Posted on 05/14/2009 8:21:08 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
Most people agree that, when it comes to economic recovery, more economic activity is better than less. When companies buy and sell more goods and services, we get more jobs and growth.
Yet, for some reason, this obvious fact eludes those who want to constrain America's access to overseas markets. At a time when government is spending hundreds of billions of dollars it doesn't have on doubtful "stimulus" initiatives, you've got to wonder why some politicians continue to argue against free trade agreements. After all, these pacts have a proven track record. Trade has created millions of jobs and is responsible for almost a third of the nation's gross domestic product (GDP).
[]
[Panama Free Trade Agreement]
Most Panamanian goods already enter the U.S. duty-free under long-standing trade preference programs, so no U.S. consumer or business would suffer as a result of this agreement. Almost 90 percent of U.S. manufacturing exports to Panama would immediately become duty-free, and any remaining tariffs would phase out over 10 years. Moreover, more than 60 percent of American agricultural exports to Panama would get duty-free treatment upon the agreement's implementation, and any remaining tariffs in that sector would phase out over the next 15 years.
[]
More than 57 million Americans are employed by firms that engage in international trade. Why are the unions not out there fighting for free trade agreements to expand their wages and job security?
What's more, free trade agreements account for more than a third of U.S. trade worldwide. The Obama administration should make FTAs a centerpiece of its stimulus effort. Expanding trade - a sector of the economy that accounts for 30 percent of GDP - should be high on the list of things that need to be done.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I remember following the BSE case very closely, since hardly anyone realizes how much beef the United States exports (and was exporting to Japan, for example, until they freaked out). There are two main beef lobbying groups, of which the National Cattlemen's Beef Association is the pro-free trade group (it is in favor of the Panama FTA). I don't recall the name of the other, but you appear to be a proponent of their's.
NCBA is an organization that is pretty heavily infested with packing houses and not actual beef producers (ie, people who put calves on the ground).
The packing houses have operated as a closed oligopoly for more than 20 years now, and if the Congress had any balls, they’d have called for an investigation of them years ago. They’re known hotspots for hiring illegal immigrant labor, failure of health standards in some cases as a result, anti-competitive practices, etc.
The “other organization” was formed in response to the NCBA’s antics - called “R-CALF,” it is heavily weighted towards representing the cow-calf operator. These are the people who are actually producing beef, not merely buying the cheapest steers they can find from whereever they can buy them the cheapest, slapping a “US-produced” label on beef that was merely finished for the last 30 days in the feedlot on the package and lying to the US consumer.
Ranchers and cattle producers have been worried about the possibility of a big wreck in imported cattle for years, either BSE or some other disease that the public would barely notice, but which could wipe out producers. For example, it was about five years ago we found out that the Argentinians had been covering up a small hoof-and-mouth outbreak in their country. There are imports of breeding cattle from various nations in South America, and all you need is one - HMD spreads like wildfire, and about the only way to contain it is to quarantine around the outbreak, shoot every animal you can find, throw them in a hole with quicklime on top, cover them up and start disinfecting facilities, trucks, pickups, you name it.
It gives US producers cold sweats at night to see the lackluster and limp-wristed response of the USDA, FDA and APHIS to news of these sorts of things - they ALWAYS only react - they’re never, ever pro-active. They will do nothing that inhibits “free trade” - even if we know there is a strong chance that the “free trade” agenda will come back and bite us in the buttocks - because bureaucrats never lose their job for incompetence. Losses and accountability are for only those of us in the private sector.
Here’s an example of how the “free trade” agenda works:
S. Korea banned importation of US-produced beef since December, 2003, after the “cow that stole Christmas” was found. This was a dairy cow that had been born and raised in Canada.
In April, 2008, the US negotiated a full resumption of beef exports to S. Korea. Ah, but what was mixed into this agreement?
Korea has to accept Mexican cattle via US packing plants (assuring that the packers still can unload their Mexican cattle) and the Koreans have to accept Canadian-origin beef that has been fed in the US for 100 days.
The Koreans cannot close their market due to individual US packing plant health, safety or other violations. The Koreas cannot close off their market to the products of a single packing plant for just one health, safety or other violation.
Long story short: We gotta make sure that those packing houses can keep peddling that foreign beef they bring into the US.
Does anyone know something about the history of our free trade of the past twenty years? Who was behind this? Was it the manufacturers or was it Wall Street? Was this a CFR scheme?
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.