says video no longer available

I thought it was Reagan (and Mulroney) who started the whole NAFTA thing?

I thought Edwards response here was spot on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8GiLTOz23w
And what was up with audience last night? Were the pro-lobbyist? proNAFTA?
The "peru deal" will drain more jobs out of this country. It will also allow jobs which are funded by taxpayer dollars to move overseas.
Clinton is so not a good choice for us. She would make a decent Rockefeller Republican, if there were still any of those around.

NAFTA causing Apoplexy?

Just asking........

Well guys, you wanted someone to do something about free trade? How about the SPP? How about TILMA up here in Canada (which will end up including the United States)? Guess what! It's being negotiated behind our backs and it is NAFTA on steroids.

http://www.youtube.com/canadiansnanaimo

Jacques @ 4:

I thought it was Reagan (and Mulroney) who started the whole NAFTA thing?

Both sides of the house were against it. Rahm Emanuel revived it and pushed it through almost as soon as Clinton took office.

Here is the correct YouTube link for the video, or go to David Sirota's site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBypp2hqxaQ&eurl=http://www.politicswest.com/13546/video_clinton_thinks_naftas_consequences_are_funny

George H.W. Bush initiated NAFTA, and fast-tracked it in Dec before CLinton took office.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:RUEV7tCYug4J:www.wilsoncenter.org/i...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement

If you're going to blame people...let them share it.

Saw most of the debate and the one aspect that stands out, Wolf Blitzer moderated more or less and it appeared his main point was to get the various candidates to contradict one another, it was to pull up statements each had made while stumping and bring up those issues and to throw them in the other's face and ask, "he said such and such, how do you feel about that?" I feel they all handled themselves with dignity and the difference between any one of them and their republican counterparts is vast.

Care must be taken now that we all don't fall into the various chasms set out by the republicans. We cannot eat our own. They will bring up points where it would appear they are in an indecisive or contradictory or insensitive mode, but remember they are being "baited" by Blitzer. His intent is either ratings, personal fame or to crawl further up the cavity of the current admin. Who will handle the moderation of the republican debate. here's an idea, either Brownie or Harriet Miers, they should be available. QUIT EATING OUR OWN. BTW Dennis was given no respect. he was basically handled as a non-entitiy. WE HAVE TO CHANGE THAT.

Josh @ 16:

George H.W. Bush initiated NAFTA, and fast-tracked it in Dec before CLinton took office.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:RUEV7tCYug4J:www.wilsoncenter.org/i...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement

If you're going to blame people...let them share it.

You're kidding right? Blame Bush 41?...Ok. Blame the Canadians and the Mexicans?? Ok.

This is somehow letting Billary off the hook?

Were you listening? All she remembers are the "charts" and apparently she's voting for it again!

WTF?

the front page of yahoo.com has a Hillary headline like every day. This sh!t is so staged and directed that it's not even funny.

Uh, that candidate is John Edwards and he has been talking about it for a long time now. That's why I am supporting him for President.

Just curious. To attend the debates are they open to the public at large or are they invites (ringers, "Clinton Party" loyalists)?

Ms. Clinton in TIME Magazine, Feb 1, 2007

I issued a report earlier this year about some of the problems we have with Canada, our very good neighbor and ally along our border. We have trouble getting New York agricultural products into Canada. And I believe that it's because the federal and provincial governments of Canada, they protect themselves. They protect their farmers. They are not going to just open their borders regardless of what NAFTA says.

She doesnt have a fucking clue what NAFTA does or its impact. She's babbling here about a universe she doesn't even understand:

TIME: Do you think NAFTA [the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed by Bill Clinton] was the right thing to do?

CLINTON: I think NAFTA was, in principle, a good idea to try to create a better trading market between Canada and the United States and Mexico. But I think the terms that it contained, and how it was negotiated under the Bush Administration and the failure to have any tough enforcement mechanism, like pollution on our border with Mexico, for example—

TIME: That was your husband's Adminstration, wasn't it? Because I recall a lot of debate about it not having labor standards and environmental standards.

CLINTON: But it was inherited. NAFTA was inherited by the Clinton Administration. I believe in the general principles it represented, but what we have learned is that we have to drive a tougher bargain. Our market is the market that everybody wants to be in. We should quit giving it away so willy-nilly. [Ed: She has zero clue what NAFTA was meant to do. It was not to benefit the US to exclusion of the other participants.] I believe we need tougher enforcement of the trade agreements we already have. You look at the trade enforcement record between the Clinton Administration and the Bush Administration, the Clinton Administration brought more trade enforcement actions in one year than the Bush Administration brought in six years.

For me, trade is who we are. We're traders. We want to be involved in the global economy, but not be played for suckers.
As we look at trade today, I don't think we can look at trade separate and apart from how we fix health care. I don't think we can look at it separate and apart from how we incentivize and pay for education, so we keep trying to improve the skills of our workforce. And I think that the budget deficit has mortgaged our future and the holders of the mortgages are governments like the government of China, so then it makes it even more difficult for us to get tough when it comes to trade. So we've kind of walked into this vicious cycle and we need to break it.

Sirota is 100%. She has no idea what she's talking about.

I'm a little tired of people thinking it was Clinton who gave us NAFTA, if they can't get that little factoid correct, why are they making comments about it all?

NAFTA was a 15 year process started by Reagan and it was a bi-partidan disaster, let's at least get that part right before we start bashing Hillary - who happens to be correct that it needs to be revisited.

Oh, and screw Digg.

What I found disappointing was Hillary would not say whether or not NAFTA was a mistake. She keeps trying to play both sides of the issue, like the Iraq war.

I really don't understand all the brouhaha over NAFTA. Maybe there is something I'm missing, but every econ major I ever talked to about it in college always touted free trade. They said that the opposition comes from the individual not being able to see the results, because whenever anything good happens to the economy the benefits are spread over the entire economy, while bad things tend to impact on specific groups of people. That seems true from what everyone has said about NAFTA. The economic benefits have been really spread out over people from Canada to Mexico, while lots of small pockets of workers have been hung out to dry, and while that's horrible, you don't have to work the same job your entire life. People can get other jobs.

What am I missing here? Seems like NAFTA is everyone's favorite punching bag. Maybe someone could post a few links and fill me in, because I'm not really understanding the problem here.

hareli @ 21:

Josh @ 16:

George H.W. Bush initiated NAFTA, and fast-tracked it in Dec before CLinton took office.

No he didn't. He did not make it law. it became law in 1994, two years after Clinton took over. By then there was strong bipartisan opposition to it. And who the hell cites wikipedia as a reliable source. Read this: Trade Fights by John Nichols.

exactly right it was pushed by poppy bushes newest son and golf partner bill clinton! and people laughed at ross paroh when he warned america the next thing youll hear is a giant sucking sound of jobs leaveing this country if nafta passes!

dBa @ 30:

I'm a little tired of people thinking it was Clinton who gave us NAFTA, if they can't get that little factoid correct, why are they making comments about it all?

NAFTA was a 15 year process started by Reagan and it was a bi-partidan disaster, let's at least get that part right before we start bashing Hillary - who happens to be correct that it needs to be revisited.

Oh, and screw Digg.

Ray-gun shat it, and Clinton shoveled it down our throats.

In any case, I don't trust a person like Hillary who can go from having health care reform as her pet project during her tenure as Whitehousewife, to having raked copious amounts of money from the health care management industry to pay for her campaigning expenses.

Everything is first and fore most about her, and we come at a distant third or fourth. Just like Bush the II's presidency has been just a weird form of therapy for the current monkey at the white house to deal with his daddy issues, a Clinton the II's presidency will be her moment of one upping her husband and their weird marriage therapy and counseling will take a turn in which all of us will continue paying the consequences. Enough of this shit... a functioning democracy can not afford 2 political families to be allowed to maintain a presence in the White house for over 3 decades.

If Hillary gave two shits about this country, she would stay home and give up her sense of entitlement regarding the presidency. Yeah, sometimes life is a bitch and unfair one at that... but I am not in the mood to tolerate more dicking around while the country is circling the drain....

dBa @ 37:

"NAFTA was a mistake to the extent it did not deliver what we hoped it would."

I'm glad Clinton didn't say THAT. She probably never said anything about revisiting it either, huh?

I'll be glad when the left is done destroying Hillary, maybe another 4 years of a republican in the White House will finally bring this all home.

Given that under a sane political ranking Hillary would be a moderate right winger or a centrist on a very good and rare day, I fail to see why it is the left's job to care and prop a candidate of an opposing ideology. Is as if the GOP was concerned with the well being and needs of Kucinich...

and people laughed at ross paroh when he warned america the next thing youll hear is a giant sucking sound of jobs leaveing this country if nafta passes!

The same way Wonkette and all the rest laugh at Dennis Kucinich an Ron Paul. This country has no interest in picking the most qualified person for their party's nomination anymore. It's all haircuts, sighs, and hee-haws.

BTW, Sirota's quick YouTube is great. Be sure to watch it. the correct link is in #14.

I was for NAFTA initially. Even in economic classes I was taking they said economic regionalism is wave of the future with: EU, NAFTA, and potential Pacific Rim, and Latin American regional groups. Even a nation the size of the US would find it difficult to compete with such behemoths, and we'd end up flipping each other's burgers unless we have one of our own like NAFTA. Additionally, it seemed to be an extention of the Monroe Doctrine. Interwined business relations were also seen as a way to bring peace to the world, or at least less war, because one does not attack one's own trading partner. In this way, it was like the pre-World War I multi-polar international structure, although admittedly it was decendents of Queen Victoria controlling the thrones of Britain, Germany and Russia.

Bubba to his credit tried to keep NAFTA from being a way for American Corporations to escape environmental and tax requirements.

But now, it appears that the naysayers to NAFTA were right, including that weirdo Ross Perot. We are ending up merely flipping each other's burgers. Initially NAFTA was seen as a way to increase trade, but how do you increase trade if you've stripped yourself of any industries, due to lower wage structures in other countries like China and India? Our increasing gas costs are blamed in part because of China and India's new booming economy. Besides outsourced jobs are offshore accounts, and corporations relocating to areas like Dubai. Economic decisions are being made in boardrooms with no loyalty to any country or fairness, just efficiency, especially when linked with the WTO, at the loss of national sovreignty. Because of trade imbalances and national debt the value of our currency is plunging, prompting folks like in Saudi Arabia and China to invest in Euros instead of dollars, thus weakening it even further, and making hyper-inflation a possibility.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjnvSQuv-H4

A vote for this bag 'o' doorknobs in a pantsuit completes america's warpspeed race to the bottom. 8 years, people!!!

We don't HAVE EIGHT YEARS TO WASTE...Americans, please please come out of your coma!!!

Biden/Dodd/Kucinich, or will we take shit for diamonds.

You're either with us (the pink-handed money changers) or against us (the remainder of the working class population of the US). The US has no economy, no jobs or manufacturing base left. The remainder of the wanna-be Barons are fighting over the minuscule scraps left behind behind - mostly through usury and fraud. If you have not already made your fortune off the backs of the third world (coupled with a moronic public which gleefully empowered these traitorous maggots), you are now officially screwed. The Amerikan Dream is over, and there's not a damned thing you can do about it. You'll be paying off the debts for trade deficits and the bloated, collusive, corrupt military industrial for your lifetime and beyond. Debtor's and tax prisons will soon be making a comeback. And the Barons will have Blackwater to protect them from the hordes of pissed on idjots with signs and pitchforks.

And it's not as if you freaking idiots weren't warned:
Imported Goods and Your Economy

But the sheeple still line up, each and every year, and buy billions in imported, toxic crap that soon ends up in the bottom of a landfill. And this year will be no different. Because the Amerikan population is STUPID to the bone.

Prove me wrong. Don't buy a damned thing this Christmas - but if you must, make sure it doesn't come from China or any other country that doesn't compete on a level playing field.

The future, MY future, has been destroyed by the absolute lowest common denominator - again.

Of course I'd vote for Kucinich if his wife hit the campaign trail in white high heeled, thigh-high boots, red vinyl micro mini, and matching gauzy crop top.

Can someone explain why this Video was pulled

tyree @ 46:

the trouble with somes thinking is we have to vote for the same crappy politicians like bush was just because they can win , its kind of like saying if we keep fighting in iraq we,ll win , and i say win what ? more of this selling our country by the corporate butchers , that kind of reasoning sounds like what a repig would say, we got to sell out our principals just to win NOTHING!

"The Iraq war was a mistake to the extent it did not deliver what we hoped it would".

Bush should take his cues from Hillary, tyree. Maybe his approval ratings would go up.

dBa @ 43:

The Treaty was signed by Bush 41 in Dec of 1992, with Congressional approval the only hurdle left.

It's ridiculous to lay it at Hillary's feet after she's pledged to study it's effects.

As far as ideology goes, I don't want a republican in the White House, and there is not one Democrat candidate able to do a worse job than Bush has.

But if you're going to fry Hillary for something she had no part in like NAFTA, AFTER she claims NAFTA failed to perform up to expectations, then I can't help but think that it isn't about NAFTA at all, but just about making sure an unelectable Democrat becomes the nominee.

I would go a bit further than you: I don't want another Republican in the White House in my lifetime with this caveat: I think things may have to get much worse before the American middle class wakes up sufficiently to meet its political responsibility and take care of itself and this country.

I have actually considered the idea that if Hillary is the Democratic nominee I will vote Green as a neutral choice or Republican as an agitator just to try to get this slumbering ship of fools to wake up. I like Dennis Kucinich. Edwards is OK. Dodd has been talking about the Constitution - I like that. Obama has been saying that he represents change - that's a totally lame old slogan but I still want to hear to what he has to say.

I will certainly vote against Diane Feinstein regardless the cost.

We may need to crank the fever higher to kill the infection. If we need a corrupt fascist like Guiliani to wake up the brain-dead so be it.

Well if you want to loose your job, house, car, and I was going to say health ins but most of us dont have any. JUST VOTE FOR CLINTON AND HALF OF THE OTHERS ON THE DEBATE LAST NIGHT. Most running do not have a vision for american people and what we need including fair trade. on sample america shipped 4500 cars to korea but kores shipped 450.000 cars to us is that fair we cant build any of our american cars in all those tradeing countrys they wont allow it. THINK AMERICAN

dBa @ 43:

The Treaty was signed by Bush 41 in Dec of 1992, with Congressional approval the only hurdle left.

It's ridiculous to lay it at Hillary's feet after she's pledged to study it's effects.

"with Congressional approval the only hurdle left" is a major hurdle. Congress was balking. No one wanted it, except an elitist few. Read the posts above. It was Rahm Emanuel who strong-armed everyone about it.

As for pledging to study its effects, she's been a goddam US senator for five years. What does she need, another decade? We've lost ONE MILLION jobs as a result. She should already be familiar with its effects. It was almost immediate.

The initial Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the USA was an agreement between countries with similar economies and development. When they added third world countries to the mix it created conditions severely damaging to both countries. Another example of the corporate agenda driving policy in both our countries.

Robert @ 53:

Can someone explain why this Video was pulled

Wasn't puled. Think the link might be wrong. Scroll up to #14 for the correct link.

Johnny2Bad @ 64:

dBa @ 60:

OneFish Says:
We may need to crank the fever higher to kill the infection. If we need a corrupt fascist like Guiliani to wake up the brain-dead so be it.

It's beginning to look like that's exactly what's going to happen.

A "corrupt fascist" (read corporatist) alright...But her name ain't Rudy.

That Hillary may be but I say Rudy's C-F quotient is two orders of magnitude greater than Hillary's. Let's crank up the fever quickly, use the straight dope, that would be Rudy. Get ready for a Gestapo, censorship, book burning, thoughtcrime statutes, employment blacklisting based on political leanings...

November 16, 2007
Diamonds or Pearls?
Wolf Blitzer Loses Democratic Debate
By DAVID SWANSON
http://www.counterpunch.org/swanson11162007.html

November 14, 2007
From Nixon Girl to Watergate
The Making of Hillary Clinton
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
First in a three-part series.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn11142007.html

November 15, 2007
The Seeds of Corruption
Hillary Clinton in Arkansas
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
Second in a three-part series.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn11152007.html

November 16, 2007
Secrecy, Intransigence and War
The Vices of Hillary Clinton
By ALEXANDER COCKBURN
and JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
Last of a three-part series.
http://www.counterpunch.org/

Avi Patil @ 67:

After reading through some of the left and right wing blogs I find there is so much more hatred towards Clintons on left than on the right. If Giuliani instead of Hillary is next president and we start another war don't start complaining again..

Please don't frame war as a black and white issue. With Giuliani you're going to get war, and with Clinton you're going to get war.

Dennis @ 56:

tyree @ 46:

the trouble with somes thinking is we have to vote for the same crappy politicians like bush was just because they can win , its kind of like saying if we keep fighting in iraq we,ll win , and i say win what ? more of this selling our country by the corporate butchers , that kind of reasoning sounds like what a repig would say, we got to sell out our principals just to win NOTHING!

"The Iraq war was a mistake to the extent it did not deliver what we hoped it would".

Bush should take his cues from Hillary, tyree. Maybe his approval ratings would go up.</blockquote come on dennis stick to how much the american people are makeing off stocks and bonds,never mind our factorys are closeing and being turned into burger kings, and never mind that someday soon when were in another fight with a real enemy like red china with fleets and aircraft and soldiers who have no place or factorys to produce these weapons we,ll need as we did in ww2, we wont have time to build a war produceing manufacturing machine again , your buddys have destroyed us , left us to the mercy of our enemys , lucky for me i wont be arround when they force you to put your hands in the air and march you and your kids off on some death march!

"I would very much like to see a progressive candidate look at making a strong stance at reforming our trade policies."

....you will see it, but not in any form detrimental to the Owners.

Johnny2Bad @ 59:

ysbaddaden @ 50:

crazylove @ 47:

A vote for this bag 'o' doorknobs in a pantsuit completes america's warpspeed race to the bottom. 8 years, people!!!

We don't HAVE EIGHT YEARS TO WASTE...Americans, please please come out of your coma!!!

Biden/Dodd/Kucinich, or will we take shit for diamonds.

I wouldn't mind polishing Hillary's doorknobs.

You, my friend, need deep psychoanalysis. Eeeeuuuu. One word...Cankles.

When middle-age make it impractical to play with your own dinky, you play with your own brain.

I never viewed the Clinton's as "leftists" or "liberals" or even real bonafide Democrats for that matter.

The Clinton's both Hillary and Bill are more out of the mold of the old Nelson Rockefeller Republicans.

If anyone is hostile towards the left and liberals it is the Clinton's--both Bill and Hillary....Hillary and Bill Clinton deceive liberals all day long into thinking they are one and the same....NOT!!!!! Hillary like Bill is perfectly capable of dropping bombs and starting unilateral wars without the approval of Congress or the United Nations.....

Bill Clinton certainly could also be charged with the war crimes his administration committed as president and Hillary is also culpable with her votes in the war crimes already committed by the Bush administration, as well....

Hillary would just as easily bomb Iran as Rudy Guiliani is capable of....

NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO came close to killing the State of Michigan... and may yet succeed in delivering the death blow.

Growing up, it was only the rare friend who had parents that didn't have good Union jobs... Now it's rare to find someone who DOES have a good Union job. Heck, it's difficult to find someone that has a good paying job anymore at all... Union or not.

With each of these statements, Candidate Hillary makes clear that she's the "establishment candidate". If she is elected, it will be the same MO as with Bush but with a different twist. I'm waiting for the reichwingnuts to swiftboat Hillary - just like the Dems are planning to easily swiftboat Rudy. Then what will we have left to choose from?? The lesser of "two evils"...."evil twins" as the case may be.

What will happen next will be the saving entry of a good candidate from the Independent side of the ledger. Anyone notice how now the pundits and the whoring MSM is recognizing that the decision of 08 will rest with the I's?? Of course, it will - the number of registered Independents is equal to the number of Registered Dems and will soon overtake the Dems in numbers. The I's eclipsed the number of REg. GOPhers long ago!

The repugnant party is now considered to be the "third party" with the Dems losing more and more people to the Independent side of things.

The Independents will have tremendous power in this coming election year. It will be the I's who will elect our next president. And, so far, none of the sickly group of candidates meets the expectations of a typical Indpendent voter - bar none.

Get over the NAFTA hate people. "Repealing," "renegotiating," or ending NAFTA is not going to restore 1 damn job. But it will make the price of everything go through the roof and weaken both of our neighboring countries who have grown closer to America through the pact.

NAFTA has been a trememdous success for America. It's made pretty much everything more affordable for all Americans. And it made America more competitive because it forced us to focus on what we are good at, namely, higher brainpower industries that attract higher wages.

In return we lost some jobs that Americans were being overpaid for anyway, like menial work in factories and textile jobs. These are jobs we would have lost anyway -- something you'll never hear Kucinich say -- because of overall trade liberalization across the world. Even with tarriffs and quotas, at some point it is cheaper to buy from Mexico instead of employ some American at $19/hour. So some people lost their jobs, and are doing landscaping and temping now? Millions of others have had better jobs created because of it.

Then there is the pesky fact that NAFTA is helping to stop that illegal immigration problem all you union people complain about because it forms jobs in Mexico. If you don't bring the cheap goods to you, the cheap labor will come to you.

Then there is our reliance on China. NAFTA, CAFTA, the Peru pact, and any trade treaty to unite this Hemisphere in free trade is the best single assurance against the threat of China to America, who we are way too reliant on. Giving the developing nations of this Hemisphere competition is the best way to assure the Chinese listen to us.

This country has become far too complacent when it comes to competition. Billions of people in the rest of the world have to deal with market forces ever day. Let's give them and hand up and trade with them.

The agreement was initially pursued by conservative governments in the United States and Canada supportive of free trade, led by:
Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney
U.S. President George H. W. Bush,
Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari.

The three-nation NAFTA was signed on 17 December 1992, pending its ratification by the legislatures of the three countries. There was considerable opposition in all three countries, but in the United States it was able to secure passage after Bill Clinton made its passage a major legislative initiative in 1993.

from: http://www.answers.com/topic/north-american-free-trade-agreement?cat=biz...

I remember the whole episode. The question is, did Clinton had a chance to oppose this agreement? And if he did, would he had been successful? Oh really? The Congressmen oppossing this agreement can be counted with my fingers, and plenty were left, enough to onanieren.

The problem with NAFTA and everything like it is that anyone who opposes it is usually accused of being an isolationist, just like anyone opposed to ILLEGAL immigration is labelled xenophobic.

MichiganGirl @ 82:

NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO came close to killing the State of Michigan... and may yet succeed in delivering the death blow.

Growing up, it was only the rare friend who had parents that didn't have good Union jobs... Now it's rare to find someone who DOES have a good Union job. Heck, it's difficult to find someone that has a good paying job anymore at all... Union or not.

The "death blow" to Michigan??? Please. Michigan was killing itself. Detroit was too stupid to adapt and focus on precision quality cars (not to mention fuel efficiency) so you lost jobs to Japan even before NAFTA. And then there is the fact that cars are still being made in the US, just not in Detroit. What does that say to you?

Then there is the fact that the UAW tries to strangle a company any time it makes money, fearing they "won't get their fair share." Except that stockholders have this stubborn desire to be reimbursed for their investments.

Way to make the state attractive for investment. Come to Michigan: You'll build your plant, and our unions will put you out of business.

Now that you're economy has suffered severely, maybe the state will be more diversified, more competitive and in the long run richer. At some point, all those giant empty foreclosed houses look really nice to some enterprising people. Perhaps you should start attracting them and stop worrying about jobs that left already.

OneFish @ 85:

You need to elaborate, not just impune.

In my memory "globalization" began with companies like GE offshoring production to Japan and then Hong Kong in the 60's and 70's. So you're telling me that the Clinton's are at the heart of the globalization process that has been the bane of the middle class for 40 years? You sound a bit daft to me.

NAFTA is widely regarded as the single most devastating blow to the middle class that has happened in this century. It ushered in the widespread corporate movement of exporting jobs OUT of the USA and is helping destroy mom and pop operations in those countries. It's corporate welfare on steroids.

Just because you appear to be a Clinton supporter, kindly refrain from labeling people "daft" just because you're not as brushed up on your history as you should be.

hareli @ 5:

Well, Nicole, let me give you some quick facts in a nutshell. After Rahm Emanuel pushed NAFTA through to broad bipartisan opposition, his Goldman Sachs buddies raced down to Mexico with US companies and financed the major factories businesses built uprooting the mom and pop stores and farms. [The corn crops were particularly hard hit.] This mainly happened in the regions close to the US border. GS helped Walmart bury the local Mexican factories with their version of how is should be done. The $2.00/hr wage was supposed to be the reward for all the uprooting.

Then the Mexican economy went sour, there was a peso crisis, and GS was on the hook financially, so the teh Clinton admin had the US taxpayer bail Goldman Sachs out. You didn't hear much about it because Lewinsky was in the air. Consequently, Emanuel went hard to work getting the China free-trade agreement with no oversight provisions, which is why we can get lead in toys and the rest.

Walmart, et al, were ecstatic because now they could get workers for $.60/hr. Vamoose. They upped and left in droves, bankrupting the Mexicans they had originally disrupted and displaced. They didn't have to worry about bitching and moaning because YAHOO there were no Mexicans unions.

Hillary was in this up to her neck in 1994. In addition, its her campaign line that she has all this WH experience.

Thank you! This is exactly why we do not need another Clinton back in the White House. I will not vote for a corporate robot and don't think many will. And Obama, just another corporate robot in training. I'm very disillusioned with our choices and the state of the media that will not talk about these things.

Why are all of you crying about NAFTA, etc. This is today's reality folks. Most of you will not bat an eye when you shop for goods online trying to get the best deal....do you? Well guess what? We, as rabid consumers, mostly only look at price and convenience...so to put the Clintons down for something that would have happened anyways (what with the unification of the European countries, et al) is disingenuous.

Layoffs happen to blue collar workers and white collar workers all the time. A lot of laid off blue collar workers have re-educated themselves and have moved to many other fields (Atleast those I am friends with...not generalizing).

If most of you had really been pained by NAFTA, etc. would you be driving a foreign made car (those of you who do drive em)? Or even American made cars that were assembled in Mexico? How many of you actually looked at a car or product and decided not to buy it because it was not assembled in the USA?

Do I agree with NAFTA? No I don't. But it is time for everyone to stop whining about something that happened and move forward...face it, we do live in a global economy and these kind of things are facts of life.

Also, the demonization of the Clintons from within the left wing is pathetic. None of the candidates are any better or worse..it is just that Clintons were in the limelight longer.

These are just my humble opinions....so if you want to flame me...go ahead....Bottomline...we need to get rid of the losers from both parties in our congress.

Evil @ 86:

Get over the NAFTA hate people.

Specious, talking point arguments, at best.

I've been in the "service" sector for over 40 years. And I've seen factory after factory uproot its entire machinery base and barge it to China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. while its employees all got pink slips. The market originally absorbed these "excessively paid" workers, but now there is nowhere to go. Electronics, woodworking machinery, cars, computers, textiles, engineered lumber, plumbing and electrical products, even the food we now buy unlabled as to it's country of origin - and much of it comes from China. Even such sundry items such as apple juice and peanuts.

Brainpower jobs? Ha. What would that be? Computers? Electronics? Programming?
Try India, China, Taiwan.
At least the Japanese set up their own damned factories and raised the standard of living for it's own citizens in the process. China is not. The only thing we now produce is war machinery (and much of the componentry is now outsourced as well), overpaid healthcare industries, shifty, avaricious bankers, junk homebuilders, and friggin' lawyers.

Cheaper products? Another joke. In 1995 a pair of Wrangler, Made in American jeans cost $14 a pair. When retailers such as Target and Wal-Mart forced price points and the factories moved to China, the jeans still cost $14.00 a pair. Where are the cheaper goods? Same with TV's, tools, machinery, etc. A subtle 10% price break at best - just enough to win over a few morons to the benefits of "globalization" (i.e.: Slave Labor). The largest difference being, I still have a few pairs of the American made items, they may be wearing thin, but they are still usable. The Imported crap has long since hit the wastebasket. What we DID get is higher commissions and profit for the Corporations and their Do-Nothing Stockholders.

"NAFTA has been a trememdous success for America."
This is so insanely idiotic it doesn't deserve a response. More affordable JUNK is still CRAP. Especially when no one has a job, or the money to buy it or haul it to the landfill after its pathetic, pre-planned lifespan. Then there is the energy consumption aspect. Instead of being frugal with the world's limited supplies of energy by producing goods which last longer than 6-12 months, we waste it by producing crap and shipping if from China, et al., throwing it away, and repeating this proceedure over and over again. Most of this crap isn't even worth repairing, and good luck with getting parts... It is a circle jerk of excessive consumption fueled by higher profit margins and ignorant, shortsighted consumers.

"Then there is the pesky fact that NAFTA is helping to stop that illegal immigration problem all you union people complain about because it forms jobs in Mexico. If you don't bring the cheap goods to you, the cheap labor will come to you."

Horseshit. Mexicans started coming here en masse because NAFTA undermined their ability to make a living from the agricultural products they previously produced. The other reason is that they were offered jobs by traitorous profiteers who wanted cheap labor to build their housing projects and work in their plants. I was there and I saw it happen. China is the new Mexico, they work cheaper, and the corrupt government cares not one whit about pollution, safety or health care - for workers OR consumers.

Oh, Never mind. As I said earlier, Americans are shortsighted sheep who have been led to the slaughter by flashy ads, instant gratification, and easy credit. (Which is probably a subsitute for having to actually THINK about anything beyond how long their hard-on lasts.)

86 Evil Says:
Get over the NAFTA hate people. “Repealing,” “renegotiating,” or ending NAFTA is not going to restore 1 damn job. But it will make the price of everything go through the roof and weaken both of our neighboring countries who have grown closer to America through the pact.

In comparison, american-made products are more heavily inspected than imported products, so therefore their quality is expected to be first-rate (meaning they're a bit more expensive to produce). And America comes first.

NAFTA has been a trememdous success for America. It’s made pretty much everything more affordable for all Americans. And it made America more competitive because it forced us to focus on what we are good at, namely, higher brainpower industries that attract higher wages.

O rly? I didn't know that white collar jobs outnumbered blue collar jobs! Gosh darn, sir! That really opened my eyes! I guess that also explains all the outsourced tech support jobs/I.T. jobs being performed at India and other southeastern asian countries. Brainpower industries, lulz!

In return we lost some jobs that Americans were being overpaid for anyway, like menial work in factories and textile jobs. These are jobs we would have lost anyway — something you’ll never hear Kucinich say — because of overall trade liberalization across the world. Even with tarriffs and quotas, at some point it is cheaper to buy from Mexico instead of employ some American at $19/hour. So some people lost their jobs, and are doing landscaping and temping now? Millions of others have had better jobs created because of it.

Hey, wanna give up your job to someone else overseas? Sounds like you want to! And the menial and textile jobs that you refer to, I didn't knowz thatz theyz were being paidz $19.00 an hour! Wow jeepers! Last I heard these jobs were paying close to minimum wage.

Then there is the pesky fact that NAFTA is helping to stop that illegal immigration problem all you union people complain about because it forms jobs in Mexico. If you don’t bring the cheap goods to you, the cheap labor will come to you.

It is? I guess the number of illegal immigrants have been rising since its ineption, and the fact that it totally screwed up the worth of the Mexican peso during the more latter half of the 1990s. WTF!

Then there is our reliance on China. NAFTA, CAFTA, the Peru pact, and any trade treaty to unite this Hemisphere in free trade is the best single assurance against the threat of China to America, who we are way too reliant on. Giving the developing nations of this Hemisphere competition is the best way to assure the Chinese listen to us.

Lulz! I thought "free trade" was another word big corporations use as an excuse to violate US labor laws. Free trade, lulz!11oneoneone!

This country has become far too complacent when it comes to competition. Billions of people in the rest of the world have to deal with market forces ever day. Let’s give them and hand up and trade with them.

See my first statement about "America first".

It seems that 'Free Trade' is more for just 'Big Business'

Lynnianaa @ 102:

86 Evil Says:
Get over the NAFTA hate people. “Repealing,” “renegotiating,” or ending NAFTA is not going to restore 1 damn job. But it will make the price of everything go through the roof and weaken both of our neighboring countries who have grown closer to America through the pact.

In comparison, american-made products are more heavily inspected than imported products, so therefore their quality is expected to be first-rate (meaning they're a bit more expensive to produce). And America comes first.

NAFTA has been a trememdous success for America. It’s made pretty much everything more affordable for all Americans. And it made America more competitive because it forced us to focus on what we are good at, namely, higher brainpower industries that attract higher wages.

O rly? I didn't know that white collar jobs outnumbered blue collar jobs! Gosh darn, sir! That really opened my eyes! I guess that also explains all the outsourced tech support jobs/I.T. jobs being performed at India and other southeastern asian countries. Brainpower industries, lulz!

In return we lost some jobs that Americans were being overpaid for anyway, like menial work in factories and textile jobs. These are jobs we would have lost anyway — something you’ll never hear Kucinich say — because of overall trade liberalization across the world. Even with tarriffs and quotas, at some point it is cheaper to buy from Mexico instead of employ some American at $19/hour. So some people lost their jobs, and are doing landscaping and temping now? Millions of others have had better jobs created because of it.

Hey, wanna give up your job to someone else overseas? Sounds like you want to! And the menial and textile jobs that you refer to, I didn't knowz thatz theyz were being paidz $19.00 an hour! Wow jeepers! Last I heard these jobs were paying close to minimum wage.

Then there is the pesky fact that NAFTA is helping to stop that illegal immigration problem all you union people complain about because it forms jobs in Mexico. If you don’t bring the cheap goods to you, the cheap labor will come to you.

It is? I guess the number of illegal immigrants have been rising since its ineption, and the fact that it totally screwed up the worth of the Mexican peso during the more latter half of the 1990s. WTF!

Then there is our reliance on China. NAFTA, CAFTA, the Peru pact, and any trade treaty to unite this Hemisphere in free trade is the best single assurance against the threat of China to America, who we are way too reliant on. Giving the developing nations of this Hemisphere competition is the best way to assure the Chinese listen to us.

Lulz! I thought "free trade" was another word big corporations use as an excuse to violate US labor laws. Free trade, lulz!11oneoneone!

This country has become far too complacent when it comes to competition. Billions of people in the rest of the world have to deal with market forces ever day. Let’s give them and hand up and trade with them.

See my first statement about "America first".

Yes... we Americans are entitled to have all the cheap goods we want imported from India and China... where they were made by 8 and 9 year old children who were being used as "slave laborers."

So buck up and enjoy your antifreeze flavored toothpaste!

Dr Know at 50 had it right. Stop buying the crap! This year all i am buying the family is four days at a very nice hotel in Glenwood Springs.
However, I challenge any of you to find a hardened steel tool NOT made in china. I've tried. Hammers, chisels, crow bars...impossible.
How sadly ironic that capital has found its perfect labor force in a communist country.
In my decidedly white collar line of work (mainframe computing analysis.arhictecture) i've seen many jobs moved to South America. As well as to India. The new NAFTA deal will only speed that process up.
All of that said, i will still support Hillary (albeit with held nose) as hard as possible if she is the Dem candidate. the GOP needs to be exposed and crushed. There are just far too many issues (politicization of DOJ, gov't funding of religious orgs, crappy fundy wish dreams passed off as science, Bush's tax cuts and on and on and on) which would only be exacerbated and furthered by another round of GOP torture politics.

We'll deal with Hillary - should she be nominated and win the general - when the time comes.
In the meantime I give money to Edwards and Kucinich.
Peace to you guys.

NAFTA is the quickest way to eviscerating the middle class through globalization. No candidate will be able to stop this monster of a machine, no matter how acute their stance happens to be on the issue, especially someone with the last name Clinton. Bilderberg Group. Bohemian Grove. NAFTA poster child.

Rather than being distracted by media created controversies like hair cuts and laughs, I would very much like to see a progressive candidate look at making a strong stance at reforming our trade policies.

Dennis Kucinich has taken the strongest stance on reforming our trade policies. He has repeatedly said that he would withdraw from NAFTA and withdraw from the WTO and return to bilateral trade agreements.

Kucinich makes this case so often, it makes your question seem kind of strange, unless your one of those people who pretends that the only Democratic candidates are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and maybe John Edwards.

Evil @ 92:

The "death blow" to Michigan??? Please. Michigan was killing itself. Detroit was too stupid to adapt and focus on precision quality cars (not to mention fuel efficiency) so you lost jobs to Japan even before NAFTA. And then there is the fact that cars are still being made in the US, just not in Detroit. What does that say to you?

Then there is the fact that the UAW tries to strangle a company any time it makes money, fearing they "won't get their fair share." Except that stockholders have this stubborn desire to be reimbursed for their investments.

Way to make the state attractive for investment. Come to Michigan: You'll build your plant, and our unions will put you out of business.

Now that you're economy has suffered severely, maybe the state will be more diversified, more competitive and in the long run richer. At some point, all those giant empty foreclosed houses look really nice to some enterprising people. Perhaps you should start attracting them and stop worrying about jobs that left already.

It is easy to be a social darwinist when it is not your job on the line.

However, I loved the touch of blaming the unemployment problems on the workers themselves. Ironically, European car makers are unionized to levels (in the old country) that would make the UAW look amateurish at best, and they manage to make better products that are *gasp* not only more competitive in the global market, but with better quality to boot. And their workers get paid decent living wages, same goes for auto workers in Japan and Korea.

The auto plants that the Japanese opened in the USA, they are not union but the benefits are equal and in most cases better than American unionized plants, and they manage to not only be competitive, but basically out produce and out sell their American counterparts. So, it seems that happy workers, with a decent living wage, and a nice set of benefits, tend to not be an issue regarding the buoyancy of a specific company in the automotive market place.

Ironically a "funny" thing happens when you stop looking at the worker's salary and benefits and look at the executive's. The average US auto executive makes 2 orders of magnitude more money per year than the average worker, the average foreign auto executive? Just one order of magnitude more than its average worker. So, clearly the problem could not be the US executives who can't manage their way out of a wet paper bag and require exorbitant salaries in exchange of their incompetence... no, siree bob! The problem must be all those workers demanding silly things like a decent living wage, and working conditions!

So please, take the canard that the problem is with unions, and stick it firmly where the sun doesn't shine. The American labor force has been raped, spitted upon, decimated, and yet it manages to be one of the most productive labor forces in the industrialized world. Yet, that does not stop some of you bastards to keep using it as a punching bag... some of you won't be happy until we are back to the glory days of the robber barons, eh?

SKYLAB @ 108:

Dr Know at 50 had it right. Stop buying the crap!

Thanks, SKYLAB, and I hear you. I've been in the electronics industry (Phillips, etc), a mechanic, plumber, electrician, built computers, IBM, and now write software and repair these decrepit homes they throw up around here. They then fold the LLC as the homes start to show signs of premature failure. I've changed jobs so many time I have trouble remembering my name in the morning. I will not sell, and I will not work for the money changers. My future is bleak. I can't imagine what my friend's children are going to do. (Most are in their early 20's.) Many have simply given up before even starting.

I got into woodworking because everything else was being outsourced and I needed a non-technical interest. Within a year, ALL the major manufacturers were moving their plants to China (Delta, Jet, Powermatic) and now you can hardly even buy a tool not produced in China. They are typically poor quality - even with the alledged "lifetime warrantee" - and I truly HATE crap tools. And clothes, and washing machines. etc. Nails whose heads pop off, screws of soft steel which snap when tightened, hardened tools that shatter when struck, 300 lb. cast iron assemblies that break and look like they came from someones back yard foundry, not to mention the poison food and toys.

Caveat emptor to the max! Wise up, folks.

Dr. Know @ 107:

My last point, and one which many people seem to miss, is that American workers cannot live for what it costs (for the moment) a worker to live in Mexico or China. Of course they can work cheaper - it costs them far less to exist. Can YOU live on 50 cents or less an hour? Are you willing to work in dirty, polluted sweat shops run by people whose idea of health care is to dump your dead, expended body in a mass grave? Can you live in a cardboard and pallet-wood home on the edge of a polluted river filled with technological waste from the West?

I didn't think so.

Hey, I'm all for raising the standard of living for everyone on the planet, but this has to be engineered carefully. Otherwise we are footing the bill with US workers and their families.
When my mortgage is (returns to) $120 month and water, power, gas, food, clothing, and education falls to 50-60s levels, I'll be more than happy to concede a pay cut. Otherwise it is IMPOSSIBLE. It doesn't really matter how many disposable $40 DVD players I can buy at WallyWorld - I have no use for them if I have no housing, food, and water. Living in a homeless shelter or prison is not the American dream.

I couldn't agree more.

This shit won't stop until we hold corporations responsible, if they want to have a piece of the pie... they should pay for having to have a pie to begin with.

I propose a simple solution to deal with all this globalization crap, esp the outsourcing problem: use leasing terms on corporations, just like real state rentals. When a corporation decides that it is cheaper to move operations overseas due to cheaper labor, no problem. However, they state needs to take a simple accounting: how much of the actual footprint the corporation has paid back in taxes and labor wages. This is, when a corporation establishes in the US, they receive a shitload of subsidies in the form of infrastructure, educated labor force, national defense, etc, etc, etc. So we simply need to calculate the footprint for that corporation, and if they want to move away, no problem. Before they can move, they simply can foot the bill for the difference of all the subsidies vs. what they have put into the nation. Just like, when you break a lease and have to pay a penalty.

Then the corporations can have all the global market place and outsourcing they desire, I just don't want to pay the bill for them to get cheaper goods. Nothing personal, I assume that the fierce capitalist proposers of the "I got mine, so fuck off away from my money" school of thought who seem to love outsourcing will have no problem with paying back what they owe.

I. like. Dennis. The multinational crony capitalists would devise a plan to dispose of Dennis' influence, should he be elected President. We need many more politicians who champion the common good and the public interest...we could start with DINO's who purportedly represent us and replace them with Dems who possess vertebrae.

Interesting reactions to the debate on Atlantic Associate Editor Ambinder's blog:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/11/diamond_v_pearl_stu...

14justice @ 120:

I. like. Dennis. The multinational crony capitalists would devise a plan to dispose of Dennis' influence, should he be elected President. We need many more politicians who champion the common good and the public interest...we could start with DINO's who purportedly represent us and replace them with Dems who possess vertebrae.

I like DK, but they are mad at work marginalizing him. And good luck with the spine thing... The major parties are all bought and paid for - the corporate definition of a good politician.

The country is too big for proper oversight, and it takes far too much money to become elected to any office. Why on earth would someone spend 20 million dollars to be (s)elected to a position that pays $168,000 a year?

If there ever was one, this is the year for strong Independents with grass-root support.
Render their money mills, media machines and spin-meisters ineffectual. Elect NO major party candidates who kowtow to party/corporate positions. Even some of the saner corporatists are knee-jerking at this point.

And while I'm spinning fairy tales, I predict that I'm going to inherit a million dollars.

Yea, right...

And while we're on the topic of Delta, Frank, the manager of the Tupelo plant, lost the very last Delta Unisaw to roll off the assembly line during hurricane Katrina. He sat in a dark, watery storage facility trying to resurrect this piece - salt water and cast iron don't go together for long. Talk about adding insult to injury...

Well, there are 2 ways of equalizing the living standards across countries, and they both follow the law of relativity:

1) You can work hard and raise the standard of living of the 3rd world, by injecting massive amounts of capital, creating a more fair distribution of wealth world-wide, lots of patience and understanding, while fostering a sense of human commonality to reach a common goal that all countries may share regardless of background.

or

2) You can lower the standard of living in the industrialized countries so that most of their populations match the level of where the rest of the 3rd world lives with, and not only save yourself all the grief and monetary loss at the top that option #1 implied, but at the same time earn a nice ridiculous profit (albeit shortsighted) in the process...

Both choices have the same effect: the equalization of standards of living across nations.

Well, guess what option the people at the top choose any time give the choice? The fault is ours for thinking that people who only think about one thing: their bottom line, had anything good in store for us. How naive can you get?

Go to a gated community in the US of A. There is were all our "captains" of industry live. Many times right next to some slum or shithole where the rest of the common folk live. Now if these assholes could care less about the shitty conditions of their neighbors, what made anyone think that all this global economy and offsourcing mumbo jumbo had anything to do with bettering the overall status quo of humanity? Esp. since it was spewed by people who could care less about the people living right next door to them...

What do you expect from a country that sends a billion a month to Pakistan to prop up the corrupt government against the populists?

Hillary Clinton is a total fraud from start to finish!

You are fooling yourselves to vote for Hillary "Fraud" Clinton or think she is the answer to America's problems. Electing Hillary "Fraud" Clinton will be just more of the same that has ocurred in the last 7 years with the Bush criminals. Yeah, Bill "Unzipper" Clinton may be more shrewd and clever and not so blunt about policy issues, but analyze the same issues and what not and you will see that "Unzipper Bill Clinton policies don't differ in scope very much with the GOP....

Who bombed Belgrade in the 1990s without either Congressional or UN approval? Bill "Unzipper" Clinton.

Who gave Blackwater a contract in 1999? Bill "Unzipper" Clinton.

Who gave Dick Cheney and Halliburton contracts in the 1990s? Bill "Unzipper" Clinton.

Who brought faith based organizations into the public policy domain in the 1990s, attached to the welfare reform bill? Bill "Unzipper" Clinton.

Who signed the Defense of Marriage Act in the 1990s?Bill "Unzipper" Clinton.

Who signed NAFTA? Bill "Unzipper" Clinton.

Who defened NAFTA? Al "Let's Bomb Iraq in 1991" Gore

Who bombed Iraq after illegally putting in spies to work with the UN in 1998? Bill "Unzipper" Clinton.

Who allowed the sanctions in Iraq to linger on in the 1990s in which Iraqi women and children died by the thousands because Bill "Unzipper" Clinton and his Secretary of State Madeline Albright thought it morally justified to take out their war crime actions on the backs of the children to get back at Saddam Hussein? Bill "Unzipper" Clinton

Its against the Geneva Conventions to take out punishment against civilians in trying to make a point against that nation's government. Targeting civilians is a war crime. Bill "Unzipper" Clinton is like Bush and Cheney guilty of war crimes against the Iraqi population!

Hillary "Fraud" Clinton has been around the powerful all her life and only concerns herself with power. Hillary "Fraud" Clinton lusts for power and she lies when claiming that the poor and disenfranchised are what moves her (Hillary "Fraud" Clinton), political life....

Bill "UnZipper" Clinton executed a mentally retarded black man in Arkansas to prove to his critics he was "tough on crime." Bill "UnZipper" Clinton signed welfare reform which was supported by Hillary "Fraud" Clinton that did more harm to impoverished single mothers than any other demographic....

Hillary "Fraud" Clinton cares not one iota about the downtrodden in the United States....Plus the fact that the Bill "UnZipper" and Hillary "Fraud" both represent the "New Democrats" which declared war on the left when the pro-corporate, anti-union worker organization was set up by Bill Clinton and his pal Al "Let's Bomb Iraq in 1991" Gore.....

Hillary "Fraud" Clinton represents the pro-corporate, anti-left wing of the "New Democrats" who would sell you down the river just as fast as the neocons if means power and more power.

Capeche?

Just why Hillary is not getting hammered harder for her yes vote on the Kyl Lieberman amendment. She said National Security is her first priority yet she votes on an amendment that defines Iran's army as a terrorist organization. Clearly Hillary is not thinking about US National Security by attempting to push Iran into a corner.

Former Senator Edwards is actually standing up to Cheney Bush and has been willing to step up to the plate and call out the neocons. He is willing to draw a line in the dirt and not keep moving it like Clinton has.

Hey who picks the candidates spots/ Why does Hillary keep getting the middle spot on the stage. I am tired of the media trying to select our President.

Any one else notice there has not been one question about the Israeli Palestinian conflict at any of the 8 Democratic debates. Governor Richardson actually brought the I/P issue up but all of the other candidates would not touch it. Blitzer did not even come close to asking the other candidates about Richardson brought up.

Why is FREE TRADE costing us money?????

Progressive Democratic candidate for congress in Illinois' 14th district, John Laesch supports FAIR trade that would honor worker's rights, women's rights, and environmental protections.

www.john08.com

I can sure understand why they pulled the video. It would make Senator Clinton look just like the snake she is, but we don't need the video to be reminded of what she said and the strikes against her and her campaign are mounting, in spite of the right wing media coverage she gets.

As a matter of fact, she would do well if she told them to stop promoting her campaign like she told the good Governor of NY, to stop promoting the notion of giving illegals drivers license so she could get the guts to vote no, instead of what she wanted to say.

The Sea Hawk @ 110:

NAFTA is the quickest way to eviscerating the middle class through globalization. No candidate will be able to stop this monster of a machine, no matter how acute their stance happens to be on the issue, especially someone with the last name Clinton. Bilderberg Group. Bohemian Grove. NAFTA poster child.

------------------

Again, you miss the forest for the trees. Deflation is what is occuring.

You are right. No one can stop this monster, but you use the wrong name. The correct name is deflation.

All cycles have an up phase and a down phase. No one can prevent the down phase of a cycle.
Inflation is followed by deflation, as night follows day. You cannot prevent night from following day.

Every boom is followed by a bust. A boom sets up the conditions neccesary for a bust to occur. thsu the bust becomes inevitable. That is why every speculative bubble bursts. No exceptions. There is currently a debt bubble. It will burst. Know that a as a fact.

If you would not have NAFTA to blame, it would be something else. The downphase of the inflation/deflation cycle does not care whether NAFTA does or does not exist. It only works its way to the bottom of the cycle.
Then the next long term up phase will begin again.

Dr. Know @ 100:

Evil @ 86:

Get over the NAFTA hate people.

Specious, talking point arguments, at best.......

Brainpower jobs? Ha. What would that be? Computers? Electronics? Programming?
Try India, China, Taiwan.

At least the Japanese set up their own damned factories and raised the standard of living for it's own citizens in the process. China is not. The only thing we now produce is war machinery (and much of the componentry is now outsourced as well), overpaid healthcare industries, shifty, avaricious bankers, junk homebuilders, and friggin' lawyers.

"NAFTA has been a trememdous success for America."
This is so insanely idiotic it doesn't deserve a response. More affordable JUNK is still CRAP. Especially when no one has a job, or the money to buy it or haul it to the landfill after its pathetic, pre-planned lifespan. Then there is the energy consumption aspect. Instead of being frugal with the world's limited supplies of energy by producing goods which last longer than 6-12 months, we waste it by producing crap and shipping if from China, et al., throwing it away, and repeating this proceedure over and over again. Most of this crap isn't even worth repairing, and good luck with getting parts... It is a circle jerk of excessive consumption fueled by higher profit margins and ignorant, shortsighted consumers.

"Then there is the pesky fact that NAFTA is helping to stop that illegal immigration problem all you union people complain about because it forms jobs in Mexico. If you don't bring the cheap goods to you, the cheap labor will come to you."

Horseshit. Mexicans started coming here en masse because NAFTA undermined their ability to make a living from the agricultural products they previously produced. The other reason is that they were offered jobs by traitorous profiteers who wanted cheap labor to build their housing projects and work in their plants. I was there and I saw it happen. China is the new Mexico, they work cheaper, and the corrupt government cares not one whit about pollution, safety or health care - for workers OR consumers.

Dude, there is really no point arguing with you.

1. Turn off Lou Dobbs. He's a tool.

2. You have no clue if you think Taiwan, India and China can provide all the intelligent labor this country needs. Companies are DYING for educated labor. They go to India, Taiwan, China, etc. to scrounge up whatever brains haven't fled the country en masse. Most outsourcing of software is coming back to the US because quality and availability has lingered.

There are plenty of good paying jobs. Just millions of underqualified candidates who haven't bothered to learn anything since high school.

2. "Cheaper products? ...In 1995 a pair of Wrangler, Made in American jeans cost $14 a pair. When retailers such as Target and Wal-Mart forced price points and the factories moved to China, the jeans still cost $14.00 a pair. Where are the cheaper goods?"

Forget about that inflation thing? How about the $9.99 khakis I pick up at Costco which would have cost be double 10 years ago. The price of pretty much everything has come down in real terms over the last 20 years through trade.

And as for this "cheap crap" that is not helping us out, what exactly does it constitute?

3. "Mexicans started coming here en masse because NAFTA undermined their ability to make a living from the agricultural products they previously produced."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Right. The plethora of high paying factory jobs that you say we lost wasn't enough to attract them.

Evil @ 144:

Dr. Know @ 100:

Evil @ 86:

Get over the NAFTA hate people.

Dude, there is really no point arguing with you.

3. "Mexicans started coming here en masse because NAFTA undermined their ability to make a living from the agricultural products they previously produced."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Right. The plethora of high paying factory jobs that you say we lost wasn't enough to attract them.

Wish I could find that news story of the Mexican hooker that worked in one of those high paying factory jobs. She was making so much money working in the factory, that she went back to prostitution, so she could make a living.