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

Skip to comments.

Farmers Threaten To Block US-Mexico Border Crossings [NAFTA]
Voice of America News ^ | Dec. 28, 2002 | AP, AFP and Reuters

Posted on 12/28/2002 7:10:41 AM PST by madfly

Angry Mexican farmers are threatening to block U.S.-Mexico border crossings on New Year's Day to protest the lifting of tariffs on agricultural products under free trade rules.

The farmers say they fear they will not be able to compete with U.S. and Canadian producers when tariffs are removed on January 1 as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The farmers and their supporters are calling on the Mexican government to do more to protect the agricultural sector.

President Vicente Fox refuses to re-negotiate the free trade agreement, but he has pledged to help the farmers compete with the United States and Canada.

Some information for this report provided by AP, AFP and Reuters.



TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government; Mexico; US: Arizona; US: California; US: New Mexico; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: borders; fox; freetrade; nafta; tariffs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-214 next last
To: 1rudeboy
NAFTA is part of the WTO and U.N
101 posted on 12/28/2002 12:53:52 PM PST by FreeSpeechZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: madfly
What a joke.
102 posted on 12/28/2002 12:54:32 PM PST by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jennikins
"They want NO BORDERS and that is just what is going to happen.

Yeah, the British wanted a lot of things a majority of the American people didn't want back in 1776, too. ;^)

103 posted on 12/28/2002 12:56:01 PM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:_wp0Kv-RuqMC:www.aft.org/
stand/previous/1993/111493.html+1994+NAFTA+REDUCE+ILLEGAL+IMMIGRATION&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Say No to NAFTA

by AFT President Albert Shanker
November 14, 1993

In a few days, the Congress will vote on NAFTA--the North American Free Trade Agreement. President Clinton and NAFTA supporters believe it will be a win-win situation for Canada, Mexico and the U.S. They believe that increased investment in Mexico will raise living standards there, making it a big market for our goods and services and increasing the number of U. S. jobs. They say U.S. job loss will be small, and workers can be retrained. Also, greater prosperity in Mexico will reduce illegal immigration to the U. S. They cite the success of the European Community as a model.

If I thought it would work out this way, I'd support NAFTA, but I don't................

104 posted on 12/28/2002 12:58:00 PM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
In other words they LIED to us. And they knew they were lying.
105 posted on 12/28/2002 12:59:46 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
After Nafta was signed I heard/read a lot of bitching and moaning from farmers, ranchers, orchard growers and rice farmers that they couldn't compete against the Mexican Farmers.

Now the Mexican Farmers are complaining!

What didya expect?

106 posted on 12/28/2002 1:00:31 PM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
No, if you're anti-protectionist, you're not necessarily pro-illegal immigration. But, nobody said that.

So, what's your point?

107 posted on 12/28/2002 1:06:41 PM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
In other words they LIED to us. And they knew they were lying.


 They said whatever had to be said to get this piece of shit NAFTA passed. Whether it came true or not was a very minor consideration.

108 posted on 12/28/2002 1:10:58 PM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
Of course one of the componants of a market economy is the free flow of labor. This, of course, can include a stipulation that the free flow be legal. But if legal immigration quotas are restricted, then there is no free flow. And this is exactly what has happened over the last decade. The quotas did not allow enough in to supply the demands of the market, so they came in illegal.

You will see many people state that they have no objections to legal immigration. These same people are against immigration reform because they know that is another name for increased immigration. And there lies the rub. The real, deep down where they live issue is not how many are legal and how many are illegal. It is the change in culture that is feared.

109 posted on 12/28/2002 1:17:04 PM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Ex-President Ford stated that NAFTA would reduce the flow of illegal immigrants across the Mexican border by providing jobs in Mexico. He concluded that if NAFTA failed of passage its opponents would have to bear the blame for the increased volume of illegals crossing the border.

Isn't that typical? LOL good ole G Ford is pretty quiet huh?

They knew EXACLY what the results of NAFTA would be..it is the results they wanted..

Movement of the industrial and pink collar jobs out of America..the movement of illegals into the country and a unitied Hemisphere..that was always there goal..Elimate the middle class..move America to a 2nd world status ..and global goverment..

Let them eat cake!

110 posted on 12/28/2002 1:25:46 PM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: FreeSpeechZone
NAFTA is part of the WTO and U.N.

It would probably be best for you to keep quiet. Use the free time to educate yourself.

111 posted on 12/28/2002 1:29:36 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
The real, deep down where they live issue is not how many are legal and how many are illegal. It is the change in culture that is feared.

One of the most prosperous times economically were the eighties. During that period annual legal immigration rates were about 500,000. I saw nothing wrong with that number. Now, it's up to a million a year thanks to George Bush Sr and the 1990 Immigration Act. Apparently NAFTA wasn't enough for him, he had to flood the country with unskilled, uneducated labor as well.

Your theory of "the free flow of labor" in a market economy is just that, a theory. I understand because of low birth rates the economy might contract, which is why several commissions including the one Congresswoman Jordan headed proposed a policy that would allow in enough people to stabilize the population, which is around 400 to 500 thousand annually. What's going on now is nothing less than a policy of greed. Flooding the labor market with cheap labor to keep wages down.

112 posted on 12/28/2002 1:33:49 PM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
It would be nice to see what Gerald Ford said, instead of relying upon what the Reform Party claims he said.
113 posted on 12/28/2002 1:34:18 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
They knew EXACLY what the results of NAFTA would be..it is the results they wanted..

Exactly. From "Los páramos desiertos" ----which discusses the destruction of Mexico by NAFTA, the causes of immigration to the USA and the effects of it on Mexico: "un campo sin campesinos, el sueño salinista cumplido" ---the dream come true of Salinas ---the rural area without it's people. Of course we all know ---or should know who Salinas was ----a major crook, drug lord etc who had no love of his country whatsoever ---he stole millions of dollars and exiled to Ireland when his presidency was over. His brother killed their own brother-in-law ---something about some bad drug deal ---and that's who the first President Bush was dealing with.

114 posted on 12/28/2002 1:38:26 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
thanks i will save that one
115 posted on 12/28/2002 1:41:11 PM PST by FreeSpeechZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
NAFTA is part of the WTO and U.N.

Is it or not?

116 posted on 12/28/2002 1:43:22 PM PST by FreeSpeechZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: FreeSpeechZone
Sorry, friend. It is not.
117 posted on 12/28/2002 1:53:02 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Of course we all know ---or should know who Salinas was ----a major crook, drug lord etc who had no love of his country whatsoever ---he stole millions of dollars and exiled to Ireland when his presidency was over. His brother killed their own brother-in-law ---something about some bad drug deal ---and that's who the first President Bush was dealing with.

Do you remember those talks? They kept telling us that Salinas was not like the OTHER corrupt Mexica presidents..he was educated and really wanted to clean it up and help his people..of course he later fled the country with vast amounts of money , much of it from American taxpayers

We now hear how honest and caring Fox is..wanna bet that he has his cash (or should I say OUR cash) in a swiss account too and will retire to France and join the other crooks

This is all about elete American's power Fritz..not you, not me and God knows not the poor Mexican people

118 posted on 12/28/2002 1:55:10 PM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
"Your theory of the free flow of labor"

As I mentioned above, I didn't write a paper on the market economy or labor markets. Once again, you try to argue against an economic system that is accepted thru-out the world and being implemented thru-out the world by saying that it is my theory.

Your argument that there is a difference in 500,000 and 1,000,000 doesn't hold water. What takes 10 years with one number takes only 20 years with the other. Both time intervals would be considered a rapid change. If you had lived in Texas during the 80s, you would know that.

119 posted on 12/28/2002 1:55:24 PM PST by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Dispute Settlement Under the NAFTA

The vast majority of trade in North America now takes place in accordance with the clear and well-established rules of the NAFTA and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Nonetheless, in such a large trading area, disputes are bound to emerge. In such cases, the NAFTA directs the governments concerned to seek to resolve their differences amicably through the NAFTA's Committees and Working Groups or other consultations. If no mutually acceptable solution is found, the NAFTA provides for expeditious and effective panel procedures.

One of the principal elements of the NAFTA is the establishment of a clear set of rules for dealing with the settlement of disputes. Dispute settlement provisions for countervailing duty and anti-dumping matters are covered under Chapter Nineteen. Chapter Twenty of the NAFTA includes provisions relating to the avoidance or settlement of all disputes regarding the interpretation or application of the NAFTA. There are also special rules for disputes under Chapter Eleven (Investment) and Chapter Fourteen (Financial Services). Administrative support to Chapter Nineteen and Chapter Twenty panels is provided by the Canadian, U.S. and Mexican National Sections of the NAFTA Secretariat.

Chapter Nineteen of the NAFTA provides for a system of binational panel review in place of final judicial review for domestic decisions regarding anti-dumping and countervailing duty matters. Prior to the entry into force of the Canada- U.S. FTA and then the NAFTA, anti-dumping, countervailing duty, and injury final determinations of a government could only be appealed: in the case of a U.S. final determination, to the Court of International Trade; in the case of a Mexican final determination, to the Tribunal Fiscal de la FederaciÓn; or in the case of certain Canadian final determinations, to the Federal Court of Appeal; or for some Revenue Canada decisions, to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT).

Canada regards Chapter Twenty as a central element of the North American Free Trade Agreement. It is invaluable in ensuring that our trade relations with the United States and Mexico are based on an established set of rules as opposed to economic or political power. As such, the objectives of the Chapter Twenty provisions are similar to those of the dispute settlement provisions of the WTO.

For investment disputes relating to obligations of NAFTA parties under Chapter Eleven, the NAFTA sets out dispute resolution procedures to resolve complaints between the investor and the host state. Complaints that are subject to NAFTA Chapter Eleven are resolved by arbitration, based on the arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Chapter Fourteen of the NAFTA contains a provision for the resolution of conflicts in the area of financial services. In this case, the resolution of disputes follows the procedures set out in Chapter Twenty of the Agreement, with the caveat that panelists are to be chosen from a special roster of experts in the field of financial services. Chapter Fourteen has not been invoked to date by the NAFTA members.

If you wish to examine the disputes considered under the various provisions of Chapters Nineteen and Twenty of the NAFTA since its implementation in 1994, you can do so by linking to the NAFTA Secretariat's section on "Decisions and Reports" below. You can also link to information on the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for the settling of private commercial disputes.

1rudeboy education yourself!!

120 posted on 12/28/2002 1:56:10 PM PST by FreeSpeechZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-214 next last

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