Trump Finally Admits To Being Full Of It

Poindexter said:
Absolutely.

View attachment 183789
More...

It's that kind of American nonsense that created the huge financial crisis in 2008/2009. A crisis that barely touched Canada. How soon you've forgotten and are readying to make more massive mistakes with the economic health of your country. You might want to note that your economy is still growing at a fairly mediocre rate and your federal debt to GDP is at an all time high and growing. Not exactly the kind of strength that warrants your overconfidence about the US and it's position in the world economy.

If you want a trade war, just do it, I couldn't care less, bring it on. Trump likes to make threats but Canada's lost interest. If we have to trade more with Europe and Asia ( both of whom we signed new trade deals within a year ), we will. And Americans will feel the pinch far more then you can understand and bellyache about things nonstop; this site illustrates that dynamic every week.
 
Last edited:
Nine_Ender said:
It's that kind of American nonsense that created the huge financial crisis in 2008/2009. A crisis that barely touched Canada. How soon you've forgotten and are readying to make more massive mistakes with the economic health of your country. You might want to note that your economy is still growing at a fairly mediocre rate and your federal debt to GDP is at an all time high and growing. Not exactly the kind of strength that warrants your overconfidence about the US and it's position in the world economy.

If you want a trade war, just do it, I couldn't care less, bring it on. Trump likes to make threats but Canada's lost interest. If we have to trade more with Europe and Asia ( both of whom we signed new trade deals within a year ), we will. And Americans will feel the pinch far more then you can understand and bellyache about things nonstop; this site illustrates that dynamic every week.
More...

Let's take a look into trade between the U.S. and Canada in more detail. There are actually very few areas of disagreements between the two countries. These areas in recent years include:
  • Timber
  • Crops such as wheat and soybeans
  • Oil / gas pipeline issues
  • Farm Equipment (parts / right-to-repair)
  • Fly-over fees for aviation North Atlantic flights (Canada's fees on the lucrative North Atlantic route are among the highest in the world.)
  • Planes (Bombardier)
  • Liquor / Beer
  • Steel / Aluminum (recent tariffs not imposed on Canada)
The reality is that there are very few areas of dispute in trade between the two countries.

In Goods the U.S. has a trade deficit with Canada each year. Tariffs applied by the U.S. on goods would hurt Canada more than the U.S. -- since to the U.S., Canada is just one of many trading partners representing just 16% of exports (including services). To Canada, the U.S. represents over 76% of the country's exports.

In Services, in recent years the U.S. has a surplus with Canada each year in recent years. Certainly if Canada reduced services coming from the U.S. it would impact some domestic U.S. companies. However the reality for Canada the minute it turns off services being provided by the U.S., the entire financial and oil sector goes kaput within a week (p.s. look it up - one of your politicians said this).

The reality is that a "trade war" is good for neither country. It would be best to keep moving forward and negotiate over any disagreements. Canada already evaded application of steel and aluminum tariffs by the U.S. Both countries recognize that trade benefits both partners.

On a side note, I will admit that the solution by Bombardier for the C-Series aircraft was brilliant. They sold 50.1% of the C-Series operation to Airbus. Airbus now obtained a small regional plane in their portfolio to take on Boeing without having to pay any of the development costs or even any cash in the deal.

The U.S. market is the largest for regional jets. Bombardier desperately needed to get into the U.S. market with the C-Series to survive. Airbus has a manufacturing plant in Alabama where the C-Series will now be manufactured (final assembly). This makes the plane a domestic U.S. product if over 40% of the assembly/material is done in Alabama. When this deal was made the dumping penalty applied by the U.S. became meaningless and was withdrawn.

Bombardier avoided bankruptcy by making this deal. At the time of the deal they had only delivered under 26 C-Series jets to two airlines (Swiss Air / Air Baltic) in Europe. They had a growing backlog of orders (with increasing manufacturing/delivery issues) but still needed to enter the U.S. market to even break-even on C-Series development. The deal to manufacture the C-Series in Alabama does mean that some of the C-Series manufacturing jobs in Canada will be going away.

The winner here:
  • Airbus - got a new modern small regional jet for no R&D cost. Owns 50.1% of the C-Series for no cash. Enters the U.S. market with a regional jet.
The loser here:
  • Boeing - now has domestic U.S. competition for a small regional jet. A market where Boeing doesn't even have a good product entry.
Both a winner & loser:
  • Bombardier - lost 50.1% of the C-Series, but did gain a large partner with big marketing reach and U.S.-based manufacturing operations. Successfully avoided going bankrupt. Will need to lay off some manufacturing staff in Canada, but solved its manufacturing/delivery issues.
 
Last edited:
gwb-trading said:
On a side note, I will admit that the solution by Bombardier for the C-Series aircraft was brilliant. They sold 50.1% of the C-Series operation to Airbus. Airbus now obtained a small regional plane in their portfolio to take on Boeing without having to pay any of the development costs or even any cash in the deal.

The U.S. market is the largest for regional jets. Bombardier desperately needed to get into the U.S. market with the C-Series to survive. Airbus has a manufacturing plant in Alabama where the C-Series will now be manufactured (final assembly). This makes the plane a domestic U.S. product if over 40% of the assembly/material is done in Alabama. When this deal was made the dumping penalty applied by the U.S. became meaningless and was withdrawn.

Bombardier avoided bankruptcy by making this deal. At the time of the deal they had only delivered under 26 C-Series jets to two airlines (Swiss Air / Air Baltic) in Europe. They had a growing backlog of orders (with increasing manufacturing/delivery issues) but still needed to enter the U.S. market to even break-even on C-Series development. The deal to manufacture the C-Series in Alabama does mean that some of the C-Series manufacturing jobs in Canada will be going away.

The winner here:
  • Airbus - got a new modern small regional jet for no R&D cost. Owns 50.1% of the C-Series for no cash. Enters the U.S. market with a regional jet.
The loser here:
  • Boeing - now has domestic U.S. competition for a small regional jet. A market where Boeing doesn't even have a good product entry.
Both a winner & loser:
  • Bombardier - lost 50.1% of the C-Series, but did gain a large partner with big marketing reach and U.S.-based manufacturing operations. Successfully avoided going bankrupt. Will need to lay off some manufacturing staff in Canada, but solved its manufacturing/delivery issues.
More...

The competition in the aircraft sector heats up...

Boeing to buy control of Embraer's $4.75 billion commercial jet unit
  • Boeing will buy a controlling stake in the commercial aircraft arm of Brazilian planemaker Embraer, cementing a global passenger jet duopoly.
  • The deal values Embraer's commercial aircraft operations at $4.75 billion, and Boeing's 80 percent ownership stake in the joint venture will be valued at $3.8 billion.
  • The deal took shape more than two years after the idea was first presented internally to Boeing's board and reflects a longstanding affinity between the two planemakers.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/05/boeing-embraer-to-form-joint-venture.html

Boeing will buy a controlling stake in the commercial aircraft arm of Brazilian planemaker Embraer under a new $4.75-billion joint venture, the companies said on Thursday, cementing a global passenger jet duopoly.

The new company, encompassing Embraer's commercial aircraft and services businesses, should make Boeing the market leader for smaller passenger jets, creating stiffer competition for the CSeries aircraft program designed by Canada's Bombardier and backed by European rival Airbus.

The deal values Embraer's commercial aircraft operations, the world's third-largest, at $4.75 billion and Boeing's 80-percent ownership stake in the joint venture at $3.8 billion, the companies said.

Boeing is expected to pay for its share of the venture in cash, according to a person familiar with the matter. The statement gave no indication of any payment Boeing was making under the deal.

(More at above url)
 
Frederick Foresight said:
I think it's instructive to reread the unedited remarks of the stable genius:

“Nice guy, good-looking guy, comes in — ‘Donald, we have no trade deficit.’ He’s very proud because everybody else, you know, we’re getting killed,” Trump said, according to the Post. “So, he’s proud. I said, ‘Wrong, Justin, you do.’ I didn’t even know. ... I had no idea. I just said, ‘You’re wrong.’ You know why? Because we’re so stupid. … And I thought they were smart. I said, ‘You’re wrong, Justin.’ He said, ‘Nope, we have no trade deficit.’ I said, ‘Well, in that case, I feel differently,’ I said, ‘But I don’t believe it.’ I sent one of our guys out, his guy, my guy, they went out, I said, ‘Check, because I can’t believe it.’”

Awe-inspiring.
More...


He still has that guy out looking at Obama's birth certificate, and vaccinations, and climate change, and anything that has to be read to understand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top