RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA?

RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Alumbrado -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 7:48:17 AM)
quote: The U.S. was still going full speed ahead with 1930s vintage factories. The resistance to automation wasn't so that people could keep using broken down equipment from the 30s, that equipment had been upgraded during WWII as part of the war effort, and it was a simple matter to keep the production lines rolling at a high rate with all the returning workers from the war. The resistance was because the unions didn't want to lose dues paying members.

Alumbrado -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 7:56:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sappatoti Just an observation not backed up by anything else other than my own thoughts... Wouldn't all those countries that were rebuilding also look at the antiquated government/industrial interactions in the US at that time and restructure their governments as well; becoming more proactive to make sure the business foundations were more friendly to both business and labor? I would think that the European and Japanese reconstruction should have at least considered that, looking to not only better how the US was manufacturing but also making the regulatory environment more progressive. Again, just an observation from a historical perspective. Don't know as I'd describe Japanese companies as more 'friendly' toward labor...[;)] They certainly had a different approach though. Ever seen how the Japanese factory workers vote? Or how the burakumin lived in order to fuel the Japanese 'economic miracle'? The history of how Mitsubishi went from a packet line to an industrial monolith is interesting reading... particularly the part about Battleship Island....

Steponme73 -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 9:01:31 AM)
The answer to this one is one word...MONEY

philosophy -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 10:09:22 AM)
FR .......try turning the question around, why would the USA want to abolish NAFTA? Quite a few posters here have pointed out how NAFTA doesn't actually have that much to do with any economic woes....so why the persistent rumbles around NAFTA? Is it vestiges of US isolationism? Is it looking for a scapegoat? Is it a diversionary exercise? Why?

popeye1250 -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 10:14:48 AM)
As long as it's millions of blue collar workers losing their jobs that's "ok." But, they won't stop there! They're working on the middle class now. With all the lawyers in Washington do you think they'd enter into a trade agreement where we'd import 500,000 lawyers each year from India or other countries willing to "work cheap?"

Archer -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 10:50:46 AM)
popeye Take a moment and actually think about how it looks to blame the movement of jobs from the US to India on a treaty called NAFTA that doesn't involve India in any way shape or form. If those Middle class jobs were moving to Canada or to Mexico then NAFTA might have a bearing. But unless there has been a huge earth shift I didn't notice India is not part of North America and thus not part of NAFTA.

popeye1250 -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 11:06:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Archer popeye Take a moment and actually think about how it looks to blame the movement of jobs from the US to India on a treaty called NAFTA that doesn't involve India in any way shape or form. If those Middle class jobs were moving to Canada or to Mexico then NAFTA might have a bearing. But unless there has been a huge earth shift I didn't notice India is not part of North America and thus not part of NAFTA. Archer, I was using a parallel example. It's business that wanted "NAFTA" not The American People! We never had a say in it! All the meetings involved business groups and govt officials only. No Unions, Citizens groups, or others were present! Up in N.H. we made a lot of noise about not getting involved in it to our congressman and senators to no avail! It was already a "done deal." Our govt certainly didn't enact "NAFTA" on "behalf" of the People! And where's the "less illegal immigration from Mexico" and "millions of high paying manufacturing jobs" that that liar Clinton promised us? This is just more govt corruption. It's supposed to be "Of The People", not "Of the corporations." This is just another reason why Lobbyists should be outlawed in Washington. The only "lobbyists" that there should be are The American People!

DedicatedDom40 -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 11:30:24 AM)
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/eleven-reasons-america-new-top/story.aspx?guid=D23E1901-728E-4A3C-99D1-7E80F74C3AE3&dist=SecMostRead

blacksword404 -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 11:44:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 quote: ORIGINAL: SilverWulf quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Unions were a significant part of the problem but only a part.... greed resides other places as well.... Of course, and not all greed is bad. Greed helps create companies, which provide the jobs in the first place. It's in a companies interest to make as much as possible. In the case of a corporation the CEO is bound by law to increase profits. So they use any loophole they can to do that. Problem is government is lax on enforcement of the law and looking out for the public interest. The FDA takes money from the drug companies they are supposed to regulate. Bound by law, huh? Can you find that law for me? Good luck. You can look here, but this is canadian law not U.S. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/cilp-pdci.nsf/en/cl00771e.html

popeye1250 -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 5:36:19 PM)
There's another huge problem with "NAFTA"; it contains all the U.S. State Dept criteria for a "Treaty." And Treaties require a 2/3 vote of the Senate which would be 67 votes. There's no way that Bill Clinton couldn't have known that! I bet it wouldn't get 5 votes today!

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Why the lack of interest in eliminating NAFTA? (8/28/2008 9:35:26 PM)
Blacksword, that ain't Canadian law. You're confused.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875