You do know there's an edit function, right?
Aurignaul wrote:
I hope we all realize that free trade in South America will cripple it more as a nation, and more effectively, than any invasion ever could. An invasion might almost be preferable. Downward pressure on prices would have no boarder tarriffs to off-set production demands that could compete in both north and south america.
How is this bad for South America? I'm serious here. The cost of living is vastly higher in the US then in say Venezuella. That means that a good that is well priced at a buck in Venezuella will go for 20 bucks in the US. That's pure profit potential for Venezuelian businesses. It means that those same business owners can pay their workers higher wages for the same amount of work and still make a profit.
The biggest fear isn't falling prices, but inflationary price changes in South America as a result. But in this case, the good far outweighs the bad.
Quote:
This would mean that wages would plummet and the south american economy would be even further crippled, tied to the US and its 200 billion dollar deficit.
Again. How do you suppose this will happen? How are wages in South America going to plummet if we open up trade a bit more between them and the US? News flash! Prices are *higher* in the US then in South America. The likely result is US dollars flowing into South America to get cheaper goods. That will *increase* the prices of those goods over time in South America and the cost of labor to produce them. That's what happens when you increase demand as a result of lifting trade barriers.
Why on earth do you suppose so many people are afraid that Cafta will cause jobs in the US to move south? US businesses could open up factories in South America (where it's cheaper to operate), pay a relatively high local wages for workers (but still less then they'd pay for medicre workers in the US), and make a profit in the process. That will *not* result in decreased wages. It'll increase them over time south of the border.
And what the hell does the US deficit have to do with a trade agreement? Nothing in this case at least...
Quote:
Free trade has destroyed Mexico's ability to control its domestic wage minimum, it is ruining welfare programes in Canada, and all we see of benefit to the US is that the top 5 % get a great deal richer.
Odd. I'd swear that Mexico's economy has stabilized quite a bit since NAFTA came along. Not sure about wellfare programs in Canada, but it's not like there isn't some ******** on this side of the border on that issue as well. Opening up trade requires compromises from all sides. That's the whole point. The idea is that the long term result is better then the short term negatives. So far, I've not seen the sky fall as a result.
Quote:
Free trade is a bad idea for a nation, but a great idea for the business men who control it.
I see. And what's good for business is bad for a national economy? You'll have a hard time convincing me of that one.