More free trade.

[piece-itpete]

Bob LOL! No, good old Cleveland, my sad home

Dave, if free trade is so bad, why is the Party of the Working Man embracing it?

Pete

[BlueStreak]

In the long run and in some ways, I think it is a good thing. But, for reasons other than domestic job creation*. In that regard, I think it is becoming clear that the benefits are dwarfed by the downside and a major cause of chronic unemployment and decline of our manufacturing base.

(*Nations are less apt to wage war against each other if they are deeply economically interdependent.)

Regards,
Dave

[BlueStreak]

We simply cannot compete against some trading partners without drastic reductions in the American standard of living. Perhaps with Europe this won't be as large an issue as it has been with Mexico and China? I dunno. Time will tell.

Regards,
Dave

[piece-itpete]

I thought at the time NAFTA was really buying some stability in Mexico. I think I was wrong.

Interesting that the left here and in Europe now think free trade equals growth? Heck all the old union guys are tea partiers now anyway

Pete

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

I thought at the time NAFTA was really buying some stability in Mexico. I think I was wrong.

Interesting that the left here and in Europe now think free trade equals growth? Heck all the old union guys are tea partiers now anyway

Pete

Yes, you were. Because bringing the jobs to Mexico did damn little for the Mexican worker other than make him a wage-slave.

In the bolded;

Which, as a conservative, I would think this would give you pause.

Regards,
Dave

[piece-itpete]

Wage slaves? It's only good enough for Americans?

I'd put our guys up against anyone. There's more to success than wages, intelligence and productivity (and economic laws/regulations!) have a lot to do with it.

Anyway, between Clinton and Obama why would we worry about it?

Pete

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

I thought at the time NAFTA was really buying some stability in Mexico. I think I was wrong.

Interesting that the left here and in Europe now think free trade equals growth? Heck all the old union guys are tea partiers now anyway

Pete

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Wage slaves? It's only good enough for Americans?

I'd put our guys up against anyone. There's more to success than wages, intelligence and productivity (and economic laws/regulations!) have a lot to do with it.

Anyway, between Clinton and Obama why would we worry about it?

Pete

I keep hearing you righties hanging that whole NAFTA millstone around Clinton's neck, why is that? Just because he signed the deal? Looks to me like it was Bush Sr's baby.... Hmmmm, selective memory?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

Negotiation and U.S. ratification
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The in an agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

[BlueStreak]

It's the same old game, Bob. The GOP will work it up, bat it around a bit but never actually do it because if it goes south on them they have to accept responsibility. Can't have that, now can we? So, a Democrat finally makes it happen, then anything that doesn't go so well is all his fault because program bears his name. As you may have noticed it's been the same with healthcare reform, gun control, etc., etc...........Been going on for decades.

Regards,
Dave

[merrylander]

Mulroney was no prize either.

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by bobabode

I keep hearing you righties hanging that whole NAFTA millstone around Clinton's neck, why is that? Just because he signed the deal? Looks to me like it was Bush Sr's baby.... Hmmmm, selective memory?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFTA

Negotiation and U.S. ratification
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The in an agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.

So, Clintons' welfare reform and Clintons' 'balanced' budget weren't his either?

Pete