Trans pacific union

Trans pacific union

Postby Formerdestination » Jun 17, 2016 4:26 pm

What do you guys think about the potential Pacific union that might be occurring with the whole Trans pacific Partnership thing?
User avatar
Formerdestination
 
Posts: 6
Joined: May 04, 2016 3:04 pm
Location: Wyoming

Re: Trains pacific union

Postby Oakvale » Jun 17, 2016 10:26 pm

I think you're misunderstood about the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership); it is only a trade agreement between the several countries - think a step beyond free trade - which will make trading easier and also challenge China.

There isn't any union at all. It's all about trade.
User avatar
Oakvale
Supporter
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Jun 15, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Americalex » Jun 17, 2016 11:41 pm

Formerdestination wrote:What do you guys think about the potential Pacific union that might be occurring with the whole Trans pacific Partnership thing?

Hi Formerdestination and welcome to the forums! I have to agree with Oakvale about this, this TPP has an economic component that is motivated by a wish to contain China's growing aspirations for greater influence and power projection capabilities in the entire pacific region. It's an economic coalition to kind of provide the stability and growth to this collection of Asian nations so that as a collective they may have the means to mount a tenable deterrence against Chinese ambitions.

With that said, the impacts on the Canada-USA relationship of this deal will be transformative for sure.. it affects many protected industries here, that will suddenly have to open up with stiff competition from American producers.. In the case of Quebec I'm thinking mainly dairy and meat industries. Wouldn't go so far as to say it's a bad thing, as meat and dairy are found to be generally damaging to human health (something I only recently discovered thanks to Dr McDougall).

You put the TPP's impacts on North American relations and contrast them with Trump's effect if he wins the presidency (which I believe and hope he will), and pulls the trigger on his intention to cancel the NAFTA deal entirely. I'm really open to a fresh trade deal, effected bilaterally between Canada and the USA. I never liked the addition of Mexico into that deal anyway. If America brings back prosperity by returning industries domestically through tariffs on trade, this is ultimately good for Canada (especially Ontario & Quebec): if America prospers, it is good for us because they will have the means of purchasing vast amounts of our quality exports.
User avatar
Americalex
Supporter
 
Posts: 20044
Joined: Aug 27, 2004 2:48 am
Location: Quebec

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Oakvale » Jun 19, 2016 5:02 am

Americalex wrote:You put the TPP's impacts on North American relations and contrast them with Trump's effect if he wins the presidency (which I believe and hope he will), and pulls the trigger on his intention to cancel the NAFTA deal entirely. I'm really open to a fresh trade deal, effected bilaterally between Canada and the USA. I never liked the addition of Mexico into that deal anyway. If America brings back prosperity by returning industries domestically through tariffs on trade, this is ultimately good for Canada (especially Ontario & Quebec): if America prospers, it is good for us because they will have the means of purchasing vast amounts of our quality exports.


It's important to remember that the reason why there was mass Mexican migration in the 90s and 2000s is that NAFTA weakened and some would say destroyed Mexico's economy, thus forcing people to look North for better prospects. That is the cost of implementing free trade with a lesser developed country whom you are not on the same level with.
User avatar
Oakvale
Supporter
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Jun 15, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Americalex » Jun 19, 2016 12:17 pm

Very good observation, I had never realized the extreme negative effects NAFTA had on Mexico, thanks for that.
User avatar
Americalex
Supporter
 
Posts: 20044
Joined: Aug 27, 2004 2:48 am
Location: Quebec

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Formerdestination » Jun 24, 2016 4:27 pm

I'm aware that it is currently only a trade agreement. I was more referring to the possible union that a lot of political theorist seem to predict coming from it.

Also apparently Mexico's economy is apparently rapidly on the rise. At least according to the articles I've been reading. So its position as a possible liability in these sort of things may be ending sooner than one would think.

My biggest worry on the agreement is probably Vietnam. With them being a communist country and all.
User avatar
Formerdestination
 
Posts: 6
Joined: May 04, 2016 3:04 pm
Location: Wyoming

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Oakvale » Jun 25, 2016 5:06 am

Formerdestination wrote:I'm aware that it is currently only a trade agreement. I was more referring to the possible union that a lot of political theorist seem to predict coming from it.

Also apparently Mexico's economy is apparently rapidly on the rise. At least according to the articles I've been reading. So its position as a possible liability in these sort of things may be ending sooner than one would think.

My biggest worry on the agreement is probably Vietnam. With them being a communist country and all.


I don't doubt that some are speculating on that, but it's the first I've heard of it, and it would be rather hard to carry out.

And yes, Mexico's economy is on the mend, and they are better off now then at any point in their past. Still a long way from properly being able to participate in a North American merger, economically at least, but morale is building, and that's a good thing.

Vietnam is also reforming and modernizing; it took them longer than it should have, but it was big decision for them to begin to split from China like they have in the past 10-20 years, and it will serve them well. Asian countries are crucial for the trade pack though, hence their inclusion.
User avatar
Oakvale
Supporter
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Jun 15, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Formerdestination » Jun 27, 2016 6:50 pm

The TPP is apparently similar to a lot of the deals and agreements that the European Union is founded on. Apparently if it goes through we could only be an agreement or two away from a Union. I think its really interesting.
User avatar
Formerdestination
 
Posts: 6
Joined: May 04, 2016 3:04 pm
Location: Wyoming

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Americalex » Jun 27, 2016 8:37 pm



If I had to support it, I would remove Brunei & Malaysia and include Taiwan and South Korea.
User avatar
Americalex
Supporter
 
Posts: 20044
Joined: Aug 27, 2004 2:48 am
Location: Quebec

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Oakvale » Jun 28, 2016 3:30 pm

Americalex wrote:If I had to support it, I would remove Brunei & Malaysia and include Taiwan and South Korea.


Yes, but the broad point of the TPP is to prevent further Chinese economic and political influence on the rest of Asia. We already have trade as well as military agreements with Korea and we provide tacit support to Taiwan, though we certainly could and should do more for the latter.

What we need to do is sure up the rest of Asia that are more susceptible to Chinese influence and power. Under normal circumstances, I'd be more cautious in the addition of Brunei and Malaysia, but these are dire times, and the west must act against China in any way possible.
User avatar
Oakvale
Supporter
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Jun 15, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Americalex » Jun 28, 2016 3:40 pm

Good point about Korea, though Taiwan is being held back because of the lack of trade options that diplomatic relations afford and that Korea enjoys. I can see why Korea wouldn't wish to antagonize China given that much of their success comes from their popularity in the chinese market for their many products. As for Brunei & Malaysia, they feel like the "Turkey of NATO" attempt to include some muslim nations to avoid seeming discriminatory, and also as you say out of pragmatic necessity/efficacy, even though we're not talking about a security arrangement.

Singapore has been included by Abu Sayyaf inside their "islamic asian caliphate" ambitions. With the radicalization of Malaysia and Indonesia (not sure about Brunei but I certainly would not travel there), it's a shaky gamble at best. Sounds like laying the stage for a backstab later, in a way similar to what Turkey appears to be planning (restoration of Ottoman name and renewed ambitions to lead political sunni Islam, doubling of its army to 1 million soldiers, purchasing of Italian equipment for mobile bridges, and indications that Erdogan envisions achieving "mahdi" statuts through an invasion/capture/destruction of Rome through blitz across Yugoslavia, etc).

Apples and oranges perhaps, but security and trade concerns certainly overlap when it comes to the TPP. Another point of interest is how the TPP basically renders NAFTA obsolete, so we're left with considerations of a US general election that can lead presumably to a Clinton presidency that would ratify the TPP, or a Trump presidency that would very much trash out the TPP. How would a Trump presidency deal with chinese ambition in the Asia-Pacific? It certainly throws a wrench in the classical approach to operating a pivot of "soft containment" to China's "unrestricted warfare".

I keep up a hope about China: that it may convert to Judeo-Christianity at some point down the road. While the socialists there have kept an iron grip on power, after decades of genocidal acts of death and destruction against the Chinese people, the truth remains that China has given up on the ideological delusions concerning a socialist eden, and have opened up to free-market practices that de facto make its population very capitalist in both mindset and activities. Surely even the top brass among the Chinese communists are bound to realize that their own revolution was financed by the very pedo-satanists who serve Islam in their own perverted way. Do they really wish to go down history lane as being the bad guys until reality caves in upon them? The chinese seem like a more pragmatic lot then this.

Just look at North Korea, since the famines of the 90s, they've moved away from psychopathic state control over every aspect of human affairs. The population there has completely given up on the brainwashing and have embraced black market capitalism, which has made the new generation very entrepreneurial, as a means of survival, but to such an extent that now the main concern of the North Korean regime is self-preservation through acquisition of strategic weapons. Inwardly they are opening up in the way that China did, they are repeating the same formula that China employed, and it's working. Now they have food and goods.. Contrast this with Venezuela where people eat rats, pets and out of trash dumpsters.. I'm sure they're also relying more and more on cannibalism as well, though it hasn't reached the media.
User avatar
Americalex
Supporter
 
Posts: 20044
Joined: Aug 27, 2004 2:48 am
Location: Quebec

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby -MM- » Jul 15, 2016 7:44 pm

Americalex wrote:
Formerdestination wrote:What do you guys think about the potential Pacific union that might be occurring with the whole Trans pacific Partnership thing?

Hi Formerdestination and welcome to the forums! I have to agree with Oakvale about this, this TPP has an economic component that is motivated by a wish to contain China's growing aspirations for greater influence and power projection capabilities in the entire pacific region. It's an economic coalition to kind of provide the stability and growth to this collection of Asian nations so that as a collective they may have the means to mount a tenable deterrence against Chinese ambitions.

With that said, the impacts on the Canada-USA relationship of this deal will be transformative for sure.. it affects many protected industries here, that will suddenly have to open up with stiff competition from American producers.. In the case of Quebec I'm thinking mainly dairy and meat industries. Wouldn't go so far as to say it's a bad thing, as meat and dairy are found to be generally damaging to human health (something I only recently discovered thanks to Dr McDougall).

You put the TPP's impacts on North American relations and contrast them with Trump's effect if he wins the presidency (which I believe and hope he will), and pulls the trigger on his intention to cancel the NAFTA deal entirely. I'm really open to a fresh trade deal, effected bilaterally between Canada and the USA. I never liked the addition of Mexico into that deal anyway. If America brings back prosperity by returning industries domestically through tariffs on trade, this is ultimately good for Canada (especially Ontario & Quebec): if America prospers, it is good for us because they will have the means of purchasing vast amounts of our quality exports.


Trump has been gaining some ground, but he is still a major underdog.

If he were to win it though, I can't help but think Canada and the US would grow further apart as Canada just elected a very liberal PM and - from what I can see - they hate Donald Trump.
User avatar
-MM-
Supporter
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Jul 17, 2013 1:03 am

Re: Trans pacific union

Postby Oakvale » Jul 17, 2016 4:23 am

-MM- wrote:Trump has been gaining some ground, but he is still a major underdog.

If he were to win it though, I can't help but think Canada and the US would grow further apart as Canada just elected a very liberal PM and - from what I can see - they hate Donald Trump.


That wouldn't be very different from the majority of the world, though.
User avatar
Oakvale
Supporter
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Jun 15, 2016 1:00 pm
Location: New Jersey


Return to Debate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
cron