Boudrias Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 40 minutes ago, Bob Long said: People have been saying we are weak vs the US on trade since Mulroney's first negotiation on the original FTA. How is Canada being the #1 trade partner with 30+ states a "weak position"? You forgot that there are a lot of us jobs linked to exports to Canada. As previously stated I have not forgotten. I think you take to much comfort in assuming current trade patterns cannot change and change quickly. At a minimum Trump can make Canadian trade to expensive for maintenance of the status quo. Canadians should be very concerned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 Just now, Boudrias said: As previously stated I have not forgotten. I think you take to much comfort in assuming current trade patterns cannot change and change quickly. At a minimum Trump can make Canadian trade to expensive for maintenance of the status quo. Canadians should be very concerned. As previously stated, Canada is old news to the US. They're sweet on Mexico now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 2 minutes ago, stawns said: As previously stated, Canada is old news to the US. They're sweet on Mexico now Not sure what your comment means? Yes, Mexico is their #1 trading partner now. A NAFTA review will include both Mexico and Canada. Both will be hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 1 minute ago, Boudrias said: Not sure what your comment means? Yes, Mexico is their #1 trading partner now. A NAFTA review will include both Mexico and Canada. Both will be hurt. I was agreeing with your statement, but I don't think they're backtracking on their mexico move.......it was trump who signed it in the first place and it falls in line with the move toward increases isolationist path the US is on 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 I do find it interesting that the hospital that treated the former Prez from that "incident" hasn't issued any kind of statement (if they have, I'll take out this comment). Unlike all the other times Presidents have been treated at a hospital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBH1926 Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 10 hours ago, stawns said: I could see them going with two women on the ticket, her and Whitmer Two women on the ticket is a risky strategy in the country that never had a female president. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 1 minute ago, stawns said: I was agreeing with your statement, but I don't think they're backtracking on their mexico move.......it was trump who signed it in the first place and it falls in line with the move toward increases isolationist path the US is on Yeah if it was Sleepy Joe that signed that deal, then I wouldn't be surprised that Donnie tries to get it revoked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attila Umbrus Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 1 hour ago, Boudrias said: I hope Biden bows out and the DNC finds a viable candidate. I doubt Harris is that. It is highly likely the GOP take POTUS, the House and the Senate if nothing changes. While I do not think Trump is a nazi or a fool I do not want that much power in his hands. I do not like his apparent willingness to abandon Ukraine to the Russians. I do empathize with American resentment over Europeans sticking the USA with NATO costs. That is changing so hopefully Trump will recognize that. I am very concerned about a Trump admin's relations with Canada. The J D Vance speech re-enforced my concerns in spades. Vance specifically criticized NAFTA and repeated the GOP initiative of reshoring industry back to the USA. Canada will be a prime target. Combine that with Canada's underfunding of the military and brownie points will be few in Washington. While Ottawa surely is developing contingency plans there are few cards to play. Suggesting states that do a lot of business in Canada will save Canada is a weak hope and a poor plan for survival. When Trump renegotiated NAFTA the last time he cut a deal with Mexico and told Canada to take it or leave it. Bilateral deals strengthen the USA position and Mexico has already shown they will throw Canada under the bus. Canadians should be very concerned. Trump understands debt he uses a lot of it. His admin will know how bad the debt issue is in Canada and will take advantage of this weak position. I love that you posted the other day about US robbing us of our natural resources only to sell them at premium costs world wide so they make all the profits... Maybe if they hard ball on NAFTA we will be forced to finally beef up our own industries and sell products world wide instead of just to one country. Having US control our economy as such has always bugged me. We should be more independent from them. The current strategy we have with them is a very familiar scenario in my world...in the natural gas industry there are lots of stories where single source energy providers use their leverage to force the hands of other companies. In example lots of natural gas facilities i've operated have multiple contracts with several natural gas providers to keep our facility full production wise and creates healthy competition. We also then get to dictate the gas contracts coming into our facility and not the other way around. Then you have other places that have only ONE source of gas supplier and those sites are always struggling to maintain their finances because they are always having to drop their rates to ensure the only gas supply they have stays on to run their facility...not a healthy model. Eventually those plants get choked out and then bought up by the gas supplier who was playing hard ball with them. We are resource rich country, with vast land and commodities, we should be much better off than we currently are. But unfortunately we have decided that selling our raw goods is the better way to go. To me that leaves our country empty of "final/end products" to use at our own will if times get tough...If we manufactured more goods we'd have more for ourselves as well. I still can't wrap my head around the fact it's cheaper to ship raw goods across the ocean to China, Taiwan, etc have them manufacture the goods, ship them back across the ocean, then sell the final products in our stores. That is cheaper than doing the full manufacturing circle locally in our own country...so maybe this will never change but it would be nice to see if it did become a reality. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 3 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: Yeah if it was Sleepy Joe that signed that deal, then I wouldn't be surprised that Donnie tries to get it revoked. It doesn't really matter who is in office, the US is on a path to pulling back on globalisation, imo. But, I agree he would do if just to be an a-hole 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 16 minutes ago, Boudrias said: As previously stated I have not forgotten. I think you take to much comfort in assuming current trade patterns cannot change and change quickly. At a minimum Trump can make Canadian trade to expensive for maintenance of the status quo. Canadians should be very concerned. I take comfort in nearly 40 years of experience handling trade well vs the US. It's fine to be concerned but that should be tempered by our approach, success and importance to so many states. Of course Vance and trump will bluster, etc. but at the end of the day they won't hurt the economy of so many states. A new global us tariff would also present new trade opportunities for us to diversify more. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 10 minutes ago, CBH1926 said: Two women on the ticket is a risky strategy in the country that never had a female president. Is the US ready for this? Dunno... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 5 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Is the US ready for this? Dunno... Given that a woman's right to choose is overwhelmingly popular in the US, including many Repubs, I'd say yes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBH1926 Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 3 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Is the US ready for this? Dunno... I don’t if I am willing to risk it to find out, especially in this current political situation. There are also almost 25 millions naturalized citizens eligible to vote, many of whom come from places where women are not considered equal. Just because they live someplace else, doesn’t mean that beliefs ingrained in them have changed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 23 hours ago, Bob Long said: is coffee lefty? every body with big money flip flops Bob . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 Something something something idolatry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 2 minutes ago, CBH1926 said: I don’t if I am willing to risk it to find out, especially in this current political situation. There are also almost 25 millions naturalized citizens eligible to vote, many of whom come from places where women are not considered equal. Just because they live someplace else, doesn’t mean that beliefs ingrained in them have changed. I'd bet a huge portion of those people left were they were partly because of the restriction of a woman's rights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 3 minutes ago, stawns said: Given that a woman's right to choose is overwhelmingly popular in the US, including many Repubs, I'd say yes. Ok but isn't that a state issue now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 1 minute ago, SilentSam said: every body with big money flip flops Bob . Sure, it's just a cost of doing business. Also if everyone does it, doesn't that make boycotting over politics kind of silly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 10 hours ago, Outsiders said: I have no issue with the opinions of others. It is just that an opinion. While I respect others viewpoints, it doesn't mean I have to agree with them. However, you go around verbally attacking people for seeing things differently. I wish you well cause I've seen people like you angry at the world. How about giving an opinion instead of Heckling others points of view? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attila Umbrus Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 7 minutes ago, SilentSam said: every body with big money flip flops Bob . Ain't that the sad truth 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 5 minutes ago, stawns said: I'd bet a huge portion of those people left were they were partly because of the restriction of a woman's rights Biden couldn't stop trumps scotus from nuking roe. Why would people trust the dems to bring it back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 6 minutes ago, stawns said: I'd bet a huge portion of those people left were they were partly because of the restriction of a woman's rights I'd suspect the reasons were more financial. They may have also wanted more freedoms but not necessarily more freedoms for women. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 10 minutes ago, SilentSam said: How about giving an opinion instead of Heckling others points of view? He did give one earlier; he seems to like the concentration camps Trump wants to set up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 1 minute ago, Bob Long said: Sure, it's just a cost of doing business. Also if everyone does it, doesn't that make boycotting over politics kind of silly? Where do you think they ( Starbucks ) get their money from ? Economies do not start with Buissness , they start with the extra few dollars we are able to spend after taxes . The more money you and I have in our pockets, the more we generate an economy. If the tax system flipped , And it never will.. Imagine how robust Economies would be if you and I only paid 20% as a flat tax . Why can’t all Buissness’s do the same to balance it out ? Its our , already taxed dollars , and their price rising that creates their revenue, to pay minimal to 0% in corporate tax. The tax system in Democracy is based on an old feudal system, One where Kings were the almighty .. those “Kings “ are now Corporations , looking for tax cuts . We as tax paying citizens offset what they do not pay . 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted July 18 Share Posted July 18 16 minutes ago, Warhippy said: Something something something idolatry These are “Adults” .. what a fkin mess . 1 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.