Posted on 11/25/2004 9:46:36 AM PST by Navydog
GENEVA (Reuters) - The World Trade Organization cleared the way on Thursday to impose $150 million of trade sanctions on the United States, sought by the European Union and others, after lawyers resolved a legal wrangle.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.excite.com ...
Huh, Im not saying is good for us but it is bad for them.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I just think we're messing with fire allowing our dollar to drop like it has. We have a massive debt to support. Foreign investments have helped do that.
A run on the bond market, there is no sign of this nor reason it will happen. The japanese are going to buy more, the asians can't stop buying them, and the euros sooner or later will buy dollars.
Hmmmm...might we have a "hostile" in our midst?
Bump
screw the investors, diss the President, screw the WTO... did I log on to DU by accident?
Good grief this is over the Byrd Amendment, but nobody has said a word about Byrd. Byrd sneaked the amendment in via an unrelated appropriations bill, in spite of numerous warnings that exactly this would happen, and it was signed into law by that perennial favorite William Clinton. So everybody is getting upset over a Byrd/Clinton measure. I would think that conservatives would be saying "I told you so." At least free trade conservatives.
The amendment does not stop anti-dumping measures on behalf of the United States. It requires that penalties for dumping be distributed to the specific companies which brought the suit in the first place. Most free trade advocates consider it bad law because it simply invites retaliation in kind. It gives a company a specific financial incentive to create a dumping suit -- the kind of approach that appeals to trial lawyers -- because the company gets to pocket the proceeds.
The 150 million dollar fine is trivial compared to the stakes involved. What to do at this point is a debatable issue, with free traders on one side and protectionists on the other and politics in the middle. I'm not sure at all that characterizing this as a 'Euroweenie' issue with conservatives all on one side is helpful in producing anything but a feeding frenzy.
That's like saying, This is a debatable issue, with the good guys on my side and the bad guys on the other side. If you read the thread, you'll see that the debate isn't as you characterize it. The WTO is not about free trade. It's about trade managed by unaccountable globocrats. If that's what you want to defend, have at it, but don't misrepresent it.
You hit the nail right on the head.
US corporations are selling out the middle class, and jeopardizing our sovereignty in the process.
And all we can do is watch.
What was misrepresented? My point was that the issue was a debatable one that was being oversimplified as a Euroweenie vs. US issue.
I think it is pretty clear that most free traders opposed the Byrd amendment. There are people I respect on both sides of this issue, but when Bob Byrd sneaks an amendment into law, avoiding process, it makes me highly suspicious. I suspect conservatives will be split on this one, as I said. That's the exact opposite of saying all the 'good guys are on my side'.
Doesn't the US fund a majority of the WTO?
Get US out of the UN (and WTO)
Thanks for the additional comments.
That's more accurate than characterizing it as a free trade vs protectionist issue. The WTO is not about free trade.
So I would like to follow the money....who in these nations was screaming the loudest for the WTO to act....who gets the 150 million dollars and who benefits from it? Some guy named Francoise who owns a villa on the Riviera to whom Chirac owes a political favor?
EU and Japanese retaliation has been set at some $50 million and $80 million, respectively, and both have already presented the WTO with a list of products they plan to hit -- ranging from sweet corn to metals and textiles.
LOL! Define hostile.
It seems our Fore Fathers, made a teeny weeny mistake, that may eventually rob America of her sovernity, when they made a ratified treaty a back door amendment to our Constitution.
It's kind of like the intrusive grain of sand that invades an oysters innards and creates a pearl; only in reverse.
"from sweet corn to metals and textiles"
So who are the heavy hitters in these countries who are in these industries who are screaming and what do they stand to gain or lose?
the WTO fines the US - but they have nothing to say about the chinese currency peg that is sucking industrial development resources from all over the world, into China.
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.