General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: NAFTA passed on Nov. 20, 1993, on the promise of jobs. Oddly enough . . . [View all]OrwellwasRight
(5,209 posts)has really very little to do with whether actual jobs were gained or lost as a result of increased trade and investment with out countries, right? "Unemployment rates" have to do with very specific categorizations that count people with part time jobs as "employed" but don't count discouraged workers as "unemployed." A better comparison would look at the trade deficit between the US and Mexico and look at what we are importing that we no longer make--that shows you actual lost jobs and lost opportunities for jobs (economists count opportunity costs the same as actual losses). If a trade deal worked well, we would not have a long term deficit with a country year after year. Losses and gains would eventually balance. That has not happened with NAFTA.
And if "technological advances" were wiping out all manufacturing jobs, how come manufacturing employment is growing in China, Thailand, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and other places? Yes, people are still needed to make things. Just not American people who won't work for $1 an hour. Life is a lot more complicated than the simplistic "the technology stole our jobs" argument.