ADVERTISEMENT

Which is better: Be an enemy of the US or an ally of long standing?

First, I don't believe the amount is as trivial as Aston paints it. Besides our contribution to NATO we have men and materials. We commit a large amount of our operations. Beyond that is the possible exposure if the worst ever comes.

Second, Aston and I have those nachos, since we are at the Brook, I have a Guinness. Time for the bill. I tell him that I am retired and he has a good job and hand him a dollar. He looks skeptical and pays. I say we need to do this more often, then get in my BMW and drive away. I'm Germany.

But wait still don't answer. Some thugs and Aston have an altercation in the parking lot. A couple of his friends, John Bull and Pierre go along beside him but I just keep going. Again I am Germany under Merkel.
 
Last edited:
We’re only asking our friend to pay his share of the tabs going forward. We have forgiven the past debts over the years. Said “we’re good”. Yet our friend who relies on us for protection balks even at this resolution. It’s beyond ridiculous....and Aston supports the freeloader.

Anyone care to take a poll whether Aston would support the request to our NATO allies to pay their fair share for their own protection if such request was made by Obama.

As far as the North Korean talks, our Lib friends have set the bar mighty low for a successful agreement with their support of the Iran deal. We can:

Give them billions
End sanctions
Allow no inspections of any military site
Require advanced notice of any inspection of a civilian site
Allow them to lie about their nuclear facilities

And the agreement will be deemed a success.
 
We’re only asking our friend to pay his share of the tabs going forward. We have forgiven the past debts over the years. Said “we’re good”. Yet our friend who relies on us for protection balks even at this resolution. It’s beyond ridiculous....and Aston supports the freeloader.

Anyone care to take a poll whether Aston would support the request to our NATO allies to pay their fair share for their own protection if such request was made by Obama.

As far as the North Korean talks, our Lib friends have set the bar mighty low for a successful agreement with their support of the Iran deal. We can:

Give them billions
End sanctions
Allow no inspections of any military site
Require advanced notice of any inspection of a civilian site
Allow them to lie about their nuclear facilities

And the agreement will be deemed a success.
If you don't have a vested interest, you can't value it
 
Getting back to tariff's...

The thing is Trump brings up individual tariffs like Canadian Dairy and ignores US lumber tariffs w Canada.(for example) I seriously doubt he does much research on the negotiation process between the two countries, despite the fact that someone probably mentions the lumber tariffs, etc, to him. I don't think he cares much to think about past negotiation between the US and other countries.

He just wants the win and ignores past arrangements, regardless of history, rational give and take negotiations, or how it affects our relationship with our allies. He doesn't want to the do the work of the presidency or anyone else to do the work either. From what I can tell he doesn't want to hear research/knowledge by trusted advisers if it goes against what he wants.

He wants other countries to give up a majority of their trade advantages with us without us giving up much of anything. We were given a concession in the the lumber tariff for the Dairy tariff or vice versa in the past. Then the lumber tariff gets ignored as Trump complains about Dairy. He acts like a child.
 
Isn’t the lumber tariff necessary or at least a response to the fact that the Canadian lumber industry is partially subsidized by the Canadian government and thus has the ability to produce lumber at below market costs?

I’m not a fan of Trump on trade but I do understand the necessity for a lumber tariff considering the unique circumstance.
 
That's what I'm saying, Trump isn't considering the reasons behind it all. He just wants to complain about Dairy. Yes there are extenuating circumstances behind the lumber tariffs, but I don't think Trump even cares to look into that. Regardless of the reason's behind all the tariffs, the US came out ahead on lumber. But Trump doesn't want to analyze that, and take that into accord. If he were truly doing his job, he would know the history of lumber tariffs like the back of his hand, to know how to use that in his negotiations. I really doubt he has even a basic idea behind the history of all of that.
 
Isn’t the lumber tariff necessary or at least a response to the fact that the Canadian lumber industry is partially subsidized by the Canadian government and thus has the ability to produce lumber at below market costs?

I’m not a fan of Trump on trade but I do understand the necessity for a lumber tariff considering the unique circumstance.
Some of the foreign tariffs pre date dt.
 
All of the tariffs pre-date Trump.(except the ones they are threatening in response to Trumps on again, off again tariffs)

That's what I am getting at. Trump is not seriously considering why they are there, if there is any justification for them, and whether they are truly fair in the whole scheme of things.(you cannot just consider them individually) And when I say Trump is not considering it, I mean the ones that seem on the surface to be advantageous to other countries, and on the surface to be advantageous to the US.

There has not been any new tariffs discussed by other countries until Trump started threatening. None of this stuff is new tariffs.
 
Curious because I don’t know. Why does Canada impose such a huge tariff on our dairy products ?
 
Canadians want to know too. The only reason I can see is blatant protectionism of the dairy market for unknown reasoning. I don't see it as a cultural or health rationale. But maybe I'm missing something.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT