Help from other countries?

[RGA]

The US is putting tarrifs on our softwood lumber but not our raw logs, hmmm. They are basically trying to squeeze out our manufacturing of our own raw logs. These stumpage rates don't mean dick when we ship raw logs, but on a 2x4, again hmmmm. If a NFL referee calls a illegal procedure penalty, then it is a penalty, if NAFTA rules, give the 5 Billion back, well you know what the answer is, but I guess we will have to negotiate to get some of our money back. Maybe a NFL coach can negotiate a 5 yard penalty instead of a 10.

Cam
The thing is the Canadian logger gets screwed -- but what Kex fails to note is that the American citizen gets screwed. Who makes out is incompetent American logging businesses (who I'm sure Bush and crew have big invstments in). Average Joe American gets ripped off. But Cam I'm still waiting for the Billions they owe us for keeping California's lights turned on a few years ago -- they paid us nothing by the way. Canada is a friend so be thankful we're not a country that has any kind of spine -- we'd be terrorists with mass destruction weapons.

I don't want to seem uncaring for the people in the south -- it is my frustration and sadness for what they're going through that had me ranting. If I didn't care I would not have said anything.

As for political systems well there is a serious problem with the 2 party system where so many diverse views get slotted into Republican and so many wildly different left views get slotted into democrat. What happens is both move largely to the center to get the most votes - that is unless one has a majority government then it cand do pretty much anything for 4 years.

Canada is not much different in this regard -- the Liberal government is a say anything to anyone group and they are the safe center vote. Which is why they're seemingly always in power. The country like the US is made up of diverse regions -- one reason I don't lump US citizens all together is because they are in many ways separate mini-countries that have banded together much as Canada's provinces are united. In Canada that means some hugely different views from a Province like Quebec and British Columbia.

Canada is heavily influenced and pressured by the United States no question of that -- if we were not then you would see a country that would be wildly different than it is now in my view. First -- gay marriage would be legal period. Second Marijuana would be de-ciminalized if not on par with alcohol as a taxable drug. Talk about paying for medical care!! As starters.

I'm not going to comment more on the situation in the South because I think I should have thought about what I said before I posted and indeed not posted in the first place. The issue of blame can indeed and should indeed be debated at another time. And Complaining about Bush is irrelevant anyway -- he's not leaving until his term ends and he can pretty much do whatever he wants.

[shokhead]

Amen to that. Right now, I'm at a point where I'm relieved that help is finally getting through to the affected areas, but I'm pissed off at everybody who had anything to do with leading the recovery effort. We can sort out who did what at an appropriate time, I'm just sick to death of the finger pointing and excuses, which had already begun when there were still thousands of people alive and still in danger. Bush's pathetic speeches and almost jocular posturing in the days that followed certainly did not reassure me that the emergency was given the appropriate urgency at the federal level. And FEMA Director Michael Brown's lack of awareness of the catastrophe in the making at the Convention Center was inexcusable when all of the major news networks already had camera crews on site for at least two days before any help arrived.

Whether or not **** ups of comparable magnitude occurred at the state and local level, we'll have to sort that out later on, but I agree with you on the criticism the police are getting -- they were undermanned and initially given a mandate of search and rescue when the shootings and looting started spinning out of control. Stories are only now getting out about the hellish anarchic conditions that the officers were trying to contain in the early hours after the flooding started. A lot of them got sent into virtual war zones knowing that their their own homes were already destroyed and family members still missing. For all the praise that the NYPD got in their response to 9/11, the NOPD was in a far more hopeless situation because the catastrophe they dealt with was citywide with no communications, no infrastructure, no outside assistance whatsoever, no vehicular access, and too little manpower.

Your sick of finger pointing yet you seem to have your finger working pretty good.

[kexodusc]

The US is putting tarrifs on our softwood lumber but not our raw logs, hmmm. They are basically trying to squeeze out our manufacturing of our own raw logs. These stumpage rates don't mean dick when we ship raw logs, but on a 2x4, again hmmmm. If a NFL referee calls a illegal procedure penalty, then it is a penalty, if NAFTA rules, give the 5 Billion back, well you know what the answer is, but I guess we will have to negotiate to get some of our money back. Maybe a NFL coach can negotiate a 5 yard penalty instead of a 10.

I see where you're coming from here, but your example isn't the crux of the matter. The raw log costs aren't hurting american industry. Stumpage fees aren't right in that example either, but they don't care. If they were hurting US industry, I'm sure they'd be concerned about it too. I work closely with Timbec, a large Canadian foresting based in eastern Canada. They've long ago set up liability reserves because they fully expect the US to rightfully win this dispute in the end. That's right, Canadian companies betting against this. If the ruling goes the other way bonus, they'll get some money back, but they don't feel they deserve it.
What our biased Canadian media and politicians aren't telling the public about this dispute is that the US has a very good leg to stand on here. Canada really trumped the US in this section of NAFTA. During negotiations, there were months of back-and-forth explanations of how industry operates. This was legally required to be done in good faith. Canada purposely omitted their stumpage tactics, violating that good faith.

Your football example isn't relevant either. Let's use a hockey example. For decades, there wasn't a "too many men" rule in hockey. So, just because these terms weren't clearly printed in the "rulebook" (or NAFTA dispute resolution policies), doesn't mean a coach is free to send 10 guys on the ice. Eventually a rule will be made. Terms will be renegotiated to include what should have been there in the first place.

Ever stop to think why the US so upset over this? In terms of dollars, there are far, far, far, more lucrative industries for them to act as bullies on. The dissolution of the autopact, Canadian manufacturing etc...

The Nafta rulings don't mean squat. NAFTA wasn't given the authority to rule in the USA's favor on this because such a situation was never predicted to be possible because Canada was expected to negotiate the terms in good faith. Those ruling aren't "Canada is right and the US is wrong". It's "the USA has failed to prove under the terms of NAFTA..." even if we as judges do agree with them.

We got greedy, pissed off the giant and they will get their way now, and there's nothing we can do about it.
Negotiate some, or get none. Time to cut loose the umbilical cord and let these inefficent, unproductive industries compete on their own merit instead of wasting tax dollars on politicaly sensitive industries.

[kexodusc]

Cam
The thing is the Canadian logger gets screwed -- but what Kex fails to note is that the American citizen gets screwed. Who makes out is incompetent American logging businesses (who I'm sure Bush and crew have big invstments in). Average Joe American gets ripped off.

Maybe, but let's be honest here, why are my tax dollars subsidizing that industry so Joe American can get a discount on lumber? That's BS. Time to quit putting unproductive industries on 20 year life support and let them die.

[bjornb17]

Cam
Who makes out is incompetent American logging businesses (who I'm sure Bush and crew have big invstments in).

Wow, RGA you've had your head so far up your ass that everything that comes out of your mouth is BS. With everything you disagree with, somehow Bush is tied in with it. That's your philosophy. I bet it's Bush's fault that you make yourself look ridiculous everytime you post something.

[kexodusc]

Canada is heavily influenced and pressured by the United States no question of that -- if we were not then you would see a country that would be wildly different than it is now in my view. First -- gay marriage would be legal period.

Gay marriage is being opposed so strongly by the mostly silent conservatives and immigrants, who are among the most religious Canadian citizens. The conservatives in this country have been mostly forgotten because of the terrible organization and leadership of the national parties. But you don't have to look to hard to see that Canada has a lot of conservative support - How quickly people forget this. Ontario rotates every 8 years historically, Atlantic Canada is all conservative, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta have strong conservative ties.

Conservative/religious opposition is a global trend, not unique to Canada at all, and American opinion has had little influence, if any. I have yet to meet someone who opposes gay marriage because the Americans don't like it...that's rediculous.

Second Marijuana would be de-ciminalized if not on par with alcohol as a taxable drug. Talk about paying for medical care!! As starters.

That will never happen, de-criminalization makes a lot of sense. Taxing marijuana revenues does not. Regulation is opposed by all 4 major parties. Besides, that authority would remain with the Provinces.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

As some of you know I work for ABC television. The local station I work at here in San Francisco did a VERY indepth interview with the former mayor, the current mayor, and the head of FEMA. First the head of FEMA has absolutely no experience with any kind of diaster planning, rescue or relief experience. He was the head of some Arabian horse organization before this job at fema, and was buddy appointed by Bush with the full knowledge that he lacked any experience. He was asked to leave his post as head of the Arabian Horse Association in 2000

Question 1: Why is a person with no experience whatsoever being appointed to an organization with the task of provide support to distressed or displaced disaster victim's?

Question 2: Why do we Americans allow unqualified buddy appointments to exist amoung our government officials?

As the interview continued, the former mayor revealed that they had done a indepth concensus on the population during a relook at New Oleans evactuation plans. What was found was that 50% responded that when asked to evacuate, they would leave immediately. They also revealed they had the money, and transportation to do so. 20% responded that they didn't have the resources, or transportation to leave New Oleans. Another 20% said they wouldn't leave under any circumstances even the they had the resources and transportation.

Here is my first finger pointing because we should NOT wait to deal with issue until it is forgotten, and some people escape without be held accountable(this is going to happen I am afraid) Why didn't the mayor(before the storm) not issue a warning that anyone that stays behind will be arrested? Escpecially in the lowest lying area's. The local officials were to blame for this one.

The mayor indicated that on Monday afternoon when the first levee started to break, he sensed that he was going to have a problem larger than could locally be handled. Tuesday morning he called Bush directly and asked him to send everything he has. Bush responded, and I quote " The calvary is coming". That was Tuesday morning. That was also the morning that another levee was breached and things began to look really bleak. Wednesday morning he made another call to Bush, and he repeated the same words as before. Again Thursday and no federal response. The head of FEMA made these VERY telling comments that quite frankly made me very angry.

-"The federal government did not even know about the convention center people until today (Thursday). ... And I - my heart goes out to every - even if they chose not to evacuate, my heart still goes out to them, because they now find themselves in this catastrophic disaster. Now is not the time to be blaming."

First, the federal government knew about this disaster on Tuesday, not Thursday. Secondly wasn't anyone watching television, or were they out playing golf?

Brown: "The people in the convention center are being fed; the people on the bridges are being provided with water. ..."

According to our reporters who were there, nobody was in charge at the convention center. Nobody had been fed, nobody was coodinating any relief, and nobody from FEMA was there at all. Threr was nobody with any authority there at all.

Was this racial, I would venture to say yes and no. Did Bush neglect to move faster because the people most in need are black? No, there is no evidence of that. However, the fact that there were poor, and just happened to be black does raise some eyebrows, and some concerns. Would this have happened if this was happening to Los Angeles? Heck no, they(FEMA) was in there within 6-8 hours writing checks after 1994. How about in San Francisco in 1989. No, they were also in there within 24 hours. What I think is the real issue is that Bush put a man in charge of FEMA who has absolutely no track record with organizing diaster relief. He put a buddy of former FEMA chief(the ole buddy network) in charge of this branch of government, and that was a HUGE mistake.

I can really understand the rage of black people all over this country about this. My god-parents who raised me are black, and the pain they felt over this is tremendous. It really didn't help when they saw the way the media was portraying black people as looters and thugs. It really didn't help that the mayor of New Oleans is black, and there is a perception that Bush didn't take him seriously. But the cries of hungry black children and the pictures of poor blacks crying out for help I think hit a little too close to home for them.

In this country this should not have happened, I don't care what the race of the people are. When you know that a catagory 5 storm is headed for a major metropolitan area surrounded by levee's designed for a catagory 3 and in some places of the city 20ft below sea level, someone should have caught the hint that boats, and helicopter were going to be needed immediately.

I hope and pray that I never in my lifetime see the most powerful country in the world abandon their poor the way it did in this case. My dad told me that the way you can evalute the moral health of a country, is to look at how they treat the poor. In this case, Amercia could be seen as having no morals at all.

[Swerd]

... First the head of FEMA has absolutely no experience with any kind of diaster planning, rescue or relief experience. He was the head of some Arabian horse organization before this job at FEMA, and was buddy appointed by Bush with the full knowledge that he lacked any experience. He was asked to leave his post as head of the Arabian Horse Association in 2000

Question 1: Why is a person with no experience whatsoever being appointed to an organization with the task of provide support to distressed or displaced disaster victim's?

Question 2: Why do we Americans allow unqualified buddy appointments to exist amoung our government officials?

I agree with your points about FEMA. They completely dropped the ball. And Bush must be held responsible for that failure.

Since Sept 11, 2001 Bush has told us a major terrorist strike is inevitable. Shouldn't there be a plan for evacuating a major American city? Even if there wasn't a specific plan for New Orleans, although it was clear that a breach of the city's levees was one of the likeliest natural catastrophes, there should have been a generic city evacuation plan. Bush told us time and again that our cities were threatened. Shouldn't he have ordered up a plan to get people out?

Someone should have also thought about what to do with hundreds of thousands of evacuees, both in the days after a disaster and in the long run. As it turned out, when people flooded out of New Orleans, it was state and local officials who rose to the challenge, making it up as they went along because there was no overall federal plan.

Is the problem the Bush administration's ideological fervor for small government?

Does the White House really believe that primary responsibility should fall on volunteers, church groups and individuals?

Or is it just stunning incompetence and lack of foresight?

[shokhead]

I dont think it had anything to do with the color of the skin or lack of money. I've come around and now think EVERYBODY screwed this up. But the worst part for me is that its still screwed up as of today,really fuc$ed up. We've done more for others in other countries and we for sure do more for the Mexicans coming across the border. It seems we screw our own while helping others outside the US. OK, i'll say it,i blame Bush. He is the leader.

[RGA]

"They've long ago set up liability reserves because they fully expect the US to rightfully win this dispute in the end."

Proof?


"Canada purposely omitted their stumpage tactics, violating that good faith"

Proof?

"Gay marriage is being opposed so strongly by the mostly silent conservatives and immigrants, who are among the most religious Canadian citizens."

Yes but the majority says otherwise -- and the majority doesn't vote conservative - they vote center.

"why are my tax dollars subsidizing that industry so Joe American can get a discount on lumber?" Umm Canadian loggers keep jobs, US citizens get cheaper wood...and the subsidy America has yet to prove which any way you slice it is why they keep losing. Got stone cold hard proof?

" have yet to meet someone who opposes gay marriage because the Americans don't like it...that's rediculous."

A - that makes no sense B I never suggested it. Religious people want to run everyone elses life - because there is absolutely no chance at all that the Christian view of the creator is even possibly not true. I don't give a rat's bottom why two men or two women want to get married and I don't care(they don;t hurt me or anyone else then whatever you want to do in your house go for -- you want to spank each other and do everything in Larry Flint's imagination then knock yourself out -- which will probably be the case) and it's not going to ruin the world - marriage or civil union or not they're gonna be together. I suppose I should be happy they're no longer being lynched for it.

I would not even mind some of the logical reasons put forth to wish to deny gay marriage but these dimwits still think it's a choice not biology. It's been 100% proven fact that it IS biology -- and if God created Man then God created them to be GAY. But logic and reasoning are not strong points when you put your eggs in the faith or intelligent design or whatever they want to call it this month.

I understand the need to believe in God -- People need to create a beacon for themselves to fill a void that something will be better than what is in their reality and in the face of no answers at least they have somthing to hold onto.

Great they create their life preserver and a bunch of others believe it but boy oh boy you're in big trouble if you don't go along. I mean I can't just believe in God I have to believe in him the EXACT same way as some book tells me too or I'm in hell. Man, from all the things religions don't let me do because they're "evil" sounds like hell would be fun -- nice blow jobs all day for a start -- if it's a sin as it is in many religious states that means it's evil and man o man I can;t wait to get head from Madonna in Hell (she's got a first class seat no doubt) Satan wasn't evil he just got tired of kissing butt all the time. (I'm sure I'm gonna get more votes now!)

[kexodusc]

RGA - you want proof? Why don't you read the whole Goddam NAFTA decisions Canada claims to have won instead of the biased CBC versions that make the headlines...You'll find on no less than 3 occassions the NAFTA dispute panels have ruled that the stumpage fees are de facto subsidies...Now go. Look. Read. Learn. And when you come back I'll be here waiting for you to say "hey, Kex, you were right, how terribly incomplete and biased my country's media coverage has been on this situation".

[kexodusc]

B I never suggested it.

Oh? Then I must be dreaming when I see the following posted under your name:

Canada is heavily influenced and pressured by the United States no question of that -- if we were not then you would see a country that would be wildly different than it is now in my view. First -- gay marriage would be legal period.

Again, I can assure you Canada will (and has) made up its own mind on this issue independent of US influence.

[shokhead]

I think the French really stepped up. So far they have given tarps and tents.

[piece-it pete]

Wow it's like my local newspaper jingle here - "Miss a day, miss a lot".

The laying of blame is important to id and fix the problems. It looks like EVERY LEVEL of gov't screwed the pooch. Yes that does include Bush - the buck stops there.

I spoke to an acquaintance Friday, born and raised in NO, who now lives in Texas. He didn't blame Bush (tho he doesn't like him), or even the state - he blamed NO.

He said EVERYBODY knew about the problem since he could remember (and he's almost retired). He went on to say that NO'ers wouldn't fix it.

This does not absolve the feds' slow response to a legitimate disaster.

Anyway I'm sure most countries would help if they could. I was thinking of our enemies in my last post. I think France needs a special mention. We've had our problems but it's a family fight (like those Canadians ), and NO was their... part? of us (the US people and culture). It must pain many of the French to see it now.

RGA there is a problem with separating hating the US gov't from the US people - in a democracy the gov't is a reflection of the people. After paying attention for some time I have come to the conclusion that some folks in the more aristocratic old world democracies have a hard time understanding this.

Yes I know that is a sweeping generalization and not always true. I blame Bush .

Who btw WAS reelected by the US citizen - not some evil US gov't or corporate plot. 52% doesn't sound like much but is a whopping win by US Presidential election standards. Republicans are only 30-35% of the general population. Get it? Or do we need to rent a billboard?

Pointing to his speaking skills as evidence of incompetence is the same as picking apart a posters' spelling errors - a ruse.

I would point to someone believing that a stupid man (or woman) could survive the American Presidential election process - and win - as a better indicator of that persons' intellegence. Well no self delusion (or just plain dissembling) isn't exclusive to the less intellegent, call it what it really is: bias.

We here in the US would have a lot more funds if we didn't spend so much protecting world shipping lanes - and the oil supply. Which was pointed out to me by a Canadian.

Pete

[RGA]

Oh? Then I must be dreaming when I see the following posted under your name:


Again, I can assure you Canada will (and has) made up its own mind on this issue independent of US influence.

First the majority of Canadians would allow gay marriage -- We have backpeddled on loosening the less harmful than alcohol, pot, due solely to US pressure that they will stop or slug so much cross border travel.

Nafta and WTO has ruled in our favour -- and awarded Canada a return of nearly 5 billion dolllars. Now any way you want to try and spin it if we're in the wrong then why would they do that? If you're saying Canada has a loop hole well they've been arguing this for more than 20 years in one form or another. http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/HET/Softwood/disputes.htm

"WTO panel concluded that the U.S. wrongly applied harsh duties on Canadian softwood exports. The panel also found that provincial stumpage programs provide a "financial benefit" to Canadian producers. But, the panel made it clear that the benefit is not enough to be a subsidy, and does not justify current U.S. duties

On Aug. 10, 2005, an “extraordinary challenge panel” under NAFTA dismissed American claims that the earlier NAFTA decision in favour of Canada violated trade rules."

[piece-it pete]

http://etherzone.com/2005/sent082905.shtml

[RGA]

Piece it Pete

Well he is sly smart getting your friends to be the crony vote counters where your Borther is governor is a help and knocking off large portions of black voters (ie democrats) off the rolls and calling it "a technical glitch" is very smart indeed. I love how religion and politics are separated -- see the 5-4 vote in the Gore Bush fiasco went right down party lines...so much for objectivity to the law (by the way that applies to the dems on the court as well).

I also like innocent until proven guilty -- lets not follow that Ahem Iraq -- but Haliburton has and will make Billions that they would not have made without it. But this discussion goes nowhere because if you're a Republican or a Democrat chances are you will side with your colour like people side with the flag. I mean look at the stink if someone doesn't rise to God Bless America at a Baseball game -- Carlos Delgado whose country has been screwed ovr by America for decades (which no doubt you'll disagree with) elected to stay on the Bench -- this makes all the papers (and he did stand for the Anthem). He's a communist because he isn't a sheep.

[shokhead]

The RIGHT thing to do is to stand for any Anthem. You dont have to say or sign anything but standing there and not talking until its over is the right thing to do.

[piece-it pete]

The RIGHT thing to do is to stand for any Anthem. You dont have to say or sign anything but standing there and not talking until its over is the right thing to do.

Just out of respect for your host :yes: .

Pete

[kexodusc]

First the majority of Canadians would allow gay marriage -- We have backpeddled on loosening the less harmful than alcohol, pot, due solely to US pressure that they will stop or slug so much cross border travel.

Again, I disagree...we backdown because of our own internal pressures.

Nafta and WTO has ruled in our favour -- and awarded Canada a return of nearly 5 billion dolllars. Now any way you want to try and spin it if we're in the wrong then why would they do that?

Yes, you can quote the media headlines until the cows come home. Why don't you start asking the right questions though. Why are the Americans purposely attacking the softwood imports? Just to protect domestic vendors? Wouldn't they realize there'd be long-term harm in that if Canada retaliated, not too mention drive up US consumer costs? Yes, they have...they also realized they got lawyered pretty bad in NAFTA in that industry.

If you're saying Canada has a loop hole well they've been arguing this for more than 20 years in one form or another. http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/HET/Softwood/disputes.htm

Yet another unbiased link with no vested interest in the outcome? Why aren't you posting an American site with their version of the history?
Here's a short version:

"Subsidies

In Canada, the government owns approximately 94% of the forest land. Instead of selling timber at fair market value – as the U.S. Forest Service and private landowners do – Canada’s provincial governments have a complex scheme of timber management which artificially encourages production (particularly in weak markets) and fixes timber prices bureaucratically at about one-fourth to one-third, on average, of its true market value.

Canadian governments add a web of regulations and practices to ensure that the subsidies benefit only Canadian sawmills and employment. Restrictions on the export of unprocessed logs prevent U.S. producers from receiving the low-price timber. Provincial governments allocate the vast bulk of timberlands through long-term "tenures" to limited numbers of large forest products firms which must agree to build and operate mills locally, stifling competition. Canadian governments often prevent companies from closing or reducing capacity and provide additional subsidies to support otherwise uneconomic mills. In effect, U.S. mills must compete against Canadian government treasuries and regulators intent on ensuring robust Canadian production and employment regardless of the market and regardless of the impact on U.S. producers.

Dumping

Canadian softwood lumber is being dumped into the United States by Canadian producers at less than the cost of production. The Canadian federal and provincial governments have caused distortions in the Canadian market and thereby encouraged dumping:

in exchange for administered, below-market price timber, Canadian companies effectively agree to produce lumber (and maintain employment) regardless of market conditions;
failure to cut an adequate volume of timber, regardless of poor market conditions, risks loss of provincial timber licenses;
in some provinces, even private forest owners are coerced to cut minimum amounts of timber rather than use their land solely for other purposes;
timber license agreements in British Columbia, for example, prohibit closing mills or reducing capacity without government approval;
federal and provincial stumpage subsidies and a ban on the export of logs from Crown lands increase the supply and lower the price of logs to Canadian lumber producers.
These and other market distortions in Canada encourage artificially inflated timber harvests, overproduction of softwood lumber, uneconomic decisions by Canadian lumber producers, and dumping of Canadian softwood lumber in the United States."

(from the USA Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports)

What you aren't hearing in the media is that Canada has set up trade barriers so that only Canadian companies can benefit from the massive advantage a government subsidized industry has. This was omitted from NAFTA at the time because a separate agreement was in place and was expected to be renewed shortly....Canada then cleverly bailed on it.

Truth is there have been numerous agreements over the years that both countries have signed outside of free-trade agreements. Every time Canada has conceded duties or export taxes because of admitted indirect subsidies through state charged stumpage fees. 100 years ago the National Policy was taking the exact same actions the Americans are doing now...our countries was built on dutying the hell out of imports from competing industries. It's a bit ironic that we would cry foul now when when our trading partners finally wisen up and close the door on our exploiting poorly written (or in this case lack of) terminology in trade agreements.

I suspect a good chunk of the 5 billion will be refunded. It's happened before in other industries too. But the USA has to do something to bring Canada to the table since there is no current export tax to compensate for state subsidized softwood exports.. You can't admit to having an unfair advantage in violation of the principles of NAFTA (which Canada has), and then drag your feet for 7 years at finding a solution to it, and then cry like a baby when your trade partner gets fed up and starts taking more aggressive actions to motivate you towards a solution.

Canada might have won a few NAFTA decisions, but keep in mind those decisions are only made from the authority given the panel, not from the position of determining who is "right or wrong". Big difference. According to NAFTA, they had to use artificially government determined "market prices" when determining the rate of subsidy, not the prevailing world commodity prices. That's like saying we want to audit your books, can we just take the numbers given as being true?"...what's the point in that?
You can bet that language won't be in any future trade agreement anywhere in the world.

For all your talk of the evil empire in the US, why don't you start asking why Canadian media and governments aren't telling the whole story to the Canadian people, instead of making rediculous David vs. Goliath propaganda?

[cam]

Hey Kex, so the Americans are angry with our affordable lumber so they put a tarrif on it. And the Americans are angry with the price of electricity, which is set within our North American market, so they don't pay us anything for the electricity that we supplied to keep the airconditioners on in California a few years ago. The US wants our lumber more expensive and our electricity cheaper. I think Uncle Sam has a bit of a control problem here. Maybe.

[bjornb17]

Hey Kex, so the Americans are angry with our affordable lumber so they put a tarrif on it. And the Americans are angry with the price of electricity, which is set within our North American market, so they don't pay us anything for the electricity that we supplied to keep the airconditioners on in California a few years ago. The US wants our lumber more expensive and our electricity cheaper. I think Uncle Sam has a bit of a control problem here. Maybe.

Thanks for the bargain

[kexodusc]

Hey Kex, so the Americans are angry with our affordable lumber so they put a tarrif on it. And the Americans are angry with the price of electricity, which is set within our North American market, so they don't pay us anything for the electricity that we supplied to keep the airconditioners on in California a few years ago. The US wants our lumber more expensive and our electricity cheaper. I think Uncle Sam has a bit of a control problem here. Maybe.

Hey Cam,

I don't know much about the energy issue out west...if it's as simple as not paying a bill then that's just wrong. Can't speak to that.
I know that in my part of the country we're buying electricity, oil, and natural gas from Maine some months, and selling it other months. There's a complex accounting scheme of forward reserves and the like, maybe there's something similar in the situation you speak of? I know the CBC here did stories on Maine needing a ton of natural gas etc and how we were selling it to them (government making a ton of money) and everyone would go home rich. Great feel good story, except it didn't talk at all about how we were buying it from Maine at the time, not selling it...a bit bizarre don't ya think?
...there's so much Ra-Ra Canada bullcrap in the media these days that it's easy for the public to get lead down the wrong path. The politicians know this...it's cool to blame Americans for all our own mistakes, the public loves it...it's like we're coming together as a country, standing up for ourselves. The media loves making these stories too because people watch.

America's got its problems for sure, but after all the disgusting lies and scandals in Canadian governments (NDP, Liberal, and Conservative) in the past few years, I'm amazed at how much blind trust and faith Canadians have in their government. A lot of Americans don't vote anymore because they got tired of it. I see that happening here too.

My honest opinion on the softwood lumber is that Canada is slightly more in the right than in the wrong...the duties are too high now. But we ignored the earlier attempts by the Americans to address the situation and we're playing a pretty dirty game here. I love it when the Premiers complain about US government caving in to t the lumber industry lobbyists...that's exactly what Canada is doing now...except worse because we subsidize their operations so much.

Funny thing is, with the $US dollar getting destroyed by the Canadian in the past 2 years, softwood lumber isn't as cheap as it use to be for them. It's gone up 30% in price since 2002. Most of the layoffs that are going to hit the industry have nothing to do with tarriffs, and more to do with uncompetitive businesses that can't rely on an artificially devalued Canadian dollar to sell their softwood. I think the dispute now is over the money "lost" the past few years.

[RGA]

The RIGHT thing to do is to stand for any Anthem. You dont have to say or sign anything but standing there and not talking until its over is the right thing to do.

He stood for the Anthem -- "God Bless America" is not an Anthem -- and that implies that God is on side with America -- Shudder! I know bush hears voices but seriously...

[RGA]

For all your talk of the evil empire in the US, why don't you start asking why Canadian media and governments aren't telling the whole story to the Canadian people, instead of making rediculous David vs. Goliath propaganda?

So your retort is American propaganda -- That is why there is the WTO and Nafta both of which are supposed to be outside impartial observers. Let's assume that American viewpoint - why agree to do business knowing how the Canadian system works? Ohh so every other country has to bend to ecxactly the way America does everything -- freedom as visioned by the Americans, business as deemed by the Americans?

An international court free of American influence is what is needed.