# possible elimination of NAFTA and the implications therein



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

having read an article (that basically suggests that NAFTA will begin to be eliminated quite soon) on page A19 of the Globe and Mail today, I am left wondering how to respond to this new investing paradigm. 

The article describes 2017 as a year where the relationship between Trudeau-Trump, and Canada-US trade officials has become increasingly dysfunctional. It is understood that trade talks will always be blunt, and perhaps nasty, but the relationship is becoming increasingly polarized (specifically the US side) - so much so that many insiders - on both sides - the article suggests, conclude that the US will, as early as the end of January 2018, begin the process of eliminating NAFTA. The article further suggests that Trump has created the dysfunction in an effort to draw foreign investors to part their $ in the US at the expense of Canada and Mexico. I am reading much of the press on the NAFTA with some interest - I am aware that the process will require approval on several levels of US govt, and is not assured. I am aware that Trump is in a battle with the clock somewhat, in that many Republican senators may, by the end of 2018, not be re-elected and therefore not support his broad economic plans. There is, indeed much "fog" in this matter. I have been doing some of my own research in exploring which CDN companies may prosper and which may be severely stressed in the new "No more NAFTA" world. 

(I think it is likely that softwood lumber could be further hit hard - but having checked auto parts makers, MAGNA, and Linnamar - in this rather threatening environment, have produced 1 yr returns of 22, and 27% respectively!

So my question to the forum is rather simple. Assuming NAFTA is in the process of becoming dismantled and eliminated, which companies (and industries) would be best able to survive and perhaps prosper, and which would likely be hammered?


----------



## Oldroe (Sep 18, 2009)

Your first clue is page 19.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

dubmac said:


> .
> the relationship is becoming increasingly polarized (specifically the US side)


Bit one sided there.
Trudeau is pushing policies around the world that are unacceptable to many countries, if he even bothers to show up.
https://globalnews.ca/news/3854335/trudeau-tpp-meeting-no-show/
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...-laws-as-part-of-nafta-talks/article36160015/

Most US states are right to work (ie freedom of association with a union)
There is no way you're going to get the Senate to approve a treaty that conflicts with their laws.
Treaties require 2/3 support, and 28 states are right to work, and that's just one of the demands Trudeau is insisting on.
I'm not sure if he's
1. Actually anti-trade and wants to kill NAFTA
2. Putting forward an "new NAFTA" that is so objectionable to Republicans that they'll pressure Trump to keep the current NAFTA.
3. Completely incompetent.


#2 is very risky, so it's either #1 or #3.
Since NAFTA is good for everyone and outstanding for Canada, #1 is the same as #3.
Can they hurry up and have another election?


----------



## lonewolf :) (Sep 13, 2016)

NAFTA not really good for anyone just have free trade. Would be tough to compete with the US with their lowering of taxes. Taxes kill the economy. US companies do not get many contract jobs outside of the US when living in another country US citizens pay taxes to the US.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Scrap NAFTA. 

Make Canada strong again.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

MrMatt said:


> 1. Actually anti-trade and wants to kill NAFTA
> 2. Putting forward an "new NAFTA" that is so objectionable to Republicans that they'll pressure Trump to keep the current NAFTA.
> 3. Completely incompetent.
> 
> ...


It's not objective to pose that wanting to terminate a trade deal is a direct indication of being anti-trade. That's ridiculous.

Every place I've ever worked has terminated employees, from time to time, yet I don't conclude they hate all employees.

I've sold stock and yet I'm not anti-corporation.

This isn't that hard.

Each deal needs to be considered on it's own merit.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

TomB16 said:


> It's not objective to pose that wanting to terminate a trade deal is a direct indication of being anti-trade. That's ridiculous.
> 
> Every place I've ever worked has terminated employees, from time to time, yet I don't conclude they hate all employees.
> 
> ...


You're right, and NAFTA is a good deal (so is TPP, so is CETA).

Tearing up good deals for Canada is a bad idea, and I can't grasp the motivation, can you think of any reason to kill NAFTA beyond being anti-trade?

I'm afraid Trump & Trudeau are both idiots who don't really grasp the consequences of what they're doing.


----------



## dougjp (Dec 31, 2017)

Excellent initial question, I'm looking for ideas about the core question too, in order to consider buying or selling individual stocks. I don't care about the politics/how would I negotiate/who said what spin offs that have so far been the focus. I'm just assuming, like the OP, that the current situation will change.

My 2 cents on this (but its too basic), is look to Canadian Companies trading on the TSE (in Cdn. $) with a large part of their business done by their US subsidiaries. If the Cdn. $ weakens, there's a financial gain to be had. The only one I'm aware of is NFI.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

dougjp said:


> Excellent initial question ...




yes, excellent initial post, even transmitting the globe journo's speculation that donald trump is purposefully destroying NAFTA so offshore corporations will locate stateside instead of considering canada or mexico.

longterm though, isolationist policies - especially ruthless isolationist policies like the above - hinder rather than help the nations that practice them.

there are countless canadian companies HQ'd in canada, trading on the TSX but usually interlisted, whose businesses are already largely US or overseas based. Constellation Software for example says it sells 80% of product into the US. Merging potash/agrium (to be called nutrien i believe) has majority of its business outside north america. A full list would be endless, many thousands of canadian corporations.

trump has previously talked about various kinds of new taxes to be imposed on canadian exports destined for US markets, in addition to NAFTA breakup.

one can observe the split in the US cabinet at the highest level. Rex Tillerson appears to have a good relationship with chrystia freeland. They're co-hosting a world meeting in vancouver at the end of january. Not about NAFTA. About north korea. But clearly, the two can pick up the phone & talk to each other. Unlike donald trump, they're not communicating via midnight tweets.


.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

I read the following quote in a globe and mail article...
"In fact, a recent study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives notes that even without NAFTA, 41 per cent of Canadian exports to the U.S. would face no tariffs, while the remainder would face, on average, only modest ones."
which allays some concern on the size of any ripple should NAFTA begone.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Ontario is raising the minimum wage $2.40 an hour to $14 an hour because so many people now depend on these jobs to raise a family.

It is a direct result of all the industrial jobs lost to Mexico, China, and the southern US.

_"We on this side of the House think it's time for those people to have an increase in their pay," said Labour Minister Kevin Flynn in question period last week. "They're trying to raise families. They're trying to buy groceries. They're trying to buy shoes for their kids. They're trying to pay their rent."_

I would guess the stock markets will largely ignore free trade issues as they have ignored everything else. 

If the spectre of a possible war with North Korea doesn't shake the market confidence, I doubt NAFTA will.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

the fate of nafta hangs on the weight of the donald trump wrecking ball which is the fundamental tenet of his "administration" (and i do use the word "administration" in its loosest possible form)

will it lose steam or will it completely shred the accumulated structures of the past 5 or 6 administrations ?

i think it is demonstrably beneficial for all 3 signatories as pie has suggested

if it does go down i think it will take the CAD with it, at least at the beginning and i am not doing any USD to CAD conversions for a while at least


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

dubmac said:


> I read the following quote in a globe and mail article...
> "In fact, a recent study by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives notes that even without NAFTA, 41 per cent of Canadian exports to the U.S. would face no tariffs, while the remainder would face, on average, only modest ones."
> which allays some concern on the size of any ripple should NAFTA begone.


Yes the anti NAFTA think tank says losing NAFTA would have a minor impact. 


The fact is the impact of even threatening to lose it is slowing investment in Canada today. Actual loss would cause significant immediate disruption, and result in an increase in the cost of living. 

Fewer jobs, higher costs and Canadian goods would be more expensive for US customers, that's all bad.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

somewhat encouraging for 2018
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tsx-2018-1.4469301


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Ontario is raising the minimum wage $2.40 an hour to $14 an hour because so many people now depend on these jobs to raise a family.


No Ontario is raising the minimum wage because they feel it's a politically popular.

Unfortunately a sudden massive wage increase like this is going to result in job and hour cuts (less income) for those a minimum wage, and smaller wage increases for others.

The thing that many proponents of a massive minimum wage hike fail to consider is that most businesses aren't sitting there making 21% profit on your labour. Quite simply the money isn't there. 
It's going to mean fewer wages or price hikes.

The government knows this https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...cover-daycare-fee-hikes-due-to-wage-bump.html


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

NAFTA took good Canadian jobs and made them bad Mexican jobs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/jerry-...-and-made-them-bad-ones-in-mexico_a_23189630/

NAFTA was designed for the benefit of multinational corporations.........not for the people in any of the countries involved.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

There was a NAFTA II thread somewhere, but I can't find it and the search function doesn't work..


https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/27/politics/mexico-us-trade-deal/index.html


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

So Mexico and the US have done a preliminary trade deal. Now the ball is in Canada's side and it is up to Canada to make a deal or Trump will go with a deal that is no longer NAFTA. The article linked below suggests it is Canada's turn to seek Mexico's guidance.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4411440/end-of-nafta-us-mexico-trade-deal-canada/


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

now that the usa has dropped the sunset clause demand, i suspect we will come in with something to sweeten the pot ... assuming of course that we get the same sunset clause

i was thinking that perhaps trudeau is holding back supply management and he would deal that but i doubt it ... something in autos i suspect

though apparently we allow 10% of foreign products and the usa only allows 2.75% so ... hmmm


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

fascinating ... here is a piece from barrie mckenna which says that perhaps, quebec not withstanding, supply management may be on the table

makes sense, maybe it’s time has come ... get past the sunset clause and you have a deal

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...tlight-as-sticking-point-amid-us-trade-shift/


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I couldn't get the story to stay up but I do agree the Dairy supply management systems time has come and we need to move past it. I think it was New Zealand that had a similar system and they got of it and have managed well without it. Of course when you are talking about Quebec as part of this, it is hard to change anything so we will have to see.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

another globe columnist with impressive creds says a save-NAFTA deal is not likely by friday.

lawrence herman, former canadian diplomat & international trade lawyer, joins others who say that dairy supply management will have to be sacrified.

some are also saying that mexico has shot itself in the foot by agreeing to the new $16 USD/hour minimum wage in automobile factories. Mexico's current $4/hour standard means the country will lose many auto contracts.

the $16/hour minimum will prove advantageous for american & canadian auto & automotive manufacturers, who will pick up business moving out of mexico.

in fact, a few analysts are saying that donald trump's $16/hour auto industry minimum is actually a behind-my-back gift to canada. In return, the present structure of the dairy industry in canada will have to end, herman says.


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...new-nafta-isnt-even-close-to-the-finish-line/


personally i don't see the end of supply management as a big deal. For consumers, plenty of milk-derived dairy products these days are based on "milk product" ingredients currently imported from undisclosed-who-knows-where, but said to be asia. 

your inexpensive yogurt of the last few years? your high-protein reinforced greek yogurt? all your commercial canadian cheeses that are extended with "casein products" aka edible plastics? these are all created with or augmented by "milk products" imported from who-knows-where. Evidently the dairy industry is not currently required to disclose the country of origin of foreign "milk products" found in yogurt, cheese, cottage cheese, sour cream, smoothies, kefirs & other milk drinks.

personally i think allowing in US dairy products could/should be followed by accurate labelling of ingredients. 

the challenge to swallowing the donald trump take-it-or-leave-it cocktail by this friday will be transitioning the dairy industry. Ironically there are plenty of dairy farmers who loathe supply management with its tight product quotas. I'm acquainted with a few francophone dairy farmers who say they would be happy to compete under continental free trade dairy.


.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

Trump gets Mexico to go from 4/hr to 16/hr and the MSM goes silent-Obozo, Baby Bush, etc.etc did nothing on this- Little Selfie wouldn't think to impose by demanding such things.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

how is a bilateral deal where mexico loses implanted auto mfg business good for mexico?


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> how is a bilateral deal where mexico loses implanted auto mfg business good for mexico?


Here you see the mentality of the left-they worry about every country, every culture is so important-except Canada.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

What good is an agreement with the outgoing President?


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

good article on supply management from cbc 
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-supply-management-explainer-1.4708341

there are mixed reviews and it isn't easy to label it as good or bad
i wouldn't be unhappy to see it go

canadian eggs butter and cheese are ok but i would love to see choice


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

kcowan said:


> What good is an agreement with the outgoing President?



trump is also rushing to meet the deadline for congress to pass his hybrid "deal" before the US mid-terms in november

US constitutional experts are weighing in to say that DT was only authorized to negotiate a trilateral trade agreement, not a bilateral "deal" with mexico ... but when did consideration of the constitution ever cause DT a moment's hesitation


in his long rambling discourse yesterday, trump set forth his message to canada in stark terms. Canada must concede dairy supply management, he said. Describing canada's dairy tariffs as "almost 300%," trump said that "We can't have that, we're not going to stand for that."

his own preferred action would be to immediately impose high US tariffs on canadian automotive imports, trump continued. Taxing canadian cars would be the "simple" solution because such tariffs would give the US "a lot of money" the "very next day," he threatened.


one has to do a reality check here. Future possible dairy exports from the US into canada would be only a piffle percentage of total US export GDP. Whereas taxing canadian automotive products coming into the US would earn the american treasury some serious coin. So what's holding trump back? why doesn't he slam on the automotive tariffs pronto? does canada have something important that the US needs, to the point where trump has to stop at the stage of fuming over wisconsin butter & cheese?

myself, i don't think it's coveting our water that inhibits the US president from going for the automotive jugular. It certainly isn't our lumber. It definitely isn't all those canadian families who will be thirsting to drink wisconsin dairy cows dry if donald trump could only get his way.

i think it may have something to do with canada's vast strategic northern land mass. Precambrian shield, water, muskeg, rocky mountain or not, canada's warming north is crucial to american defense. Trump's advisors have told him not to rock that boat. Trump can bluster on & on about wisconsin dairy farmers; but i'm thinking it's not likely that trump will choose to drop the tariff barrier against canadian automotive product.

.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

trump is not smart enough, nor well read enough nor capable of long-term thinking that would inform him of the value of canada as a long term friend for the reasons you cite and more

i think he absolutely would bring the hammer down on canada and tariff autos 25% in a heartbeat

he is desperate to look strong and like a winner

i also think he is taking heat on the sidelines from the many states that have huge stakes in doing business with canada and that may well be restraining him


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> trump is also rushing to meet the deadline for congress to pass his hybrid "deal" before the US mid-terms in november
> 
> US constitutional experts are weighing in to say that DT was only authorized to negotiate a trilateral trade agreement, not a bilateral "deal" with mexico ... but when did consideration of the constitution ever cause DT a moment's hesitation
> 
> ...


Yeah sure-"Canada's Warming North"-HAHAHA-Al Gore's beachfront palace will be underwater then.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

fatcat said:


> trump is not smart enough, nor well read enough nor capable of long-term thinking that would inform him of the value of canada as a long term friend for the reasons you cite and more
> 
> i think he absolutely would bring the hammer down on canada and tariff autos 25% in a heartbeat
> 
> ...


You heard it here children-the Fat Man is way smarter than Donald Trump.


----------



## Userkare (Nov 17, 2014)

W.R.T. Supply management - I had always wondered if this meant that product was held in storage during times of high-supply/low-demand. I have experienced buying eggs that the yolk just oozed out of, and was pale yellow. I acquired a taste for 'scrabbled' over 'sunny-side-up' because of that. Buying organic eggs locally never had that problem.

So, if that's the case, I wouldn't cry too hard if we had to sacrifice supply management for the wider scope trade deal.

But... The danger I see in that is the subsidized American farmers, who have a longer growing season than our Canadian farmers, will dominate the market and eventually wipe out the Canadian farming industry. What happens, then, in the event of some natural ( or man-made ) disaster that wipes out a lot of US production? Can Canada be assured that we'll get our share, or will we be left to starve in the cold?

My compromise proposal is that we allow US access to our protected dairy, etc but insist on 'origin' labeling. This way, we can get a trade deal, but still keep our Canadian farmers in business by letting the American products rot on the shelves. 

Ahhhhhh who am I kidding? The moron hordes buying their groceries at WalMart wouldn't give a crap where it's from, just as long as it's cheap!


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

From what I understand is Trump wants US tariffs and subsides removed if we do the same. There is an very good interview going on which I will link to you guys later.

Anyway no matter our opinion of Trump we are under a short timeline that ends Friday. Apparently to get any deal through the current congress the time is very short. Also I heard the current Mexican leader who made the deal is leaving close to this timeline.

For Trudeau he has an election coming and the dairy industry expects to keep the current system. However if he doesn't give in then he may alienate Ontario voters if Trump applies auto tariffs.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

Here is an interview with Chris Garcia former director at the US department of Commerce on Global CKNW 980. Start on Aug. 28 and skip to 1:35 PM to listen to the interview. I like this interview because he gives a no holds bar view of the US side and what it gains from opening up NAFTA. The interviewer asks all the tough questions that you guys would like to ask someone like this. You may not agree with him but you just don't get this kind of interview on mainstream radio like this.

https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cknw/


----------



## milhouse (Nov 16, 2016)

Userkare said:


> W.R.T. Supply management - I had always wondered if this meant that product was held in storage during times of high-supply/low-demand. I have experienced buying eggs that the yolk just oozed out of, and was pale yellow. I acquired a taste for 'scrabbled' over 'sunny-side-up' because of that. Buying organic eggs locally never had that problem.


I was always under the impression (rightly or wrongly) that the vibrancy of the yolks were due to what the chicken was eating. 



Userkare said:


> But... The danger I see in that is the subsidized American farmers, who have a longer growing season than our Canadian farmers, will dominate the market and eventually wipe out the Canadian farming industry. What happens, then, in the event of some natural ( or man-made ) disaster that wipes out a lot of US production? Can Canada be assured that we'll get our share, or will we be left to starve in the cold?


At the risk of bringing climate change into the discussion, the growing season is likely getting longer in Canada. WRT disaster, I can see droughts and access to fresh water being an issue where Canada may have an advantage.


----------



## milhouse (Nov 16, 2016)

new dog said:


> Here is an interview with Chris Garcia former director at the US department of Commerce on Global CKNW 980. Start on Aug. 28 and skip to 1:35 PM to listen to the interview. I like this interview because he gives a no holds bar view of the US side and what it gains from opening up NAFTA. The interviewer asks all the tough questions that you guys would like to ask someone like this. You may not agree with him but you just don't get this kind of interview on mainstream radio like this.
> 
> https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cknw/


Thanks for the link. However, I don't think there was any revelation from discussion as it reiterated a lot of the Trump administration's talking points. There were some valid concepts which I think everyone would agree with, like the need to update an agreement that is decades old, particularly in light of all the technological evolution and that while both sides would feel pain, Canada would hurt more. But blaming NAFTA, with respect to the Canadian aspect of it, on American jobs being shipped overseas, factories closing down, and a causing a trade deficit is a stretch. 

My prediction: Deal gets done with dairy supply management being agreed to be slowly sunset over the course of the new agreement. Trump gets a win. Trudeau can manage the damage over a period of time but can tout the new auto rules as a win in the meantime. 
Possible sticking point is Chapter 19 - Dispute Resolution Mechanism but I think it will get back into the agreement.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I agree milhouse but for some reason we don't get good interviews like this very often. The host peppered this guy with good questions that we all like to hear someone on the Trump side answer. Usually we just get some person critical of Trump who just basically agrees with the host with some extra insight.

I applaud global CKNW for giving us all the sides to this issue.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

Supply management with origin labeling likely to be given up.
And once its up and the next US administration is in, likely a WTO challenge from Canada on the subsidization of US farmers WRT milk production.

I have no problem with the increase in the minimum duty free amounts. I can't think of a time I've ever had to pay duties on online orders, so its obviously not even enforced right now.

The $16min wage for auto parts is a likely a win for Canada, even if we had nothing to do with it, at the expense of Mexico. Also a win for red auto producing states that are right to work.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

quebec premier Philippe Couillard clearly shows in this video that he knows that all of the trade threats & bluster are coming from US president donald trump. Couillard is stunned at the damage trump is inflicting on canadian province/US state governor business relationships.

couillard says - as he must say for political reasons - that he will do everything in his power to protect quebec dairy farmers. However he has no details as to the actions & certainly with a quebec election coming up this october 1st, now is not the time for extravagant actions.


afaik "supply side" dairy management is so full of leaks in canada that the term is almost meaningless. All dairy processors are using milk products & milk derivatives brought in from countries as far away as asia. These cheap dairy imports explain the low yogurt & the low bulk cheese prices of recent years - those products are not made with 100% canadian milk.

so we might as well get real & get ready to change over the dairy industry in canada, if it means canada can gain some semblance of trade order & peace with the maniac in the oval office. Even a temporary truce via a supersonic patched-up "NAFTA" agreement would be better than berserk daily threats from the white house bully.

i appreciate noblea's suggestion ^^ just upthread. He points out that canada could go along for now, then go after massive US subsidies of its own US dairy industry via the WTO later.
.







.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

Explain logically why the whole country of Canada has to pay through the nose for the good of these dairy farmers? Where were all the snowflake tears for all the manufacturing jobs lost in Ontario under all these B/S "free trade with the third world" deals?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Big Kahuna said:


> Explain logically why the whole country of Canada has to pay through the nose for the good of these dairy farmers? Where were all the snowflake tears for all the manufacturing jobs lost in Ontario under all these B/S "free trade with the third world" deals?



oh stop stalking cmffers for the sole purpose of insulting them, that's all you ever do in this forum


Edit: ontario hosts almost as many dairy farmers as quebec although total ontario dairy product may be slightly less. Ontario & all provincial dairy farmers will be equally affected by any change in NAFTA.


----------



## Speculator (May 9, 2018)

Big Kahuna said:


> Explain logically why the whole country of Canada has to pay through the nose for the good of these dairy farmers? Where were all the snowflake tears for all the manufacturing jobs lost in Ontario under all these B/S "free trade with the third world" deals?


Good question! I have no idea why other than votes, the dairy industry gets all that love. When I hear of another dairy farm going under I pour myself a scotch and raise my glass.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> oh stop stalking cmffers for the sole purpose of insulting them, that's all you ever do in this forum
> 
> 
> Edit: ontario hosts almost as many dairy farmers as quebec although total ontario dairy product may be slightly less. Ontario & all provincial dairy farmers will be equally affected by any change in NAFTA.


The rumour is that lots of well respected posters have left this forum because of you and your bullying. That is what they have been saying. So I guess you figure you are going to bully me-LOL.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Big Kahuna said:


> The rumour is that lots of well respected posters have left this forum because of you and your bullying. That is what they have been saying. So I guess you figure you are going to bully me-LOL.



^^ total lie. Posters including many of my friends have left because the place has become too cluttered with the likes of yourself. Frauds with zero knowledge in finance who lie, stalk, insult, vent their own personal neuroses, foment hatred, encourage violence. Describes you to a tee.

countless cmffers have criticized you, kahuna. They have criticized you loudly & powerfully. They are the respected forum members, not yourself.

as for yourself, you have no friends in this forum. Most members have you on ignore. Myself, i feel pity for any human being whose life is so empty that he or she does nothing except stalk, harass, insult & spew out poison on an anonymous chat forum, particularly one which is dedicated to a financial mission that he or she knows nothing about.


.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> ^^ total lie. Posters including many of my friends have left because the place has become too cluttered with the likes of yourself. Frauds with zero knowledge in finance who lie, stalk, insult, vent their own personal neuroses, foment hatred, encourage violence. Describes you to a tee.
> 
> countless cmffers have criticized you, kahuna. They have criticized you loudly & powerfully. They are the respected forum members, not yourself.
> 
> ...


Just repeating what I have read on this forum-you say it is a lie but other posters say otherwise. Don't shoot the messenger.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

the POTUS has made it clear that either canada gives up something - at this point we're only guessing that it has to be dairy - or else he's going to slap taxes on canadian manufactured auto product. 

autos are mega-billion dollar business for canada. The Automotive Agreement is older than many of us ... sags, if you are around, can you tell us when it was signed? under lester Pearson? it's as old as RRSPs then?

destruction of the automotive agreement will rip the canadian economy to pieces in the short term. No one has any idea how this nation would recover. The immediate devastation would shock canada to its core.

that is why re-configuring the dairy industry would make sense. It's already heavily undermined by foreign dairy products that are being legally imported into canada. Other foreign dairy products are illegally brought into canada under false labelling. Recently fatcat entertained cmf forum with descriptions of young broiler chickens (illegal import at present) being shipped into canada in cartons marked 2-year-old stewing hens (legal import at present), while everybody along the supply line from US chicken processor to canadian wholesale supermarket dealer knows exactly what is going on, wink wink

only the blindest & stupidest of trumpsuckers on here would raise any issue about the re-working of dairy supply side management

.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The auto pact was signed in 1965 with Pearson in power at the time. I kind of remember that for some reason while in high school.

Added: I recall the date because it was also the time of the Canada Pension Plan and I made my first CPP contributions in 1966. A number of such things happened under Pearson.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Big Kahuna said:


> Just repeating what I have read on this forum-you say it is a lie but other posters say otherwise. Don't shoot the messenger.



one wants to look at the reputation & the quality of the rumour-mongers. They are poor quality posters & the regulars on here frequently exchange personal e-mails about what frauds & imposters they are.

kahuna, i'd like to repeat although i know you are not capable of understanding: what is destroying this forum are the ever-increasing number of bigots & bullies *like yourself*.

right now a long-term member is back in this forum recruiting valuable posters to move to another forum, one where he says trolls like yourself will be promptly voted down into invisibility. It's an attractive idea.


.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> The auto pact was signed in 1965 with Pearson in power at the time. I kind of remember that for some reason while in high school.
> 
> Added: I recall the date because it was also the time of the Canada Pension Plan and I made my first CPP contributions in 1966. A number of such things happened under Pearson.



yea i was guessing Lester B because i recently had to look up the date of inception of the CPP & discovered it was way back in the 1960s. These fixtures - CPP, Automotive - are bedrock canada. Every canadian alive has either been born or else has grown up under them. 

so far & fortunately, enough US democrats & enough blue states understand very well that the automotive agreement as well as NAFTA itself benefits them right in the pocketbook. This fact - the interlocking of the economies - is what we are counting on.

words fail when it comes to contemplating the infantile brain of the maniac in the white house. All is talk & no show. He's on-again-off-again with every country in the world. Yesterday he was all bromance-cuddly with north korea's Kim; today Kim is back to being the bad guy who's still shuffling his nuclear missiles.

personally i find mexico's conduct in this final NAFTA chapter to be servile & grovelling. They have no dignity whatsoever. Several journalists in the globe have repeatedly reported that canada had an understanding with mexico from the get-go, that neither country would seek by itself to exploit a bilateral deal with donald trump. Yet that is precisely what mexico did. We should include mexico on our tourism boycott list, at least for the time being.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> one wants to look at the reputation & the quality of the rumour-mongers. They are poor quality posters & the regulars on here frequently exchange personal e-mails about what frauds & imposters they are.
> 
> kahuna, i'd like to repeat although i know you are not capable of understanding: what is destroying this forum are the ever-increasing number of bigots & bullies *like yourself*.
> 
> ...


Why do regular members need to exchange e-mails, when the health of a forum solely depends on moderation?

I was a moderator and then administrator of a highly regarded audio forum for five years. I wouldn't do it again, as I've already served my time, but I do have an insight.

Moderation is fairly simple. The moderator is not there to be your friend or care what people think of them. It isn't a democracy. It's a dictatorship. When anyone breaks the rules, the mod sends them a private message with a warning that if this happens again, they will be suspended without discussion for a certain amount of time. Any subsequent infraction will result in a permanent ban. 

That's it - no discussion. A mod never comments publically about any member on the forum. It's all done through private message.

I admit to a real eye opener since joining this forum, and continually ask myself, where are the moderators on CMF?

ltr


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

Read the Wikipedia article on Agricultural subsidies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy#United_States *$172 Billion* in 2010 by the USA. But somehow our limited Supply Management of a few products is *"unfair."*. Supply management may have its problems, but it is the only thing keeping some our farmers from being bankrupted by heavily subsidized US products. Which, by the way, the US has a long history of "dumping" on poor countries in the guise of "foreign aid", driving local farmers there out of business too. So that countries that were previously self-sufficient in food are now basket cases.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I was just listening to Bloomberg radio and the guest was saying that we have extremely good negotiators on our side. They know how to negotiate and what to expect in return if they give something up, they also know the value of what is being put up and talked about.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

like_to_retire said:


> Why do regular members need to exchange e-mails



simple, we exchange e-mails because we are very good "internet friends"

there are some amazing & wonderful people in this forum, it's nice to have them as pen-pals


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> simple, we exchange e-mails because we are very good "internet friends"
> 
> there are some amazing & wonderful people in this forum, it's nice to have them as pen-pals


Ahh, OK, so friends is trumping good moderation, and yet you are complaining about trolls?

ltr


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

new dog said:


> I was just listening to Bloomberg radio and the guest was saying that we have extremely good negotiators on our side. They know how to negotiate and what to expect in return if they give something up, they also know the value of what is being put up and talked about.


JT should have paid Harper to get a deal done for us months ago. We are all going to be walking bow legged after our "negotiators" get done.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Eder said:


> JT should have paid Harper to get a deal done for us months ago. We are all going to be walking bow legged after our "negotiators" get done.



the above makes no historical sense. Trudeau was elected in october 2015. NAFTA was not even a cloud on the horizon at that time. Barack Obama was president of the US.

donald trump didn't start to campaign until 2016, was not sworn in as president until early 2017. During his MAGA campaign trump referenced ending NATO, NAFTA & several kinds of immigration & refugee streams into the US. He articulated countless other campaign tricks designed to portray the US as the victim of evil foreigners, from whose predatory grip he vowed that only he, donald trump, would be able to deliver the republic. Trump still talks up the US-as-victim ideology & sadly some americans are still falling for it.

in reality, harper was a failure at foreign policy. For 13 long years, he presided over a series of keystone XL blockages coming from US western states. He was said to not get along with either obama the democrat nor george dubya bush, the republican predecessor in the white house. The idea that harper could have "re-negotiated NAFTA" during his term of office is a laughingstock.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

That was not what Eder said. The assertion was that JT could have paid Harper earlier this year or last year to get a deal done (and keep his other minions out of the way). History has nothing to do with it.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

^^

technically you have a point but what do months or years matter? history has everything to do with it. Stephen harper never had any clout in washington. Not when in power. Not now. To the best of my recollection harper only ever had one foreign friend across the entire 13 years he was in office & that solitary friend was not in north america.

brian mulroney now, that's another story. Still a powerhouse. Except he's weighing in for this NAFTA crisis on the trudeau team.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I expressed no opinion on Harper et al... Just clarifying what I believe was Eder's point.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

https://www.opencanada.org/features/nafta-negotiations-your-guide-players-and-priorities-matter/

Trudeau may not be the main player in getting this deal done. He has his politics and his pressures but isn't it really the negotiating team that knows the details and the values discussed and how to get the deal done.

These people are not just more elected Liberals but professionals who know what they are doing.

Of course if Trudeau runs his mouth he could derail this thing and should let these guys do their job.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Opinion piece: Who needs NAFTA? Canada can do without it


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

james4beach said:


> Opinion piece: Who needs NAFTA? Canada can do without it


When I saw Maude Barlow's name on the piece I went elsewhere. Her opinion doesn't interest me.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

news-by-the-minute

Chapter 19. I was hoping the US wouldn't stick on that one. Dissolving dairy would be/would have been much easier for canada.

good luck chrystia & Co. Although this NAFTA chapta might be over for now.

what a six-year-old bully that donald trump is. Whoever heard of a president secretly concluding a deal with a 3rd nation, then sneering at its closest friend that it's got exactly four days to come crawling to the table? sounds like a melodrama script out of caligula or machiavelli

i admire ms Freeland for her buoyant courage & her masterful diplomacy throughout these past 4 days in washington. Others would have boycotted the US capital entirely.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't want or support any further American incursions into my personal space, even to make a trade deal. I don't want my personal information held on US computer servers.

I don't want to lose Canadian family farms and food security and rely on Americans food sources. Canada must protect our own producers and markets.

Trading in goods and services is fine, but it seems like the Americans want to go far deeper than the simple exchange of goods.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

^+1 Agreed Humble. The team's work is to their credit regardless of the results. 
It really does make one wonder where we're headed when someone in the person of Trump can make it to the top and be tolerated in that role. A* truly despicable role model* to any of the generations that follow behind.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

I must admit it is enjoyable to witness the fury of the childish leftists at the continued success of Donald Trump and his restoration of America.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I'm not impressed with the bluster from the US on NAFTA. They are suggesting they could walk away from NAFTA and sign a deal with Mexico. Sure, if the GOP want to be crucified in the states that got Trump elected. Punitive duties on imports from Canada in automotive would put the US auto industry in chaos by disruptive the integrated supply chain. Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin would destroy Trump.

So, if we can get a reasonable deal, then fine. But I don't think we should feel pressured into a bad deal. I question the loyalty of those who are applauding Trump's attempt to strong-arm Canada. 

If Trump has been successful at anything, it has been at restoring the prison population--with members of his campaign team and administration, who are singing like canaries. Tick tock...


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

sags said:


> Trading in goods and services is fine, but it seems like the Americans want to go far deeper than the simple exchange of goods.




i'd say that, by now, trump has unravelled enough for the world to see what his despicable presidency is driving at. It's transparently clear that his MAGA strategy is to break apart all international alliances, then batter each individual country into the bloodiest pulp he can muster.

meanwhile, trump has added priority for US nuclear control of space warfare. From atomic bombs dropping out of space onto naughty nations that refuse to lick his boots, to surface drones that murder uppity leaders in foreign nations who refuse to lick his boots, donald trump intends to MAGA into a US that will preserve white race american wealth.

no, make that the preservation of trump's own personal wealth & his cronies' own personal wealth.

contrast the above with our own country as well as many other nations. Canada & other countries are all saying Look, the World is up against a Sticky Wicket when it comes to refugees, wars, racial tensions, poverty. Let's all Work to figure out some Shared Solutions.

thankfully, many americans are saying the same. RIP senator mcCain. Would you had seen the upcoming november elections but may your spirit prevail.

.


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

andrewf said:


> I'm not impressed with the bluster from the US on NAFTA. They are suggesting they could walk away from NAFTA and sign a deal with Mexico. Sure, if the GOP want to be crucified in the states that got Trump elected. Punitive duties on imports from Canada in automotive would put the US auto industry in chaos by disruptive the integrated supply chain. Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin would destroy Trump.
> 
> So, if we can get a reasonable deal, then fine. But I don't think we should feel pressured into a bad deal. I question the loyalty of those who are applauding Trump's attempt to strong-arm Canada.
> 
> If Trump has been successful at anything, it has been at restoring the prison population--with members of his campaign team and administration, who are singing like canaries. Tick tock...


We question the loyalty of leftists like yourself that applaud what Selfie and Wynne have done to Canada. Selfie is an open and proud Globalist-he even stated publicly that Canada has no culture worth preserving-he isn't loyal to Canada and neither are you.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Big Kahuna said:


> We question the loyalty of leftists like yourself that applaud what Selfie and Wynne have done to Canada. Selfie is an open and proud Globalist-he even stated publicly that Canada has no culture worth preserving-he isn't loyal to Canada and neither are you.



oh my, even more schizzy-deranged than usual, aren't you

trudeau never said any such thing

and who is "we?" you are alone here, kahuna


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

Now even Notley is pulling out of Selfie's stupid Climate Scam-LOL https://www.680news.com/2018/08/30/alberta-pulling-federal-climate-plan-pipeline-decision/


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> oh my, even more schizzy-deranged than usual, aren't you
> 
> trudeau never said any such thing
> 
> and who is "we?" you are alone here, kahuna


I guess you haven't noticed that your gang of extreme leftists is getting more outnumbered every day-LOL.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Big Kahuna said:


> I guess you haven't noticed that your gang of extreme leftists is getting more outnumbered every day-LOL.



no we are winning because we have the energy & the grits, whereas the aging parties referenced by our moderator are wearing down & thinning out 

wearing down & thinning out like DT's straggly hair .:biggrin:


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Canada’s lead negotiator and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland is scheduled to hold a press conference at 4:30 P.M. Eastern Time Friday (2030 GMT). It was unclear whether the two countries had agreed a deal. 

ltr


----------



## Big Kahuna (Apr 30, 2018)

humble_pie said:


> no we are winning because we have the energy & the grits, whereas the aging parties referenced by our moderator are wearing down & thinning out
> 
> wearing down & thinning out like DT's straggly hair .:biggrin:


Maybe if Melania exits the picture you could have a chance there-LOL.


----------



## nobleea (Oct 11, 2013)

like_to_retire said:


> Canada’s lead negotiator and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland is scheduled to hold a press conference at 4:30 P.M. Eastern Time Friday (2030 GMT). It was unclear whether the two countries had agreed a deal.
> 
> ltr


I'm going to guess no, after another foot in mouth comment from Pres.
"The Toronto Star reported Friday that Trump, in an interview with Bloomberg News, said the U.S. is unwilling to make concessions and that his position was "going to be so insulting they're [Canada] not going to be able to make a deal." CBC has not independently verified the comments.

Trump admitted on Twitter that he made the comments to Bloomberg on Friday, claiming an understanding with the news agency that his comments were off-the-record was "blatantly violated."

"Oh well, just more dishonest reporting. I am used to it. At least Canada knows where I stand!" he tweeted."


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

From CBC newsite preceding the news conference


> The North American Free Trade Agreement talks have broken off for the weekend.
> 
> United States Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said Washington will resume negotiations with Canada's team on Wednesday.
> 
> ...


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

NAFTA deal by tonight is possible, says the globe & mail today.

canada would concede on dairy while US would concede on chapter 19, globe says.

but there's a deal-breaker: Canada needs a US guarantee that it will not impose import tariffs on autos in the future. 

no, better make that: Canada needs a _donald trump_ guarantee that _he_ will not impose auto tariffs in the future.

as some have pointed out, a NAFTA agreement - by tonight's phony deadline or by any other future phony deadline - is useless unless it includes a sidebar that will prevent impulse-ridden trump from taxing canadian automotive any time he decides he "doesn't like a canadian representative very much."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/pol...on-chapter-19-in-exchange-for-greater-access/


the globe article also says that US refusal to remove 25% tariffs on canadian steel & aluminum is also an issue.

not that a silly biscuit opinion matters; but i'm hoping canada doesn't sign tonight. I'm hoping we go for full automotive agreement support plus the US should drop their metal tariffs for this country. 

i'm counting on the "blue" state industries within the US to keep on bending the White House ear to the fact that they need canadian steel plus canadian aluminum without heavy import tariffs.

in this long-drawn-out NAFTA saga - brilliantly stickhandled by chrystia freeland & Co - the US is visibly withdrawing by baby steps. One nanometre at a time. Delays are a good thing, not a bad thing. Refusals by ottawa to cave in to white house bullying are paying off. Canada's strategy of concentrating on the blue state governors & politicians is paying off. 

it appears that a far more worrisome issue for US trade negotiators at this moment is china. One had only to see the shocked face of the chinese ambassador to the United Nations last week, as he listened to donald trump's threatening speech about how china & other nations have "cheated" and "abused" the US of A. China is going to retaliate, i have no doubt.

.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Oh yes and we will agree to name the new agreement whatever the hell Trump wants so he can claim a win!

And Freeland promises to stay off twitter.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

ottawa & washington sign NAFTA, newly re-christened as the USMC trade agreement.

the new deal includes the crucial sidebar guarantee that the US will not impose tariffs on canadian automotive products.

canadian consumers win as the duty-free limit for US personal imports into canada rises to $100.

canadian consumers will also likely win as the US gains export inroads into the canadian dairy industry. Some - but not all - canadian supply management dairy limitations were relaxed. Prime minister Justin Trudeau will hold a press conference today (monday) to explain more.

the new deal is the product of a weekend-long bunker session with Chrystia Freeland, canadian ambassador to the US David MacNaughton, Katie Telford & Gerald Betts from the PMO, hunkered down together with Trudeau in the prime minister's office in ottawa, linked throughout to US negotiators via videolink.

macNaughton told the globe's ottawa bureau chief that he was more than pleased with the result. "If a few months ago you had told me we would get a deal like this, I would have taken it in a nanosecond," the ambassador said.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/pol...line-of-nafta-deal-pending-approval-of-trump/

there will be flak from the canadian dairy industry but it could be minor. Personally i know of dairy farmers who could expand their already-large milk cow operations but they have been limited by the cost & even the impossibility of having to buy more quota under supply management. These farmers will welcome the disappearance of dairy quota. The limited competition provided by the new USMC trade agreement doesn't bother them.

.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nafta-finale-sunday-deadline-trump-1.4844623

Fascinating. I wonder what happens to my NAFTA cross-border work status.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

james4beach said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nafta-finale-sunday-deadline-trump-1.4844623
> 
> Fascinating. I wonder what happens to my NAFTA cross-border work status.




here's the working text of the new USMC trade agreement

https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/f...-mexico-canada-agreement/united-states-mexico


you concern looks to be under chapter 16, "temporary entry"

long section ... an affected party like yourself should peruse carefully for details ... flash scan suggests that situation has not changed although both gummints will monitor who gets in to work more frequently


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

an emerging consensus is that, in resisting the brutal trump bully machine, canada comes off with a better deal in USMC than mexico, which capitulated early & loses heavily in the automobile sector.

long-drawn-out & highly-fraught campaign ended last night with a resounding success for canada. Auto industry is protected, yay. There are minor adjustments to be made for new cars that exceed the quota but canada is nowhere near that level yet.

chapter 19 on dispute resolution to be preserved, yay

infamous chapter 11 on cross-national suing of gummints by corporations to be phased out, yay

some adjustments to canadian dairy supply management will liberate parts of this country's dairy industry to expand. A net result should be increased range of products plus lowered prices for consumers, yay

canadian consumers will benefit heavily from new cross-border shopping $100 ceiling (is that CAD or USD?) It's my understanding that canadian online consumers who order US but don't go anywhere near the border will be included in the new USMC $100 exemption. 

canadian retail industry could be spooked, though. Farewell small purchases from walmart dot ca, amazon dot ca, costco dot ca, home depot dot ca ...

canadian consumers relying on prescription medications could also be spooked by new USMC regulations extending the trademarked life of new pharma products in canada to 10 years, thus limiting canada's thriving generic drug industry.


all in all, a brilliant, patient & persevering tour de force from freeland, macNaughton, trudeau & Co. There's no way in aitch ee double-ell that andrew scheer could have even begun to negotiate the new USMC agreement. 



.


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

Lots of politicians and market watchers (?) will likely exhale with some relief with this done.
One has to wonder how much DT can now distract the spotlight from his present foibles to the new USMCA deal.
Next up is Brexit, with a March 29 2019 deadline....interesting that minority politicians in the UK are suggesting that Theresa May negotiate a "Canada-style" trade deal with the EU. ....if she lasts that long. no deal in sight. 6 months to go.
Mid-term elections in Nov as well. 
And of course...the ongoing saga that is China-US relations.


----------



## new dog (Jun 21, 2016)

I was confident in the people who were negotiating on our side as I said upthread and as long as JT let them do their job this would probably get done. So here we are and the team did do its job, although I don't like the name USMCA so we lost on that.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

humble_pie said:


> new cross-border shopping $100 ceiling (is that CAD or USD?)


I read that the new limits for Canada will be C$150 for customs duties and C$40 for taxes.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2018/10/...ercials-breaking-down-the-digital-nafta-deal/

I am most pissed off about failure to exempt Canada from the stupid section 232 tariffs and copyright term extension from life+50 to 70 years.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The side letter https://ustr.gov/sites/default/file...A/USMCA/US Canada 232 process side letter.pdf isn't very satisfactory on Section 232 tariffs but I suppose it is better than nothing.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Basically, we made a bunch of concessions and got nothing in return. Not a win by any stretch... unless your definition of winning means you didn't come in last place.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Looks like Harper was right....just accept Trumps demands...could have saved a year. Oh well on to the next battle lol.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I am really proud of Chrystia Freeland hanging in and not conceding any more. The auto deal is much better than their opening position and will likely hurt Mexico much more than Canada. The dairy compromise will hurt us more than the rich dairy industry owing to JTs political pandering. I can only hope that the Quebec election results will serve as a wake-up call to him.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

kcowan said:


> I am really proud of Chrystia Freeland hanging in and not conceding any more.


^+1 Definitely the right person for the job. The fact that she got under Trump's skin and that he chose to insult her is the highest of compliments.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

nathan79 said:


> Basically, we made a bunch of concessions and got nothing in return. Not a win by any stretch... unless your definition of winning means you didn't come in last place.



on the contrary we got a lot in return. Most of original NAFTA continues on as before, particular & especially the automobile/automotive industry without which canada would be an economic shambles.

just pulling off the above with an unstable, hostile, impulse-ridden bully who utilizes threats, insults & bombs to conduct US foreign policy is a stunning accomplishment imho.

a giant item mostly gained by canada's pushing was the elimination of the infamous NAFTA chapter 11. This allowed corporations in one country to sue the gummints of partner countries for allegedly thwarting their business expansion plans within said partner. Corporations were allowed to sue, not just for investments already made, but for profits that their expansion business plans suggested they *might* be able to earn in the future. What a farce.

such cases were tried in washington before a tribunal derived from the IMF. My understanding is that, dollar-wise, US corporations had far more of these cases against ottawa than the reverse. It was a big accomplishment to get rid of the chapter 11 parasite.


* * * * *

it won't be impossible to adjust on dairy. Canada's recent pacific & europe trade agreements have already opened that window. I know of big, efficient dairy farmers who will be ecstatic to get rid of dairy quota because finally they will be able to expand. At the other extreme, small organic bio-herd & bio-flock dairy, with their specialized markets, won't be hurt.

the problem will be the US dumping its over-produced milk products into canadian markets. The over-production of such products as dried milk & protein concentrates is subsidized by the US federal gummint, so new USMCA appears to leave only the WTO as a court in which canada could pursue anti-dumping legislation.

i imagine it wlll be impossible to boycott US milk derivatives in local mass production food products. Much will go into cheese manufacture ... nobody's going to boycott the friday night ritual family pizza delivery which the kids count on.


.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

kcowan said:


> I am really proud of Chrystia Freeland hanging in and not conceding any more. The auto deal is much better than their opening position and will likely hurt Mexico much more than Canada. The dairy compromise will hurt us more than the rich dairy industry owing to JTs political pandering. I can only hope that the Quebec election results will serve as a wake-up call to him.



wondering what makes u think that CF's bilateral/international strategy is any different from JT's?

me i see no difference between the two. They worked hand in glove. The fact that the final weekend of negotiation took place in the PM's office bunker together with his 2 top aides, along with freeland who was specifically not sent to washington, tells all.

independent & capable though she is, chrystia freeland is trudeau's hand-picked global affairs cabinet minister. In world venues, the warrior princess is the prime minister's mouthpiece. The two are interchangeable.

as for the quebec election and/or the quebec dairy industry sending any kind of "wake-up call" to the PM, those were anticipated weeks ahead of time. Dealing with the quebec dairy lobby was taken into account. Surrendering the automotive industry or chapter 19 instead would have been appallingly different & far more disastrous for canada.

do you also believe that the election of doug ford in ontario sent a "wake-up call" to trudeau? do you really believe the PMO is not fully aware of the voting pressure coming from the new populist far right?

.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

james4beach said:


> ... Fascinating. I wonder what happens to my NAFTA cross-border work status.


According to the US sources complaining about a missed opportunity to help American workers ... it looks like nothing.
They wanted limits while Canada wanted to update the list of professions/educational requirements that qualify. What is reported is that it stays as-is.
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/policy/immigration/article219324725.html


Cheers


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> as for the quebec election and/or the quebec dairy industry sending any kind of "wake-up call" to the PM, those were anticipated weeks ahead of time. Dealing with the quebec dairy lobby was taken into account. Surrendering the automotive industry or chapter 19 instead would have been appallingly different & far more disastrous for canada.
> 
> do you also believe that the election of doug ford in ontario sent a "wake-up call" to trudeau? do you really believe the PMO is not fully aware of the voting pressure coming from the new populist far right?


When the voters wake up and realize that dairy price management has not gone away and that they are going to pay more to compensate the rich dairy producers, there will be backlash against Trudeau.

(Chrystia was a mouthpiece but a very effective one IMO. The pandering to Quebec dairy farmers is JTs legacy.)

I believe that Ford's win in Ontario was a vote against the provincial liberals. I think it was a backlash to a party that overly influenced by shallow politics. Whether that can carry over to the federal level remains to be seen. I have always thought that Ontario voters voted for themselves without regard to national implications.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

kcowan said:


> When the voters wake up and realize that dairy price management has not gone away and that they are going to pay more to compensate the rich dairy producers, there will be backlash against Trudeau.



possibly; but what has this ^^ got to do with quebec? people consume dairy all across canada

american dairy will be able to penetrate canadian markets to the tune of 3.59%. Most of the imports will be processed milk products used in the manufacture of cheese, yogurt, sour cream & other dairy products. As i understand it, very little or none will be fresh milk.

3.59% american dairy in this country is a mere bagatelle. European & asian dairy are already in canada to the tune of 3.25%. Prices have not changed. One might even dare to predict that US dairy will penetrate under USMCA & consumers will notice nothing.

of all the issues that could backlash trudeau in 2019, me i'd say dairy is the least significant.






> The pandering to Quebec dairy farmers is JTs legacy.



how so, JT's "legacy" though. The PM hasn't left office yet.

of course any ottawa gummint in power is going to protect canadian industries that get harmed by donald trump's brutal vagaries. Already ottawa has approved grants & subsidies to aluminum producers. Would you call supporting canadian aluminum & steel producers, who are reeling under never-before-seen punitive Trump Tariffs, "pandering?"

me i wouldn't call it "pandering." Just imagine the uproar that would ensue if ottawa ignored hard-hit steel or aluminum. Ottawa won't ignore dairy either.

PS i don't know any "rich" dairy farmers. I'm acquainted with 2 or 3 farmers who operate herds of more than 2000 cows. They work harder than just about everyone i know. All 3 are multi-generational family enterprises, so they inherited most of their ancestral land & today own their hectares outright, although all 3 rent additional pastures from neighbours. All 3 are classic "land rich" farmers who invest continuously in improvements, which makes them also classic "cash poor" farmers.

.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> PS i don't know any "rich" dairy farmers. I'm acquainted with 2 or 3 farmers who operate herds of more than 2000 cows. They work harder than just about everyone i know. All 3 are multi-generational family enterprises, so they inherited most of their ancestral land & today own their hectares outright, although all 3 rent additional pastures from neighbours. All 3 are classic "land rich" farmers who invest continuously in improvements, which makes them also classic "cash poor" farmers.
> .


So what? That is the nature of capital intensive industries. Somehow our (especially family) agricultural operations feel like they should be treated differently than other businesses. I come from a farming/ranching background and there is no logical reason a 'family' farm should be treated any differently than another generational business whether it be a fishing lodge, telco cable, gas utility, etc. If a family farm can't make it, sell it to an industrial farm conglomerate that can get efficiencies of scale. Dairy/poultry/egg farmers should not be treated any differently than, for example, family grain farmers/ranchers. If they cannot compete, sell out. Consolidation is what has made our cereal grain and livestock operations in western Canada internationally competitive.

It is time coddled segments of our economy went mainstream with everything else.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

humble_pie said:


> ... PS i don't know any "rich" dairy farmers. I'm acquainted with 2 or 3 farmers who operate herds of more than 2000 cows. They work harder than just about everyone i know. All 3 are multi-generational family enterprises, so they inherited most of their ancestral land & today own their hectares outright, although all 3 rent additional pastures from neighbours. All 3 are classic "land rich" farmers who invest continuously in improvements, which makes them also classic "cash poor" farmers.


My dairy farm experience is in Ontario years ago, but 3 dairy farms with herds of over 2000 cows is huge. Quebec dairy farms are smaller than the Canadian average which I think is around 80 head. The largest I'm aware of in Ontario is about 500-600 cows now, very high tech. I believe the largest Canadian dairy herd is in BC at just over 3000.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> So what? That is the nature of capital intensive industries. Somehow our (especially family) agricultural operations feel like they should be treated differently than other businesses. I come from a farming/ranching background and there is no logical reason a 'family' farm should be treated any differently than another generational business whether it be a fishing lodge, telco cable, gas utility, etc. If a family farm can't make it, sell it to an industrial farm conglomerate that can get efficiencies of scale. Dairy/poultry/egg farmers should not be treated any differently than, for example, family grain farmers/ranchers. If they cannot compete, sell out. Consolidation is what has made our cereal grain and livestock operations in western Canada internationally competitive.
> 
> It is time coddled segments of our economy went mainstream with everything else.




?? wondering why the sharp tone of voice? we are on the same page after all

in numerous posts i've always said that removal of dairy supply management will benefit large, efficient dairy operations because they will be able to expand at long last. The removal of quota will help them, even if all the steps to relinquish dairy management should be carried out in slow sequence.

a super-efficient dairy farm with more than 2000 cows is never to be condemned just because it happens to be owned by a multi-generational farm family, all descendants of the original 18th century settler. 

on the contrary, it's a canadian business success story. One of the farms i'm thinking of has four or five houses scattered about on the property, each surrounded by a few acres of personal garden, hedgerows, trees. Each house belongs to a married son or a married daughter or a married brother of the patriarch. All work the farm year round. Teenaged grandchildren work the farm during the summer. Taken together, this clan is a powerful beacon & a pillar of the ottawa valley farm community.

no one in their right mind would want to see US owned agribusiness buy out & drive out a native canadian family such as the above. It's likely that this family's dedication to the successful growth of their enterprise produces a more successful operation than one that would be managed by head offices located in new york state.

.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

i agree that section 32 of the USMCA working agreement is a concern

but what does it mean, in reality. Canada has ongoing trade relations with china, in fact recognized beijing years before nixon/kissinger gave china the thumbs-up long time ago. Nothing in USMCA appears to be seeking to disrupt well-established canadian/chinese relations.

some have said that the language of the document spells out that parties cannot plan to sign new full-blown bilateral trade agreements with certain countries - read china - without first advising washington. But parties are free to carry on existing trade relationships, goes this school of thought.

this school recites that what the US is trying to prevent is either canada or mexico turning into a back-door conduit for chinese products, importing china goods into canada or mexico, then altering or re-packaging these goods for delivery into the US while never incurring donald trump's harsh new anti-china high tariffs.

this school says that business-as-usual trading relationships with china will not be affected by USMCA.

.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> ?? wondering why the sharp tone of voice? we are on the same page after all


That is a rhetorical 'so what', not directed personally. The point I made is there are a lot of capital intensive industries that are rich in assets but not free cash flow. I have a general irritation with the 'woe is me' coming from supply managed farming, as if they are a special class. 


> on the contrary, it's a canadian business success story. One of the farms i'm thinking of has four or five houses scattered about on the property, each surrounded by a few acres of personal garden, hedgerows, trees. Each house belongs to a married son or a married daughter or a married brother of the patriarch. All work the farm year round. Teenaged grandchildren work the farm during the summer. Taken together, this clan is a powerful beacon & a pillar of the ottawa valley farm community.


I agree there is nothing wrong with multi-generational businesses and I did not say to the contrary. Atco/CU is multi-generational too. So is Loblaws. Atco/CU has done a lot in Alberta for example. Calgary wouldn't have its world class equestrian facility if it was not for the Southern family. Simply that there is nothing special about a multi-generational farming business.



> no one in their right mind would want to see US owned agribusiness buy out & drive out a native canadian family such as the above. It's likely that this family's dedication to the successful growth of their enterprise produces a more successful operation than one that would be managed by head offices located in new york state.


That can always be taken care of by legislative restrictions as it is for telecoms, etc, etc. But that also disadvantages a Canadian family from selling to the highest bidder. Nothing wrong with large corporate entities. There are many, many very large cereal grain farming operations in the prairies of many thousands (even tens of thousands) of acres run by multi-generational families. One of my best friends runs a very large operation with his daughter and son-in-law and their children. They have several very large combines and their huge tractors have GPS that can be programmed to cultivate, sow and manage the land driverless. I also know of large cattle ranches with many thousands of cattle on tens of thousands of acres of land (ten thousand acres = 15.6 sq miles). Why not have an industrial scale dairy farm of 10000 dairy cows? They might be able to integrate at that size taking out some of the middlemen creating their own powdered industrial milk. Seems to me the industry is very narrow thinking if they cannot see the big picture.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> i agree that section 32 of the USMCA working agreement is a concern
> 
> but what does it mean, in reality. Canada has ongoing trade relations with china, in fact recognized beijing years before nixon/kissinger gave china the thumbs-up long time ago. Nothing in USMCA appears to be seeking to disrupt well-established canadian/chinese relations.
> 
> ...


I agree. While the clause is an affront to sovereignty and chaffs at our patriotism, it doesn't mean much with our ongoing business trade with China. It merely puts a wrench in a large encompassing trade deal....which probably is a blessing in disguise. China is not known for fair dealings and a runt of a country like ourselves doesn't stand much chance taking on China doing what they want, e.g. being rogue like the US recently has been with us.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OnlyMyOpinion said:


> My dairy farm experience is in Ontario years ago, but 3 dairy farms with herds of over 2000 cows is huge. Quebec dairy farms are smaller than the Canadian average which I think is around 80 head. The largest I'm aware of in Ontario is about 500-600 cows now, very high tech. I believe the largest Canadian dairy herd is in BC at just over 3000.


Yes, 2000 is massive by Canadian standards. Current quota value in Quebec is $24k/kg of butter fat per day, which is roughly equivalent to one productive cow. So the quota for a 2000 head operation would be worth a whopping $48 million. Unless every penny was borrowed, I hazard to think that a farmer on this scale is indeed 'rich' on a net worth basis.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> I agree. While the clause is an affront to sovereignty and chaffs at our patriotism, it doesn't mean much with our ongoing business trade with China. It merely puts a wrench in a large encompassing trade deal....which probably is a blessing in disguise. China is not known for fair dealings and a runt of a country like ourselves doesn't stand much chance taking on China doing what they want, e.g. being rogue like the US recently has been with us.


Hopefully we only have to deal with the US acting erratically for another 2 years.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> While the clause is an affront to sovereignty and chaffs at our patriotism, it doesn't mean much with our ongoing business trade with China. It merely puts a wrench in a large encompassing trade deal....which probably is a blessing in disguise. China is not known for fair dealings and a runt of a country like ourselves doesn't stand much chance taking on China doing what they want, e.g. being rogue like the US recently has been with us.



this ^^ wraps up the issue & ties a perfect big bow on the top, imho

not in a million years would canada set out right now to pursue a one-sided new trade agreement with china only. If china joins the Transpacific would be another story; but for now canada is doing her usual with Sino trade.

as others mention, things could change stateside in a couple of years. Plus USMCA itself is up for debate & renewal of sorts in only 6 years. Even if the PM, parliament & the express will of all the voters in canada would be - inexplicably - to trade hell-for-leather with china, it would take at least 6 years, probably more like 10 years, to bring that change about.

what looks like an affront to sovereignty & a blow to our patriotism boils down to something we can easily live with, for the time being. 

meanwhile there was trudeau yesterday, cheerfully & deliberately affirming that canada intends to seek "deeper" trade ties with china.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/tru...ter-some-say-usmca-impedes-any-deal-1.4118165


----------



## number12spicy (Dec 19, 2017)

Great deal for Canada...believe we are finally back on track after some inept years under the previous government

Looking forward to another Liberal majority.


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> canadian consumers will benefit heavily from new cross-border shopping $100 ceiling (is that CAD or USD?) It's my understanding that canadian online consumers who order US but don't go anywhere near the border will be included in the new USMC $100 exemption.
> 
> canadian retail industry could be spooked, though. Farewell small purchases from walmart dot ca, amazon dot ca, costco dot ca, home depot dot ca ...


Are there changes to the personal exemption travel limits, or is this just referring to online sales importation, and when do changes come into force? I am in the US right now on vacation!

I always bring back with me a fair bit of American/exotic butter. The description for the limits of dairy importing are either way out of date or purposefully conflicting to catch people. You are allowed to bring back 20kg of dairy, but at a value above $20, duties apply, which is obviously a lot less than 20kg of anything...

Usually I just bring back several pounds of butter, which is worth about ~$20 or so anyways. I am always weary of carting in multi kgs of butter, like I would prefer, to avoid the potential $20 limit hassle at the border..


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Exotic butter? Like New Zealand or Irish?


----------



## peterk (May 16, 2010)

Ya! I think those were the two countries. I've seen NZ butter for sale in Canada recently at Save-On, but it's like $13 for 1/2 lb.

Once, several years ago, I tracked down some NZ butter out of Calgary from I believe a restaurant wholesaler. Bought $100 worth, came in a few big multi-lb blocks, but didn't love the flavour of that particular brand so never reordered.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

re personal exemption for border-crossing travellers: this is said to be $100 under USMCA but i don't believe this is in force & effect yet - probably needs congressional approval first - so existing NAFTA/canada customs rules will apply until that future date.

re cross-border online ordering: more surfacing details don't look so good. Old rules said to pay customs duties on various products in excess of the limits. USMCA says that sales tax is to apply to incoming items from the US that were ordered online. In most cases the sales tax will be higher than the original customs duties.

neil macdonald from the CBC had a rant about this. He said the US stores that sell the goods to canadians won't & can't collect taxes; however the customs brokers who handle the parcels are mandated to collect the sales tax & they will remit this to the gummint of canada. Macdonald said that canada post traditionally does not collect this sales tax, so online buyers of american goods who are able to route their shipments via canada post have a gambler's chance of maybe no tax (routing details like this would be difficult to accomplish, i would think)

macdonald said that online buyers whose US purchases are routed through customs brokers will end up paying GST & HST when applicable, ie the sales taxes are likely to be higher than the old customs duties.

.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Interesting times ... several articles have said that the old system for ordering online was $20 before sales tax and duties kicked in. Under USMCA, sales tax kicks in at $40 while duties kick in at $150. The bigger $150 has gotten the press but several have commented that duties are typically around 2% while the sales tax can be 13% so the "savings" may be limited. https://globalnews.ca/news/4503461/canada-duty-free-limit-usmca/

This article says that the USMCA savings won't apply when shipping goods using Canada Post, presumably because they are not a private courier.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...ca-wont-apply-to-canada-post-ottawa-says.html

Coming into force is being written up as needing parliament to ratify the deal which likely means months before being implemented.



Cheers


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

automobile industry consultant & journo Dennis Desrosiers says that USMCA is great for canadian & US autoworkers but the car price outlook under NAFTA Gen 2.0 means more expensive cars will be coming down the road.

employment in canada & the US wins, says desrosiers, who has been reporting on the auto industry since 1985. But employment in mexico loses. Consumers everywhere will also lose.

desrosiers argues many advantages for canada under USMCA but first & foremost is that it allows canada to send 900,000 more vehicles per year to the United States. That's an increase of more than 50% over the 1.7 million cars that canada currently exports - an increase not likely to be attained during the 16-year life span of the new trade agreement.

desrosiers advice to car owners concerned by higher prices in the future? drive your own car longer or else buy used, says the industry analyst.

https://driving.ca/chevrolet/auto-n...a-2-0-is-good-for-canada-and-bad-for-everyone


----------

