USMCA = NAU+TPP

[acptulsa]

I remember that thread. It replaced this one.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...s.org+8679%252

How dare you pollute an activism thread with this kind of defeatism?

Sounds like Thunburg. Still mad at e_d for pointing out that Trump was taking Javarnka's advice and staying in the agreement, which he has now replaced with something at least as bad?

[acptulsa]

And you would defend Satan himself if he agreed with you on immigration.

And what is my opinion on immigration, Brian? I've got nearly 49,000 posts. Search them.

Here's what you'll find. I believe open immigration won't work in a welfare state. I believe if we fixed the economy, the majority of us would be for immigration. Two thousand miles of border fence would be an expensive and ineffective boondoggle. Immigrants, no matter how conservative, won't vote Republican as long as Republicans openly hate on them. A nation has a right to control immigration, but this government is committed to incompetence and corruption, and is therefore incapable of doing that. And I'm sick to death of every other thread on this forum being hijacked to talk about how horrible immigrants are. So sick of it that I would call out the Archangel Gabriel for doing that.

If you have convinced yourself I have any other position on immigration, then you have let your own opinion on the subject color your perception of me. The question is, you have let that color your perception of me and who or what else? Could it be SwordShyll is everything Superfluous Man is and more relentless and more obnoxious, but you won't let yourself see it because the Shyll plays to your bias, and Superfluous cuts against it?

You know, that's fine, to a point. No one thinks you ought not have beliefs. But when you start using your mod powers to punish people for disagreeing, or refuse to use your mod powers where you should because someone agrees with you, the forum dies.

I would defend Satan himself? I have news. I don't agree with Superfluous Man. Are you comparing him to Satan? Most people assume Satan is less polite than him.

Would you defend Satan himself if he agreed with you on immigration, Brian?

“My Guy” has to be a Good Guy because I am a Good Guy and know what a Good Guy is.

Since you don’t like My Guy then you can’t be a Good Guy because Good Guys would never like the Other Guy.

I am pretty sure that’s the gist with these Team Players. Then they blarge on about Defending the Constitution and oaths like good little trained seals.

I have discovered that most humans are incapable of truthful analysis and logic. That is why it’s so effective for the government and media to pump this trash out 24/7. People just gobble it up because they are simply unable to create an independent thought and too damn stupid to realize it. Welcome to the suck.

Excuse me for not owning the assumption that I agree with every little thing Superfluous Man says, just because banning him for talking immigration in too many threads, and allegedly putting words in people's mouths, and not banning Swordshyll for talking immigration in more unrelated threads and putting more words in people's mouths, does not look like impartial, just moderation to me.

[The Rebel Poet]

And what is my opinion on immigration, Brian? I've got nearly 49,000 posts. Search them.

Here's what you'll find. I believe open immigration won't work in a welfare state. I believe if we fixed the economy, the majority of us would be for immigration. Two thousand miles of border fence would be an expensive and ineffective boondoggle. Immigrants, no matter how conservative, won't vote Republican as long as Republicans openly hate on them. A nation has a right to control immigration, but this government is committed to incompetence and corruption, and is therefore incapable of doing that. And I'm sick to death of every other thread on this forum being hijacked to talk about how horrible immigrants are. So sick of it that I would call out the Archangel Gabriel for doing that.

If you have convinced yourself I have any other position on immigration, then you have let your own opinion on the subject color your perception of me. The question is, you have let that color your perception of me and who or what else? Could it be SwordShyll is everything Superfluous Man is and more relentless and more obnoxious, but you won't let yourself see it because the Shyll plays to your bias, and Superfluous cuts against it?

You know, that's fine, to a point. No one thinks you ought not have beliefs. But when you start using your mod powers to punish people for disagreeing, or refuse to use your mod powers where you should because someone agrees with you, the forum dies.

I would defend Satan himself? I have news. I don't agree with Superfluous Man. Are you comparing him to Satan? Most people assume Satan is less polite than him.

Would you defend Satan himself if he agreed with you on immigration, Brian?

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to acptulsa again.

I still can't believe Super was banned simply for not being sufficiently anti immigrant.

[PAF]

And what is my opinion on immigration, Brian? I've got nearly 49,000 posts. Search them.

Here's what you'll find. I believe open immigration won't work in a welfare state. I believe if we fixed the economy, the majority of us would be for immigration. Two thousand miles of border fence would be an expensive and ineffective boondoggle. Immigrants, no matter how conservative, won't vote Republican as long as Republicans openly hate on them. A nation has a right to control immigration, but this government is committed to incompetence and corruption, and is therefore incapable of doing that. And I'm sick to death of every other thread on this forum being hijacked to talk about how horrible immigrants are. So sick of it that I would call out the Archangel Gabriel for doing that.

If you have convinced yourself I have any other position on immigration, then you have let your own opinion on the subject color your perception of me. The question is, you have let that color your perception of me and who or what else? Could it be SwordShyll is everything Superfluous Man is and more relentless and more obnoxious, but you won't let yourself see it because the Shyll plays to your bias, and Superfluous cuts against it?

You know, that's fine, to a point. No one thinks you ought not have beliefs. But when you start using your mod powers to punish people for disagreeing, or refuse to use your mod powers where you should because someone agrees with you, the forum dies.

I would defend Satan himself? I have news. I don't agree with Superfluous Man. Are you comparing him to Satan? Most people assume Satan is less polite than him.

Would you defend Satan himself if he agreed with you on immigration, Brian?



Excuse me for not owning the assumption that I agree with every little thing Superfluous Man says, just because banning him for talking immigration in too many threads, and allegedly putting words in people's mouths, and not banning Swordshyll for talking immigration in more unrelated threads and putting more words in people's mouths, does not look like impartial, just moderation to me.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to acptulsa again.

[Origanalist]

Casey Jones making a comeback?

[acptulsa]

[spudea]

This is exactly what Libertarians want. NO BORDERS NO WALL NO USA AT ALL

[acptulsa]

This is exactly what Libertarians want. NO BORDERS NO WALL NO USA AT ALL

Always fun to see people pop up to collectivize libertarians.

Remember when it was mainly liberal Obamabots accusing us of marching in lockstep?

[devil21]

bump

[jmdrake]

Now, let me get this straight. Amash is labeled a "traitor" and accused of helping to "destroy the constitution and rule of law" for participating in a process that is, at least at face value, prescribed by that very constitution.

Trump, on the other hand, signs this treaty which if ratified would formally hand off American sovereighnty to a multi-national entity and there's very little by way of criticism, let alone such hue and cry as raised against Amash. How is formally handing away American sovereignty any less a "destruction if the constitution and rule of law" than is voting for impeachment?

Curious.

+rep

[jmdrake]

Please point to anyone defending the USMCA.

There are plenty of people trying to tell us not to worry about the impeachment coup.

There are plenty of people who are against impeachment but don't consider it a coup. Me for instance. Just because someone doesn't go along with your hyperbole or doesn't think Amash is a traitor for voting for impeachment doesn't mean that person agrees with impeachment or thinks it's not worth worrying about.

[RonZeplin]

A coup to overthrow the Constitutional Government of the United States of America. It's the Hillary/Trump neocons stupid.




"A New World Order coming into view" ~GHW Bush/Trump.

[juleswin]

Please point to anyone defending the USMCA.

There are plenty of people trying to tell us not to worry about the impeachment coup.

But you are some other old timers, defend the hell out of the man who is pushing this trade deal daily

[jmdrake]

There are so many people here supporting it that I need to debate?

Who here is supporting impeachment besides Zippy? For that matter Zippy may be supporting the USMCA.

[Origanalist]

Always fun to see people pop up to collectivize libertarians.

Remember when it was mainly liberal Obamabots accusing us of marching in lockstep?

He just wants "objectivity".

[PAF]

Labor

US Vice President Mike Pence speaks on the USMCA to at a Uline distribution center in Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin in 2019
USMCA Annex 23-A requires Mexico to pass legislation that improves the collective bargaining capabilities of labor unions.[26] The specific standards Mexico is required to comply with are detailed in the International Labour Organization's Convention 98 on freedom of association and collective bargaining. The administration of Mexico's President, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, introduced legislation in late 2018 which pursues compliance with these international standards.

Other labor related measures include a minimum wage requirement in the automotive industry. Specifically, 40 to 45 percent of the automobiles manufactured in North America must be made in a factory that pays a minimum of $16 per hour.[25] This measure will be phased in during the first five years after USMCA ratification.


Intellectual Property

The USMCA will extend the copyright length in Canada to life plus 70 years, and 75 years for sound recordings.[27] This extension mirrors the same IP policy captured in the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, paragraph 18.63.[28] Furthermore, biotechnological firms would have at least 10 years exclusivity period for agricultural chemicals (double the current 5), and industrial designs' period would "jump" from current 10 to 15 years.


Elimination of Foreign Office and Local Presence requirements

The USMCA would eliminate the need for companies to establish headquarters in any other USMCA country. It will encourage cross-border business by excluding US companies from the need to localize data, open a Canadian or Mexican HQ. For example, McDonald's Canada would cease to exist and there would only be a North American McDonald's or Apple.


Sunset clause

Additionally, there is a stipulation that the agreement itself must be reviewed by the three nations every six years, with a 16-year sunset clause. The agreement can be extended for additional 16-year terms during the six-year reviews.[31] The introduction of the sunset clause places more control in shaping the future of the USMCA in the hands of domestic governments. However, there is concern that this can create greater uncertainty. Sectors such as automotive manufacturing require significant investment in cross-border supply chains.[32] Given the dominance of the United States consumer market, this will likely pressure firms to locate more production in the US, with greater likelihood of increased production costs for those vehicles.


Currency

A new addition in the USMCA is the inclusion of Chapter 33 which covers Macroeconomic Policies and Exchange Rate Matters. This is considered significant because it could set a precedent for future trade agreements. Chapter 33 establishes requirements for currency and macroeconomic transparency which, if violated, would constitute grounds for a Chapter 20 dispute appeal. The US, Canada, and Mexico are all currently in compliance with these transparency requirements in addition to the substantive policy requirements which align with the International Monetary Fund Articles of Agreement.


Against exchange rate manipulation

The USMCA countries are to abide IMF standards aimed to prevent the manipulation of exchange rates. The agreement calls for a public disclosure of market interventions. The IMF can be summoned to act as a referee if the parties dispute.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...nada_Agreement

[PAF]

//

[devil21]

bump for posterity

The best deals!

[pcosmar]

Got out of NAFTA

Meet the New and improved NAU...

[devil21]

Got out of NAFTA

Meet the New and improved NAU...

Goes to show how easy it really is to dupe conservatives under a cult of personality. Fake attack a media created figure and then whatever he does and supports will be either embraced or overlooked, even if it goes completely contrary to what conservatives claim to support. It's almost too easy....I gotta give TPTB credit for executing the plan almost seamlessly.