Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    48,029

    New NAFTA Announced by White House and Dems

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/10/polit...eal/index.html

    Good news! We can finally come together and bash both Dems and Trump for the same thing!

    Yay!

    Reunited and it feeeeels so good!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,185
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/10/polit...eal/index.html

    Good news! We can finally come together and bash both Dems and Trump for the same thing!

    Yay!

    Reunited and it feeeeels so good!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    That's the spirit!

    Don't give anything a chance.

    After all, who knows more about a trade agreement involving billions of dollars and thousand of jobs over three different economies than you.

    PSD is lucky to have you.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,099
    Our patent/copyright system is broken ... a little less protection is good.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    91,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Sluggo1 View Post
    That's the spirit!

    Don't give anything a chance.

    After all, who knows more about a trade agreement involving billions of dollars and thousand of jobs over three different economies than you.

    PSD is lucky to have you.
    If one thinks that deals like NAFTA are bad for this country, as I believe on the whole GGGGG-Men does, then this is perfectly reasonable.
    Prior to 11/1/19: if you were on my ignore list, I was sticking to ignoring you thanks to great advise.
    From 11/1/19 on: I will no longer be responding to comments back to people on my ignore list.
    _____

    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,185
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    If one thinks that deals like NAFTA are bad for this country, as I believe on the whole GGGGG-Men does, then this is perfectly reasonable.
    I am not getting your point.

    If deals like NAFTA are bad for the country and we are replacing it with a new deal, why bash Trump and the dems.

    Should we have no deal at all????

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,099
    Quote Originally Posted by Sluggo1 View Post
    I am not getting your point.

    If deals like NAFTA are bad for the country and we are replacing it with a new deal, why bash Trump and the dems.

    Should we have no deal at all????
    I think that's what he's saying. And I can see the merit in that as well. There are positives both ways.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    91,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Sluggo1 View Post
    I am not getting your point.

    If deals like NAFTA are bad for the country and we are replacing it with a new deal, why bash Trump and the dems.

    Should we have no deal at all????
    If he thinks that what Trump and the Democrats are trying to replace NAFTA with is worse than what is currently the law, then he would not support it. I assume he sees it like this, which should answer your last point/question: Nothing > NAFTA > New NAFTA.
    Prior to 11/1/19: if you were on my ignore list, I was sticking to ignoring you thanks to great advise.
    From 11/1/19 on: I will no longer be responding to comments back to people on my ignore list.
    _____

    Think long and hard about why you respond to nonsense. Please!


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    48,029
    It was just a facetious take on our ability to unite against both Dems and Trump. So much for that pipe dream.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,099
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    If he thinks that what Trump and the Democrats are trying to replace NAFTA with is worse than what is currently the law, then he would not support it. I assume he sees it like this, which should answer your last point/question: Nothing > NAFTA > New NAFTA.
    He could think Nothing > New NAFTA > NAFTA too.

    Ideally we get every country to use the same employment rules we use as far as conditions, benefits, and work hours, then we don't need any trade agreements at all. But that utopia isn't coming anytime soon.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    91,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    He could think Nothing > New NAFTA > NAFTA too.

    Ideally we get every country to use the same employment rules we use as far as conditions, benefits, and work hours, then we don't need any trade agreements at all. But that utopia isn't coming anytime soon.
    He could but I donít think that is likely give his post. Either way though, he would prefer neither to the two NAFTA options. Thatís the big point

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    30,099
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    He could but I donít think that is likely give his post. Either way though, he would prefer neither to the two NAFTA options. Thatís the big point
    Agreed.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    10,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Our patent/copyright system is broken ... a little less protection is good.
    What is the deal with that on the new NAFTA?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    10,424
    One big thing that concerns me (and special) has to do with generic drugs. In the old NAFTA, the US gave pharmaceutical companies 12 years before they would release the generic version, Canada 7 and Mexico 5. The US wanted to change that so all countries had to wait at least 10 years, that part has been scrapped, thankfully for special and myself. I did read that many think that the new rule for the US ( minimum 10 years in stead of the 12 year hard limit will mean that residents of the US may have to wait for generic drugs even longer. Sucks for you guys

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    4,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Powders View Post
    One big thing that concerns me (and special) has to do with generic drugs. In the old NAFTA, the US gave pharmaceutical companies 12 years before they would release the generic version, Canada 7 and Mexico 5. The US wanted to change that so all countries had to wait at least 10 years, that part has been scrapped, thankfully for special and myself. I did read that many think that the new rule for the US ( minimum 10 years in stead of the 12 year hard limit will mean that residents of the US may have to wait for generic drugs even longer. Sucks for you guys
    Well the drug companies got a hand in writing it, so I'm sure they are protected. See, in the US, you just bribe folks to get what you need.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    31,112
    Substantively, is there a synopsis of what changed?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •