Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[NAFTA] Renegotiation

13468911

Posts

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    So round 7 of NAFTA talks ended, with little progress it seems. Or at least, progress was overshadowed by the Orange Idiot's new global trade war on steel and aluminium.

    Unsurprisingly, President Baby is getting impatient, and is now pushing for a deal within weeks.
    Round 7 of the NAFTA talks concluded in Mexico City with grim comments by US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. He said the United States is prepared to walk away from the three-way negotiation and seek separate deals with Mexico or Canada.

    Everyone better act fast, he warned.

    "Now our time is running very short," Lighthizer said at a press conference, standing next to his counterparts from Mexico and Canada. "I fear that the longer we proceed, the more political headwinds we will feel."

    [...]

    Lighthizer expressed disappointment that only six of the 30 chapters in NAFTA had been agreed upon after seven months of negotiations.

    Of course, this has nothing to do with the fact the Republicans are facing the specter of a disastrous midterm election and don't want to negotiate this with an enemy Democrat Congress at their back, nor that they are desperately looking for an international win to feed to their nationalistic base and avoid the worst in November, nor the fear that a new left-wing federal government winning in Mexico before the US election will fight them tooth and nail and humiliate them.

    8th round in Washington in April.

    sig.gif
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    So the alternative if negatiations between two other parties that largely agree fall through is ...separate agreements with those same two parties?

  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    So round 7 of NAFTA talks ended, with little progress it seems. Or at least, progress was overshadowed by the Orange Idiot's new global trade war on steel and aluminium.

    Unsurprisingly, President Baby is getting impatient, and is now pushing for a deal within weeks.
    Round 7 of the NAFTA talks concluded in Mexico City with grim comments by US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. He said the United States is prepared to walk away from the three-way negotiation and seek separate deals with Mexico or Canada.

    Everyone better act fast, he warned.

    "Now our time is running very short," Lighthizer said at a press conference, standing next to his counterparts from Mexico and Canada. "I fear that the longer we proceed, the more political headwinds we will feel."

    [...]

    Lighthizer expressed disappointment that only six of the 30 chapters in NAFTA had been agreed upon after seven months of negotiations.

    Of course, this has nothing to do with the fact the Republicans are facing the specter of a disastrous midterm election and don't want to negotiate this with an enemy Democrat Congress at their back, nor that they are desperately looking for an international win to feed to their nationalistic base and avoid the worst in November, nor the fear that a new left-wing federal government winning in Mexico before the US election will fight them tooth and nail and humiliate them.

    8th round in Washington in April.
    So... the US government is unhappy with the progress in the three-way negotiation because things aren't going their way, and wants to use their economic might to bully each of the two other nations separately.

    I'm sure that the Canadian and Mexican governments are going to be happy to forfeit their bargaining power and agree to those terms. I'm really hoping those two nations realize that not sticking together is a stupid move, and that only by remaining united can they stop this erratic Administration from taking advantage of them.

    YoutubeGnome-InterruptusRichykimeLovelyFencingsax
  • nowwhatnowwhat Registered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    So round 7 of NAFTA talks ended, with little progress it seems. Or at least, progress was overshadowed by the Orange Idiot's new global trade war on steel and aluminium.

    Unsurprisingly, President Baby is getting impatient, and is now pushing for a deal within weeks.
    Round 7 of the NAFTA talks concluded in Mexico City with grim comments by US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. He said the United States is prepared to walk away from the three-way negotiation and seek separate deals with Mexico or Canada.

    Everyone better act fast, he warned.

    "Now our time is running very short," Lighthizer said at a press conference, standing next to his counterparts from Mexico and Canada. "I fear that the longer we proceed, the more political headwinds we will feel."

    [...]

    Lighthizer expressed disappointment that only six of the 30 chapters in NAFTA had been agreed upon after seven months of negotiations.

    Of course, this has nothing to do with the fact the Republicans are facing the specter of a disastrous midterm election and don't want to negotiate this with an enemy Democrat Congress at their back, nor that they are desperately looking for an international win to feed to their nationalistic base and avoid the worst in November, nor the fear that a new left-wing federal government winning in Mexico before the US election will fight them tooth and nail and humiliate them.

    8th round in Washington in April.
    So... the US government is unhappy with the progress in the three-way negotiation because things aren't going their way, and wants to use their economic might to bully each of the two other nations separately.

    I'm sure that the Canadian and Mexican governments are going to be happy to forfeit their bargaining power and agree to those terms. I'm really hoping those two nations realize that not sticking together is a stupid move, and that only by remaining united can they stop this erratic Administration from taking advantage of them.

    It's a textbook Prisoner's Dilemma.

    In a Trump world, either Canada or Mexico could betray the other one and make Trump think he made the 'best deal', and get a better deal than they would together. Realistically, both would be working to get the best deal between themselves and the US, even if it screws the other. If they can't strike a deal themselves, they can fall back on the combined bargaining power.

    The big spanner in the works is that there are things Trump can't do unilaterally, and he's not exactly known to stick to his deals. That changes the calculus significantly, when the reward for betrayal may not actually materialize. I assume that the people at the negotiation table know this, and I'm sure there is plenty of backroom discussion where the US negotiating party is telling their Canadian / Mexican counterparts that - yes, Trump is an idiot, and they will try to get the best deal they can in spite of him.

  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    But doesn’t the prisoners dilemma hinge on the fact that the prisoners can’t communicate with one another? You betray the other person because you can’t coordinate with someone so you have no way of knowing that they won’t betray you first, but in this case, they do. By using a telephone.

    monikerhippofantshrykeRMS OceanicmrondeauKetBramilskiDuke 2.0PolaritieKayne Red RobeLordSolarMachariusTubularLuggagekimeMorganVLovelyFencingsaxEtiowsaGnome-InterruptusMoridin889TynnanJragghenRawkking GoodguyNiryaSkeith
  • PhasenPhasen 2020 or bustRegistered User regular
    Javen wrote: »
    But doesn’t the prisoners dilemma hinge on the fact that the prisoners can’t communicate with one another? You betray the other person because you can’t coordinate with someone so you have no way of knowing that they won’t betray you first, but in this case, they do. By using a telephone.

    I dunno if I would believe anything Trump tried to communicate to me.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
  • mrondeaumrondeau Montréal, CanadaRegistered User regular
    Phasen wrote: »
    Javen wrote: »
    But doesn’t the prisoners dilemma hinge on the fact that the prisoners can’t communicate with one another? You betray the other person because you can’t coordinate with someone so you have no way of knowing that they won’t betray you first, but in this case, they do. By using a telephone.

    I dunno if I would believe anything Trump tried to communicate to me.

    Sure, but Trump is not one of the "prisoners" who are coordinating.

    PhasenKayne Red RobeshrykekimeLovelyFencingsaxmonikerBouwsTGnome-InterruptusMoridin889Tynnan
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    mrondeau wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Javen wrote: »
    But doesn’t the prisoners dilemma hinge on the fact that the prisoners can’t communicate with one another? You betray the other person because you can’t coordinate with someone so you have no way of knowing that they won’t betray you first, but in this case, they do. By using a telephone.

    I dunno if I would believe anything Trump tried to communicate to me.

    Sure, but Trump is not one of the "prisoners" who are coordinating.

    Although Trump's willingness to keep to any agreement made with the betraying prisoner would be another problem with trying to apply any game theory trickery to the situation.

    MorganVYoutubeFencingsaxDuke 2.0Gnome-Interruptus
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    mrondeau wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Javen wrote: »
    But doesn’t the prisoners dilemma hinge on the fact that the prisoners can’t communicate with one another? You betray the other person because you can’t coordinate with someone so you have no way of knowing that they won’t betray you first, but in this case, they do. By using a telephone.

    I dunno if I would believe anything Trump tried to communicate to me.

    Sure, but Trump is not one of the "prisoners" who are coordinating.

    Although Trump's willingness to keep to any agreement made with the betraying prisoner would be another problem with trying to apply any game theory trickery to the situation.

    au contraire, such considerations are the very fibre of Game Theory.

    mrondeauFencingsax
  • mrondeaumrondeau Montréal, CanadaRegistered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    daveNYC wrote: »
    mrondeau wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Javen wrote: »
    But doesn’t the prisoners dilemma hinge on the fact that the prisoners can’t communicate with one another? You betray the other person because you can’t coordinate with someone so you have no way of knowing that they won’t betray you first, but in this case, they do. By using a telephone.

    I dunno if I would believe anything Trump tried to communicate to me.

    Sure, but Trump is not one of the "prisoners" who are coordinating.

    Although Trump's willingness to keep to any agreement made with the betraying prisoner would be another problem with trying to apply any game theory trickery to the situation.

    au contraire, such considerations are the very fibre of Game Theory.

    I'm not an expert, but I'm fairly certain that it's much easier if someone is always defecting or picking the same option.

    Like playing Rock-Paper-Scissors against someone who always picks rock.

  • hawkboxhawkbox Registered User regular
    Good old rock, nothing beats rock.

    RMS OceanicXaquinmonikerAl_watKetBraForarBouwsTGnome-InterruptusshrykeiTunesIsEvilRchanen
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    hawkbox wrote: »
    Good old rock, nothing beats rock.
    Poor predictable @hawkbox. Always taking rock.

    ForarhawkboxMvrckRchanen
  • BouwsTBouwsT Wanna come to a super soft birthday party? Registered User regular
    edited March 2018
    I'm sure you're all seeing this, but It's big news here north of the 49th.

    Donald Trump Admits to Lying to Justin Trudeau Re: Trade Figures

    A notable quote from the article:
    "Nice guy, good-looking guy, comes in - 'Donald, we have no trade deficit.' He's very proud because everybody else, you know, we're getting killed."

    The president continued: "I said, 'Wrong, Justin, you do.' I didn't even know. I had no idea. I just said, 'You're wrong.'"

    Any hot takes south of the border, or has this flown under the radar?

    Edit: Linky

    BouwsT on
    I shall be telling this with a sigh
    Somewhere ages and ages hence:
    Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
    I took the one less traveled by,
    And that has made all the difference.
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    BouwsT wrote: »
    I'm sure you're all seeing this, but It's big news here north of the 49th.

    Donald Trump Admits to Lying to Justin Trudeau Re: Trade Figures

    A notable quote from the article:
    "Nice guy, good-looking guy, comes in - 'Donald, we have no trade deficit.' He's very proud because everybody else, you know, we're getting killed."

    The president continued: "I said, 'Wrong, Justin, you do.' I didn't even know. I had no idea. I just said, 'You're wrong.'"

    Any hot takes south of the border, or has this flown under the radar?

    Edit: Linky

    This is only a problem if Justin is stupider then trump.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    Moridin889
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    BouwsT wrote: »
    I'm sure you're all seeing this, but It's big news here north of the 49th.

    Donald Trump Admits to Lying to Justin Trudeau Re: Trade Figures

    A notable quote from the article:
    "Nice guy, good-looking guy, comes in - 'Donald, we have no trade deficit.' He's very proud because everybody else, you know, we're getting killed."

    The president continued: "I said, 'Wrong, Justin, you do.' I didn't even know. I had no idea. I just said, 'You're wrong.'"

    Any hot takes south of the border, or has this flown under the radar?

    Edit: Linky

    They're in the general us economics thread. Stupid man proud of ignorant stupidity.

    shrykeGnome-Interruptus
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    daveNYC wrote: »
    mrondeau wrote: »
    Phasen wrote: »
    Javen wrote: »
    But doesn’t the prisoners dilemma hinge on the fact that the prisoners can’t communicate with one another? You betray the other person because you can’t coordinate with someone so you have no way of knowing that they won’t betray you first, but in this case, they do. By using a telephone.

    I dunno if I would believe anything Trump tried to communicate to me.

    Sure, but Trump is not one of the "prisoners" who are coordinating.

    Although Trump's willingness to keep to any agreement made with the betraying prisoner would be another problem with trying to apply any game theory trickery to the situation.

    au contraire, such considerations are the very fibre of Game Theory.

    In regards to the other prisoner. Unfortunately Trump is in the role of the cop, and if you can't trust him to keep to his part of the deal then there's no point in considering betrayal. Specifically in this instance Trumps already trying to screw people over, so why exactly should they expect that any behavior on their part will result in less screwing?

    He's so bad at this. It's like the scorpion and the frog, except the scorpion is surrounded by stung frog corpses when he makes his request.

    moniker
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    BouwsT wrote: »
    I'm sure you're all seeing this, but It's big news here north of the 49th.

    Donald Trump Admits to Lying to Justin Trudeau Re: Trade Figures

    A notable quote from the article:
    "Nice guy, good-looking guy, comes in - 'Donald, we have no trade deficit.' He's very proud because everybody else, you know, we're getting killed."

    The president continued: "I said, 'Wrong, Justin, you do.' I didn't even know. I had no idea. I just said, 'You're wrong.'"

    Any hot takes south of the border, or has this flown under the radar?

    Edit: Linky

    Trump only cares about the trade deficit from goods, which is in fact at a deficit with Canada. This isn’t really contested, but he didn’t know that going in, he just guessed. It’s also just a dumb thing to care about in general.

    There’s also the fact that there are discrepancies in reporting between Canada and the US, with Canada actually backing up Trumps claim of a deficit. It seems like one of those things where you can flex the numbers in a variety of ways to make conflicting conclusions from the same data.

  • Monkey Ball WarriorMonkey Ball Warrior A collection of mediocre hats Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited March 2018
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    Monkey Ball Warrior on
    "I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    The alternative is lashing yourself to the mast of a ship that is going under.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    Gnome-InterruptusYoutubeSleepSkeithKayne Red Robe
  • MeeqeMeeqe Lord of the pants most fancy Someplace amazingRegistered User regular
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    I think you'd find yourself in good company overall. The Dems aren't nearly as left as the GOP makes them out to be, in a sane world they would be what a moderate responsible right-wing party would look like.

    I like children. Provided they go home with their parents at the end of the day.
    GaddezYoutubeV1mSleepFencingsaxSkeithKayne Red RobeEtiowsa
  • Monkey Ball WarriorMonkey Ball Warrior A collection of mediocre hats Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited March 2018
    Gaddez wrote: »
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    The alternative is lashing yourself to the mast of a ship that is going under.

    That was never an option. The possibility of my joining the Republican Party became 0% in 2016. The alternative is not joining a party.

    Monkey Ball Warrior on
    "I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    No. Why would it be?

    shrykeSleepArdolRedTide
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Gaddez wrote: »
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    The alternative is lashing yourself to the mast of a ship that is going under.

    That was never an option. The alternative is not joining a party.

    In which case you are merely in the water beside the ship as it goes under and subsequently drags you down with it via undertow.

    No. If you feel that the republican party has gone bonkers then the only viable option in the current political climate is to go Dem since they're the only party with the presence and policies in place to oppose the Malarkey of the current GOP.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    kimehawkboxFencingsax
  • Monkey Ball WarriorMonkey Ball Warrior A collection of mediocre hats Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited March 2018
    moniker wrote: »
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    No. Why would it be?

    Because in a normal universe I'd be a republican. But we live in a messed up alternate dimension where a protectionist republican is president.

    I guess my actual point is I think it is remarkable how different the republican party has become in such a short time.

    Monkey Ball Warrior on
    "I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    No. Why would it be?

    Because in a normal universe I'd be a republican. But we live in a messed up alternate dimension where a protectionist republican is president.

    In a normal universe the Democrats would be the right wing party. :rotate:

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    V1m38thDoeEdith Upwards
  • Monkey Ball WarriorMonkey Ball Warrior A collection of mediocre hats Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    :rotate: Someone help me this is really happening :rotate:

    "I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Gaddez wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    No. Why would it be?

    Because in a normal universe I'd be a republican. But we live in a messed up alternate dimension where a protectionist republican is president.

    In a normal universe the Democrats would be the right wing party. :rotate:
    In most other Western democracies, they are. Sure, there are a few true hardliners, but there's few policies that I've seen "centrist" Democrats take, that wouldn't be out of place in another country's conservative party.

  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    No. Why would it be?

    Because in a normal universe I'd be a republican. But we live in a messed up alternate dimension where a protectionist republican is president.

    I guess my actual point is I think it is remarkable how different the republican party has become in such a short time.

    I guess I don't consider something that began ~5 years before I was born continuing throughout my lifetime to be that short of a period of time. None of those things you described have been outside of the Democratic party mainstream for a generation plus. Bringing it back to the topic at hand, NAFTA and the WTO were negotiated by Democrats.

    shrykeGnome-InterruptusSleepFencingsaxKetBraArdolEdith UpwardsCouscousDoctorArch
  • Monkey Ball WarriorMonkey Ball Warrior A collection of mediocre hats Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited March 2018
    moniker wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    2018: As a free market globalist that supports local and state spending on mass transit, can acknowledge basic facts about C02 and global warming, is intensely worried about federal debt and deficits, and leans libertarian on social issues, I'm seriously considering officially joining the Democratic Party, at least for a few years.

    Isn't that weird?

    No. Why would it be?

    Because in a normal universe I'd be a republican. But we live in a messed up alternate dimension where a protectionist republican is president.

    I guess my actual point is I think it is remarkable how different the republican party has become in such a short time.

    I guess I don't consider something that began ~5 years before I was born continuing throughout my lifetime to be that short of a period of time. None of those things you described have been outside of the Democratic party mainstream for a generation plus. Bringing it back to the topic at hand, NAFTA and the WTO were negotiated by Democrats.

    Maybe it's more that I've changed. So, imagine it's 2003. Bush just announced we're going to invade Iraq. I actually think this is a good idea. This isn't something I'm proud of today, but its true. My thinking at the time was two fold. One: There's no way Saddam doesn't have WMD, this has to be the best vetted intelligence ever because starting a war on false pretenses would be political suicide. Oh to be that young and naive again. Two: I'd been convinced we'd signed all our national sovereignty over the to the UN and this was basically a big screw you to our evil overlords; an act of noble rebellion. We can chalk that one up to gullibility.

    I could have joined the Republicans this whole time. I never have. The prospect got dimmer and dimmer each year. But this is the first year I've ever considered joining the other side in an official capacity, even temporarily. Traditionally the Democrats have been too socialistic and the Republicans have been at least tangentially related to my worldview. But between their steady erosion of anything resembling principles and my own changes, they've pushed me out. And the Dems at this point are essentially everyone that isn't standing for this bs anymore. Which you'd think would be a lot more people than it actually is.

    Monkey Ball Warrior on
    "I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    Detailed political party discussion isn't on topic here. Back on topic please.

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Progress!
    The United States, Canada and Mexico could soon announce a deal in principle to update NAFTA that would likely tackle the key issue of autos content while leaving other contentious chapters to be dealt with later, three sources familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.

    The ministers in charge of the talks are due to meet in Washington this week. If all goes well, the leaders of the three nations could make an announcement about progress on an updated NAFTA at a regional summit in Peru next week, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo said on Monday.

    "What they're looking to do is 'Let's hammer out as much as we can, with the specific focus on automotive, and if we can declare an agreement in principle in Lima that's a good moment for everybody'," said one of the sources.

    The challenge is that a deal in principle might well be so vague on areas of disagreement that negotiators would be faced with many more months of very challenging work with no guarantee of success at the end.

    sig.gif
    BouwsT
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    Progress!
    The United States, Canada and Mexico could soon announce a deal in principle to update NAFTA that would likely tackle the key issue of autos content while leaving other contentious chapters to be dealt with later, three sources familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.

    The ministers in charge of the talks are due to meet in Washington this week. If all goes well, the leaders of the three nations could make an announcement about progress on an updated NAFTA at a regional summit in Peru next week, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo said on Monday.

    "What they're looking to do is 'Let's hammer out as much as we can, with the specific focus on automotive, and if we can declare an agreement in principle in Lima that's a good moment for everybody'," said one of the sources.

    The challenge is that a deal in principle might well be so vague on areas of disagreement that negotiators would be faced with many more months of very challenging work with no guarantee of success at the end.
    The problem is, the Canadian and Mexican negotiators can't know if the American negotiatior has any real authority or autonomy. You know they're both wondering if at the end of this, Trump is gonna tweet out "BAD DEAL! Mexico and Canada are taking advantage of us! #MAGA!" and refuse to sign, or undercut it in any way he can, regardless of what concessions Mexico and Canada give him.

    We've seen it time and time again, where Trump, with little actual understanding on the topic, has someone negotiate on his behalf, is given more than is fair, sees (or more likely is told) that there's a minor tradeoff, and loses his shit, undermining or destroying everything.

    If NAFTA gets renegotiated, and it's not Canada and Mexico giving away the farm, I'll be surprised. Cause Trump has the capacity to screw anything up.

    SleepmonikerGnome-InterruptusCouscousmrondeauRichyKayne Red RobeForarPsykomaFencingsaxMoridin889Duke 2.0Edith UpwardsRMS OceanicSkeith
  • AegisAegis Not Quite TorontoRegistered User regular
    That sounds less like progress and more like "we need to say something, anything, even if it says literally nothing".

    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
    mrondeaumonikerYoutubeLaOsGnome-InterruptusshrykeFencingsaxDuke 2.0Rear Admiral Choco
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    The thing is, trump is a god damn moron who likely has no idea what is actually in nafta or what it's individual letters actually stand for so trump's negotiators could come back to him talking up a storm about what an amazing deal they managed to sucker out of the canadian and mexican government when the reality is that they're just agreeing to whatever is reasonable for all parties involved.

    It's not like trump's base will double check his work on this.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    shrykeBouwsTAridholFencingsaxEdith Upwards
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    It occurs to me that I've never actually seen any public discussion on what the nature of our current trade deals are and who, if anyone, they actually favor. It's all just Trump claiming that they're terrible, and the smarter portion of the country rolling their eyes at him. I know the general public doesn't want to understand anything about trade policy, but if Trump is going to keep making unsubstantiated claims someone should at least be calling him on it.

  • MortiousMortious The Nightmare Begins Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    It occurs to me that I've never actually seen any public discussion on what the nature of our current trade deals are and who, if anyone, they actually favor. It's all just Trump claiming that they're terrible, and the smarter portion of the country rolling their eyes at him. I know the general public doesn't want to understand anything about trade policy, but if Trump is going to keep making unsubstantiated claims someone should at least be calling him on it.

    He's been called out several times, including other world leaders iirc. It doesn't matter, he just claims he's right anyway, and also that he just made it up, and then keeps on trucking.

    Move to New Zealand
    It’s not a very important country most of the time
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
    Gnome-InterruptusFencingsaxmonikerYoutube
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Mortious wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    It occurs to me that I've never actually seen any public discussion on what the nature of our current trade deals are and who, if anyone, they actually favor. It's all just Trump claiming that they're terrible, and the smarter portion of the country rolling their eyes at him. I know the general public doesn't want to understand anything about trade policy, but if Trump is going to keep making unsubstantiated claims someone should at least be calling him on it.

    He's been called out several times, including other world leaders iirc. It doesn't matter, he just claims he's right anyway, and also that he just made it up, and then keeps on trucking.

    He's even called himself out, admitted in a speech to his supporters that he lied about the trade deficit to Trudeau.

    No one cared.

    sig.gif
    Gnome-InterruptusEdith UpwardsshrykeFencingsaxmonikerYoutubeLovely
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    Mortious wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    It occurs to me that I've never actually seen any public discussion on what the nature of our current trade deals are and who, if anyone, they actually favor. It's all just Trump claiming that they're terrible, and the smarter portion of the country rolling their eyes at him. I know the general public doesn't want to understand anything about trade policy, but if Trump is going to keep making unsubstantiated claims someone should at least be calling him on it.

    He's been called out several times, including other world leaders iirc. It doesn't matter, he just claims he's right anyway, and also that he just made it up, and then keeps on trucking.

    He's even called himself out, admitted in a speech to his supporters that he lied about the trade deficit to Trudeau.

    No one cared.

    Everyone knows he's lying or deluded about the details, but how about the big things? For all I or the average person knows our existing deals could very well be heavily weighted in our favor.

  • hippofanthippofant ティンク Registered User regular
    So, does someone smarter than me have any insight as to what sort of economic impact the following proposal might have? It seems pretty unorthodox.

    NAFTA talks in ‘new, more intensive phase,’ Freeland says:
    The new U.S. proposal on automotive content would replace its previous proposal for a rule requiring that 50 per cent of a car’s content be made in the U.S. in order for the car to qualify for tariff-free treatment. The new proposal involves a wage credit toward the tariff-free threshold for North American content. In other words, automakers could meet the threshold, which the U.S. wants raised, by paying workers significantly higher wages — perhaps $15 (U.S.) per hour — than autoworkers currently make in Mexico.

  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Great for Mexican autonworkers. Net gain to Mexico.

    If it’s binding of course.

    wbBv3fj.png
    DevoutlyApatheticmonikerEdith UpwardsYoutubeRichyGnome-InterruptusCouscousSkeith
Sign In or Register to comment.