Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Trans-Pacific Partnership looks like a giant step toward the end of sovereign nations. [View all]KoKo
(84,711 posts)144. Here's some Links to help you out about NAFTA since you seem confused:
NAFTA at 20
Read the new report from Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch: NAFTA at 20 - One Million U.S. Jobs Lost, Mass Displacement and Instability in Mexico, Record Income Inequality, Scores of Corporate Attacks on Environmental and Health Laws.
http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=531
Resources
Report: NAFTA at 20 - One Million U.S. Jobs Lost, Mass Displacement and Instability in Mexico, Record Income Inequality, Scores of Corporate Attacks on Environmental and Health Laws
Press Release: NAFTA at 20: One Million Lost U.S. Jobs, Higher Income Inequality, Doubled Agriculture Trade Deficit With Mexico and Canada, Displacement and Instability in Mexico, and Corporate Attacks on Environmental Laws
Learn more about the NAFTA cross-border trucking case
Let them Eat Imports: Food Imports to U.S. Soar under WTO-NAFTA Model, Threatening Family Farmers and Safety
NAFTA's Broken Promises 1994 - 2013: Outcomes of the North American Free Trade Agreement
NAFTA's Legacy for Mexico: Economic Displacement, Lower Wages for Most, Increased Immigration
Debunking USTR Claims in Defense of NAFTA: The Real NAFTA Score 2008
NAFTA Superhighway/SPP: The Truth is Stranger Than Fiction
NAFTA: Kicked Up a Notch (FPIF 5/23/07)
The World Bank on NAFTA: Wrong Numbers Lead to Wrong Conclusion
The Ten Year Track Record of NAFTA
http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=531
--------------------AND----------------------
NAFTAs Impact on U.S. Workers--Economic Policy Institute
Posted December 9, 2013 at 4:00 pm by Jeff Faux (RESEARCH REPORTS AT LINK)
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market.
By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers, which had driven the expansion of the middle class since the end of World War II. The result has been 20 years of stagnant wages and the upward redistribution of income, wealth and political power.
NAFTA affected U.S. workers in four principal ways. First, it caused the loss of some 700,000 jobs as production moved to Mexico. Most of these losses came in California, Texas, Michigan, and other states where manufacturing is concentrated. To be sure, there were some job gains along the border in service and retail sectors resulting from increased trucking activity, but these gains are small in relation to the loses, and are in lower paying occupations. The vast majority of workers who lost jobs from NAFTA suffered a permanent loss of income.
Second, NAFTA strengthened the ability of U.S. employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits. As soon as NAFTA became law, corporate managers began telling their workers that their companies intended to move to Mexico unless the workers lowered the cost of their labor. In the midst of collective bargaining negotiations with unions, some companies would even start loading machinery into trucks that they said were bound for Mexico. The same threats were used to fight union organizing efforts. The message was: If you vote in a union, we will move south of the border. With NAFTA, corporations also could more easily blackmail local governments into giving them tax reductions and other subsidies.
- See more Research and Reports at:
http://www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/#sthash.TakkEZF0.dpuf
NAFTAs Impact on U.S. Workers
Read the new report from Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch: NAFTA at 20 - One Million U.S. Jobs Lost, Mass Displacement and Instability in Mexico, Record Income Inequality, Scores of Corporate Attacks on Environmental and Health Laws.
http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=531
Resources
Report: NAFTA at 20 - One Million U.S. Jobs Lost, Mass Displacement and Instability in Mexico, Record Income Inequality, Scores of Corporate Attacks on Environmental and Health Laws
Press Release: NAFTA at 20: One Million Lost U.S. Jobs, Higher Income Inequality, Doubled Agriculture Trade Deficit With Mexico and Canada, Displacement and Instability in Mexico, and Corporate Attacks on Environmental Laws
Learn more about the NAFTA cross-border trucking case
Let them Eat Imports: Food Imports to U.S. Soar under WTO-NAFTA Model, Threatening Family Farmers and Safety
NAFTA's Broken Promises 1994 - 2013: Outcomes of the North American Free Trade Agreement
NAFTA's Legacy for Mexico: Economic Displacement, Lower Wages for Most, Increased Immigration
Debunking USTR Claims in Defense of NAFTA: The Real NAFTA Score 2008
NAFTA Superhighway/SPP: The Truth is Stranger Than Fiction
NAFTA: Kicked Up a Notch (FPIF 5/23/07)
The World Bank on NAFTA: Wrong Numbers Lead to Wrong Conclusion
The Ten Year Track Record of NAFTA
http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=531
--------------------AND----------------------
NAFTAs Impact on U.S. Workers--Economic Policy Institute
Posted December 9, 2013 at 4:00 pm by Jeff Faux (RESEARCH REPORTS AT LINK)
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market.
By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers, which had driven the expansion of the middle class since the end of World War II. The result has been 20 years of stagnant wages and the upward redistribution of income, wealth and political power.
NAFTA affected U.S. workers in four principal ways. First, it caused the loss of some 700,000 jobs as production moved to Mexico. Most of these losses came in California, Texas, Michigan, and other states where manufacturing is concentrated. To be sure, there were some job gains along the border in service and retail sectors resulting from increased trucking activity, but these gains are small in relation to the loses, and are in lower paying occupations. The vast majority of workers who lost jobs from NAFTA suffered a permanent loss of income.
Second, NAFTA strengthened the ability of U.S. employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits. As soon as NAFTA became law, corporate managers began telling their workers that their companies intended to move to Mexico unless the workers lowered the cost of their labor. In the midst of collective bargaining negotiations with unions, some companies would even start loading machinery into trucks that they said were bound for Mexico. The same threats were used to fight union organizing efforts. The message was: If you vote in a union, we will move south of the border. With NAFTA, corporations also could more easily blackmail local governments into giving them tax reductions and other subsidies.
- See more Research and Reports at:
http://www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/#sthash.TakkEZF0.dpuf
NAFTAs Impact on U.S. Workers
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
163 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Trans-Pacific Partnership looks like a giant step toward the end of sovereign nations. [View all]
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
OP
Yes I can see how those that support Wall Street would support Clinton-Sachs. nm
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#91
Do you think that H. Clinton-Sachs is a progressive? Do you think her close ties with
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#118
By whose definition is H. Clinton a progressive? Does she support FDR type regulations?
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#120
See you're already doing it." Nyah nyah I deal with facts. You're just making stuff up."
Armstead
Jan 2014
#133
Do I understand you to say that you think that the TPP and NAFTA are progressive? nm
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#146
Socially progressive -- But a corporate conservative on issues of money and power
Armstead
Jan 2014
#125
That does. I will never support her, wouldn't have anyway because of her support for War, but that
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#92
I agree. Now is the time to make it clear that if Dems push her they will lose. So they better start
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#97
They need to own their shit, their wars and their selling out the middle class.
NYC_SKP
Jan 2014
#105
Exactly. And in many ways it's our fault too for looking the other way because the alternative is
sabrina 1
Jan 2014
#117
Is this a rhetorical question implying that anyone who thinks there is a "they"
ChisolmTrailDem
Jan 2014
#56
The right is all over the "One World Government" and FTA's and the WTO (One World Economy?)
pampango
Jan 2014
#42
I was once surprised to hear a Canadian say that NAFTA "only benefited the US"..
whathehell
Jan 2014
#109
The poll does not have anything to do with the TPP. The far right believes it is the 'liberal elite'
pampango
Jan 2014
#112
Perhaps not. But we share little in terms of the tea party world view, I suspect.
pampango
Jan 2014
#136
Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't our international treaties and agreements almost always
pampango
Jan 2014
#138
So where is this leading? Will there be one world government run by someone chosen by the
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#11
Whoever is really running the show has 30,000 armed Drones coming to watch you where you live/work.
blkmusclmachine
Jan 2014
#24
No one in power is worried about the American Empire. They are looking to a World government.
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#13
They get their empire via these trade agreements, it's just not the American Empire.
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#29
Harnessing the US military and infrastructure but above all of us (is what I suspect).
FiveGoodMen
Jan 2014
#69
They (our politicians) are expecting to be taken care of after they destroy our country.
indie9197
Jan 2014
#38
The TPP be the end of the Bretton Woods? The intent of FDR's 1944 conference is still alive.
pampango
Jan 2014
#43
Of Course It Is... They Just Don't Know How To Explain It, Without Using The Word FASCISM...
WillyT
Jan 2014
#16
Right Wing Watch: The NAFTA Superhighway and North American Union are far-right conspiracy theories
pampango
Jan 2014
#41
Remember when the GOP blocked the UN disabilities treaty in the Senate in 2012?
Cali_Democrat
Jan 2014
#145
There is a huge divide between the republican base and politicians on NAFTA and 'free trade'
pampango
Jan 2014
#115
So you provide graphs to illustrate how the trade treaties have killed the USA
brentspeak
Jan 2014
#122
The graphs show US manufacturing employment has been declining since 1955. What "trade treaties"
pampango
Jan 2014
#135
Thanks for not anwering the question. The 40 year decline in manufacturing jobs did not
pampango
Jan 2014
#152
No doubt but this is still a pretty significant actual legal advancement of that conclusion.
TheKentuckian
Jan 2014
#123
I don't see how really. We'd have to be of a mind to pretty much go rogue, drop out of the WTO,
TheKentuckian
Jan 2014
#162
I Agree, Sir: This Is 'Corporate Sovereignity', And It Is An Abomination
The Magistrate
Jan 2014
#37
Selective examples. Try Singapore for a "country" that "trades the most." Like 270% of its GDP.
El_Johns
Jan 2014
#100
Singapore and Hong Kong are essentially city-states but your point about the importance of
pampango
Jan 2014
#113
This was the ultimate goal of world elites all along. Now resource/energy control can proceed
ancianita
Jan 2014
#68
Yes. The beginning of the end of nation-states, and the change to corporate-states.
JDPriestly
Jan 2014
#72
Yes, more or less. The American Revolutionary War was between the colonies and
rhett o rick
Jan 2014
#156
I feel that a World Parliament would be a good first step, particularly if we want...
Humanist_Activist
Jan 2014
#99
First off no, second off, learn how to spell corporate if you want to try to be condescending...
Humanist_Activist
Jan 2014
#111
The US says it wants to "expand democratic values" but does the opposite
solarhydrocan
Jan 2014
#114