'Buy American' less helpful than free trade, Fast says

FRee trade between our two counties is good for all concerned.

It's funny cuz whenever I hear the old saw come out about "Buy American", it never seems to mean stuff like, mineral resources, oil, electricity, etc.

I think we should do a WTO challenge to this mostly because the US is shooting themselves in the foot.

For example, PVC sewage pipe. Mostly made in Canada. But the chemicals are made in Texas (from oilsands oil) and made into pipe in Ontairo. So, it's 'Canadian'.

But with Stephen 'Softwood Surrender' Harper in charge, I doubt we will. We'll just pass up the opportunity to ratchet up our importance in Washington and cave like always.

Same old protectionist BS from south of the border - one of these days hopefully we'll wake up and diversify our trade more so crap like this won't affect us at all.

The "Buy American" protectionists mental Lilliputians in Washington needs to see this clip and learn

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3vbCxj2ifs

It is just as true now as it was then.

You obviously know more about trade issues than him. Tell us how it should have been done?

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.

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.

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.

I don't recall the details, but Canada came out ahead in the legal challenges and the Harper government finally caved to pressure that had been ongoing for more than twenty years.

What I think is important, though, is that the American position and the resolution were a direct contradiction of the Free Trade agreements. The US, essentially, wanted a managed trade in a sector where the balance was not in their favour.

Similar conditions apply to the Wheat Board where the ending of that body probably has more to do with Harper's desire to please the United States than any idea of freeing Canadian farmers.

We have a power relationship with the US not a trade agreement.