Why Current Trade Deal is not in Interest of the United States

Magoo · Jun 29, 2019

This Trade Deal is written by a member of Council of Foreign Relations, an organization dedicated to forcing the united States into the new world order click on this link to learn the dirty details and why we must oppose it:

http://newswithviews.com/the-usmca-in-a-nutshell/

Pass this on to everyone you know.

PaulSmith69 · Jun 29, 2019

The biggest changes between it & NAFTA sound pretty good to me.:

Country of origin rules: Automobiles must have 75 percent of their components manufactured in Mexico, the US, or Canada to qualify for zero tariffs (up from 62.5 percent under NAFTA).
Labor provisions: 40 to 45 percent of automobile parts must be made by workers who earn at least $16 an hour by 2023. Mexico passed new labor laws to give greater protections to workers. Democrats still want tougher enforcement, though.
US farmers get more access to the Canadian dairy market: The US got Canada to open up its dairy market to US farmers, a big issue for Trump.
Intellectual property and digital trade: The deal extends the terms of copyright to 70 years beyond the life of the author (up from 50). It also extends the period that a pharmaceutical drug can be protected from generic competition, and includes new provisions to deal with the digital economy, such as prohibiting duties on things like music and e-books, and protections for internet companies so they’re not liable for content their users produce.
Sunset clause: The agreement adds a 16-year “sunset” clause — meaning the terms of the agreement expire, or “sunset” after 16 years. The deal is also subject to a review every six years, at which point the US, Mexico, and Canada can decide to extend the USMCA.

PaulSmith69 · Jun 29, 2019

This too says it is a good deal: https://www.heritage.org/trade/report/analysis-the-united-states-mexico-canada-agreement

PaulSmith69 · Jun 29, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
The biggest changes between it & NAFTA sound pretty good to me.:

Country of origin rules: Automobiles must have 75 percent of their components manufactured in Mexico, the US, or Canada to qualify for zero tariffs (up from 62.5 percent under NAFTA).

Labor provisions: 40 to 45 percent of automobile parts must be made by workers who earn at least $16 an hour by 2023. Mexico passed new labor laws to give greater protections to workers. Democrats still want tougher enforcement, though.

US farmers get more access to the Canadian dairy market: The US got Canada to open up its dairy market to US farmers, a big issue for Trump.

Intellectual property and digital trade: The deal extends the terms of copyright to 70 years beyond the life of the author (up from 50). It also extends the period that a pharmaceutical drug can be protected from generic competition, and includes new provisions to deal with the digital economy, such as prohibiting duties on things like music and e-books, and protections for internet companies so they’re not liable for content their users produce.

Sunset clause: The agreement adds a 16-year “sunset” clause — meaning the terms of the agreement expire, or “sunset” after 16 years. The deal is also subject to a review every six years, at which point the US, Mexico, and Canada can decide to extend the USMCA.

Oops! Forgot link:

https://www.vox.com/2018/10/3/17930092/usmca-mexico-nafta-trump-trade-deal-explained

Supposn · Jul 10, 2019

Maoo, economic policies effectively choosing to favor specific individuals, or selected groups, or characterizations of nations, or industries, or enterprises, are generally poor economic policies.
Within general but explicitly written laws, regulations, and guidelines, it's preferable that the markets rather than government determine individual global trade transactions.

I'm among the proponents for USA adopting the improved trade proposal described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. The unilateral, self-funding, substantially market-driven policy would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate USA's chronic annual trade deficits of goods while increasing our GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

Refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_certificates
and https://politicalfray.com/threads/usa-goods-could-be-more-price-competitive.5806/

Respectfully, Supposn

PaulSmith69 · Jul 10, 2019

Supposn said:
https://politicalfray.com/threads/usa-goods-could-be-more-price-competitive.5806/

US goods could be more price competitive if we DROP the minimum wage.

Supposn · Jul 10, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
US goods could be more price competitive if we DROP the minimum wage.

PaulSmith69, eliminating the federal minimum wage rate would do extremely little to increase USA's exports but it would extremely reduce the purchasing powers of lower wage employees and substantially reduce it for our median wage. Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn said:
Minimum wage. ... If rather than a political determination, the minimum rate would be annually cost of living adjusted in the same manner as social security retirement benefits, it would improve the condition of our working poor and decrease need for public assistance more than otherwise.

PaulSmith69 · Jul 10, 2019

Supposn said:
PaulSmith69, eliminating the federal minimum wage rate would do extremely little to increase USA's exports but it would extremely reduce the purchasing powers of lower wage employees and substantially reduce it for our median wage. Respectfully, Supposn

Worker productivity should improve.

Supposn · Jul 10, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
Worker productivity should improve.

PaulSmith69, reducing wage rates increase labors' productivity? Respectfully, Supposn

PaulSmith69 · Jul 10, 2019

Supposn said:
PaulSmith69, reducing wage rates increase labors' productivity? Respectfully, Supposn

Indeed. Business will have more flexibility therefore greater ability to concentrate on increasing productivity.

The booming economy has accelerated the modest productivity increases of the past. Less business restriction should increase the boom even greater, or at least keep it going, resulting in even greater productivity increases.

reedak · Jul 11, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
Worker productivity should improve.

My great friend, your boss should have reduced your salary to improve your productivity too.

PaulSmith69 · Jul 11, 2019

reedak said:
My great friend, your boss should have reduced your salary to improve your productivity too.

My productivity cannot get any lower than ZERO. Money for Nothing, my friend!

Supposn · Jul 11, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
Indeed. Business will have more flexibility, therefore, greater ability to concentrate on increasing productivity.

The booming economy has accelerated the modest productivity increases of the past. Less business restriction should increase the boom even greater, or at least keep it going, resulting in even greater productivity increases. ...

PaulSmith69, the federal minimum wage rate is one among factors affecting markets.

Minimum wage rate's “restrictions” on commercial enterprises are no more restrictive than are laws prohibiting fraud. The U.S. Congress have in both cases passed legislation they determined to be in the best interests of our nation's economic and social well-being.
Respectfully, Supposn

PaulSmith69 · Jul 11, 2019

Supposn said:
PaulSmith69, the federal minimum wage rate is one among factors affecting markets.

Minimum wage rate's “restrictions” on commercial enterprises are no more restrictive than are laws prohibiting fraud. The U.S. Congress have in both cases passed legislation they determined to be in the best interests of our nation's economic and social well-being.
Respectfully, Supposn

I doubt that very much. Few businesses are affected by laws against FRAUD, whilst MANY are affected by arbitrary minimum wage laws which literally seriously affect their business model.

Respectfully, Robert K. Aufgeblassen

Supposn · Jul 19, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
I doubt that very much. Few businesses are affected by laws against FRAUD, whilst MANY are affected by arbitrary minimum wage laws which literally seriously affect their business model.

Respectfully, Robert K. Aufgeblassen

PaukSmith69, you're posting nonsense.
The criminal statutes somewhat protect businesses from being defrauded and they somewhat discourage those businesses from committing frauds.
The federal minimum wage rate is a legally specific, rather than an indefinite arbitrary rate.
Respectfully, Supposn

PaulSmith69 · Jul 20, 2019

Supposn said:
The federal minimum wage rate is a legally specific, rather than an indefinite arbitrary rate.
Respectfully, Supposn

It is arbitrarily determined, & flat across the board to boot, even though costs of living vary WIDELY depending on where you live! Probably cost 3 or 4 times to live in Beverly Hills vs Tupelo, Mississippi!

Supposn · Sep 26, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
It is arbitrarily determined, & flat across the board to boot, even though costs of living vary WIDELY depending on where you live! Probably cost 3 or 4 times to live in Beverly Hills vs Tupelo, Mississippi!

PaulSmith69, the federal minimum wage rate determined by the U.S. Congress prevents a state from deliberately or inadvertently undermining the economy of any other state in the USA. This avoids problems among adjoining states. States may increase the minimum within their own jurisdictions but they're prohibited from reducing it . Respectfully, Supposn

PaulSmith69 · Sep 27, 2019

Supposn said:
PaulSmith69, the federal minimum wage rate determined by the U.S. Congress prevents a state from deliberately or inadvertently undermining the economy of any other state in the USA. This avoids problems among adjoining states. States may increase the minimum within their own jurisdictions but they're prohibited from reducing it . Respectfully, Supposn

If you say so, but States' Rights allow a certain amount of independence national control, and it could be considered UNCONSTITUTIONAL. With total freedom of movement, one can select any State which they have a greater preference.

Plus, if there was NO (Federal) minimum wage, all States would be equal, w/o any having an advantage.

Supposn · Sep 27, 2019

PaulSmith69 said:
If you say so, but States' Rights allow a certain amount of independence national control, and it could be considered UNCONSTITUTIONAL. With total freedom of movement, one can select any State which they have a greater preference.

Plus, if there was NO (Federal) minimum wage, all States would be equal, w/o any having an advantage.

PaulSmith69, you're contending that a restaurant near the border of a higher minimum wage rate state would not be of some disadvantage to it neighbor in a state lacking a minimum wage rate? This would have no effect upon the states' tax revenues and economies?

The federal minimum wage rate does not and cannot equate all states' economies, but it does reduce the extent that a state can deliberately or inadvertently undermine its neighboring state's economy.

What could be considered unconstitutional? The federal minimum rate has prevailed against every U.S. Constitutional challenge.
What freedom of movement do we now lack? Respectfully, Supposn

Why Current Trade Deal is not in Interest of the United States

Similar threads