PDA

View Full Version : Oz and US Free Trade agreemant


Sheep Guts
20th Oct 2003, 06:15
Anyone know what this Free Trade Agreement thats being negoitiated between Australia and the US is all about?

Will it make Aircraft and Parts Cheaper?


Sheep

p. hey Im bored:hmm:

Torres
20th Oct 2003, 07:11
No duty now, only GST on aircraft and aircraft parts. Therefore, aircraft parts prices would not change under a free trade agreement.

splatgothebugs
20th Oct 2003, 07:12
It would be the same as the one that NZ is getting................oops sorry that dosen't exsist:p

As far as I understand it will not really effect the exchange rate in the long run.........BUT short term could strengthen, it's a bloody good deal for importers and ewxporters and your defence force. Very very cheap gear :ok:

SeldomFixit
20th Oct 2003, 14:17
it means, put simply, gives the USA full, free & unfettered access to your markets. In return, well, they'll take full, free & unfettered access to your markets. Did I mention that the US will get full, free....................................

Rich-Fine-Green
23rd Oct 2003, 15:01
SeldomFixit;

Australia has much more to gain.

Australia actually punches well above it's weight in the USA.

Australia is the 8th largest investor in the USA (thanks to Messers Lowy, Pratt & others) with US$70BN of investment over there and Australian companies employ over 80,000 Americans.

The USA has investments of about US$130BN in Australia and employs over 300,000 Australians.

I see a free trade agreement as more advantageous to Australia than the USA.

druglord
23rd Oct 2003, 19:10
thanks rich-fine-green, contrary to prevalent foreign thinking the USA isnt' out to screw everyone.

OzExpat
23rd Oct 2003, 22:28
Maybe Dubya had a pang of conscience about the way he in which he shamelessly ripped the heart out of our once thriving sheep and lamb export market in Iraq... :yuk: There are many other instances where the US has shafted us too. Don't forget that US farmers still receive government subsidies.

If this FTA leads to a level playing field, I'm all for it... but I don't believe in the tooth fairy either. :ugh:

druglord
23rd Oct 2003, 23:39
Mmm...sounds like you might be french. The US has gotten rid of one of the worst dictators in the world has just signed a new deal to send 87B in aid to Iraq, prevented countless other acts of genocide/murder and all you can think about is the lost sheep trade.
Mmmm... the US was trying the same isolationist policy in 1939, but changed it's mind thank goodness or we'd be using the yen in oz, and deutchmark in france.

OzExpat
24th Oct 2003, 21:46
the US was trying the same isolationist policy in 1939, but changed it's mind

Changed it's mind? How strange... I thought that an air attack on Pearl Harbour did that. :ugh: How times change eh? In 1917 (a bare 3 years after the start of WW 1), it only took the sinking of ONE ship to change American minds about that war. In 1941, it took the sinking of almost the whole US Pacific Fleet to achieve the said change of mind.

Uncle Sam is getting an awful lot of trade business for its money and efforts. And I promise to forget that the whole premise for the invasion of Iraq was the supposed existence of WMD. They still seem to be somewhat elsuive, don't they? :yuk:

The very fact that the spin doctors have come up with all that bs about liberating the people of Iraq is proof, to me, that even dear old Uncle Sam wants everyone to forget about WMD. How can we ever forget, or forgive, such a massive lie? :ooh:

As for me being French... :}

AIRWAY
24th Oct 2003, 22:01
OzExpat a French :} :} :}


Yes i'd like to know where those WMD are:confused:

No dought America has gotten rid of a dictactor, but anything that America get's it's hands on there is always trouble... :rolleyes:

druglord
25th Oct 2003, 03:59
As to trade received for invading iraq...mmm. not sure..I'm not privy to such information, I find it hard to believe it would amount to the 87B that they're putting into country not to mention what they've already spent. ...as for the WMD, ok you may have a valid point, time will tell...as for getting rid of a dictator, I fly with pilots who spent time in Afghanistan and Iraq and they tell me how much the people there appreciated them.

and airway....anything america gets its hands on...really now, would that include the truman plan and rebuilding Japan and Korea?

SeldomFixit
25th Oct 2003, 12:47
Druglord - keep it coming - you're a crackup mate. I just hope that whilst so much of "HIS" time is devoted to "God save America", there's a bit left over to save the rest of us FROM America.

Boney
25th Oct 2003, 14:25
Yes, Dubya is my hero too, not to mention that lying little peice of dog sh!t in Canberra, Johhny.

Apparently, Johhny has to write his name on the soles of his shoes these days as his head is so far up Dubya's clacker, people can't find him.

And where are those WMD?

Fact: The chemicals that the Americans claim Sadam had tons and tons of have a shelf life of generally 1-4 years. The inspection teams believed they may not have got all the chemicals but they were sure they destroyed all the machinery possible for making the chemicals. That was in the early/mid 90's. An imminent threat in early 2003 - I don't think so.

Fact: If I were to enrichen uranium in my back yard, or indeed in a tunnel under my house, the Americans have been able to detect that by space for about 10 years. So the old story about cannisters being smuggled into Iraq was nothing but a scare campaign as "The Co-ilition of the Killing" were starting to run out of bullsh!t.

Fact: Dick Cheney and Dubya have both worked in the oil industry. Donald Rumsfield has a back ground in selling weaponry. I can not remember the exact details (some ppruner must know the details) but he was in the news a few months ago as he was the chairmen of a company that had sold equipment to North Korea to aid them in developing nuclear power stations/weapons. Prime examples above of how black a human soul can be!

Quote:
"Sadam could launch missiles within 45mins". Tony Blair, late 2002

I found it interesting when Colin Powell presented his case for murder last year. He held up pictures of warehouses, trucks moving around factories etc. etc. At the time there were about 200 hundred inspectors on the ground in Iraq. Now, I am not a smart bloke but can someone please explain this. Why didn't Powell pick up a phone, you know those things, they have been around only for about 100 years, and ring the bl00dy inspectors and get them to turn up for a surprise visit. And maybe he did. But as we heard no more about it, I can only guess of 2 things. Either the whole story was crap OR the inspectors dropped in the day the photo's were shown (if they were really smart, the day before) found nothing, but OUR world leaders accidentally forgot to tell us.



Q: Why does God allow war to happen?

A: So American's can learn geography!



If our world leaders spent as much money and effort on famine and the envirament, then we ALL would have something to fight for!

It's not about interest rates and home improvement TV shows.

Mmmm, ..... Iraq has the world's second largest oil reserve. I don't have a recent figure but 6 months ago the estimated cost of the war + first 6 months was $US180 billion. And Dubya did ALL this just because he is bl00dy good bloke.

Yep, he's my hero.

"All we are saying ..... is give peace a chance". J Lennon, 1969

Col. Walter E. Kurtz
25th Oct 2003, 17:50
America never does anything unless it is purely in self interest, or in the best interest of US business.

NEVER.

Druglord, by the way, the Japanese were knocking on Australia's door BEFORE the US became involved. If the Japanese never attacked Pearl Harbour, the US would never have got involved in the Pacific, or Europe.

Gnadenburg
25th Oct 2003, 19:24
druglord

I am sure no US pilot would just saunter around Baghdad and get a welcoming impression from the locals. Sounds like a tall story from weekenders trash hauling in the Guard.

Shock and Awe- The number of US state sponsored dictators post WW11.

druglord
26th Oct 2003, 05:43
So I'm not quite sure what the arguement here is...that america is the only country that does things in it's own interest and every other country is altruistic...thus the enormous amounts of foreign aid provided by the rest of the free world...or that america shouldn't have gotten involved in WW2 if pearl harbour hadn't been invaded...or that there's a conspiracy theory with american oil companies and the commies...
what's next the CIA killed the loch ness monster?
If you're getting your news source from the BBC or CNN I'll listen to your arguements, if it's from channel 9 or the Australian...well I just not that naive

AIRWAY
28th Oct 2003, 21:37
G'day

Hi all according to "The Australian" newspaper at least for now the FTA is not heading on the right direction on some of the key issues:rolleyes:

Boney
29th Oct 2003, 05:21
The saddest thing that we will probably lose in all this is our cultural independance.

As part of the FTA with the United States of Aggression, we will let a lot more American TV in to our living rooms. Unfortunately this may well mean that the Australian Film and Television Industry will suffer.

Do you really think the Americans are going to give anything away when their economy is going down the gurgler? Because Johnny does absolutely EVERYTHING that the Washington Baboon asks, without question, they probably think us Aussies are just a bunch of losers - a bunch of 'yes' men. They have no respect for us. Lets face it, they even sent us a bill for the bombs we used to murder Iraq's to further THEIR world domination and oil interests.

My guess is Australia is about to get a right rogering from the Americans when it comes time to sign on the dotted line. Maybe in the spirit of free trade, Johnny could get an American company to produce the next round of fridge magnets?

Be alert and be very alarmed - these war mongers are still in power!

poteroo
3rd Nov 2003, 07:29
US FTA WON'T GIVE SAME BENEFITS AS A FULL MULTILATERAL TRADE AGREEMENT

The US is rushing the innocents in Canberra into this FTA because they,(the US), do not want to sign up for the full blown multilateral trade agreement which has been the long term aim of all nations in the World Trade Organisation.

The US operates on the 'united they stand - divided they fall' principle of business, and can gain far more advantageous terms via these FTA's than they will via a WTO agreement. That's why they currently have 17 of them in progress, and why they, along with the EU, have deliberately sabotaged the last 3 rounds of the WTO Trade meets.

The US is fearful of the influence of China, and these FTA's are one way of ensuring that the US has 'influence' over potential competitors for China's huge import market.

The history of FTA's is that generally the US has not delivered on it's side of the agreement The North American Free Trade Agreement promised Canada access to the US grain and meat markets over 5 years ago - they are still sitting on the 49th parallel....wishing they'd been less naive.

The US always has icluded very long term, vaguely worded terminology to cover agriculture in their FTA's, including such long 'phase-in' periods that most of our generation will be in nursing homes before it's applicable. And it does not affect subsidisation.

Given that they are spending US$19 billion on farm subsidies in the next 3 years, is it any wonder that the US wants us to sign off on an FTA which will have precedence-in-law over any future multi-lateral arrangements? It's not in the interests of US farmers to support the WTO trade talks - they will not lose a thing via a US-OZ FTA.

One of the other concerning aspects of an FTA is that it often gives companies much more power in respect of challenging decisions such as those relating to quarantine, and monopolistic trading. US companies have a nasty habit of litigating at the drop of a hat, and that's what's happened with the NAFTA agreement - 28 court actions were pending as of 15/10/03 - effectively blocking the intent of the FTA.

A strong agricultural sector has a huge multiplyer effect right through the economy. It means more aircraft sales, and more hours flown, whether private, charter, ag, or regional RPT.

Farmers are understandably worried that any FTA will involve a reduction in quarantine standards, the abolition of the single desk wheat marketing arrangements, and a loss of ability to import cheaper generic chemicals, fertilisers and pharmaceuticals due 'dumping' claims of the largely US owned multi-nationals. We are being told that our intent to keep Oz clean & green can't be justified - essentially because other countries have the problems, and greatly envy us our low disease and pest status. It's just plain sabotage for us to relax our barriers to facilitate a FTA. Especially when the US and EU clearly use non-tariff barriers such as bogus quarantine claims to keep our primary produce out.

In the longer term, any FTA will see more pests and diseases entering OZ, over and above the current alarming rate of quarantine incursions. Buy a Thrush or Airtractor now - while the A$ is up!! [just joking, of course]

Yes, there may be some increased opportunities for export to US markets, but we need to remember that the US farmer will be much more able to compete with us for existing markets elsewhere in the world. Our costs are likely to rise if our current ability to import generic chemical and fertiliser is challenged via the anti-dumping rules about to be changed by Customs. We'll be less able to compete with the US in many respects.

I cannot see many benefits for Oz in any FTA, because our federal government is so clearly intent on appeasement of the US. They are lightweights fighting the Mike Tyson of world trade. There will be substantially more benefits from a WTO multilateral agreement, because Oz will be negotiating from a position of strength with the so-called 'Cairns' group of nations.

We need to say NO to big buddy and the FTA.

My interest in this arises from being an agricultural scientist and specialist crop protection consultant for over 40 years.

cheers,

OzExpat
3rd Nov 2003, 21:43
Thanks RV6-VNE, that seems to vindicate my suspicions. Maybe one day we'll have the sort of pollies that won't want to bend over and take it up the @rse from America.

exmexican
4th Nov 2003, 20:24
Keep battling Druggie! We don't, however, believe everything that comes from CNN anymore. Read some Hunter S Thompson, PJ O'Rourke, and Micheal Moore.
The US has aggressively guarded it's agricultural markets for many moons. Basic incompetence and inefficiency are rewarded by massive subsidies,while the Aussies forge ahead in all areas of agricultural finesse. There's not a farmer in the US that would survive open competition for more than a few years.
As for WMD, the US would know exactly how much **** is scattered around over there. After all, the reciepts are in the top drawer of the desk in the oval office.
Sow the wind, reap the hurricane.

druglord
4th Nov 2003, 21:16
exmex, hey dude...sorry i tried to email ya, but I can't get through on bigpond. Have ya got a hotmail addy or something like that? You the last of the mohicans up there with raingauge? Yeah i realize america muscles people around with the trade thingie, but I just get sick of the america-bashing that goes on especially in this forum when everyone loves aussies over here. Hey i got new job, hopefully be driving RJ's next month. drop me another line..Ciao

the wizard of auz
5th Nov 2003, 09:58
BWAAAHAHAHA, ozex, French. :p
Just got to have my little dig......... all those places that were quoted as receiving US aid, were I believe blown to the ****house by the US prior to the aid being supplied. Lets face it, you yanks won't do anything unless its good for the yanks.
you have to spend money on a place after you blow it up.... Its much more comfortable to occupy and control then. ;)

Boney
5th Nov 2003, 11:43
Now that it would appear that the whole 'Weapons of Mass Destraction' thing was a scam, what I would like to know is when is the United Nations going to charge Bush, Blair and HoWARd as War Criminals?

Oh, that's right - I have forgotten the Golden Rule.

He with the gold makes the rules.

Thank God Bush didn't visit The Great Barrier reef while here the other week. As many would know, under the reef is a huge oil supply and thanks to global warming and The Crown of Thorns Starfish, large areas of the reef are dying. If Bush had been made aware of this, once back home, he may have started one of his propaganda speeches with .....

"Australia, give up your weapons of Mass Destraction"

the wizard of auz
5th Nov 2003, 18:01
And I would give it up too! :}

DIVINE WIND
6th Nov 2003, 04:06
Hey Druglord
I just moved to NY. I can say with confidence that the king-pins of Aussie GA & our good friends at CASA could learn a thing or two if they came over here for a peek. One thing that they have to sort out here is the gambling laws. Gone are my saturday arvo's at the local having a punt.
:{
Back in your box Boney

Boney
6th Nov 2003, 05:32
Devine Wind, yes change gambling laws but keep your head in the sand as our world leaders take us a step closer to another World War every month - good to see you have your priorities right.

Sheep Guts
6th Nov 2003, 05:45
Heres an interesting spin on this. The US has a FTA ( Free Trade Agreement)with Canada. Many Canadian Pilots get NAFTA ( North American Free Trade) Visas to work in the US. I dont know if this is still true post 9/11. Wonder of that could be arranged across the Pacific.

Anyone have moreinfo on this would be interresting indeed.


Sheep

druglord
6th Nov 2003, 23:16
Thanks divine, yes oz is a great place, but the aviation industry is totallly different. you looking for airline work? Gotta green card? Keep in touch and I might be able to walk a resume in for ya.
Sheep guts, unfortunately it's very difficult to get especially airline work for non-citizens/green card holders, and l'm not sure what sorta arrangements they have with canada, but talking to a roomie who's been up there flying the past couple weeks he said he's talking to guys with 10,000 hours that can't get out of Twotters, so i think they'd love to try to score work here, but it's somewhat prohibitive legally.

DIVINE WIND
7th Nov 2003, 21:59
Hey Druglord,
Check your PM's
DW :cool:

Winstun
8th Nov 2003, 04:14
Unfortunately this may well mean that the Australian Film and Television Industry will suffer. ...boo hoo..:{ I am certain the Aussie taxpayer is over getting screwed in yet another area...besides still forking out millions for a white elephant (ABC), subsidising third rate acting wannabees is not on. while the Aussies forge ahead in all areas of agricultural finesse ...:hmm: yeah, like finessefully raping the earth to imminent extinction..:rolleyes:

OzExpat
8th Nov 2003, 22:20
Bwahahaha, onya Winstun! I always get a real belly laugh out of your posts! Keep up the good work!

All of us get a bit bitter and twisted if we miss out on getting laid once in a while. I guess you miss out all the time huh?