Hydraboss Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 The other half probably rightly realize we'd have little impact on their economy either way. That and Canada is a major supplier (in minor terms) of domestic oil. The trade-off for the Obamanation is that they keep their sizable market open to a relatively small business sector (Canadian) in exchange for a reliable source of black stuff. It's a no-brainer for the no-brainer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Obama is doing Harper a favour based on good economic principles and something of a personal relationship, Layton, the BQ and the Liberals played no part other than providing background noise. This favour is contingent on Harper delivering a true reciprocal agreement. Ontario among other provinces could pose a problem on our side. On the U.S. side there could be a variety of problems. We have no idea how this will be viewed south of the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 This favour is contingent on Harper delivering a true reciprocal agreement. Ontario among other provinces could pose a problem on our side.On the U.S. side there could be a variety of problems. We have no idea how this will be viewed south of the border. Free trade with Canada is almost always looked at as a good thing south of the boarder as long there is no NAFTA super highway. Either way they have a health care debate going on no one will pay attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Obama is doing Harper a favour based on good economic principles and something of a personal relationship, Layton, the BQ and the Liberals played no part other than providing background noise. I agree with this. The Americans, believing themselves to be the centre of the world, didn't feel they needed Canada. I think Obama realizes that in the interest of friendship and future support for Canada it's better to exempt Canada from this agreement. Our economies are so intertwined anyways that restricting each other didn't help anyone. Buy American makes sense to keep Mexican and Chinese garbage from putting people out of work. It doesn't make sense when Canada by and large plays on a level field with big brother down south. Obama knows this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 (edited) I still don't get what's wrong with the so called NAFTA Super Highway. The Port of Winnipeg component is still going ahead championed by none other than Gary Doer. Edited September 30, 2009 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Obama is doing Harper a favour based on good economic principles and something of a personal relationship, Layton, the BQ and the Liberals played no part other than providing background noise. I don't know Slim. Granting such an exemption is a huge deal. Would Obama agree to such an exemption unless something was put on the table by Harper as a bargaining chip? Obama has to be able to turn around and say he got something in return. I'm no economist so I don't know what's in it for the US and I can't see it as a simple favour because they like us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 I still don't get what's wrong with the so called NAFTA Super Highway. The Port of Winnipeg component is still going ahead championed by none other than Gary Doer. I agree we do so much trade there is no reason why we shouldn't plan our highways to meet those trade needs. Apparently it doesn't play well with radical right or radical left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 I don't know Slim. Granting such an exemption is a huge deal. Would Obama agree to such an exemption unless something was put on the table by Harper as a bargaining chip? Obama has to be able to turn around and say he got something in return. I'm no economist so I don't know what's in it for the US and I can't see it as a simple favour because they like us. They want Canadian provinces to open up to Nafta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 That and Canada is a major supplier (in minor terms) of domestic oil. The trade-off for the Obamanation is that they keep their sizable market open to a relatively small business sector (Canadian) in exchange for a reliable source of black stuff.It's a no-brainer for the no-brainer. Still, I would think it is something more concrete than what is already on stream. I'm somewhat puzzled. It seems to me there's more to it. Perhaps I see it as simply too good a deal to be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 They want Canadian provinces to open up to Nafta. Thanks punked. That makes sense. So, there is a condition and there's no guarantee it will be met. Still the fact the exemption is a go with Obama is a good first step. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim MacSquinty Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 The Americans, believing themselves to be the centre of the world, didn't feel they needed Canada. I think Obama realizes that in the interest of friendship and future support for Canada it's better to exempt Canada from this agreement. Our economies are so intertwined anyways that restricting each other didn't help anyone. Buy American makes sense to keep Mexican and Chinese garbage from putting people out of work. It doesn't make sense when Canada by and large plays on a level field with big brother down south. Obama knows this. Agreed, there is probably a little more to it, traditionally its been the Republicans south of the border who had a better understanding of free trade and less inclination toward protectionism. This deal may have something to do with "fortress America" being more inclusive of Canada on other fronts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Thanks punked. That makes sense. So, there is a condition and there's no guarantee it will be met. Still the fact the exemption is a go with Obama is a good first step. Yep the condition is the Provinces open up to America the same Canada does as country. I am hesitant to think this will be a good thing for all provinces but I do think over all it will be a good thing linking suppliers up with their supply chain. Like I said I see it as a good thing outside of Ontario and Quebec however within those two provinces some regions could be hurt I think competing with the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OddSox Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Yep the condition is the Provinces open up to America the same Canada does as country. I am hesitant to think this will be a good thing for all provinces but I do think over all it will be a good thing linking suppliers up with their supply chain. Like I said I see it as a good thing outside of Ontario and Quebec however within those two provinces some regions could be hurt I think competing with the US. Currently there is more protectionism between Ontario and Quebec than there is between either province and the states. If this agreement serves to reduce that protectionism by even a little bit it would be beneficial for both provinces. There is a huge amount of trade between Ontario/Quebec and the northern United States. Their industries are so intertwined that there have been American companies strenuously complaining about the restricton of their Buy American policies. There is support in the States for more cooperation - it's just a matter of numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Currently there is more protectionism between Ontario and Quebec than there is between either province and the states. If this agreement serves to reduce that protectionism by even a little bit it would be beneficial for both provinces.There is a huge amount of trade between Ontario/Quebec and the northern United States. Their industries are so intertwined that there have been American companies strenuously complaining about the restricton of their Buy American policies. There is support in the States for more cooperation - it's just a matter of numbers. Like I said I am very hesitant but if it is a good thing for Canada I am all for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Perhaps I see it as simply too good a deal to be true. Any agreement won't be instant. Talks could stretch to many months, possibly a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Visionseeker Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Harper called the Buy American clause a minor irritant. It wasn'tI hope the agreement goes through but it is something that the BQ and Liberals have been asking for all this year. And it might not survive a Senate vote. A similar attempt was made back In February. It won't survive the Senate. Healthcare has eaten-up the window. There's no way the Dem dominated Senate goes into 2010 with legislation promoting the "exporting of jobs". The clause will remain until the US sees an economic up-swing. If that sounds like the beatings shall continue until morale improves, well, thems the facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Visionseeker Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 There wouldn't be a Senate vote if Obama used discretionary powers to over turn it. It would be a Whitehouse decision. Uh, no. A law already on the books is not subject to presidential veto. Besides, Obama isn't interested in helping his fellow Dems in 2010 by exporting jobs. The clause will stay until at least 2011. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Visionseeker Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Do you really think that a bunch of American Senators were worried about whether Kitchener would buy American widgets for a municipal project, hell half of them figure we live in Igloos and get our groceries by stalking it in the tundra. The other half probably rightly realize we'd have little impact on their economy either way.Obama is doing Harper a favour based on good economic principles and something of a personal relationship, Layton, the BQ and the Liberals played no part other than providing background noise. Obama is blowing smoke. He knows full well that the fidgety Senate will decide and that such a decision well not be favorable to Canadian interests in the near future. He's simply telling us what we want to hear with no capacity to make it happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Uh, no. A law already on the books is not subject to presidential veto. Besides, Obama isn't interested in helping his fellow Dems in 2010 by exporting jobs. The clause will stay until at least 2011. Never said a veto, I said he would use discretionary power something which is not subject Senate approval. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Still, I would think it is something more concrete than what is already on stream. I'm somewhat puzzled. It seems to me there's more to it. Perhaps I see it as simply too good a deal to be true. I agree. Access to Canada's market can't be the answer. The entire Canadian market is a bit smaller than that of just California! However, American industry has a huge investment in Canada. Auto manufacturers, parts suppliers and raw resources located here supply the whole continent and more besides. If they had to depend on just the domestic Canadian market they've have to close their doors in an instant. So Obama must be hearing nattering from American industry with a stake in Canada. Also, no one has mentioned an extension of the Afghan mission! Or political support at the UN against Iran. Or keeping critical resources out of Chinese hands instead of available to Uncle Sam. It's not surprising that we don't get told everything about such deals. Politically, Canada seems to have a death wish. We constantly shoot ourselves in the foot by championing politically correct causes while ignoring the water filling up our boat. Any government of any party that truly wants to do the best for their country must sometimes "hide their light under a bushel", so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.