McCain lashes Democrats for criticizing NAFTA

reply to post by WuTang

NAFTA has nothing to do with liberalized trade with china. I agree with you though that outsourcing started long before.

Heres an article for you to read since you like reading stuff.
www.humanevents.com...
"Red China is investing heavily in developing deep-water ports in Mexico to bring an unprecedented volume of containers into the U.S. along the emerging NAFTA Super Highway. This move signals China’s emergence as the unexpected economic winner in the North American Union free market."

From 1992 to 2002 the decreases in the CGI more than offset losses in the manufacturing wages for the average worker. I will have to dig up some old debate readers and economics journals to provide the number

You mean the lies the Clintons used to push NAFTA through, and I haven't heard many problems coming from trade with Canada. But from China,Mexico and the rest theres more problems then I could probly ever list.
But to end NAFTA with them means ending NAFTA so be it. Canada might of stopped some of the unfair trade, USA has pushed for it more and more
no matter how bad it hurts the people hear because the fat cats are getting fat off of it.

I am not even factoring the other benefits seen in nations who outsource their manufacturing industries. It generally leads to higher levels of education, increased standards of living, and accelerated industrial innovation, to name a few.

Again look at the US education, is down innovation is down,standards of living is down, economy is shot, theres no sight of change as the prices of everything keeps going up.

- Could you point me to the study or article where you found that the service industry cannot offset the loss in MF jobs?

How about the US economy.

[edit on 11-3-2008 by JBA2848]

[edit on 11-3-2008 by JBA2848]

[edit on 11-3-2008 by JBA2848]

Unless anybody here is benefiting from NAFTA all you are doing is speculating. We are now under NAFTA unable to compete, most of our production base has been outsourced to developing countries.

Our manufacturing base has been killed littler by litter, the industry that used to support middle class America, the class that used to support the American economy is in the dangerous species list.

None of the candidates that we have right not wants to touch the subject and for obvious reasons is not good for politics right now, as Americans pay checks get short by high cost of living and inflation, and the economy keeps falling that is not good politics.

Countries now are using America to dump their cheap goods because in America now the land of the free and plenty we are now the land of the spenders on credit.

Even our government depend on developing countries to support our debt as we are no longer producers of wealth.

America’s last reminding wealth is now in the hands of a few Americans ultra rich and the rest is foreign.

A nation that doesn’t produce wealth anymore to support its citizens can not survive but we have given our wealth to other countries in free trade gone, wrong, greedy and unrestricted.

reply to post by JBA2848


No I don't mean the lies Bill told the unions to secure their vote.

I mean that buying the same amount of goods with a worse job that you did when you had a better job will leave you better off overall.

The decreased price of goods due to the outsourcing of their production more than offsets the loss for the average manufacturing employee forced to take a less well paying position.

I do not understand what you are trying to get at.

reply to post by WuTang

They charge the same or more than they did befor. The savings that they make come from tax dollars sent to them for helping a deprived country. Then is used in return as a offset to pay there people more money to make the prices cheaper on the products they send here. But the money ultimately comes from tax payers here. All we get is less jobs. Not to count they have no saftey standards to follow they just make a toy with poison and say well its still a toy. They give you poison pills and say well we used a cheaper formula.
Dont forget im talking anout China not Canada.

[edit on 11-3-2008 by JBA2848]

Another down fall of the free trade, is national security, foreign corporations own 1/4 of America.

The US net international investment position (what we own of the rest of the world minus what they own of us) has been decreasing by 22% per year over the last 20 years. In other words, in the past 20 years, foreign interests have accumulated $11.5 trillion of US assets.

Many think that when you bring the issue of controlling free trade it means that we want isolation, but guess what the danger of our national security to fall in hands of countries that we have been preached for decades that they are our enemies comes to mind, but not in the minds of those in the government that are selling our nation and the legacy of our children.

So what does this have to do with "free trade?" Coincident with the adoption of "free trade" measures such as NAFTA and WTO, the US trade deficit has fallen off a cliff. In the 10 years preceding NAFTA, the aggregate US trade deficit was about $900 billion. In the 10 years following NAFTA, that amount skyrocketed to over $3 trillion.

Coincidency of just a myth, our nation was doing pretty good economicaly before we were sold to deveoloping countries like China.

Foreign acquisitions of US companies in the 10 years after NAFTA totaled $1.2 trillion up from just $340 billion in the preceding years in the late 80's and early 90's when everyone feared that the US was losing ownership to foreigners. The fear was well founded, it was just well short of the mark.

I rest my case.

www.economyincrisis.org...

reply to post by marg6043


I am not speculating. I am forming an opinion based on the heaps of journals and economic textbooks I have read.

Yes, the MFG industry used to support MC America. Does that mean it is the only way to support the MC? Just because something was doesn't mean something should always be. Change is the only constant, as they say.

Yeah, countries dump cheap goods on America. That is the fault of every single American. If no one bought unnecessary goods, and rather invested all their wealth, then outsourcing production could do more harm than good. But in a society where people will spend all of their money (and even money they don't have) on luxury goods, you can't blame the government for having policy reflecting the demands of citizens.

A nation that doesn’t produce wealth anymore to support its citizens can not survive but we have given our wealth to other countries in free trade gone, wrong, greedy and unrestricted.

America by and far produces more wealth per capita than any nation on the face of this planet. How do you think America can afford to run such a large trade deficit?

Adam Smith once said

not only the prejudices of the public, but what is much more unconquerable, the private interests of many individuals, irresistibly oppose [free trade]

Perhaps if people were willing to put aside their initial prejudices there would be a forum for open, intellectual debate of market policy, besides that of academia.

For anyone who actually wishes to learn about the effects of free trade on employment, the environment, and various other issues, I would suggest this book, or any other university debate style reader. They do a very effective job of presenting the various viewpoints and their reasoning (through peer reviewed articles), so you can make an informed decision on what to support.

reply to post by JBA2848


I see the news media has scared you into adopting protectionist ideals with poison pills and lead toys. As for savings coming from tax dollars from helping impoverished nations, that makes no sense, and I am not sure you completely understand what it is you are trying to say (I know I don't - sorry )

reply to post by marg6043


No, you rest the case of economyincrisis.com. Have you read economic articles of the opposite perspective? From browsing the site I see their list of articles is from Newsmagazines (hardly an accepted economic source), a few fringe professors and authors (whose opinions count just as much as others to be fair), and finally, the nail in the coffin for me, manufacturing industry papers (who would clearly oppose free trade even if would solve world hunger - less money for them). I am sorry but this is just a ridiculous source, I would not be surprised in the least if this website was funded by a manufacturing mogul.

People always talk about how outsourcing makes the rich richer. Well you all should remember that so does protectionism - people own factories in America, and they strive to prevent factories from around the world from doing business with America.

EDIT: Foreign ownership of business in America is by no means proof that NAFTA and free trade are bad. If you are resting your case on that, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't make a very good lawyer .

Globalization is happening whether people like it or not, as it has been since the first city states joined together into small nation states. The dissolving of borders in a natural process that has been one of the few constants throughout history.

[edit on 11-3-2008 by WuTang]

reply to post by WuTang


But you forget in America the average person has been hurt by free trade unfair acts. Trade I think should be the word of issue. Becuase free trade means traders in products may buy and sale products from one place to the other without penalty.
Traders buy these products from where ever, And sale it at market price.
So how does the average joe benifit from that.Theres only so many traders in America. And the manufacturers of cheapest products expand. China. The manufacturers of expensive products due to regulations, quailty controls closes down. US.

reply to post by WuTang


Thats what many still think today, that America is a maker of wealth, no we are not longer building wealth, for the contrary the wealth of his nation is controlled by the ultra rich.

When we have millions of Americans losing homes, jobs and numbers to match that our job grow is stagnant is prove that a sector of the American population a big sector is falling behind and is not light at the end of the tunnel.

You let the government keep lying about our economy, but Joe down the road will tell you other wise.

reply to post by JBA2848


Well you have to remember that, when it comes to wages and prices, the free market is a self-regulating entity. Would *some* Americans take pay cuts? Of course they would, but these cuts would be offset by lower prices of foreign goods. Furthermore, it is not in any trader's interest to have the wages of Americans fall too low, because then the trader could not sell his or her goods.

reply to post by WuTang


So are they lying? or you just don't want to see the truth about Americans falling economy because it doesn't match your opinions.

Unless you are in the ultra rich ranks I guess that regular Joe and the petty economic problems facing everyday Americans is not part of your live.

reply to post by marg6043


Ha! If you think the down-at-the knees American has it rough, you should see how the poor (barely) make by south of the border and in China. A heck of a lot worse than here....

[edit on 11-3-2008 by chromatico]

reply to post by chromatico

Well you have to remember that, when it comes to wages and prices, the free market is a self-regulating entity. Would *some* Americans take pay cuts? Of course they would, but these cuts would be offset by lower prices of foreign goods. Furthermore, it is not in any trader's interest to have the wages of Americans fall too low, because then the trader could not sell his or her goods.

But when the products keep coming from overseas and not here the jobs are lost. The companys close down. Somebody takes a paycut doesn't change that. Its like Bush and Feds giving us $600 and saying that will fix the economy. I hope you think thats a joke. $600 doesn't even pay the rent.

[edit on 11-3-2008 by JBA2848]

reply to post by chromatico


Occurs the have it worst, they are slaves to the emerging class thats is controlling the wealth, they do not necessarily have to share with the people they exploit.

But then again just because we have laws in the US to protect the workers and the government hand out social help we are just in the same boat but with more human rights or that is what they tell us.

reply to post by JBA2848


I don't support Bush's so-called economic stimulus package, but I'm not exactly sure what that has to do with NAFTA.

TOPOFF 5 will open the NAFTA gates and it looks as if it 'is' a go.

www.blacklistednews.com...

Canada, Mexico and America.

The new Tres Amigo's?

reply to post by chromatico


Well the stimulus package is to keep the mouth shot of the poor that will be benefiting from it so they don't complain about the economy that is a result of government bad policies, over spending, wars and free trade.

Alright. Here's a challenge I'd like to issue to NAFTA opponents. Demonstrate, using data, that any NAFTA nation or China is worse off than they were before NAFTA.

Good luck.

OK guys this is going to be my last post. I cannot continue this closed discussion. If it ever opens up I may return.

To JBA:
The benefit to the average Joe (as i have said, bolded, capitalized,emphasized, etc) is that he can buy more goods when trade is liberalized. The lack of penalty for buying and sale-ing () good allows anyone on the planet (such as china) to make use of the comparative advantage they possess in an economic activity (manufacturing). It comes down to efficiency, in that less resources are wasted when a good is produced where it is cheapest. It is a pareto efficient change, in that the gains in one place offset loss in another.

To Marge:
I am sick of this useless rhetoric. I agree America's growth is stagnating slightly. You have never told me WHY FREE TRADE CAUSES THIS. For all you know free trade is slowing this. You can only throw so many symptoms in my face.

So tell me, how would producing goods, goods that can be made way more efficiently in other countries, be good for America? Who will buy them?

I also wanted to ask you what economists you read Marge. From what I get from your posts they are radically different than even some of the most staunch protectionists.

I will leave everyone with a great little econ 101 example of how trade benefits everyone.

We have America, and Canada. They can both produce two goods, Maple Syrup (MS), and Freedom Fries(FF). America can make 10 MS a year, but they can make 20 FF a year. Canada on the other hand can make 30 MS a year, but only 10 FF. The demand for both is equal.

Now with no trade, America would have to spend 2/3 of their time making MS, and 1/3 of their time making FF, for a total of 7MS and 7FF (6.66). Canada would make 7.5 of each FF and MS. That is a total of ~29 total units of goods.

Lets try using trade to exert each nations comparative advantage, Canada in MS and the US in FF. Canada would make 30MS, and America would make 20FF. That is a total of 50 units of goods, making the two nations almost twice as productive.

Even the nations alone are better off. Assuming 1 FF= 1 MS, America could trade 10 FF for 10 MS. 10 > 6.66. A total of 20 units of goods.

Canada would receive 10FF for 10MS. They would have a total of 30 units of goods. That is more goods than both nations combined produce without trade.

I know this a very simplified explanation, but it is the basis of why free trade is fairly accepted in the economic world as a Pareto efficient solution for closed economies.

For anyone who has spent hours deriving functions of widgets, calculating utility, and balancing efficiency, that one was for you