NationStates Jolt Archive

The U.S. Senate has passed the trade deal known as CAFTA, and the House will probably do so, too, if it hasn't already. This is the Central American Free Trade Agreement and the proponents say it is much different than NAFTA. Supposedly this is a one-way trade deal that will remove some barriers that exist in exporting products from the U.S. to the Central American States.

Somehow the deal is supposed to make people in Guatemala want to buy textiles made in the U.S. I'm not quite sure how that's going to happen, none of the stories I read go into many details. One thing is for certain, though. The defeat of this trade pact would be the first defeat in forty years for a negotiated trade deal. Big deal!

So does anyone out there have any more insight into what makes this better than NAFTA?

Well to my knowledge the countries of Central America are more heavily sweatshopped than Mexico and Canada.

The U.S. Senate has passed the trade deal known as CAFTA, and the House will probably do so, too, if it hasn't already.

If it is a trade Treaty, the House doesn't have to vote on it. Only the Senate has to confirm Treaties. U.S. Constitution Article II, Section 2,

Well to my knowledge the countries of Central America are more heavily sweatshopped than Mexico and Canada.
That's exactly the reason that makes me wonder what we can do to convince Central Americans to buy Union-Label clothes from North Carolina. I'm pretty sure we need to turn this one down.

The U.S. Senate has passed the trade deal known as CAFTA, and the House will probably do so, too, if it hasn't already. This is the Central American Free Trade Agreement and the proponents say it is much different than NAFTA. Supposedly this is a one-way trade deal that will remove some barriers that exist in exporting products from the U.S. to the Central American States.

Somehow the deal is supposed to make people in Guatemala want to buy textiles made in the U.S. I'm not quite sure how that's going to happen, none of the stories I read go into many details. One thing is for certain, though. The defeat of this trade pact would be the first defeat in forty years for a negotiated trade deal. Big deal!

So does anyone out there have any more insight into what makes this better than NAFTA?

Yes it is much different. They removed the N completely and replaced it with a brand new and improved C. It will also allow big businesses to hire 3 hondurans illegals for the same thing they now pay 1 mexican illegal, this of course assuming there is no clause granting some guest crap to anyone arriving after ratification.
The entire thing is nothing but a continuation of the NAFTA crap and the selling points are nothing more than a continuation of the lies they told about NAFTA.
Fortunatley for the moment at least CAFTA is having a much more difficult time in the House and last I checked it didn't look to favorable for it. Of course this is all subject to change as the holdouts are properly compensated for their favorable votes.

Liverbreath'] Fortunatley for the moment at least CAFTA is having a much more difficult time in the House and last I checked it didn't look to favorable for it. Of course this is all subject to change as the holdouts are properly compensated for their favorable votes.

Is this a treaty or an agreement? If it is a treaty the House has nothing to do with. (see post #6)

It's a trade agreement, and it's going to have a lot of trouble passing the House, Myrmidonisia's claims to the contrary notwithstanding. There are a lot of red state Representatives from textile producing states who are already in trouble over NAFTA, and they're not going to slit their own throats, especially with Tom Delay in trouble and weakened a little. If the Hammer can't hammer them as much as he needs to, this thing is DOA.

And I say good.

Is this a treaty or an agreement? If it is a treaty the House has nothing to do with. (see post #6)

It is an agreement, but they want to try and make it appear as unreversible as possible. The house does have to vote on it. It is all about Corporate dominance over democracy.

Liverbreath']It is an agreement, but they want to try and make it appear as unreversible as possible. The house does have to vote on it. It is all about Corporate dominance over democracy.

Well, being the Conservative Republican I am, I was against NAFTA. If this is anything like it, I'm not for it either. We have lost enough of our industries to cheap labor markets that make inferior quality goods. Oh, and I want MFN status for China revoked.

I'd say it is a good idea, because we need two strong Americas to counterbalance the Asian threat to our economic dominance. Better ties with these countries will lead to more stable economic growth and more stable governments; this is great because these countries have some decent oil deposits and loads of natural resources. NAFTA was a success, and so will CAFTA be.

Small farmers in Central America will be driven out of business and forced to work in maquilladoras (spelling? I took French in high school.) The crappy, cheap products the maquilladoras turn out will put Americans in the manufacturing sector out of work and drive down wages in the US.

The same thing happened with NAFTA. NAFTA lost us 1 million jobs and CAFTA is even bigger. Do the math.

Just a curious question. If the US passes this resolution then this means that the US agrees to the treaty. What about the other countries involved? If they don't agree to it then it is just so much hot air.

Small farmers in Central America will be driven out of business and forced to work in maquilladoras (spelling? I took French in high school.) The crappy, cheap products the maquilladoras turn out will put Americans in the manufacturing sector out of work and drive down wages in the US.

The same thing happened with NAFTA. NAFTA lost us 1 million jobs and CAFTA is even bigger. Do the math.

Prove that one. The US created 24,000,000 jobs from 1993 to 2000, and manufacturing gained 300,000. U.S. manufacturing wages increased dramatically, with real hourly compensation up by 14.4% in the 10 years since NAFTA, more than double the 6.5% increase in the 10 years preceding NAFTA. US manufacturing soared 44%, and productivity grew 28%, resulting in mre gains in living standards.

U.S. exports to Canada and Mexico grew from US$134.3 billion (US$46.5 billion to Mexico and US$87.8 billion to Canada) to US$250.6 billion (US$105.4 and US$145.3 billion respectively).

This isn't including the benefits to farmers, only manufacturing and service.