Jump to content

If Negotiation Not Possible, Your Preferred Retaliation Is?  

5 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Posted

Decima Research has just completed polling Canadians about the softwood lumber dispute.

Canadians would prefer a negotiated settlement, however if that is not possible the higest support for retaliation is the Layton New Democrats proposal for an export tax on oil and gas exports, and the province with the highest support for this is Alberta.

Canadians prefer negotiation, but support some forms of trade retaliation

I also heard on the radio tonite that a major Canadian lumber company, Interfor I believe, is pulling out of the lumber alliance in BC. Their CEO said there is no need to be involved anymore as Canada has won the softwood lumber fight with the US. He said that NAFTA is the only legal body and the WTO decision is of no consequence.

So it sounds like the US better belly up to the bar and pay up or NAFTA is done like dinner.

Posted

Actually, pulling out of NAFTA would be preferable. The neo-cons in this newsgroup may think that I "hate trade", but I'm afraid they wouldn't even listen to either the facts or a good argument....

Posted

The Terasen thing is a bad idea. No sense punishing Canadian shareholders. However, delaying the Alaska pipeline is interesting. I'm not sure what the downside would be.

"Canada is a country, not a sector. Remember that." - Howard Simons of Simons Research, giving advice to investors.

Posted
Actually, pulling out of NAFTA would be preferable.  The neo-cons in this newsgroup may think that I "hate trade", but I'm afraid they wouldn't even listen to either the facts or a good argument....

Why don't you actually make a good argument and quit resorting to blanket insults like 'neo-con' while you are at it?

Posted
The Terasen thing is a bad idea.  No sense punishing Canadian shareholders.  However, delaying the Alaska pipeline is interesting.  I'm not sure what the downside would be.
Actually, blocking the Alaska pipeline is a dumb idea. The US would just route the oil down to coast of Alaska and take it by ship. May cost more but at least they don't have to deal with cranky neighbors. Blocking the Terasen deal would have the least advesre effects on Canadians since Canadian shareholders would still own a piece of a profitable company that will continue to pay higher dividends. Short term investers may gripe but on the whole Canadian investors would not be hurt much if the deal did not go through.

To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,017
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    taylor66
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Gtechalax earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Gtechalax earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Gtechalax earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Canadaisintrouble earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • AlizyMalik earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...