The whole point of an import tariff is to protect the excesses of unions.
Posted on 03/29/2016 4:16:27 PM PDT by Olog-hai
When Donald Trump threatened to “break” the North American Free Trade Agreement, auto industry workers offered up some of the loudest cheers.
Mr. Trump easily won the Republican primary in Michigan this month. The state, home base for the American auto industry, also delivered an upset victory to Bernie Sanders, the Democratic anti-NAFTA standard-bearer.
But the autoworkers’ animosity is aiming at the wrong target. There are still more than 800,000 jobs in the American auto sector. And there is a good case to be made that without NAFTA, there might not be much left of Detroit at all.
“Without the ability to move lower wage jobs to Mexico, we would have lost the whole industry,” said Gordon Hanson of the University of California, San Diego, who has been studying the impact of NAFTA on industries and workers since its inception more than two decades ago. …
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The whole point of an import tariff is to protect the excesses of unions.
Amen.
They lie
There are still more than 800,000 jobs in the American auto sector.Yeah?
Where?
Tell that to Ford workers whose jobs are moving to Mexico.
NAFTA resulted in the government picking winners and losers. Even worse, it also allowed foreign governments to do so.
The title itself was outrageous enough.
He is a damned LIAR. PERIOD!
But the dirty little secret is there are MORE unionized GOVERNMENT employees now than exist in ALL of private sector America.
And you and me pay not only these unionized government employee salaries, but their benefits, retirements on and on.
Government unionized employees are choking all of us off.
How so?
Sounds like something lying lawyers like Gore or Cruz would say.
Maybe the Latino immigrants will follow the jobs back./s
“Nafta is often blamed for dynamics that are not of its making. The surge of Mexican exports in the 1990s was propelled by a sharp devaluation of the peso, which set off the so-called Tequila Crisis. The wave of immigration from Mexico into the United States, which lasted until 2005, was driven by a decline in government subsidies to farmers and an economic collapse that occurred just as millions of young Mexicans were entering their late teens and were desperate for jobs.”
Lasted until 2005?
Has DT talked about going back to non-union government employees?
How not so? NAFTA allowed non-market economies to trade with market economies, and paved the way for the deluge of regulations that followed. A free market does not permit beggar-thy-neighbor policies, nor does it make boats sink rather than float with a rising tide. Like I said, it is a false dilemma to posit a Scylla/Charybdis choice between free trade and mercantilism.
Marx would have not have endorsed free trade so enthusiastically if he had not seen how ready of a vehicle for an attack on society it was.
Maybe the Latino immigrants will follow the jobs back./s
“Nafta is often blamed for dynamics that are not of its making. The surge of Mexican exports in the 1990s was propelled by a sharp devaluation of the peso, which set off the so-called Tequila Crisis. The wave of immigration from Mexico into the United States, which lasted until 2005, was driven by a decline in government subsidies to farmers and an economic collapse that occurred just as millions of young Mexicans were entering their late teens and were desperate for jobs.”
Lasted until 2005?
NAFTA resulted in the government picking winners and losers. Even worse, it also allowed foreign governments to do so.
I think you are right. I also think there are useful idiots in government who believe they are doing the right thing for the right reasons, but I also believe there are many powerful people in our government who have discovered (and benefit from) how much money they can make picking winners.
We are not a free market and what we have had for some time is not really capitalism. It’s crony capitalism with strong hints of socialism.
Yeah....NOT moving jobs to Mexico would have cost American jobs.....OK. Obvious they couldn’t give a crap about the “low paying” (aka hourly workers that actually build the product thus creating wealth) jobs and the people who did them that are now mostly on welfare.
That probably comes under the heading of, “We’re losing in every direction”, “Government fraud and waste are choking us off”. He targeted the entire system, which is obviously in need of a thorough cleaning and downsizing.
So it wasn't NAFTA itself, but the anti-NAFTA backlash.
No, not the “anti-NAFTA backlash” that never happened.
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.