Don't look a gift horse in the mouth (Trump to cancel NAFTA)

14 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth (Trump to cancel NAFTA)
NorthReport

If true this could be the best possible economic news average joe and Jane Canadian, you know, working class stiffs (not the right-wing Harperites nor the almost as right-wing Trudeau yuppies), have had for a long, long time, so let's capitalize on it

josh

Don't take a horse's ass word at face value.

Mobo2000

Yes, likely nothing more than typical Trump bravado and bluster.    However, fingers crossed!

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Good riddance. BTW,If Trump introduces tariffs, I hope Canada has the balls to see that hand and raise it twice as hard. We have the upper hand any way..The Americans could only hope to have half the natural resources we have. If they start with tariffs on soft lumber,tariff the shit out of our clean water and hydro electricity. In other words,smack the shit out of them.

Rev Pesky

From Alan Smithee:

In other words,smack the shit out of them.

I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment, but unfortunately the facts stand in the way. The trade between Canada and the USA is almost equal in dollar volume, but the USA economy is much larger than ours.​

The Canadian economy is less than 10% of the American economy, yet the exports and imports are almost equal. So any stoppage of trade with the USA would affect Canada much more than the USA. That's not to say we're not important to the USA, after all we are about the same size as California, but whatever we are to the USA, they are ten times that to us. We can get into a fight, but we can't win. 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

From Alan Smithee:

In other words,smack the shit out of them.

I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment, but unfortunately the facts stand in the way. The trade between Canada and the USA is almost equal in dollar volume, but the USA economy is much larger than ours.​

The Canadian economy is less than 10% of the American economy, yet the exports and imports are almost equal. So any stoppage of trade with the USA would affect Canada much more than the USA. That's not to say we're not important to the USA, after all we are about the same size as California, but whatever we are to the USA, they are ten times that to us. We can get into a fight, but we can't win. 

I guess that makes sense since they have 10 times the population as us. But what exactly do we rely on the US in imports? Porno and cheap beer?

Anyway,the orange shitbag wants a trade war with China. Once China turns around and claims states for all the debt the Americans owe the Chinese,their economy will be decimated anyway. They'll have no one and nowhere to turn to.

Rev Pesky

A quick look at what Canada imports from the USA:

Top USA exports to Canada

Here’s a list of the top product categories based on data collected by the U.S. Department of State:

  • Automotive parts and accessories
  • Motor Vehicles and Spare Parts
  • Industrial and electrical machinery
  • Plastics
  • Computers
  • Chemical
  • Petroleum Products
  • Natural Gas
  • Agricultural Products

Now, that's not to say we couldn't source this stuff from anywhere else, but given the USA is right next door, shipping costs (to say nothing of the non-green-ness of it) would raise prices for many products. 

I'm not sure where you live, but I live in BC, and if all California produce was taken from the store shelves, we'd be eating a lot of turnips through the winter. The trading relationship between Canada and the USA is the biggest trading relationship in the world between two countries. Pretty hard to shut that down without some major shakeups in the economies of both parties.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

A quick look at what Canada imports from the USA:

Top USA exports to Canada

Here’s a list of the top product categories based on data collected by the U.S. Department of State:

  • Automotive parts and accessories
  • Motor Vehicles and Spare Parts
  • Industrial and electrical machinery
  • Plastics
  • Computers
  • Chemical
  • Petroleum Products
  • Natural Gas
  • Agricultural Products

Now, that's not to say we couldn't source this stuff from anywhere else, but given the USA is right next door, shipping costs (to say nothing of the non-green-ness of it) would raise prices for many products. 

I'm not sure where you live, but I live in BC, and if all California produce was taken from the store shelves, we'd be eating a lot of turnips through the winter. The trading relationship between Canada and the USA is the biggest trading relationship in the world between two countries. Pretty hard to shut that down without some major shakeups in the economies of both parties.

Thanks for the info. I wish I had a list of the products Canada exports to the US. It's quite a dilemma.

It's not me who wants to fuck around with our trade relationship,it's the madman now running the US that does.

I just can't see how they wouldn't get hurt in the process as well.

And if we get hit hardest,we'll have to look for a trade partnership with other countries instead.

There's nothing wrong with trying to expand our trade relations with Europe,South America and Asia but not in the same manner as the trade deals that are already in place.Even if goods are slightly more expensive. If Trump wants to isolate the US,put them in a position where they are forced to do the same. I think they'd come begging back in the end.

I say fair trade opposed to free trade.

Rev Pesky

From Alan Smithee:

I say fair trade opposed to free trade.

​I certainly agree with you there. It's interesting to me how often we hear the phrase 'level playing field' from business, when the last thing they want is a level playing field in terms of workers standard of living. They have tonnes of rules about dumping etc., but using lower wages as a lure to business is not considered 'dumping'.

​In my opinion, the real answer to the trade deals is to raise the living standards of everyone. There's nothing wrong with trading with other countries. Unfortunately those deals are usually just ways of allowing capital to flow to lower wage countries. Money can move back and forth across borders easily. Workers cannot.

Sean in Ottawa

I very much agree with the last few posts regarding the issue of labour.

I have aways thought trade was a good thing and that both environmental subsidies (through degradation and lower standards) and labour subsidies through lower wages and standards, ought to be tarriffed. If these subsidies are quantified and tarriffs designed to equalize for them then free trade becomes possible. At the moment with these issues ignored as they are then you cannot.

iyraste1313
Pondering

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/us-politics/could-trump-real...

Mr. Holleyman argues that Mr. Trump shot himself in the foot by threatening withdrawal in April and getting smacked down by businesses that are part of the Republicans' voting coalition, particularly the trade-dependent agriculture industry.

"By playing that card prematurely and getting batted down publicly by domestic US. interests, both Canada and the Mexico now see the chances of the US actually going through with withdrawal to be extremely remote," Mr. Holleyman wrote in an e-mail.

Not everyone is so sure.

Columbus, Ohio-based trade lawyer Daniel Ujczo warns that NAFTA's advocates don't seem to realize how deeply entrenched dislike of the deal is among blue-collar voters in industrial states who tipped the election to Mr. Trump. Mr. Ujczo argues it will be very difficult to make changes to the existing deal that would satisfy this constituency.

"This was a core piece of why Trump won the election, and the facts on the ground in this part of the world haven't changed," he said in an interview.

One possible scenario, he said, is that Mr. Trump's negotiators reach a deal with Canada and Mexico that Mr. Trump grudgingly accepts and publicly undermines. This could make it hard to get Congress to sign off on such an agreement, setting up a legislative debacle similar to the one over Mr. Trump's attempt to repeal Obamacare.

What we have now that NAFTA has been in effect for decades is mutually assured destruction between Canada and the US. That why it doesn't matter in this case that the US is so much bigger or we could potentially lose more. We  can be bullied here and there on softwood lumber and other irritants but that is not ripping up the deal. Mutually assured destruction evens things up.   Trump wants to cut out Mexico. I doubt he can do even that without badly damaging the US economy. We are their largest export market.

The whole point of these trade deals is to make it very difficult to get out of them. They can be modified and at this point the deal could be modernized but the US would have to be giving Canada something "we" wants in exchange. Otherwise it's a deadlock.

Trump has failed at nearly everything he's tried to do. All he knows how to do is bully people people that want a deal with him. Trumps problem is nobody really wants a deal with him. Status quo is fine. Obamacare will not be repealed. The border wall will not be built even if a few feet are.

Daniel Ujczo warns that NAFTA's advocates don't seem to realize how deeply entrenched dislike of the deal is among blue-collar voters in industrial states

It doesn't matter because many of the states that elected him would be economically destroyed if they lost Canada as an export market. In any case he can't do it alone and Congress won't cooperate.

iyraste1313

While contingency planning is in its early stages, the WSJ acknowledges that it has thrown up a critical question“ How much authority does the president actually have to scuttle an existing trade agreement? ‘This is sort of uncharted territory where no one really knows,’ said Warren Maruyama, a former trade official in the Reagan and two Bush administrations…Mr. Maruyama agreed that the president probably has the power to cancel or gut Nafta, but he expects challenges—with a chance of success—if Mr. Trump attempts to kill the deal unilaterally. “There are people who are desperately scouring [key provisions of trade law] on Capitol Hill and law firms and at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce right now to try to create some kind of argument that Trump can’t do this,” said Mr. Maruyama, now partner at Hogan Lovells LLP in Washington.”

The potential avenues for challenging a withdrawal appear to be twofold, either on the basis that it is unconstitutional, or that a President can’t reverse laws which were passed by Congress with regard to its implementation. Should Trump serve notice, any parties, such as lawmakers or businesses, with standing could seek an injunction in a Federal court. If that fails, the WSJ reports that Congress could still take further measures to exercise leverage over the White House “The Congressional Research Service said in a 2016 report that a final notice of withdrawal from the president ‘appears sufficient’ to release the U.S. from its international obligations under Nafta, but that Congress might wield a variety of powers to dissuade a president from canceling the deal, including through its control over the budget. Congress in theory could also pass a law reinstating Nafta or a similar agreement, but lawmakers are divided on the issue and unlikely to advance legislation protecting a trade agreement, especially if they don’t have a veto-proof majority.....

.....this is within the context of a growing revulsion and challenge to status quo congress...which dare not challenge the decision of Trump.....