The War on Canada

[2Fingers]

It’s a partnership between Canada and USA, goes both ways.

Plus if the accusations are true then it is a good thing, no?

[Per]

It’s a partnership between Canada and USA, goes both ways.

Plus if the accusations are true then it is a good thing, no?

What accusations?

Not abiding by US unilateral sanctions?

Could hardly be a crime if you are not based in the USA.

Remember, the Iran deal of 2015 was not a deal between the US and Iran; it was a deal between the US, the UK, France, Russia, China, Germany (ie the permanent members of the UN security council, plus Germany) and Iran.
Iran agreed to halt its nuclear programme and allow IAEA inspections, and in return the others agreed to lift the sanctions imposed by the UN.

In 2018 the US unilaterally withdrew from the deal. All other signatories promised to honour the deal, as they well should, as Iran had not in any way violated the terms of the agreement.

The US has then threatened to punish any company that does business with Iran, but seriously, companies from the signatory nations are pretty much obliged by their governments deal with Iran, and international law, to not discriminate against Iran.
And frankly, from my grasp of international law, I cannot see how the US could possibly believe that they have jurisdiction over trade relations between eg China and Iran.

[Mickey107]

Both The US and Canada, (and I use the two together partly because of the humongous border they share), would and hopefully will,
be served much better doing far less business with communist China. It is a reliance that will eventually destroy the way of life and many of the freedoms we enjoy.
I could look back in my records and find roughly the same words from my own hand, 20 to 25 years ago.

[Per]

Both The US and Canada, (and I use the two together partly because of the humongous border they share), would and hopefully will,
be served much better doing far less business with communist China. It is a reliance that will eventually destroy the way of life and many of the freedoms we enjoy.
I could look back in my records and find roughly the same words from my own hand, 20 to 25 years ago.

Having actually studied international economics at the university, I would be inclined to say uhm... no.

I mean, could you actually look a midwest farmer in the eye and repeat that?

Keeping in mind that "China is a major market for U.S. agricultural products because each year it buys more than $10 billion of U.S. soybeans. China accounts for more than one-half of total U.S. soybean exports."
https://www.fca.gov/template-fca/downlo ... arkets.pdf

Can you imagine the impact on soybean prices in the US if the exports suddenly got cut in half?

Now, China accounts for roughly 15% of US overall agricultural exports, but soybeans is where their share is specifically great, and the product that would suffer the most from deteriorating trade.

Carter reaped the wrath of US farmers after his sanctions against the Soviet Union caused agricultural prices to plummet.
That's the main reason he was not reelected.*

So wait - maybe you do have a point!
If Trump goes to an all out trade war with China, American farmers will get severely hurt, they will then turn on him and he won't get reelected...
Good point. I agree. America would be better served doing less business with China! Bring it on!

I mean, sure, the economy will suffer, but it just might be worth it.

* although some credit of course also goes to the ayatollahs of Iran, who refused to release their hostages until after the election, supposedly having struck a secret deal with Reagan, which is why he was illegally and secretly selling arms to Iran. Oliver North wad just a fall guy.

[Mickey107]

Study harder.

And try to project long term consequences of a "North American", trade dependency.
Where one door closes, history shows, generally, another opens.

Oh, and lest we not forget about that nasty loan that tends to influence "some" decision making.

[Per]

The evidence is overwhelming though that free trade is beneficial for all parties involved.

Trade barriers lead to inefficiencies and higher consumer prices, which in turn leads to a drop in demand, as people cannot afford to buy all the stuff they want. Look at the two Koreas for a great example. South Korea has free trade, North Korea does not. Or the two Germanys during the cold war. Free trade in Western Germany, self reliance in East Germany.

Overall, import substitutions and self reliance are a typical trait of communism and fascism. Democracies tend to embrace free trade, which allows the people to vote with their wallets.

[Mickey107]

Free trade should be everywhere. I have and would never argue that.
Often, threats of tariffs are actually used, even partially, but not legally binding, implemented.
This tactic is not new. Creates angst, most assuredly, as it is meant to.
You have pointed out before, that China now has a middle class of notable size, good start.
There is still the dilemma of fair competition in regards to trade.
Trump is not the first leader to threaten tariffs or trade sanction, nor will he be the last.
Utopia hasn't quite arrived yet but, in my estimation, we are about 2% closer than we were 30 years, (metric generation, LOL), ago.

[Mickey107]

I just realized, the sight isn't allowing indentations.
I must be mad, I thought it used to.
This is a test. It is only a test. Do not adjust you------

[5thhorseman]

Trade barriers lead to inefficiencies and higher consumer prices, which in turn leads to a drop in demand, as people cannot afford to buy all the stuff they want.

That might be a good thing. People in general are buying too much crap anyways.

[Topper]

The USA's beef is that Huwa shared US derived technology with Iran. That technology is protected by national security. There is no proof, that is for the courts to determine. Canada acted as it is required to to under it's extradition treaty with the US. It has not handed the suspect over, that may happen, it may not. There is a point down the road where political interference can be triggered, but the case is not there yet. That time frame could be 90 days away.

[Per]

Trade barriers lead to inefficiencies and higher consumer prices, which in turn leads to a drop in demand, as people cannot afford to buy all the stuff they want.

That might be a good thing. People in general are buying too much crap anyways.

Sure. Tell that to the people who are laid off, 'cause people won't buy their products.
You can start with GM and Ford.

Told you the auto industry would be hurt by the steel and aluminium tariffs.

[Per]

Days after the Canadian authorities arrested one of China’s leading technology executives at the behest of Washington, Cisco warned some employees that China might return the favor.

In an email with the subject line “Travel Restriction to China,” the Silicon Valley networking giant cautioned employees against nonessential travel to China “due to recent events.” Cisco has since said the email was sent in error and that there are no China travel restrictions on its employees.

Still, the fear is real.

The arrest this month of Meng Wanzhou of Huawei, the Chinese telecom giant, appears to have put a certain kind of elite — tech-savvy, comfortable in both countries — square in the middle of the economic conflict between the United States and China. For many Chinese tech entrepreneurs, the United States suddenly doesn’t seem like the same place that welcomed them to study, work and raise money. That could be a big problem for both countries.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/busi ... ravel.html

[Per]

And now the Chinese retaliate... against Canada...

A Canadian, reported to be a former diplomat, has been detained in China and his current employer says it is working for his prompt release.
The International Crisis Group said it was "aware of reports" of Michael Kovrig's detention.

Prime Minister Trudeau said Canada is in direct contact with Chinese authorities concerning the case.

The news comes days after Canada arrested a top executive of the Chinese telecoms giant Huawei.

Mr Trudeau said the case is being taken "very seriously". Canada's foreign affairs ministry gave no further details about the incident or its talks with China.

Tensions between Canada and China have been high over the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, Huawei's chief financial officer and daughter of its founder, on Saturday 1 December.

Federal public safety minister Ralph Goodale told journalists in Ottawa that the government is "deeply concerned by the situation".

The minister said there is currently no "explicit indication" of any link between her arrest and Mr Kovrig's reported detention.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46527975

[2Fingers]

Per - do you believe the 2 are similar?

[Per]

Per - do you believe the 2 are similar?

Uhm... probably not.

China's move is strictly political, to put pressure on Canada.

I'll give the US the benefit of the doubt, that there may actually be something substantial behind their allegations. It is questionable though if the US really does have jurisdiction over a Chinese companies trade with a third country, but assuming there are US patents somehow involved, I perhaps should not rule it out.

There are many though that suspect that the arrest of the CFO of one of China's most successful companies, a company that recently passed Apple in global market share, in the middle of a trade war between China and the USA, is mainly a political move, meant to increase the pressure on China. So, I'm not going to rule that out either.

If it turns out that the arrest og Meng Wangzhou actually is just another case of Trump bullying, then they're sort of the same. If it turns out that Meng really did do something bad that the US does have jurisdiction over, then they're definitely not the same.

I don't think anyone thinks there is just cause for the arrest of the Canadian diplomat. That's just a chess move.
The question that remains to be answered is if the first arrest was about criminal justice or trade politics.