Posted on 09/03/2007 10:54:47 PM PDT by Exton1
One more reason to hold out for a non-CFR candidate for POTUS.
So do I.
I’m Praying he does. :)
Exactly! He said "NAFTA will cause a giant sucking sound as jobs go south" As this chart shows, he was right!
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Postal Square Building 2 Massachusetts Ave., NE Washington, DC 20212-0001 |
Phone: (202) 691-5200 |
Just look at all the manufacturing jobs we lost in the 7 years after NAFTA.
Check this out!
I thought the important thing about a giant sucking sound was the speed? If we didn't lose millions of manufacturing jobs in the first year or two after NAFTA, why would we lose them six or seven years later?
That would explain how 30 million Mexicans came north looking for opportunity.
So there was no giant sucking sound. I'm glad we agree.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, oh, DoughtyOne, but there is one, but only one, Republican candidate who actually is aware of the problem.
You know who he is.
Yes, and you already know who he is.
That would explain how 30 million Mexicans came north looking for opportunity."
FYI: NAFTA is not what it seems, and has not helped the Mexicans anymore than it has "helped" us.
Note that the House vote was 234-200 and the Senate vote was 61-38. A treaty requires no House concurrence but does require the concurrence of 2/3s of the Senators "present." [U. S. Constitution - Article II; Section 2]. Two-thirds of the Senate present for the NAFTA vote did not concur. The Bill was passed but no treaty was authorized.
NAFTA is not a treaty.
"As law but not treaty, NAFTA can be altered or repealed with the simple passage of another law. So, when a Congress critter says that their hands are tied, that they are "bound" by NAFTA, it's likely a disingenuous argument. However, in the case that they are speaking out of ignorance, that they actually believe that NAFTA is a not easily altered treaty, then they should be reminded that NAFTA is simply law and that they have the power to create or change laws."
[Credit and thanks given to Colorado Buckeye for this information.]
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 103rd Congress - 1st Session
As compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate Vote Summary
Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R.3450) Vote Number: 395 Vote Date: November 20, 1993, 07:28 PM Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Bill Passed Measure Number: H.R. 3450 Measure Title: A bill to implement the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Vote Counts: YEAs 61
NAYs 38
Not Voting 1 More details on Senate vote here: U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote:
U. S. House FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 575 (Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined) H R 3450 RECORDED VOTE 17-Nov-1993 10:36 PM
QUESTION: On Passage
BILL TITLE: NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ACT
Ayes Noes PRES NV Democratic 102 156 Republican 132 43 Independent 1 TOTALS 234 200 More details on the House vote here: Final Vote Results for Roll Call 575
Do you think the government should be able to tell corporations where they can be located? Who they can hire?
and still export their goods to the US duty free?
NAFTA says they can, so why not?
Would you have us return to the manufacturing conditions of the US pre-Sinclair?
Manufacturing in America gets safer every year.
What manufacturing in America? I think it’s gone down by at least 30% since NAFTA....and all the jobs went with it.
You have any numbers to back up this assertion? Or are you guessing?
You mean how you categorically spout disinformation sans anything to back up all your opinions on every thread to which you post? No, I'm not like you, toad.
Information, as of 2004 (three years ago); it's likely even worse now:Jobs were displaced in every state and major industry in the United States. Two thirds of those lost jobs were in manufacturing industries. The proposed Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA) duplicates the most important elements of NAFTA, and it will only worsen conditions for workers in the United States and throughout the hemisphere (Faux, Campbell, Salas, and Scott 2001). Since NAFTA took effect, the growth of exports supported approximately 1 million U.S. jobs, but the growth of imports displaced domestic production that would have supported 2 million jobs. Consequently, the growth of the U.S. trade deficit with Mexico and Canada caused a net decline in U.S. production that would have supported about 1 million U.S. jobs.
Before adopting an agreement such as DR-CAFTA, it is important to understand the following about NAFTA's effect on U.S. jobs:
* The 1 million job opportunities lost nationwide are distributed among all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Those affected most in terms of total jobs displaced include: California (-123,995), Texas (-72,257), Michigan (-63,148), New York (-51,582), Ohio (-49,886), Illinois ( -47,701), Pennsylvania ( -44,173), Florida (-39,987), Indiana (-35,157), North Carolina ( -34,150), and Georgia (-30,464) (see Appendix Table A-1).* The 10 hardest-hit states, as a share of total state employment, are: Michigan (-63,148, -1.44%), Indiana (-35,157, -1.19%), Mississippi (-11,630, -1.03%), Tennessee (-25,588, -0.94%), Ohio (-49,886, -0.92%), Rhode Island (-4,482, -0.91%), Wisconsin (-25,403, -0.90%), Arkansas (-10,321, -0.89%), North Carolina (-34,150, -0.89%), and New Hampshire (-5,502, -0.87%) (see Appendix Table A-2).
NAFTA is a free trade and investment agreement that provided investors with a unique set of guarantees designed to stimulate foreign direct investment and the movement of factories within the hemisphere, especially from the United States to Canada and Mexico. No protections were contained in the core of the agreement to maintain labor or environmental standards. As a result, NAFTA tilted the economic playing field in favor of investors and against workers and the environment, causing a hemispheric "race to the bottom" in wages and environmental quality.
You missed the facts I constantly post?
No, I'm not like you, toad.
No kidding. You're more like Oprah. All feelings, no facts.
The rise in the U.S. trade deficit
You're using EPI as a source? LOL! What's wrong, nothing good on the CPUSA website?
Now as interesting as your left wing source data about jobs may be, your claim was that manufacturing in America has gone down by at least 30% since NAFTA. You understand the difference between manufacturing output and manufacturing employment? Try again?
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.