View Full Version : Hillary Supports NAFTA II
disrupter
11-08-2007, 08:11 PM
BREAKING: Clinto Announces Support for NAFTA Expansion
David Sirota, 8 Nov 07
Under intense pressure from Sen. John Edwards (D) and a building national fair trade movement, Sen. Hillary Clinton tonight finally disclosed her position on a Bush administration-backed bill to expand the NAFTA trade model that passed the U.S. House today and is now moving to the U.S. Senate. Reuters is reporting that Clinton says she will vote for the Peru Free Trade Agreement - the first agreement in a package of corporate-crafted agreements to vastly expand the NAFTA trade model. Clinton is citing the Peru deal's labor standards as justification for her support, despite the fact that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has told reporters it has received "assurances" that those labor standards are "unenforceable," and despite a Columbia University report showing how the Peru deal could actually weaken labor law enforcement.
The announcement, which flies in the face of polls showing the public strongly opposed to NAFTA-style trade policies, comes on the same day the New York Times reports that Clinton is being endorsed by NAFTA architect Robert Rubin, the CEO of Citigroup - a company that stands to reap financial rewards from the NAFTA model. Rubin's announcement came with a promise to raise Clinton more money from Wall Street.
With Obama also supporting the lobbyist-written Peru agreement, Clinton's announcement is a huge opening for Edwards, who has made opposition to NAFTA-style trade agreements a centerpiece of his campaign. This is especially true considering recent headline-grabbing plant closings in both Iowa and New Hampshire.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/breaking-clinton-announc_b_71853.html
You are part of a global labor market, when workers in Peru or China get screwed that weakens the bargaining position of US workers, including high skill jobs like programmers etc. that can be outsourced to dirt cheap replacements.
Jesse Hemingway
11-08-2007, 10:28 PM
what do you expect from that republican, monica sucks hillary blows.
Smurf-Herder
11-08-2007, 11:38 PM
A lot of Republicans hate NAFTA.
I have very strong feelings about it.
In the perfect world I'm all for opening free trade to everyone but we need to be cautious. Our deal with China could have been great but we ignored two things and now they own us.
1. We allowed them to manipulate their currency. We should have put tariffs on their products as soon as they started.
2. We don't require any safety standards for workers or goods. Mattel alone recalled nearly 1,000,000 items. Every parent I spoke with had to throw something out.
Cat slave
11-09-2007, 12:48 AM
I have very strong feelings about it.
In the perfect world I'm all for opening free trade to everyone but we need to be cautious. Our deal with China could have been great but we ignored two things and now they own us.
1. We allowed them to manipulate their currency. We should have put tariffs on their products as soon as they started.
2. We don't require any safety standards for workers or goods. Mattel alone recalled nearly 1,000,000 items. Every parent I spoke with had to throw something out.
You are exactly right! Bring back tarrifs and whats wrong with a good dose
of "protectionism" and this not so perfect world?:banghead:
Cat slave
11-09-2007, 12:51 AM
And why is there still an embargo against Cuba? Not that I have any interest
in visiting the place but it seems rather twisted that we are supporting and
enabling a burgeoning monolith of a country that is less than zero on human
rights and openly communist.
You are exactly right! Bring back tarrifs and whats wrong with a good dose
of "protectionism" and this not so perfect world?:banghead:
You have to look deeper at the issue. China has been manipulating their currency to keep it pegged to the dollar. You do know this right?
What that means is that they are unfairly keeping their goods dropping in cost so that we can never compete with them. It makes it harder for us to sell to them and easier for them to sell to us. Many in congress have wanted to address this issue but now that China owns 10% of our debt we really can't. We gave away the store.
If they let their currency float then we have fair trade and we deal with it.
Do you understand what they've been doing with the currency? A lot of people don't.
moonman
11-09-2007, 04:09 AM
I don't have any problem with NAFTA or NAFTA II.
What I do object pasionately is that neither Clinton or Bush administrations sought to enforce the environmental and labor provisions, which would have resolved most of Sir Moby's objections as well.
The currency issues, at least as I understand them, are outside the NAFTA contract.
I also object to how NAFTA has been sold. It is not a 'free trade' but rather a managed trade kinda bargain. Still we haven't enforced the environmental and labor protection parts of the bargain. In other words our elected representatives have sold us out.
kittens
11-09-2007, 12:17 PM
what do you expect from that republican, monica sucks hillary blows.
Smurfherder is right a lot of republicans are against NAFTA.
This issue exposes the globalists. Supporters of NAFTA are globalists and they are, by stealth, creating a North American Union in exactly the same way the EU was started.
The EU celebrated it's 50th anniv. recently. It was only formally announced to the public a dozen or so years ago. The truth of the merger was hidden from view in the 'free speech zone' of 'Conspiracy Theory' for years.
kittens
11-09-2007, 12:20 PM
You are exactly right! Bring back tarrifs and whats wrong with a good dose
of "protectionism" and this not so perfect world?:banghead:
We should go back.
Tariffs should replace the Income Tax.
Smurf-Herder
11-09-2007, 06:03 PM
Smurfherder is right a lot of republicans are against NAFTA.
This issue exposes the globalists. Supporters of NAFTA are globalists and they are, by stealth, creating a North American Union in exactly the same way the EU was started.
The EU celebrated it's 50th anniv. recently. It was only formally announced to the public a dozen or so years ago. The truth of the merger was hidden from view in the 'free speech zone' of 'Conspiracy Theory' for years.
Exactly.
The Globalist Conspiracy is real; and it infests both parties. And I blackballed a lot of Republicans on that last immigration bill. The whole idea was supposed to be border security. But that goes against the NAU plan.
disrupter
11-09-2007, 11:10 PM
Many voting republicans are wising up to the fact that despite the republican leadership's rhetoric to support moral values they are in fact economic, corporate criminals & even their claims of social morality are repeatedly proved false.
The republican base knows the current Republican party does them economic harm, not good.
Most Americans of any & all parties are beginning to see the corporate agenda & NAFTA is not particularly good for them. Even highly skilled people see their jobs outsourced.
With the collapsing of the dollar the last insularity in the US economy has been shredded. it isn't all the fault of 'free traders', indeed much of it may have been inevitable, what is criminal is the savage brutal speed the corporate criminal class has forcibly inflicted this on the American people.
The American people are still trying to rationalize the fact that they have been economically raped & the US treasury has been looted. This is not easy for a victim of rape to do rationally & proportionally.
I don't know the ultimate prognosis for the US. Perhaps we really do have an innovative spirit that will over come much of this, but we could be looking at an economic decline & demoralization of the American people & its spirit.
While standardization of some things is useful,
standardization of criminality is not.
moonman
11-10-2007, 12:46 AM
Exactly.
The Globalist Conspiracy is real; and it infests both parties. And I blackballed a lot of Republicans on that last immigration bill. The whole idea was supposed to be border security. But that goes against the NAU plan.
Meriam-Webster defines conspiracy thus;
1: the act of conspiring together
2 a: an agreement among conspirators b: a group of conspirators
Synonym: Plot
Meriam-Webster defines plot thus;
A secret plan for accomplishing a usually evil or unlawful end.
IF your allegation be true dontcha kinda agree the secret is out? Which would mean there is no conspiracy because it's not a "secret plan" anymore. Duh.
WTO, NAFTA, North American Union are not necessarily bad things. The devil as always is in the details.
Smurf-Herder
11-10-2007, 07:53 PM
Meriam-Webster defines conspiracy thus;
1: the act of conspiring together
2 a: an agreement among conspirators b: a group of conspirators
Synonym: Plot
Meriam-Webster defines plot thus;
A secret plan for accomplishing a usually evil or unlawful end.
IF your allegation be true dontcha kinda agree the secret is out? Which would mean there is no conspiracy because it's not a "secret plan" anymore. Duh.
WTO, NAFTA, North American Union are not necessarily bad things. The devil as always is in the details.
The media is not immune.
It's just too big to fight. We can only do the best we can for ourselves.
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.