Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 That's just it, they want to sell you things you don't need. Market research and advertising have some of the slimiest people working for them. Ok - so the previous point about communication not involving the average citizen now being conceded, I will concur with your opinion on advertisers. If the communication was both ways, we'd know a lot more about the TPP than we do. The overall scope might be given to the population, but there is nothing we can really do to change the course and avoid things like the TPP. It's not in our best interest. By moving the conversation sideways with every response, you're confusing things. The reason I pointed out that communication is a two-way street was in response to your assertion that "perception is from people selling you the junk". Now, you're moving that discussion into the TPP itself. Fine, but the pricing and selling of smartphones is a different thing from the selling of politics. I agree with some of what you're saying here but look up the MAI if you think that citizens are unable to change the course of multinational agreements. You are not going to save any money either, while at the same time putting our own businesses and farmers at risk. There is no saving if I have to dole out taxes that will be used as subsidies for farmers (but that already happens) and still pay a higher price for those other products and STILL pay a high price for our 'domestic' products. Hell, even 'domestic' products carry some amount of foreign made items. You are talking past all of the points that were made about trade previously in the thread. Go back and read them again, and if you have something new to add (ie. not "you're not going to save any money" "subsidies for farmers" will mean no savings) then please do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 What do you mean by transitional? Apologies - I already posted to you that you weren't listening but in fact you didn't know what I meant here. The subsidies for farmers are designed to help them transition to the new marketplace, ie. they're not meant to be permanent. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transitional Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 GMO foods are usually innovative. Innovative for who? You hinted at intellectual property when a patent is given to a corporation. Monsanto has indeed gamed the system to it's advantage. And not because of it's so called innovation. This gave Monsanto the ability to practically control the entire food market. All your food comes from a handful of parent corporations with a plethora of other companies under their banner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Ok - so the previous point about communication not involving the average citizen now being conceded, I will concur with your opinion on advertisers. By moving the conversation sideways with every response, you're confusing things. The reason I pointed out that communication is a two-way street was in response to your assertion that "perception is from people selling you the junk". Now, you're moving that discussion into the TPP itself. Fine, but the pricing and selling of smartphones is a different thing from the selling of politics. I agree with some of what you're saying here but look up the MAI if you think that citizens are unable to change the course of multinational agreements. You are talking past all of the points that were made about trade previously in the thread. Go back and read them again, and if you have something new to add (ie. not "you're not going to save any money" "subsidies for farmers" will mean no savings) then please do so. The TPP includes the selling of politics and products. The marketing and advertising methods are the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 The TPP includes the selling of politics and products. The marketing and advertising methods are the same. Ok, it includes 'selling' implicitly but... I'm confused. Are you saying advertising is somehow going to be affected by the TPP ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 We already discussed transition above. Transition to what? Because there is money to be made in that market. We already agreed that they can grow their supply with time. Once they have the supply then there will still be business to be had in Canada, since there is today. We certainly did not agree. Agriculture is not like manufacturing, you can't just crank up a machine and produce more cows like you can widgets. There are limits on what you can produce and those limits can be greatly effected by things like climate and weather. Drought is also having a big effect on agriculture in California where so much of our produce comes from. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/canadian-beef-prices-keep-rising-as-drought-leaves-pastures-parched/article25331929/ That’s helped boost meat output. In the first four months of 2015, Canada increased exports of beef to the U.S. by 7 per cent to 77,900 tons, government data show. “If that means a bigger flow from Canada, that’s a good thing,” said Steve Sunderman, who owns a feedlot south of Norfolk, Nebraska. Increased sales south of the border creates higher prices in Canada, where processors already are paying 14 cents more per pound than buyers in the U.S., said Brian Perillat, a senior analyst at Calgary-based Canfax. We are already paying more because of US demand, adding 150 million Japanese to the customer pool will just drive prices even higher. When the world price of oil goes to $100 per barrel, that's what Canadians pay even though we produce it ourselves. If we pay any less it is only because we don't have the infrastructure to sell it to someone else. If we pay any less it is because we don't export it. That's a big reason why the industry wants pipelines that can supply the Asian market instead of being tied to the US for exports. The last guy to try and impose Canada only pricing for a commodity was Pierre Trudeau with the NEP and he damn near destroyed the oil industry in Canada and Alberta's economy doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Transition to what? Transition to a system with less protectionism. We certainly did not agree. Agriculture is not like manufacturing, you can't just crank up a machine and produce more cows like you can widgets. There are limits on what you can produce and those limits can be greatly effected by things like climate and weather. Drought is also having a big effect on agriculture in California where so much of our produce comes from. So, to be clear: you don't agree that we can produce more beef ? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/canadian-beef-prices-keep-rising-as-drought-leaves-pastures-parched/article25331929/ Ok, I'd like to understand the reasons for the increase here. Is it a short term or long term thing ? When the world price of oil goes to $100 per barrel, that's what Canadians pay even though we produce it ourselves. Oil isn't a good analogy since we pay above the market price for dairy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Transition to a system with less protectionism. What system? While my community has a mixed economy, farming is still the biggest industry so what do you transition to? Another kind of farming possibly but the plain fact is, dairy farmers are the biggest consumers of any farmers. They buy more equipment and machinery, build more buildings and use more services than any other type of farming around here, so what do you replace them with that can add the same amount of value to a local economy. So, to be clear: you don't agree that we can produce more beef ?Ok, I'd like to understand the reasons for the increase here. Is it a short term or long term thing ? The answers are in that article I posted. Oil isn't a good analogy since we pay above the market price for dairy. You can try and control prices up or down. The NEP already showed us what happens when you artificially try and control them down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 What system? While my community has a mixed economy, farming is still the biggest industry so what do you transition to? I'm not sure how you would describe the post-TPP system, but the answer is out of my depth. so what do you replace them with that can add the same amount of value to a local economy. There are ostensibly benefits to other parts of the economy, but maybe you dispute that. These are elementary questions we have already covered - you can go and look them up, they don't appear for me for me to answer. You can try and control prices up or down. The NEP already showed us what happens when you artificially try and control them down. The NEP was a different version of this same approach, namely managing the Canadian economy apart from the global marketplace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 The NEP was a different version of this same approach, namely managing the Canadian economy apart from the global marketplace. Isn't that what you are suggesting by maintaining that Canadians should be able to pay less for Canadian meat than others in a global market place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Isn't that what you are suggesting by maintaining that Canadians should be able to pay less for Canadian meat than others in a global market place. Now you're making me wonder.... Why aren't we paying world prices now ? Is it that "world" prices for beef are kept high by tariffs ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) I'm only speaking to the orthodoxy around trade deals. Even then, many people don't seem to get the basics behind trade deals and I blame the lack of productive dialogue in a public forum.Orthodoxy...like the basic secrecy and exclusiveness the government affords its favoured constituencies in the trade deals it makes? What exactly is it you think people don't get that you have some special insight to? Edited November 10, 2015 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) Now you're making me wonder.... Why aren't we paying world prices now ? Is it that "world" prices for beef are kept high by tariffs ? Tariffs only effect what consumers pay, not what producers get. If you increase demand but can't increase supply to meet that demand, the product becomes more valuable. To everyone, not just consumers formerly affected by tariffs. Edited November 10, 2015 by Wilber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Orthodoxy...like the basic secrecy and exclusiveness the government affords its favoured constituencies in the trade deals it makes? It's understandable, though. The system we use to discuss these things has no way to weigh the positives, so instead of creating one they just ram it past us. What exactly is it you think people don't get that you have some special insight to?The economic basics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 The most fundamental basic of economics is confidence. You seem to have a lot more reasons for feeling confident about this deal than anyone who wasn't involved in the negotiations are able to see. That said people have a pretty good sense when they're being screwed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 If you increase demand but can't increase supply to meet that demand, the product becomes more valuable. Right, but we established above that supply can increase, albeit slowly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 You seem to have a lot more reasons for feeling confident about this deal than anyone who wasn't involved in the negotiations are able to see. I want to hear their reasons. I hear things like 'we can't increase the supply', which begs discussion. That said people have a pretty good sense when they're being screwed. People hate trade deals... economics is the modern witchcraft... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Right, but we established above that supply can increase, albeit slowly We haven't established that at all. The article says cattle producers are downsizing their herds because they can't get or afford feed. Some are getting record prices but still losing money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 People hate trade deals... economics is the modern witchcraft...Nowhere near as much as they hate government secrecy and exclusiveness...The not so new authoritarianism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 We haven't established that at all. The article says cattle producers are downsizing their herds because they can't get or afford feed. Some are getting record prices but still losing money. Feed prices are really not part of the discussion of how trade deals work - there are lots of things that could impact these deals, positively or negatively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Feed prices are really not part of the discussion of how trade deals work - there are lots of things that could impact these deals, positively or negatively. Never said they were, I'm just trying to bring a little reality to this discussion. Trade deals don't always mean you will pay less for everything, they can also mean you will pay more for some things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Tariffs only effect what consumers pay, not what producers get. It affects both. It creates a price wedge between demand and supply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) Now you're making me wonder.... Why aren't we paying world prices now ? Is it that "world" prices for beef are kept high by tariffs ? Tarrifs, transportation costs, regulations, quotas, etc. Edited November 11, 2015 by -1=e^ipi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Sure. We could have lowered tariffs on dairy and autoparts and any number of other things and we didn't, because rightly or wrongly it was believed that protecting those industries was worth the higher cost to consumers. No, it was believed that protecting those industries would get you more votes. Plus our mainstream parties are irrationally pro-status quo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 It affects both. It creates a price wedge between demand and supply. In that respect you are right, that is why I am saying increased overseas demand will drive our prices up. 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.