Must have been "mulroney" in the url...smackyo said:wow, no comments on this jewel of debate? i thought there would be at least a few.
Where on earth did you get the idea that Canada was "royally fucked" by NAFTA??? By no means is it perfect and its got serious issues. Certainly the softwood business is a pile of shit...But we do run a trade surplus with the States and have for years, and do a HUGE amount of two-way trade. Trade that frequently benefits both nations (somethig politicians all too frequently forget). So if Turners point is that Canada is getting "royally fucked" I'd say he was most definitely NOT right.smackyo said:well with all the talk lately about nafta and how canada is royally fucked by it i found this in the cbc archieves and found it interresting.
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-73-1469-9807/politics_economy/brian_mulroney/clip8
then cancel the document and sign deals with other nations. weather or not we do bussiness with china or the u.s. we are still doing bussiness with some kind of tyrant. think the u.s. doesn't violate human rights? think again. the tarriffs and bullshit we've been charged can towards reformatting our trade plan.notyetgeezer said:Canada cannot negeotiate from its weak position, we need them more than they need us (at this time) The US seems to ignore the fact that Cda is the largest supplier of oil to the US, not the arabs etc..but, in any trade war, there are usually only losers not real winners and we would not win that war at this time.
FTA has been good for Cda but critics love to denigrate anything that is not socialistic in its foundation even though FTA has great benifits for Mexico and its social ills.
If Trudeau had not gone nuts on his great social policies we might have made FTA stronger for Canada but those policies have taxed us into a second rate economy with the taxpayer footing the bills.
So, stay away from FT wars with the US, we dont have big enough balls or enough sperm ..
hhhhmmm i'm not so sure they would have went ahead with the agreement. the liberal senent wouldn't push the legislation through unless mulroney had electoral support. eventually, who knows? i guess they may have but what i get from the debate is that it wouldn't have happend on john turners watch.dirtydan said:Now with that said, would Liberal government cancelled the agreement? While I think Turner spoke from the heart with the sincereity he could muster I think the behind the scenes apparatus of the Liberal Party would have ensured the very same Mulroney deal would have been signed.
