Free Trade - Good or Bad?
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Like I said, I'm no expert.
I can dig up some material on it. But I personally don't mind a combination of free trade with some regulations that protect important aspects of each country's economy.
No regulation is stupid.
I'm hearing that the cost of gas will go up as we export more. At least that's what I'm hearing.
I'm no econ expert, that's why I'm deferring to the experts.
I would imagine the cost of gas will always go up regardless how much you export. I've yet to see prices drop as more fields are discovered. Oil companies will never drop prices too much so they can turn a bigger profit.
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?
Right. Well this is something that we cannot successfully answer ourselves on an anecdotal basis alone. We should try and get economists and other profs who constantly analyze these sorts of things to help guide us to a truthful consensus.
While I have my reservations on the environment and the energy sector, this thread is to discuss the positive and negative aspects of free trade, as well as the true meaning of the term. It should be noted that all trade agreements (even NAFTA) have some regulatory aspects to them, so I'm not sure if free trade is truly significant anyway.
Last edited:
Well, for instance, in the latest agreement we made with China on investments, it was primarily a regulatory one. FIPA - Foreign Investment Protection Agreement ensures an equal leveling field in terms of investments. This is not a "free trade" concept, it's a regulatory one...
The Canadian side is hopeful that the FIPA with China will promote a better equilibrium in the balance of trade, as China has become Canada's second-most important trading partner after the US. In 2010, Canada's trade deficit with China was US$29.7 billion out of a total trade turnover (imports plus exports) of $54.7 billion.
The FIPA is not a free-trade agreement - Canada has FIPAs in force with two dozen countries and is negotiating with nearly a dozen others - but the two sides this week made diplomatic noises about their interest in exploring the feasibility of one. Given the nearly two decades required to negotiate the FIPA, one should not anticipate a free-trade agreement anytime soon.
The FIPA is intended to give Canadian companies more protection against discriminatory and arbitrary practices and stabilize, or at least make predictable, their business environment in China. In practice, it is hoped that it will facilitate the implantation into China's economy of small- and medium-sized Canadian businesses that cannot afford to take big risks. The FIPA will not supersede Canada's existing foreign investment regime, so acquisitions and investments by Chinese firms in Canada will still be subject to review by Ottawa.
Asia Times Online :: China-Canada boost ties
Essentially, the market was "freer" before this agreement between Canada and China. China was free to take over some petrol companies in Canada, but we had less direct influence on them. In a free market, no one cares about the sovereignty that one state has.
Similarly, with the U.S., it seems like just as some of our most successful business reach their peak, they are bought out by American companies and that business goes south.
I'm sure we have a FIPA with the U.S., but the free trade aspect still came with obvious detriments like the above.
Similarly, with the U.S., it seems like just as some of our most successful business reach their peak, they are bought out by American companies and that business goes south.
I'm sure we have a FIPA with the U.S., but the free trade aspect still came with obvious detriments like the above.
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.
Yes, there are plenty of public organizations that still exist.
FIPA doesn't exist?
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?
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?
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?
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
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.
Canada has choice to make. Jobs in resources or jobs in manufacturing. We don't have the manpower to fully develop both.