Views on NAFTA

jdobbin · March 1, 2008

You might want to check that. No one wins against the CRTC unless they toe the line.
CMT got in because they bent to the rules.

Viacom owned 100% of CMT when it was first broadcast into Canada. The CRTC licenced a Canadian CMT and took the U.S. CMT off the air. Viacom squawked and in the end had to settle for a 10% ownership in the new Canadian company.

Topaz · March 1, 2008

I caught McCain on the news and he mentioned what the two Dems were saying about NAFTA but he first mention Canada being the US partner in Afghanistan and being the biggest trade partner and how the Clinton and Obama want to redo NAFTA. McCain totally against it.

bush_cheney2004 · March 1, 2008

I caught McCain on the news and he mentioned what the two Dems were saying about NAFTA but he first mention Canada being the US partner in Afghanistan and being the biggest trade partner and how the Clinton and Obama want to redo NAFTA. McCain totally against it.

Yep...another good reason to vote for Senator McCain.....don't worry, I'll do it for you!

Hydraboss · March 1, 2008

This is so juvenile.

If the US were ever to suspend NAFTA, Alberta could simply "suspend the Alliance pipeline. And the power grid to the NW states. Of course we would have to start shipping to the east directly (personally I think we should "let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark").

Regardless, st best the Democrats would only be popular until Arnold's air conditioner tripped the breaker.

August1991 · March 1, 2008

Canada's economy was a basket case headed for oblivion. You want access to the world's biggest market...then dance to the music. How the hell do you think economic "world domination" came about in the first place?

That's a remarkably stupid (and offensive) remark.

NAFTA? I am always astonished that some Canadians are angry when Americans won't buy our trees but the same Canadians are angry if Americans want to buy our water. Hewers of wood and drawers of water? Rather, some Canadians hate Americans whatever the Americans do.

As to Obama, Canadians and Mexicans do not threaten Ohio workers.

And North America? This is North America as it truly should be understood: A series of interconnected points. For something more dramatic and dynamic, try this view (wait to load).

NAFTA makes the lives of ordinary Americans and Canadians better. The world is a better place when people can deal with one another more easily.

----

The one provision in the FTA (and now NAFTA) that raises concern in Canada is the guarantee of US access to Canada's energy (oil and gas). This was easy for Mulroney to offer the Americans. The provision stipulates that the Canadian government will not discriminate between Canadian buyers and American buyers - everyone must pay the same price. IOW, it's an international guarantee that there will never again be a NEP. That's both good politics and good economics.

bush_cheney2004 · March 1, 2008

That's a remarkably stupid (and offensive) remark.

It was intended to be...twas the best I could do in short order texting on a cell phone in response to equally "stupid" assertions.

NAFTA? I am always astonished that some Canadians are angry when Americans won't buy our trees but the same Canadians are angry if Americans want to buy our water. Hewers of wood and drawers of water? Rather, some Canadians hate Americans whatever the Americans do.

Some Canadians have no other way to define themselves.

As to Obama, Canadians and Mexicans do not threaten Ohio workers.

Nope....not any more...too late for that.

And North America? This is North America as it truly should be understood: A series of interconnected points. For something more dramatic and dynamic, try this view (wait to load).
NAFTA makes the lives of ordinary Americans and Canadians better. The world is a better place when people can deal with one another more easily.

Yes and no....North America was not so bad before NAFTA either.

The one provision in the FTA (and now NAFTA) that raises concern in Canada is the guarantee of US access to Canada's energy (oil and gas). This was easy for Mulroney to offer the Americans. The provision stipulates that the Canadian government will not discriminate between Canadian buyers and American buyers - everyone must pay the same price. IOW, it's an international guarantee that there will never again be a NEP. That's both good politics and good economics.

Not really important given world markets and Canada's disadvantages for product refining and distribution. Shipping hydro, lumber, and tarsands oil to China wsn't in the cards.

Alta4ever · March 1, 2008

For NAFTA to really work the special interest groups like R Calf and the CWB have to be shut down.

jbg · March 2, 2008

In other words they'd cave-in to US pressure too.
Of course if the situation were reversed, they'd just tell all of us to go fly a kite.

I guess you must love the GOP?

geoffrey · March 2, 2008

You want access to the world's biggest market...then dance to the music.

A few hundred billion for another war similar to Iraq is an awfully expensive alternative to dealing with us fairly. Alberta has your ticket. Your going to have to pay our price though... hmm... I'm sure it will be more reasonable than the cost of another war.

More oil here than in Saudi Arabia. Do you want secure supply or not? Certainty isn't free, you know that though I'm sure.

bush_cheney2004 · March 2, 2008

A few hundred billion for another war similar to Iraq is an awfully expensive alternative to dealing with us fairly. Alberta has your ticket. Your going to have to pay our price though... hmm... I'm sure it will be more reasonable than the cost of another war.

The price is set by market demand (Alberta learned this the hard way back in the 1980's).....even the history of tarsands development has foreign fingerprints all over it. Pretending that the Alberta oil patch exists as only domestic development and production is a wonderful exercise in nationalism (as much as it can be in Canada). It is unclear to me how the crude would get to any other market economically. Canada actually imports about 1,000,000 bpd of far sweeter crude and distillates.

More oil here than in Saudi Arabia. Do you want secure supply or not? Certainty isn't free, you know that though I'm sure.

The Saudis, Russians, and Americans each produce far more oil than Canada. Most of it does not have to be squeezed out of bituminous sand, which also exists in many other places.

Topaz · March 4, 2008

The price is set by market demand (Alberta learned this the hard way back in the 1980's).....even the history of tarsands development has foreign fingerprints all over it. Pretending that the Alberta oil patch exists as only domestic development and production is a wonderful exercise in nationalism (as much as it can be in Canada). It is unclear to me how the crude would get to any other market economically. Canada actually imports about 1,000,000 bpd of far sweeter crude and distillates.
The Saudis, Russians, and Americans each produce far more oil than Canada. Most of it does not have to be squeezed out of bituminous sand, which also exists in many other places.

gee, BC I heard two Americans say last night, that the US exporter of oil to the US is Canada and Mexico.

Topaz · March 13, 2008

On the news today, it was reported that the PM's head guy had talked to Clinton people and not Obama and Mike Wilson has said it was Obama that called but it wasn't.... Mike Wilson, friends of the Mulroney era and probably just a crooked. It looks like the Harper government doesn't want a Dem in the White House. Clinton, herself is using this against Obama when she knows it was her that called the PMO!

eyeball · March 13, 2008

Of course the Conservatives want the most right-wing government possible in America.

This leak, which was probably engineered, could help Clinton win which would help the Republicans. More Americans are apt to fear and loath Clinton than are willing to support Obama. In addition, the longer Clinton and Obama continue battling it out the less time a winner will have to unite Democrats and campaign for the presidency.

McCain on the other hand has all the time in the world. Throw in a galvanizing event like a new front in the War on Terra say...an attack on Iran by GW, and who do you think will be cast as the best war-time President that's prepared to carry on the fight?

jbg · March 15, 2008

Of course the Conservatives want the most right-wing government possible in America.

As if the CPC is going to swing a US election. Ha ha.

Carinthia · March 15, 2008

As if the CPC is going to swing a US election. Ha ha.

Well I don't know about that. They toasted Howard Dean in the 2004 run, for yelling "yes" a little too vociferously. Doesn't take much to tip the voters, apparently.

jbg · March 15, 2008

Well I don't know about that. They toasted Howard Dean in the 2004 run, for yelling "yes" a little too vociferously. Doesn't take much to tip the voters, apparently.

I have listened to the Dean "primal scream" speech. He sounded crazed.

In any event he was way too far left to be elected in the US, or at least positioned himself that way. In Vermont he was actually a centrist governor and his tactics in running for the Democratic Primary were bizarre enough to raise questions about his balance, even aside from that speech.

Carinthia · March 15, 2008

I have listened to the Dean "primal scream" speech. He sounded crazed.
In any event he was way too far left to be elected in the US, or at least positioned himself that way. In Vermont he was actually a centrist governor and his tactics in running for the Democratic Primary were bizarre enough to raise questions about his balance, even aside from that speech.

Yes, the bashing he took in the media, was taken at face value by me. I did not have the same interest then, in American politics that I have now, thanks to Bush/Cheney. It did seem absurd to make such a big deal of it. He didn't come across to me as crazed, just over exuberant and slightly innapropriate, nothing more.

Hyru · April 3, 2008

Big debates around whether NAFTA should stay or go. Many Canadians have shown dissatisfactions with NAFTA, saying they got the lower end of the bargain... some suggest Canada didnt know what they were doing when they signed off to NAFTA :unsure:

Its definitely fostered new forms of political organizations, many of which go beyond Canadian boarders.

M.Dancer · April 3, 2008

Where is this big debate???

Who are these Canadian boarders and why can't they get their own place?

bush_cheney2004 · April 3, 2008

Canada can abbrogate the NAFTA Treaty at any time....just requires six months notice to the USA and Mexico. But something tells me we would see an identical thread about Canada not knowing what it was doing by leaving NAFTA.

Hyru · April 3, 2008

Where is this big debate???
Who are these Canadian boarders and why can't they get their own place?

The debates come throughout U.S politics (especially now - election discussions) and throughout Canadian life (newspapers, politics, etc)

M.Dancer · April 3, 2008

The debates come throughout U.S politics (especially now - election discussions) and throughout Canadian life (newspapers, politics, etc)

I am aware that their has been phoney statements made by democrats who have no intention of killing the golden goose, pandering to voters....

....but I am not aware of anyone serious debating NAFTA in Canada.

Why would we?

Hyru · April 3, 2008

I am aware that their has been phoney statements made by democrats who have no intention of killing the golden goose, pandering to voters....
....but I am not aware of anyone serious debating NAFTA in Canada.

Why would we?

Because many believe it undermines soverignty in Canada... ANy dispute is taken into WTO accounts rather than Canadian courts. Also, corporations are the ones that primarily benefit from NAFTA, not the average Joe. Undemocratic? Maybe.

M.Dancer · April 3, 2008

Because many believe it undermines soverignty in Canada... ANy dispute is taken into WTO accounts rather than Canadian courts. Also, corporations are the ones that primarily benefit from NAFTA, not the average Joe. Undemocratic? Maybe.

Like I said, I haven't heard of any serious debate in Canada.

Why for the life of me I will never understand why people are afraid of trade. I suppose somethink prosperity comes from a gov't cheque....so they fear that people working, people making money somehow, in some nebulous way threatens our soverienty.

May come as a surprise but Corporations are made up of people, mostly average joes but some average janes too....are they not worthy of an opportunity for prosperity?

Canadian courts of course have no jurisdition (sovereinty) over the trading practises of foriegn countries...If you are afraid of a loss of soverienty, then fear what would happen if foreign ports were closed to our trade.