White House readies order on withdrawing from NAFTA

[DemocratSinceBirth]

The Trump administration is considering an executive order on withdrawing the U.S. from NAFTA, according to two White House officials.

A draft order has been submitted for the final stages of review and could be unveiled late this week or early next week, the officials said. The effort, which still could change in the coming days as more officials weigh in, would indicate the administration’s intent to withdraw from the sweeping pact by triggering the timeline set forth in the deal.

The approach appears designed to extract better terms with Canada and Mexico. President Donald Trump pledged on the campaign trail to renegotiate NAFTA, a trade deal signed in 1994 by former President Bill Clinton that removes tariffs and allows for the free flow of goods and services between the three countries in North America. Trump in recent weeks has stepped up his rhetoric vowing to terminate the agreement altogether.

“NAFTA’s been very, very bad for our country,” he said in a speech last week in Kenosha, Wisconsin. “It’s been very, very bad for our companies and for our workers, and we’re going to make some very big changes or we are going to get rid of NAFTA once and for all.”

Peter Navarro, the head of Trump’s National Trade Council, drafted the executive order in close cooperation with White House chief strategist Steve Bannon. The executive order was submitted this week to the staff secretary for the final stages of review, according to one of the White House officials.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/26/white-house-nafta-withdraw-trump-237632

[Hoyt]

1. Don't believe it when Trump says NAFTA is bad for us, or when Democrats say it.

[zipplewrath]

4. At this point the harm has been done

Just exiting from NAFTA probably won't change a whole lot except it will increase costs for alot of goods. Agri-business will be hurt, and what's left of the textile industry will probably totally go belly up. The industries that exited for Mexico are predominately already gone and probably would go overseas if they left Mexico. And has been repeatedly pointed out, at this point, if one builds a new factory in the US, one builds a highly automated one, especially with the low energy prices from natural gas based electricity.

Now, if he negotiated something more favorable to the US worker, not to mention to the environment, it could help. Not to mention that he could also help the Mexican farmer, which might mean a reduction in Mexican immigration.

[burnbaby]

9. as a person in IT

it sure made life hard for me. I could do without NAFTA

[Hoyt]

11. Are Canadians and Mexicans competition for IT workers? Honestly don't know.

[burnbaby]

12. i think Inidia

is our biggest competitor. Not so sure about Canada, but Mexico is starting to play a big role too.

I'm at the tail end of my career. Just trying to get a few more years out of it. I hate it and I once loved doing my job. I loved learning and seeing how things work. I just don't care anymore. tired of 24/7, tired of so many things.. Geez I am ranting, so sorry

[Bradical79]

14. That's irrelevent to NAFTA -nt

[burnbaby]

15. I'm sorry

Did you say NAFTA is irrelevant to india taking lot's of IT jobs?

[Bradical79]

17. Yes?

It's the North America Free Trade Agreement between U.S., Canada, and Mexico. Nothing to do with India and IT jobs.

[NurseJackie]

2. This will not have the desired outcome.

[roamer65]

7. Inflation is gonna go through the roof.

It will be fun to watch the deplorables not be able to afford anything.

[burnbaby]

10. then maybe we can make it over here again

and you can get off on watching people work and not afford things.

[Xolodno]

19. Make it here?

Get real. The cost of doing so is extensively higher. Higher prices = people buying less or spending more for their income on items and buying less other US made goods.

And that assumes even with tariffs, the Mexican or Canadian version STILL isn't cheaper, hell, and if we push in enough tariff to make sure something made here is cheaper, guess what? Ever hear of retaliatory tariffs? And lets drop the other shoe shall we? Resources, you still need to import some of those...oh gee, guess just what happened, some of that went up because it was cheaper to import it before the tariffs. Oh and about that retaliatory thing, they could tie the tariffs to the resource that's needed to produce a product. So in other words, no matter how much in tariffs you put in, the retaliatory will STILL make the foreign version cheaper.

And of course, Joe Farmer is in real trouble. He just lost a significant portion of his income. Because all he knows is, he takes his corn or wheat to the scales, gets his check and goes back home. He doesn't have an f'n clue that bigger companies like ADM take that crop, transport and sell to Canada and Mexico.

With tariffs in effect, they will sell a lot less to Canada and Mexico and the bullshit "well we can consume it" answer just makes that person look stupid since we already consume plenty. Last I checked prices for bread and corn were pretty damn low. Any lower, then there is no profit margin.

If Trump does pull out completely....hold on to your butts, it will certainly trigger a good sized recession and drop the standard of living something fierce. Trade agreements are extremely complex and come about due to looming significant economic changes and not something Joe Schmuck thinks "of if we got rid of NAFTA, things will go back the way they used to". Got news, "the way they used to" is gone and cannot return. Unless of course you want to change the USA into a third world nation. In that case, I'm out of here. I have the skill sets that another country would want. But I bet a lot of GOP voters don't.

[burnbaby]

20. I don't know anymore

I do remember when it was put into law and tons of people were out of work, manufacturing places closed down. It was very sad times.

[Xolodno]

21. Tons?

The Economic Policy Institute put it about 800k. What it doesn't tell you, how many of those were going bye-bye anyway. Its like wanting the hey day of Coal or Timber industries back, got news, no matter how much deregulation you do, those jobs aren't coming back. Only prolonging the inevitable.

The cost of manufacturing here for many jobs is prohibitive, unless you pay poverty wages which does no good for anyone anyway. Even then, if you forced these manufacturers to stay, they would have switched to automation. Again, no benefit. Plus the higher costs make the manufacturers products to costly to sell abroad. Hurting the company which probably houses the operations and service jobs domestically. So in effect, you still lose the manufacturing jobs and stunt the company from creating more jobs that would service international operations.

And here is a cold hard fact, 14 Million jobs here are now connected to NAFTA. 14 Million is a lot worse than 800k.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Wouldn't an EO upsurb the Senate's

non- delegable duty re treaties?

[Volaris]

8. If NAFTAs a treaty (I'm pretty sure it is)

Then you're correct and LittleFingers can sign all the Executive Suggestions he fuckin wants and the Senate will tell him to Go Get Bent, there's way too much election money from CorpAg for them to renegotiate it.

[burnbaby]

16. i think he can put

tariffs on the goods coming back into the country. Which would increase how much we pay for a product, but the theory behind it is, it would then be less expensive to build or make here in the US which would mean jobs coming back

[Kentonio]

5. I think we're seeing exactly what this supposed 'master deal maker' relies on as a strategy

On countless different issues now he's done exactly the same thing. Threaten the harshest outcome possible, and then try and haggle down. It's pathetic.

[roamer65]

6. Currency wars, trade wars, world war.

[Hoyt]

13. America telling the world to go to hell after taking more than our share of resources & wealth

is bound to cause problems. Plus, it's kind of like some Ahole who goes to a poker game, wins most of everyone's money, and leaves early.

[Johonny]

18. It seems like a bad way to negotiate "better terms" from number 2 and 3 on our export list

It's like Trump wants to fail and drag the economy down with him. Okay list start from scratch on trade and renegotiate a trade treaty that took two presidencies to negotiate and pass and see if we get a better deal now that a game show host is president. What could go wrong?

[smirkymonkey]

22. Very, very, very, very very.

Very, very.

[spanone]

23. yesterday's news....he's flip flopped