Let's Create A Country Called Canada

[mirror]

NAFTA is dead, if it ever lived

Time to cut loose from the Yankee Mullahs and Sheiks

Canadians need to once and for all stop being lead around on a string, to stop fighting amonst ourselves, and to realize who the real enemy to Canada and our economic well being really is.

By 2004 — 15 years after the first Canada-U.S. pact — it had become conventional wisdom within government and business circles that free trade was an unalloyed success.

Yet two problems were simmering beneath the surface. Both exploded this summer.

The first has to do with the logistics of continental integration. Trucking goods back and forth across North America makes sense only when gasoline is relatively cheap — which it was when the first Canada-U.S. deal was inked in 1989.

But with gas at $1 a litre, it makes less economic sense to build carburetors in Mexico, truck them to an engine plant in Ohio and ship the completed engine to a car assembly plant in Windsor.

The second problem is the perennial one: The U.S. adheres to trade deals only when it chooses to.

Nothing has exemplified this more than the ongoing saga of softwood lumber. Even before free trade, Canadian lumber — the kind used in housing construction — was supposed to be allowed into the U.S. duty-free.

But since 1981, American lumber producers have complained that Canadian wood is unfairly subsidized. And since 1986, the U.S. government has aggressively taken their side.

The U.S. complaints have been dismissed as groundless seven times by bilateral trade panels, including one that ruled earlier this month. The panels ruled that, even under U.S. trade law, Canadian softwood lumber exports are fine.

Yet none of these decisions made any permanent difference. After the latest one, the U.S. government immediately announced that, according to its interpretation of the ruling, the decision simply doesn't apply to the bulk of duties levied on Canadian lumber.

What makes this time different is that Canadians are finally getting the message: Free trade is much less than it seems; the NAFTA emperor has no clothes.

Ironically, the death of NAFTA is not a new story. It is more of a rerun.

In 1855, colonial British North America, desperate for new markets, entered into its first free-trade arrangement with the U.S. That lasted only until Washington killed it 11 years later.

Then, too, Canadian business reacted with dismay by immediately lobbying for outright annexation by the U.S.

But, in the end, British North America's answer to the end of free trade was to create a country. The theory was that this new Dominion of Canada, while continuing to trade with the U.S. and others, would stop snivelling about its loss of special status with Washington and try instead to operate in the world as a serious and ultimately independent nation.

It wasn't a bad idea. It might be worth trying.

[mirror]

Well we can certainly see from the previous article that listening to the Thomas d'Aquinos, the Canadian business community, is the worst possible thing that Canadians should do.

I can see what with Martin & now Harper attacking the US Ambassador, that it is going to get very crowded on the left, at least until the election is over.

Seriously though, it is a bit refreshing to see Harper take a shot at the US - he mst have chocked when his advisers told him to do it.

[Rambler Man]

I can see what with Martin & now Harper attacking the US Ambassador, that it is going to get very crowded on the left, at least until the election is over

Protecting free trade is somehow a left-leaning policy? I always thought free, unrestricted economies and trade was more of a right leaning idea.

[Argus]

NAFTA is dead, if it ever lived

Time to cut loose from the Yankee Mullahs and Sheiks

Canadians need to once and for all stop being lead around on a string, to stop fighting amonst ourselves, and to realize who the real enemy to Canada and our economic well being really is.

Posting long reams of material is against the rules. Do you think people are too stupid to click on a link or something? I mean, do you have an actual point? The Americans are being unfair on trade? Yeah? So?

Do you have a replacement in mind for 85% of our exports? I'm guessing uh... nooooooo.

[mirror]

It's great that our kick-ass Conservative leader Stephen Harper is going to support Linda McQuaig's point of view. I suppose there is always a first for everything:

Linda McQuaig says we should revert to use of global trade rules

[Toro]

This is from McQuaig's article

NAFTA has done much to erode our sovereignty, denying us control over our own energy resources, creating a wide-ranging set of rights for corporations, and limiting our power to protect the environment and shape public programs.

With the exception of energy resources (which is wrong), the criticisms she has of NAFTA are the same criticisms the anti-globalization crowd has of the WTO. Yet McQuiag is articulating that we should scrap NAFTA for the WTO.

[mirror]

Layton is requesting that Parliament be recalled so that Canadian politicians can deal with the this crisis for our softwood lumber fight with the US. I think this is an excellent idea so that Canada can develop a concrete plan to sort this out and also we need to discuss whether or not is is futile to remains in this trade agreements with the US.

Layton prods PM on softwood