Anyone still like NAFTA

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

I'm fine with this kind of scenario, but most people don't see the big picture.

I see the big picture perfectly. Employees around the world will compete with each other to get the jobs that will allow them to feed themselves. They will accept lower and lower salaries in order to remain competetive. How exactly would salaries raise in other countries? It they're willing to work for pennies, companies will exploit them. If they start wanting higher wages, someone else will work for pennies and the company will move there. The only way to stop it is to make it not worthwhile for employers to nation shop for the cheapest labor.

The big picture of global free trade is corporate world domination and fascism.

[PeteH 0]

Quote

I
Employees around the world will compete with each other to get the jobs that will allow them to feed themselves. They will accept lower and lower salaries in order to remain competetive. How exactly would salaries raise in other countries?
***

Aren't they competing already?

I believe all western companies pay better salary to 3rd world employees than they would get from local jobs.
What reason people have to change jobs? Money.
Salaries have already rosen there.

***
It they're willing to work for pennies, companies will exploit them. If they start wanting higher wages, someone else will work for pennies and the company will move there. The only way to stop it is to make it not worthwhile for employers to nation shop for the cheapest labor.

And other companies who want the employees will pay bigger salary. Competition on both sides balances things.

Quote

The big picture of global free trade is corporate world domination and fascism.

That would be possible if one major company owned everything. I really can't see that happening in totally free market.

I know regular people have to work to eat, so they can't say no to work forever. That gives the edge to the corporations that can survive longer without workers.
But when they have to compete with other companies, they really can't afford to do nothing and loose their business.

Current situation with laws/borders making healthy competition impossible helps some company owners that surprisingly do have connections with the politicians making these laws.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Goddam Comunists!
It never ceases to amaze me how the left wingers on both sides of the border can make identical anti-trade arguments about how all the jobs are flowing the other way.
NAFTA and its precursor the Canada-US free trade agreement have been good for all participants. The problem with expanding trade relationships is that the benefits are general to the whole economy (increased efficiency) and the pain tends to be acutely felt by a few (plant closures). This is something Ronald Reagan instictively understood, but George W. Bush does not. Reagan was under just as much protectionist pressure as G.W., but had the strength of his convictions to resist.
Has employment decreased in the US since NAFTA? No. Has the American economy been in a slow decline since CAFTA (1988) or NAFTA (1992) were signed? Are you nuts? 1992-2000 was the greatest period of economic growth in the century.
The last time the world engaged in aggressive currency devaluation (as the US now is) and raising of tarriff walls was in 1929. The rewards for the whole planet over the next fifteen years were not what I hope we are looking forward to.

[PhillyKev 0]

You're right...unemployment is slightly lower now than it was in 1992. However, wages have decreased. The lowest 33% of wages have decreased by 14%, the next 33% have decreased 6%, and the top 1% of wage earners have experienced a 1% increase in wages during the 1990's. In other words, the lower skilled labor force has seen a dramatic decline in wage earning potential. Why? Cheaper, foreign competition.

Do I have a problem with CAFTA? No. Do I have a problem with companies that use labor forces in equitable markets such as western europe? No. Do I have a problem with companies having non-restricted access to workers willing to work below poverty levels? Hell yes. And what does this have to do with communism? I don't think everyone should make the same or have the same no matter what their skills or abilities. I just think that we shouldn't allow companies that sell their products in the US to allow them to manufacture those products over seas and bring them into this country without paying import duties. Otherwise, why would anyone employ any unskilled labor in the US? It's not economically feasible.

[PeteH 0]

Quote

Do I have a problem with companies having non-restricted access to workers willing to work below poverty levels? Hell yes. And what does this have to do with communism? I don't think everyone should make the same or have the same no matter what their skills or abilities. I just think that we shouldn't allow companies that sell their products in the US to allow them to manufacture those products over seas and bring them into this country without paying import duties. Otherwise, why would anyone employ any unskilled labor in the US? It's not economically feasible.

Remember the steel tariffs? GWB put import tolls for foreign (to you) steel. That helped American steel companies, 'cos they could sell their steel at higher price for American companies that use steel. Foreign steel using companies had access to cheaper steel and they could sell their products cheaper -> American companies suffered from this.

Only way companies could compete equally on global market would be totally free market market with no tariffs, no label restrictrions, no supportive benefits (for example for agricultural products or shipyards).