FrankRep
04-03-2008, 11:11 PM
Business Week Seeks to Downplay Bad Effects of NAFTA
The John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
April 3, 2008
ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:
In a wide-ranging report about the North American Free Trade Agreement, Business Week made many admissions about the harm emanating from NAFTA. But it came up short of recommending that the United States pull out of the agreement.
Follow this link to the original source: "What You Don't Know About Nafta (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_13/b4077000922817.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_to p+story)"
COMMENTARY:
Noting that there is "no shortage of statistics making Nafta look bad," the article's quartet of authors point to pro-NAFTA claims at its outset in the 1990s that the slight U.S. trade deficit with Mexico would turn into a $10 billion surplus while eliminating the illegal immigration problem. But, as the magazine reported, our nation's trade deficit with Mexico "passed $74 billion in 2007."
Focusing on General Electric, readers are told that the iconic company has sent thousands of U.S. jobs south of the border to make refrigerators and other small items, employing 30,000 Mexicans at pay scales that are one-third of U.S. salaries. Supposedly countering this stunning loss, Mexico is purchasing large turbines, aircraft engines and locomotives. But those purchases do not compensate for the loss of 30,000 jobs. NAFTA's "successes" have delighted Rafael Diaz-Granados, the CEO of Mexico's GE operations: "It helped turn GE from a very American-centered company into a much more global one." And that is certainly one of the reasons why NAFTA has delighted some American corporate leaders, top Mexican authorities, and the many globalists who want national borders erased and world government built.
After NAFTA, "U. S.-owned auto parts companies set up shop [in Mexico]. General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Volkswagen, and Toyota expanded their Mexican lines. Mexican car production leapt three-fold, to 2 million units per year. With two-thirds exported. According the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. now had a $34 billion deficit in cars, trucks, and parts last year with Mexico. Since 1999, some 200,000 auto-related jobs have left Michigan and Ohio."
Beneficiaries of the NAFTA pact also include U.S. agricultural giants who have seen exports to Mexico triple. No mention was made of all the small Mexican farmers who have been driven out of business by this huge American presence. The article further notes that "Banamex, owned by Citibank, is Mexico's No 2 bank," and "Wal-Mart also dominates Mexican retailing."
When NAFTA took effect in 1994, trade between Canada and the U. S. "was already near duty-free," said Business Week. In other words, there was no need for any aspect of NAFTA if the relationship between our nation and our northern neighbor was considered.
In summary, the article tells readers that, in the United States, there have been enormous job losses, lower wages, and a huge increase in the trade deficit. NAFTA is also a step toward world government. Its effects, noted above from an article written by individuals who see merit in the pact, have been extremely harmful to Americans. And the pact is now being used by globalists in our nation as authorization to proceed toward uniting the three NAFTA nations in a North American Union — without any further input from the U.S. Congress.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/node/7671
Activism:
Solving the Illegal Immigration Crisis Requires Blocking the NAU and Repealing NAFTA
http://capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=10658721
The John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
April 3, 2008
ARTICLE SYNOPSIS:
In a wide-ranging report about the North American Free Trade Agreement, Business Week made many admissions about the harm emanating from NAFTA. But it came up short of recommending that the United States pull out of the agreement.
Follow this link to the original source: "What You Don't Know About Nafta (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_13/b4077000922817.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_to p+story)"
COMMENTARY:
Noting that there is "no shortage of statistics making Nafta look bad," the article's quartet of authors point to pro-NAFTA claims at its outset in the 1990s that the slight U.S. trade deficit with Mexico would turn into a $10 billion surplus while eliminating the illegal immigration problem. But, as the magazine reported, our nation's trade deficit with Mexico "passed $74 billion in 2007."
Focusing on General Electric, readers are told that the iconic company has sent thousands of U.S. jobs south of the border to make refrigerators and other small items, employing 30,000 Mexicans at pay scales that are one-third of U.S. salaries. Supposedly countering this stunning loss, Mexico is purchasing large turbines, aircraft engines and locomotives. But those purchases do not compensate for the loss of 30,000 jobs. NAFTA's "successes" have delighted Rafael Diaz-Granados, the CEO of Mexico's GE operations: "It helped turn GE from a very American-centered company into a much more global one." And that is certainly one of the reasons why NAFTA has delighted some American corporate leaders, top Mexican authorities, and the many globalists who want national borders erased and world government built.
After NAFTA, "U. S.-owned auto parts companies set up shop [in Mexico]. General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Volkswagen, and Toyota expanded their Mexican lines. Mexican car production leapt three-fold, to 2 million units per year. With two-thirds exported. According the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. now had a $34 billion deficit in cars, trucks, and parts last year with Mexico. Since 1999, some 200,000 auto-related jobs have left Michigan and Ohio."
Beneficiaries of the NAFTA pact also include U.S. agricultural giants who have seen exports to Mexico triple. No mention was made of all the small Mexican farmers who have been driven out of business by this huge American presence. The article further notes that "Banamex, owned by Citibank, is Mexico's No 2 bank," and "Wal-Mart also dominates Mexican retailing."
When NAFTA took effect in 1994, trade between Canada and the U. S. "was already near duty-free," said Business Week. In other words, there was no need for any aspect of NAFTA if the relationship between our nation and our northern neighbor was considered.
In summary, the article tells readers that, in the United States, there have been enormous job losses, lower wages, and a huge increase in the trade deficit. NAFTA is also a step toward world government. Its effects, noted above from an article written by individuals who see merit in the pact, have been extremely harmful to Americans. And the pact is now being used by globalists in our nation as authorization to proceed toward uniting the three NAFTA nations in a North American Union — without any further input from the U.S. Congress.
SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/node/7671
Activism:
Solving the Illegal Immigration Crisis Requires Blocking the NAU and Repealing NAFTA
http://capwiz.com/jbs/issues/alert/?alertid=10658721