The NAFTA failure

Another reason of the increased immigration?

The predicted increase in the U.S. trade balance with Mexico did not occur, and larger is the decline in the trade balance with Canada.

NAFTA was suppoused to bost the econmy of the US and the other two partner countries, but now our trading deficit is bigger than ever.

What is that?

Because. . .the boom was only along Mexican borders and it was not enough jobs for everybody, the wages were still lower that what illegal immigrants can make in the US.

It actually help the migration of illegal boom.

Why is NAFTA a failure? Could a vision into the future would have help solve or avoid the problems that now face the nation?

Or it was NAFTA means to fail? Why until this day the three country leaders involve in NAFTA still are trying to save it?

Ten years later, didn't work before and is not going to work now.

what are you on about?

its just setting things up legally for a union, i dont think the trade balance has much to do with anything.

Here's a couple links to the story.

CAFTA outlook clouded by NAFTA's failure for farmers

www.businesshq.com

Later
Sporty





[edit on 31/3/2006 by SportyMB]

Originally posted by AdamJ
what are you on about?

its just setting things up legally for a union, i dont think the trade balance has much to do with anything.

RUDE! No reason for it.

I agree that NAFTA's purpose was to create the legal basis for a continental union. The trade balance was used as part of the argument to justify the original agreement.

Originally posted by soficrow
RUDE! No reason for it.

lol, yea i know
i knew it would come across like that but i though what the heck
seriously i couldnt understand the post

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 1-4-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

ok i offically appologise to you marg. seem to have got done here.
Im sorry i couldnt understand what your post was about and frustration had already built up. I wasnt even deliberately being rude, just the way it comes across on the net.

and i think i answered you question in one line to save alot of time but no it hasnt failed, because its not about trade deficit.
I dont think politicians are interested in the US trade deficit, if they were it would never be as bad as it is already and the national debt wouldnt be 30+ trillion. It doesnt have anything to do with that, its to do with opening the area up for potentially merging it as a union. So its a success and that explains for you why the three leaders you mention are still for it.

[edit on 1-4-2006 by AdamJ]

[edit on 1-4-2006 by AdamJ]

NAFTA was and is an abyssmal failure. It should be repealed immediately and all talk of stupid "Free-trade" zones should end. The only people who benefit from such programs are the rich businessmen who exploit the low-wage earners in other countries. I could possibly support such a program if it required that a universal wage be paid regardless of the country.

AdamJ

Is ok to be confuse.

I apologized for making this thread and then no been able ot up date it, I have been busy.

Ok, the purpose of NAFTA.

1- To make legally for foreign businesses to operate in Mexico in accordance with the free trade agreement and to make possible to trade with Canada and US.
2- NAFTA was to create more jobs and lower the unemployment.


Reality,

1- Mexico had a problem it was a dependency of foreign capital and an over evaluation of the peso.
2- Mexico had to devalued the peso to attract more investors.
3- Mexican working conditions in Mexico has worsened.
4- Million of children were working to make ends meet for their families.
5- Hourly wages lower than in the 80s
6- 19% percent of wages lower than the minimum.
7- 66% with not benefits
8- 35% less full time work
9- 8 million Mexicans has now found themselves in the poverty class from middle class.
10- It has sent Canada into a recession.

End on the line NAFTA actually has made possible for the increased migration of illegals into the US.

It is a failure? Yes for the small farmers and small businesses that have been taken over the big companies that are the ones making all the profits in the NAFTA agreement.

Now do you understand better why migration has risen since NAFTA came about?

NAFTA has produced benefits for transnational corporations, while for everyone else – workers, family farmers and small businesses in all three countries, the social and ecological environment on the U.S.-Mexico border – NAFTA has been a net loss.

mhssn.igc.org...

10- It has sent Canada into a recession.

Been watching the news lately? That recession has been in the grave for at least 2 years. The more Oil and other Resources go up in price, the better our economy does. (INFACT Canada's economy has been outperforming both the US and Mex economy for many quaters now)

The negative aspect of NAFTA have been overshadowed by the geopolitical influence on the price of Oil.

The biggest issue most peopel I've talked to have about NAFTA is that it opens up Canadian institutions that have been apart of the landscape since before Canada even existed, to foreign ownership...

RIP Hudsans Bay Company...

Originally posted by sardion2000
Been watching the news lately? That recession has been in the grave for at least 2 years. The more Oil and other Resources go up in price, the better our economy does. (INFACT Canada's economy has been outperforming both the US and Mex economy for many quaters now)

Perhaps but the trade deficit is still there and is not Canada population the one migrating to the US but Mexico.

U.S. trade deficits with Canada under NAFTA in both agricultural and food products. The U.S. farm deficit with Canada increased from $100 million in 1993 to $1.1 billion in 2004 (U.S. International Trade Commission 2005). What had been, in 1993, a $1.2 billion U.S. food products surplus with Canada was transformed by 2004 into a $3.1 billion deficit. Thus, the U.S. trade balance with Canada in food and agricultural products suffered a net decline of $4.3 billion.

Source given by SportyMB link.