RUEZ RUEZ:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
RUEZ RUEZ:
You obviously know more about trade issues than him. Tell us how it should have been done?
I'm not a trade expert, but sticking to the agreements the US signs with other countries might be a good start.
I'm not familiar with softwood trade agreements signed with other countries. It wasn't perfect but the government ended a dispute that had been running for a very long time and had affected many workers.
From what I remember, we were about to win all the rulings for NAFTA and WTO challenges that the US put up trying to protect it's industry against ours. That is the only reason there was ever a challenge - lobbying by industry. Once again, we let our status as a valued ally of the US go limp, instead of standing up for ourselves and looking them straight in the eye. We let the US keep billions in illegal fines paid by the lumber industry and distribute it to their industry who use it as a legal fund for more challenges to our industry. And to top it off, we let the Whitehouse itself keep a billion $!
I also recall a few economists who were saying the US industry couldn't compete against ours, so they should give up and let the market decide and let those people get on with productive work instead of subsidizing a dying industry.
But that's beside the point here. In my example, the 'Buy US' policies work against the US because they can't get that kind of PVC pipe anywhere else (including the US) and the company doesn't get orders from new infrastructure projects and the projects might not go ahead from the lack of sewer pipe; and the Texas refinery doens't get chemical orders due to lack of demand. It hurts the US worse than it does us.