Bush push in the bush
Posted on 07/24/2007 2:53:25 AM PDT by ovrtaxt
NAFTA could feel like a day at the beach
Sara Falconer
|
Bush push in the bush
|
From Aug. 19 to 21 in the quiet tourist village of Montebello, Quebec, George W. Bush, Stephen Harper and Mexican president Felipe Calderón will meet privately. And if you're uneasy about the combination of NAFTA's liberal economics and post-9/11 "Homeland Security" policies, tough luck. They'll be busy listening to the North American Competitiveness Council (NACC), a lobby powerhouse of over 30 executives from the private sector that gives the corporate agenda a formal place in the SPP - unlike citizens' groups and even many lawmakers. As a "dialogue" rather than a treaty or an agreement, the SPP isn't bound by any legislative restrictions.
Mandeep Dhillon of No One Is Illegal is concerned that this process is flying far below the public radar in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, unlike NAFTA, which was at least met with vigorous public debate.
"It's really insane to think about the fact that already 300 changes have been proposed or come into effect in different areas of trade, immigration and labour," she says.
Organizers from Montreal and Ottawa, united under the banner Peoples' Global Action (PGA) Network, are planning to camp out and dig in for several days of demonstrations against the SPP, culminating in a day of action on Aug. 20.
A key element of their perspective is solidarity with indigenous and immigrant struggles, a rejection of nationalist rhetoric that stresses "protecting our land, protecting our resources."
"We can't start talking about trade and terror laws unless we recognize what impact that is having on those communities," said Dhillon.
On Saturday, July 21, a "Consulta" - which seems to be a fancy word for "meeting" - will take place to strategize in French, English and Spanish. It happens at UQÀM, room R-M 110 (315 Ste-Catherine E., corner St-Denis), from noon to 5 p.m. For more info: www.psp-spp.com.
Interesting that from the American viewpoint it is presented as fostering security and business growth. From the Canadian viewpoint as fostering a more green agenda and facilitating the movement of Canadian resources. The Mexican page given (they actually linked to a Spanish-language page on the main SPP site) seems to just be the President's page, rather than an SPP page.
Judging from observation, it seems that the Canadians are the most alarmed by the SPP, and the Mexicans the most ignorant, with the United States in the middle.
Different marketing tactics for different mindsets. I guess it reflects the strength of the greenies in Canada.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-1355300745194023737
Actually, if you listen to this lady, she says we’re more on the ball than Canada. She’s a leftist, I think, but she’s apparently one of the few who are doing something about it.
Just noted that a lot, if not most, of your posts on the SPP and NAU are from Canadian sources, although Canada does not have as large a presence either in the general media or the internet as the United States (because its population is about 1/10 of the American).
This is true.
Ping for later
Still waiting for that “giant sucking sound” 15 years after Ross Perot popularized the idea that Nafta would put us all out of work.
Have you heard that giant sucking sound of millions of illegal slave laborers coming this way?
The sucking sound is going in the opposite direction from what Perot claimed, but it’s not because of NAFTA.
Since NAFTA unemployment in the US has dropped so that it is now around 4.5%. That strong growth in jobs is drawing illegals to the US.
Wasn’t the purpose of NAFTA to grow our economy? And if so, it would have seemed to have worked.
It was also supposed to grow the Mexican and Canadian economies, which it has also done. The problem is that socialist or corrupt governments never grow as fast as capitalistic market economies.
What we need now is to push Mexico and Canada toward capitalist market economies.
One result of having a system like this is that trade between Canada and the U.S. tends to be much more regional than national -- and the Canadian government generally has very little authority to intervene in this process. Over time, it's only natural that the two economies would eventually become increasingly interwined.
Sheese, you must be deaf.
You got it. Just like the Xlinton's. Telling one group one thing, and a different audience the precise opposite. Just so long as they can be jollied along to continue support for whatever "it" is...
Of course, here in the U.S. the "it" is the end of the Republic and the Constitution...which will be rendered a meaningless piece of paper that this White House NEVER DID respect.
Not in manufacturing, which appears to have dropped by about 30% at a minimum...based on employment statistics.
And the evidence is that the wages of the dislocated were not in fact improved when they took the service jobs that were all that was available. Manufacturing has a vastly higher "economic multiplier effect" than service jobs.
Further, it isn't really all that important about jobs per se...
IT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAT THE U.S. RETAIN IT'S INDEPENDENCE. PERIOD.
Our Founder's understood this.
Bump. Thanks for link.
No, but NAFTA was sold with the idea that it would stop illegal immigration. The farmers in Mexico have been destroyed by it and now they'e all here!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.