Allowing countries to decide what to ban is just saying that ag goods are exempt from free trade.
Why should the US put up with this? We have a natural advantage in agriculture, with very high productivity.
If you're against free trade, ok, but that's going to apply to European exports of all kinds. And if the trade motivation for links with Europe goes away, so does the motivation for defending Europe via NATO. NATOxit (NATOff? NATOut?) would cost Europe enormously.
"On the global scale, more countries need to say "no" to keep the US government in check. It's what the founding fathers would have wanted"
I am very skeptical that any of the founding fathers would have wanted European countries restricting US trade. With that said, I agree that the Europeans should make a stand and not accept what they consider dangerous pesticides to be imported into the EU
Unfortunately, this will just increase imports from countries that don't ban them and make life harder for local farmers. It's the blessing of free trade based on lowest common denominators.
As a completely practical matter, a country is entitled to do what it wants to protect an industry. I'd agree that it is usually a bad idea, but every country does it to some degree. If France decides it has a right (god given, or lawfully given) to a wine industry then it can ban all wine imports. I'm not sure why you'd call out America for this, it has been far more open to trade than most countries, and benefitted from it. UNfortunately it has left some people behind and caused a backlash.
We’re not banning all trade with a particular national, we’re banning a particular app from a nation we import more from (in terms of dollars as of 2019) than any other nation.
This kind of unilateral decision strikes me as short sighted and more politically motivated than anything.
The US is theoretically based on a checks and balances system, in the hopes of preventing unchecked tyranny.
On the global scale, more countries need to say "no" to keep the US government in check. It's what the founding fathers would have wanted.
The complaints are about how restriction will impact "global trade" of particular pesticides. The EU's entire point is that these items should not be traded. That statement holds regardless of the economic impact.
It is standard behaviour in international trade though. “If you ban our products from your country, we’ll ban your products from ours”.
Suppose hypothetically, that the EU banned imports of Australian wine, why would it be “reactionary” for Australia to respond in kind by banning imports of EU wine?
It's not to prevent a competitive industry which can just produce something cheaper but also to prevent governments which actively use banned practices to give their nation an unfair advantage. More here:
It's like saying the EU is poisoning the US because there are things we don't ban but they do. It's up to us to make that determination and stop the importation. They like raw cheese, that's great, we prefer to avoid the low chance of food poisoning. But that goes for lots of chemicals and pharmaceuticals. Each economic zone or country makes its own determination.
That's what national standards and regulations are for. If the countries don't care to even have laws to protect their citizens, then the blame is greatly on them.
But, instead of making hay with those governments, it's more attractive to say the EU is to blame. No, go protest those countries --that's where they should make hay, but it's probably not as sexy and they'd probably be run out.
Prohibiting importation means your farmers are at a disadvantage compared to the farmers in the country next door.
Will you now outlaw food imports from countries that accept Russian fertilizer?
If you do so, will you outlaw food imports from countries that ban direct importation of Russian fertilizer, but are lax on enforcement when ships registries are faked and when fertilizer goes through other nations?
I’m confused too why this issue needs to be any more complicated than this. Are there any other product categories where allow imports from a country that completely bans our exports?
Why should the US put up with this? We have a natural advantage in agriculture, with very high productivity.
If you're against free trade, ok, but that's going to apply to European exports of all kinds. And if the trade motivation for links with Europe goes away, so does the motivation for defending Europe via NATO. NATOxit (NATOff? NATOut?) would cost Europe enormously.
reply