Trump is right about trade treaties

[SuperDemocrat]

Every time we do something wrong every country in such and such treaty threatens to impose trade sanctions against us. Individually these don't mount up to anything at all but collectively they can have an effect on our trade since every country simultaneously imposes those sanctions. Maybe it is by design that these third world countries (such as France) jump into these collective bargaining agreements because they know that by themselves they can't do any harm to us but if you combine them with a lot of other third world countries then they have enough negotiating power to do some harm to us.

Trump is correct when he says that these trade treaties should be signed with one country at a time so that they can't all gang up on us with some bullshit complaint.

 

[AntonToo]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

Most trade agreements are like collective bargaining agreements between the United States and the rest of the world. We have very little power to retaliate if we wanted to but if we signed them individually we would be able to retaliate.

France isn't as important as it thinks it is.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

This is really an attempt to water down my argument. You are right. The united states has a lot of trade agreements and not all of them are of the nafta and TPP style. I was talking about the ones that seem to act like collective bargaining agreements between us and the rest of the world. I guess I should have narrowed it down a little bit but I assumed that since the hot topic was trade in this election that everyone would know what I was referring to.

 

[AntonToo]

France isn't as important as it thinks it is.

That's not the definition of third world country.

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

This is really an attempt to water down my argument. You are right. The united states has a lot of trade agreements and not all of them are of the nafta and TPP style. I was talking about the ones that seem to act like collective bargaining agreements between us and the rest of the world. I guess I should have narrowed it down a little bit but I assumed that since the hot topic was trade in this election that everyone would know what I was referring to.

NAFTA is an agreement between 3 countries - United States, Canada and Mexico in which way is it a collective agreement between us and the rest of the world?

Further, each member assumes same responsibilities, so the agreement is no more between US and "rest" than any other member country.

 

[toomuchtime_]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

True and that's why Trump supports bilateral trade agreements that protect and promote both countries' interests and opposes multilateral trade agreements that always drain jobs from America and increase out trade deficit.

 

[AntonToo]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

True and that's why Trump supports bilateral trade agreements that protect and promote both countries' interests and opposes multilateral trade agreements that always drain jobs from America and increase out trade deficit.

So if we sign two free trade agreements, one with Mexico, one with Canada, then all of a sudden jobs will come back? Why?

 

[toomuchtime_]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

True and that's why Trump supports bilateral trade agreements that protect and promote both countries' interests and opposes multilateral trade agreements that always drain jobs from America and increase out trade deficit.

So if we sign two free trade agreements, one with Mexico, one with Canada, then all of a sudden jobs will come back? Why?

We won't sign free trade agreements with countries like Mexico because they are disadvantageous to Americans. We will sign trade agreements that protect and promote American interests.

 

[AntonToo]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

True and that's why Trump supports bilateral trade agreements that protect and promote both countries' interests and opposes multilateral trade agreements that always drain jobs from America and increase out trade deficit.

So if we sign two free trade agreements, one with Mexico, one with Canada, then all of a sudden jobs will come back? Why?

We won't sign free trade agreements with countries like Mexico because they are disadvantageous to Americans. We will sign trade agreements that protect and promote American interests.

Ahh so multilaterality has actually nothing to do with your complaints, Your complaints are about America having ANY free trade with lower wage countries like Mexico and what you actually favor are protectionist policies that rely heavily on tariffs.

Why didn't you just say so?

 

[toomuchtime_]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

True and that's why Trump supports bilateral trade agreements that protect and promote both countries' interests and opposes multilateral trade agreements that always drain jobs from America and increase out trade deficit.

So if we sign two free trade agreements, one with Mexico, one with Canada, then all of a sudden jobs will come back? Why?

We won't sign free trade agreements with countries like Mexico because they are disadvantageous to Americans. We will sign trade agreements that protect and promote American interests.

Ahh so multilaterality has actually nothing to do with your complaints, Your complaints are about America having ANY free trade with lower wage countries like Mexico and what you actually favor are protectionist policies that rely heavily on tariffs.

Why didn't you just say so?

I did say so. And multilateral treaties treat all parties the same, so, for example, NAFTA forces the US to treat Mexico and Canada the same when the US has vastly different issues with these countries. As Trump recently mentioned, Ford is preparing to build factories in Mexico to make auto parts. If this happens, people in Michigan will lose their jobs and our trade deficit will increase, but a tariff on auto parts from Mexico would discourage this move and keep the jobs in Michigan; I fully support this.

How can you believe it is wrong for an American president to protect the livelihoods of American citizens?

 

[Toro]

Every time we do something wrong every country in such and such treaty threatens to impose trade sanctions against us. Individually these don't mount up to anything at all but collectively they can have an effect on our trade since every country simultaneously imposes those sanctions. Maybe it is by design that these third world countries (such as France) jump into these collective bargaining agreements because they know that by themselves they can't do any harm to us but if you combine them with a lot of other third world countries then they have enough negotiating power to do some harm to us.

Trump is correct when he says that these trade treaties should be signed with one country at a time so that they can't all gang up on us with some bullshit complaint.

Give us an example.

 

[Toro]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

Most trade agreements are like collective bargaining agreements between the United States and the rest of the world. We have very little power to retaliate if we wanted to but if we signed them individually we would be able to retaliate.

France isn't as important as it thinks it is.

You are incorrect.

It is not The United States v the World. Countries engage in multilateral negotiations, with almost all countries agreeing to reduce barriers.

Countries cannot unilaterally take action against the United States. The only way that countries can retaliate against the United States - or any other country for that matter - is to show that the United States has violated the agreement causing harm to the industry in question. IOW, the only way any country can take action against the US is if the US does something first that violates the agreement. If the United States doesn't violate the agreement, no action can be taken against us.

 

[Toro]

France isn't as important as it thinks it is.

That's not the definition of third world country.

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

This is really an attempt to water down my argument. You are right. The united states has a lot of trade agreements and not all of them are of the nafta and TPP style. I was talking about the ones that seem to act like collective bargaining agreements between us and the rest of the world. I guess I should have narrowed it down a little bit but I assumed that since the hot topic was trade in this election that everyone would know what I was referring to.

NAFTA is an agreement between 3 countries - United States, Canada and Mexico in which way is it a collective agreement between us and the rest of the world?

Further, each member assumes same responsibilities, so the agreement is no more between US and "rest" than any other member country.

The funny thing about NAFTA is that when the original US-Canada free trade deal was signed, opponents of the deal in Canada made the same argument about the United States that American opponents of NAFTA make about Mexico - that it would be a rush to the bottom for cheap labour and lax environmental laws.

Also interesting, the critics in Canada were all from the anti-capitalist left.

Never in my life did I think I would see American "conservatives" who claim to be for capitalism and free enterprise get in bed with extreme leftists like Naomi Klein.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Watching the left support the same trade agreements they hated before simply because Trump is running on the issue is priceless. I kind of wonder if Trump said Rainbows were beautiful if the left would then say they weren't. It just gets so fucking damn stupid with lefties sometimes. There is no rationality to what they say sometimes.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

Most trade agreements are like collective bargaining agreements between the United States and the rest of the world. We have very little power to retaliate if we wanted to but if we signed them individually we would be able to retaliate.

France isn't as important as it thinks it is.

You are incorrect.

It is not The United States v the World. Countries engage in multilateral negotiations, with almost all countries agreeing to reduce barriers.

Countries cannot unilaterally take action against the United States. The only way that countries can retaliate against the United States - or any other country for that matter - is to show that the United States has violated the agreement causing harm to the industry in question. IOW, the only way any country can take action against the US is if the US does something first that violates the agreement. If the United States doesn't violate the agreement, no action can be taken against us.

Thank you for providing the rope by which I shall hang your argument with. Countries can not take unilateral action against the United States but a whole bunch of them can and they can all simultaneously impose trade restrictions which would hurt the United States. They only act together because they can't act unilateraly. It is basically the United States vs the world in these disputes.

 

[AntonToo]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

True and that's why Trump supports bilateral trade agreements that protect and promote both countries' interests and opposes multilateral trade agreements that always drain jobs from America and increase out trade deficit.

So if we sign two free trade agreements, one with Mexico, one with Canada, then all of a sudden jobs will come back? Why?

We won't sign free trade agreements with countries like Mexico because they are disadvantageous to Americans. We will sign trade agreements that protect and promote American interests.

Ahh so multilaterality has actually nothing to do with your complaints, Your complaints are about America having ANY free trade with lower wage countries like Mexico and what you actually favor are protectionist policies that rely heavily on tariffs.

Why didn't you just say so?

I did say so. And multilateral treaties treat all parties the same, so, for example, NAFTA forces the US to treat Mexico and Canada the same when the US has vastly different issues with these countries. As Trump recently mentioned, Ford is preparing to build factories in Mexico to make auto parts. If this happens, people in Michigan will lose their jobs and our trade deficit will increase, but a tariff on auto parts from Mexico would discourage this move and keep the jobs in Michigan; I fully support this.

How can you believe it is wrong for an American president to protect the livelihoods of American citizens?

You didn't say your problem was free trade with Mexico rather that muti/bilateral nature of agreements.

Although I don't have strong opinion on this issue I have always favored free trade, which traditionally was more of a republican/conservative position...until Clinton triangulated it that is.

There are real downsides to going down the tariff wars route, starting with increased prices, so I don't agree that protectionism is synonymous with "protecting livelihoods" as you try to frame it

 

[Toro]

lol France is a third world country? You sound like a complete ignoramus.

United States has A LOT of tade agreements, to broad brush and simply say they are all bad without having any actual clue about their contents is not constructive.

Most trade agreements are like collective bargaining agreements between the United States and the rest of the world. We have very little power to retaliate if we wanted to but if we signed them individually we would be able to retaliate.

France isn't as important as it thinks it is.

You are incorrect.

It is not The United States v the World. Countries engage in multilateral negotiations, with almost all countries agreeing to reduce barriers.

Countries cannot unilaterally take action against the United States. The only way that countries can retaliate against the United States - or any other country for that matter - is to show that the United States has violated the agreement causing harm to the industry in question. IOW, the only way any country can take action against the US is if the US does something first that violates the agreement. If the United States doesn't violate the agreement, no action can be taken against us.

Thank you for providing the rope by which I shall hang your argument with. Countries can not take unilateral action against the United States but a whole bunch of them can and they can all simultaneously impose trade restrictions which would hurt the United States. They only act together because they can't act unilateraly. It is basically the United States vs the world in these disputes.

Wrong.

Countries can NOT simultaneously impose trade actions against the United States, UNLESS the United States violates the trade agreements first.

Nor do they.

Parochialism and the restriction of individual liberty and freedom promoted by Trump supporters has no place in international business and free trade.

 

[Toro]

Watching the left support the same trade agreements they hated before simply because Trump is running on the issue is priceless. I kind of wonder if Trump said Rainbows were beautiful if the left would then say they weren't. It just gets so fucking damn stupid with lefties sometimes. There is no rationality to what they say sometimes.

And watching clueless people who think they are "conservatives" who support Trump hypocritically arguing for Big Gubmint to impose taxes on trade to redistribute wealth just like liberals is hilarious.

 

[Toro]

Every time we do something wrong every country in such and such treaty threatens to impose trade sanctions against us. Individually these don't mount up to anything at all but collectively they can have an effect on our trade since every country simultaneously imposes those sanctions. Maybe it is by design that these third world countries (such as France) jump into these collective bargaining agreements because they know that by themselves they can't do any harm to us but if you combine them with a lot of other third world countries then they have enough negotiating power to do some harm to us.

Trump is correct when he says that these trade treaties should be signed with one country at a time so that they can't all gang up on us with some bullshit complaint.

Give us an example.

Still waiting for an example.

 

[AntonToo]

Watching the left support the same trade agreements they hated before simply because Trump is running on the issue is priceless. I kind of wonder if Trump said Rainbows were beautiful if the left would then say they weren't. It just gets so fucking damn stupid with lefties sometimes. There is no rationality to what they say sometimes.

Except of course many prominent liberals have always bitched about NAFTA, which was passed mostly by Republicans and signed by Bill Clinton. And let's not forget that Bernie was first in line to explicitly run against NAFTA

If anyone has really reversed position on this, it's the right.