Reply #46: NAFTA does get bashed around

[SlowDownFast]

a lot in liberal and progressive circles. NAFTA apparently does have some areas for serious improvement, but people should not ignore the following aspects about it:

1. Mexico was near bankruptcy around the time NAFTA passed. Clinton/Gore's loan guarantees and NAFTA may have helped stave off bankruptcy and then growth. Had Mexico gone under, there may have devastating consequences on immigration front, as well as much harm to life and living condition in Mexico as well.

2. Our trade is much better balanced with NAFTA countries (around 72 cents exported for every dollar imported) versus the rest of the world (around 50 cents exported on the dollar imported). In 2005, we exported 130 bn worth to Mexico (imported 170 bn), and exported 210 bn to Canada (imported 290), which are not unhealthy figures, if one considers that the GDP of either nation is a small fraction of the US GDP.

Gore has acknowledged unforeseen negative effects of his support of NAFTA as witnessed in this 2006 interview with Larry King:

-SNIP-

KING: We're back with Al Gore. Before we talk about immigration, a look back at then Vice President Al Gore debating Ross Perot in 1993. The most viewed regularly scheduled cable show ever happened right here. Well, it happened in Washington. The subject is how NAFTA would improve our relationship with Mexico. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GORE: The best way to eliminate our influence down there is to defeat NAFTA. The best way to preserve it is to enter into this bargain, continue the lowering of the barriers. We've got a commitment that they're going to raise their minimum wage with productivity. We've got an agreement for the first time in history to use trade sanctions to compel the enforcement of their environmental standards. As they begin to develop and locate better jobs farther south, we cut down on illegal immigration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Has that happened?

GORE: Well, it's hard to say that illegal immigration got any better. It obviously got a lot worse. But it might have been worse still without the effort to try to boost the economy in Mexico.

You know, during the Clinton-Gore administration, we faced a couple of big challenges on that front. There was a financial crisis in Mexico and we took the bold step of shoring them up. And then when it came to this agreement to try to strengthen their economy and get more good jobs down there to slow down the flow of immigration, I think we did the right thing.

I think other developments in the aftermath of those years, principally the rise of China and the movement of jobs from Mexico to China and to other Asian countries, made the situation worse than it would have otherwise been. But without the agreement that was made and without the shoring up of their economy back then, it could have been much worse still.

-SNIP-

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/13/lkl.01.html


That said, I believe NAFTA was a disaster and there is plenty of data to back that up. In fact I believe deregulation has sold America down the river of no return. I also believe that global warming is real and the effects of it would certainly change the face of civilization and because of that global warming is probably the most important issue of our time.

Bottom line is that people need to examine all the aspects when critiquing anything, the good and the bad. Constructive solutions can only come from honest analysis and critique.

This issue really deserves a thread of it's own, especially if/when Gore decides to get in the race. But lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater.