Buy American

[Topaz]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7866900.stm Did anyone see Tom Clark on TV? He was talking to a former US ambassdor Blandard? He said he didn't think it apply to Canada and some others countries because Canada and the US had another agreement to protect each other. So if this is true, why is Day sounding so tough. Doesn't he know about this agreement? Is the media making too much of this, IF this isn't true? I think the media or Day's office should find out about this other agreement with the US.

[Mr.Canada]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7866900.stm Did anyone see Tom Clark on TV? He was talking to a former US ambassdor Blandard? He said he didn't think it apply to Canada and some others countries because Canada and the US had another agreement to protect each other. So if this is true, why is Day sounding so tough. Doesn't he know about this agreement? Is the media making too much of this, IF this isn't true? I think the media or Day's office should find out about this other agreement with the US.

If you knew about it prior to today why didn't you slam Stock then? Oh yeah, the TV didn't tell you to yet.

The language is very clear in the congressional amendment in the budget. Stock is doing his job. If he said nothing you'd be slamming Harper instead so spare us.

[Argus]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7866900.stm Did anyone see Tom Clark on TV? He was talking to a former US ambassdor Blandard? He said he didn't think it apply to Canada and some others countries because Canada and the US had another agreement to protect each other. So if this is true, why is Day sounding so tough. Doesn't he know about this agreement? Is the media making too much of this, IF this isn't true? I think the media or Day's office should find out about this other agreement with the US.

Why is Ignatieff sounding so tough? Doesn't he know about this agremeent? Why is he demanding to know how Harper coul dhave allowed the Americans to put this into their incentive program? Doesn't he realize the Americans rarely allow Canadians to write their bills for them?

[Progressive Tory]

If you knew about it prior to today why didn't you slam Stock then? Oh yeah, the TV didn't tell you to yet.

Actually, in those videotapes I posted of Michael Ignatieff, recorded before Christmas, he speaks at length about American protectionism, and how our natural resources can be used as a bargaining chip. It's not new, but the Cons didn't respond to it until it hit the papers.

But all that aside:

"A survey conducted last week by the industry-backed American Iron and Steel Institute found that 86% of poll respondents favor using American iron and steel for stimulus-funded transportation and infrastructure projects."

There is a great deal of debate over the issue in the U.S. as well. Economists are concerned that it could mean paying more for steel, but since the money is staying in the U.S.; that won't be seen as a problem. It still generates more revenue for the U.S. economy if it can keep American steelworkers employed.

However, from what I understand, the 'protectionism' is only in regards to stimulus spending on infastructure; not day to day operations. This stimulus spending is still viewed as a 'one of', or at least a 'few of'. A boost to the American economy, for the American people.

The problem with the EU, Canada, China, etc.; is they counted on 'trickle down' from American stimulus to help their own economies weather the economic crisis. They now may not be able to factor that in and will go have to go back to the drawing board.

When we have a case, is when the U.S. just says 'no more imports', period. This is not what's happening here.

[Progressive Tory]

Why is Ignatieff sounding so tough? Doesn't he know about this agremeent? Why is he demanding to know how Harper coul dhave allowed the Americans to put this into their incentive program? Doesn't he realize the Americans rarely allow Canadians to write their bills for them?

Like I just reminded Mr. C.

"Actually, in those videotapes I posted of Michael Ignatieff, recorded before Christmas, he speaks at length about American protectionism, and how our natural resources can be used as a bargaining chip."

This threat has been real for sometime. 'One of' infastructure stimulus spending does not sound like something that would have been written into any trade agreement. Therefore, we can't count on that. We have to look for other alternatives.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Like I just reminded Mr. C.

"Actually, in those videotapes I posted of Michael Ignatieff, recorded before Christmas, he speaks at length about American protectionism, and how our natural resources can be used as a bargaining chip."

This threat has been real for sometime. 'One of' infastructure stimulus spending does not sound like something that would have been written into any trade agreement. Therefore, we can't count on that. We have to look for other alternatives.

Lucky for everyone I am not Prime Minister because I would call a little press conference and have the media show up by the flame in front of the Parliament Building to watch me tear up the NAFTA document and toss the pieces into the fire. What the Americans are doing is violating the agreement, give them their 60 days notice and wait and see what happens. We import a lot of their stuff into this nation, tax the hell out of it. We need to be aware of the implications of "their" stimulus package.

[Alta4ever]

Lucky for everyone I am not Prime Minister because I would call a little press conference and have the media show up by the flame in front of the Parliament Building to watch me tear up the NAFTA document and toss the pieces into the fire. What the Americans are doing is violating the agreement, give them their 60 days notice and wait and see what happens. We import a lot of their stuff into this nation, tax the hell out of it. We need to be aware of the implications of "their" stimulus package.

If we tax the hell out of their products comming to our country its our citzens who have to pay more for it. If you want to plays these games though, you could slap export taxes on energy. But really all of this is going to be about posturing and it would just be best find new markets to sell into. If they don't want ot play with us we should just sell our resources else where.

[Progressive Tory]

Lucky for everyone I am not Prime Minister because I would call a little press conference and have the media show up by the flame in front of the Parliament Building to watch me tear up the NAFTA document and toss the pieces into the fire. What the Americans are doing is violating the agreement, give them their 60 days notice and wait and see what happens. We import a lot of their stuff into this nation, tax the hell out of it. We need to be aware of the implications of "their" stimulus package.

Actually, if I were the Prime Minister I would tear up NAFTA for other reasons, and I'm not alone:

Many Canadians Want to Renegotiate NAFTA.

Canadian voters 'heart' Obama despite NAFTA

Is NAFTA and trade relations between U.S. and Canada in jeopardy with Obama presidency?

"According to this ROBBINS poll the vast majority of U.S. 'voters' are NOT of the opinion that Free trade with Canada is important."

I agree that we have to challenge this to a certain extent, but also have to look at the broader picture. I've never read the agreement, but I'm sure many of Obama's experts have, and know the fine tuning.

If (American) opinion polls indicate that the U.S. should look after their own first, with the unprecedented stumulus package, which is being paid for from money they don't have, keeping THEIR workers employed should always be front and centre.

It is in everyone's best interest that the American economy rebounds, because it affects global markets. If this is a 'one of' measure, and not a complete abolishment of international treaties, then the area is a little grey.

Naturally, we have to protest and try to get him to change his mind, but it's not in our best interest to just cut off ties. They won't miss us as much as we'll miss them.

[Alta4ever]

Actually, if I were the Prime Minister I would tear up NAFTA for other reasons, and I'm not alone:

Many Canadians Want to Renegotiate NAFTA.

Canadian voters 'heart' Obama despite NAFTA

Is NAFTA and trade relations between U.S. and Canada in jeopardy with Obama presidency?

"According to this ROBBINS poll the vast majority of U.S. 'voters' are NOT of the opinion that Free trade with Canada is important."

I agree that we have to challenge this to a certain extent, but also have to look at the broader picture. I've never read the agreement, but I'm sure many of Obama's experts have, and know the fine tuning.

If (American) opinion polls indicate that the U.S. should look after their own first, with the unprecedented stumulus package, which is being paid for from money they don't have, keeping THEIR workers employed should always be front and centre.

It is in everyone's best interest that the American economy rebounds, because it affects global markets. If this is a 'one of' measure, and not a complete abolishment of international treaties, then the area is a little grey.

Naturally, we have to protest and try to get him to change his mind, but it's not in our best interest to just cut off ties. They won't miss us as much as we'll miss them.

While there are problems in Nafta now is not the time to play the protectionsit card or re negociate the right time to do this is in a year to 18 months when we are starting to come out of the recession, not when we are in the middle of it.

[Progressive Tory]

While there are problems in Nafta now is not the time to play the protectionsit card or re negociate the right time to do this is in a year to 18 months when we are starting to come out of the recession, not when we are in the middle of it.

In terms of the UNIQUE UNPRECEDENTED no holds barred economic stimulus, it might be argued that it's the best time. He's not tearing up Nafta with this. He can renegotiate it later if that's what he wants to do. It's an American problem, with an American solution.

Keep your workers employed by buying American to build unplanned for (or at least immediately unplanned for) infastructure. I don't like it either, because we counted on trickle down from the U.S. stimulus package. However, 86% of Americans agree with what he's doing. They don't care what we think. We just have to be careful with how far we push with thing.

When Flaherty was in charge of roads in Ontario, there was a lot of hype about his government's plan to rebuild our highways, and he made good on a lot of the promises. However, when it was learned that all the contracts went to a Quebec firm, who for the most part brought their own workers, I'm surprised he escaped with his life. In the end, it cost taxpayers more and left many Ontarians unemployed, adding to the discontent with the Harris government.

When a country or province is in trouble, they should look after themselves first.

[bush_cheney2004]

When Flaherty was in charge of roads in Ontario, there was a lot of hype about his government's plan to rebuild our highways, and he made good on a lot of the promises. However, when it was learned that all the contracts went to a Quebec firm, who for the most part brought their own workers, I'm surprised he escaped with his life. In the end, it cost taxpayers more and left many Ontarians unemployed, adding to the discontent with the Harris government.

There still would have been significant economic benefit to Ontario based businesses. Besides, Isn't Quebec in Canada?

When a country or province is in trouble, they should look after themselves first.

They should do this regardless of circumstances.

[Alta4ever]

In terms of the UNIQUE UNPRECEDENTED no holds barred economic stimulus, it might be argued that it's the best time. He's not tearing up Nafta with this. He can renegotiate it later if that's what he wants to do. It's an American problem, with an American solution.

Keep your workers employed by buying American to build unplanned for (or at least immediately unplanned for) infastructure. I don't like it either, because we counted on trickle down from the U.S. stimulus package. However, 86% of Americans agree with what he's doing. They don't care what we think. We just have to be careful with how far we push with thing.

When Flaherty was in charge of roads in Ontario, there was a lot of hype about his government's plan to rebuild our highways, and he made good on a lot of the promises. However, when it was learned that all the contracts went to a Quebec firm, who for the most part brought their own workers, I'm surprised he escaped with his life. In the end, it cost taxpayers more and left many Ontarians unemployed, adding to the discontent with the Harris government.

When a country or province is in trouble, they should look after themselves first.

What I am saying is that their is still a lot that Americans buy from our economy and at time when job losses are high do you want to loose those too? No to mention the products that we import, do want to have to start payign tariffs on these. Remeber these costs are always passed to the consumer.

The time to make those changes are when we are increasing employement not decreasing.

[bush_cheney2004]

What I am saying is that their is still a lot that Americans buy from our economy and at time when job losses are high do you want to loose those too? No to mention the products that we import, do want to have to start payign tariffs on these. Remeber these costs are always passed to the consumer.

Right....it is estimated that about $1.5 billion in trade crosses the border each day. Going gonzo for a small portion of this one time stimulus package at the expense of existing trade would be cutting nose to spite face.

The time to make those changes are when we are increasing employement not decreasing.

Yes...Canada will have far more leverage once the recovery is sustained (T_avg in the green band for any nukes out there.)

[Topaz]

If you knew about it prior to today why didn't you slam Stock then? Oh yeah, the TV didn't tell you to yet.

The language is very clear in the congressional amendment in the budget. Stock is doing his job. If he said nothing you'd be slamming Harper instead so spare us.

Watch Tom Clark's video from yesterday.http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090131/clark_powerplay_090131/20090202?hub=QPeriod

[M.Dancer]

Watch Tom Clark's video from yesterday.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...202?hub=QPeriod

fixered

[Molly]

The vast majority of US voters might not believe that free trade with Canada is important, but the vast majority of US voters are blissfully unaware that we are their largest trade partner.

It might behoove us well to draw it to their, or at least their legislators attention. A trade war doesn't do anyone a lot of good, but immediate and direct retaliation for bad faith is fair game. How about an origin-specific whomper of an import tax on anything for which a Canadian supplier exists, lasting day-for-day as long as any such bad faith policy on their part?

[madmax]

Canada has more leverage in a trade war then in NAFTA. Just one way is uglier then the other. The US is used to turfing NAFTA rulings against them. Trade Wars are UGLY, but bouncing between #1 and #2 trading partner with the US has its influences. Unfortuneately CHINA is the US #1 trading partner and we are sliding back and forth in the spot but unlikely to maintain #1 partner in the long run.

That said,

In the last 2 years, all Canadian Steel Plants were sold to larger foreign interests.

Defasco was sold to Arcelor Mital

Stelco was sold to US Steel

and on it goes. There are NO Canadian owned Mills today.

US STEEL owns both Lake Erie Works and Hilton Works.

Hilton Works will eventually be closed.

Lake Erie Works Will not.

US STEEL has made nothing but back to back to back to back to back.... Quarterly profits with the "Bankrupt Stelco... that kept making $100Million Dollar Quarterly Profits while "Bankrupt".

US STEEL like other operations in the US is leveraging the Government to help fund their operations, and want the BUY AMERICAN policy.

THEY have no fear, worries or concerns about the latest posturing, and it affecting their operations at Lake Erie Works.

US STeel announce 3000 layoffs in the US Mills and 650 in Canada. The 650 in Canada didn't happen and only a relative handful were laid off from Hilton works and some of those were offered jobs at Lake Erie works. People are still working at Lake Erie with as few as 4 months in.

US STEEL just had another profitable quarter amidst this major downturn and much lower steel prices. ( I have no idea how). Just the same US Steel stock is falling.

Regardless of all the noise and posturing. Canadian Steel will flow over the boarder to be used in US value added operations for public works.

Should be a fun topic to follow.

Let the Sabre Rattling begin

[blueblood]

Actually, if I were the Prime Minister I would tear up NAFTA for other reasons, and I'm not alone:

Many Canadians Want to Renegotiate NAFTA.

Canadian voters 'heart' Obama despite NAFTA

Is NAFTA and trade relations between U.S. and Canada in jeopardy with Obama presidency?

"According to this ROBBINS poll the vast majority of U.S. 'voters' are NOT of the opinion that Free trade with Canada is important."

I agree that we have to challenge this to a certain extent, but also have to look at the broader picture. I've never read the agreement, but I'm sure many of Obama's experts have, and know the fine tuning.

If (American) opinion polls indicate that the U.S. should look after their own first, with the unprecedented stumulus package, which is being paid for from money they don't have, keeping THEIR workers employed should always be front and centre.

It is in everyone's best interest that the American economy rebounds, because it affects global markets. If this is a 'one of' measure, and not a complete abolishment of international treaties, then the area is a little grey.

Naturally, we have to protest and try to get him to change his mind, but it's not in our best interest to just cut off ties. They won't miss us as much as we'll miss them.

NAFTA has worked out very well for both Canada and the US and both sides are richer because of it.

I for one am not worried one little whit about the US protectionism on steel. If the Obama administration and the US steel industry want to soak taxpayers and steel customers with an expensive buy in America policy, they can deal with the outrage from customers having to deal with unnecessarily high priced steel. Also steel manufacturers not having steel to work with causes problems.

The US tried this experiment with BSE and the US meat packing industry went ballistic. American consumers were gouged, feedlots were empty and taking a hit on their profits. Needless to say GW Bush told RCalf to go fly a kite.

Americans are consumers too, and don't like paying more than they have to.

[GostHacked]

When I find something that says ' MADE IN THE USA ', I will consider buying it.

I also have the same problem with finding something ' MADE IN CANADA '.

You are not buying Amercian/Canadian, you are buying an American/Canadian service that has outsourced it's product manufacturing to another country. The only things you can buy Canadian or American anymore are in the service industry. But then even most of the hookers are not homegrown.

[madmax]

You are not buying Amercian/Canadian, you are buying an American/Canadian service that has outsourced it's product manufacturing to another country. The only things you can buy Canadian or American anymore are in the service industry. But then even most of the hookers are not homegrown.

That is pretty much true of any value added production. Certainly in the consumer arena there is little that one can find in a dept store that is made in Canada. Especially since the criteria changed long ago. Now imported in Canada or if you do something like Repackage it, it gets a made in Canada sticker. Of course those stickers aren't made in Canada.... just kidding...some come right off the printer labels, labels made in, erm, forget it.

GostHacked.

What can I say. You're right....

[bush_cheney2004]

.....You are not buying Amercian/Canadian, you are buying an American/Canadian service that has outsourced it's product manufacturing to another country. The only things you can buy Canadian or American anymore are in the service industry. But then even most of the hookers are not homegrown.

Maybe, but it depends on what the product is. Here are some examples from my own consumer experiences:

1) Auto parts - I know how to distinguish from CanAm vs. China sourced parts, and will pay the premium. I like Belinda's parts!

2) Specialty electronics - when I want a high end CATV distribution amplifier, I can find it fabrique' au Quebec.

3) Many of our families consumer paper/pulp products come from Canada

4] Refined petroleum distillates in my region started life in Canada

5) Much of the softwood lumber and exterior wood products sold in my area come from Canada

6) Software applications - some very good stuff comes out of (gulp)....Toronto!

[Progressive Tory]

There still would have been significant economic benefit to Ontario based businesses. Besides, Isn't Quebec in Canada?

Yes it is. For now anyway. However, this was when Flaherty was with the Ontario provincial government. I guess I should have explained that. At the time, the unemployment rate was quite high. The feeling was that they were our roads and we should build them.

He tried to justify it by saying that they had the lowest bid. However, as always happens, somebody proved him wrong. They weren't the lowest but maybe the ones willing to grease the palms. Flaherty had very greasy palms back then.

Except for very menial labour, all the workers were from Quebec and paid their taxes to Quebec, while our guys were unemployed and paid taxes to nobody.

[Progressive Tory]

What I am saying is that their is still a lot that Americans buy from our economy and at time when job losses are high do you want to loose those too? No to mention the products that we import, do want to have to start payign tariffs on these. Remeber these costs are always passed to the consumer.

The time to make those changes are when we are increasing employement not decreasing.

I'm agreeing with you that this is not a good thing for Canadians. It sucks. However, I'm not sure that in reality we can really do anything about it, because it may be outside the boundaries of normal trade agreements.

I posted a link awhile back that Alberta ranked the highest for Canadians worrying about their jobs at 40%. (Wasn't there just a big layoff in some steel company in Calgary?)

Ironically, about the same time our local news show did a 'man on the street' piece, asking Kingstonians if they were worried about their jobs? There were two youngs guys who said they weren't worried at all because if they were laid off they would just go to Alberta.

Don't you think that the people of Alberta should look after their own first, if jobs become scarce? Sometimes desperate times call for desperate measures.

For now Obama's protectionism is restricted to the economic stimulus infastructure building. Not the day to day.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes it is. For now anyway. However, this was when Flaherty was with the Ontario provincial government. I guess I should have explained that. At the time, the unemployment rate was quite high. The feeling was that they were our roads and we should build them.

No, you were quite clear on that. It's just that such parsing to the provincial, county / division / district, or local level becomes problematic. At least it wasn't Amerikuns!

He tried to justify it by saying that they had the lowest bid. However, as always happens, somebody proved him wrong. They weren't the lowest but maybe the ones willing to grease the palms. Flaherty had very greasy palms back then.

Palm greasing goes a long way in such matters...see Adscam.

Except for very menial labour, all the workers were from Quebec and paid their taxes to Quebec, while our guys were unemployed and paid taxes to nobody.

Right, but the construction consumables surely came from Ontario, contributing to second and third tier businesses right down to the roach coaches.

[Alta4ever]

I'm agreeing with you that this is not a good thing for Canadians. It sucks. However, I'm not sure that in reality we can really do anything about it, because it may be outside the boundaries of normal trade agreements.

I posted a link awhile back that Alberta ranked the highest for Canadians worrying about their jobs at 40%. (Wasn't there just a big layoff in some steel company in Calgary?)

Ironically, about the same time our local news show did a 'man on the street' piece, asking Kingstonians if they were worried about their jobs? There were two youngs guys who said they weren't worried at all because if they were laid off they would just go to Alberta.

Don't you think that the people of Alberta should look after their own first, if jobs become scarce? Sometimes desperate times call for desperate measures.

For now Obama's protectionism is restricted to the economic stimulus infastructure building. Not the day to day.

Nope if those guys want to work here great!