Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33
  1. #1
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826

    Small Government & free trade..not compatible!

    I was listening to NPR yesterday on the way home from work, and I ended up sitting in my car for over an hour(with my dogs of course) listening to the subject matter. The discussion was on small government and free trade, and the information was very compelling. They talked about how free trade actually INCREASES the size of government in America because free trade lowers salaries, decreases jobs which drives up employment insurance, welfare, food stamp and various other social services. They made an interesting point that before free trade agreements were in place, the unemployment level was around 5-6 percent. Post recession we are sitting at 9.2%, and in Cali were I live, it is 12.9%.

    Automobiles used to be made in Michigan, and exported all over the world. Lots of people had well paying jobs with great benefits. Local business thrived, which fed other local businesses. With free trade Michigan lost a ton of jobs, and manufacturers began to localize their production in countries they actually sell the cars. Local businesses closed as workers were laid off, and what is left is cities like Detroit. As a matter of fact, most of the Midwest went from a production hot house to what they call the rust belt.

    They also made a direct correlation between the outsourcing of jobs to China, and falling of wages here in the US(illegal immigration didn't help either). They also made a direction correlation between free trade and falling wages(two big duh's). We in America were told that free trade would INCREASE jobs, raise wages, and actually benefit our country. We were hoodwinked, and actually sold ourselves out based on the propaganda we were fed.

    The round table discussion was so interesting I just could not stop listening. I was glad for the information, but it quite frankly outraged me.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  2. #2
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852
    The endless list of "results" that we see bandied about in the media are but symptomatic of the fact that we've never really tried "free trade" or "free market capitalism". Let's dispell that myth right now. Our government has progressively allowed our position within the world market to grow by facilitating multinationals to view this country only from the demand-side.

    We see this with the increasing debt, we see it with oil speculation, we certainly see it with agriculture...the entire concept of supply-and-demand has been abrogated in favor of oligarchy.
    So, I broke into the palace
    With a sponge and a rusty spanner
    She said : "Eh, I know you, and you cannot sing"
    I said : "That's nothing - you should hear me play piano"

  3. #3
    Suspended atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oaktown!
    Posts
    1,774
    I have to agree w/ Bob here - we've never had real free trade nor have we ever had real free markets in America.

    The system is rigged. The transfer of money from the have nots to the haves is what it is really all about.

    Hopefully folks in the Tea Party, the Lefty Enviros, and everyone else will see through this divide and conquer strategy by the wealthy that keeps them fighting over scraps, and re-balance the wealth like we saw in America post WWII.

  4. #4
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    The textbook rationale for free trade is that trade is increased overall and that all countries benefit -- more or less. History has shown that this is generally true. However not all countries necessarily benefit equally, nor do all segments within a given country.

    It's worth understanding that recent free trade agreements have been less about free trade in physical products, and a lot more about securing access to investor foreign markets and resources, preventing local governments from favoring domestic companies, and protecting foreign investors from local goverment regulations or confiscation. In other words it's largely about "making the world safe for capitalism".

    Note that the US can no longer sustain a protectionist economy. If for no other reason, it's because the US is no longer even remotely self-sufficient in the resources it consumes; it must have access to foreign resources even more that it needs markets for its goods. The other side of the same coin is that US workers are no longer able to demand premium wages & salaries when other countries are increasingly able to supply not only resources but manpower at rates far below what the US can provide.

    Capitalism is the great leveler of the global economy: investment flows where the greatest return can be had, and that is invariably where resources, including labor, are cheapest and least well regulated. What will make the US compeditive again? To a global corporation it's obviously to have US salaries & wages, working conditions, and health & safety laws fall to the lowest global common denominator.

    If Americans don't want that, then they need to invest in education, infrastructure, and innovation in such areas as sustainable energy production. The global corporations aren't interested in providing the funding this if they can get what they want in, e.g. India and China. So tt's got to be done by -- or at least under the leadership of -- the US Fedral and state governments.

    All we here today from right-wing US politicians is how free enterprise is good for what ails us, and that lower taxes and less government regulation are the answer to every problem. Saddy a lot of people, like Tea Partiers, suck this up like mother's milk because it's consistent with the American Myth. I call this the "Bribe the Rich" strategy; it's based on the notion that the rich will invest their profits and tax saving back into the local economy. But this isn't what's happening: instead the rich are either sitting on their cash, (or speculating with it), or else investing in foreign economies. Understand that this is how the rich will "reward" US citizens for their tax breaks until said citizens' wages & working conditions have fallen to the global common denominator.

  5. #5
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsticks
    The endless list of "results" that we see bandied about in the media are but symptomatic of the fact that we've never really tried "free trade" or "free market capitalism". Let's dispell that myth right now. Our government has progressively allowed our position within the world market to grow by facilitating multinationals to view this country only from the demand-side.

    We see this with the increasing debt, we see it with oil speculation, we certainly see it with agriculture...the entire concept of supply-and-demand has been abrogated in favor of oligarchy.
    Allowing -- rather, encouraging -- consumer debt has the politicians and the Federal Reserve's method of sustaining the US economy under so much presure from global competion, automation, and, N.B., a strategy of concentrating wealth increasingly in the hands of the rich. The strategy presumes that the rich will repay us by investing in the domestic economy. This approach was/is variously know as "supply side" or "trickle down" economics.

    The problem is that hasn't worked and won't worked because the rich haven't and won't invest in the domestic economic while there are so many more profitable options in the developing world -- the US is no longer preceived as compedative in the world economy.

  6. #6
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    I agree with the stickster as well. They touch on what he states when they got to the bailouts of the financial industry. Two points on that. The mentioned that if we were really in a free market environment, there would be no subsidies at all, no bailouts, and no corporate welfare. All would have to sink or swim on their own.

    The second point was that the bailout was all about rescuing the wealth engine for the rich and powerful. They didn't want to use their own money, so they took ours. They mentioned that if we got rid of the subsidies to oil companies, agri-businesses, and various other corporate welfare, and return back to the tax rate on the rich during the Clinton years, our debt would be a whole lot smaller than it is. They debunked the myth that tax cuts to corporation and the wealthy create jobs. They pointed to the fact that when the Bush tax cuts kicked in, there were FEWER jobs created, and an acceleration of outsourcing. The outsourcing has now made it much tougher to get out of this recession, because we don't make much of anything anymore. The tore a whole in Nixon for his privatization of health care, and killed Regan for his policies that accelerated the difference between the rich and the poor. The credit Regan with shifting wealth(or benefits) from the middle and lower classes, to the rich and corporations.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  7. #7
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsticks
    The endless list of "results" that we see bandied about in the media are but symptomatic of the fact that we've never really tried "free trade" or "free market capitalism". Let's dispell that myth right now. Our government has progressively allowed our position within the world market to grow by facilitating multinationals to view this country only from the demand-side.

    We see this with the increasing debt, we see it with oil speculation, we certainly see it with agriculture...the entire concept of supply-and-demand has been abrogated in favor of oligarchy.
    Really the problem is the oppsiote, i.e. we have indeed experience a substantial measure of "free market ecomony", thanks to deregulation and lower taxes, and also international free trade. The problem is that under an unmitigated free market things don't always play out just as we would like them to.

    The US no longer holds the cards in the world economy as it did when it had plenty of cheap domestic land and abundant resources in the 19th and early 20th century. Domestic investment no longer looks so good to the wealthy classes today as it did then. Provide tax breaks for the rich and they will invest the money off shore.
    Last edited by Feanor; 04-13-2011 at 05:02 PM.

  8. #8
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852

    I agreed with much of post #4, especially paragraph 4 but...

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    Really the problem is the oppsiote, i.e. we have indeed experience a substantial measure of "free market ecomony", thanks to deregulation and lower taxes, and also international free trade. The problem is that under an unmitigated free market things don't always play out just as we would like them to.

    The US no longer holds the cards in the world economy as it did when it had plenty of cheap domestic land and abundant resources in the 19th and early 20th century. Domestic investment no longer looks so good to the wealthy classes today as it did then. Cut tax breaks for the rich and they will invest the money off shore.
    ...No.
    So, I broke into the palace
    With a sponge and a rusty spanner
    She said : "Eh, I know you, and you cannot sing"
    I said : "That's nothing - you should hear me play piano"

  9. #9
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsticks
    ...No.
    Says you!

  10. #10
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852

    Just off the top of my head...

    japonica
    The Chicken Tax
    the repeal of the Chicken Tax
    The Volker Plan
    30% Chinese tariffs on motorcycles
    Chinese tariffs on U.S. nylon products at 96.5%
    the 2010 National Trade Estimate
    Currency manipulation of the yuan and euro
    Canadian subsidized lumber
    Bill Clinton toothless international policy regarding intellectual property rights
    (here's some irony for you: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/opinion/24sun2.html )
    Presidents Ford and Carter, Zbigniew freakin' Brzezinski...

    ad infinitum

    When were we practicing free trade?
    So, I broke into the palace
    With a sponge and a rusty spanner
    She said : "Eh, I know you, and you cannot sing"
    I said : "That's nothing - you should hear me play piano"

  11. #11
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Gotta agree with sticks The champions for free market economies have the most regulatory obstacles to free markets. The champions for free trade are the most protectionist economies.

  12. #12
    I put the Gee in Gear.... thekid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    VB VA
    Posts
    2,307
    There will never be such a thing as Free Trade. For true free trade to exist the trading partners have to be on or nearly on the same economic level and in many ways the governments have to share the same goals and expectations for their people.
    In more developed countries industry and government usually work together to form policies usually designed to favor the industry in some protectionist way. Governments often choose which industries they will protect and trade agreements are built on that basis.

    Certain politicians use the term "Free Trade" to put forth policies that favor the industries they are trying to assist. It sounds better to say we are entering into a "Free Trade" agreement with a country rather than to say we are changing our trade and tax policies that will make it easier for that industry to outsource jobs and allow them to sell products outside of the US. This allows the company to be even more profitable and continue to donate heavily to the politicians re-election fund.
    NAD D3020
    Denon 2910
    Denon DMD 1000
    MSB Link DAC III
    Von Schweikert VR2
    NAD 7240PE
    NAD 5240
    Hughes AK 100
    Tascam 122
    Technics SL 1700
    Rogers BBC Monitors LS3/6

  13. #13
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsticks
    japonica
    The Chicken Tax
    the repeal of the Chicken Tax
    The Volker Plan
    30% Chinese tariffs on motorcycles
    Chinese tariffs on U.S. nylon products at 96.5%
    the 2010 National Trade Estimate
    Currency manipulation of the yuan and euro
    Canadian subsidized lumber
    Bill Clinton toothless international policy regarding intellectual property rights
    (here's some irony for you: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/opinion/24sun2.html )
    Presidents Ford and Carter, Zbigniew freakin' Brzezinski...

    ad infinitum

    When were we practicing free trade?
    These are (mostly) abuses of concept of free trade. I won't justify them. But if you're going to criticize free trade you need to do it based on where free trade is working, not where it isn't.

    Also maybe you ignoring my other points.

    I don't entirely agree with free trade along the lines of the NAFTA agreement are intended to undermine the autonomy of goverments to control their own nation's resources, enterprises, and laws. For example, Canadian governments can't restrict export of Canadian oil or water, regulate the trade price of these commodities, favor Canadian oil exploration & extraction companies, etc. When tendering government contracts, Canadian governments are limited in their ability to favor Canadian companies. Etc. Basically NAFTA is less about free trade per se than it is about giving US companies easy access to Canadian & Mexican resources and markets, and protection from these nations' regulations

    My other points went beyond free trade, viz.:
    • Raw capitalism, including NAFTA-style free trade, will accelerate the inevidable decline of the US (and Canada);
    • Low taxes for the rich will further facilitate this decline rather than resist it as the right-wing politicians insist.

  14. #14
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Gotta agree with sticks The champions for free market economies have the most regulatory obstacles to free markets. The champions for free trade are the most protectionist economies.
    Indeed, noteably the US itself as you were doubtless implying. We in Canada certainly feel that US interests are constantly try to create exceptions to the spirit of NAFTA. 'Sticks mentions supposed Canadian lumber "subsidies"; there are more examples that work the other way.

    But like I said, we certainly criticize "free trade" based on how it is working, not just where it is not -- see my issues with NAFTA, above and below.
    Last edited by Feanor; 04-14-2011 at 03:45 AM.

  15. #15
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    ...
    They also made a direct correlation between the outsourcing of jobs to China, and falling of wages here in the US(illegal immigration didn't help either). They also made a direction correlation between free trade and falling wages(two big duh's). We in America were told that free trade would INCREASE jobs, raise wages, and actually benefit our country. We were hoodwinked, and actually sold ourselves out based on the propaganda we were fed.
    ...
    This I entirely agree with. Global "free trade, as it exists, does not favor US or Canadian workers. NA workers and hence the middle class cannot compete with workers in, e.g., China or India based on wages or working conditions. Also, as nations like these sponsor education and training for their workers, NA workers advantage in these areas will quickly diminish.

    See my other posts about what free trade agreements, like NAFTA, actually do. Now let's talk about what they don't do:
    • Enforce equal worker health & safety standards
    • Enforce equal product quality & safety standards
    • Enforce equal environment & climate stantards.
    If free trade agreements did these things, as well as just protect the priviledges of global corporations, they would be a lot easier to justify.

  16. #16
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659

    Simple answer

    Quote Originally Posted by bobsticks
    japonica
    The Chicken Tax
    the repeal of the Chicken Tax
    The Volker Plan
    30% Chinese tariffs on motorcycles
    Chinese tariffs on U.S. nylon products at 96.5%
    the 2010 National Trade Estimate
    Currency manipulation of the yuan and euro
    Canadian subsidized lumber
    Bill Clinton toothless international policy regarding intellectual property rights
    (here's some irony for you: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/24/opinion/24sun2.html )
    Presidents Ford and Carter, Zbigniew freakin' Brzezinski...

    ad infinitum

    When were we practicing free trade?
    We were. They weren't.

    Folks, this is NOT a level playing ground but the heads of the multi-national companies are doing just fine, thank you.

  17. #17
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852
    Yes...
    So, I broke into the palace
    With a sponge and a rusty spanner
    She said : "Eh, I know you, and you cannot sing"
    I said : "That's nothing - you should hear me play piano"

  18. #18
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by markw
    We were. They weren't.
    ...
    No, if by "we" you mean the US playing fair. From a Canadian perspective, US interests are as relentlessly as any other country's in seeking ways to undermine the NAFTA free trade concept, (such as it is).

    For a taste of NAFTA issues from a Canadian perspective, (if you give a damn: unlikely), check out the Council of Canadians website item ... here. Canadians do share many of the same concerns as Americans.

    Quote Originally Posted by markw
    ...
    Folks, this is NOT a level playing ground but the heads of the multi-national companies are doing just fine, thank you.
    Yes, why yes, they are.
    Last edited by Feanor; 04-14-2011 at 07:53 AM.

  19. #19
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    But like I said, we certainly criticize "free trade" based on how it is working, not just where it is not -- see my issues with NAFTA, above and below.
    Bill, I think this is where you misunderstand my thrust. You have issues with NAFTA both for its lack of protection for workers and the advantageous position the U.S. has gained vis-a-vis economic posturing/maneuvering. You think that is "bad" and I think that yopu assume that I think that is "good".

    My problem is not specific nor resuls oriented in this case. My issue is that "free-trade" has but one defining characteristic...that it's free; devoid of restriction, complication, intervention, whatever.I don't think that the U.S. has played "fair" and no one else has, I think the U.S. has played stupid and no one has played at all.

    In context of the conversation I think the U.S. showed up to the fight on steroids in 1789, slipped on a wet spot in 1828, took a simultaneous illegal elbow and shot to the crotch in 1930, and suffered the KtFO punch on August 15, 1971. We lost, and we lost the instant that we implemented protectionist policy because this is economics and backroom politics and each and every slippery slope argument applies.

    So, it's not that I didn't read your other posts or even that I don't agree with much of the analysis. You're a pretty well-read, curmudgeony character drawing from some solidly researched sources (John Stuart Mill, Hayek, Lenin, Freidman...even some Nock and, god forbid, Adam Smith), my point is that the discussion becomes moot when it becomes a "free market except for that deal with him or except for that deal with her.

    I don't confuse the existing venal and sort of retarded mercantilism running amok with any reasonable experiment with a "free market". My guess is that most on this site that complain about the state of things are doing so from a parochial or at least micro-perspective largely influenced by their current disadvantaged position.

    That said, I appreciate your perspective.

    ---sticks
    So, I broke into the palace
    With a sponge and a rusty spanner
    She said : "Eh, I know you, and you cannot sing"
    I said : "That's nothing - you should hear me play piano"

  20. #20
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by bobsticks
    Bill, I think this is where you misunderstand my thrust. You have issues with NAFTA both for its lack of protection for workers and the advantageous position the U.S. has gained vis-a-vis economic posturing/maneuvering. You think that is "bad" and I think that yopu assume that I think that is "good".
    ...
    Then we're not so far apart. Thanks for the clarifications.

    For emphasis I'll repeat my point of view. Agreements like NAFTA are first + foremost for the benefit of global corporations. Workers, (and the middle class), are an afterthough at best. If workers were considered then there would be clauses to "level the playing field" for workers -- which would tend to be beneficial workers in both countries. Ditto for consumers; ditto for the environment. But the ordinary people & the environment are off the table in "free trade" discussions.

  21. #21
    Man of the People Forums Moderator bobsticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    down there
    Posts
    6,852
    Yeah, I tend not to think of those things.
    So, I broke into the palace
    With a sponge and a rusty spanner
    She said : "Eh, I know you, and you cannot sing"
    I said : "That's nothing - you should hear me play piano"

  22. #22
    M.P.S.E /AES/SMPTE member Sir Terrence the Terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    Then we're not so far apart. Thanks for the clarifications.

    For emphasis I'll repeat my point of view. Agreements like NAFTA are first + foremost for the benefit of global corporations. Workers, (and the middle class), are an afterthough at best. If workers were considered then there would be clauses to "level the playing field" for workers -- which would tend to be beneficial workers in both countries. Ditto for consumers; ditto for the environment. But the ordinary people & the environment are off the table in "free trade" discussions.
    Your conclusions and the commentators agree, hence why he said that we sold ourselves out based on propaganda.
    Sir Terrence

    Titan Reference 3D 1080p projector
    200" SI Black Diamond II screen
    Oppo BDP-103D
    Datastat RS20I audio/video processor 12.4 audio setup
    9 Onkyo M-5099 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-510 power amp
    9 Onkyo M-508 power amp
    6 custom CAL amps for subs
    3 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid monitors
    18 custom 3 way horn DSP hybrid surround/ceiling speakers
    2 custom 15" sealed FFEC servo subs
    4 custom 15" H-PAS FFEC servo subs
    THX Style Baffle wall

  23. #23
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
    Your conclusions and the commentators agree, hence why he said that we sold ourselves out based on propaganda.
    That was never in question.

  24. #24
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    Indeed, noteably the US itself as you were doubtless implying. We in Canada certainly feel that US interests are constantly try to create exceptions to the spirit of NAFTA. 'Sticks mentions supposed Canadian lumber "subsidies"; there are more examples that work the other way.

    But like I said, we certainly criticize "free trade" based on how it is working, not just where it is not -- see my issues with NAFTA, above and below.
    HI Feanor...

    I really wasn't singling out the US. I've seen enough examples of Canadian protectionism to know it's systemic throughout both nations. Every country wants free-trade when they're exporting, and protectionism in election years and when they're importing. Sometimes Canada and the US team up vs other economies where there's mutual interest (automobiles) sometimes it's cross border dispute and the rhetoric on both sides of the border ramps up. I'm not convinced any one country is better or worse in this area...they all cheat for different reasons.

  25. #25
    Suspended markw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Noo Joisey. Youse got a problem wit dat?
    Posts
    4,659

    you'r eright. I really don't give a damn.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    No, if by "we" you mean the US playing fair. From a Canadian perspective, US interests are as relentlessly as any other country's in seeking ways to undermine the NAFTA free trade concept, (such as it is).

    For a taste of NAFTA issues from a Canadian perspective, (if you give a damn: unlikely), check out the Council of Canadians website item ... here. Canadians do share many of the same concerns as Americans.
    A quick scan of that blog shows me some internal problems that canada has to dal with and a bit of buyer's remorse.

    Considring that canada has benefited from being out neighbor all these years, what with a lot of our auto manufacturing, copying most of our culture, and being the best friend of the biggest, baddest guy on the block, you should consider it a cheap price to pay.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •