Canadian tariffs

[SharperDingaan]

The linkage is just less apparent in developed countries.

Much more of the population works in the gig economy, than has been the case for a very long time. While an energetic bright fellow could do very well, most people will take home less - and lose benefits such as healthcare, drugplans, etc. Costs that now have to be paid out of a reduced income.

Food has seldom been cheaper that it is today, but its cost has begun to rise.
For a great many people a 10% increase in food cost + a 5% increase in shelter costs (mortgage/rent) = at least one monthly visit to the foodbank. How long is a politician going to stay in power, when those foodbank users are coming from the richer neighborhoods?

Supposedly if food costs more - you would cut back elsewhere. But it doesn't happen this way.
Are you really going to give up that 2nd car? Sell the house and move to something smaller (mortgage you can actually afford)? Give up that coffee habit or street lunch 4+days/week? Give up some data usage on your cell phone? Or is it more likely that you're going to use debt to maintain that lifestyle that you can no longer afford? Until you're  cut off.

But if everyone BK's at the same time, everyone gets bailed out.
Politiciians are replaced in the name of change, protectionism is imposed, & locals are put back to work - to raise the money to keep servicing their debt. In different times we called this slavery, 'selling your soul to the company stole'. Same masters in place, just different generations.

Ultimately the cause is rising basic costs (food costs),
and inability to adapt.

SD

[Cardboard]

Removing production quotas on milk, eggs and chicken is a no brainer.

We don't have them on beef, pork, cereals and what is the issue please?

I can understand the hormones thing but, I am sure that is something workable with the U.S. or another excuse from Canadian producers. If you saw what they feed animals with (especially chickens) with all the antibiotics and everything else in between you would consider this a farce.

It is a system meant to help the small, unproductive farmers to stay in business. A union type of system. And some get really rich through this.

Cardboard

[bizaro86]

If Canada has decided that no hormones are allowed, then make that a rule no problem. Instead of having huge tariffs and quotas, just don't allow milk with hormones across the border. If anyone wants to export here they can so hormone free just like the locals. Locals without hormone benefits will be at an export disadvantage, but may be able to get premium pricing for a premium product.

[rb]

If Canada has decided that no hormones are allowed, then make that a rule no problem. Instead of having huge tariffs and quotas, just don't allow milk with hormones across the border. If anyone wants to export here they can so hormone free just like the locals. Locals without hormone benefits will be at an export disadvantage, but may be able to get premium pricing for a premium product.

They won't because as amazing as it might sound it is against the law in the US to say that your milk doesn't contain hormone.

[KJP]

If Canada has decided that no hormones are allowed, then make that a rule no problem. Instead of having huge tariffs and quotas, just don't allow milk with hormones across the border. If anyone wants to export here they can so hormone free just like the locals. Locals without hormone benefits will be at an export disadvantage, but may be able to get premium pricing for a premium product.

They won't because as amazing as it might sound it is against the law in the US to say that your milk doesn't contain hormone.

In US, you can advertise your milk as "synthetic hormone free," or the equivalent.  I just confirmed that by checking the milk carton in my refrigerator.

To the extent you cannot say "hormone free," I believe that's because the statement is false due to milk containing natural hormones.

[rb]

My apologies. KJP is correct. Apparently there has been a ruling in 2011 by the US Court of Appeals that overturned the labeling ban.

[Cigarbutt]

There has been and there will be trade disputes but most agricultural trade between Canada and the United States is unimpeded and clearly benefits people on both sides of the border. Trade has increased ++ since the introduction of NAFTA.

Agriculture is different and perhaps deserves a special status but, in 2016, Canada was the world’s fifth-largest exporter of agriculture and agri-food products with the US being by far Canada’s main trading partner.

Canadian food exports have grown 77% over the last 10 years to $56 billion annually, with the US accounting for slightly more than 50% of this amount.

Both sides recognize that trade barriers can continue to go down but, to obtain/maintain a win-win, we need constructive discussions. Supply management can be phased out but one would expect that this would involve a reconsideration of how the US subsidizes its own agricultural sector.

Fortunately, I submit that some are ready to have these kinds of discussions.
https://www.heritage.org/trade/report/promoting-free-trade-agriculture

[SharperDingaan]

Removing production quotas on milk, eggs and chicken is a no brainer.

We don't have them on beef, pork, cereals and what is the issue please?

I can understand the hormones thing but, I am sure that is something workable with the U.S. or another excuse from Canadian producers. If you saw what they feed animals with (especially chickens) with all the antibiotics and everything else in between you would consider this a farce.

It is a system meant to help the small, unproductive farmers to stay in business. A union type of system. And some get really rich through this.

Cardboard

Canaada is not the US. It's a deliberate choice 'by the people of Canada, for the people of Canada'.
If the US cannot export its milk, eggs, or chicken that is purely a US problem. Produce less, eat more of it, or let it rot.

Every country maintains strategic reserves, typical US examples are oil, certain minerals, certain technologies, etc.
Canadian family farms are strategic reserves. Relying on bigger, (primarily US) corporate farms for cheaper food, is a very dumb thing -  as anytime the US chose to restrict/cut off food supply, Canada would starve. Paying more to maintain family farms, is a lot cheaper than paying extortion money to an oligarch of food suppliers.

The US is whining because the targeted tarifs are biting.
Almost all trade partners have targeted the same industries, and employment in those industries is about to rapidly crash without a prompt resolution. The chump tried to bully his way at the G6+1, and lost so badly that he had to run away early (4 hours earlier than planned?). So now he's doubling down, and trying to distract wih NK instead.

Sadly bodies are going to have to fall before there's a change.
And it will not be until a whole lot of republicans lose their seats.

SD


 
 

[Viking]

Cardboard, pre-Trump, I would have agreed with your comments. I worked in the dairy business for many years and understand the subsidies and the hidden tax it represents on consumers. Until Trump is gone there is no way I would want to make big changes to dairy, egg or poultry industries. Change is needed. However, we also need a trade partner we can trust and where the new agreement will be honoured and respected.

If we have learned anything from Trump in his first 18 months it is that he cannot be trusted and that it is highly unlikely he will honour any agreement that is ultimately reached. He changes his mind on important issues more frequently than most people change their underwear.

I also think Trump may be good as a change agent for many things. The benefits (and weaknesses) of free trade are better understood and more openly debated today. There are losers; and we can’t just assume they magically shift employment into growing industries (as most economists assume). I wonder if the MeToo movement is also due in some way to Trump (people getting so pissed of with his behaviour). There are many more examples like these two of where Trump may help create a more balanced discussion (than what existed before).

[cameronfen]

Cardboard, pre-Trump, I would have agreed with your comments. I worked in the dairy business for many years and understand the subsidies and the hidden tax it represents on consumers. Until Trump is gone there is no way I would want to make big changes to dairy, egg or poultry industries. Change is needed. However, we also need a trade partner we can trust and where the new agreement will be honoured and respected.

If we have learned anything from Trump in his first 18 months it is that he cannot be trusted and that it is highly unlikely he will honour any agreement that is ultimately reached. He changes his mind on important issues more frequently than most people change their underwear.

I also think Trump may be good as a change agent for many things. The benefits (and weaknesses) of free trade are better understood and more openly debated today. There are losers; and we can’t just assume they magically shift employment into growing industries (as most economists assume). I wonder if the MeToo movement is also due in some way to Trump (people getting so pissed of with his behaviour). There are many more examples like these two of where Trump may help create a more balanced discussion (than what existed before).

Generally, it's stupid to stupid to subsidize domestic businesses (generally...).  Why?  When you trade with someone else both sides win.  The seller because they can sell above cost and the buyer because you would only buy if the thing was more valuable than how much it costs.  Subsidies are a tax on the domestic population, for the benefit of international buyers of your good (through lowering of your products price.  Thus basically you are taking money from your own citizens and giving money to other countries.