|
May 03, 2006 Over-Reach or Overdrawn? |
|
|
Today's Wall Street Journal [May 1, 2006] carries a piece titled, Lumbering Along [pg. A-14], editorializing the significance of an agreement last week to settle the long-waged, Canada - U.S. soft wood lumber dispute. According to the Journal,
That's the good part - the headline, but then the Journal article goes on to examine some of the "hidden costs" of the agreement. First, according to the Journal, the negotiated settlement serves to put a "floor" on lumber prices in the U.S. at $355 per thousand board feet. Below this price threshold, Canadian lumber imports to the U.S. are punitively "taxed" increasingly more - the lower the price goes. The Journal adds that this "hardly helps make housing more affordable amid rising mortgage rates." Additionally, the settlement allows for the U.S. lumber industry to keep 1 billion of the 5 billion in illegal duties collected since 2002 - with half of this "windfall" going directly to the [U.S.] domestic players that filed the protective action in the first place. Perhaps even more unsettling about this "resolution" is that it clearly demonstrates the failure of NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement] in general and specifically its dispute resolving mechanisms. The softwood lumber dispute had hearing under the guise of this "dispute resolving mechanism" where an international resolution committee had ruled in Canada's favor on this issue on more than one occasion. Also worthy of mention, because the Journal piece refuses to come right out and say it,
We only learn of this 'hard cap' when we peruse Canadian coverage of the same incident, which was "front page news" instead of being buried on page A-14. Trade deals like NAFTA epitomize or embody the globalist agenda. In one fell swoop, whether consciously or not, the globalist agenda has been dealt a severe blow. As the WSJ reveals,
The resolution of the Canada / U.S. softwood lumber dispute has created a degree of confusion and raises several questions. Will this sounding of the "protectionist bell" extend to other areas of trade - like oil, natural gas and water? Or, maybe these negotiations were intended to send a blunt "proxy message" to the Chinese? Who knows, perhaps the softwood lumber issue and its resolution is a case of over-reach? At the end of the day, it could be argued that the imposition of tariffs and other protectionist measures are responsible for the destruction of wealth as opposed to its nurturing or creation. But perhaps we should not be surprised with this development - given the state of disrepair of our global "fiat monetary system" - some, like Greenspan mentor Ayn Rand, might argue that it's simply a progression:
|
|
Copyright © 2004 - 2006 Rob Kirby Image rendition and html coding Copyright © 2000-2009 SafeHaven.com ADVERTISEMENTS
« BullionVault.com
-- Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices »
« Honest Money: A History of U.S. Gold & Silver Currency -- by Douglas V. Gnazzo Maestro, My Ass! -- by Michael Ashton » « Opinions expressed at SafeHaven are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven or its management. Articles are available via RSS/XML. Please visit RSSHelp for instructions. » |