On balance...do you think NAFTA has been good or bad for workers, consumers, and the poor?

[Ken Burch]

It's been almost twenty years, so we can probably draw some conclusions by now. And those conclusions matter when deciding whether to back the other trade deals our corporate overlords want with Europe and Asia and the rest of Latin America

12 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	On Balance, good
	0 (0%)
	On Balance, bad
	12 (100%)
	not sure
	0 (0%)
	no opinion
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[MFrohike]

1. It's a dumpster fire

Trade agreements that promote the free flow of labor also promote lower wages and benefits. It makes me think of the English peasants who were forced off their land during the enclosure period. They had no money, no land, and no power. NAFTA and its ideological cousins just seem like a modern day update of that time.

[madokie]

2. A disaster

I can't vote cause its not one of the options
sorry

[Laelth]

3. Is this a trick question? n/t

-Laelth

[pampango]

4. Like the 'free trade' in Europe, it is a good thing but we lack the progressive taxes, strong unions

and good safety net that Europeans have so our society has become increasingly unequal. Trade is a good thing, but the 99% benefit if there are progressive policies to make it happen.

Even if trade is stopped or severely limited, our society will still be as unequal if we do nothing about our taxation, union and safety net legislation. (We tried that before under republicans and FDR had to pick up the pieces.) If we had strong unions, progressive taxes and an effective safety net, we would be Germany and we would not worry about trade. We would enjoy it.

[Jefferson23]

5. Horrific..that level of bad. From Adam Smith:

"The vile maxim of the masters of mankind": "All for ourselves, and nothing for other People.

The invisible hand will destroy the possibility of a decent human existence "unless government takes pains to prevent" this outcome, as must be assured in "every improved and civilized society."

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

[htuttle]

6. Turns out that 'Consumers' and 'Workers' are the same people

NAFTA has only been good for the major shareholders and upper management of selected corporations.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

7. On balance, NAFTA would be bad, but not for any reason that would be presented here.

First of all, citing Adam Smith, of all people, in a thread like this is nuts. The Wealth of Nations, properly understood, is a long and extremely detailed refutation of the idea that restricting trade between nations leads to anything but poverty.
Like Isaac Newton, Smith's book is limited, because the horizons he wrote about were limited, for the most part, to Europe, and to European nations that were roughly in the same stage of development. He did have some excellent insights into why China, for instance, which at his time was still by far the largest economy on the planet, wasn't also the richest. But that's an outstanding exception to the general rule: his book was correct that free trade between nations that are in the same stage of development with each other is good, but between nations that are at different stages is bad.
Mexico is pretty obviously not equal to the US in terms of its development, and so free trade between the two simply isn't possible, not because of any disadvantage to the US, but because of its overwhelming disadvantage to Mexico.
This thread reeks of US-centric privilege.

[Laelth]

8. I expect my politicians to "reek" of US-centirc privilege.

If they don't, they're traitors. I don't elect representatives to take care of the people of India. No, I elect people to take care of my interests, as a citizen of the United States.

-Laelth

[Benton D Struckcheon]

9. NAFTA was a huge gift to the US.

Not that you would notice, obviously.

[Laelth]

10. I am open to hearing what you have to say about that.

As you suggest, I am prone to believe otherwise, but, if you're willing to explain, I'm all ears.



That said, my point about US-centrism stands.

-Laelth

[Benton D Struckcheon]

11. Simply put,

if you put a weaker and a stronger person on the same level, who wins? I trust I don't have to explain who the weaker one is in this case.