You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #19: I think I am starting to get it. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Economy Donate to DU
lovedems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. I think I am starting to get it.
Edited on Fri Feb-20-04 09:22 PM by lovedems
However, I still can't shake the feeling and urge to blame bu$h for what NAFTA has become and ruined anything posotive that should have come out it. NAFTA turned 10 years old this year. How under the first 6 years, under Bill Clinton, did unemployment fall to new lows? Didn't Mexico initially benefit from NAFTA? It seems to me like NAFTA was not a perceived problem under Clinton. The economy was good, job creation was abundant and jobs were not being exported. If they were, jobs with equal pay and benefits were being created. It is only since 2000, since bu$h took office that NAFTA has suddenly become an issue front and center.

I came across this very informative forum. Joseph E. Stiglitz, professor of economics at Columbia University and author of "The Roaring 90's," was chief economist of the World Bank from 1997 to 2000. He won the Nobel Prize in economics in 2001. There might be something in here that would be of interest to you. Since you were so kind to share with me, let me share with you.

Maintaining full employment is the concern of monetary and fiscal policy, not of trade policy.

Conservatives have long sought to receive compensation for regulations that hurt them, and American courts and Congress have usually rejected these attempts. Now businesses may have accomplished indirectly, through treaty, what they could not get more openly through the democratic political process.

Meanwhile, those harmed by the actions of the foreign firms, for instance by what they do to the environment, do not have comparable protections of appealing to an international tribunal and receiving compensation. The concern is that Nafta will stifle regulation, no matter how important for the environment, health or safety.


It seems to me, and again, correct me if I am wrong (if you aren't sick of this already) that it is the conservatives and their CEO friends who have taken advantage of any loop holes in NAFTA and have created this giant that needs to be addressed. I am still at a loss as to how NAFTA seemed an unimportant national issue for the first 6 years of it's existence but now under republican controlled congress and WH, suddenly it is one of the hot button issues in this election because of the absurdity that it has become. Can you help me get passed the point that I shouldn't fault Clinton (and Kerry and Edwards) for this? If I even need to get passed that point? I just can't find a resonable reason that I should blame them for what has become of NAFTA.

Anyway, one of the solutions that you stated was to bring the importance of the union back, I couldn't agree more. My step dad has been a union man for 35 years and he is literally watching it crumble before his eyes. He said it was happening under bush 1 and now again under jr. Again, all for the benefit of big business. He is losing benefits left and right which of course indirectly affects his salary. His union members are being told take it or we will move! I think you are 100% correct that one of the biggest solutions to this problem is to give corporations a choice: personhood or full taxes.

You have been so incredibly helpful I can't even begin to thank you for helping me with what is a complex issue for me. If you find any glaring misinformation, please clear me up.

Edit: That article from the Dane I found fascinating. I am going to venture a guess that the reason they are able to live in such a wonderful society is because of taxes. The one thing all Americans want to avoid paying. It is sad isn't it? They want the luxuries of this great nation but want somebody else to pay for them! When will people realize that with tax cuts comes the loss of vital services? The republican mantra "no country has ever taxed itself into prosperity" I think is hogwash.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -This NAFTA thing SoFlaJets  Feb-19-04 10:07 AM   #0 
  - Good Intentions..  Robroy   Feb-19-04 10:14 AM   #1 
  - I tried that argument a few days ago with little success.  lovedems   Feb-19-04 10:20 AM   #2 
  - JMHO, The idea of "Competitive Advantage" was redefined or misuderstood  54anickel   Feb-19-04 10:22 AM   #3 
     - So, when Clinton signed NAFTA was it to be for the purpose of  lovedems   Feb-19-04 10:28 AM   #4 
        - Wasn't a big worry over jobs  mad_as_hell   Feb-19-04 02:57 PM   #8 
        - I don't know what was on Clinton's mind. I don't think it was necessarily  54anickel   Feb-19-04 02:58 PM   #9 
        - Was it to negate our democracy for World Union fascism?  mac2   Feb-21-04 11:53 AM   #21 
  - You are right.  buckeye1   Feb-19-04 10:32 AM   #5 
  - I am not anti-NAFTA  BayCityProgressive   Feb-19-04 11:56 AM   #6 
     - I'm not anti-NAFTA either.  seasat   Feb-19-04 02:36 PM   #7 
     - If you enfirce those things, then its not 'Free Trade'  cprise   Feb-19-04 05:49 PM   #11 
        - IMHO Using the term "Free Trade" in NAFTA is the misnomer that  54anickel   Feb-20-04 06:07 PM   #18 
     - Not true  cprise   Feb-19-04 05:42 PM   #10 
     - NAFTA has a chapter11 (I think thats the right #) If we or any country  Gin   Feb-19-04 07:34 PM   #12 
     - You'd better be against NAFTA if ..  mac2   Feb-21-04 12:02 PM   #22 
  - I have been reading all of these interesting replies and now I find  lovedems   Feb-19-04 09:19 PM   #13 
  - Many legislators raised these objections about NAFTA  cprise   Feb-20-04 09:22 AM   #15 
     - First of all, let me start by saying that I totally appreciate your  lovedems   Feb-20-04 11:12 AM   #16 
     - Insidious problems mean we have our work cut out for us  cprise   Feb-20-04 04:45 PM   #17 
        - I think I am starting to get it.  lovedems   Feb-20-04 08:58 PM   #19 
     - EU is not much different...  mac2   Feb-22-04 12:03 PM   #24 
        - No, you don't quite understand the EU  muriel_volestrangler   Feb-23-04 05:35 AM   #26 
  - NAFTA SUCKS!!!!  lams712   Feb-19-04 10:19 PM   #14 
  - Exactly....  kalian   Feb-21-04 09:17 AM   #20 
  - NAFTA is old my post #22  mac2   Feb-21-04 12:06 PM   #23 
  - NAFTA/Globalisation  Sorry.   Feb-22-04 02:39 PM   #25 
     - I heard Nader say this morning that both NAFTA and The WTO have a 6 month  Gin   Feb-23-04 11:28 AM   #27 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Economy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC