A Quote by Max Baucus

Any bilateral trade and investment agreement must be comprehensive and address the full range of barriers to U.S. goods and services if it is to receive broad, bipartisan congressional support.
I know something about trade agreements. I was proud to help President Clinton pass the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993 and create what is still the world's largest free-trade area, linking 426 million people and more than $12 trillion of goods and services.
Both France and Britain are supportive of India's bid for a broad-based agreement on trade and investment with the European Union.
The effect of the foreign direct investment of Etihad in Jet Airways and the implied bilateral agreement of air services between India and the UAE has primarily damaged Air India, which is a government-owned airline with huge assets that are extremely valuable.
There's a whole range of areas that we'll be looking at, so I'm not at this very early stage going to specify any particular areas. As you will know, there will be a limit to how far we can go in terms of a formal free trade agreement until we've actually left the European Union. I think there is much that we [with Donald Trump] can do in the interim in terms of looking at how we can remove some of the barriers to trade in a number of areas.
Leaving the E.U. with no trade deal is the worst possible option. It will condemn British exporters to the full range of tariffs and barriers that apply under WTO rules.
One of the roles of a U.S. ambassador - anywhere in the world - is to promote bilateral trade and investment.
A crucial responsibility of any central bank is to control inflation, the average rate of increase in the prices of a broad group of goods and services.
As ambassador, I am focused on expanding bilateral trade and investment between the United States and Spain.
Before we move forward with new efforts to lower the barriers to international free trade, we must review the consequences of the policies of the past and address the problems of the present.
The good news is that the Paris Agreement is not just a bilateral agreement between the United States and some other country. You have 200 countries who came together. It's an international agreement.
When you hang the 'bipartisan' tag on something, the perception is that differences have been worked out, and there's a broad agreement that that's the way forward.
Most trade agreements arise from a desire to liberalise trade - making it easier to sell goods and services into one another's markets. Brexit will not.
The bottom-up, loosely-coupled, bilateral and multi-stakeholder practices that have created the network of networks we call the Internet allow for a broad range of business models.
In my home district, exports support more than 100,000 jobs. Imagine how many more jobs we can create by breaking down the barriers that prevent Chicago-made goods and services from entering new markets.
We have a raising wages agenda. And that includes tax policy, trade policy. TPP is a very bad agreement. Covers 40 percent of the world's economy, and it will cost us jobs. It's not well-drafted. It's an agreement, an investment agreement that will benefit Wall Street a lot, but not working people.
The last months, weeks and days have seen accelerating discussions, involving the DUP for the first time, about a comprehensive agreement which would see all outstanding matters dealt with and the Good Friday Agreement implemented in full.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!