Thursday, September 18, 2008
O Canada! O Europe! What is cooking on the comprehensive trade front?
While the USA seems to be talking itself into all sorts of protectionist corners with its various brands of election rhetoric, a different tune seems to be coming up in the True North.
The possibility of a comprehensive pact between Canada and the EU is in the air, with an economic summit planned for 17 October (three days after polling in the upcoming Canadian General Election).
That suggests Europeans could take up employment in Canada without having to go through the Landed Immigrant points procedure (and conversely that Canadians could work throughout Europe). It also implies a huge increase in trade between Europe and Canada. If the US goes protectionist it may find itself out in the cold.
While this plan seems to have the strong support of the defending Tory minority government in Ottawa, it is backstage reporting as far as the current election campaign is concerned.
Haven’t seen the Liberal party of Canada position on this as yet…
But wouldn’t it be nice to get some discussion of this in European countries? What for example do our LibDem MEPs think about this idea and what do our MEP candidates make of it? There are apparently documents within the European Commission which are not in the public domain and yet the issue affects us greatly…
The possibility of a comprehensive pact between Canada and the EU is in the air, with an economic summit planned for 17 October (three days after polling in the upcoming Canadian General Election).
The proposed pact would far exceed the scope of older agreements such as NAFTA by encompassing not only unrestricted trade in goods, services and investment and the removal of tariffs, but also the free movement of skilled people and an open market in government services and procurement… (Globe and Mail 18 September)
That suggests Europeans could take up employment in Canada without having to go through the Landed Immigrant points procedure (and conversely that Canadians could work throughout Europe). It also implies a huge increase in trade between Europe and Canada. If the US goes protectionist it may find itself out in the cold.
While this plan seems to have the strong support of the defending Tory minority government in Ottawa, it is backstage reporting as far as the current election campaign is concerned.
Because of the election, Mr. Harper appears to have decided not to unveil a full text of the proposed agreement, but instead to use the summit to inaugurate the trade talks with the launch of a “scoping exercise” that will quickly set the goals of the pact and lead to formal
“comprehensive trade and investment negotiations” to begin in “early 2009,” according to communications between senior Canadian and European officials examined by The Globe and Mail.
Haven’t seen the Liberal party of Canada position on this as yet…
But wouldn’t it be nice to get some discussion of this in European countries? What for example do our LibDem MEPs think about this idea and what do our MEP candidates make of it? There are apparently documents within the European Commission which are not in the public domain and yet the issue affects us greatly…
Labels: Canada, European Union, free trade
Comments:
Post a Comment
Friday, May 11, 2007
Free Trade - an increasingly live issue
Free Trade is coming back into serious debate, and not only in the electronic islands of the LibDem blogosphere.
One question is whether a backlash against Free Trade in the USA could bring in some kind of neo-protectionism.
‘Free Trade’s Great but…’ is a theme discussed by Washington Post commentator Alan S. Blinder who as a ‘Free Trader down to my toes’ writes an article ‘Trying to Save Free Trade From Itself’.
And more seriously Ralph Gomery ( a former senior vice-President at IBM who oversaw numerous globalisation processes from the inside) has published a critique of globalisation aimed at changing the policies of the Democratic Party in the USA. He now says that Free Trade as at present practiced may actually be harmful for existing highly industrialised countries and that new policies are needed. (That is, I think, he challenges in part the Rocado 'compartive advantage' paradigm) He is one of the organisers of the Horizon Project, which aims to ensure that ‘The USA remains the pre-eminent economic power in an age of globalisation’.
Note that an undercurrent of these arguments, if I read them rightly, is that Free Trade if actually practiced freely may be too good at spreading wealth to countries at present very poor, to the disruption of the currently relatively wealthy..
One question is whether a backlash against Free Trade in the USA could bring in some kind of neo-protectionism.
‘Free Trade’s Great but…’ is a theme discussed by Washington Post commentator Alan S. Blinder who as a ‘Free Trader down to my toes’ writes an article ‘Trying to Save Free Trade From Itself’.
And more seriously Ralph Gomery ( a former senior vice-President at IBM who oversaw numerous globalisation processes from the inside) has published a critique of globalisation aimed at changing the policies of the Democratic Party in the USA. He now says that Free Trade as at present practiced may actually be harmful for existing highly industrialised countries and that new policies are needed. (That is, I think, he challenges in part the Rocado 'compartive advantage' paradigm) He is one of the organisers of the Horizon Project, which aims to ensure that ‘The USA remains the pre-eminent economic power in an age of globalisation’.
Note that an undercurrent of these arguments, if I read them rightly, is that Free Trade if actually practiced freely may be too good at spreading wealth to countries at present very poor, to the disruption of the currently relatively wealthy..
Labels: free trade, globalisation
Comments:
“Note that an undercurrent of these arguments, if I read them rightly, is that Free Trade if actually practiced freely may be too good at spreading wealth to countries at present very poor, to the disruption of the currently relatively wealthy..” quoted you.
Yep that is the way it looks. But the money is manipulated because after all it is just paper and is assigned a value through all sorts of means which bankers can mess with. So China undervalues their currency thus has a massive knowledge transfer from all the nations of the world and even gathers all manufacturing into it self. We are totally dependent upon China for all our needs and that makes them the leader, not the United States.
Let’s clarify the wealth that is being given to poorer countries. You are asking, especially young single people in the US, to work three average jobs or more to make a living while they take a pay cut. LABORS wealth will be redistributed to these poor nations people. So at this point it looks more like a seesaw effect in which we give everything to the poor countries and we live in poverty while complaining that our youth don’t want to work for global 2 dollar a day wages because it doesn’t pay the bills in our own market. If you impoverish labor in your country, you impoverish the nation. And even more true in a global economy where the global elite have become decoupled from the nation state.
It’s a total rip off. It doesn’t make any sense. China and India at this point have all they need to raise their people out of poverty. Now they need to start building up their consumer base instead of depending upon western nations. Our labor is competing one-on-one versus their labor because they have the education and the same tools we created given to them by our own corporations.
In the end if they have massive unemployment, we have massive unemployment. If they have surplus labor we have surplus labor. If they live in poverty, we live in poverty. That’s the direction we are headed! How long will it take to raise their boat and that is how long it will take before we see wages and standards of living rise in America.
The only people that win are the international business owners who are making profits, not from innovation, but simply crossing a border where currency is a different value than our own and then selling back to higher currency markets. And that’s why China devalues their currency, to make sure they keep everything in their pocket while the entire worlds wealth is redistributed to them through stupid pieces of paper that has no meaning.
Then add in Western debt! People are buying on debt and losing income at the same time. That means higher defaults in the long run as most labor doesn’t have a clue that the economy is going down! Why? Because they are constantly being lied to that it is a strong economy and the sky is the limit! So max those credit cards. And so the dangers of politicians lying to the masses instead of telling the truth might cause us even greater harm. After all why pay down debt when job creation is amazing and the economy is booming? Never mind that the average world market wage is 2 dollars a day, so I suggest you do the math of where American labor is headed.
Just remember you are asking your neighbors and any laborer in America to live in poverty for someone on the other side of the planet who already lives in poverty. Then I hear so called free traders saying labor is too rich and doesn’t deserve what they have, so let’s redistribute it like a bunch of socialists? What happened to incentive to work and the fact that labor often won’t work below their market rate? Why is it okay to redistribute labors wealth, but not that of the wealthy because they say that violates their liberty and we can’t do that. Or it would hurt to many people if we stole from them so we shouldn’t do that.
This is getting old fast. Why do we believe this nonsense? I care about people all over the world, but I don’t want to live in poverty. The liars said it would raise them up to our western standards, not lower our labor to their standards. A tide that raises all boats only raises the wealthy globalists boats and it is totally obvious here and now.
Post a Comment
Yep that is the way it looks. But the money is manipulated because after all it is just paper and is assigned a value through all sorts of means which bankers can mess with. So China undervalues their currency thus has a massive knowledge transfer from all the nations of the world and even gathers all manufacturing into it self. We are totally dependent upon China for all our needs and that makes them the leader, not the United States.
Let’s clarify the wealth that is being given to poorer countries. You are asking, especially young single people in the US, to work three average jobs or more to make a living while they take a pay cut. LABORS wealth will be redistributed to these poor nations people. So at this point it looks more like a seesaw effect in which we give everything to the poor countries and we live in poverty while complaining that our youth don’t want to work for global 2 dollar a day wages because it doesn’t pay the bills in our own market. If you impoverish labor in your country, you impoverish the nation. And even more true in a global economy where the global elite have become decoupled from the nation state.
It’s a total rip off. It doesn’t make any sense. China and India at this point have all they need to raise their people out of poverty. Now they need to start building up their consumer base instead of depending upon western nations. Our labor is competing one-on-one versus their labor because they have the education and the same tools we created given to them by our own corporations.
In the end if they have massive unemployment, we have massive unemployment. If they have surplus labor we have surplus labor. If they live in poverty, we live in poverty. That’s the direction we are headed! How long will it take to raise their boat and that is how long it will take before we see wages and standards of living rise in America.
The only people that win are the international business owners who are making profits, not from innovation, but simply crossing a border where currency is a different value than our own and then selling back to higher currency markets. And that’s why China devalues their currency, to make sure they keep everything in their pocket while the entire worlds wealth is redistributed to them through stupid pieces of paper that has no meaning.
Then add in Western debt! People are buying on debt and losing income at the same time. That means higher defaults in the long run as most labor doesn’t have a clue that the economy is going down! Why? Because they are constantly being lied to that it is a strong economy and the sky is the limit! So max those credit cards. And so the dangers of politicians lying to the masses instead of telling the truth might cause us even greater harm. After all why pay down debt when job creation is amazing and the economy is booming? Never mind that the average world market wage is 2 dollars a day, so I suggest you do the math of where American labor is headed.
Just remember you are asking your neighbors and any laborer in America to live in poverty for someone on the other side of the planet who already lives in poverty. Then I hear so called free traders saying labor is too rich and doesn’t deserve what they have, so let’s redistribute it like a bunch of socialists? What happened to incentive to work and the fact that labor often won’t work below their market rate? Why is it okay to redistribute labors wealth, but not that of the wealthy because they say that violates their liberty and we can’t do that. Or it would hurt to many people if we stole from them so we shouldn’t do that.
This is getting old fast. Why do we believe this nonsense? I care about people all over the world, but I don’t want to live in poverty. The liars said it would raise them up to our western standards, not lower our labor to their standards. A tide that raises all boats only raises the wealthy globalists boats and it is totally obvious here and now.
# posted by 
: 4:52 am, June 10, 2007
: 4:52 am, June 10, 2007
