• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump just blew by the 2018 deadline to fix NAFTA

Mycroft said:
None. But that's because I didn't say they did.

It seems to be Canada, according to that article, that is using the term, "unfair".
Click to expand...

I am going to quote you:

"As an American, I know that Mexico and Canada have had a good thing going...at the expense of the US. Trump intends to end that and get a good thing going FOR the US. If that ends the good thing Mexico and Canada had going...oh well. That's life."

How has NAFTA been a good thing for Canada at the expense of the US? You brought this point up, so you should explain it.
 
Last edited:
Yes_Minister said:
I am going to quote you:

"As an American, I know that Mexico and Canada have had a good thing going...at the expense of the US. Trump intends to end that and get a good thing going FOR the US. If that ends the good thing Mexico and Canada had going."

How has NAFTA been a good thing for Canada at the expense of the US? You brought this point up, so you should explain it.
Click to expand...

Okay. Now you are asking a different question...one that relates to my comments.

Let's take just one NAFTA issue: The amount of foreign built parts that can be included in vehicles made in Mexico and Canada. Vehicles that can come into the US at very low tariffs.

What has been happening is that Mexico and Canada buy a lot of parts from other countries instead of building those parts themselves or buying the parts from the US. This allows them to get those parts very cheaply. If, on the other hand, those other countries tried to sell those parts to US auto makers, stiff tariffs would apply. This does two things: It gives Mexico and Canada an advantage over US made autos. It allows those other countries to skirt the US tariffs.

This is a good thing for Mexico and Canada...not so much of a good thing for US automakers.

So...what have US automakers done? They've moved their auto plants to Mexico and Canada. Again...not so much of a good thing for the US since that's US jobs that went away.

Trump wants to either end this...or greatly reduce the amount of non-NAFTA parts allowed to be used in building autos. Of course, that's not a good thing for Mexico and Canada because they lose the ability to use the cheap parts. It'll cost them more to build vehicles. But it's a good thing for the US because US automakers will be able to build vehicles, competitively, in the US...creating more US jobs. The US parts makers will also benefit.

As I said, I don't blame Mexico and Canada for resisting changes to their good thing, but as an American I'd like to see a good thing come to the US. Trump does, too.
 
Mycroft said:
Okay. Now you are asking a different question...one that relates to my comments.

Let's take just one NAFTA issue: The amount of foreign built parts that can be included in vehicles made in Mexico and Canada. Vehicles that can come into the US at very low tariffs.

What has been happening is that Mexico and Canada buy a lot of parts from other countries instead of building those parts themselves or buying the parts from the US. This allows them to get those parts very cheaply. If, on the other hand, those other countries tried to sell those parts to US auto makers, stiff tariffs would apply. This does two things: It gives Mexico and Canada an advantage over US made autos. It allows those other countries to skirt the US tariffs.

This is a good thing for Mexico and Canada...not so much of a good thing for US automakers.

So...what have US automakers done? They've moved their auto plants to Mexico and Canada. Again...not so much of a good thing for the US since that's US jobs that went away.

Trump wants to either end this...or greatly reduce the amount of non-NAFTA parts allowed to be used in building autos. Of course, that's not a good thing for Mexico and Canada because they lose the ability to use the cheap parts. It'll cost them more to build vehicles. But it's a good thing for the US because US automakers will be able to build vehicles, competitively, in the US...creating more US jobs. The US parts makers will also benefit.

As I said, I don't blame Mexico and Canada for resisting changes to their good thing, but as an American I'd like to see a good thing come to the US. Trump does, too.
Click to expand...

Except how many new manufacturing jobs has Canada gained from this, do you have numbers? Because it seems like NAFTA as it is structured now has hit Canadian manufacturing worse then US manufacturing, so how has Canada benefited from this?

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/11/22/manufacturing-canada-usa-nafta_n_13151136.html

Also would you support the US stop dumping corn into Mexico or stop the practices Canada is complaining about in that WTO report? If you want a really fair deal, the US would have to change its practices as well.

I think most Canadians would be fine with changing NAFTA, but do not trust Trump to make a fair deal.
 
Yes_Minister said:
Except how many new manufacturing jobs has Canada gained from this, do you have numbers? Because it seems like NAFTA as it is structured now has hit Canadian manufacturing worse then US manufacturing, so how has Canada benefited from this?

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/11/22/manufacturing-canada-usa-nafta_n_13151136.html

Also would you support the US stop dumping corn into Mexico or stop the practices Canada is complaining about in that WTO report? If you want a really fair deal, the US would have to change its practices as well.

I think most Canadians would be fine with changing NAFTA, but do not trust Trump to make a fair deal.
Click to expand...

I'll leave the details and the negotiations to Trump and his people. I'm confident they'll do what's best for the US.

I don't care about a "fair deal". I don't think Canada or Mexico care either. We all care about a deal that benefits us...that we can agree on.
 
Mycroft said:
I'll leave the details and the negotiations to Trump and his people. I'm confident they'll do what's best for the US.

I don't care about a "fair deal". I don't think Canada or Mexico care either. We all care about a deal that benefits us...that we can agree on.
Click to expand...

Okay, then what do you want? Do you think the US should be fair and give concessions from Canada and Mexico to get concessions from them in return or should the US act like a bully and try to strong arm Canada and Mexico into a one sided deal?

Because Canadians would rather see NAFTA die then see Trump change it into something that actively screws them over and then you have to ask yourself, how will trade be managed instead? Because there are jobs in all 3 countries linked to trade.

Frankly I do not think you realize how big a player Canada is in regards to US trade, Canada is the biggest foreign trading partner of 35 US states. Its not a relationship to take lightly.
 
Last edited:
Yes_Minister said:
Okay, then what do you want? Do you think the US should be fair and give concessions from Canada and Mexico to get concessions from them in return or should the US act like a bully and try to strong arm Canada and Mexico into a one sided deal?

Because Canadians would rather see NAFTA die then see Trump change it into something that actively screws them over and then you have to ask yourself, how will trade be managed instead? Because there are jobs in all 3 countries linked to trade.
Click to expand...

shrug...

I'd like to see all sides negotiate as best they can.

What I don't agree with you on is that the US is the bad guy. That the US is acting like a bully. That the US is trying to strong arm anyone.

The US is simply negotiating.

Each country is trying to get the best deal they can. That's all.
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

I'd like to see all sides negotiate as best they can.

What I don't agree with you on is that the US is the bad guy. That the US is acting like a bully. That the US is trying to strong arm anyone.

The US is simply negotiating.

Each country is trying to get the best deal they can. That's all.
Click to expand...

I am saying that any good faith talks involve give and take, if Trump wants to act in good faith, he will have to give up things to get things from Canada and Mexico. He can't expect concessions from Canada and Mexico if he is unwilling to make any in return.
 
Mycroft said:
Good.

1. It became obvious very early on that neither Canada or Mexico intended to accommodate the improvements that Trump wanted. Especially as concerns the percentage of autos that must be manufactured in either Canada, Mexico or the US.

2. Trump was very clear from the beginning that he would pull out of NAFTA if the other two countries couldn't reach a deal with him.

3. The other two countries elected to drag the negotiations out to the end of the deadline rather than just end negotiations on their own.

I suspect this was a tactic for them. They think Trump will keep negotiating and they hope the Dems take control of Congress. They think this will give them an advantage.

I suspect Trump won't fall for their tactic. He will pull out of NAFTA and they'll be screwed. They will have to negotiate with the US individually. This puts both countries at a disadvantage.

So it goes...
Click to expand...

You do know that Hundreds of Thousands of US jobs depend on NAFTA or some sort of deal being in place, oh well.....
 
Yes_Minister said:
I am saying that any good faith talks involve give and take, if Trump wants to act in good faith, he will have to give up things to get things from Canada and Mexico. He can't expect concessions from Canada and Mexico if he is unwilling to make any in return.
Click to expand...

There has been give and take.

Take that auto parts issue, for example. The US would like 100% of autos produced in all three countries to be built with parts from those three countries, but the US is willing to negotiate a smaller percentage. So far, the three countries haven't been able to come to an agreement on what that percentage should be.
 
Casper said:
You do know that Hundreds of Thousands of US jobs depend on NAFTA or some sort of deal being in place, oh well.....
Click to expand...

Yes...and I know that MILLIONS of jobs have been lost because of NAFTA and the tactics used by Mexico and Canada to get around NAFTA.
 
Mycroft said:
There has been give and take.

Take that auto parts issue, for example. The US would like 100% of autos produced in all three countries to be built with parts from those three countries, but the US is willing to negotiate a smaller percentage. So far, the three countries haven't been able to come to an agreement on what that percentage should be.
Click to expand...

Except at one point Wilbur Ross was saying that the US was no position to make concessions and concessions would have to made solely by Canada and Mexico. Stop trying to make NYC real estate power moves in these talks and start making hard choices, because you will not get everything you want.

Trump complained about Canada's dairy system, but Canada is not going to change that to appease Trump, you want that to change, its going to cost you something.
 
Mycroft said:
Yes...and I know that MILLIONS of jobs have been lost because of NAFTA and the tactics used by Mexico and Canada to get around NAFTA.
Click to expand...

How many jobs has Canada "stolen" from the US through NAFTA? That sounds like a BS claim.

Do you think the US always follows the rules when it comes to trade? Canada and Mexico would disagree.

Fair trade means the US does not get to break the rules whenever it feels like it, but insist Canada and Mexico always has to follow the rules.
 
Yes_Minister said:
Except at one point Wilbur Ross was saying that the US was no position to make concessions and concessions would have to made solely by Canada and Mexico. Stop trying to make NYC real estate power moves in these talks and start making hard choices, because you will not get everything you want.

Trump complained about Canada's dairy system, but Canada is not going to change that to appease Trump, you want that to change, its going to cost you something.
Click to expand...

shrug...

Viewpoints change. Ross and others involved in the negotiations will certainly change their "lines in the sand" as negotiations proceed. That's how those things work.

I'm not going to talk about individual issues in the negotiations. The only reason I talked about the auto parts issue was to present an example of some of the things that are being negotiated and why they are being negotiated.

This is what we were talking about when I brought up the auto parts issue (which you singled out):

As an American, I know that Mexico and Canada have had a good thing going...at the expense of the US. Trump intends to end that and get a good thing going FOR the US. If that ends the good thing Mexico and Canada had going.
Click to expand...
 
Yes_Minister said:
How many jobs has Canada "stolen" from the US through NAFTA? That sounds like a BS claim.
Click to expand...

Well, not really "BS", though I may have exaggerated.

The numbers are not cut and dried, but this might help:

Some Democratic candidates, including Barack Obama, have said that 1 million jobs have been "lost because of NAFTA."

https://www.factcheck.org/2008/07/naftas-impact-on-employment/
Click to expand...

Keep in mind this article is from 2008.

Do you think the US always follows the rules when it comes to trade? Canada and Mexico would disagree.

Fair trade means the US does not get to break the rules whenever it feels like it, but insist Canada and Mexico always has to follow the rules.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant issue.

There are already remedies and processes in place to deal with disputes...both within NAFTA and through the WTO.

Ideally, EVERYONE will abide by the agreements that are made.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Trump just blew by the 2018 deadline to fix NAFTA

x240-LOE.jpg

US trade representative Robert Lighthizer.



The 'Great Dealmaker' is nowhere to be seen.

Related: Trump missed Congress’s deadline for getting a NAFTA deal done. Now what?
Click to expand...

The last guy didn't give a ****.
 
Mycroft said:
Well, not really "BS", though I may have exaggerated.

The numbers are not cut and dried, but this might help:



Keep in mind this article is from 2008.
Click to expand...

And how many of those jobs went to Canada? I think you are conflating Canada with Mexico, wages tend to be higher in the Canada then the US, Quebec is not a french speaking Mexico.

Mycroft said:
Irrelevant issue.

There are already remedies and processes in place to deal with disputes...both within NAFTA and through the WTO.

Ideally, EVERYONE will abide by the agreements that are made.
Click to expand...

Except the US just ignored it when the WTO ruled in favor in Canada 4 times in a row in this lumber dispute, so clearly the US doesn't follow the rules when it feels like it, which makes this very relevant.

Do the rules apply to the US or not? The US complains about Canada dumping lumber into its market (despite WTO rulings saying otherwise) but seems fine with the US dumping corn into the Mexican market. The US government and Boeing complained about Canadian government subsidies to Bombardier, but ignored US subsidies to Boeing.

If Trump is serious about fair trade, he should look at the US' trade practices.
 
Yes_Minister said:
And how many of those jobs went to Canada? I think you are conflating Canada with Mexico, wages tend to be higher in the Canada then the US, Quebec is not a french speaking Mexico.

~snipped the stuff I already said I consider irrelevant~
Click to expand...

I'm not going to differentiate between Canada and Mexico when I'm talking about NAFTA, as a whole. That's getting into the weeds. Something I think I've already expressed disinterest about.

Though, I will say that if/when it comes time to have Canada/US trade talks because NAFTA was tossed in the crapper, that might be the time to discuss this issue of job loss to Canada.
 
Mycroft said:
I'm not going to differentiate between Canada and Mexico when I'm talking about NAFTA, as a whole. That's getting into the weeds. Something I think I've already expressed disinterest about.

Though, I will say that if/when it comes time to have Canada/US trade talks because NAFTA was tossed in the crapper, that might be the time to discuss this issue of job loss to Canada.
Click to expand...

Except you have to''get into the weeds'' for this issue to make any sort sense, otherwise its a bunch of abstractions.
 
Last edited:
Yes_Minister said:
Except you have to''get into the weeds'' for this issue to make any sort sense, otherwise its a bunch of abstractions.
Click to expand...

I've constantly tried to deal with this topic in a broad sense. I don't have to get into the weeds if I don't want to.

If you don't like it...well, too bad.
 
Mycroft said:
I've constantly tried to deal with this topic in a broad sense. I don't have to get into the weeds if I don't want to.

If you don't like it...well, too bad.
Click to expand...

Fine, I am just saying that discussion about this issue without getting into the weeds is very limited. The Devil is in the details.

Also if Trump supporters want to get rid of NAFTA, you guys are going to have to have to decide how you want trade relations between the US, Canada and Mexico to go without it.
 
Yes_Minister said:
Fine, I am just saying that discussion about this issue without getting into the weeds is very limited. The Devil is in the details.

Also if Trump supporters want to get rid of NAFTA, you guys are going to have to have to decide how you want trade relations between the US, Canada and Mexico to go without it.
Click to expand...

Don't worry. Trump has that covered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom