[hedgetrimmer]

Overall, CAFTA would cost the U.S. about $4.4 billion over the next 10 years, primarily in lost tariffs, the CBO said.

[hedgetrimmer]

"If I own a company in Costa Rica and decide I want to come locate to Napoleonville, I can bring my business and all the people that work for me and I don't have to go through all of the information processes," Melancon said. "As I appreciate it, they're not necessarily bound by the laws of the United States because that's part of the deal with Central America."

--U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-Napoleonville

[hedgetrimmer]

The costs of CAFTA keep growing.

[Iron Matron]

CAFTA can fail if US Citizens who opposed to such trade agreements would go ahead and pay the higher costs of USA made goods, when possible. We need to support US Industry- not play nanny to Countries who are capable of helping themselves.

CAFTA and NAFTA are purely political and drive up costs to US Citizens. Why are US Citizens giving in to what I can only call blackmail? We should demand that point of origin be placed on all products so we can buy products produced in the USA whenever possible and not accidentally support foreign regimes.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Overall, CAFTA would cost save the U.S. consumer about $4.4 billion over the next 10 years, primarily in lost reduced tariffs, the CBO said.

[Dat Mon]

I would like some enterprising financial type who has studied this trade agreement to post what the projected net amount of GOODS traded and net amount of labor SERVICES traded are.

I suspect this agreement is all about SERVICES.... NOT GOODS.

I understand that the net Central American goods market is about equal to the normal commerce of an average mid size American city.

The other fact is that we don't need this agreement to end sugar subsidies...all Congress has to do is stop the sugar growers funding every year when they approve those huge Omnibus spending and farm bills.

[Mase]

"Not only would CAFTA threaten the livelihoods of thousands of U.S. sugar farmers and workers, but now we have proof that it's a bad deal for taxpayers and would be a revenue loser, too," said Republican Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho, a state where sugar beets are grown

No hyperbole or deception here. This is a good example of how the sugar cartel and their money can make normally rational people say very stupid things.

Tariffs are taxes. Removing tariffs reduces taxes. History has proven over and over again that when tariffs are reduced, commerce increases which, in turn, increases personal wealth and revenue for the government.

[ken21]

the sugar empire strikes back! wonder where mike simpson gets his money?

unions, socialists and many on free republic are against cafta.

[ken21]

free republic is beginning to look like a union internet site.