US-Mexico trade deal is a biggie. (big win) Details inside.

[vacuum]

Preliminary Details of U.S./Mexico Trade Deal… (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/preliminary-details-of-u-s-mexico-trade-deal/) Posted on August 27, 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/preliminary-details-of-u-s-mexico-trade-deal/) by sundance (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/author/sundancecracker/)

In direct relationship to the checkbook policy that impacts middle-class Americans the U.S./Mexico trade deal is the biggest win so far in Trump’s presidency. There are such massive ramifications it could take days for anyone to comprehend how the granular details have such massive downstream consequences. The deal is incredibly complex.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-3.jpg?w=640&h=427 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-3.jpg)
At the 30,000 ft level, the deal positions Mexico to retain their current multinational investments, and through a series of sector-by-sector standards on origination the deal simultaneously closes the fatal NAFTA loophole. The agreement makes an economic manufacturing partnership between the U.S. and Mexico; and for assembly products third parties will have to produce parts and origination material within the U.S. and Mexico.
U.S.T.R. Lighthizer has put some details forward:
♦The NAFTA Loophole closure is explained in Summary Form HERE (https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/august/united-states%E2%80%93mexico-trade-fact-1); with emphasis on the Auto-Sector. The key is a 75% part origination level for auto-assembly; and a 40-45% level for parts with a minimum $16/hr wage rate. The source-origination rate (75%) is even higher than all previously forecast negotiation results.
Example of downstream consequences/benefits: German auto-maker BMW recently built a $2 billion assembly plant in Mexico (almost complete). Most of their core parts were coming from the EU (steel/aluminum casting components) and/or Asia (electronics). Now the assembly plant will have to source 75% of the auto-parts from the U.S. and Mexico, with 45% of those parts from facilities paying $16/hr. Result: BMW will need to modify their supply chain and build auto parts in the U.S. and Mexico.
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-2.jpg?w=640&h=427 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-2.jpg)
♦Agriculture is another important sector, explained in Summary Form HERE (https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/august/strengthening-nafta-agriculture). CTH needs to dig into the details on this sector. Overall it appears Mexico has agreed to a common set of food manufacturing safety standards. Additionally the removal of any/all subsidies in agricultural trade between the U.S. and Mexico. There’s more, a lot more, but it will require some analysis akin to separating grains of sand with a toothpick.
♦U.S.T.R. Lighthizer also provides a Summary Fact Sheet HERE (https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/august/modernizing-nafta-be-21st-century) with a broad high-level review of the agreement principles.


New “rules of origin” requirements to incentivize billions a year in vehicle and automobile parts production in the United States, supporting high-wage jobs.
The strongest, fully enforceable labor standards of any trade agreement.
New commitments to reduce trade-distorting policies for agricultural goods.
Improvements enabling food and agriculture to trade more fairly.
Strong and effective intellectual property protections.
The strongest disciplines on digital trade of any international agreement.
The most robust transparency obligations of any United States trade agreement.

NOTE: #7 is a critical point, with a great deal of emphasis, given the complexity of the rules of origin now constructed to close the NAFTA loophole.
White House Fact Sheet Available HERE (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-keeping-promise-renegotiate-nafta/).
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-1.jpg?w=640&h=427 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-1.jpg)
CTH will have a lot more on the specific details, but we wanted to get the links to the fact sheets out quickly. Because of the fundamentally flawed prior agreement, this new trade agreement has massive consequences far beyond what would normally be considered.
Not only is Asia, specifically China, impacted; but so too are the EU and other international trade partnerships. The critical point is that the U.S. and Mexico have agreed to partner in our approach toward the rest of the world. Outgoing globalist Mexican President Pena Nieto is not happy; incoming nationalist Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador is ultimately the winner.
Through the efforts of Robert Lighthizer (U.S.) and Jesus Seade (AMLO) the Trump administration has now closed one of the access routes into coveted U.S. market, exploited by multinational corporations and countries (using NAFTA). The Mexico route is secure, agreements are made, and now attention turns toward Canada.
Think about the BMW example above, the downstream ramifications within this agreement are massive. It is not coincidental that Canada’s Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland is in Germany (https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2018-08-27/canada-appeals-for-german-backing-amid-saudi-rights-row) coordinating the response. Now that a deal with Mexico has been reached, Canada has lost all prior leverage.
Remember, the U.S. and Mexico have agreed to “no protectionist tariffs/subsidies” in the agricultural sector. Canada protects its dairy sector with massive protectionist tariffs and subsidies. It is doubtful Trudeau and Chrystia can retreat from their construct.
Therefore:

“I think with Canada, frankly, the easiest we can do is to tariff their cars coming in. It’s a tremendous amount of money and it’s a very simple negotiation. It could end in one day and we take in a lot of money the following day,” Trump said (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trade-nafta/u-s-mexico-reach-nafta-deal-pressure-turns-to-canada-idUSKCN1LC1E7?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=twitter).
Canada responded:

Canada responded with a statement Friday night, saying: “Our focus is unchanged. We’ll keep standing up for Canadian interests as we work toward a modernized trilateral NAFTA agreement.” (link (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/27/trump-says-hes-terminating-nafta-announces-new-trade-agreement-with-mexico.html))
This will likely be the outcome. Like it or not, Canada gets to continue protecting dairy sector and gives up its auto-manufacturing sector as a consequence.
Freeland is expected to arrive in the U.S. tomorrow….

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/canadian-trade-team1.jpg?w=640&h=474 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/canadian-trade-team1.jpg)


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/preliminary-details-of-u-s-mexico-trade-deal/

[vacuum]

Mexican Trade Team: Regardless of Canada The Deal Between the U.S. and Mexico Still Stands… (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/mexican-trade-team-regardless-of-canada-the-deal-between-the-u-s-and-mexico-still-stands/)
Posted on August 27, 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/mexican-trade-team-regardless-of-canada-the-deal-between-the-u-s-and-mexico-still-stands/) by sundance (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/author/sundancecracker/)

So much good news: WASHINGTON (Reuters) (https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-trade-nafta-videgaray/u-s-mexico-trade-deal-stands-even-if-canada-left-out-mexican-minister-idUKKCN1LC20P?rpc=401&amp) – The trade deal between the United States and Mexico will stand even if Canada does not come to an agreement with the Trump administration in the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Mexico’s foreign minister said on Monday (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c48scHewzI).

“If for any reason the government of Canada and the United States do not reach an agreement, we already know that there will still be a deal between Mexico and the United States.”
~ Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray (link (https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-trade-nafta-videgaray/u-s-mexico-trade-deal-stands-even-if-canada-left-out-mexican-minister-idUKKCN1LC20P?rpc=401&amp))
Remember those “private meetings” between Jesus Seade and Robert Lighthizer?
It is said: a picture is worth a thousand words. Cue the audio visual (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4hRUXqE5pA):
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/jesus-seade.jpg?w=640&h=347 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/jesus-seade.jpg)
The incoming Mexican President, Andrés Manuel López Obrador,(AMLO)’s representative is Jesus Seade. The outgoing Mexican President Pena Nieto’s representative is Mexican Secretary of Economy Idelfonso Guajardo.
Why the joy in Seade and the defeated Guajardo? The answer is in the details: (https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2018/august/modernizing-nafta-be-21st-century)
One of President Trump’s principal objectives in the renegotiation is to ensure the agreement benefits American workers. The United States and Mexico have agreed to a Labor chapter that brings labor obligations into the core of the agreement, makes them fully enforceable, and represents the strongest provisions of any trade agreement.
Key Achievement: Worker Representation in Collective Bargaining

The Labor chapter includes an Annex on Worker Representation in Collective Bargaining in Mexico, under which Mexico commits to specific legislative actions to provide for the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining.
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/amlo-andres-manuel-lopez-obrador.jpg?w=640&h=360 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/amlo-andres-manuel-lopez-obrador.jpg)
BOOM !! Key Achievement: Labor Rights Recognized by the International Labor Organization

The Labor chapter requires the Parties to adopt and maintain in law and practice labor rights as recognized by the International Labor Organization, to effectively enforce their labor laws, and not to waive or derogate from their labor laws.
Additionally, the chapter includes new provisions to take measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced by forced labor, to address violence against workers exercising their labor rights, and to ensure that migrant workers are protected under labor laws.
Key Achievement: New Labor Value Content Rule

To support North American jobs, the deal requires new trade rules of origin to drive higher wages by requiring that 40-45 percent of auto content be made by workers earning at least $16 USD per hour.
Why is this important?
Massive consequences.
♦First, this is the part where AMLO gets a key win for his new Mexican economic agenda; the right of workers to form collective bargaining agreements, ie. unions. Mexico’s President-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrado is not only coming into office with a mandate, he is also bringing with him a majority parliament on his agenda.
By putting the rights of Mexican workers in the forefront two win/win objectives are accomplished for both AMLO and Trump. (1) The reason U.S. corporations moved to Mexico was partly to exploit cheaper labor. Now that those corporations have invested themselves in Mexico (sunk cost) they will have to agree to collective bargaining; thereby raising the standard of living for Mexican workers (an AMLO goal). (2) For future investment considerations the low-wage incentive for relocation of U.S. manufacturing is now eliminated (a Trump goal).
Multinational vulture corporations can no longer bribe local Mexican officials for low-wage regional labor. The Mexican worker, with AMLO legislation, will have the ability to fight off exploitation.

Manufacturing corporations will need to raise wages (AMLO win), and corporations will be less likely to move out of the U.S. based on the wage analysis portion of the total cost equation (Trump win). I have no doubt this was part of the ‘closed-door’ private discussions between Seade and Lighthizer. No doubt.
♦Secondly, how is the left-wing political opposition in Canada and the U.S. going to fight against this deal which includes protections for collective bargains and union representation? Trump fractures the Democrats/Liberals by supporting a policy that they claim is at the heart of their support base. Do you really think Senator Patrick Leahy, or Senator Bernie Sanders are going to go on record against organized labor?
How can Justin or Chrystia from Canada going to argue against higher Mexican wages?
The U.S./Mexico 75% auto rule of origin for manufacturing parts works in synergy with the demand that 45% of those manufacturing components must come from assembly and manufacturing wages of $16/hr or higher. In essence AMLO and Trump are controlling the calculations within the Total Cost of Manufacturing.
Watch the Canadian Leftists try to reconcile today’s events while not yet absorbing how the projected Mexican wage increases are factored into the total agreement. (first six minutes):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5qzEeF-M5U.

Here’s the Mexican trade team press conference. Use the ‘closed caption’ for the English sub-titles:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c48scHewzI.

Within this agreement President-elect Lopez-Obrador and President Trump have fractured Wall Street’s exploitative multinational Big Club. No doubt, despite his hundreds of millions spent, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Tom Donohue is finally seeing significant defeat on the horizon.

The first White House visit by AMLO is going to be epic!
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/the-big-club-trade-conflict.jpg?w=640&h=584 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/the-big-club-trade-conflict.jpg)https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/smile-1.jpg?w=640&h=360 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/smile-1.jpg)


This entry was posted in Auto Sector (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/auto-sector/), Big Government (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/big-government/), Big Stupid Government (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/big-stupid-government/), Canada (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/canada/), China (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/china/), Decepticons (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/decepticons/), Deep State (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/deep-state/), Dem Hypocrisy (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/dem-hypocrisy/), Donald Trump (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/donald-trump/), Economy (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/economy/), Election 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/election-2018/), energy (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/energy/), Environmentalism (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/environmentalism/), European Union (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/european-union/), History (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/history/), Legislation (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/legislation/), media bias (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/media-bias-2/), Mexico (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/mexico/), NAFTA (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/nafta/), President Trump (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/president-trump/), Trade Deal (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/), Uncategorized (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/uncategorized/), US dept of agriculture (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/us-dept-of-agriculture/), US Treasury (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/us-treasury/), USA (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/usa/). Bookmark the permalink (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/mexican-trade-team-regardless-of-canada-the-deal-between-the-u-s-and-mexico-still-stands/).


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/mexican-trade-team-regardless-of-canada-the-deal-between-the-u-s-and-mexico-still-stands/

[vacuum]

U.S.T.R. Robert Lighthizer Explains U.S./Mexico Trade Agreement and China Trade Reset… (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/u-s-t-r-robert-lighthizer-explains-u-s-mexico-trade-agreement-and-china-trade-reset/) Posted on August 27, 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/u-s-t-r-robert-lighthizer-explains-u-s-mexico-trade-agreement-and-china-trade-reset/) by sundance (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/author/sundancecracker/)
The corporate-owned, Wall Street-controlled, U.S. media are twisting, contorting, and in many cases hiding the consequential details of the U.S-Mexico trade agreement.
The reason for MSM disinformation campaign is quite simple: the deal helps the U.S. middle-class; helps both U.S. and Mexican workers; begins deconstructing the tentacles of Wall Street economic policy; and highlights a major success story for President Trump and the country in general. The UniParty, Wall Street and the agenda of their purchased political class are being dismantled…. All of those interests are furious.
While it is still available, watch the 10 minutes of this report (and interview with U.S.T.R. Lighthizer) from 07:00 to 17:00 to get a generally good idea of how significant a day this is. (prompted, just hit play)



https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-4.jpg?w=665&h=348 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-mexico-oval-4.jpg)
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro also appears on Fox Business with Lou Dobbs to discuss the deal.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ka5mtxO0H0Q.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/president-trump-shizo-abe-g7.jpg?w=640&h=533 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/president-trump-shizo-abe-g7.jpg)



This entry was posted in Auto Sector (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/auto-sector/), Big Government (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/big-government/), Canada (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/canada/), Donald Trump (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/donald-trump/), Election 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/election-2018/), media bias (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/media-bias-2/), N Korea (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/n-korea/), President Trump (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/president-trump/), Trade Deal (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/), Uncategorized (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/uncategorized/), US dept of agriculture (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/us-dept-of-agriculture/), US Treasury (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/us-treasury/), USA (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/usa/). Bookmark the permalink (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/u-s-t-r-robert-lighthizer-explains-u-s-mexico-trade-agreement-and-china-trade-reset/).

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/u-s-t-r-robert-lighthizer-explains-u-s-mexico-trade-agreement-and-china-trade-reset/

[vacuum]

Justin from Canada Painted His Country Into a Lose/Lose Trade Corner – More Details of U.S-Mexico Deal… (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/justin-from-canada-painted-his-country-into-a-lose-lose-trade-corner-more-details-of-u-s-mexico-deal/) Posted on August 27, 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/justin-from-canada-painted-his-country-into-a-lose-lose-trade-corner-more-details-of-u-s-mexico-deal/) by sundance (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/author/sundancecracker/)
By choosing politics over fundamental trade economics Justin and Chrystia from Canada have painted themselves into an isolated position on the renegotiated North American Trade deal. Here’s the basic Canadian conundrum.
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/lighthizer-freeland-trudeau.jpg?w=640&h=295 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/lighthizer-freeland-trudeau.jpg)
The U.S. and Mexico have agreed to manufacturing origination terms; wage and labor improvements; elimination of AG subsidies and non tariff barriers; and removal of all protectionist tariffs – so long as the structural terms of commerce are upheld.
In order for Canada to join the U.S. Mexico deal they would need to:


(1) eliminate soft-wood subsidies in the lumber sector;
(2) eliminate protectionist tariffs in the AG (Dairy) sector;
(3) accept the 75% rules of origin, eliminating the NAFTA loophole;
(4) agree to the enforcement mechanisms for all the above;
(5) allow U.S. banks to operate in Canada (financial sector).

Each of these five issues, now locked-in and agreed by the U.S. and Mexico are “take-it-or-leave-it” terms for Canada to join. There’s almost no-way, given the politicization of the Canadian plan, for Justin and Chrystia to agree to those terms and keep their fragmented political support base appeased.
Therefore, absent total acquiescence, it is likely Canada will keep their soft-wood lumber subsidies, keep their protectionist Dairy tariffs, keep their banking rules blocking U.S. access, and face a 25% duty on U.S. auto imports – effectively destroying their auto manufacturing sector. Car companies (ex. Toyota) will simply leave Canada and return to building/assembling in the U.S.
Here’s the content from a conference call (https://publicpool.kinja.com/subject-press-call-on-the-united-states-mexico-trade-a-1828635990) filling in more details:
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/us-trade-team-nafta-mexico.jpg?w=640&h=454 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/us-trade-team-nafta-mexico.jpg)
Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. We are here today to do a call on the U.S.-Mexico Trade Agreement. I am joined by United States Trade Representative, Ambassador Lighthizer; Deputy Trade Representative, Ambassador Mahoney; and Assistant to the President, Jared Kushner.
We will be having opening remarks that will be on the record, attributable to the individual speaker. They will state their name prior to speaking. Question-and-answer will be attributable to a senior White House official/senior administration official.
Again, the opening remarks will be on the record, attributable to the individual speaker, and question-and-answer will be attributable to a senior administration official.
With that, I’m going to turn the call over to Ambassador Lighthizer.
AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: Yeah. Hi, everyone. This is Bob Lighthizer. I’ll just make a few remarks and then I think Jared will, and then we’ll take questions.
I would say I think this is an extremely historic time. I think that we had a NAFTA agreement that had gotten seriously out of whack, that had led to large trade deficits, and that needed updating; it needed modernizing consistent with the way the economy works now.
I think we had an enormous amount of hurdles to overcome to renegotiate an agreement that had about $1.1 [trillion] or $1.2 trillion worth of total trade, by far the biggest agreement of its kind in the world.
We had a number of — I’m just trying to give you a little context. We had a number of rounds — seven rounds — over a period of almost exactly one year. Some of these rounds had as many as a 1,000 people in it because you’re negotiating — from the three countries — because you’re negotiating so many complicated provisions.
We’ve now come out the other side of that process with Mexico. We hope that Canada can join in now, and expect them to begin that process very soon.
With respect to the United States and Mexico, we have an agreement that is absolutely terrific. I think it is fair to say we’ll do a rebalancing. I think it’s going to lead to more jobs for American workers and farmers, but also more jobs for workers and farmers from Mexico.
I think it’s going to modernize the way we do automobile trade, and I think it’s going to set the rules for the future at the highest standards in any agreement yet negotiated by any two nations for things like intellectual property, and digital trade, and financial services trade, and all of the things that we think of as the modernizing, cutting-edge places that our economy is going.
So this is great for business. It’s great for labor. It has terrific labor provisions in it. Stronger and more enforceable labor provisions that have ever been in an agreement by a mile. Not even close. And these modernizing provisions are also the greatest that anyone has ever had.
So we’re very, very excited about it. We’re very, very happy to be partnering with Mexico on this difficult process of negotiations. And we look forward to having this — either be joined by Canada or not — but go through to a very successful conclusion of the Congress, hopefully with overwhelming Republican and Democratic support, and have it lead to real, tangible benefits for our workers and our farmers.
Now, with that, I’ll let — I think Jared wants to make a comment, and then we’ll take questions.
MR. KUSHNER: Thank you, Ambassador. And I also want to point out that this was a deal that was done, really, in almost record time. We did it very quickly for one of these trade deals. And a big part of why we were able to do that is because of the great cooperation we had with the Mexican government. We had a very constructive relationship. It was very focused on the future. We were not — we were willing to address the problems that each side had. And it was by having a very constructive and frank dialogue over the course of many months that we were able to reach a very quick agreement by the standards of these trade agreements. So I do give a lot of credit to the Mexican negotiating team, obviously to Ambassador Lighthizer and his team, and also to President Pena Nieto and President-elect Lopez Obrador.
We believe, very strongly, that Mexico is our neighbor. Our countries share a lot in common. And solving the problems that we had in our trading relationship will hopefully be a springboard off of which we can address a lot of other issues that we share together. But the spirit of cooperation and trust that’s been built between our countries, as we’ve worked very closely over the past year and a half together, hopefully will just continue to get better and lead to an even better, more prosperous, and safer relationship between the two countries.
So we came in with a joint objective. The same objective we both had was for us to make America better off and to make Mexico better off. And I think what we were able to accomplish with this deal is really to create a win-win transaction. And there, hopefully, will be a lot more to come.
I’ll just say, finally, that the President — obviously, he’s fighting for America. He’s fighting for our workers. He’s fighting for our companies. And he will be tough, but at the end of the day, he’ll be fair. And we presented a deal, ultimately with his leadership, that he thought was fair deal that would make our country better. And so he was — so he was happy to do it.
And with that, I’ll pass it maybe to Ambassador Mahoney, or we could open up for questions.
AMBASSADOR MAHONEY: You guys have said it all. Let’s start with questions.
♦Q Hey, good afternoon. How do you expect Canada is going to respond to the news of this deal? And how much of this big announcement today was designed to put pressure on Trudeau? There seems to be a real suggestion here that the train is leaving the station; you’re either on it, or you’re going to get left behind.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I don’t — you know, this wasn’t designed to put pressure on anyone or anything like that. We’re in a position where we had a negotiation that went on for close to a year. The last few months — several weeks, I guess I’d say, more accurately — we decided we were better off to try to get a deal with one party and then hopefully the other.
It tends to be the way these things work in any event, right? It’s hard to have three people all just have the lightbulb go on at the same time. So this is not part of the negotiating strategy or anything. We did it in what I think to be the sensible way. We worked with one party. We got through. We worked it out. And now we’re bringing the other party in. The other thing — or the other party is coming in for the talks.
The other thing I would say is, let’s remember that we had seven rounds, as I said, and literally tens of thousands of hours of negotiating that were either bilateral between the United States and Canada, or trilateral.
So it isn’t like Canada is coming in at the last minute. They know the issues; we’ve talked about all these issues. And I think this is a normal, orderly way to arrive at an agreement with three people.
♦Q Thank you. Where do things stand on the U.S. demands for a sunset provision and changes to investor-state dispute resolutions?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So we have an alternative to sunset, which we think works. It accomplishes what we need to accomplish, and it also protects the interests of investors, may they be in Mexico or the United States.
So the way our agreement would work is we have a 16-year period — and we would have a review after 6 years, where we would hope to work out problems. And then, at the end of that review, we would expect that the agreement would be extended for another 16 years, and that you would think of it as more or less a rolling forward of the agreement timeframe, but with real opportunity for a review in a way that will keep both modernizing on track and keep disputes from festering. So that’s number one, the first question.
The second on the ISDS: We have a process wherein there will be an ISDS provision for everyone in both countries, who — which ISDS will be limited in the following ways, essentially –and that is, they’ll be for expropriation for a national — failure to give national treatment or failure to give MFN.
With respect to companies that have contracts with the government and either government: In certain sectors, they get the old-fashioned ISDS, and those sectors are oil and gas, infrastructure, energy generation, and telecommunications. So that’s the answer to that question.
♦Q Thanks so much for doing this call. I wanted to find out, are the number of TN visas changing in this new agreement? Is it a part of it?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: No.
♦Q Great. Thanks very much. Can you just outline the specifics of how this agreement is different from NAFTA? The President obviously said it was better. Can you sort of specifically lay out how that is the case? And regarding Canada, will the tension between President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau affect the ability to get a deal?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I’m not going to comment on the latter. I don’t know that there is any tension. The reality is that leaders of nations tend to do what’s in the interest of their nation, and that’s what I expect to happen in most cases, or almost all cases.
So in terms of the way this is better than NAFTA 1.0, that’s a very, very, very long answer. It’s better in all respects. But having said that, I’ll just mention some of the high, high — you know, the top lines.
One, the rules of origin for automobiles — remember automobiles are hundreds of billions of dollars in trade — are much more detailed, and would be much better for the region and for the United States.
The labor requirements are totally different. They weren’t even in the agreement in the last one. And they’re completely enforceable.
In areas like digital trade, financial services, IP, all of the kinds of things you think of as a new economy, we are setting newest high-level standards that are not only better than NAFTA 1.0 but are also better than TPP or, I would suggest, any other agreement that’s been negotiated.
So to me, it’s innovative. I think this alternative method of review is innovative, that it will give both people the focus of a strong, viable agreement that goes on for years, and years, and years.
And with respect to every sector — environment — every sector, this is an improvement not only over NAFTA — the original NAFTA — or I should say, the agreement formally known as NAFTA, but also far better than TPP.
So there literally is not an area where we didn’t plus up what we had done before. And this with the cooperation of both; this is not just the United States. The Mexicans also wanted this result.
♦Q Thank you for doing this call. In the Oval Office, you said that you expected to notify Congress by Friday of the new deal, which would be signed by the end of November. What type of deal do you envision notifying Congress about? And what type of deal will Congress — or should Congress be prepared to sign at the end of November with many GOP leaders now weighing in and saying that any deal has to be a trilateral one?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, first, so the way this will work is, we send up a letter and then 90 days later it is signed by the heads of government. Right? So that’s basically the process.
And what we will do is, ideally, Canada will be in and we’ll be able to notify that. If Canada is not in, then we’ll notify that we have an agreement with Mexico and that we’re open to Canada joining it.
So it clearly is something that we believe is consistent with the statute. And in terms of — I don’t know, you know, and of the views of whoever the GOP leaders you’re talking about, but I think there are a lot of people who think we’re better off with all three countries involved. And I hope we will get to that result.
♦Q Hi, and thanks for doing the call. To follow up on that question, when you notify Congress of the renegotiation, that notification indicated that they’d be trilateral discussions. How can you notify — if Canada doesn’t join on — how could you notify a bilateral agreement if that initial notification was for a trilateral discussion?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I’ll just repeat it one more time. We’re going to — if it comes to that, ideally we’ll have the Canadians involved. If we don’t have the Canadians involved, then we will notify that we have a bilateral agreement that Canada is welcome to join. And we think that satisfies our requirements — the requirements of the statute.
♦Q Hi there. Can you tell us if you think that you’re confident that those labor provisions you’re speaking about will suffice for Democrats to support this deal?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So I guess I missed — the question is, do I think the labor provisions will —
♦Q Yes, sir. You were talking about those labor provisions. Do you think that that will be enough for the Democrats to support the deal?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, thank you. Yes. I — it certainly is my hope. I can’t, obviously, speak for members; they make their own decisions. But I believe there has never been a trade agreement remotely as good on labor from the point of view of organized labor and Democrats, for whom that’s a high priority, than this one.
So it is in detail. It lays out the obligations, which are all obligations which the United States has and which Mexico is having. Mexico is in the process of reforming their labor laws.
And it is — they are across the board; they require secret ballots — all the kinds of things that we would expect. And they are enforceable. They’re enforceable. Mexico can enforce these obligations against us and we can enforce the baseline obligations against them.
So I do believe when this is studied and looked at by the people, be they Republicans or Democrats, for whom this is a major issue, they’re going to say this is the most forward-leaning labor provisions ever agreed to, and they can be completely enforceable. So I’m optimistic that we’re going to get a lot of bipartisan support.
♦Q Yes, sir. Thanks for holding this call. President Trump talked about terminating NAFTA. Just to clarify, he meant that in the context of getting a separate — getting, in addition to the deal announced today, a separate bilateral deal with Canada, since two bilateral deals would therefore represent — make NAFTA moot. Is that the case? And what hopes do you have that Canada is available or willing to do a separate bilateral deal?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you. First of all, I should add that, on the labor provisions, these were endorsed by the President-elect, who’s very forward-leaning — of Mexico, very forward-leaning on labor issues also. Because they were part of the negotiations and were engaged on some provisions, but particularly this provision.
What was the other question?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: It’s on whether —
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Oh, yeah, the issue of termination. So, I’m sorry — the issue of termination. It’s impossible to have two agreements at the same time. Whenever you have an agreement that supplants another agreement, you have to pause or get rid of the prior agreement. How you do that is something that we’re still in the process of looking at. At a minimum, the new agreement will supplant the old agreement. Right? Just as a technical matter.
We did that when we went to NAFTA from the 1988 Canadian deal. So I think we have to — every strategy, every tactic is not laid out at this point, but notionally, what the President is saying is you can’t have two agreements like this. And when you get a new agreement, you’re not going to have NAFTA anymore.
♦Q Hi. Yes, you mentioned oil and the ISDS. Can you explain exactly what the changes are regarding the oil industry and how — oil investments — and how that will be handled at the request of the new government? And also just going back, just for clarification, on the sort of sunset replacement, you said it’s extended for 16 years but revised or reviewed every 6 years? Did I understand you correctly?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me answer the first question first, which is, regarding oil and gas investments in Mexico, given the way that the Mexican energy sector is set up, those companies — or American companies operating down there — have contracts with the Mexican government. For those companies, there’s no change in ISDS. They continue to have the full suite of ISDS protections that they enjoy under NAFTA 1.0.
And with regard to the review and term extension provision, the way it works is that there’s a 6 — there’s a period of a 16-year term on the deal, but every 6 years you have a review. At each 6-year review, the parties can decide to extend the term another 16 years.
♦Q For a fresh 16 years.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: For a fresh 16 years. Right.
So you would go — you know, the first instance, if you get to your 6, and the parties decided that they wanted to push it out another 16 years, you’d then be — you’d be 16 years from your 6. So you’d be at — I guess at year 22.
So we — but if the parties decide at year 6 that they do not wish to bump it out another 16 years, then what they will do is they will meet and have a review every year in the hopes that they can solve whatever issues have arisen between them, and agree upon another 16-year extension.
So the idea here is that these reviews have consequences. They’re incentives for the parties to deal with any issues, to continue to modernize the agreement. But at the same time, you’re always far enough away from the end to where it, ideally, will not affect investment.
♦Q Hi there. Thanks for doing this call. If Canada were to enter back into the agreement, what would it be called if not NAFTA?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We’ll figure something out, but right now we have a United States-Mexico Trade Agreement that we’re working on. We’ll work with Canada when they — I guess we’re going to start this afternoon with them. And we’re focused more on the substantive issues, and hopefully we’ll get those resolved, and then we’ll pick what the name should be.
Thank you.
♦Q Yes, thank you for doing this call. I just wanted to make sure, specifically: Has Mexico agreed to a bilateral deal if Canada can’t be brought onboard?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think we’re at a position where we’re going to have discussions with Mexico over the — sorry, we’ll have discussions with Canada this week; see where we get to. But I think, at the end of the day, Mexico is in a position where they want to protect their markets, and they’ll hopefully do what’s right for Mexico.
Mexico does have an agreement with Canada through TPP, so it wouldn’t hurt their trading relationship. But again, I think we all have a preference to see it come together. But if we’re not able to do that, then we’ll move on bilaterally.
But for more clarity, maybe ask the Mexicans. So that’s just my speculation.
END (https://publicpool.kinja.com/subject-press-call-on-the-united-states-mexico-trade-a-1828635990)
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/trump-friends-trade-team-ross-mnuchin-navarro-lighthizer.jpg?w=640&h=1075 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/trump-friends-trade-team-ross-mnuchin-navarro-lighthizer.jpg)https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/lighthizer-freeland-nafta.jpg?w=615&h=322 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/lighthizer-freeland-nafta.jpg)
I am reminded how badly Chrystia Freeland screwed up the negotiations in January of 2018 when she demanded that Canada be allowed to arbitrarily set their own trade import standards with China… This was right after idiot Justin signed Canada on to the TPP trade agreement.
Any canucklehead could see that signing on to TPP and simultaneously demanding to set your own standards for manufacturing origination was a poison pill. It would make the NAFTA fatal flaw infinitely worse for the U.S….. any idiot could see that problem. That was the moment when Lighthizer gave up on Canada.
FLASHBACK to the End of Round Six: (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/01/30/nafta-round-6-ustr-robert-lighthizer-highlights-canadas-deceptive-negotiation-approach/)

Ambassador Lighthizer (https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2018/january/closing-statement-ustr-robert): It is a pleasure to be here in Quebec. Montreal is one of the great cities of the world, and I have not been back in many years, and I’ve missed it. I used to come here in the 70s and 80s with my wife and children to go to Mont-Tremblant and learn how to ski. We loved the French culture, we loved the excellent food, the wonderful skiing and as I recall, it was cold all the time. That hasn’t changed at least.
[…] Now let me turn to the Sixth Negotiating Round and the status of our talks. We believe that some progress was made. We closed one chapter, as Ildefonso [Guajardo] said it was the chapter on corruption, which is a very important chapter, and we made some progress on a few others. More importantly though, we finally began to discuss some of the core issues. So this round was a step forward, but we are progressing very slowly.
We owe it to our citizens, who are operating in a state of uncertainty, to move much faster. Of course, negotiating as a group of three is more difficult than bilateral talks. Often, issues become more complicated and contentious when there are three parties.
I would like to comment on two proposals by the Canadians, one of which has been in the press quite a bit, and that is a presumed compromise on rules of origin.
We find that the automobile rules of origin idea that was presented, when analyzed, may actually lead to less regional content than we have now and fewer jobs in the United States, Canada, and likely Mexico. So this is the opposite of what we are trying to do.
In another proposal, Canada reserved the right to treat the United States and Mexico even worse than other countries if they enter into future agreements. Those other countries may, in fact, even include China, if there is an agreement between China and [Canada]. This proposal, I think if the United States had made it, would be dubbed a “poison pill.” We did not make it, though. Obviously, this is unacceptable to us, and my guess is it is to the Mexican side also.
Finally, I would like to refer, because I think it fits into this context to an unprecedented trade action that Canada brought against the United States very recently. It constitutes a massive attack on all of our trade laws. If it were successful, it would lead to more Chinese imports into the United States and likely fewer Canadian goods being sold in our market.
Now we understand that countries often challenge specific actions taken by another country in the context of trade laws. This is normal and what we expect. But this litigation essentially claims that 24 years ago, the United States effectively gave away its entire trade regime in the Uruguay Round. Of course, we view this case as frivolous, but it does make one wonder if all parties are truly committed to mutually beneficial trade. It also underscores why so many of us are concerned about binding dispute arbitration. What sovereign nation would trust to arbitrators or the flip of a coin their entire defense against unfair trade? (more (https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2018/january/closing-statement-ustr-robert))
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/nafta-january-2018.jpg?w=640 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/nafta-january-2018.jpg)
Right friggin’ there, January 30th 2018 (https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2018/january/closing-statement-ustr-robert), is when Canada lost. I’m a hobbyist for granular details in U.S. trade history. That moment can be marked as the exact day when the Canadian government made a fatal flaw in their negotiating strategy. That day in January created the place where they are today in August. Isolated.


This entry was posted in ASEAN (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/asean/), Auto Sector (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/auto-sector/), Big Stupid Government (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/big-stupid-government/), Canada (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/canada/), Dem Hypocrisy (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/dem-hypocrisy/), Economy (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/economy/), Election 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/election-2018/), Legislation (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/legislation/), media bias (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/media-bias-2/), Mexico (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/mexico/), NAFTA (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/nafta/), President Trump (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/president-trump/), Trade Deal (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/), Uncategorized (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/uncategorized/), USA (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/usa/). Bookmark the permalink (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/justin-from-canada-painted-his-country-into-a-lose-lose-trade-corner-more-details-of-u-s-mexico-deal/).

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/27/justin-from-canada-painted-his-country-into-a-lose-lose-trade-corner-more-details-of-u-s-mexico-deal/

[Neuro]

The genius of this was to leave Canada out in the cold. Now essentially they have a take it or leave it deal. They have very little negotiation space.

As for BMW I don’t think they will be able to source 75% of parts in a reasonable time frame. It is a long process to set up a parts manufacturer. They’ll probably end up closing the factory in Mexico and sell US-Mexico Beamers from Germany with tariffs. If you want a Beamer get one now, they’ll be way more expensive in the future.

[Ares]

The genius of this was to leave Canada out in the cold. Now essentially they have a take it or leave it deal. They have very little negotiation space.

As for BMW I don’t think they will be able to source 75% of parts in a reasonable time frame. It is a long process to set up a parts manufacturer. They’ll probably end up closing the factory in Mexico and sell US-Mexico Beamers from Germany with tariffs. If you want a Beamer get one now, they’ll be way more expensive in the future.

Already have one, but parts may be a problem. :) lol

In other words for Canada, the saying should go:

Elect a cuck, expect to get fucked. :)


Reading through some of the early press releases Trump has just crushed every single incentive for our manufacturers to uproot and leave to Mexico.

[ziero0]

As for BMW I don’t think they will be able to source 75% of parts in a reasonable time frame.
Easy solution. When the E.U. implodes the U.S. moves in and incorporates the United States of Europe into the union. Q.E.D.

If we are lucky Russia might even want in on the deal.

[vacuum]

Canada is screaming bloody murder.

They're shell shocked.

Chrystia Freeland’s so-called friends in Mexico bid her adios on NAFTA

Konrad Yakabuski
Published August 29, 2018

A year ago, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland was touting her relationship-building skills with her Mexican and U.S. counterparts on the NAFTA file as proof she was the right person to pilot the Trudeau government’s efforts to save the continental free-trade agreement.

“It’s extremely valuable that we’re close,” Ms. Freeland told (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/meet-chrystia-freeland-the-woman-defining-canadas-foreign-role/article35964992/)The Globe and Mail’s Adam Radwanski as she rhymed off the names of senior U.S. and Mexican officials with whom she was negotiating NAFTA’s fate. “I exchange texts with Luis and Ildefonso all the time.”

This week, Ms. Freeland’s so-called friends happily threw her under the bus as Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray and Economy Secretary Ildefonso Guajardo negotiated a bilateral U.S.-Mexico trade deal that gives ground on several key Canadian priorities. And despite all the diplomatic niceties about hoping Canada signs on, Mexico is quite prepared to bid us adios.

“In any scenario, we will have a free-trade agreement between Mexico and the U.S., regardless of what happens with Canada,” Mr. Videgaray said following Monday’s breakthrough deal.

While Mexican negotiators were breaking out the champagne, Canadian officials were insisting that our absence from the party had nothing to do with a clash of personalities. You would hope that to be true; that any decision to exclude Canada from the talks did not stem from anything as petty as the personal dislike of top U.S. negotiator Robert Lighthizer and U.S. President Donald Trump for Ms. Freeland and her boss, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Yet, we know enough about Mr. Trump to realize that operating out of personal spite or enmity is what he does best. You only had to witness his graceless reaction to the death last week of Republican Senator John McCain – one of the President’s fiercest critics who voted against Mr. Trump’s failed attempt to overhaul Obamacare – to take the measure of his smallness.

From Day 1, Ms. Freeland and Mr. Lighthizer were bound to clash. She is a proud proselytizer of the so-called Davos consensus that sees globalization as a good thing that allows high-minded elites to gather in exclusive enclaves to promote inclusive capitalism all while hobnobbing with their billionaire friends. He is an old-school negotiator who sees global trade as a zero-sum game and shares Mr. Trump’s belief that his country has been getting hosed.

By June, Mr. Lighthizer had had enough lectures on Canada’s “progressive trade agenda” to exclude Ms. Freeland entirely from the talks. While Mr. Videgaray was courting Team Trump – the Wall Street Journal reported this week that the Mexican Foreign Minister has visited the White House about 45 times since Mr. Trump took office – Ms. Freeland was taking swipes (https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/14/2018-diplomat-of-the-year-chrystia-freeland-read-the-transcript/) at the very U.S. administration she was tasked with softening up.

The result is that Canada is now before a fait accompli – an extremely flawed U.S.-Mexico deal – that it must somehow try to both fix and join without blowing the whole thing up. And it must do all this by Friday or risk being sidelined on trade for the duration of the Trump presidency.

To say that Canada has been out-negotiated up to this point is an understatement. But Mexico’s ability to strike a deal shows that, from the outset, it understood much better than Canada what the Trump administration needed in any new agreement. And while Mexico’s concessions on dispute settlement, investor protection, minimum content and rules of origin would turn back the clock on continental economic integration, they may be the only way to save the furniture (tariff-free access to the U.S. market) until a more trade-friendly U.S. administration comes along. Mexico has decided to accept managed trade, rather than free trade, with the United States. That was always the most likely outcome of any negotiation.

Making it unpalatable for U.S. manufacturers to locate plants in Mexico or Canada has always been the Trump administration’s top priority. No amount of lecturing by Canada on the win-win benefits of continental supply chains was ever going to change that. This is a fact-challenged U.S. administration that means what it says: America First. Anything that facilitates cross-border investment – such as a NAFTA dispute resolution mechanism independent of U.S. courts – is by definition antithetical to Mr. Trump’s way of thinking.

The question now is not whether Canada can stand its ground, but rather how much it will need to give up in order to avoid being shut out entirely by Ms. Freeland’s former friends.

Follow Konrad Yakabuski on Twitter @konradyakabuski (https://www.twitter.com/konradyakabuski)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-chrystia-freelands-so-called-friends-in-mexico-bid-her-adios-on-nafta/

[Ares]

his is a fact-challenged U.S. administration that means what it says

LOL Fact-challenged? Nice. So America hasn't been getting raped on trade for close to 30 years now due to NAFTA?

Something tells me these "free trade" globalist cock suckers are mad at having to eat sour grapes as the American piggy bank is closed.

[ziero0]

So America hasn't been getting raped on trade for close to 30 years now?

Depends. I would gladly trade my promissory note in exchange for your 280SL. How is that for an equitable trade?

[vacuum]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyJpVlqzwSY

Seriously....what the hell is wrong with Canada?

[Horn]

I'm not sure, but this is probably dollar positive news +1

Climate change suffers a major blow.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jajLYjIW0Q

[vacuum]

President Trump Notes Canadian Trade Priorities Conflict With U.S-Mexico, Here’s the Likely End Result… (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/09/01/president-trump-notes-canadian-trade-priorities-conflict-with-u-s-mexico-heres-the-likely-end-result/)

Posted on September 1, 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/09/01/president-trump-notes-canadian-trade-priorities-conflict-with-u-s-mexico-heres-the-likely-end-result/) by sundance (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/author/sundancecracker/)

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has submitted a regulatory 90-day notification to congress outlining the intent to modify the U.S. trade deal with Mexico according to mutually agreed terms.

However, the Canadian trade priorities; including retention of protectionist tariffs (dairy) and non-regulatory barriers (telecom/banking); in combination with subsidies (lumber/aeronautics), make Canada joining the deal almost impossible.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/trump-tweet-nafta-canada.jpg?w=640&h=433
(https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/trump-tweet-nafta-canada.jpg)
Canada is scheduled to meet with Lighthizer again on Wednesday, but it seems very doubtful the political needs for Justin Trudeau would allow any three-way agreement.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-freeland-and-trudeau.jpg?w=640&h=360
(https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/trump-freeland-and-trudeau.jpg)
If you take the U.S-Mexico deal out of the U.S-Canadian discussion and just look at the fundamental baselines for the Canadian position it becomes easier to see the problem.

On the issues at the heart of the Canadian trade priorities any movement away from the current trade relationship with the U.S. is a loss.

In general terms the U.S. wants: the elimination of tariffs, the elimination of subsidies and the elimination of non-tariff barriers to trade. The Trump/Lighthizer position is to create an actual trade bloc (Canada joins), or a bilateral agreement based on the same principles that would apply to a trade bloc.

President Trump could offer to eliminate the current Steel and Aluminum tariffs so long as Canada agrees to limits on imported Steel/Aluminum from China. However, it doesn’t look like Canada is willing to agree to terms around ‘rules of origin’ because Canada no longer has a heavy industrial base as part of their economic foundation.

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/amlo-2-andres-manuel-lopez-obrador.jpg?w=300&h=180 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/amlo-2-andres-manuel-lopez-obrador.jpg)

Mexico, via President-elect Lopez-Obrador, wants to establish heavy industry to expand the Mexican economy and create a real manufacturing industrial base.

AMLO sees energy resource development as financial collateral toward achieving more actual heavy manufacturing investment in Mexico. Guess what? He’s right.

Conversely, and showcasing an entirely different set of economic priorities, Canada has slowly removed its heavy industry at the behest of liberal environmental policy and shows no signs of wanting to reestablish that sector.

Without a heavy manufacturing industrial base, Canada needs to retain their import of component parts (made from heavy manufacturing) and simply assemble those parts in Canada. The U.S. and China are their main suppliers for Canadian component goods. A limited industrial base precludes Canada from agreeing to any rules of origin that could essentially limit their economy.

To form a trade relationship with the U.S., based on the same manufacturing priorities applied to the U.S-Mexico deal, Canada would have to fundamentally reverse decades of trade and internal economic/regulatory policy; -OR- Canada would have to limit their Asian purchases and use the U.S. and/or Mexico as the source of their component part origination. This is basic industrial economics.

Again, if you take the U.S-Mexico agreement away from any review of a U.S-Canada agreement, what you discover is that in a bilateral discussion of trade between the U.S. and Canada; the hungry Canadian already eats 2/3rds of the pizza (current terms).

Any move to make the pizza (trade relationship) more equitable in a bilateral deal (50/50) means Canada will have to give up some pie. Canada doesn’t have any current internal economic policy they are willing to give up.

Canada wants to retain their lumber and aeronautics subsidies; they want to retain their protectionist dairy tariffs; they want to retain their barriers keeping their banking and telecommunications sectors protected from external competition; and they want to keep the current manufacturing and assembly processes for durable goods without the pesky industrial/environmental challenges from creating the components of those goods.

This is what Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland call “protecting Canadian workers, and protecting Canadian values”.
That’s why President Trump simply looks at the challenge and says it is far easier to accept the Canadian position and make an independent move that will remove 1/4 of the pizza. That move would be to place a 20 to 25% tariff on Canadian manufactured automobiles which will essentially mean those auto companies will relocate back into the U.S.

Beyond automobiles President Trump and Robert Lighthizer will then, inside the bilateral agreement or separately if no agreement possible, establish a duty on any imported durable good that exceeds an established percentage of North American content. This shuts down the third-party exploitation loophole.

This is where I somewhat disagree with those who say President Trump has been setting up this auto-tariff scenario all along. It’s not that Trump’s motive/strategy has been to remove the auto-manufacturing per se’, but rather that President Trump has long-accepted the ‘Canadian priorities’ as they exist. Trump understands the problem at its root and basic cause, and he see’s this approach as the most simple and logical solution.

Tax Canadian automobiles at 25% and one-quarter of the pie will revert back to the U.S.
Done.

Canada gets to keep its priorities intact; and Justin/Chrystia get to tell their constituents they maintained the values of the Canadian people.

See how that works?

https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/lighthizer-not-amused.jpg?w=640&h=480 (https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/lighthizer-not-amused.jpg)


This entry was posted in Auto Sector (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/auto-sector/), Canada (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/canada/), Donald Trump (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/donald-trump/), Election 2018 (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/election-2018/), Environmentalism (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/environmentalism/), Legislation (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/legislation/), media bias (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/media-bias-2/), NAFTA (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/nafta/), President Trump (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/president-trump/), Trade Deal (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/trade-deal/), Uncategorized (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/category/uncategorized/). Bookmark the permalink (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/09/01/president-trump-notes-canadian-trade-priorities-conflict-with-u-s-mexico-heres-the-likely-end-result/).

[monty]

John Birch Society author Kristin(((Stockheimer))) says new NAFTA is on the road to North American Union.

Vicky Davis’ research, who posts much of her work on TVOI News, also points to a continuation of a North American Union. http://tvoinews.net/corruption/pirates-ports-treason/


NAFTA Furthers the North American Union Merger
https://www.jbs.org/jbs-news/news/item/19277-nafta-furthers-the-north-american-union-merger

Kristin Stockheimer (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://www.jbs.org/jbs-news/news/itemlist/user/23103-kristinstockheimer)

Their agenda, whether they accomplish it through a trilateral or bilateral agreement, is for the new NAFTA agreement to be made compliant with the Marrakesh Agreement, which established the World Trade Organization (WTO) and which in fact not be “free trade,” but a globalist sovereignty-destroying deal. (https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/30007-new-nafta-deal-with-canada-this-month)

That’s happening on the surface; digging deeper, the process to combine the U.S., Mexico, and Canada is already bearing fruit. The New American writer Christian Gomez has exposed how the three North American countries are being integrated into a North American Union energy infrastructure. (https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/29925-shocking-government-report-outlines-north-american-energy-integration-scheme) This integration is demolishing America’s independence by ceding power in the name of North American cooperation, supposedly to bring additional security and stability.

A 59-page report published by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) stated, “State and DOE officials we interviewed said they did not expect the U.S. renegotiation of NAFTA and withdrawal from the Paris Agreement to have significant impact and stated that the energy sector in North America is already well integrated.”

What does this mean? The Deep State culprits are constantly at work, and they are already integrating systems right under our noses. Mr. Gomez covers it perfectly:
The last North American Leaders’ Summit was held on June 29, 2016, in Ottawa, Canada, between Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, and then-U.S. President Barack Obama.

Although no future meetings have been scheduled yet with President Donald Trump, this report reveals the continued behind-the-scenes moves toward a North American Union by the Deep State.


This tactic has the continued potential to merge the countries together using energy as an excuse.
By aligning energy regulations, the average American household would be subject to regional energy management dictating their consumption down to miniscule details. It would erase boundaries and borders between the three countries. Local and state governments couldn’t do anything to change the laws and Congress couldn’t either. The end result would be a country that doesn’t control its own energy and power plants but would be slaves to the North American Union bureaucracy.

Integration is taking place whether Americans notice or not. Let’s make sure they notice, so we can stop and reverse it! NAFTA is a vital stepping stone for the globalists to morph from a regional trade bloc to a complete regional government known as the North American Union. This threat to sovereignty must be stopped. It’s about time we put a wrench in their plans, just as we did more than a decade ago. Let’s not only send an email to our representatives and senators in Congress, but let’s do it in swarms, as well as call and then distribute our Deep State special reports in your community.

Is the North American Union on your politicians’ radar?

Take Action:


Get your group in coordination to send Congress and the President an email to Get US Out! of NAFTA and other regional integration schemes. (https://www.votervoice.net/JBS/campaigns/58679/respond)
Educate others on the North American Union by reading and sharing “Shocking Government Report Outlines ‘North American Energy Integration’ Scheme”. (https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/north-america/item/29925-shocking-government-report-outlines-north-american-energy-integration-scheme)
Hand out our Deep State Special Reports (January 8, 2018 (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://www.jbs.org/store/shoptna/tna-back-issues/tna-2018-back-issues/the-new-american-january-8-2018-2) and August 20, 2018 (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://www.jbs.org/store/shoptna/tna-back-issues/tna-2018-back-issues/the-new-american-august-20-2018-2)) as well as our “Are you a Globalist or Americanist?” slim jim (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://www.jbs.org/store/shopjbs/are-you-a-globalist-or-an-americanist-slim-jim).


Image from Wikimedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag-Map_of_the_North_American_Union.svg) by NuclearVacuum, CC BY-SA 3.0.

[monty]

Now Vicky Davis is reporting on a foreign investment company moving into Grant County Oregon. Does it tie into the North American Union plot? I think maybe so. Whether or not it does it is still part of the global plan.

Heads Up Grant County – Incoming. http://tvoinews.net/corruption/heads-up-grant-county-incoming/
Posted By: Vicky Davis (http://tvoinews.net/author/vicky-davis/)on: August 02, 2018In: Corruption (http://tvoinews.net/category/corruption/), Featured (http://tvoinews.net/category/featured/)Tags: Economic Development (http://tvoinews.net/tag/economic-development/), Grant County (http://tvoinews.net/tag/grant-county/), Les Zaitz (http://tvoinews.net/tag/les-zaitz/), Paris Club (http://tvoinews.net/tag/paris-club/)2 Comment (http://tvoinews.net/corruption/heads-up-grant-county-incoming/#comments)
Related

[Note: I’m taking pains to respond to this so be patient because the reason will become obvious]


https://i1.wp.com/tvoinews.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Forest_meme.jpg?resize=300%2C251 (https://i1.wp.com/tvoinews.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Forest_meme.jpg)

On the Voice of Grant County Facebook page, one of the moderators posted a meme (https://www.facebook.com/901946629902924/posts/1680900192007560/?comment_id=1680910642006515&reply_comment_id=1684670604963852) about something a Forest Service Manager is alleged to have said in the 1990s. Immediately, there was a troll who claimed that it was fake news. I don’t know who produced the meme but after what happened this morning, I suspect that it was a set up for The Voice of Grant County facebook page. For the record, I didn’t post the meme, I just commented on it.

What I got in my email this morning is a notification that I didn’t know where the comment is – nor how to respond to it (I do now because I read the fine print). I did however notice the #fakenews and if I were a betting person, I’d bet that is a twitter account for the Southern Poverty Law Center goons who are all over the west feeding information back to the SPLC who then passes it on to the FBI who then adds that information in the terrorist watchlist databases. As everybody knows (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/28/gop-lawmaker-wants-answers-on-fbis-alleged-southern-poverty-law-center-ties.html), it’s the patriotic Americans that SPLC watches and reports on.


https://i1.wp.com/tvoinews.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/forest_service_fake_news.jpg?fit=683%2C394

The thing that got my attention first though was the source of the post – GC Economic Development (https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100009016051175). That was a ah ha! moment… the foreign invasion is about to begin in John Day and it will be easier if they can cut off information from the outside and that is their pattern – control the media in the area first. Notice the sign on image of the GC Economic Development webpage. It’s a sign for an industrial park. That industrial park no doubt will be built with EB-5 foreign money. The foreign investors will get tax breaks which ultimately amount to a virtually free business for them. The people in John Day will get property tax increases to pay for new infrastructure and if they follow the pattern they did in Twin Falls, Idaho, they won’t even get the jobs after the government subsidies run out.

Economic development is a strategy to create debt – not to benefit the people of the local area. Greenfields development which is what it would be in John Day is development in rural areas where the tax base is very small relatively speaking. When foreign money comes in, the local town officials are “incentivized” (read bought off) to incur the debt for “job creation”. Ultimately, the Houston Terms (1990 – G7) of the Paris Club debt-for-nature (http://www.clubdeparis.org/en/) swap will occur. (Actually, it’s not clear if they are already executing the debt-for-nature swap allowing foreign money to come in to takeover American land. That could be the reason for allowing foreign development of greenfields in the first place).

During the occupation of Malheur in Burns County, I started looking at Les Zaitz because he was focused on the people who were protesting and not looking at the reason for the protest. In the research I was doing, I found that Les Zaitz was the president of the Grant County Economic Development Council (GCEDC). The GCEDC was the dba name of The Institute For Conscious Culture – a foreign owned corporation.


https://i2.wp.com/tvoinews.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Conscious_Culture_dba.jpg?fit=512%2C359

And it was discovered that the man who set up Michael Emry was actually a career FBI informant who sets people up for a living. He works with both the FBI and the JDL. It was found that he was even leader of a KKK group. Of course this kind of activity in an area draws accusations of “racism” which – in the past has shut people up so that the COMMUNIST THUGS could get away with what they want without objection from the locals. There is a pattern here and they keep repeating it over and over and over.


Another article that I wrote and posted on the Voice of Grant County website about the repeating pattern was lost when I didn’t renew the website. But “miraculously”, that website was recovered by somebody and is now in the Internet archive. Somebody with pull had to do that because I sure don’t know of a way to get a deleted website back. A couple of months ago, just for the hell of it, I checked the archives to make sure it wasn’t there – but it was there and I recovered it:


So what is it that they are going to be doing in Grant County? International Corridor. Inland Port.


https://i0.wp.com/tvoinews.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Canamex_Corridor_with_Intermountain.jpg?fit=395%2C 429

[vacuum]

Deadline is midnight tonight.

Canada will either be in or out. Its big news either way.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmC9OPaSsLQ

[vacuum]

Done deal?


U.S. and Canada Reach Trade Deal to Keep Nafta Trilateral

By Jenny Leonard (https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/ATpfLAnnS4k/jenny-leonard)
, Josh Wingrove (https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/ASLqWCO-Zh4/josh-wingrove)
, and Jennifer Jacobs (https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/ASzQCOA5TQg/jennifer-jacobs)
September 30, 2018, 10:18 PM UTC Updated on October 1, 2018, 2:25 AM UTC


Parties plan to publish trilateral text by midnight deadline
U.S. business, lawmakers urged U.S. to keep Canada in pact


https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/iODVWd2Bef20/v0/800x-1.jpg

Canadian, American and Mexican flags stand on stage ahead of the first round of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) renegotiations in Washington, D.C., U.S. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg LISTEN TO ARTICLE
1:56

The U.S. and Canada have agreed on a trade deal that would save the North American Free Trade Agreement as a trilateral bloc, according to three people familiar with the matter.

President Donald Trump has approved the developments and the expectation is that an agreement will be announced on Sunday night, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Canadian officials are working on the final touches.

U.S. and Canadian negotiators have been negotiating around the clock this weekend to make a Sunday midnight deadline that would allow the countries to sign the deal as the final act before Mexico’s outgoing President Enrique Pena Nieto leaves office at the end of November.

Reaching a pact with Canada allows the 24-year-old pact to remain trilateral and for the U.S. to check another box for its legislative process in the lead up to a congressional vote.

Trump has said he wants to rename the deal the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement.

Smoother Path

Some people familiar with the talks credited Trump senior adviser Jared Kushner for helping smooth the path toward a deal. When it looked like negotiations had stalled or broken down due to friction between the U.S. and Canadian sides, Kushner kept talks going with aides close to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, including Gerald Butts and Katie Telford, three people said.

Lighthizer and Kushner were at the USTR office in Washington on Sunday afternoon negotiating final details by conference call with the Canadians in Ottawa. U.S. officials have been keeping Trump in the loop on every step since Friday, two people said.

U.S. lawmakers and business have urged the administration to keep Canada in the deal but the trilateral nature had been in jeopardy after Trump on Aug. 27 announced he reached a deal with Mexico that Canada could join if it’s willing to make concessions. They agreed to publish the text by the end of September.

The Canadian dollar was rallying on anticipation of a deal, strengthening 0.5 percent, while the Mexican peso gained abut 0.2 percent.

[vacuum]

I'm relatively disappointed we compromised with Canada to get a deal. But I guess its significantly better than what we have. Just not as good as it could have been if we held to no compromises and did the auto tariffs.

I guess we'll wait and see as more details emerge how it turned out overall.

[Horn]

All trade deals are bad trade deals, for common men everywhere.

[monty]

Here comes the North American Union . . . . .

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/01/11/biden-trudeau-and-amlo-release-the-declaration-of-north-america-prepare-your-affairs-accordingly/


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/nafta-flag.png (https://theconservativetreehouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/nafta-flag.png)
The DNA is a declaration centered around six pillars: 1) diversity, equity, and inclusion; 2) climate change and the environment; 3) competitiveness; 4) migration and development; 5) health; and 6) regional security. The action-oriented outline provides the roadmap for the ideological intentions of the three governments.

I would strongly urge everyone to review the declaration [READ HERE (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/01/10/declaration-of-north-america-dna/)], because just like a 5-year financial plan, every family should first know the scale of the chaos they are going to encounter in order to make plans to secure their life.

The declaration does not need much interpretation to be understood, this is the framework for how the United States, Canada and Mexico see the future of North America.

Unfortunately, only a miniscule number of Americans will read the Declaration (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/01/10/declaration-of-north-america-dna/), and yet it is information like this that tells you the intent of government in our life.

[Neuro]

It’s a declaration of dependence. Whatever government is chosen will be subject to govern according to this roadmap and the overlords of it.

[Cebu_4_2]

Not to mention the WEF that's going down.

[woodman]

Here comes the North American Union . . . . .

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/01/11/biden-trudeau-and-amlo-release-the-declaration-of-north-america-prepare-your-affairs-accordingly/

[/SIZE]
I can hardly read it. Making me sick.