Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NAFTA has yet to show its strongest benefits
El Paso Times Monday archives ^ | Feb 24, 2003 | El Paso Times editorial

Posted on 02/25/2003 7:49:56 AM PST by FITZ

American manufacturers took a huge battering in 2002 as the nation's trade deficit hit a record $435.2 billion.

A deficit occurs when America imports more than it exports.

It's disappointing that the U.S. continues to have wide deficits with its two trading partners in the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mexico and Canada. While NAFTA has proved of tremendous benefit to those two countries, the United States, and particularly the southern border area, still have not seen the rich economic harvest promised by NAFTA proponents.

But the bulk of the deficit is with China and Japan. China accounted for $103.1 billion of the 2002 deficit, and Japan caused $70.1 billion in deficit.

President Bush says that his plans for new free-trade agreements will narrow the deficit by lowering barriers to U.S. exports. He may be right, but NAFTA certainly shouldn't be used as a model.

One troubling facet of the 2002 deficit is that farm trade posted a loss.

Generally, farm exports can be counted on for big surpluses, and this is only the second time farm trade has suffered a deficit.

It's true that many forces were at work on the trade balance this year, including uncertainty about war, a weak world economy, emphasis on a strong dollar, stock-market malaise and unemployment.

But massive and increasing trade deficits were with us well before these newer concerns. Such a massive deficit won't be fixed in a year or two. But the Bush administration's economic gurus need to be finding ways to even things out.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: failure; freetrade; nafta; pooreconomy
While NAFTA has proved of tremendous benefit to those two countries

Maybe to Canada but Mexico is in deep economic trouble, and they seem to forget the campesinos have been protesting NAFTA.

1 posted on 02/25/2003 7:49:56 AM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FITZ
I certainly wouldn't characterize Canada's economy as being on the upswing, either.
2 posted on 02/25/2003 7:51:28 AM PST by ECM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ECM
Then who IS benefitting from NAFTA?
3 posted on 02/25/2003 7:55:02 AM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Then who IS benefitting from NAFTA?
No one needs to benefit from NAFTA, ever. Like anything else government does, it's the thought that counts.

4 posted on 02/25/2003 8:06:14 AM PST by sixmil (down with open-borders-tariff-free traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: *"Free" Trade
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
5 posted on 02/25/2003 8:32:37 AM PST by Free the USA (Stooge for the Rich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ECM
Actually, they're economy (the Canadians) is enjoying one of the largest upswings in the world right now:

"Canada has been outperforming other Group of Seven economies, producing more robust growth, in part because of low interest rates and solid job expansion"

In the last year alone I believe they've created over 500,000 new jobs.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2003/02/24/31767-cp.html

Their economy is running rings around ours:

http://ctv2.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/business/RTGAM/20030110/wjobs/business/businessBN/ctv-business
6 posted on 02/25/2003 8:38:58 AM PST by GoAhead-Make My Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sixmil
Who is benefiting from NAFTA
China - and anyone hauling parts to and products from
7 posted on 02/25/2003 8:47:50 AM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GoAhead-Make My Day
How's their currency doing?
8 posted on 02/25/2003 8:54:45 AM PST by ECM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
NAFTA has yet to show its strongest benefits

That's the same thing they say about Communism, another failed government controled plan...

NAFTA was never about selling the impoverished Mexicans products they couldn't afford. NAFTA was about American companies sending (exporting) raw materials duty-free to Mexico to be manufactured with cheap labor then have the finished product "imported" duty-free back here for consumption.

NAFTA labor wasn't cheap enough for the greedy bastards, so now they've closed down and moved on from Mexico to China...Where I think they'll meet their match.

9 posted on 02/25/2003 8:57:13 AM PST by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
NAFTA labor wasn't cheap enough for the greedy bastards, so now they've closed down and moved on from Mexico to China...Where I think they'll meet their match.

As usual, your posts make no sense. When did cheap labor become bad? Doesn't labor have a market value just as other goods and services? You slam government and then you slam the private sector. Does anything please you?

10 posted on 02/25/2003 10:27:00 AM PST by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
When did cheap labor become bad?

When greedy businesses profited from the American way and when that wasn't good enough they abandoned the people of the country that got them where they are...People who in some cases even subsidized them through reduced property taxes, energy rates, local taxes etc. to attract their business.

Doesn't labor have a market value just as other goods and services?

Sure, I wonder if you feel the same about union's and their collective bargaining. When you can find American workers who can (even if they wanted to) live on what a Chinese or even a Mexican worker earns let me know.

Someday your words/attitude/greed will come back to haunt you.

11 posted on 02/25/2003 5:24:31 PM PST by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
 U.S. Trade Balance with Mexico 
(billion dollars)
Year
1991
1992
1993
1994*
1995*
1996*
1997*
1998*
1999*
2000*
2001*
2002*
U.S. imports from Mexico
31.1
35.2
39.9
49.5
62.1
74.3
85.9
94.6
109.7
135.9
131.3
134.7
U.S. exports to Mexico
33.3
40.6
41.6
50.8
46.3
56.8
71.4
78.8
86.9
111.3
101.3
97.5
U.S. Trade Deficit (surplus)
(2.2)
(5.4)
(1.7)
(1.3)
15.8
17.5
14.5
15.8
22.8
24.6
30.0
37.2

* NAFTA went into effect January 1, 1994

Despite the rapid emergence of China as a lopsided trading "partner",
the Trade Deficit with Mexico continues to grow since the signing of NAFTA.

12 posted on 02/25/2003 5:50:00 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
Someday your lack of knowledge will come back to haunt you. Oh, hello, that is today.
13 posted on 02/25/2003 8:45:30 PM PST by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
We have no trade imbalance in the true sense of the word. When we paid dollars we got an equal amount in goods and services making that an even trade, not an imbalance. The Mexicans may, as a result, have more dollars in reserve than we have pesoes but so what? What are they going to do with those dollars? They can't make a run on Ft. Knox because we are no longer on the gold standard. We are better off with the goods and services than we are with the pesoes, which sometimes lose value rapidly and unpredictably. Go Pat go, where?
14 posted on 02/25/2003 8:52:20 PM PST by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
BUMP
15 posted on 02/25/2003 8:57:30 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Then who IS benefitting from NAFTA?

The drug cartels. As the volume of goods crossing our borders increase and the regulation of their flow decreases due to the volume, it makes it easier for the drug smugglers.

16 posted on 02/25/2003 8:58:37 PM PST by varon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
Someday your lack of knowledge will come back to haunt you. Oh, hello, that is today.

And that's the best you can do!

We have no trade imbalance in the true sense of the word. When we paid dollars we got an equal amount in goods and services making that an even trade, not an imbalance.........

Blah, blah, blah...empty words with no meaning salted with greed...Were you saying something about a post not making any sense?

Sing your little song to the White House who's starting to squirm a little over your idiotic self-serving theory of no imbalance.

17 posted on 02/25/2003 9:52:13 PM PST by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson