Posted on 12/09/2016 12:59:45 AM PST by expat_panama
President-elect Donald Trump's stance on trade deals assumes unbalanced international trade agreements are domestic job killers. In the election, that won him favor in broad swathes of the country where globalization seems irrelevant, and foreigners and Washington alike are viewed with suspicion.
So, what will happen to established trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), when Trump takes office Jan. 20?
When NAFTA was finalized more than two decades ago, Ross Perot infamously predicted it would create "a giant sucking sound" of jobs leaving for Mexico. Since then, NAFTA has been blamed for our county's trade deficit with our North American trading partners. Trump said so himself during the general election, and promised to rip up or...
Trump's passion for job creation is admirable and understandably popular. And he is correct on one point: NAFTA can be made better. But the fact is, the U.S. is always working to improve and strengthen existing trade agreements. Let's focus on the benefits of our existing agreements and addressing gaps in those agreements, rather than on disrupting the rules of engagement currently in place...
...For example, NAFTA's intellectual property (IP) provisions don't account for the rise of the internet and the digital economy. Adding language to NAFTA that recognizes the IP realities of the 21st century would modernize the agreement. Provisions should address cross-border data flows, prohibit forced data localization and reflect balanced copyright policy.
Updating NAFTA to align policies that support innovation and further harmonize standards would reduce conflicting and costly energy-efficiency requirements, as well as other unnecessary technical trade barriers.
Now is a good time to pivot from political rhetoric to reality. Supporting a valuable trade agreement with our neighbors, while modernizing it to one that strengthens our nation's economy and security, is a win-win for all.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Well in that case don’t reply
Huh. Really? No kidding --when the hell did this happen? Dang, I wish to hell I wasn't always the last to hear about this sort of thing.
Now that you know...
Ooops, my bad. I was trying to be facetious but I had my comms settings wrong.
There. Now I can try this again:
Huh. Really? No kidding --when the hell did this happen? Dang, I wish to hell I wasn't always the last to hear about this sort of thing.
howzaatt?
When I said "now that you know" I was being - get this - sarcastic! (Check your incoming comms settings.)
But there still remains a serious point about global free trading regimes.
We are better off negotiating our trading relationships on an individual country basis. And when we have a country running up $500 billion trade surpluses with us, we've gotten it wrong with that country and need to renegotiate it.
Remove a few key states and Shrillary won the election. Stoopid.
The theory NAFTA and TPP would make imports cheaper for the American consumer was quiet true, however with all the jobs lost due to this who has the money to buy the cheap crap? Chicken and egg...
With trade America first the world second, we win, they lose.
10 paragraphs in and the moron author still hasn’t said why NAFTA is a job creator.
We look at China today and we see the upside numbers of extraordinary growthAt our expense. China would not be what they are without us. Sadly some people are too stupid to see it.
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.