• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NAFTA dead?

Canada is not going to ditch NAFTA. The two way trade is very good for both countries, and Canada runs a big trade surplus with the U.S.

There's nothing in that article that mentions ditching NAFTA. That is just a trade dispute, probably one of many.

Also, U.S. Canada free trade predates NAFTA.
 
The talk of a dead NAFTA was from a TV report where the BC(British Columbia) Minister of Forests suggested that it may as well be. I agree it is not dead, just passing along how it's being viewed as such up here. Perhaps I should have stated these points earlier. oops.

The Softwood Lumber dispute is the oldest ongoing Trade dispute between the US/Canada, going on for 20ish years now. Trade Panels/Tribunals/etc have consistently favored the canadian side of the dispute(with a few minor points raised against the Canadian position), but the US has persisted in taking actions that are always ruled unwarranted or overly heavy handed. This issue is a PITA that needs to be resolved already.
 
The talk of a dead NAFTA was from a TV report where the BC(British Columbia) Minister of Forests suggested that it may as well be. I agree it is not dead, just passing along how it's being viewed as such up here. Perhaps I should have stated these points earlier. oops.
Click to expand...

Minister of Forests? LOL. Nice country.

You take the word of one special interest as representing an entire country's opinion?

Look, I don't even think these people are upset about free trade. I think they want free trade in lumber so they can export it to the U.S., which may or may not be covered by the NAFTA agreement depending upon U.S. vs. Canadian interpretations of it. NAFTA was comprehensive, but there were a few exceptions made.

And even if the lumberjacks do want to scrap NAFTA, the whole country is not going to flush their economy down the toilet to please one group. Canadians are dumb, but not that dumb.
 
And even if the lumberjacks do want to scrap NAFTA, the whole country is not going to flush their economy down the toilet to please one group. Canadians are dumb, but not that dumb.
Click to expand...

You obviously do not know many Canadians. This involves the US and that means that many Canadians would be willing to destroy themselves in some sort of attempt to try to 'stick it' to the US. Hopefully the smart Canadians can silence their suicidal brethren.
 
Originally posted by: MisterCornell
The talk of a dead NAFTA was from a TV report where the BC(British Columbia) Minister of Forests suggested that it may as well be. I agree it is not dead, just passing along how it's being viewed as such up here. Perhaps I should have stated these points earlier. oops.
Click to expand...

Minister of Forests? LOL. Nice country.

You take the word of one special interest as representing an entire country's opinion?

Look, I don't even think these people are upset about free trade. I think they want free trade in lumber so they can export it to the U.S., which may or may not be covered by the NAFTA agreement depending upon U.S. vs. Canadian interpretations of it. NAFTA was comprehensive, but there were a few exceptions made.

And even if the lumberjacks do want to scrap NAFTA, the whole country is not going to flush their economy down the toilet to please one group. Canadians are dumb, but not that dumb.
Click to expand...
Forestry in BC is a little beyond 'special interest'.

the interpretation has already been challeneged, negotiated, mediated, arbitrated, and everything else; every authority has concluded that Canada's position is essentially correct in this dispute, and so far it hasn't lead to a resolution.
 
Canadians are dumb...
^^now that sounds real intelligent 😛

also, minister of forestry was probably made when the industry increased BC's GDP 400% link
From 1971 to 1981 total production or Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased more than fourfold in dollar terms. Adjusting for the effects of inflation, the real growth in GDP was over 60 percent during this period
Click to expand...
This position has probably transformed into a trade dispute position...and rightfully, as ruled by trade commissions.

Also, you wanna talk about funny cabinet posistions: "Homeland Security" and "Interior" 😛
 
Originally posted by: MisterCornell
The talk of a dead NAFTA was from a TV report where the BC(British Columbia) Minister of Forests suggested that it may as well be. I agree it is not dead, just passing along how it's being viewed as such up here. Perhaps I should have stated these points earlier. oops.
Click to expand...

Minister of Forests? LOL. Nice country.

You take the word of one special interest as representing an entire country's opinion?

Look, I don't even think these people are upset about free trade. I think they want free trade in lumber so they can export it to the U.S., which may or may not be covered by the NAFTA agreement depending upon U.S. vs. Canadian interpretations of it. NAFTA was comprehensive, but there were a few exceptions made.

And even if the lumberjacks do want to scrap NAFTA, the whole country is not going to flush their economy down the toilet to please one group. Canadians are dumb, but not that dumb.
Click to expand...

We "dumb" Canadians don't ask for much, just for the US to abide by that which they have agreed to.
 
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
And even if the lumberjacks do want to scrap NAFTA, the whole country is not going to flush their economy down the toilet to please one group. Canadians are dumb, but not that dumb.
Click to expand...

You obviously do not know many Canadians. This involves the US and that means that many Canadians would be willing to destroy themselves in some sort of attempt to try to 'stick it' to the US. Hopefully the smart Canadians can silence their suicidal brethren.
Click to expand...


Hahahaha. LOL. Good point.
 
You two can bash canada's dependence and intellect all you want.
fact of the matter is, US imposed tariffs on free trade goods and trade committees have ruled in canada's favour.

Stay on topic please.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
You two can bash canada's dependence and intellect all you want.
fact of the matter is, US imposed tariffs on free trade goods and trade committees have ruled in canada's favour.

Stay on topic please.
Click to expand...

It is very much on topic. We were talking about if Canadians would damage themselves in order to 'stick it to' the US, aka dropping from NAFTA. You should try to follow the conversation more before you accuse others of being off topic.

 
Originally posted by: Stunt
Canadians are dumb...
^^now that sounds real intelligent 😛

also, minister of forestry was probably made when the industry increased BC's GDP 400% link
From 1971 to 1981 total production or Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased more than fourfold in dollar terms. Adjusting for the effects of inflation, the real growth in GDP was over 60 percent during this period
Click to expand...
This position has probably transformed into a trade dispute position...and rightfully, as ruled by trade commissions.

Also, you wanna talk about funny cabinet posistions: "Homeland Security" and "Interior" 😛
Click to expand...

When talking about funny government positions, the Queen definitely tops the list! 😀
 
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
When talking about funny government positions, the Queen definitely tops the list! 😀
Click to expand...
hahaha, come on man, i made a thread about this already...
i agree she has a dumb position, but until it affects me...meh
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
When talking about funny government positions, the Queen definitely tops the list! 😀
Click to expand...
hahaha, come on man, i made a thread about this already...
i agree she has a dumb position, but until it affects me...meh
Click to expand...

That's pretty sad to read. You shouldn't be such a selfish person.
 
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
It is very much on topic. We were talking about if Canadians would damage themselves in order to 'stick it to' the US, aka dropping from NAFTA. You should try to follow the conversation more before you accuse others of being off topic.
Click to expand...
If the US did something illegal, they should be held to account. If you let countries get away with crimes, the world would all go to hell. If it is worth it, i think we should pull our weight in this situation.

What would you do if a country did something illegal to you, do you let it fly and wait for the next illegal act...i don't thinkso.
 
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
That's pretty sad to read. You shouldn't be such a selfish person.
Click to expand...
How is that selfish?
Half the nation doesnt vote in the US and Canada, should these people be held to account?...i think not, passivity is acceptance of the status quo, or potential status quo.
If you want to explore the Queen situation, go in the other thread.
 
In international relations, there are no real courts, definitely not anyone ones that the U.S. would take orders from.

The "best" Canada can do is impose some retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. But that's of dubious value to Canadians. It would raise prices for Canadian consumers, and eliminate the benefits of trade.

Either way, the U.S. is the elephant in this relationship, and Canada the annoying fly. There's not a whole lot Canada can do, and many of the options (retaliatory tariffs) involve hurting Canadians.

How you like them apples? 😀
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
If the US did something illegal, they should be held to account. If you let countries get away with crimes, the world would all go to hell. If it is worth it, i think we should pull our weight in this situation.

What would you do if a country did something illegal to you, do you let it fly and wait for the next illegal act...i don't thinkso.
Click to expand...

This is not exactly like a crime.

But if someone called me a 'name', I wouldn't go and attempt to murder him and then commit suicide. Would you do that?
 
Originally posted by: MisterCornell
Either way, the U.S. is the elephant in this relationship, and Canada the annoying fly. There's not a whole lot Canada can do, and many of the options (retaliatory tariffs) involve hurting Canadians.

How you like them apples? 😀
Click to expand...

You have to remember that many Canadians think that they are actually very important in the world. It seems that they don't really seem to understand the 'mechanics' of the real world.

Canadians should try to do something in an ideal sense, but in the end they can't really do much. Such is the relationship with Canada and the US.
 
The point is that Canada has already lost billions and the U.S. buries itself in red tape. If the U.S. was more open in its trade dealings maybe they would be met with more acceptance when it comes to security issues and missile programs.
 
Originally posted by: Stunt
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
That's pretty sad to read. You shouldn't be such a selfish person.
Click to expand...
How is that selfish?
Half the nation doesnt vote in the US and Canada, should these people be held to account?...i think not, passivity is acceptance of the status quo, or potential status quo.
If you want to explore the Queen situation, go in the other thread.
Click to expand...

It's selfish because all you care about is yourself. What other thread are you refering to?
 
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
This is not exactly like a crime.

But if someone called me a 'name', I wouldn't go and attempt to murder him and then commit suicide. Would you do that?
Click to expand...
It is a crime, as it breaks existing trade deals
I don't think canada is trying to 'kill' the US. Merely pay for illegal damages. This isnt a hard thing to understand, happens daily in the cout systems. Of course i would like to see this settled without getting nasty with sanctions and economic burdens on both sides of the border. Just looking for the US to pay for canada's entitled damages.
 
so now the US should just make agreements with no intention of honouring them... i see... RM and CoW up to their usual BS.
 
Originally posted by: Whaspe
The point is that Canada has already lost billions and the U.S. buries itself in red tape. If the U.S. was more open in its trade dealings maybe they would be met with more acceptance when it comes to security issues and missile programs.
Click to expand...

Canada would face even more trade problems with the US if it did not adequately provide to the 'security issues'. If they wish to be negligent, then they should be prepared to face the devastating consequences that could come with such behavior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top