Nafta

Trump's in a hurry to get the talks rolling. Speculation is, he wants it done before next year's Mexican election campaign starts. Apparently there's a popular left-wing front runner that might stir up an inconvenient public sentiment.
Will Trump try to resurrect his image by being tough in trade negotiations? Time to arrange markets in Europe?

Grand Mal said:

Trump's in a hurry to get the talks rolling. Speculation is, he wants it done before next year's Mexican election campaign starts. Apparently there's a popular left-wing front runner that might stir up an inconvenient public sentiment.
Will Trump try to resurrect his image by being tough in trade negotiations? Time to arrange markets in Europe?

Click to expand...

I think we definitely need to diversify. If this election cycle has taught us anything, it's that America is ready to go completely bat **** crazy at the drop of a hat, as much as I love our neighbours, it's not a great basket to put all our eggs in.....

Long time between now and then. I'm crossing my fingers on this first foreign trip!

Rexedgar said:

Long time between now and then. I'm crossing my fingers on this first foreign trip!

Click to expand...

Whether by design, or not, yesterday's appointment of a special counsel came at a good time for us and Trump.

Can you imagine Trump dealing with the constant stream of negative news and subsequent calling for a special prosecutor, while overseas on official business? :mrgreen:

Grand Mal said:

Trump's in a hurry to get the talks rolling. Speculation is, he wants it done before next year's Mexican election campaign starts. Apparently there's a popular left-wing front runner that might stir up an inconvenient public sentiment.
Will Trump try to resurrect his image by being tough in trade negotiations? Time to arrange markets in Europe?

Click to expand...

I would have thought that was, what Ceta was about. But the Eu is not the place to look for dynamic markets for the moment. It might get somewhat better, but the Western Pacifc Rim and Southern Asia are the areas to look.

Chomsky said:

Whether by design, or not, yesterday's appointment of a special counsel came at a good time for us and Trump.

Can you imagine Trump dealing with the constant stream of negative news and subsequent calling for a special prosecutor, while overseas on official business? :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

I hope he doesn't read the foreign press. It would depress him.

joG said:

I would have thought that was, what Ceta was about. But the Eu is not the place to look for dynamic markets for the moment. It might get somewhat better, but the Western Pacifc Rim and Southern Asia are the areas to look.

Click to expand...

Unless, of course, America decides to go crazy in that arena... I agree with you, but if America goes to war, as it seems the Trumpers are calling for more and more, then shipping lanes on the Atlantic would be preferable. Also, that market would be far more interested in finished goods, we need to start manufacturing again, so we need markets wealthy enough to buy our goods, not just our raw materials, to then be sold back to us in finished state. In a peaceful world, we're smartest if we diversify, and somehow sit somewhere in the middle...my opinion, of course.

Grand Mal said:

Trump's in a hurry to get the talks rolling. Speculation is, he wants it done before next year's Mexican election campaign starts. Apparently there's a popular left-wing front runner that might stir up an inconvenient public sentiment.
Will Trump try to resurrect his image by being tough in trade negotiations? Time to arrange markets in Europe?

Click to expand...

Being on the West Coast, there is but ONE story worth heading: NAFTA.

Talks should open by this fall and they appear to have a very short shelf life. The head of the US team has written to his Canadian counterpart to advise they have begun meetings and consultations with business and want to begin tri-partate talks this fall.

Very curious is the silence from Ottawa and the inside information that Canadian trade experts have taken up temporary residence in Mexico City. Trudeau is very crafty, he loves to be under estimated.

I have a funny feeling Mr. Trump is going to be frustrated on this promise as well. NAFTA took talks and pacts dating back to the Pearson era, the talks spanned Pierre Trudeau, Brian Mulroney, and Jean Chretien and 5 persidents. It is a massively complex document.

In closing what I know about negotiating deals, is the party that's in a hurry always loses. If they have a spring deadline, I see Trump acting unilaterally and ripping up the whole thing causing a serious recession.

w this is where I theorize that Trump wants a win and soon, as in next fall, and yes he is besieged and frustrated on other points.

There is but one problem with that. NAFTA is like a deliberate puzzle where if you change a word here, a lot changes somewhere else. Trump is making a huge strategic mistake in hurrying, and perhaps through his bravado doesn't realize there are consequences.

He is also opening the talks amid the softwood lumber dispute which should be getting court attention in the fall, and that this time Canada is planning and will deliver a return salvo. In the past on softwood we have gone the court route and last time the Americans simply ignored the rulings. So, this time will be different and they will pay a price.

joG said:

I hope he doesn't read the foreign press. It would depress him.

Click to expand...

He doesn't read any press, JoG. He gets his news from cable! :mrgreen:

Grand Mal said:

Trump's in a hurry to get the talks rolling. Speculation is, he wants it done before next year's Mexican election campaign starts. Apparently there's a popular left-wing front runner that might stir up an inconvenient public sentiment.
Will Trump try to resurrect his image by being tough in trade negotiations? Time to arrange markets in Europe?

Click to expand...

Ok, here's a good one.

WHAT does he want to get rolling, exactly?

I have never heard anyone identify any major provisions that are actually unfair to the US. When the Economist pressed him on it, all he could say is "NAFTA BAD!!!"

And I'm not talking results -- which doesn't make sense in terms of Canada anyway, since trade is basically equal between the two.

So, anyone? Care to get into specifics? Hmm?

Visbek said:

Ok, here's a good one.

WHAT does he want to get rolling, exactly?

I have never heard anyone identify any major provisions that are actually unfair to the US. When the Economist pressed him on it, all he could say is "NAFTA BAD!!!"

And I'm not talking results -- which doesn't make sense in terms of Canada anyway, since trade is basically equal between the two.

So, anyone? Care to get into specifics? Hmm?

Click to expand...

Softwood lumber, for one thing. Last month the US applied a 20% tariff to Canadian wood, retroactive for 90 days, with the threat of more to come. Dairy is another issue, apparently, and energy. Oil, electricity, I'm not sure of the details.

OlNate said:

Unless, of course, America decides to go crazy in that arena... I agree with you, but if America goes to war, as it seems the Trumpers are calling for more and more, then shipping lanes on the Atlantic would be preferable. Also, that market would be far more interested in finished goods, we need to start manufacturing again, so we need markets wealthy enough to buy our goods, not just our raw materials, to then be sold back to us in finished state. In a peaceful world, we're smartest if we diversify, and somehow sit somewhere in the middle...my opinion, of course.

Click to expand...

It is true that the Chinese do not seem to want to prevent the North Koreans from proliferation. The NK has threatened the USA and two close allies. The threat and insinuated blackmail is bad enough. The precedent of further proliferation is, however, much more dangerous.

What is sadder yet is the total irresponsibility of the global community letting the situation deteriorate into circumstances resembling the those preceding ww2. But is understandable with their populations not realizing the implications or structure of the challenge.

As to the shipping lanes one of the main reasons that they are halfway safe anywhere is the USA presence and overwhelming force it can project. It is not the Eu or UN that does that. It is nice that Canada has usually pitched in, but the situation is deteriorating in respect to international security and it is important that everyone not only understands how security is secured but also shoulders more responsibility and a greater portion of the cost both financial and in boots on the ground.

That will not secure Peace, but it might give the global community the time to negotiate a stable international security structure.

Grand Mal said:

Softwood lumber, for one thing. Last month the US applied a 20% tariff to Canadian wood, retroactive for 90 days, with the threat of more to come. Dairy is another issue, apparently, and energy. Oil, electricity, I'm not sure of the details.

Click to expand...

Lumber and dairy are not part of NAFTA.

The US keeps getting beaten on the lumber issue at the WTO. Nothing to do with NAFTA.

Lumber is an EXTREMELY small part of US-Canadian trade. It's less than 2%. Dairy is even smaller.


More to the point, merely saying "oil gas milk lumber" is NOT specific. Again, what are the specific provisions that favor Canada or Mexico over the US? And are there truly no provisions that favor the US? That seems highly unlikely, even considering that NAFTA requires an update.

Grand Mal said:

Trump's in a hurry to get the talks rolling. Speculation is, he wants it done before next year's Mexican election campaign starts. Apparently there's a popular left-wing front runner that might stir up an inconvenient public sentiment.
Will Trump try to resurrect his image by being tough in trade negotiations? Time to arrange markets in Europe?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what President Pence will do about NAFTA. No one is.

Visbek said:

Lumber and dairy are not part of NAFTA.

The US keeps getting beaten on the lumber issue at the WTO. Nothing to do with NAFTA.

Lumber is an EXTREMELY small part of US-Canadian trade. It's less than 2%. Dairy is even smaller.


More to the point, merely saying "oil gas milk lumber" is NOT specific. Again, what are the specific provisions that favor Canada or Mexico over the US? And are there truly no provisions that favor the US? That seems highly unlikely, even considering that NAFTA requires an update.

Click to expand...

Well then I don't know why it needs renegotiating. Maybe Trump sees it as a 'soft' target, a place he can score easy points. Or maybe he's just beating up on Mexico again and Canada is peripheral to what he's trying to accomplish.
And maybe those large American corporations with huge investments in maquiladoras along the border will bring some pressure to bear, before the swamp is completely drained.

calamity said:

I'm not sure what President Pence will do about NAFTA. No one is.

Click to expand...

(grin!)

Chomsky said:

He doesn't read any press, JoG. He gets his news from cable! :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

I am very much afraid you may be right.

joG said:

I am very much afraid you may be right.

Click to expand...

He is right, Trump has been shown to get his information from cable news, you can see it in the background during interviews and in his tweets.

Grand Mal said:

Trump's in a hurry to get the talks rolling. Speculation is, he wants it done before next year's Mexican election campaign starts. Apparently there's a popular left-wing front runner that might stir up an inconvenient public sentiment.
Will Trump try to resurrect his image by being tough in trade negotiations? Time to arrange markets in Europe?

Click to expand...

Dude, he campaigned on re adjusting trade deals to level the playing field. No doubt most of what he needs is in the boiler plate of the agreement, but not enforced. Either way, we need our trade accounts to get into balance. We either pay for imports with money or goods. A healthy trade relationship is in balance over time so one treasury isn't being depleted and the other one getting fat. Goods for goods is the way it has to work.

Carjosse said:

He is right, Trump has been shown to get his information from cable news, you can see it in the background during interviews and in his tweets.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't doubt that. I have channeled tv news on along side Reuther and Bloomberg as well. But he would have cool briefings too

Visbek said:

Ok, here's a good one.

WHAT does he want to get rolling, exactly?

I have never heard anyone identify any major provisions that are actually unfair to the US. When the Economist pressed him on it, all he could say is "NAFTA BAD!!!"

And I'm not talking results -- which doesn't make sense in terms of Canada anyway, since trade is basically equal between the two.

So, anyone? Care to get into specifics? Hmm?

Click to expand...

If this pact gets opened for renegotiation then Canada must make sure we get our water rights back. That alone would be a big win.

rjay said:

If this pact gets opened for renegotiation then Canada must make sure we get our water rights back. That alone would be a big win.

Click to expand...

Ever see a picture of the Colorado River where it crosses the border into Mexico? That'll tell you all you need to know about America and water rights. Millions of them move to places where there is no fresh water, places where where I wouldn't camp overnight, and they still want their lawns and swimming pools and golf courses.
It'll end badly.

What's the point of even renegotiating NAFTA? The U.S. already has all the trade power over Canada and Mexico in that deal.

Trump rushes in where angels fear to tread and he has such poor execution... I can see this going badly for the United States.

If it gets renegotiated, I hope Canada retains better control over its water, and that growth hormone-laden milk from the U.S. remains banned.