United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement will replace NAFTA

There is a new US-Canada-Mexico trade deal. The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement replaces NAFTA. Three North American countries plan to sign before the end of November, after which it would be submitted to Congress.

The negotiations between American and Canadian officials involved offering more market access to U.S. dairy farmers, as well as Canada agreeing to an arrangement effectively capping automobile exports to the United States.

The deal will also modernize what was covered by NAFTA by adding provisions on digital trade and intellectual property.

The new trade pact will come up for review every six years.

48 thoughts on “United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement will replace NAFTA”

  1. I would like to see a non-partisan analysis. Words can be different. But will this actually change the balance of payment especially since Canada was at the losing end with NAFTA.

    Reply
  2. I would like to see a non-partisan analysis. Words can be different. But will this actually change the balance of payment especially since Canada was at the losing end with NAFTA.

    Reply
  3. What you are saying makes zero sense… Did we just magically create two more US clones with the same economic and political power as the original US??? Because if so nobody told the rest of us about it…

    Reply
  4. What you are saying makes zero sense… Did we just magically create two more US clones with the same economic and political power as the original US??? Because if so nobody told the rest of us about it…

    Reply
  5. Well, it won’t have more than an insignificantly small impact on the US economy. Note, you have to take into account the significance of the changes in this analysis. The most significant change was mandating labor rates on 40% of the content of automobiles. Trump thinks this will increase the number of cars manufactured here in the US but I and others think it will merely raise the wages in Mexico. This is good thing for Mexico but not for the US. There is a small foot in door of the Canadian dairy market. This has trivial impact on both sides of the border. The new digital rights provisions are just there for show. If we got a similar agreement with China that would be a big deal but these are meaningless provisions with Mexico and Canada.

    Reply
  6. Well it won’t have more than an insignificantly small impact on the US economy. Note you have to take into account the significance of the changes in this analysis.The most significant change was mandating labor rates on 40{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of the content of automobiles. Trump thinks this will increase the number of cars manufactured here in the US but I and others think it will merely raise the wages in Mexico. This is good thing for Mexico but not for the US.There is a small foot in door of the Canadian dairy market. This has trivial impact on both sides of the border.The new digital rights provisions are just there for show. If we got a similar agreement with China that would be a big deal but these are meaningless provisions with Mexico and Canada.

    Reply
  7. I would like to see a non-partisan analysis. Words can be different. But will this actually change the balance of payment especially since Canada was at the losing end with NAFTA.

    Reply
  8. What you are saying makes zero sense… Did we just magically create two more US clones with the same economic and political power as the original US??? Because if so nobody told the rest of us about it…

    Reply
  9. Well, it won’t have more than an insignificantly small impact on the US economy. Note, you have to take into account the significance of the changes in this analysis.

    The most significant change was mandating labor rates on 40% of the content of automobiles. Trump thinks this will increase the number of cars manufactured here in the US but I and others think it will merely raise the wages in Mexico. This is good thing for Mexico but not for the US.

    There is a small foot in door of the Canadian dairy market. This has trivial impact on both sides of the border.

    The new digital rights provisions are just there for show. If we got a similar agreement with China that would be a big deal but these are meaningless provisions with Mexico and Canada.

    Reply
  10. Historically the lack of gold has stifled economic growth. That was the main reason the US and other countries abandon it.

    Reply
  11. Historically the lack of gold has stifled economic growth. That was the main reason the US and other countries abandon it.

    Reply
  12. So what are the actually difference between the old treaty and the new treaty? It there an executive summary of the main difference? Just want to see what we got for twinkling on our old friends.

    Reply
  13. So what are the actually difference between the old treaty and the new treaty? It there an executive summary of the main difference? Just want to see what we got for twinkling on our old friends.

    Reply
  14. Yes. Look at the stats for the middle class incomes AND assets (savings especially) since before and after we closed the Gold Window and thus ended Bretton Woods. One might only get a measly 1% or less return in savings (actually, they got more) in the old gold standard era but there was zero monetary inflation (price rises are not monetary inflation but can be caused by actual monetary inflation). In fact, there was a constant, low-level DE-flationary effect from improved productivity and technology that really increased the value of one’s savings and earned wages over time when we had the gold standard. “One problem with finding such data is that most countries have tended to go on & off the gold standard at *roughly* the same time.” Not really. China stayed on a silver standard throughout the 19th century and first half of the 20th for example. Great comparison. When Britain briefly left the gold standard following WWI (but not during WWI, which was odd), many other nations stayed on it, including the US. The comparisons in economic performance and per capita wealth between those other nations is pretty stark. I suggest reading up on Nathan Lewis’ work. He covers historical examples with real data. But here is a link to just a ‘primer’ on the subject: http://bit.ly/2NXZBzW After reading his work, you’ll quickly figure out that most ‘experts’ on TV don’t know jack how the gold standard worked. Believe or not, but the study of money isn’t really taught in economics these days. The main reason we left the gold standard was very simple and very much not conformant with popular myth otherwise: Because the folks at the Federal Reserve lost the institutional knowledge to competently maintain it. All they had to do was engage in unsterilized interventions (buying/selling bonds and either adding to the money supply or subtracting from it in the process…not fiddling with interest rates at all), which is what banks did for centuries quite effectively. W

    Reply
  15. Yes. Look at the stats for the middle class incomes AND assets (savings especially) since before and after we closed the Gold Window and thus ended Bretton Woods. One might only get a measly 1{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} or less return in savings (actually they got more) in the old gold standard era but there was zero monetary inflation (price rises are not monetary inflation but can be caused by actual monetary inflation). In fact there was a constant low-level DE-flationary effect from improved productivity and technology that really increased the value of one’s savings and earned wages over time when we had the gold standard.One problem with finding such data is that most countries have tended to go on & off the gold standard at *roughly* the same time.””Not really. China stayed on a silver standard throughout the 19th century and first half of the 20th for example. Great comparison. When Britain briefly left the gold standard following WWI (but not during WWI”” which was odd) many other nations stayed on it including the US. The comparisons in economic performance and per capita wealth between those other nations is pretty stark.I suggest reading up on Nathan Lewis’ work. He covers historical examples with real data. But here is a link to just a ‘primer’ on the subject:http://bit.ly/2NXZBzWAfter reading his work you’ll quickly figure out that most ‘experts’ on TV don’t know jack how the gold standard worked. Believe or not but the study of money isn’t really taught in economics these days.The main reason we left the gold standard was very simple and very much not conformant with popular myth otherwise: Because the folks at the Federal Reserve lost the institutional knowledge to competently maintain it. All they had to do was engage in unsterilized interventions (buying/selling bonds and either adding to the money supply or subtracting from it in the process…not fiddling with”

    Reply
  16. What we need is fixed currencies. Canada and Mexico deliberately engage in currency manipulation to maintain favorable trade balances with the US, while China merely maintains a peg (fixed rate). That makes Ottawa and Mexico City more guilty than Beijing. Yet, our corporate globalist elites make sure Mexico and Canada get a free pass. So, to fix this they should be required to maintain a price peg to the US dollars for their currencies. That can be brought up in six years provided we have another America First POTUS in office (unlikely) vs a corporate elitist sellout of the Clinton(both of them)/Gore/Romney/Bush(all of them)/Pence mentality.

    Reply
  17. What we need is fixed currencies. Canada and Mexico deliberately engage in currency manipulation to maintain favorable trade balances with the US while China merely maintains a peg (fixed rate). That makes Ottawa and Mexico City more guilty than Beijing.Yet our corporate globalist elites make sure Mexico and Canada get a free pass.So to fix this they should be required to maintain a price peg to the US dollars for their currencies. That can be brought up in six years provided we have another America First POTUS in office (unlikely) vs a corporate elitist sellout of the Clinton(both of them)/Gore/Romney/Bush(all of them)/Pence mentality.

    Reply
  18. Are you referring to using gold as actual money or as a means to control the value of money via a price peg? Because the latter is what all modern, industrial societies since the end of the first third of the 19th century used, with or w/o central banking. Not the former, even though it was legal to use gold as money if one preferred. In fact, that freedom was a major feedback signal to let those issuing the money that that either had too much money in circulation relative to demand for it or too little relative to demand for gold. Today, we wouldn’t need redemption. Anyone with internet access could check if the price peg to gold on the existing gold commodity markets varied out of its range too much and for how long. The government could not hide its mismanagement of the value of the currency in that situation. The entire world would see it, rather instantly like never before in human history.

    Reply
  19. Are you referring to using gold as actual money or as a means to control the value of money via a price peg?Because the latter is what all modern industrial societies since the end of the first third of the 19th century used with or w/o central banking. Not the former even though it was legal to use gold as money if one preferred. In fact that freedom was a major feedback signal to let those issuing the money that that either had too much money in circulation relative to demand for it or too little relative to demand for gold.Today we wouldn’t need redemption. Anyone with internet access could check if the price peg to gold on the existing gold commodity markets varied out of its range too much and for how long. The government could not hide its mismanagement of the value of the currency in that situation. The entire world would see it rather instantly like never before in human history.

    Reply
  20. The new trade pact will come up for review every six years.” Awesome! We can squeeze Mexico and Canada for more every six years! Btw, one of Justin ‘Castro’ Trudeau’s hissy fits was that change. Looks like he bent over and took it up the âss for O Canada!, instead. Now, let’s watch how many Dems vote against this because Trump just pissed all over the Clinton-Gore NAFTA Sell Out and is replacing it with an America First one of his own. That and just accuse Trump of being a rapist w/o any proof.

    Reply
  21. The new trade pact will come up for review every six years.””Awesome! We can squeeze Mexico and Canada for more every six years!Btw”” one of Justin ‘Castro’ Trudeau’s hissy fits was that change. Looks like he bent over and took it up the âss for O Canada! instead.Now”” let’s watch how many Dems vote against this because Trump just pissed all over the Clinton-Gore NAFTA Sell Out and is replacing it with an America First one of his own. That and just accuse Trump of being a rapist w/o any proof. “””””””

    Reply
  22. Nations using gold, or silver currency inevitably experience greater than average for the period economic performance, and growth of their middle classes.” Citation needed. This might actually be the case, but could you point me to some reference that compares countries economic performance over the same periods. One problem with finding such data is that most countries have tended to go on & off the gold standard at *roughly* the same time.

    Reply
  23. Nations using gold or silver currency inevitably experience greater than average for the period economic performance” and growth of their middle classes.””Citation needed. This might actually be the case”””” but could you point me to some reference that compares countries economic performance over the same periods. One problem with finding such data is that most countries have tended to go on & off the gold standard at *roughly* the same time.”””

    Reply
  24. Just as I predicted. NAFTA would be replaced in short order, once there was no doubt Trump was going to get a better deal, or have no deal, and go piecemeal. Now, if illegal immigration can be controlled, the economic situation of the middle class will at least decline more slowly. The real solution for trade that lets each country sell what it does best, buy what it’s people most need/want, and balance trade in currency terms is the classic gold standard. Nations using gold, or silver currency inevitably experience greater than average for the period economic performance, and growth of their middle classes. It is difficult for government to inflate money supply without debasing coins themselves, which is immediately obvious. Without this power, government spending is held in check, since taxes can be raised only so high, without governments being replaced. It’s not surprising the gold standard is the best monetary system, since Sir Isaac Newton, as master of the Royal Mint adopted it, ushering in the modern gold standard, and a period of unprecedented prosperity for Great Britain. Now tell me, what modern day economist, or politican is half as bright as Isaac Newton? How many of them do you think that could di novo create calculus? Heck, how many of them could describe the principles behind derivatives, or integrals? My guess is half the economists, and 1/100 of the politicians.

    Reply
  25. Just as I predicted. NAFTA would be replaced in short order once there was no doubt Trump was going to get a better deal or have no deal and go piecemeal. Now if illegal immigration can be controlled the economic situation of the middle class will at least decline more slowly.The real solution for trade that lets each country sell what it does best buy what it’s people most need/want and balance trade in currency terms is the classic gold standard. Nations using gold or silver currency inevitably experience greater than average for the period economic performance and growth of their middle classes. It is difficult for government to inflate money supply without debasing coins themselves which is immediately obvious. Without this power government spending is held in check since taxes can be raised only so high without governments being replaced.It’s not surprising the gold standard is the best monetary system since Sir Isaac Newton as master of the Royal Mint adopted it ushering in the modern gold standard and a period of unprecedented prosperity for Great Britain. Now tell me what modern day economist or politican is half as bright as Isaac Newton? How many of them do you think that could di novo create calculus? Heck how many of them could describe the principles behind derivatives or integrals? My guess is half the economists and 1/100 of the politicians.

    Reply
  26. So what are the actually difference between the old treaty and the new treaty? It there an executive summary of the main difference? Just want to see what we got for twinkling on our old friends.

    Reply
  27. Yes. Look at the stats for the middle class incomes AND assets (savings especially) since before and after we closed the Gold Window and thus ended Bretton Woods.

    One might only get a measly 1% or less return in savings (actually, they got more) in the old gold standard era but there was zero monetary inflation (price rises are not monetary inflation but can be caused by actual monetary inflation). In fact, there was a constant, low-level DE-flationary effect from improved productivity and technology that really increased the value of one’s savings and earned wages over time when we had the gold standard.

    “One problem with finding such data is that most countries have tended to go on & off the gold standard at *roughly* the same time.”

    Not really. China stayed on a silver standard throughout the 19th century and first half of the 20th for example. Great comparison. When Britain briefly left the gold standard following WWI (but not during WWI, which was odd), many other nations stayed on it, including the US. The comparisons in economic performance and per capita wealth between those other nations is pretty stark.

    I suggest reading up on Nathan Lewis’ work. He covers historical examples with real data. But here is a link to just a ‘primer’ on the subject:

    http://bit.ly/2NXZBzW

    After reading his work, you’ll quickly figure out that most ‘experts’ on TV don’t know jack how the gold standard worked. Believe or not, but the study of money isn’t really taught in economics these days.

    The main reason we left the gold standard was very simple and very much not conformant with popular myth otherwise: Because the folks at the Federal Reserve lost the institutional knowledge to competently maintain it. All they had to do was engage in unsterilized interventions (buying/selling bonds and either adding to the money supply or subtracting from it in the process…not fiddling with interest rates at all), which is what banks did for centuries quite effectively.

    W/o a fixed constant to compare values against, a unit of measurement is quite useless. Can you imagine if the length of a centimeter or inch changed every day arbitrarily? Yet, that is how we manage our currency supply.

    Reply
  28. What we need is fixed currencies. Canada and Mexico deliberately engage in currency manipulation to maintain favorable trade balances with the US, while China merely maintains a peg (fixed rate). That makes Ottawa and Mexico City more guilty than Beijing.

    Yet, our corporate globalist elites make sure Mexico and Canada get a free pass.

    So, to fix this they should be required to maintain a price peg to the US dollars for their currencies. That can be brought up in six years provided we have another America First POTUS in office (unlikely) vs a corporate elitist sellout of the Clinton(both of them)/Gore/Romney/Bush(all of them)/Pence mentality.

    Reply
  29. Are you referring to using gold as actual money or as a means to control the value of money via a price peg?

    Because the latter is what all modern, industrial societies since the end of the first third of the 19th century used, with or w/o central banking. Not the former, even though it was legal to use gold as money if one preferred. In fact, that freedom was a major feedback signal to let those issuing the money that that either had too much money in circulation relative to demand for it or too little relative to demand for gold.

    Today, we wouldn’t need redemption. Anyone with internet access could check if the price peg to gold on the existing gold commodity markets varied out of its range too much and for how long. The government could not hide its mismanagement of the value of the currency in that situation. The entire world would see it, rather instantly like never before in human history.

    Reply
  30. “The new trade pact will come up for review every six years.”

    Awesome! We can squeeze Mexico and Canada for more every six years!

    Btw, one of Justin ‘Castro’ Trudeau’s hissy fits was that change. Looks like he bent over and took it up the âss for O Canada!, instead.

    Now, let’s watch how many Dems vote against this because Trump just pissed all over the Clinton-Gore NAFTA Sell Out and is replacing it with an America First one of his own. That and just accuse Trump of being a rapist w/o any proof. <-- that's their 'thing' these days, it seems

    Reply
  31. “Nations using gold, or silver currency inevitably experience greater than average for the period economic performance, and growth of their middle classes.”
    Citation needed. This might actually be the case, but could you point me to some reference that compares countries economic performance over the same periods. One problem with finding such data is that most countries have tended to go on & off the gold standard at *roughly* the same time.

    Reply
  32. Just as I predicted. NAFTA would be replaced in short order, once there was no doubt Trump was going to get a better deal, or have no deal, and go piecemeal. Now, if illegal immigration can be controlled, the economic situation of the middle class will at least decline more slowly.
    The real solution for trade that lets each country sell what it does best, buy what it’s people most need/want, and balance trade in currency terms is the classic gold standard. Nations using gold, or silver currency inevitably experience greater than average for the period economic performance, and growth of their middle classes. It is difficult for government to inflate money supply without debasing coins themselves, which is immediately obvious. Without this power, government spending is held in check, since taxes can be raised only so high, without governments being replaced.
    It’s not surprising the gold standard is the best monetary system, since Sir Isaac Newton, as master of the Royal Mint adopted it, ushering in the modern gold standard, and a period of unprecedented prosperity for Great Britain. Now tell me, what modern day economist, or politican is half as bright as Isaac Newton? How many of them do you think that could di novo create calculus? Heck, how many of them could describe the principles behind derivatives, or integrals? My guess is half the economists, and 1/100 of the politicians.

    Reply

Leave a Comment