Posted on 03/31/2009 10:07:47 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
WASHINGTON -- The long-simmering dispute over allowing Mexican trucks onto U.S. highways is escalating into a trade war that could cost Washington state agricultural interests millions of dollars in lost sales and present the Obama administration and the Democratic-controlled Congress with an early test of their trade policies.
Washington's pear, cherry, apricot and Christmas tree growers find themselves in the middle of a trade clash not of their own making and facing 20 percent tariffs on their exports to Mexico.
The biggest impact, however, could be on the state's potato growers and processors. Mexico buys $83 million worth of frozen potato products annually, the bulk of them from Washington state, where 10 plants employing 20,000 people produce frozen French fries, hash browns and Tater Tots.
On the other side, organized labor, led by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and consumer groups continue to insist Mexican trucks and their drivers present a major road hazard to U.S. motorists. They also charge that Mexico illegally imposed the tariffs without living up to its obligations under the North American Free Trade Agreement.
As the most trade-dependant state in the nation, with one in three jobs tied to exports and imports, Washington state is closely watching the Mexican trucking dispute.
(Excerpt) Read more at miamiherald.com ...
Blog entry by an attorney or not, it does not change the information in it nor does it make it wrong.
One would think an attorney would know a thing or two about citing to authority.
“This is probably due to the fact it has less formaldehyde in it than some of the lesser brands. Yes, they still put the equivalent of embalming fluid in Chinese beer, but not as much as they used to.”
Bohemia is one of the best lagers in N. America, in my opinion.
Oh, I remember you.
Nevermind. You like to argue and I’m not taking the bait.
I’ve expressed my opinion, and that’s that. You have yours.
And you like to post BS. C’est la vie.
There are more than 6.5 million trucks in the United States. The program Congress terminated allowed 97 Mexican trucks to roam among them. Ninety-seven!
Shutting them out not only undermines NAFTA. It caused Mexico to retaliate with tariffs on 90 goods affecting $2.4 billion in U.S. trade coming out of 40 states.
The very last thing we need now is American protectionism. It is guaranteed to start a world trade war. A deeply wounded world economy needs two things to recover: (1) vigorous U.S. government action to loosen credit by detoxifying the zombie banks and insolvent insurers, and (2) avoidance of a trade war.
Free trade is the one area where the world indisputably turns to Washington for leadership. What does it see? Grandstanding, parochialism, petty payoffs to truckers and a rush to mindless populism. Over what? Over 97 Mexican trucks — and bonus money that comes to what the Yankees are paying for CC Sabathia’s left arm.
I posted to you before. You are selling snake oil. I went to the statistics and we have been running a negative trade deficit with Mexico since 1994. Every single year. Guess when Nafta and “free trade” policies went into effect? You cite one company who trades with Mexico out of tens of thousands of companies, and that is proof? You sell snake oil.
I posted to you before. You are selling snake oil. I went to the statistics and we have been running a negative trade deficit with Mexico since 1994. Every single year. Guess when Nafta and “free trade” policies went into effect? You cite one company who trades with Mexico out of tens of thousands of companies, and that is proof? You are misleading people.
It was from your link.
I call BS on this one.
Those Mexican trucks had passed U.S. safety inspections and in fact compiled a slightly safer record than U.S. trucks. Earlier this year, the DOT analyzed the safety record of Mexican carriers in the U.S. from 2003-2006. http://mexicotrucker.com/wall-street-journal-mexican-truck-stop
I never had any illusions then or now about about Mexico being a 3rd world country, and they have no intention of changing, ever.
Any legislator dealing with Nafta would know that, and would from the start address these issues. It should't be that hard - insurance companies such as Lloyds insure international travelors and commercial carriers all the time. I suspect that the issues are a result of enacting feel good legislation w/o a clue how to execute the contract, and a room full of special interests with a bad case of the 'gimmes' in their face
Those "safer' Mexican trucks were being operated under a pilot program. You don't think the powers to be made sure those trucks were artificially made safer under the pilot program?
Also, the majority of those trucks were from US domiciled companies in Mexico. It's the Mexican owned trucks I'm concerned about.
92 trucks today, 10,000 next year. Just as what happened to the illegal immigrants in this country.
Obviously, in your rush to sign up you made a mistake. You meant to say a trade deficit, right?
BTW, what is your trade deficit with your local gas station?
There is no trade deficit. It is a Marxist illusion promulgated by those who wish to bad mouth trade. Do you understand double entry accounting? Credits = Debits?
You've traded dollars for goods. If you buy my refrigerator next door, next city, next state or next country the transaction is complete (without surplus or deficit).
Here is an example: Refrigerator (the one you want) $1000. Cash $1000 (what I want). You give cash = $1000 = refrigerator.
No deficit/surplus. Got it? If you still don't understand I can try a different example. What industry do you work in?
Can you show me the accounting on that? Did we steal from Mexico or Mexico from us?
Plus, who are you checking with?
No, they use old CBs (often discussed by ignorant Hams) to drag themselves to a halt.
Yet the Mexican trucks operating in the buffer zone (the ones that are less safe than the long-haul trucks) for over a decade show no sign of being the rolling deathtraps one would expect to see in a old Cheech & Chong movie (where I think some people gather their impressions of Mexican trucks).
Trade with Mexico : 2009
NOTE: All figures are in millions of U.S. dollars, and not seasonally adjusted unless otherwise specified.
Month Exports Imports Balance
January 2009 9,790.6 12,474.6 -2,684.0
TOTAL 9,790.6 12,474.6 -2,684.0
This is how you are intentionally being confused:
America exported $9,790.6 worth of something to Mexico. This transaction is in balance as it was paid for.
Mexico exported to the United States $12,474.6 worth of something. This transaction is also in balance as it was paid for.
The supposition and lie is that trade must be exactly equal or else someone is losing. Each way the trades were paid for.
Suppose you work for a grocery store. They pay you a salary of $25,000/year. You receive your check all year and it totals $25,000. No deficit at all. Your employer traded you your labor in exchange for dollars.
It is the only grocery store in town. You shop there to the tune of $10,000. You pay for all your groceries in cash. No deficit or surplus. The store gave you $10,000 of goods in exchange for your money in cash.
The trick: A Marxist comes to town. He wants and desperately needs contention. It can only be done through crisis. He says to you: Look at your boss he's really only paying you $15,000/year ($25,000 (salary)-10,000 (grocery cost) = $15,000).
Do the math. Think about the example in real life.
Do you fall for it and become a comrade?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.