• 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.

US/Australia enter free trade agreement

C

charrison

Lifer
linkage

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick announced that the United States-Australia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) entered into force today. The U.S.-Australia FTA is the first FTA between the United States and a developed country since the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement in 1988. More than 99 percent of U.S. manufactured goods exports to Australia have immediately become duty free. Manufactured goods account for 93 percent of U.S. exports to Australia.

...


Australia is a large and growing trade and investment partner of the United States. Two-way annual goods and services trade is nearly $29 billion, a 53-percent increase since 1994. Australia purchases more goods from the United States than from any other country, and the United States enjoys a bilateral goods and services trade surplus of $9 billion.
Click to expand...

 
Originally posted by: yllus
What's wrong with free trade?
Click to expand...


Nothing - if it actually was free.

You can take a look at some of the details for yourself, but basically the people who are upset by it are upset because while it involves removing almost all australian taxes on imports from the US immediately, on the US side it involves lowering taxes on a lot of things by a smaller amount, and in most cases provides a 10 year timeframe in which it is to be done. It also enforces some US copyright laws on australia and makes it more difficult for australian authorities to decide not to sell specific US medications.

http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/n...ausfta_at_a_glance.pdf

Note that while it's indisputably one sided, the view that it will be beneficial to australia in the long run regardless is fairly common, except among those who export to the US and feel that they have gotten a raw deal over having the tariffs unchanged or lowered over a very extended period of time ( sugarcane growers in particular ).
 
Originally posted by: Velk
Nothing - if it actually was free.

You can take a look at some of the details for yourself, but basically the people who are upset by it are upset because while it involves removing almost all australian taxes on imports from the US immediately, on the US side it involves lowering taxes on a lot of things by a smaller amount, and in most cases provides a 10 year timeframe in which it is to be done. It also enforces some US copyright laws on australia and makes it more difficult for australian authorities to decide not to sell specific US medications.

http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/n...ausfta_at_a_glance.pdf

Note that while it's indisputably one sided, the view that it will be beneficial to australia in the long run regardless is fairly common, except among those who export to the US and feel that they have gotten a raw deal over having the tariffs unchanged or lowered over a very extended period of time ( sugarcane growers in particular).
Click to expand...
The effects of the agricultural export tarriffs being lifted for Australia will, alone, be incredible. I see Australia benefitting much more from this than the U.S. The Aussies get wider access to a market of 280+ million people. The Americans get an additional, what, 30 million? Pharmaceuticals stay protected, TV and the media stays protected, investment in strategic Australian sectors is still screened. Inextricable integration with the U.S. has already happened. It's a win for the Aussies AFAIK.
 
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: Velk

http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/n...ausfta_at_a_glance.pdf

Note that while it's indisputably one sided, the view that it will be beneficial to australia in the long run regardless is fairly common, except among those who export to the US and feel that they have gotten a raw deal over having the tariffs unchanged or lowered over a very extended period of time ( sugarcane growers in particular).
Click to expand...

The effects of the agricultural export tarriffs being lifted for Australia will, alone, be incredible. I see Australia benefitting much more from this than the U.S. The Aussies get wider access to a market of 280+ million people. The Americans get an additional, what, 30 million? Pharmaceuticals stay protected, TV and the media stays protected, investment in strategic Australian sectors is still screened. Inextricable integration with the U.S. has already happened. It's a win for the Aussies AFAIK.
Click to expand...


That would certainly be true - if the tariffs were actually lifted. For example, the detail with beef, which got the best deal out of the agricultural products :

o Annual quota will increase by 20,000
tonnes within three years, reaching a
total of 70,000 additional tonnes after 18
years.
o In-quota duty will be eliminated and over
quota tariff phased out over 18 years.
Click to expand...

And sugar, which got the worst deal, got absolutely nothing.

Still, as I said before, it's commonly thought to be a good thing, even if it would be more beneficial if it actually was 'free trade' for both sides.

 
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Hopefully the labor government will back out of this trade agreement once elected.
Click to expand...



why?
Click to expand...


Because hes a dumb liberal who hates America and thinks free trade is bad?
Click to expand...

That is EASIALLY the broadest, stupidest explanation I have ever heard from anyone in P&N. While I can't see anything wrong with this on the surface, I haven't looked into it too much and I assume there is a reason for aidanjm's comment other than that he's a "dumb liberal".

Besides, there is the mistaken notion that just because free trade is good (and I believe so, being an economic conservative), anything close to free trade is also good. That is wrong, "close enough" can often be much worse than you would expect. Looking kind of like free trade from a distance is often enough to bring out the conservatives rallying behind it, but upon closer inspection, it can be anything BUT free trade.

Of course I don't know enough to comment on this particular situation. But I have noticed people are way too willing to jump on the "free trade" bandwagon without even looking to see if free trade principles are even being followed and what the overall economic effects of one particular semi-free trade setup are.
 
Originally posted by: Velk
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: Velk

http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/n...ausfta_at_a_glance.pdf

Note that while it's indisputably one sided, the view that it will be beneficial to australia in the long run regardless is fairly common, except among those who export to the US and feel that they have gotten a raw deal over having the tariffs unchanged or lowered over a very extended period of time ( sugarcane growers in particular).
Click to expand...

The effects of the agricultural export tarriffs being lifted for Australia will, alone, be incredible. I see Australia benefitting much more from this than the U.S. The Aussies get wider access to a market of 280+ million people. The Americans get an additional, what, 30 million? Pharmaceuticals stay protected, TV and the media stays protected, investment in strategic Australian sectors is still screened. Inextricable integration with the U.S. has already happened. It's a win for the Aussies AFAIK.
Click to expand...


That would certainly be true - if the tariffs were actually lifted. For example, the detail with beef, which got the best deal out of the agricultural products :

o Annual quota will increase by 20,000
tonnes within three years, reaching a
total of 70,000 additional tonnes after 18
years.
o In-quota duty will be eliminated and over
quota tariff phased out over 18 years.
Click to expand...

And sugar, which got the worst deal, got absolutely nothing.

Still, as I said before, it's commonly thought to be a good thing, even if it would be more beneficial if it actually was 'free trade' for both sides.
Click to expand...



In the end the agreement is something that both sides can live with, or it would not have been signed. But i agree, but "free trade agreements" are far too complicated.
 
Originally posted by: charrison
In the end the agreement is something that both sides can live with, or it would not have been signed. But i agree, but "free trade agreements" are far too complicated.
Click to expand...

No, it is not something both sides can live with. There is enormous rage at this deal among certain segments of the Australian community. I am hopeful the deal with be scratched at change of government here.
 
Originally posted by: ntdz
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Hopefully the labor government will back out of this trade agreement once elected.
Click to expand...



why?
Click to expand...


Because hes a dumb liberal who hates America and thinks free trade is bad?
Click to expand...

I am fond of America, and Americans (well, 50% of them, at least.) But there are problems with the trade agreement. We have a socialized health care system here, and a majority of the population are happy with it. That is threatened by this agreement. There are some other problems. I don't think there is such a thing as free trade, anyway. Every market is modified, the market itself is man-made.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top