Auto Free Trade Act
- Thread starter teruchev
- Start date
- Status
Hersfold
TNPer
Well, I'm hoping you're going to stick with "Auto Free Trade Act", because that monster of a title you've got up top ain't gonna fit.
Anyway...
Ok.
Not entirely true... If a nation's domestic products are of lower grade than those produced elsewhere, they may be better off prohibiting imports of that item. Won't help out the producer much, but there's thousands of other nations to sell to. But generally ok, I suppose.
Good.
Well... this hits on the point I mentioned earlier. If a nation's internally produced autos are of lesser quality than the foreign variety, and their exports aren't enough to cover the import costs, they're logically going to want to limit their imports on automobiles, or else lose money. Thus defeating the purpose of the resolution.
Assuming this is the resolution itself.... do you really need this line? If it passes, this bit is a tad obvious.
And if this is intended to be a Committee, be VERY CAREFUL about what you have them do.
Ok.
Check your spelling... otherwise this is ok.
Define "retaliatory tariff" for me. Is this meant to be interpreted as "He put a tariff on my cheese exports, so I'll put a tariff on his cars", or are Members still allowed to impose tariffs on non-members whenever they want to? Might raise a bit of argument.
-6- is ok.
Looks good in general... as I said, I've got a few reservations about it, but nothing that wouldn't be too hard to address or fix. Good luck!
Anyway...
Ok.
Not entirely true... If a nation's domestic products are of lower grade than those produced elsewhere, they may be better off prohibiting imports of that item. Won't help out the producer much, but there's thousands of other nations to sell to. But generally ok, I suppose.
Good.
Well... this hits on the point I mentioned earlier. If a nation's internally produced autos are of lesser quality than the foreign variety, and their exports aren't enough to cover the import costs, they're logically going to want to limit their imports on automobiles, or else lose money. Thus defeating the purpose of the resolution.
Assuming this is the resolution itself.... do you really need this line? If it passes, this bit is a tad obvious.
And if this is intended to be a Committee, be VERY CAREFUL about what you have them do.
Ok.
Check your spelling... otherwise this is ok.
Define "retaliatory tariff" for me. Is this meant to be interpreted as "He put a tariff on my cheese exports, so I'll put a tariff on his cars", or are Members still allowed to impose tariffs on non-members whenever they want to? Might raise a bit of argument.
-6- is ok.
Looks good in general... as I said, I've got a few reservations about it, but nothing that wouldn't be too hard to address or fix. Good luck!
teruchev
TNPer
Hersfold:
As this resolution will of course have no power outside of the UN, member states are still free to engage in whatever kind of trade activities they want with non-member states, whenever they want. This clause merely affirms that for the reticient crowd.
Thank you, Hersfold, for your thoughtful and constructive critique.
Steve Perry, GCRC,
President.
- Status