agreements to try to remove unintentional trade barriers mostly relating to regulations, and they each have a higher per-capita wealth than Canada does with all of Canada's protectionism. According to your theory, Hong Kong and Singapore ought to be poorer than Canada, not wealthier.

 

[MHz]

If we had a government working for Canada we would be buying Venezuela with the grain we are having trouble finding buyers for.

 

[CaptainTrips]

If we do nothing but import, the Canadian dollar would drop which in turn would make our products and services more attractive on the world stage with or without reciprocity. Hong Kong and Singapore have unilateral free trade in addition agreements to try to remove unintentional trade barriers mostly relating to regulations, and they each have a higher per-capita wealth than Canada does with all of Canada's protectionism. According to your theory, Hong Kong and Singapore ought to be poorer than Canada, not wealthier.

The extremely weak Canadian dollar would make imports much more expensive than any tariff we currently have on them, thus wiping out any advantage to opening our market unilaterally. Our exports would be cheaper, but subject to tariffs if we didn't have reciprocal deals. How would Canadians like being isolated by a 25 cent dollar? Not very much I think.

 

[White_Unifier]

The extremely weak Canadian dollar would make imports much more expensive than any tariff we currently have on them, thus wiping out any advantage to opening our market unilaterally. Our exports would be cheaper, but subject to tariffs if we didn't have reciprocal deals. How would Canadians like being isolated by a 25 cent dollar? Not very much I think.

Hong Kong and Singapore seem to be doing just fine with unilateral free trade.

 

[MHz]

We export food and energy and you say the other side is holding all the cards. We make it so cheap they would be stupid to refuse it, we then do enough trading that they use a lot of both, perhaps even start up a hemp industry so we have lots of items to barter. Or we can make them starve and dump the grain in the ocean just over the 1st horizon.

 

[White_Unifier]

We export food and energy and you say the other side is holding all the cards. We make it so cheap they would be stupid to refuse it, we then do enough trading that they use a lot of both, perhaps even start up a hemp industry so we have lots of items to barter. Or we can make them starve and dump the grain in the ocean just over the 1st horizon.

Hong Kong and Singapore are extremely dependent on resource exports. If unilateral free trade were bad for an economy, those two jurisdictions would have suffered the most from it.

 

[CaptainTrips]

Hong Kong and Singapore seem to be doing just fine with unilateral free trade.

Singapore does not have unilateral free trade. It has FTAs with all its trading partners including the US. That means it got something in return for what it gave.

 

[White_Unifier]

Singapore does not have unilateral free trade. It has FTAs with all its trading partners including the US. That means it got something in return for what it gave.

Unilateral free trade and FTA's are not mutually exclusive. In fact, Stephen Harper engaged in some unilateral free trade when he was Prime Minister by reducing a few tariffs unilaterally outside of any agreement even though most of our tariff reductions come from agreements.

Unilateral free trade cannot solve all problems. It can unilaterally eliminate tariffs, subsidies, and other intentional trade barriers. Beyond that though, to eliminate unintentional barriers (such as packaging and labeling, language, sanitary, and other regulations), a government must negotiate to harmonize conflicting rules. It can unilaterally eliminate some regulations through deregulation, but there may be other more essential regulations that are fundamental to the proper operation of a system but that might function differently from that in another country. In such cases, one of the two countries will need to conform to the other's rules or they will need to both adopt new more compatible rules. That will require an FTA.

So no, unilateral free trade and negotiated trade are not necessarily mutually incompatible.

Where Singapore has an advantage though is that while other negotiators are busy negotiating tariffs and subsidies, Singapore can cut to the chase and negotiate banking, sanitary, phyto-sanitary, packaging, labeling, language, and other regulations right off the bat. What Singapore will be negotiating in an FTA will be very different from what most other states will be negotiating since it doesn't have any tariffs and subsidies to talk about.

 

[CaptainTrips]

Unilateral free trade and FTA's are not mutually exclusive. In fact, Stephen Harper engaged in some unilateral free trade when he was Prime Minister by reducing a few tariffs unilaterally outside of any agreement even though most of our tariff reductions come from agreements.

Unilateral free trade cannot solve all problems. If can unilaterally eliminate tariffs, subsidies, and other intentional trade barriers. Beyond that though, to eliminate unintentional barriers (such as packaging and labeling, language, sanitary, and other regulations), a government must negotiate to harmonize conflicting rules. It can unilaterally eliminate some regulations through deregulation, but there may be other more essential regulations that are fundamental to the proper operation of a system but that might function differently from that in another country. In such cases, one of the two countries will need to conform to the other's rules or they will need to both adopt new more compatible rules. That will require an FTA.

So no, unilateral free trade and negotiated trade are not necessarily mutually incompatible.

Where Singapore has an advantage though is that while other negotiators are busy negotiating tariffs and subsidies, Singapore can cut to the chase and negotiate banking, sanitary, phyto-sanitary, packaging, labeling, language, and other regulations right off the bat. What Singapore will be negotiating in an FTA will be very different from what most other states will be negotiating since it doesn't have any tariffs and subsidies to talk about.

Singapore did not unilaterally drop all trade barriers before negotiating its FTAs. Nobody gives away their bargaining chips before sitting down at the table.

 

[White_Unifier]

Singapore did not unilaterally drop all trade barriers before negotiating its FTAs. Nobody gives away their bargaining chips before sitting down at the table.

Hong Kong's ONLY tariffs relate to tobacco, alcohol, and fuel. That though was motivated not by nationalist protectionism but rather by the desire to protect public health and the environment.

As far as I know, Singapore has no tariffs whatsoever or if it does, like in Hong Kong, it imposes them only on non-desirable products.

Feel free to prove me wrong. From all I've read, Singapore has gone to unilateral free trade:
https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Unilateral-Free-Trade.pdf

Here's an example of a Singaporean Free Trade Agreement:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/simon-lester/excluding-tobacco-from-tr_b_12750088.html

You'll notice that Singapore and Australia are already free traders. If anything, they were negotiating reducing free protection on tobacco companies. In other words, when a country is protectionist, it's busy negotiating for the union lobby. When it's a free-trading nation, it can shift its focus on public health, safety, and other more important matters.