The U.S. and Mexico struck a trade deal on Monday that paved the way to replace NAFTA, the current agreement between the two nations and Canada. Mexican officials promised the Latin American country would start buying as farm product as possible from the USA.
Nextbigfuture notes that the USA was always the 800-pound gorilla in the NAFTA (Canada-Mexico-USA) trade deal. The US could always have forced more lopsided terms. Other administrations had chosen towards long-term relations.
Canada has remained on the sidelines of trade talks recently while the U.S. aimed at first striking a deal with Mexico.
“Once the bilateral issues get resolved, Canada will be joining the talks to work on both bilateral issues and our trilateral issues,” Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s foreign minister, said Friday. “And will be happy to do that, once the bilateral US-Mexico issues have been resolved.”
There was some hope that a new NAFTA could be solidified before Mexico’s government turnover on Dec. 1.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
And you know all this how?
Nextbigfuture notes that the USA was always the 800-pound gorilla in the NAFTA (Canada-Mexico-USA) trade deal. The US could always have forced more lopsided terms. Other administrations had chosen towards long-term relations. ” So… this is just an opinion piece..? That statement there is not fact, it’s not “real”, you literally just made it up. The US can’t and won’t “force” anything, we had a terrible deal that was nothing more than an aid package costumed up as a trade agreement. Plus our supposed “partners” frequently just ignored the terms and did what they wanted at the expense of US businesses. It was unethical and unsustainable. That has now been fixed
So what are the actual differences between the old agreement and the new agreement? No body will sign out to an agreement that leaves them at a total disadvantage. And why would Mexico sign any agreement when the odds are that Trump will burn it before the ink dries.
And you know all this how?
Nextbigfuture notes that the USA was always the 800-pound gorilla in the NAFTA (Canada-Mexico-USA) trade deal. The US could always have forced more lopsided terms. Other administrations had chosen towards long-term relations.””So… this is just an opinion piece..? That statement there is not fact”””” it’s not “”””real”””””””” you literally just made it up.The US can’t and won’t “”””force”””” anything”””” we had a terrible deal that was nothing more than an aid package costumed up as a trade agreement. Plus our supposed “”””partners”””” frequently just ignored the terms and did what they wanted at the expense of US businesses. It was unethical and unsustainable. That has now been fixed”””
So what are the actual differences between the old agreement and the new agreement? No body will sign out to an agreement that leaves them at a total disadvantage. And why would Mexico sign any agreement when the odds are that Trump will burn it before the ink dries.
I’m glad a deal has being struck, and look forward to hearing the details in the coming days.
Who cares? In fact, it helps Trump & Trumpism if Mexico can be made to look as it is reneging on the deal. Just like it helps that Dying Europe will NOT be raising their defense spending to 2% of GDP as they consistently have lied to us doing but not doing in the past. Both cases lets Trump scream “America First! MAGA!” while the Dems just talk about transgender bathroom rights. Then we end up giving both Mexico and NATO notice and REALLY play hard ball in the first case while outright abandoning them in the second.
So… this is just an opinion piece..? That statement there is not fact, it’s not “real”, you literally just made it up. ” Nope. This is established fact. The US IS the 800 pound gorilla of North America and will be so for DECADES. But you are correct in saying that ‘other administrations’ simply sold out the American people in the prior ‘agreement’.
I’m glad a deal has being struck and look forward to hearing the details in the coming days.
Who cares? In fact it helps Trump & Trumpism if Mexico can be made to look as it is reneging on the deal.Just like it helps that Dying Europe will NOT be raising their defense spending to 2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of GDP as they consistently have lied to us doing but not doing in the past. Both cases lets Trump scream America First! MAGA!”” while the Dems just talk about transgender bathroom rights. Then we end up giving both Mexico and NATO notice and REALLY play hard ball in the first case while outright abandoning them in the second.”””
So… this is just an opinion piece..? That statement there is not fact” it’s not “”real”””””””” you literally just made it up. “”””Nope. This is established fact. The US IS the 800 pound gorilla of North America and will be so for DECADES. But you are correct in saying that ‘other administrations’ simply sold out the American people in the prior ‘agreement’.”””
Your unsupported opinion only Nobody really cares about
Your unsupported opinion onlyNobody really cares about
I interpreted that as the “rights of transgender bathrooms”, as if the bathrooms themselves were being granted special privileges and free college scholarships. Then I realised that nobody, absolutely nobody, would be surprised if a pressure group DID start agitating for inanimate structures to be considered people and given money and political preference, and demanding more and more be done until “structural-americans” achieved equality in income, college degrees and positions on corporate boards.
It would be snarky to point out that for a Gorilla to reach 800 pounds it would have to be really fat, obese even.
I interpreted that as the rights of transgender bathrooms””” as if the bathrooms themselves were being granted special privileges and free college scholarships.Then I realised that nobody absolutely nobody would be surprised if a pressure group DID start agitating for inanimate structures to be considered people and given money and political preference”” and demanding more and more be done until “”””structural-americans”””” achieved equality in income”””” college degrees and positions on corporate boards.”””
It would be snarky to point out that for a Gorilla to reach 800 pounds it would have to be really fat obese even.
I know one thing. The Canadians were ordering vacation trailers like mad. Now it has almost completely dried up. I don’t think they take kindly to being considered a US national security threat having been a close allies, friends and trading partners with the US for many decades. If you think they can’t hurt us, guess again. They buy a lot from us. Canadians are looking for the “made in the USA” sticker and setting those items back on the shelf.
I know one thing. The Canadians were ordering vacation trailers like mad. Now it has almost completely dried up. I don’t think they take kindly to being considered a US national security threat having been a close allies friends and trading partners with the US for many decades. If you think they can’t hurt us guess again. They buy a lot from us. Canadians are looking for the made in the USA”” sticker and setting those items back on the shelf.”””
Russia spends 5.4 percent of its GDP on the military. The European Union has a GDP more than eight times the size of Russia’s, so if they wanted spending parity they should only be putting 0.675 % of their GDP into the military. That’s assuming they don’t want a war – if they keep sufficient strength to deter attack, any extra would be a waste of resources. The US spends 3.29 % of its GDP on the military, but since its economy is almost as big as Europe’s, and still bigger than China’s (which spends 1.9 %), it’s clear that America is by far the biggest spender on guns. Its allies, combined, also spend comfortably more than China and Russia combined, so if the US manages to hang on to those, it has overwhelming global superiority. A cynical person might almost say that someone spending that much on armaments – three times as much as China, and nine times as much as Russia – wasn’t actually doing it for ‘defense’, but was looking for a fight somewhere. Either that, or the spending isn’t getting value for money.
There were really big apes once: Gigantopithecus.
Russia spends 5.4 percent of its GDP on the military. The European Union has a GDP more than eight times the size of Russia’s so if they wanted spending parity they should only be putting 0.675 {22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of their GDP into the military. That’s assuming they don’t want a war – if they keep sufficient strength to deter attack any extra would be a waste of resources. The US spends 3.29 {22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of its GDP on the military but since its economy is almost as big as Europe’s and still bigger than China’s (which spends 1.9 {22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}) it’s clear that America is by far the biggest spender on guns. Its allies combined also spend comfortably more than China and Russia combined so if the US manages to hang on to those it has overwhelming global superiority. A cynical person might almost say that someone spending that much on armaments – three times as much as China and nine times as much as Russia – wasn’t actually doing it for ‘defense’ but was looking for a fight somewhere. Either that or the spending isn’t getting value for money.
There were really big apes once: Gigantopithecus.
Much like the NK “deal”, I have reservations about if this will be any real improvement on NAFTA. Mexican politicians know the timing of this deal is entirely political ahead of midterms. The US side may have simply just let them have a lot of what they wanted in time to claim some sort of deal being made. Of course there will be a few wins in there for special interest/voting groups in the U.S.
It’s difficult to fully gauge the actual spending effectiveness. One issue many European armies have is that they have very low readiness levels. Germany for example has quite a lot of hardware on paper but they under-invest in maintenance and spare parts to an alarming level; last year all of Germany’s subs had a lapse where they weren’t operational. There have even been training exercises where there were not enough machineguns to go around for all the units that needed them. Then there is how every country has different labor costs – some equipment being operated is quite expensive for what it is. Leclerc and Rafale are very expensive due to low production numbers. Much of what European militaries have is good quality, but some of it is very expensive because its more or less a subsidy for domestic industries.
Much like the NK deal”””” I have reservations about if this will be any real improvement on NAFTA. Mexican politicians know the timing of this deal is entirely political ahead of midterms. The US side may have simply just let them have a lot of what they wanted in time to claim some sort of deal being made. Of course there will be a few wins in there for special interest/voting groups in the U.S.”””
It’s difficult to fully gauge the actual spending effectiveness. One issue many European armies have is that they have very low readiness levels. Germany for example has quite a lot of hardware on paper but they under-invest in maintenance and spare parts to an alarming level; last year all of Germany’s subs had a lapse where they weren’t operational. There have even been training exercises where there were not enough machineguns to go around for all the units that needed them. Then there is how every country has different labor costs – some equipment being operated is quite expensive for what it is. Leclerc and Rafale are very expensive due to low production numbers. Much of what European militaries have is good quality but some of it is very expensive because its more or less a subsidy for domestic industries.
We get exceptionally poor value for money, even if all you are doing is comparing prices. When you factor in that most of it is worthless, as in, not needed, and it will become obsolete in a decade, then we are definitely the town idiot to squander so much on defense. Add in that we are doing it on credit? And we are easily outsmarted by skunks, opossums, and geese. Pork barrel is what is driving all this. And short of totally rewriting the Constitution, I am not sure how to get rid of this. Most other problems we can fix by decent laws and a few minor Amendments, but the fact that Congress is made up of politicians who are looking out for their little constituency first, and authorize the expenditures, virtually guarantees pork. You could require them to sign an oath that they will serve the country as a whole first, but most of them are liars, and the rest rationalizers, so that is hopeless. Yeah, I suppose that is rather depressing. Sorry. I don’t remember who it was, but they were military brass and were being questioned by Congress. A congressperson was asking if they had enough money and resources. They said, “Yes, they had everything they needed”. But, that does not mean anything to Congress, they just allocate tens of additional billions on top of whatever they gave them the year before. As some kind of minor adjustment, perhaps the military can be empowered to say: “No. We do not want or need this weapon” devise or unneeded expenditure. That may cut some programs, not many, but some of the clearly boneheaded ones. Or perhaps, for Congress to order anything for the military, the military first must request that expenditure, and perhaps have some say in negotiating a price and selecting the contractors.
We get exceptionally poor value for money even if all you are doing is comparing prices. When you factor in that most of it is worthless as in not needed and it will become obsolete in a decade then we are definitely the town idiot to squander so much on defense. Add in that we are doing it on credit? And we are easily outsmarted by skunks opossums and geese.Pork barrel is what is driving all this. And short of totally rewriting the Constitution I am not sure how to get rid of this. Most other problems we can fix by decent laws and a few minor Amendments but the fact that Congress is made up of politicians who are looking out for their little constituency first and authorize the expenditures virtually guarantees pork. You could require them to sign an oath that they will serve the country as a whole first but most of them are liars and the rest rationalizers so that is hopeless.Yeah I suppose that is rather depressing. Sorry.I don’t remember who it was but they were military brass and were being questioned by Congress. A congressperson was asking if they had enough money and resources. They said Yes”” they had everything they needed””. But”” that does not mean anything to Congress they just allocate tens of additional billions on top of whatever they gave them the year before. As some kind of minor adjustment”” perhaps the military can be empowered to say: “”””No. We do not want or need this weapon”””” devise or unneeded expenditure. That may cut some programs”” not many but some of the clearly boneheaded ones. Or perhaps for Congress to order anything for the military the military first must request that expenditure”” and perhaps have some say in negotiating a price and selecting the contractors.”””
What’s the same?
What’s the same?
And it has sunset clauses. And it weaken’s corporations’ ability to use the Agreement to override state/local regulations. Those are two very big changes. But TDS sufferers can not admit to that, so…,
Note: The deal is not signed yet. They have come to a preliminary agreement and are waiting for Canada to chime in (seriously chime in, not Justin’s Trump Derangement Syndrome bashing). THEN when a signed agreement is actually done, Trump will have something to send to Congress.
8{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of US GDP is involved in international trading of goods — exports/imports combined. (services is another thing) 50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of that (4{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of GDP) is between our NAFTA partners. So from the US point of view we are engaged in trade with Canada a lot. More than all the EU countries combined…but not a whole lot when you look at the entire GDP picture. Contrary to popular myths the US economy is just not as connected to the rest of the world as everyone thinks. Only about four other nations are less connected. North Korea being one of those. Whereas for Canada the portion of its GDP involving trade with the US is: In 2009 73{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of Canada’s exports went to the United States and 63{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of Canada’s imports were from the United States.So even more than China Canada is screwed & tattooed when it comes to its trade dependencies with the US. We hold ALL the cards. Which amazes me why Trudeau has gone out of his way to publicly bash Trump and even stabbed him in the back behind the scenes once already.
And it has sunset clauses. And it weaken’s corporations’ ability to use the Agreement to override state/local regulations.Those are two very big changes. But TDS sufferers can not admit to that so…
Note: The deal is not signed yet. They have come to a preliminary agreement and are waiting for Canada to chime in (seriously chime in not Justin’s Trump Derangement Syndrome bashing).THEN when a signed agreement is actually done Trump will have something to send to Congress.
Update: PM Justin Beaver Deepthroats Trump’s Côck! So much for Canadians ‘standing up to Trump!’. Hahahahah…just as I predicted (below). Canada’s Trudeau says NAFTA deal possible by Friday cnb.cx/2MBwzFQ
…and Prime Minister Justin Beaver Capitulates To Trump’s Demands! Canada’s Trudeau says NAFTA deal possible by Friday” cnb.cx/2MBwzFQ
Russia spends 5.4 percent of its GDP on the military. The European Union has a GDP more than eight times the size of Russia’s, so if they wanted spending parity they should only be putting 0.675 % of their GDP into the military” That’s not how it works. All of Russia’s equipment is domestically produced. They pay in rubles for goods with Russian costs, not European ones.
Just outright say how you hate America, Matteo. Such honesty on your part would be so much easier for everyone involved.
8% of US GDP is involved in international trading of goods — exports/imports combined. (services is another thing) 50% of that (4% of GDP) is between our NAFTA partners. So from the US point of view, we are engaged in trade with Canada a lot. More than all the EU countries combined…but not a whole lot when you look at the entire GDP picture. Contrary to popular myths, the US economy is just not as connected to the rest of the world as everyone thinks. Only about four other nations are less connected. North Korea being one of those. Whereas for Canada, the portion of its GDP involving trade with the US is: In 2009, 73% of Canada’s exports went to the United States, and 63% of Canada’s imports were from the United States. So, even more than China, Canada is screwed & tattooed when it comes to its trade dependencies with the US. We hold ALL the cards. Which amazes me why Trudeau has gone out of his way to publicly bash Trump and even stabbed him in the back behind the scenes once already.
Update: PM Justin Beaver Deepthroats Trump’s Côck!So much for Canadians ‘standing up to Trump!’. Hahahahah…just as I predicted (below).Canada’s Trudeau says NAFTA deal possible by Fridaycnb.cx/2MBwzFQ
…and Prime Minister Justin Beaver Capitulates To Trump’s Demands!Canada’s Trudeau says NAFTA deal possible by Fridaycnb.cx/2MBwzFQ”
Russia spends 5.4 percent of its GDP on the military. The European Union has a GDP more than eight times the size of Russia’s” so if they wanted spending parity they should only be putting 0.675 {22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of their GDP into the military””That’s not how it works. All of Russia’s equipment is domestically produced. They pay in rubles for goods with Russian costs”””” not European ones.”””
Just outright say how you hate America Matteo. Such honesty on your part would be so much easier for everyone involved.
Update: PM Justin Beaver Deepthroats Trump’s Côck!
So much for Canadians ‘standing up to Trump!’. Hahahahah…just as I predicted (below).
Canada’s Trudeau says NAFTA deal possible by Friday
cnb.cx/2MBwzFQ
…and Prime Minister Justin Beaver Capitulates To Trump’s Demands!
Canada’s Trudeau says NAFTA deal possible by Friday”
cnb.cx/2MBwzFQ
“Russia spends 5.4 percent of its GDP on the military. The European Union has a GDP more than eight times the size of Russia’s, so if they wanted spending parity they should only be putting 0.675 % of their GDP into the military”
That’s not how it works.
All of Russia’s equipment is domestically produced. They pay in rubles for goods with Russian costs, not European ones.
Just outright say how you hate America, Matteo.
Such honesty on your part would be so much easier for everyone involved.
8% of US GDP is involved in international trading of goods — exports/imports combined. (services is another thing) 50% of that (4% of GDP) is between our NAFTA partners. So from the US point of view, we are engaged in trade with Canada a lot. More than all the EU countries combined…but not a whole lot when you look at the entire GDP picture. Contrary to popular myths, the US economy is just not as connected to the rest of the world as everyone thinks. Only about four other nations are less connected. North Korea being one of those.
Whereas for Canada, the portion of its GDP involving trade with the US is: In 2009, 73% of Canada’s exports went to the United States, and 63% of Canada’s imports were from the United States.
So, even more than China, Canada is screwed & tattooed when it comes to its trade dependencies with the US. We hold ALL the cards.
Which amazes me why Trudeau has gone out of his way to publicly bash Trump and even stabbed him in the back behind the scenes once already.
And it has sunset clauses. And it weaken’s corporations’ ability to use the Agreement to override state/local regulations.
Those are two very big changes. But TDS sufferers can not admit to that, so…,
Note: The deal is not signed yet. They have come to a preliminary agreement and are waiting for Canada to chime in (seriously chime in, not Justin’s Trump Derangement Syndrome bashing).
THEN when a signed agreement is actually done, Trump will have something to send to Congress.
What’s the same?
We get exceptionally poor value for money, even if all you are doing is comparing prices. When you factor in that most of it is worthless, as in, not needed, and it will become obsolete in a decade, then we are definitely the town idiot to squander so much on defense. Add in that we are doing it on credit? And we are easily outsmarted by skunks, opossums, and geese.
Pork barrel is what is driving all this. And short of totally rewriting the Constitution, I am not sure how to get rid of this. Most other problems we can fix by decent laws and a few minor Amendments, but the fact that Congress is made up of politicians who are looking out for their little constituency first, and authorize the expenditures, virtually guarantees pork. You could require them to sign an oath that they will serve the country as a whole first, but most of them are liars, and the rest rationalizers, so that is hopeless.
Yeah, I suppose that is rather depressing. Sorry.
I don’t remember who it was, but they were military brass and were being questioned by Congress. A congressperson was asking if they had enough money and resources. They said, “Yes, they had everything they needed”. But, that does not mean anything to Congress, they just allocate tens of additional billions on top of whatever they gave them the year before.
As some kind of minor adjustment, perhaps the military can be empowered to say: “No. We do not want or need this weapon” devise or unneeded expenditure. That may cut some programs, not many, but some of the clearly boneheaded ones.
Or perhaps, for Congress to order anything for the military, the military first must request that expenditure, and perhaps have some say in negotiating a price and selecting the contractors.
Much like the NK “deal”, I have reservations about if this will be any real improvement on NAFTA. Mexican politicians know the timing of this deal is entirely political ahead of midterms. The US side may have simply just let them have a lot of what they wanted in time to claim some sort of deal being made. Of course there will be a few wins in there for special interest/voting groups in the U.S.
It’s difficult to fully gauge the actual spending effectiveness. One issue many European armies have is that they have very low readiness levels. Germany for example has quite a lot of hardware on paper but they under-invest in maintenance and spare parts to an alarming level; last year all of Germany’s subs had a lapse where they weren’t operational. There have even been training exercises where there were not enough machineguns to go around for all the units that needed them. Then there is how every country has different labor costs – some equipment being operated is quite expensive for what it is. Leclerc and Rafale are very expensive due to low production numbers. Much of what European militaries have is good quality, but some of it is very expensive because its more or less a subsidy for domestic industries.
Russia spends 5.4 percent of its GDP on the military. The European Union has a GDP more than eight times the size of Russia’s, so if they wanted spending parity they should only be putting 0.675 % of their GDP into the military. That’s assuming they don’t want a war – if they keep sufficient strength to deter attack, any extra would be a waste of resources. The US spends 3.29 % of its GDP on the military, but since its economy is almost as big as Europe’s, and still bigger than China’s (which spends 1.9 %), it’s clear that America is by far the biggest spender on guns. Its allies, combined, also spend comfortably more than China and Russia combined, so if the US manages to hang on to those, it has overwhelming global superiority.
A cynical person might almost say that someone spending that much on armaments – three times as much as China, and nine times as much as Russia – wasn’t actually doing it for ‘defense’, but was looking for a fight somewhere. Either that, or the spending isn’t getting value for money.
There were really big apes once: Gigantopithecus.
I know one thing. The Canadians were ordering vacation trailers like mad. Now it has almost completely dried up. I don’t think they take kindly to being considered a US national security threat having been a close allies, friends and trading partners with the US for many decades. If you think they can’t hurt us, guess again. They buy a lot from us. Canadians are looking for the “made in the USA” sticker and setting those items back on the shelf.
I interpreted that as the “rights of transgender bathrooms”, as if the bathrooms themselves were being granted special privileges and free college scholarships.
Then I realised that nobody, absolutely nobody, would be surprised if a pressure group DID start agitating for inanimate structures to be considered people and given money and political preference, and demanding more and more be done until “structural-americans” achieved equality in income, college degrees and positions on corporate boards.
It would be snarky to point out that for a Gorilla to reach 800 pounds it would have to be really fat, obese even.
Your unsupported opinion only
Nobody really cares about
I’m glad a deal has being struck, and look forward to hearing the details in the coming days.
Who cares? In fact, it helps Trump & Trumpism if Mexico can be made to look as it is reneging on the deal.
Just like it helps that Dying Europe will NOT be raising their defense spending to 2% of GDP as they consistently have lied to us doing but not doing in the past.
Both cases lets Trump scream “America First! MAGA!” while the Dems just talk about transgender bathroom rights. Then we end up giving both Mexico and NATO notice and REALLY play hard ball in the first case while outright abandoning them in the second.
“So… this is just an opinion piece..? That statement there is not fact, it’s not “real”, you literally just made it up. ”
Nope. This is established fact. The US IS the 800 pound gorilla of North America and will be so for DECADES.
But you are correct in saying that ‘other administrations’ simply sold out the American people in the prior ‘agreement’.
And you know all this how?
”
Nextbigfuture notes that the USA was always the 800-pound gorilla in the NAFTA (Canada-Mexico-USA) trade deal. The US could always have forced more lopsided terms. Other administrations had chosen towards long-term relations.
”
So… this is just an opinion piece..? That statement there is not fact, it’s not “real”, you literally just made it up.
The US can’t and won’t “force” anything, we had a terrible deal that was nothing more than an aid package costumed up as a trade agreement. Plus our supposed “partners” frequently just ignored the terms and did what they wanted at the expense of US businesses. It was unethical and unsustainable. That has now been fixed
So what are the actual differences between the old agreement and the new agreement? No body will sign out to an agreement that leaves them at a total disadvantage. And why would Mexico sign any agreement when the odds are that Trump will burn it before the ink dries.