[llama66]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

llama66 llama66:

Bart, my issue lies not with you, but with the idea the JT has somehow been disrespectful.

I liken this to you and I have a disagreement, and you punch me in the face. I return the favour and punch you back. Then some one asks if I'm going to apologise, of course I'm going to say not until you aplogise first. You get mad when you hear that I wont apologise for me punching you in response for punching me and you decide that you and your buddies call me a back stabber, all because I wont apologise first.

There is a better way.

Agreed.

Since it's not an option that NAFTA is going to be renegotiated or ended then negotiate in good faith instead of demanding a bunch of SJW bullshit that's nothing more than a deal killer for someone like DJT who doesn't give a fuck about most of it.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nafta-c ... -1.4246498

Totally. NAFTA is supposed to be about trade, specifically reducing barriers to trade. Not about the SJW cause de jour. Let’s get this shit done (without the sunset clause)

[BartSimpson]

Too bad we're not running the negotiation!

[llama66]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Too bad we're not running the negotiation!

We could get this done in one night at a pub.

[BartSimpson]

llama66 llama66:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Too bad we're not running the negotiation!

We could get this done in one night at a pub.

Oh, hell yeah. If the negotiators were Reagan and Mulroney it would have been over and done already and they would have done it at the pub!

[Tricks]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

And JT is of a mindset that it's okay to insult, mock, and ridicule President Trump because it's fashionable to do so in fashionable circles. And that's fine if he's a late night talk show host working the cocktail party circuit.

I wasn't aware that DJT was such a snowflake that he found what Trudeau said to be mocking ridicule and insulting. The same fucking assholes who are supporting this garbage were saying a victim of a fucking school shooting were part of a conspiracy, should be killed, should be hunted down like fucking dogs. You have no fucking idea how ridiculous it is that a man who has tweeted things like the following gets butthurt over literally NOTHING.









And if you really want to see the rest
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... &smtyp=cur

Trudeau can't say it, but we can. Donald Trump can kindly go fuck himself. It's amazing that we constantly hear about how weak and feeble liberals, millennials, or anyone else who disagrees with hardline trumpers are. And yet Trudeau says what he's literally been saying for weeks, said to Trumps face, and said at the G7 meetings, and he blows a fucking gasket like baby throwing a temper tantrum. You elected the biggest fucking snowflake on this planet. What a fucking pussy your president is.

Just incase his fucking idiot advisers don't know. That's what insulting Trump looks like.

Fuck me you made me as angry as Thanos.

[BartSimpson]

We elected an internet troll as our President. See, Thanos was busy.

[BeaverFever]

rickc rickc:

You talk about how we destroy countries economically. You mean like that whole Marshall Plan thing? Yeah we really screwed them over when they were down didn't we? Or that whole cold war thing. At the end of WW2 Canada had the third largest navy in the world. What happened?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... splacement
Now you hang out with the likes of Chile, Peru, Vietnam for fucks sake. You had no problem letting us do the heavy lifting and picking up the tab during the cold war. You had no problem Monday morning quarterbacking as long as you didn't have to belly up to the bar and pay.

. What’s any of that have to do with Trump? Trump is about as far away as you can get from noble and magnanimous endeavors like the Marshall Plan. And last time I checked helping Russian dismantle the western alliance is the exact opposite of leading the Cold War against Russia.

$1:

No one contributes more financial aid than the U.S. No one. When the shit hits the fan no one dips into their wallets to contribute, or shows up on the scene to help out more than Americans. No one.

Not if you measure as percentage of GDP or per capita. You use your large population size to appear more generous than you actually are.

$1:

You talk about how we punished Cuba for kicking out the Mafia, like that is all they did. The fact is that Cuba stole property from American companies and the stockholders without compensation.

Which was stolen from Cuba to begin with. Anyway starving peasants “stealing” from foreign stockholders and corporations who used their massive toprop up brutal dictators isn’t such a compelling story is it?

$1:

The fact of the matter is that the Mafia only owned a few hotels and casinos, not the whole country.

. You’ve got to be kidding me. Go get a history book.

$1:

You cannot blame the Mafia for the whole country being a third world shithole. Latin America was corrupt long before the Mafia came along.

. Possibly true, but since those countries have been US puppet states manipulated by the US government, privateers and corporations for a couple centuries it’s hard to say how they would have fared had the US just left them alone. At any rate it doesn’t excuse your role in perpetuating and exploiting those conditions and deliberately undermining attempts to improve them.

$1:

The Cubans who worked in those establishments had a better life than the people working in the hotels in Cuba today.

. Not true.

$1:

The people who visited those establishments back than (as in Americans) actually tipped!!! They were not a bunch of cheapskates staying in all inclusives leaving their wallet at home.

. Baseless claim.

$1:

I live and work in a city that was built by the mob. Let me tell you for a fact that no one (who is not a cop or a G-Man) who lived and worked in Vegas is going to tell you that things are better now without the mob. The workers were treated very well. They lived very well. Ask our old mayor: Oscar Goodman. He was a lawyer for the mob.

. The mafia is good, just ask this mob lawyer! LMAO

[JaredMilne]

...Wow, this one blew up even faster than my thread about the pipeline issue. Having had much of the day to think about it, here are some of my thoughts:

-I'm surprised nobody's remarked on the fact that prominent Conservatives Andrew Scheer, Doug Ford and Stephen f*cking Harper are all taking Trudeau's side on this one. You can't call any of these guys protectionists, especially not with Harper's efforts to sign trade deals with China and Europe during his reign, but Harper is baffled as to why Trump is obsessed with Canadian trade.

Oh, and the NDP and Greens have Trudeau's back on this too.

-The Americans have played dirty on NAFTA more than once. Remember the softwood lumber disputes, how the panels continually ruled in our favour, but the Americans just ignored them? Remember the mad cow crisis, when American ranchers continued to fight to keep the border closed to our beef even after we got the problem under control? Where the f*ck was NAFTA then? Remember how many times we've been sued under that goddamn Chapter 11 ISDS clause, whereas the Americans have never been successfully sued? Foreign investors actually have better investment protections and recourse than our own people!

-As for the tariff issue, John Ralston Saul has written that even before the free trade deals were signed we didn't really have much in the way of tariffs with the U.S. And our tariffs and protections have been, in many ways, a way to maintain our independence to avoid becoming an American satellite. I can live with supply management if it means that we have more smaller operators in business and control over our domestic food production, as llama66 and Robair have warned us of the dangers to smaller producers who can't compete with the big guns. I'm quite happy to have Americans like Bart as neighbours, but as Red Green said, I'm not changing my tune-and my tune just happens to be "O Canada".

And with Bart's comments on our supposedly bad business climate, we've largely been following the conservative economic playbook for nearly 30 years. We've repeatedly cut taxes, signed trade deals, repealed regulations, and more. The U.S. has done the same thing, and look how so many Americans have reacted to what they consider the causes of stagnant wages and living standards. You've got economists wondering what to do-and as I wrote in an article for Policy Options back in January, I wrote about how guys like Saul, Eric Kierans and Mel Hurtig were warning about a lot of the same problems 15-30 years ago that we're dealing with today, and are saying the same things that economists are now discussing. We're only catching up to Hurtig and company now.

Maybe Trump is on to something, even if he's going about it in a completely ham-handed and bungling way. Maybe we need to be reconsidering the "free trade"/globalization model, which so many Americans (and so many Britons, what with Brexit) are so pissed off about. That said, I don't think that he's the man to do the job, not when one of his top aides says that Trudeau belongs in hell, only to eat his own words two days later.

-As to what I think we should do, I agree with most of the posters here in saying that we have to defend our interests, and show the U.S. that they're not the only ones who can say "don't tread on me", if it comes to that.

But we also need to consider the real underlying problem here, the one that's caused inequality to constantly increase, that's gotten so many people both among the liberal elites and the good people of "flyover country" so angry, and that people are turning to populists to deal with...

...namely, the serious flaws in the one-size-fits-all neoliberal economic model.

(Whew! That's what an hour's worth of writing and several more of thinking about the issue during the day gets you... )

[Thanos]

When it's the American flyover country farmers and metal industry employees and foreign car manufacturer employees that are the ones most likely to get hurt by the consequences of Trump's bluster then the bigger question should be why the people in these states voted for a narcissistic maniac who is about to cause them a hell of a lot of pain just to sate his ego.

[llama66]

What's needed is understanding, The States must understand Dairy Management is an institution Canadian's are unwilling to dismantle, and Canadian's must understand that the States may ask us to give them something else, Softwood or something. But we cant allow the States to roll over us.

Side note: It's been mentioned somewhere, there is an unintended consequence to Trudeau's sudden appearance of a backbone... his popularity will soar. Going in to an election year. Not saying its a good/bad thing, just that its a thing.

[llama66]

JaredMilne JaredMilne:

...Wow, this one blew up even faster than my thread about the pipeline issue. Having had much of the day to think about it, here are some of my thoughts:

-I'm surprised nobody's remarked on the fact that prominent Conservatives Andrew Scheer, Doug Ford and Stephen f*cking Harper are all taking Trudeau's side on this one. You can't call any of these guys protectionists, especially not with Harper's efforts to sign trade deals with China and Europe during his reign, but Harper is baffled as to why Trump is obsessed with Canadian trade.

Oh, and the NDP and Greens have Trudeau's back on this too.

-The Americans have played dirty on NAFTA more than once. Remember the softwood lumber disputes, how the panels continually ruled in our favour, but the Americans just ignored them? Remember the mad cow crisis, when American ranchers continued to fight to keep the border closed to our beef even after we got the problem under control? Where the f*ck was NAFTA then? Remember how many times we've been sued under that goddamn Chapter 11 ISDS clause, whereas the Americans have never been successfully sued? Foreign investors actually have better investment protections and recourse than our own people!

-As for the tariff issue, John Ralston Saul has written that even before the free trade deals were signed we didn't really have much in the way of tariffs with the U.S. And our tariffs and protections have been, in many ways, a way to maintain our independence to avoid becoming an American satellite. I can live with supply management if it means that we have more smaller operators in business and control over our domestic food production, as llama66 and Robair have warned us of the dangers to smaller producers who can't compete with the big guns. I'm quite happy to have Americans like Bart as neighbours, but as Red Green said, I'm not changing my tune-and my tune just happens to be "O Canada".

And with Bart's comments on our supposedly bad business climate, we've largely been following the conservative economic playbook for nearly 30 years. We've repeatedly cut taxes, signed trade deals, repealed regulations, and more. The U.S. has done the same thing, and look how so many Americans have reacted to what they consider the causes of stagnant wages and living standards. You've got economists wondering what to do-and as I wrote in an article for Policy Options back in January, I wrote about how guys like Saul, Eric Kierans and Mel Hurtig were warning about a lot of the same problems 15-30 years ago that we're dealing with today, and are saying the same things that economists are now discussing. We're only catching up to Hurtig and company now.

Maybe Trump is on to something, even if he's going about it in a completely ham-handed and bungling way. Maybe we need to be reconsidering the "free trade"/globalization model, which so many Americans (and so many Britons, what with Brexit) are so pissed off about. That said, I don't think that he's the man to do the job, not when one of his top aides says that Trudeau belongs in hell, only to eat his own words two days later.

-As to what I think we should do, I agree with most of the posters here in saying that we have to defend our interests, and show the U.S. that they're not the only ones who can say "don't tread on me", if it comes to that.

But we also need to consider the real underlying problem here, the one that's caused inequality to constantly increase, that's gotten so many people both among the liberal elites and the good people of "flyover country" so angry, and that people are turning to populists to deal with...

...namely, the serious flaws in the one-size-fits-all neoliberal economic model.

(Whew! That's what an hour's worth of writing and several more of thinking about the issue during the day gets you... )

You forgot Former PM Brian Mulroney is also quizzled at this tactic. He's also spoken out although not quite as loudly.

[BeaverFever]

$1:

Nearly 9 Million U.S. Jobs Depend On Trade With Canada [Infographic]

Last year, website canadianbusiness.com analyzed government figures from both countries to find out how many U.S. jobs depend on trade with Canada. In total, some 9 million jobs are reliant on trade with Canada. California (1.66 million), New York (680,900) and Florida (620,000) have the most at stake while Alaska (21,300), Vermont (18,900) and Wyoming (13,100) have the least jobs tied to Canadian trade. Even if Trump continues to take an aggressive protectionist stance on trade with the country's most important allies, the U.S. certainly won't be immune from retaliation.

*Click below to enlarge

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccar ... bfb5c1538e

[Sunnyways]

Supply management is something we should get rid of for our own good but that’s politically impossible now. Today again, Trump insulted our PM and directly threatened Canadians. We can’t appease that sort of blackguardism. BTW the US subsidizes its own dairy industry and has massive tariffs on multiple agricultural products.

[BeaverFever]

Sunnyways Sunnyways:

Supply management is something we should get rid of for own good but that’s politically impossible now. Today again, Trump insulted our PM and directly threatened Canadians. We can’t appease that sort of blackguardism. BTW the US subsidizes its own dairy industry and has massive tariffs on multiple agricultural products.

Supply management works. Every alternative to supply management is government subsidy as the US and EU do which leads to market distortions and oversupply

[Robair]

Yep