Yonhap reports that the United States and Korea have failed to reach an agreement on autos and beef.
The two sides will continue to talk during the course of the G20 summit, though.
No deal on cars and beef: Yonhap
Previous post: Galaxy S beats snot out of iPhone in Consumer Reports
Next post: G20 This and That
{ 83 comments… read them below or add one }
I heard a rumour that the Koreans are trying to poison the Americans by sending them low-quality cars that they wouldn’t even give to their dogs. Pass it on.
I heard the rumor in the press that LMB was quoted as saying, he is willing to give into US demands on auto, but no deal if the US side insists on Korea importing beef over 30 months old. Frankly, I would have preferred to not to give in on auto which forces Korea to lower emissions and fuel efficiency standards that won’t help the US car sales that much, but give into the beef issue, since US beef is safe and delicious. But that’s just me. I do understand it’s political, since his government was almost overthrown by the massive street protests couple of years ago.
U.S. beef exporters are saying they don’t need the “all ages, all cuts” concessions Max Baucus is demanding—just pass the damn thing already so we can get a head start on the gradual elimination of the 40% tariff:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-09/u-s-beef-exporters-urge-speed-not-changes-in-south-korea-trade-pact.html
As I stated in the last thread (for which cm disagreed with me) I thought a compromise on autos was both necessary and a good thing. However, according to this:
http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=020000&biid=2010111115358
The Koreans thought they had a compromise on autos and thought they had an understanding that beef would be talked about later and separately, then the U.S. negotiators brought it up again.
Ut videam,
… and stick it to the Australians:
http://www.meattradenewsdaily.co.uk/news/101110/usa___cattlemen_pushing_a_snowball_uphill_.aspx
So, are U.S. negotiators derailing the FTA for just 5% of potential beef exports to Korea? That sounds rather counter productive, if true.
The great thing about that Dong-A piece is that since it’s filed under “Archives,” a casual reader would have no idea whether it was a straight news story, an editorial, or an op-ed piece. Yet it reeks of opinion journalism, as is a good example of just how bad MSM journalism is in Korea, even in 2010.
So awful it’s awesome!
DLB
Yes… I would like to hear from the U.S. negotiators what the stumbling blocks were.
I think we’re down to either 30 month old beef rule stays or no deal. If LMB signs this deal with the beef concession, he will have another street revolution on his hand. Not only that, the there is no way in hell the opposition will ratify this treaty. If you think the Americans are thinking that they’re getting a raw deal, then you should hear the Korean farmers and the Korean unions and the leftist organizations who they have their own complaints about the deal. They will never support the FTA if the beef import is opened completely. It’s hard enough as it is without the beef controversy, without adding the beef to the issue. President LMB, remembering 2008, will not sign something that will probably not pass, and risk another mayhem riots on the streets during the G20 meeting, and furthermore risk his government in power. If I was in his position, I’d probably do the same thing.
And WK, bad ideal to lowered standards on auto emissions and fuel efficiency. Korea needs to go the opposite, and should have higher standard to improve the air quality, and to cut down on high oil import bills. They are lowering the standards for the US auto industry but, even if Korea completely gives in on auto, I doubt the American auto companies and their trade unions will support this deal.
The FTA with Australia and New Zealand looks interesting, since Korea and the other two countries do not have a great deal of overlapping industries, which should make this negotiation much easier to deal with. Canada is a different animal, as Canadian beef is also banned from Korea due to Mad Cow concerns, and the Canadian auto unions assembling American cars, are the extension of the American auto unions. They too, oppose vehemently the FTA with Korea. But Canada will probably follow the US in which ever they go.
cm,
I propose a “snap back” tariff. American automakers will be give a 5 year window to lower emission standards to a mutually acceptable level. If not, then tariffs should go back up.
Uh-oh! Is the Korean Embassy racist, or just practicing pretty crude race-based campaigning for the KORUS-FTA?
I see that the social media arm of the Korean Embassy in America is seeking FTA support on Facebook, et al., by declaring: “As Korean Americans, we know the importance of the US-Korea relationship.”
What, no one else does? Or aren’t American Americans invited to the party?
And who said MOFAT doesn’t have a sophisticated propaganda machine?
So awful it’s awesome,
DLB
DLB,
They are mobilizing the fifth column. Unfortunately, they are not as subtle as the Israeli Lobby…
Oh, and just in case you haven’t clicked “like” yet:
http://www.facebook.com/aipac
I’m watching out for you buddy!
Number one American car seller, Ford Taurus gets 8.7km per liter. Compare this to the BMW 502d which gets 20km per liter. The Chrysler Compass gets 10km per liter, the GM Cadillac CTS gets 9.4km, while the Cadillac Escalade only gets 5.9km. These are all just horrible numbers, if you compare them to the German, Japanese, and domestic models. Yet these are the models that are being offered to the consumers in Korea. And you wonder why Americans wonder why they’re not selling. Jesus, just look at the cars and their usage of gas… nobody can afford to pay $300 to fill up the tank in one of these! The ones who can afford the expensive gas, will drive the BMW’s and Benz’s. Why would they drive an American car if they wanted luxury?
This current debacle has Senator Max Baucus’ fingerprints written all over it.
WangKon, no deal. Obama will leave Seoul without an FTA. This will be a big blow to the FTA. I would think this would put the nail in the coffin unless something dramatic happens soon.
I think the responsibility of why this agreement failed this time lies squarely on the American side who kept pushing to get more and more, to the tune of even trying to rewrite the Korean auto standards law by saying they are hidden non tariff barriers. Hidden non tariff barriers to them, but no problem for EU, Japanese, and Korean car makers.
http://biz.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/11/12/2010111201664.html?Dep1=news&Dep2=biz&Dep3=biz_news
Quite a shame. On a partisan note a saw a new Pew Research poll signalling that most Republicans, esp Tea Partiers, have turned against free trade.
Robin, not true. Most Americans favor free trade with EU, Canada, Japan, Mexico, and even India. But not for Korea, which is lumped together with China (who are also not welcome).
Americans favor free trade.
Americans are against one-way free trade, and are dismayed by huge trade imbalances year after year, decade after decade, with “friendly” nations whose markets are closed to American products.
In the wake of NAFTA, Americans distrust govt-to-govt managed-trade agreements, especially with countries whose pledges to open their markets sound an awful lot like Lucy egging on Charlie Brown to kick the football, all the while promising that this time it will be different.
None of which has anything to do with the Korea “F”TA. If there is one thing Obama has shown himself capable of thus far, it is giving away the store to his “opponents” (Republican’ts, Big Health Care, Wall Street, etc.) while fighting his “friends” (the Dem base, referred to by his chief of staff as “retards”) in order to do the bidding of corporate donors. So if you’re Korea tonight, the thing you have to be asking yourself is, which side has given, or is giving, or will give, more money to Obama and Dems: those who want the “F”TA or those who don’t want the “F”TA?
Both of you are wrong. We welcome free trade. We just want it to be actual free trade, not subsidized by the foreign trading partner’s government…
Americans want commerce not conquest, competition, not colonization, and customers, not captives…
We want to be able to be tourists when and where we want. We want other countries to be as rich as us so they buy lots of stuff from us. And we don’t like being told lies about our motives.
“Hegemony” is a word most often used by our philosophical enemies. We don’t want a world controlled by America, we want the whole world as free as we are.
Sorry WB, you’re right but you snuck that in while my 21wpm typing was slowing me down…
I have a hard time believing that, even if the emission standards of South Korea were changed for the imported American vehicles, South Koreans would willingly buy the gas-guzzling crapfest that is Ford/GM/Chrysler. If they’re having trouble selling the damned things here, how in the world are they going to convince the consumers in a country where the gas price is easily triple of the price in US? People still snicker when they hear that someone got a new F-150 or a Taurus, for crying out loud.
Well here is a quick link: http://aleksandreia.wordpress.com/2010/11/10/tea-party-opposes-free-trade/
Sorry, it’s from a blog I don’t even read, but I’m writing from my phone; you can find more complete results if you want. Setnaffa made me laugh with his use of ‘we.’ Who is this we? Speaking on behalf of the entire GOP, or all red-blooded Americans? Anyway I did also see that Korea got lumped in with China, which is also sad. But if there’s another poll I’m missing please fill me in. As far as I see now more Dems support FTAs than Repubs. Is it a nationalistic thing?
“We” being essentially the folks who actually pay taxes…
Dems support FTA? Sure, if that’s what the Central Committee tells them to do… They oppose them to, on cue…
Ah, so I guess you were especially talking on behalf of democrats since communities that vote dem tend to be wealthier and better educated than those which vote republican. I had misunderstood you, Set. Indeed blue states tend to subsidize red states. So confounding, isn’t it? Such wealthy, generous communists — who woulda thunk it?
You “misunderestimate” yourself again…
The Tea Party, of which I am not a member, has gained enormous power in the GOP. They won the House for the GOP. They will win the Senate and the White house for the GOP in less than two years, barring a return to the Dubya/McAmnesty days.
“The times they are a-changin’…”
Get ready to see another “American Century” starting really, really soon.
Interesting Foreign Policy magazine article on the issue:
http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/11/12/the_korus_catastrophe
FP magazine (owned by the Washington Post) puts all the blame squarely on Obama.
Here are a few of my observations after reading about the problems of the deal.
1) According to the Koreans and FP magazine, the Americans seemed to be working for a “list of specific demands” rather than a set of principles.
2) It appears that Obama asked his Democratic cohorts to come up with a list, he didn’t look at them, and then had it sent off to Ron Kirk, the U.S.’s main negotiator.
3) Some of these “list of demands” apparently offended the Koreans, particularly the over 30 month beef demand (can’t call them requests).
4) This tells me a few things about Obama’s management style. He’s certainly not a micro manager. I think he likes to give big and broad and vague goals and then sit back and let underlings handle the details.
5) Despite the enormous good will that Obama has worked up with the labor unions and automakers, it appears that Obama didn’t use any of them to moderate or make more realistic their demands. There appears to be a lack of dialogue between the administration and his major labor and auto political allies on the FTA.
6) The way this blew-up and the surprise on both the Obama and Lee administrations I think is a greater failure for Obama than for Lee. It just appears that Obama never really had a firm handle on the situation and was never really involved in any meaningful way in the process. Furthermore, he used none of his considerable leverage in the auto industry (he basically saved most of that industry via the bail-outs) to make negotiations go smoother. Leaders leverage their relationships to get things done. Leaders make sure their subordinates have strong directives and help burst through log jams. This entire situation of the KORUS FTA is a failure of Obama as a leader.
Ultimately, I think Obama, if this was to be evaluated in a corporate situation, would make a better Chairman than a CEO or COO. He doesn’t appear detail oriented. He’s more of a big pictures guy.
setnaffa,
I dunno about “American Century” aspirations. The Tea Partiers tend to have isolationist tendencies, no?
that’s from Shadow Government; the blog is written by ex-Bushies.
Well, it’s not just that article, but other stuff I’m reading too. Obama just appears disorganized. Great figurehead. Can’t really seem to control his own party though.
This is going strictly by what I’m reading in the Korean media.
I think this deal is almost 95% dead. Even LMB who has been a strong proponent of the deal has been talking tough, but now he sounds fed up. Korea has been willing to give in on auto by eliminating the fuel and emission requirements and taxes on engine displacements and some other regulatories that the US wants changed. But what the US threw in was another set of demands which includes putting 25% taxes on Korean pickup trucks permanently. That, and with the beef over 30 month issue, and there’s a feeling on the Korean side that the US demands are going to be never ending, thus the hands thrown up in air.
The FTA wasn’t exactly the best deal for the American side so if it’s dead well the US doesn’t have a lot to loose. However for the Korean side, it puts a dent in their quest to become a “hub of FTAs” in addition to gaining further access to the US market.
“puts a dent in THEIR quest to become..”
theotherkorean, I thought you were a Korean? This set back will certainly put a dent, but I don’t think it will be that damaging for Korea, since FTA with other countries around the world are in full swing. All it will means is that the US companies will be in a very bad position to compete, by next year. But it may not matter much for the US to give up the Korean market, since Korea represents only about $30billion in US exports, about half the size of the Chinese market for US goods. So Korea may not matter much since it’s a small market relatively speaking.
correction:
US companies will be in a very bad position to compete in Korea.
cm,
It’s okay. Mins referred to Koreans in the third person also.
Correction again.
“So Korea may not matter much to the US, since it’s relatively a small market”.
cm,
Although you do have a point. If TOK’s original language was Korean, then Konglish popular words like “hub” or “ubiquitous.” would be less funny given knowledge of the particulars of the Korean language and the habit of Koreans to use direct translations of their words into English phrases.
Native Korean speakers understand this and accept it better than non-native speakers.
Man, this just keeps getting better and better. In my email box this afternoon, a message from the Korean Embassy to the United States entitled “Want Cheaper Korean Goods” (no question mark – nice).
The text, calling for support for the FTA, reads: “The Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement will help eliminate fees on Korean products imported to the United States.”
Um, OK. But are cheap(er) imports really the best way for the government propaganda arm of Korea, Inc. to be selling this travesty of an agreement. Shouldn’t the embassy folks be focusing on, oh, I dunno, JOBS?!
Jeez. We provide for Korea’s defense, provide a massive market for the country’s goods, educate the country’s Ph.D.’s, invest billions in FDI, and allow for 40 years of unfettered technology transfer, and STILL they shank our president.
But Korean conservatives are our allies, and it’s the fault of OUR negotiators when an agreement isn’t finalized. Oy!
DLB
Hey DLB,
Let’s play with subject nouns!
What other country can we fit in here, huh?…
I don’t think LMB would purposely want to “shank” Obama. LMB seems to genuinely like him and perhaps vice versa.
However, I do like the prospects of a $100 to $150 cheaper Samsung HDTV…
This is how the EU FTA agreement will make Korean products cheaper per the Yomiuri Shimbun:
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/business/T101111006172.htm
Shit… the FTA creates a difference of 1,003 euros vs. 863 euros for the same TV! Too bad an FTA in the U.S. can’t be enacted before X-mas! I’d buy my dad another TV.
DLB, Korea offered the United States, a free trade, tariff free, barrier free market. The United States refused to take up the offer because they do not trust Korea. Korea gave big concessions to the US even after the deal was already signed, and gave the US another negotiation. The US didn’t just reciprocate, they wanted even more concessions. The bottom line is, the US side renegade on the deal that was signed on 2007. That’s not Korea’s fault, and that’s not “shanking Obama”.
I can’t help wondering why the Kyopos here are debating the FTA as if they are Koreans. And I thought they were Americans. It’s no wonder why other Americans question their loyalty.
uhh… because my nationality is South Korea, not USA? Is that reason enough for you?
@cm #40: “Korea offered the United States, a free trade, tariff free, barrier free market.”
Really? Color me skeptical, because Korea doesn’t need an “FTA” to open its markets. It just needs to open its markets. A true FTA would be a one-page document that simply reads, “Henceforth there shall be free trade.”
“The United States refused to take up the offer because they do not trust Korea.” Perhaps. But whose fault is that? Charlie Brown’s or Lucy’s?
“Korea gave big concessions to the US even after the deal was already signed. The bottom line is, the US side renegade on the deal that was signed on 2007.”
Well, keep in mind, it wasn’t Obama’s deal. He inherited it from the most hated, failed regime perhaps in U.S. history. I would’ve thought he wanted a “win” after last week’s disastrous election to show for his $200 million per day jaunt to Asia. But obviously his people didn’t want a deal, at least not this deal, no matter how much the Koreans were willing to give up at the end.
@WK: “This entire situation of the KORUS FTA is a failure of Obama as a leader. He doesn’t appear detail oriented. He’s more of a big pictures guy.”
At this point I’m not sure what Obama is. During the campaign he said he opposes bilateral FTA’s in favor of broader regional trade deals. But he said a lot of things during the campaign that he’s since walked away from. He’s not a man of principle, and is beholden to corporate donors; so if corporate America (& Korea Inc.) really wants this so-called FTA, then it will eventually pass. To the further detriment of American workers.
I have a growing feeling Obama is destined to be another Jimmy Carter. A decent man overwhelmed by the complexity of the job and the nastiness of the opposition, he will make a fine ex-president starting two years from now.
TOK,
Why do you think support KORUS FTA = Traitor?
I’ve mentioned in another thread that Korea should make auto concessions and allow a construct that allows for the sales of a meaningfully sizable volume of cars built by American companies that most likely will employ Americans (rather than Canadians, Mexicans or Chinese).
http://www.rjkoehler.com/2010/11/05/ford-takes-aim-at-the-korus-fta/#comment-399187
What exactly is your issue?
theotherkorean writes:
Your concerns are easy to address:
1) This is a Korea-related blog, in a very large, general sense. Ergo, Korea related issues are going to be discussed regardless of whether you are a GI stationed or were stationed in Korea; current or former scumbag English teacher; or self-entitled/secretly self-loathing Kyopo. Either way you cut it this issues coming up and no one really gives a shit about what you “wonder.”
2) It’s seems to totally elude you that in this day and age of instant communications and multiple media venues, immigrant or second generation children are able to follow events about their ancestral lands with very great ease. As these people are following events from across the ocean, of course they’re going to have opinions about what they see. If they have an opinion about the issue, why the hell can’t they go to some venue and express it? Now, I know it probably annoys you, but frankly, this all the more reason to do it.
3) CM and WK are right, interest in events in one’s ancestral lands does not mean Americans will question one’s loyalty. The only person doing that is YOU and other malcontents. Tell me, are you going to say that some Jewish kid from Harrington Park, NJ is a traitor because he/she is interested in Israeli-Palestine issues? Are Polish immigrants who vote in their home country’s EU referendums potential fifth columnists? You know the answers to these and hence the stupidity of your question.
Listen, like you, I have had my problems with Kyopos. I don’t know what your specific problems were, but whatever it was you really need to get over it and get a life. Kyopos to my understanding are fairly large, diverse group. Go around speak and socialize with more, I’m sure you’ll find at least one to your liking.
At the risk of talking to myself, let me elaborate a bit:
Bush-Cheney hit the ground running — running like Usain Bolt. From Day 1 there was a rapid stream of executive orders, regulatory rollbacks, policy initiatives, and litigation (or in Microsoft’s case, the abrupt end of successful antitrust litigation). All of the special interests that make up the GOP — the corporations, the neo-con think-tanks, the churches and the god, gays, and guns crowd — rushed to push through their pet projects, with Rove acting as a three-ring circus master and Luntz tailoring the message. The project to invade Iraq began the first week those guys were in office (but only after they put out the devilishly false story that Clinton’s people removed the “W” from White House computer keyboards). Like a pit bull on steroids, the Bush-Cheney machine was horriblly destructive, yet awesome in its ruthless efficiency.
By contrast, Obama seems utterly lost. Serious people in Washington don’t listen to DFH bloggers; but all of the serious establishment institutions are conservative if not 100% pro-GOP. To whom does a Dem administration listen? Ariana Huffington? Whose pet projects does it push? Acorn’s? Past the campaign, there simply is no liberal machine supplying an agenda. In such a vacuum, there are only corporate donors and lobbyists, and the president’s principles and energy in reacting to events. Clinton had both. Obama, like Jimmy Carter, seems to have neither principles nor energy; and a typical result was the Seoul G-20, where Obama seemed interested in pursuing certain goals, yet failed to achieve any of them.
correction/improvement:
… where Obama suddenly seemed interested in certain goals (Chinese yuan appreciation, the so-called FTA), but failed to achieve any of them.
“It just needs to open its markets”
Korea to unilaterally eliminate tariffs to zero, while the US keep their tariffs on Korean products? What country does unilateral elimination of all tariffs, a totally open market?
“Perhaps. But whose fault is that? Charlie Brown’s or Lucy’s?”
If there’s no form of certain trust, then there really no point in even discussing FTA.
“But obviously his people didn’t want a deal, at least not this deal”
Gee… and I’m sure you were also sympathetic when LMB opened the beef market to the US in 2008, and angry Korean oppositions wanted a renegotiation with the US. Imagine that, at that time, LMB’s government and their supporters, I included, vehemently argued that we would lose the trust of the US, and make Korea a laughing stock by going back on a deal. But that’s exactly what the US has done – going back on a deal and successfully getting a renegotiation.
” To the further detriment of American workers.”
With the deal broken, do you think this is going to help the American workers in the future? I don’t think so. You will end up losing more workers, while the immediate economic effect on Korea will be neutral. Starting next year, for every $25,000 EU car exports to Korea, Europeans will end up saving $3000. That’s going to help the American auto companies to sell their cars in Korea, or the California wine growers, or the beef and dairy producers in mid west, or the Boeing workers in Seattle.
It’s all Korea’s and Lee Myung Bak’s fault, they won’t open up their markets, says WAP.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/10/AR2010111006338.html?sid=ST2010111006337
I would think it’s the American people who don’t want a FTA with South Korea because they’re mad at China. You know, South Korea, China, what’s the difference? American media is starting to sound like the paranoid Korean leftist media during the mad cow import in 2008.
@cm #48: I thought Korea did re-negotiate over beef. In response to the crazy cow nonsense, LMB personally pleaded with Bush Jr. to “ask” U.S. meat producers to not ship over-30 month beef. Am I imagining that?
This so-called FTA isn’t Obama’s deal. And while he appeared to want to push it through “to create jobs” the lack of a successful outcome indicates his real policy is otherwise. As someone else said, Good riddance!
Hopefully this is the last we have to hear about “free” trade deals that are anything but. Yet I fear this is far from the last we will have to endure. I think Korea’s best bet is to form a regional trade alliance with Japan and China, and then pursue an arrangement with the North American market (and ASEAN, etc.). But WE know nationalism reigns far too supreme in this part of the world for that to ever happen or for these nations to ever truly open their markets to the foreign barbarian devils.
#50, you just don’t want to admit the quickly changing dynamics in Asia. It’s not Korea getting hurt by this non agreement. The US had more to gain than Korea. Just look at the list of Korean products to the US, there’s not much more they can gain with the FTA as they are now. Many Korean manufacturers especially auto, have manufacturing facilities in the US, and the FTA won’t make a huge difference for them. LMB’s government wants a closer economic relationship with United States to hedge against the growing menace of China. If the US won’t step up to the plate, EU and others will. And they will take your market share in Korea, which is offering to open its market to whoever wants to reciprocate. The trade deficit with Korea will only climb, unless you start a protectionist war. That means more lost jobs for American workers. You think 6000 US autos sold in Korea are bad? How about cut that in half? US beef? Why would Koreans would buy that, if there are much more cheaper Australian beef with no Mad Cow stigmatism? As well as all your service sectors now must watch on the sideline, as EU bidders take up bids for financial services, education, legal services, patents, public works projects, as the entire service market has just opened up for the Europeans, but not to the Americans. See what the Americans are losing out to the Europeans, all in the name of protecting their uncompetitive auto industry and their bloated union workers, that cannot compete without government handouts.
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:j5-Z8hy2nkIJ:trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/october/tradoc_146695.pdf+fta+korea+eu+public+work&hl=en&gl=ca&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgRPeJ4T3_r1w_n23edrUFQYAuPbx3R3mo0ugnO4Zqjabo_U8_2ikR6e0qSJtY5AAwTO_JUxuSFv-qACcrB_SsbgOb2UTkqpgd2vrqJ7k2na4l9zU8BCQTuWJhUSDRpCowlEm5c&sig=AHIEtbRBIdbYLAjcB3oZPDdbAp6Ddt7Jww
.
Charles Tilly,
Perhaps TOK’s scope of
paranoiaconcern is too limited. Why is he only focusing on traitorous kyopos in America? What about the potential fifth columns in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, etc.?@cm #51
The only way for me to respond is to repeat what I’ve already said. As we are starting to go around in circles, I suggest we agree to disagree. You say the U.S. would benefit from this govt-micromanaged trade deal more than Korea would benefit; I doubt it. I could count on the fingers of one hand the number of American cars I saw in two years in Korea. Koreans see buying Korean as a matter of survival and wouldn’t drive U.S. cars even if Ford and Chevy gave ‘em away for free. You say Korea can live without the so-called FTA; I certainly think the U.S. is better off without it. I’m content to leave it at that.
wrong again, weikuboy.
Korean brand loyalty to Korea, Inc is weak compared to Japan.
Most recent example is the iphone.
Koreans prefer to wear US ‘maker’ brand clothes. One of the required routines of any South Korean tourist in the USA is to buy as much clothes as they can afford to buy with their budget and plane loads allow.
Koreans whore over Lexus, BMW, Mercedes, and even plebeian brands like Toyota over Hyundai.
Opposing the FTA won’t save your social security or get you unlimited free healthcare, ‘boy’. You have to earn that stuff or get the government to tax everyone higher. Or else, it’s fiscally not possible. That’s why I’m not a fan of ‘factcheck.org’. Election year lies, temporary truths, who cares?
i said this in 2008 and I will say it again. No government in history relied on taxing the few wealthy 5% alone.
None.
Factcheck.org may have plastered that all over, but that is the prime example of a election year temporary truth.
You have to tax everyone higher to support social programs. And historically that is the middle class.
India bought some old military cargo planes with propellers, but what they really want is to get cozy enough and buy Hornets or Raptors to intimidate Pakistan and China.
i actually support more social programs IF everyone is taxed higher.
and drug test all social help recipients. I have met so many people who decided not to work ever again on that low income they get in the mail for free and ‘budget’ themselves to buy illegal street drugs.
How can the Washington Post blame this failed deal on President Lee Myung Bak who has tried more than anybody to get this deal through? It was Lee who almost got impeached in 2008, for allowing in US beef. And it certainly wasn’t Lee, who dithered and wasted time for 3 years, it was the US side who did that.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/11/AR2010111103288.html?sid=ST2010111108057
What exactly is your issue?
WK, you don’t get it do you?
As long as the Kyopos don’t link me with mins and take potshots at my nationality, then I leave you guys alone. However if you and the other Kyopos feel the need to do the above, well I guess I can take potshots at the Kyopos.
Ladies and Gentlemen, go read post #41 by theotherkorean, which started this Kyopo nonsense again.
cm, you clearly don’t understand the issue. It’s okay if TOK gives you shit for being a Kyopo… but it’s totally uncool if you give him shit for his confused/confusing background.
JoongAng Ilbo’s cartoon on little progress in the bilateral trade talks.
http://pds.joinsmsn.com/news/component/htmlphoto_mmdata/201011/12/htm_2010111200171911001140-001.JPG
Most of those clothes are made outside the US, such as China, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, etc. The US – ROK FTA covers items manufactured in each country, respectively. Polo branded good made in Sri Lanka would not enter the ROK under the tariff regime of the US – ROK FTA. Moreover, Korean’s arms are too short, so the fashionable brands don’t look right. Ever see a Korean in a Zegna or Brioni suit? Good grief! Better they stick to Bang Bang. Or Andre Kim.
The iPhone is a made in China good. Under the WTO all signatories are required to open their respective markets and the max tariff on telecomm and IT gear is 10% (I recall); at their discretion signatories can apply a lower tariff. Keep in mind that the iPhone was kept out of the Korean market long after it had been launched worldwide. How was that? Non-tariff barriers. And still with all that time to sort itself out Sammy couldn’t make a smart phone on its own to counter Apple’s. Thank heavens for the Android OS, or it would be a bloodbath for Samsung and LG. And where is the iPad in Korea? Again, barriers erected to protect Sammy. Again and again we see that when Korean companies can’t compete straight up in Korea the gov’t comes to the rescue. Do you expect this to change because a Korean signed an agreement?
Now Dr. Pissypants states that Koreans are “whores” for foreign brands such as BMW and Lexus – interesting choice of word, btw. While it is true these brands do enjoy a premium cachet, imports account for something like 5% of the cars on Korea’s roads. Where else in the world does the domestic champion enjoy 95% market share?
Beef and other food items. If Koreans are fools enough to pay $60 – $80 a kg, I say let ‘em. Eat up, Chul Soo. The greater percentage of income they spend on necessities means less for luxuries, such as vacations overseas.
In the end a contract should be signed between parties that trust each other. The history of Korea is one of double dealing.
This is not true. In fact, according to a recent article in the New York Times the unit sales of Ford are now a fairly respectable 400 cars per month.
It’s all about product. With the Mustang and Taurus, Ford has some pretty attractive cars to offer Korean consumers with a little extra scratch.
” Moreover, Korean’s arms are too short, so the fashionable brands don’t look right.”
-Right, let’s stop the FTA because Koreans have short arms and green faces, and have tails in their backs, and they would look ridiculous in cool American brand clothes.
“And where is the iPad in Korea? Again, barriers erected to protect Sammy.”
-The iPad is debuting any day now, it was Apple who decided on the timing of the debut. You can’t blame Sammy for that one. Agreed that Korea had many barriers in the past, but they are coming down gradually, even without the FTA. Look at the success of the iPhone.
” imports account for something like 5% of the cars on Korea’s roads”
- I would check your numbers, that was couple of years ago. It’s now about 7%. But I don’t blame you for this confusion because the rate of increase has been very sharp. Look at the growth rate, not just the flat numbers. If the Japanese brands are entering in mass, why can’t Americans?
“In the end a contract should be signed between parties that trust each other. The history of Korea is one of double dealing.”
-Look at the success of the Chile and Korea FTA. It’s been a huge success.
But once again, agreed, you have to have some level of trust for the FTA to work. Here’s finally someone in the US media who is being honest, it’s refreshing to read this one that explains everything about the big lie that’s being pushed around North America to protect their leftist trade unions with big fat privatized entitlement programs.
The truth about these “hidden barriers” in Korean auto sector:
http://www.truthabouttrade.org/news/latest-news/16895-korea-too-green-for-democrats
Seouldout, I think about it, and I think this is good, a blessing in disguise, really. No FTA between Korea and US will keep all those polluting gas consuming junk out of Korea, and stop giving unfair advantages to American auto makers who can’t compete on the standards that are laid out for everyone. Then later on, still see Americans complaining that their cars are still not selling in Korea despite the free trade agreement. It’s probably for the best for the sake of the relationship between the two countries later on.
Excellent decision, America!
Shorter cm:
You can’t break up with me. I’m breaking up with YOU!
(Later, over phone:) Get it? I broke up with YOU, bitch!
(17 phone messages later): I’m so much happier without you!
(Next day, standing outside window with boombox over head:) I don’t care air air air air air, bitch I don’t care!
Take a deep breath and let it go, man.
sigh.. big breath taken. Feel much better got that off my chest.
7%!? Golly, count me wrong!
Now, what the US needs to do next is hold up Korean cars and auto parts at the port for months on end. Just construct all sorts of grief for the Koreans.
seouldout,
you ever heard of Japan?
sure you have.
it’s no secret the South Korean economic model is a lift off of Japan.
where else the world, my ass. Suffering from hatred of locals, I see.
and you know what, every American secretly wishes there was a free trade agreement with Japan as well.
Cars, electronics, grocery items, movies (well, they would have a problem there, as it is fact that 90% of them are sexually inappropriate, even items for children. Even Dragonball and Sailormoon had to be edited for nudity and delayed launch by 15 years or longer), even household items.
back in the early 1990s, I heard of Americans saying the Japs are taking our jobs.
even with the Toyota recall, in 2010, I hear Americans saying ‘I’m gonna buy a Toyota, it’s gonna run for 200,000 miles. Nobody now is saying the Japs are taking our jobs.
and as stated above, labor is cheaper and assembly in the US is more profitable for companies like Mercedes, Nissan, Toyota, Volkswagen, Hyundai, Kia, Honda.
Detroit had 20 years to adjust. That’s a long time to wake up.
In the past 20 years, I saw Chrysler being bailed out twice. Older people will accurately account that Chrysler was bailed out in the Reagen era, too. Actually if you count the fact that the Germans were misinformed and bought Chrysler, that would count as another bail out. Flint is a wasteland. Detroit is a dead city. I think Michigan in general has been the most racist and stupid state I have ever traveled to. People are nicer in Wisconsin, Illinois, and even the deep South. Actually I found people in the deep South shared something with me. A Christian conservative majority.
CM. Citing to the National Review? REALLY? I mean, REALLY??? From your former posts, I would have never pegged you a far-right republican neo-con who thinks that Saddam and his people are even in death hiding the WMDs… really?
If I pegged you wrong, and you are in fact an ubber-patriot neo-con, then you have my sincerest apologies. Otherwise,,, really?
#71, well it is a good editorial. It just summed up nicely what I’ve been saying. Do you not find it ironic that the (left or right) anti FTA people were always against the FTA with all these shit hole countries who have lower environmental standards. Yet now they want lower environmental standards for Korea, disingeniously calling them a “hidden trade barrier”. It doesn’t give anybody any confidence that Detroit needs lower standards for them to compete. I mean what does that say about your product that you need lower regulations because you can’t meet the requirements? Isn’t the US emission requirements also trade barrier then, against the Chinese makers who can’t export their cars to the US because they can’t meet the US requirements yet?
Well, if they think that it won’t be an “accurate account”. It was during the Carter administration, and the loan guarantees were from Congress.
Thanks for playing… we have some nice parting gifts for you.
If cm were a right wing free trader you’d see that he’d want to end the protection for Korean farmers. He certainly doesn’t want that. He’s an economic nationalist. Moreover, he wants cancel trade with China and India because they’re using resources – cm is pretty freaked out by the rare earths issue. Toss them out of the boat if I recall his argument.
Jobs never move because “labor is cheaper”. Investors move their capital to places where they can gain the greatest income. Tax policy has a far greater influence than so-called “cost of labor”…
When there is confiscatory tax policy and uncertainty of future costs, smart investors move elsewhere. Axelrod on Fox News Sunday all but doomed America…
“If cm were a right wing free trader you’d see that he’d want to end the protection for Korean farmers. ”
Actually I’m all for ending the subsidies on Korean farmers. But what I do want is to revamp Korean agricultural industry to be a competitive force. But I’m against what some here have suggested – totally abandon agriculture and rely on China and others for food.
” he wants cancel trade with China and India because they’re using resources”
Nonsense. Just you wish for it, it doesn’t mean it’s feasible.
” – cm is pretty freaked out by the rare earths issue.”
Again, nonsense. I’m not freaked out by rare earths issue. What I’m freaked about is the China’s attitude to blackmail.
Ladies and Gentlemen, go read post #41 by theotherkorean, which started this Kyopo nonsense again.
Hmmm let’s see this thread was going the way it was supposed to until the following comments by the two esteemed Kyopo commentors in #32 and 34;
theotherkorean, I thought you were a Korean?
It’s okay. Mins referred to Koreans in the third person also.
Well I myself don’t think my comment in #41 is cool, but since you two decided to take the path of questioning my nationality and linking me with mins, because I took the position that America doesn’t have a lot to loose, I decided a little tap on the shoulder to remind you guys was called for.
As I said before if you guys leave me alone, I’ll leave you alone. I think that’s a fair arrangement.
To concede something to theotherkorean, despite my criticisms of him in my previous comment, I think he makes a good point.
Looking back through the thread, it’s seems to me that WK and CM were needling theotherkorean for no real good reason. I recall another thread from probably a month or so back when they were immersed in this third-rate Sherlock Holmes style investigation as to whether theotherkoreans was some “mins” or whatever. It was interesting for about one or two comments but then got pretty stale if not downright tiresome pretty fast. I mean, really, who gives a flying fuck if he’s “mins,” a native Korean, or whatever? Sure he has his annoying moments but he comes off as pretty knowledgeable and intelligent at certain times.
Like he said: if WK and CM leave him alone then I think he should leave them alone as well. However, I suggest you keep your word on that, TOK. If not, then expect the knives to come out and expect no pity as well.
What’s so offensive about my comment at #32?
“I thought you were Korean?”.
cm, don’t be a fucking idiot.
CM, the guys at the National Review have a political axe to grind. Pure and simple. This non-tariff barrier (“NTB”) issue is a classic example of such an axe. Hey, for the most part, I consider myself a free-trader, and I think an FTA between the US and Korea would be a good thing. Yet one more thing to strengthen an already tight aliance.
However, using this NTB issue in the way that the National Review guys are, is a touch disingenuos. Back in 2008, the US was able to get far more significant environmental concessions out of Korea during negotiations. The point with the current US request (which FYI Korea has apparently altready ok’d) is not that they think that the standards are too high, but that the standards were created specifically to protect the Korean car industry. You and I, however, were not sitting at the negotiations table, byt the fact that Korea conceded may lead an outside observeer to believe that such standards were, in fact, more NTB than regulations spwaned out of true environmental concern.
Regardless, as mentioned above, the point has already been negotiated and is now a non-issue.
Japonymous,
Korea actually uses a modified version of California’s emissions laws, which are the toughest in the U.S.
Also, yes, Korea did make concessions on autos, but I think there were numbers caps for different displacements. For example, one model could only sell 50k units before tougher emissions requirements kicked in, etc.
Given the size of the country (the size of OH) and the high density living, I personally think that tougher emissions laws make sense for Korea.
Charles Tilly,
I will make a deal w/TOK. The interesting thing is that Mr. TOK never categorically denied formally being the online persona known as mins0306. He’s shown general irritation with the association. He’s questioned it, etc. but he’s never categorically denied it. If he does, I’ll never bring it up again. My word.
Leave it to an editorial in a red state to tell it like it is:
http://newsok.com/trade-setback-suggests-weakened-president/article/3513848
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 1 trackback }