May I be first to dance on graves of NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT?

Free trade is a good concept. I only make 2 demands.

1) That everyone play by the rules.

2) That agreements dont undermine American soverignty.

It seems that Clinton and Bush have been playing fast and loose with both, our soverignty, and the rules. In setting agreements, the soverignty of the United States has been undermined, as obeying the rules of the trade agreements that have been negotiated has become more important than US laws, rules and regulations. In addition, it seems that the Bushneviks in power had no intention to play by their own rules either. A case in point is the breaking of our agreement with Canda over importing timber, due to our eagerness to do the bidding of corporations, and circumvent the very laws we are a party to passing.

Other nations now see the US as insincere, and willing to break laws. I see what is happening today as the first steps in the deaths of our agreements. To be honest, that is fine by me. I have been against these agreements from the start.

Death to NAFTA.
Death to CAFTA.
Death to GATT.

Naw, these won't die

we'll just shape up is all, or least i hope so.

these agreements have so much potential and its not realized...

danarhea said:

Free trade is a good concept. I only make 2 demands.

1) That everyone play by the rules.

2) That agreements dont undermine American soverignty.

It seems that Clinton and Bush have been playing fast and loose with both, our soverignty, and the rules. In setting agreements, the soverignty of the United States has been undermined, as obeying the rules of the trade agreements that have been negotiated has become more important than US laws, rules and regulations. In addition, it seems that the Bushneviks in power had no intention to play by their own rules either. A case in point is the breaking of our agreement with Canda over importing timber, due to our eagerness to do the bidding of corporations, and circumvent the very laws we are a party to passing.

Other nations now see the US as insincere, and willing to break laws. I see what is happening today as the first steps in the deaths of our agreements. To be honest, that is fine by me. I have been against these agreements from the start.

Death to NAFTA.
Death to CAFTA.
Death to GATT.

Click to expand...

Hardly a death threat. Even your article says a slap on the wrist should do the trick.

Now...how about the Canadian violations? I believe another Forum member brought up a 160 million fine levied against the Canadian Government in favor of UPS.

Didn't the U.S. just add 6 more nations to the Free Trade Agreements? With another half-dozen Latin American countries negotiating at this very moment, I think you'll have to take a raincheck on your dancing.:2wave:

Death to NAFTA.
Death to CAFTA.
Death to GATT.

Click to expand...

I agree.These things screw the American work force.It takes away the potential employee's or employee's right to negotiate wages and working conditions,and to unionize.

jamesrage said:

I agree.These things screw the American work force.It takes away the potential employee's or employee's right to negotiate wages and working conditions,and to unionize.

Click to expand...

I disagree. They create jobs which helps the American work force.

This from the Center For Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute (and it should be noted that it's 18 months old):


"For one thing, it has delivered on its principal promise of increasing trade. Since 1993, the year before the pact took effect, two-way commerce between the United States and Mexico roughly tripled, from $81 billion to $232 billion. For another, NAFTA has helped speed Mexico's dramatic economic and political transformation. The trade agreement marks a major milestone in Mexico's turn away from a closed, centrally directed economic system under the authority of a one-party state, to an open and dynamic market democracy."

"There has been no "giant sucking sound" of jobs and investment heading south. In the past decade, the U.S. economy has added a net 18 million new jobs."

From the office of the US Trade Representative:

"All member economies have grown significantly from 1993-2003:


· United States: 38% economic growth


· Canada: 30.9% growth


· Mexico: 30% growth

MiamiFlorida said:

Hardly a death threat. Even your article says a slap on the wrist should do the trick.

Now...how about the Canadian violations? I believe another Forum member brought up a 160 million fine levied against the Canadian Government in favor of UPS.

Didn't the U.S. just add 6 more nations to the Free Trade Agreements? With another half-dozen Latin American countries negotiating at this very moment, I think you'll have to take a raincheck on your dancing.:2wave:

Click to expand...

You seem to be omitting the fact that the US is refusing to abide by the tribunal's decision, which is why many Canadians are beginning to call for Canada's leaving NAFTA. After all, why be in it, if the other members do not abide by the tribunal's decisions? What makes this so ironic is because Canada, if it leaves NAFTA, would be doing much more of a service to American Patriotism than Bush ever dreamed of doing himself.

danarhea said:

You seem to be omitting the fact that the US is refusing to abide by the tribunal's decision, which is why many Canadians are beginning to call for Canada's leaving NAFTA. After all, why be in it, if the other members do not abide by the tribunal's decisions? What makes this so ironic is because Canada, if it leaves NAFTA, would be doing much more of a service to American Patriotism than Bush ever dreamed of doing himself.

Click to expand...

I doubt very much that the dispute won't be settled. We're not talking about Iran here...we're talking about Canada.

Besides......

The United States is the largest market in the world. Free Trade Agreements, while they are beneficial for our economy....are A LOT MORE beneficial to the economies of our trade partners.

The United States and partners are planning a 40-nation free-trade zone. There are 13 already in the loop. You really believe the Canadians are going to cut off their nose to spite their face?

MiamiFlorida said:

I doubt very much that the dispute won't be settled. We're not talking about Iran here...we're talking about Canada.

Besides......

The United States is the largest market in the world. Free Trade Agreements, while they are beneficial for our economy....are A LOT MORE beneficial to the economies of our trade partners.

The United States and partners are planning a 40-nation free-trade zone. There are 13 already in the loop. You really believe the Canadians are going to cut off their nose to spite their face?

Click to expand...

Actually, it WAS settled. The US refused to abide by the settlement. That is the problem. Would Candada cut off its nose to spite its face? If its nose is already cut off due to cheating by the most powerful member, they would not see that as a problem.

You and I are not going to see eye to eye on this, or apparently much else, but I very much appreciate your intelligent response and debate. On the last board I was on, Political Crossfire, I would have had the crap trolled out of me if I did not agree with the Bush supporters in the thread. Nice to know that those trolls do not represent the majority of you guys, and I never thought they actually did. I was just on the wrong board, thats all. LOL.

I believe, of course, that you are wrong, and I am sure that you feel the same about me, but somewhere down the line, we will find something to agree on, which will bridge the gap just a little, and thats what counts.

danarhea said:

Actually, it WAS settled. The US refused to abide by the settlement. That is the problem. Would Candada cut off its nose to spite its face? If its nose is already cut off due to cheating by the most powerful member, they would not see that as a problem.

You and I are not going to see eye to eye on this, or apparently much else, but I very much appreciate your intelligent response and debate. On the last board I was on, Political Crossfire, I would have had the crap trolled out of me if I did not agree with the Bush supporters in the thread. Nice to know that those trolls do not represent the majority of you guys, and I never thought they actually did. I was just on the wrong board, thats all. LOL.

I believe, of course, that you are wrong, and I am sure that you feel the same about me, but somewhere down the line, we will find something to agree on, which will bridge the gap just a little, and thats what counts.

Click to expand...

Well...although I voted for Bush, I am not a Republican. As a matter of fact, I voted for the last 2 Democratic presidents (for Clinton twice).

You should note that Canada has taken a two-track approach in the dispute - litigation and negotiation.

And this is from the Canadian government:

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/het/softwood/Legal.htm

I quote:

"The third Administrative Review (AR3), covering lumber imports to the United States over the period April 1, 2004 to March 31, 2005, is currently under way. The US Department of Commerce has issued its questionnaires to Canada; responses are due September 19, 2005. Commerce appears to be on a faster timeline in AR3 than in previous reviews."

This is an ongoing process, is it not?

I understand what you mean about certain forums. I have participated for years in a Spanish forum where the members range from Basque separatists to Latin American marxists and everything in between. Although there are some very well informed people on that forum, some of them take debate as a personal offense.

I don't see why....if everyone agreed with each other we'd be bored to death.

MiamiFlorida said:

Well...although I voted for Bush, I am not a Republican. As a matter of fact, I voted for the last 2 Democratic presidents (for Clinton twice).

You should note that Canada has taken a two-track approach in the dispute - litigation and negotiation.

And this is from the Canadian government:

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/het/softwood/Legal.htm

I quote:

"The third Administrative Review (AR3), covering lumber imports to the United States over the period April 1, 2004 to March 31, 2005, is currently under way. The US Department of Commerce has issued its questionnaires to Canada; responses are due September 19, 2005. Commerce appears to be on a faster timeline in AR3 than in previous reviews."

This is an ongoing process, is it not?

I understand what you mean about certain forums. I have participated for years in a Spanish forum where the members range from Basque separatists to Latin American marxists and everything in between. Although there are some very well informed people on that forum, some of them take debate as a personal offense.

I don't see why....if everyone agreed with each other we'd be bored to death.

Click to expand...

Hmmm. We are almost opposites. I used to vote for Republican presidents. But like I said, ALMOST. I would never vote for a Democrat. LOL.

As for your response, you seem to be talking around the Q, in that you havent addressed why the US refuses to abide by the decision.

danarhea said:

Hmmm. We are almost opposites. I used to vote for Republican presidents. But like I said, ALMOST. I would never vote for a Democrat. LOL.

As for your response, you seem to be talking around the Q, in that you havent addressed why the US refuses to abide by the decision.

Click to expand...

That's just it...they are still negotiating. A refusal is when you walk away from the table and close the door.

In international diplomacy sometimes yes means no....no means yes.....and maybe...who knows what that means.

MiamiFlorida said:

That's just it...they are still negotiating. A refusal is when you walk away from the table and close the door.

In international diplomacy sometimes yes means no....no means yes.....and maybe...who knows what that means.

Click to expand...

And that may be the problem. Sounds a lot like the UN.

I disagree. They create jobs which helps the American work force.

Click to expand...

Wow minimum wage jobs!That is what everyone wants,a job at walmart.That way those years in school can go straight down the tiolet.Nice to know that those years in K-12 and those years in college and trade school can go down the toilet.

New jobs do not mean **** if all those new jobs coming in are just low wage jobs.

wal-mart hires over 8.50 an hour BTW...

8.50 and hour is still a low wage job.

you think you're making good money straight ouf of college?


It takes years to build a rep worth 30+ an hour.

jamesrage said:

Wow minimum wage jobs!That is what everyone wants,a job at walmart.That way those years in school can go straight down the tiolet.Nice to know that those years in K-12 and those years in college and trade school can go down the toilet.

New jobs do not mean **** if all those new jobs coming in are just low wage jobs.

Click to expand...

How do you figure those jobs are: #1. "Coming in"...... #2. Low paying?

Lets see; If Caterpillar doubles or triples its sales of say...tractors....to South America.....aren't we going to need more engineers, designers, executives, etc...?

How about the automakers, the aerospace industry, shipping, Insurance...those low paying jobs? You think the employees at Microsoft are going to take a hit?