Posted on 05/24/2005 7:08:18 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
It really matters where the jobs that Americans lose go. That's what CAFTA is about. It's not about destroying textile jobs in the Carolinas. They're history, anyway--if not this year, then in five years. CAFTA is about keeping work in our hemisphere that would otherwise go to China.
The Central American Free Trade Agreement would cut tariffs on commerce among the United States, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala. The Dominican Republic, which is in the Caribbean, also wants to join.
Though President Bush is battling hard for the accord, some observers declare it all but dead. The generally pro-trade New Democrat Coalition has just jumped ship. But new Democrats should think again and back CAFTA. So should old Democrats.
Organized labor doesn't want to hear this defeatist talk about managing losses. That's understandable. But while labor has been dealt a bad hand, it still must play the cards. That means choosing the least bad of bad options.
Some labor critics point to NAFTA as a reason to shoot down CAFTA. The 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement covered the United States, Canada and Mexico. Foes of these accords note, for example, that there were 127,000 textile and apparel jobs in South Carolina before NAFTA. Now there are 48,000.
The truth is, the United States was bleeding these kinds of factory jobs decades before NAFTA. And it's unclear how large a part NAFTA has played in the years since.
Many of these jobs were not sucked down to Mexico but over to China and other Asian countries. And of the lost jobs that can be traced to Mexico, how many would have simply gone to China instead, had it not been for NAFTA? Even Mexico has seen factories move to China.
Labor-intensive industries in America continue to fight a hopeless war against competitors paying pennies-an-hour wages. The futility of it all can be seen in the following numbers, provided by A.T. Kearney, a consulting firm:
It costs $135 to make 12 pairs of cotton trousers in the United States. It costs $57 to make the trousers in China and ship them here. It costs $69 to do so in other parts of the world.
In this business, the United States is clearly out of the running. But many low-wage countries are still contenders with China--especially if they can ship their products here tariff-free.
Americans would be better off if their imports came from Managua, rather than Guangdong. After all, our Latin neighbors are more likely to buy the things we have to sell. That's why farmers producing beef, pork and corn are all for these treaties. So are U.S. companies that make machinery, especially for construction.
Then there are foreign-policy considerations. CAFTA partners would include very poor countries with fragile democracies. More trade with the United States could stabilize them--and reduce the pressures on their people to come here illegally. And if the workers make more money, they'll be able to buy more American goods.
Some Democrats argue that these poor countries compete by exploiting their workers. Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., for example, opposes the accord because, he says, "the basic rights of working people in Central America are systematically repressed."
He has it backward. Economic desperation creates the conditions for oppression. Workers are strongest where jobs are plentiful. CAFTA could empower workers and lift them from grinding poverty.
Rather than protect jobs that will eventually leave America, labor and its Democratic allies should protect the people who lose them. Trade Adjustment Assistance is a federal program that offers financial help and training for Americans who lose jobs because of imports.
Democrats complain that the program is underfunded, and they are right. So why not make more money for Trade Adjustment Assistance a bargaining chip to win support for CAFTA?
There's no exit door out of this global economy. Parts of the American economy will do well in it; other parts will not. Free trade in the Americas is about joining with our neighbors in a common defense against China's growing power. Those are the true stakes, and fighting futile battles will only distract us from what matters.
Houston is full of illegals from Central America.
The key issue is to take away American jobs - where they go is a mere detail.
Anyway, a true free traitor shouldn't care which hemisphere trade is in; that's a distortion of the holy writ of trade without barriers of any sort. What knots they tie themselves into!
It would be ever so much easier if they would just admit their real goal - destruction of America.
How much more are you willing to pay out of your pocket to keep the eeeeevilllll free-marketers from destroying our economy?
You'd have a hard time getting them to take their proper places on the line in a factory.
We can play the chart game all day, I've got some reliable ones showing real wages declining. It doesn't do much for all those areas devasted by Free Trade where people are making nothing. That's why those who count in Congress aren't voting for CAFTA.
Where I live, you have 6 hours and 20 minutes. Let the game begin.
I have a feeling I'm on the verge of getting the "look it up yourself, the information is out there" defense. Frankly, I thought I was going to get it much earlier.
Will CAFTA's elimination of tariffs on our exports increase our exports or not?
It's weird. NO ANSWER.
Why are we debating with people who don't even know how to link? With their poor math and reading comprehension skills, it's no wonder they can't compete.
One of the most memorable lines of Perot's was his claim of the sucking sound we'd hear if NAFTA was passed. And how right he was. But the Free Traders aren't satisfied, they want to hear more of it.
If my quick reading of your post is anywhere close to the point of it, it is that jobs lost to pore folks in our hemisphere is somehow a significant improvement to sending them over the Pacific.
I wouldn't try to sell that idea to the American who lost his job.
Well, what's the point of adding billions in trade if the government spends a few million dollars?
Oh, they know how to link all right. They simply won't.
Really? How many jobs did we have before NAFTA? How many now?
But the Free Traders aren't satisfied, they want to hear more of it.
The only sucking sound I hear is the wind blowing thru the big holes in your argument.
There' a Global in your future!
That's true, and if they modernize and grow their GDP, that's all the more reason for their citizens to try to sneak into our country.
The benefits of lower tariffs are far outweighed by the loss of jobs to cheaper labor. The Central American market is small in terms of what we can sell them but they do have millions of workers willing to sweat for $5.00 a day. And what from our market they can buy anyway making those kind of wages?
That wasn't my reading, but who cares? I'm more interested in your subsitution of "[somewhere] over the Pacific" for "sending them to China." Heck, these threads are usually knee-deep in anti-China hysteria. The first time you that you suggest there is no difference between "us" and "them" and you can't even bring yourself to say the word "China?" What's up with that? Are you feeling ok?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.