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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
K&R liberal_at_heart May 2015 #1
Rec! progressoid May 2015 #2
I pledge allegiance to the meme that Bill Clinton destroyed America ucrdem May 2015 #3
Pssst....NAFTA didn't end in 2000. jeff47 May 2015 #14
At the start of 2001 Clintonomics ended and Terranomics began. ucrdem May 2015 #16
No, at the start of 2001 the dot-com bubble burst. jeff47 May 2015 #20
What is Terranomics? Jack Rabbit May 2015 #27
Basically, it's consumer economics. Belief that a country can grow economically through Exilednight May 2015 #44
Yep. What percentage of those jobs are living wage jobs like the ones that went overseas? jwirr May 2015 #26
Tariffs on imports from Mexico averaged 4% before NAFTA. Inequality had been rising since 1969. pampango May 2015 #4
+10 ucrdem May 2015 #6
Screw that bullshit Art_from_Ark May 2015 #9
So you are saying that NAFTA had nothing to do with job lose in this country? And that is also has jwirr May 2015 #28
RW meme? cui bono May 2015 #53
You're making the mistake of thinking that NAFTA is about trade. jeff47 May 2015 #12
Many will be interested to know that NAFTA was not about trade. pampango May 2015 #24
Well, the "giving a blowjob to Wall Street agreement" didn't focus group as well. jeff47 May 2015 #25
I don't believe that FDR was the "Wall Street" blowjob" kind of guy. pampango May 2015 #33
We aren't in 1936 anymore, and our trading partners aren't only in Europe. jeff47 May 2015 #41
Great post. pampango May 2015 #45
In a sense, you are correct, but in practice .... Exilednight May 2015 #55
The question is not each country is capable of producing safe food products. The question is will jwirr May 2015 #31
"How is the USDA going to protect us from unsafe foods from other countries?" The same way pampango May 2015 #34
It is a matter of trust. As to inside the USA the USDA has the authority to do that. I will turn the jwirr May 2015 #35
I don't want them "unlabeled". I want them to be 'labeled' (certified) as safe to eat. pampango May 2015 #42
I trust most people but not with my food. jwirr May 2015 #43
I don't trust everyone with my food either, but their nationality is not the issue. n/t pampango May 2015 #46
That is actually one of the big points about TPP. There will be universal labeling standards (which okaawhatever May 2015 #48
Universal labeling standards Art_from_Ark May 2015 #52
Yeah, just look at the WTO ruling on the meat labeling. cui bono May 2015 #54
NAFTA made it easy for US manufacturing to relocate to Mexico brentspeak May 2015 #17
Do you think that WTO rules would not protect manufacturers in Mexico as they have pampango May 2015 #21
If you think that's bad... Art_from_Ark May 2015 #5
The EPI report is deeply flawed. The Congressional Research Service came out with okaawhatever May 2015 #7
Had never seen this before. Thanks for posting it. n/t pampango May 2015 #8
That CRS report is over ten years old brentspeak May 2015 #11
The EPI study, and the claims made in this "report" are laughable. A sixth grader can see the okaawhatever May 2015 #23
Except your report stops when the story would be bad for NAFTA. jeff47 May 2015 #18
No, the report dosn't get bad for NAFTA. I only picked out the parts that directly addressed okaawhatever May 2015 #36
Yes, it really does. jeff47 May 2015 #38
Having read several reports how jobs has been lost, I have not seen a sturdy which gives Thinkingabout May 2015 #29
You deal with those by looking at changes in trade between the countries. jeff47 May 2015 #40
These job losses was due to rechnology advancement, I rather think the Thinkingabout May 2015 #49
Right. That's how you exclude those losses from the analysis. (nt) jeff47 May 2015 #50
The screwjob so nice... they want to do it twice. AzDar May 2015 #10
And the TPP will be NAFTA cubed. Baitball Blogger May 2015 #13
It's too bad you are part of the 'social issues don't matter' crowd because some of the strongest Bluenorthwest May 2015 #15
Silly. That was 20 years ago. You can't keep blaming the Clintons for that forever. L0oniX May 2015 #19
HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!! WillyT May 2015 #22
Recent book with analysis of how NAFTA effected real ppl Spiggitzfan May 2015 #30
Let's assume for a moment that Public Citizen is right and we lost 1 million jobs to Mexico/Canada. Hoyt May 2015 #32
Yes, and Mexico had been losing jobs to China before signing NAFTA. Also, the 1 million okaawhatever May 2015 #37
It will be nice when Mexico advances similar to us or Canada. North America will be a cool place Hoyt May 2015 #39
Have you ever been to Mexico? a la izquierda May 2015 #56
We must put Mr. and Mrs. Nafta back in the White House!!!!1111 bigwillq May 2015 #47
She won't take credit for that or the TPP . orpupilofnature57 May 2015 #51
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NAFTA at 20: One Million ...»Reply #43