more jobs are leaving the USA for Canada than are coming into USA.
You say so but only provide anecdotal evidence from your own experience.
When NAFTA came into effect whole industries in central Canada dried up as the protection disappeared. There was a lot of whining but mostly folk agreed that a deal is a deal and the long term effects would be good.
It was the case that legal situation surrounding forestry tenure ws not the same in Cananda as the US and it was likely but not particularly well proven that BC forestry licences might have given BC producers an advantage over US. There were a number of efforts made by US producers (of inferior product) to have tariffs imposed on the BC prodcut as retaliation for the supposed BC advantage. Each time, the relevant NAFTA and international organizations stated the BC situation was not in violation of the NAFTA agreement. Since US is the biggest BC market it did get local attention and BC in fact changed its marketing arrangement in effort to mollify the view of US trade folk. But it makes no difference, whatever BC does - the fix is in in Washington.
As for tariffs etc. get a life
Is there a free trade agreement, or not?
It is not all one way Charlie.
Never said it wasn't. When the weasels in Ottawa get out of the way we eat your lunch every time. Parts of your country don't like it and will backdoor any kind of international agreement US makes. That's a fact of life. The cycle goes on. You apparently want to deny it.
What I did say is that there was a lot of bad PR and bad economics:
The really crappy aspect was the gloating that went on about it as the US's allies tried to separate their resentment about the tariffs whilst the US sought sympathy for 911 and material support for the fight against terrorism. The attitude in Mainstreet, Anytown, Anycountry, is, "What a bunch of assholes! They want support and at the same time they shit on us!" [Direct quote]
The Canadians, British, Australians, most Europeans inside and outside the EU had the same experience. Howard and Blair had the right idea even though the US was trying to kneecap them, and Chretien and Chirac had the wrong one.
This bad PR and economics makes it difficult for Canadians like me, who definitely support Bush's position regarding terrorism and Middle East, to defend it against guys like Marcos. Look at this from his reply to me:
It was when the Bush II regime dropped the war against terror, in favour of destroying international institutions for the settling of international disputes, and began a programme of unilateral invasion of sovereign nations, that's where we said wait a minute, perhaps these things should not be decided wholly by small groups of men in the back rooms of any single national capital ... even, yes, dare we speak the name - Washington
Lord! Where do I start? I've been to this poisoned well so often I'm dying from the fumes.
France is going to be hit very hard for its position. You will see congress, administration take economic action against France.
Probably. But it's still bad economic policy.
It will set an example of not to slam good old USA.
True. But it's still bad economic policy. The world needs less tariffs and subsidies, not more. |
