PDA

View Full Version : More free trade.


piece-itpete
02-15-2013, 08:46 AM
"The United States and European Union aim to start negotiating a vast Transatlantic free trade pact by June, though the plan confirmed on Wednesday faces many hurdles before it might help revive the world's top two economies.

......"

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/14/us-eu-us-trade-idUSBRE91C0OC20130214

No uproar from the left? No comment from the right?

Pete

BlueStreak
02-15-2013, 10:07 AM
Yeah! More jobs for Americans!

(Seeing as how European companies have begun to see us as their "Mexico" in regards to labor costs and regulation......)

Regards,
Dave

bobabode
02-15-2013, 11:00 PM
:rolleyes:I like a cheap Bordeaux, Pete. What's to hate? Have you got your tits in an uproar again?:D

mini me
02-16-2013, 11:38 AM
Ok, I'll bite.

I hate this kind of crap. "Free Trade Agreements" often create more chaos than freedom, and product quality often becomes the least common denominator in trade agreements. Did you catch the line buried in the story about 2/3 of the way down that the agreement will focus on creating product standards for things like seat belts, so that everyone can compete? Seat belts are a good example of a product standard that need not be lowered just so a bunch of political hacks can celebrate crafting a trade agreement.

bobabode
02-16-2013, 04:00 PM
Ok, I'll bite.

I hate this kind of crap. "Free Trade Agreements" often create more chaos than freedom, and product quality often becomes the least common denominator in trade agreements. Did you catch the line buried in the story about 2/3 of the way down that the agreement will focus on creating product standards for things like seat belts, so that everyone can compete? Seat belts are a good example of a product standard that need not be lowered just so a bunch of political hacks can celebrate crafting a trade agreement.

"Negotiations will focus on harmonizing standards, from car seat belts to household cleaning products, and regulations governing services. These help ensure exporters can compete."

This^? No where does it state that seatbelts standards would be lowered. It says harmonized. Aren't EU safety standards higher? So, we would have to raise our standards to compete in their market. Is your cup half empty?;)

mini me
02-16-2013, 10:21 PM
"Negotiations will focus on harmonizing standards, from car seat belts to household cleaning products, and regulations governing services. These help ensure exporters can compete."

This^? No where does it state that seatbelts standards would be lowered. It says harmonized. Aren't EU safety standards higher? So, we would have to raise our standards to compete in their market. Is your cup half empty?;)

I don't think so. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety ranks the "safest" cars and the Euro cars aren't over-represented on the list each year.

bobabode
02-17-2013, 04:02 AM
I don't think so. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety ranks the "safest" cars and the Euro cars aren't over-represented on the list each year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance_Institute_for_Highway_Safety
Not really the most unbiased group out there and they aren't the one who sets standards, are they? We were talking about seat belt standards and you made an unfounded allegation that our standards would be lowered as a result of any free trade agreement with the EU. I'll be happy to look at the real standards and report back if that'll make you happy but I have a feeling that we will find that the EU would be the one having to lower their standards to accomodate our shittier seatbelt standards. I'll bet you a buck I'm right...:)

BlueStreak
02-17-2013, 06:40 AM
"Negotiations will focus on harmonizing standards, from car seat belts to household cleaning products, and regulations governing services. These help ensure exporters can compete."

This^? No where does it state that seatbelts standards would be lowered. It says harmonized. Aren't EU safety standards higher? So, we would have to raise our standards to compete in their market. Is your cup half empty?;)

Better? In some ways, but, I have seen trade-offs. When I was in the automotive lighting business, lamps made for the American (N.C. & S.) market were molded out of polycarbonate because it is very rugged. Lamps made for the European market had to be made of a Thermoset resin, because it is resistant to thermal changes that affect photometrics--A more stable light spread winter and summer. The thing is, we found that the thermally induced changes in the PC resins was negligable and the Thermoset resins tend to be brittle and crack easily under heavy vibration. Add to that the fact that the materials and molding process for TS resin is much more expensive and troublesome..................:rolleyes:

Dave

mpholland
02-17-2013, 10:49 AM
Free trade is great for huge corporations. I don't see it helping us little folk out much, except allowing us to pay about the same price for cheap crap as we used to pay for decent products. The differential basically goes to the wealthy and makes them even more so.

piece-itpete
02-18-2013, 09:31 AM
Thanks mp, I was about to point out the sheer hypocrisy of the left regarding free trade and you went and messed it up :D

Pete

icenine
02-18-2013, 12:54 PM
Hmmm

I would imagine free trade with the EU would benefit us more than them.......

and remember we need to export to make our economy at home stronger.

I mean are we really afraid of cheap imported European goods?
duh


everyone wants to buy American but goes to Walmart......
I mean worrying about Europe after the Chinese have taken our manufacturing base away is sort of silly.

Maybe brand new Wharfedale speakers will be cheape....wait those are made in China....

piece-itpete
02-18-2013, 01:04 PM
I thought free market was the devil? :D

I've heard off and on about a possible one with South America too. Perhaps we should be persuing one with China? Certainly the Asian Rim countries.

Pete

bobabode
02-18-2013, 01:36 PM
I thought free market was the devil? :D

I've heard off and on about a possible one with South America too. Perhaps we should be persuing one with China? Certainly the Asian Rim countries.

Pete


Mmmmm, thai sticks!:rolleyes: Me and TD'll be happy.;)

piece-itpete
02-18-2013, 02:14 PM
Lol let me tell you the first time I bought stick. I was just a pup drove down to the hood with friends. A guy hops in, smokes a teenie pinner - excellent, so we all buy a bunch. Leave, it turns out to be colored sawdust mixed with wood glue tied nicely on sticks :D

Pete

ebacon
02-18-2013, 02:50 PM
A pinner. LOL. Have not heard that in while.

d-ray657
02-18-2013, 03:18 PM
Hmmm

I would imagine free trade with the EU would benefit us more than them.......

and remember we need to export to make our economy at home stronger.

I mean are we really afraid of cheap imported European goods?
duh


everyone wants to buy American but goes to Walmart......
I mean worrying about Europe after the Chinese have taken our manufacturing base away is sort of silly.

Maybe brand new Wharfedale speakers will be cheape....wait those are made in China....

I have a pair of Wharfedale Sapphire SP-87, which I believe were made before production was moved to China. In any event, I have given them to my son, and he loves them.

Regards,

D-Ray

icenine
02-18-2013, 03:39 PM
I have a pair of Wharfedale Sapphire SP-87, which I believe were made before production was moved to China. In any event, I have given them to my son, and he loves them.

Regards,

D-Ray

I have the wharfedale w70ds but they are pretty beat up with broken trim...I will take them to the thrift once I can steel myself for the trip down the stairs..they weigh about 75 lbs....

I found some B&W 601i s about a month ago at the SA...for like $26

bobabode
02-18-2013, 03:40 PM
Lol let me tell you the first time I bought stick. I was just a pup drove down to the hood with friends. A guy hops in, smokes a teenie pinner - excellent, so we all buy a bunch. Leave, it turns out to be colored sawdust mixed with wood glue tied nicely on sticks :D

Pete

Where, Wheeling?:D

icenine
02-18-2013, 03:42 PM
Being made in China does not make things bad...it is the quality control process of any individual product that makes it good or not. I have been running a Jolida 102b for going on 4 years not one ounce of trouble.

I think this PC and Monitor are all made up of stuff from China lol

BlueStreak
02-18-2013, 07:00 PM
Free trade is great for huge corporations. I don't see it helping us little folk out much, except allowing us to pay about the same price for cheap crap as we used to pay for decent products. The differential basically goes to the wealthy and makes them even more so.

Outsourcing has NEVER been about saving you and I any money. As a matter of fact, you and I are among the people who pay for it.....with our jobs and the negative effect it has on wages.

Regards,
Dave

piece-itpete
02-19-2013, 08:22 AM
Bob LOL! No, good old Cleveland, my sad home :)

Dave, if free trade is so bad, why is the Party of the Working Man embracing it?

Pete

BlueStreak
02-19-2013, 09:02 AM
In the long run and in some ways, I think it is a good thing. But, for reasons other than domestic job creation*. In that regard, I think it is becoming clear that the benefits are dwarfed by the downside and a major cause of chronic unemployment and decline of our manufacturing base.

(*Nations are less apt to wage war against each other if they are deeply economically interdependent.)

Regards,
Dave

BlueStreak
02-19-2013, 09:05 AM
We simply cannot compete against some trading partners without drastic reductions in the American standard of living. Perhaps with Europe this won't be as large an issue as it has been with Mexico and China? I dunno. Time will tell.

Regards,
Dave

piece-itpete
02-19-2013, 09:39 AM
I thought at the time NAFTA was really buying some stability in Mexico. I think I was wrong.

Interesting that the left here and in Europe now think free trade equals growth? Heck all the old union guys are tea partiers now anyway ;)

Pete

BlueStreak
02-19-2013, 10:40 AM
I thought at the time NAFTA was really buying some stability in Mexico. I think I was wrong.

Interesting that the left here and in Europe now think free trade equals growth? Heck all the old union guys are tea partiers now anyway ;)

Pete

Yes, you were. Because bringing the jobs to Mexico did damn little for the Mexican worker other than make him a wage-slave.

In the bolded;

Which, as a conservative, I would think this would give you pause.

Regards,
Dave

piece-itpete
02-19-2013, 10:52 AM
Wage slaves? It's only good enough for Americans? :p

I'd put our guys up against anyone. There's more to success than wages, intelligence and productivity (and economic laws/regulations!) have a lot to do with it.

Anyway, between Clinton and Obama why would we worry about it? ;) :D

Pete

bobabode
02-19-2013, 05:50 PM
I thought at the time NAFTA was really buying some stability in Mexico. I think I was wrong.

Interesting that the left here and in Europe now think free trade equals growth? Heck all the old union guys are tea partiers now anyway ;)

Pete

Wage slaves? It's only good enough for Americans? :p

I'd put our guys up against anyone. There's more to success than wages, intelligence and productivity (and economic laws/regulations!) have a lot to do with it.

Anyway, between Clinton and Obama why would we worry about it? ;) :D

Pete

I keep hearing you righties hanging that whole NAFTA millstone around Clinton's neck, why is that? Just because he signed the deal? Looks to me like it was Bush Sr's baby.... Hmmmm, selective memory?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

Negotiation and U.S. ratification
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Antonio), Texas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas), on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush), Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney) and Mexican President Carlos Salinas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Salinas), each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The in an agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

BlueStreak
02-19-2013, 07:21 PM
It's the same old game, Bob. The GOP will work it up, bat it around a bit but never actually do it because if it goes south on them they have to accept responsibility. Can't have that, now can we? So, a Democrat finally makes it happen, then anything that doesn't go so well is all his fault because program bears his name. As you may have noticed it's been the same with healthcare reform, gun control, etc., etc...........Been going on for decades.

Regards,
Dave

merrylander
02-20-2013, 07:12 AM
Mulroney was no prize either.

piece-itpete
02-20-2013, 09:03 AM
I keep hearing you righties hanging that whole NAFTA millstone around Clinton's neck, why is that? Just because he signed the deal? Looks to me like it was Bush Sr's baby.... Hmmmm, selective memory?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

Negotiation and U.S. ratification
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Antonio), Texas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas), on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush), Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney) and Mexican President Carlos Salinas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Salinas), each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The in an agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

So, Clintons' welfare reform and Clintons' 'balanced' budget weren't his either?

Pete

bobabode
02-20-2013, 01:18 PM
So, Clintons' welfare reform and Clintons' 'balanced' budget weren't his either?

Pete

Now you're getting the swing of things, buddy!;)
Obie's debt belongs to Geee! Dubya.... :cool:

BlueStreak
02-20-2013, 02:26 PM
I'd put our guys up against anyone. There's more to success than wages, intelligence and productivity (and economic laws/regulations!) have a lot to do with it.


After the last few days that I've had at work....I'd say we're completely screwed if intelligence and productivity are key to success.

Regards,
Dave

piece-itpete
02-20-2013, 02:33 PM
http://www.untamedtresses.com/images/smilies/spittake.gif

I remember back when China was becoming 'capitalized' I read an article about a work program there, to encourage productivity. The guy had seen huge banners, one at a bank - 'Work hard or you will be fired' :D

Pete

finnbow
02-20-2013, 02:34 PM
http://www.untamedtresses.com/images/smilies/spittake.gif

I remember back when China was becoming 'capitalized' I read an article about a work program there, to encourage productivity. The guy had seen huge banners, one at a bank - 'Work hard or you will be fired' :D

Pete

I think they lifted that motto out of Mitt Romney's computer.

Bigerik
02-21-2013, 07:01 AM
Free trade among similar economies is not a bad thing. What has destroyed the US economy, and I now fully believe it is completely wrecked, is this stupid trade with China. America pumps money into that country, gives it it's intellectual property, and gives it all the jobs. China gives cheap shit back in return. Or some not so cheap shit.

The US is in the vast trade war with China. Been going on for ages. Except no one in the US seems to acknowledge it.

piece-itpete
02-21-2013, 08:14 AM
I thought we were trying to bring China into the realm of civilized nations through trade? Our China policy has been remarkably bipartisan.

Pete

Bigerik
02-21-2013, 08:19 AM
I thought we were trying to bring China into the realm of civilized nations through trade? Our China policy has been remarkably bipartisan.

Pete

Yeah, that's because both sides get envelopes full of cash from the pro-China lobbyists.

merrylander
02-21-2013, 09:44 AM
Yeah, that's because both sides get envelopes full of cash from the pro-China lobbyists.

Which makes me wonder how SCOTUS ever figured out how the 1st amendment covers lobbying? I have always thought that the word "person" in the Constitution and amendments meant a "citizen" not some foreign goverment.