Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Obama calls critics of TPP secrecy 'Conspiracy Theorists' [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)221. Here's what's wrong with NAFTA.
NAFTAs Impact on U.S. Workers
JEFF FAUX
Economic Policy Institute, December 9, 2013
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market.
By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers, which had driven the expansion of the middle class since the end of World War II. The result has been 20 years of stagnant wages and the upward redistribution of income, wealth and political power.
NAFTA affected U.S. workers in four principal ways. First, it caused the loss of some 700,000 jobs as production moved to Mexico. Most of these losses came in California, Texas, Michigan, and other states where manufacturing is concentrated. To be sure, there were some job gains along the border in service and retail sectors resulting from increased trucking activity, but these gains are small in relation to the loses, and are in lower paying occupations. The vast majority of workers who lost jobs from NAFTA suffered a permanent loss of income.
Second, NAFTA strengthened the ability of U.S. employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits. As soon as NAFTA became law, corporate managers began telling their workers that their companies intended to move to Mexico unless the workers lowered the cost of their labor. In the midst of collective bargaining negotiations with unions, some companies would even start loading machinery into trucks that they said were bound for Mexico. The same threats were used to fight union organizing efforts. The message was: If you vote in a union, we will move south of the border. With NAFTA, corporations also could more easily blackmail local governments into giving them tax reductions and other subsidies.
Third, the destructive effect of NAFTA on the Mexican agricultural and small business sectors dislocated several million Mexican workers and their families, and was a major cause in the dramatic increase in undocumented workers flowing into the U.S. labor market. This put further downward pressure on U.S. wages, especially in the already lower paying market for less skilled labor.
Fourth, and ultimately most important, NAFTA was the template for rules of the emerging global economy, in which the benefits would flow to capital and the costs to labor. The U.S. governing classin alliance with the financial elites of its trading partnersapplied NAFTAs principles to the World Trade Organization, to the policies of the World Bank and IMF, and to the deal under which employers of Chinas huge supply of low-wage workers were allowed access to U.S. markets in exchange for allowing American multinational corporations the right to invest there.
CONTINUED...
http://www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/
So, there's that.
BTW: President Obama, despite his vow as candidate to amend NAFTA, never has.
JEFF FAUX
Economic Policy Institute, December 9, 2013
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NATFA) was the door through which American workers were shoved into the neoliberal global labor market.
By establishing the principle that U.S. corporations could relocate production elsewhere and sell back into the United States, NAFTA undercut the bargaining power of American workers, which had driven the expansion of the middle class since the end of World War II. The result has been 20 years of stagnant wages and the upward redistribution of income, wealth and political power.
NAFTA affected U.S. workers in four principal ways. First, it caused the loss of some 700,000 jobs as production moved to Mexico. Most of these losses came in California, Texas, Michigan, and other states where manufacturing is concentrated. To be sure, there were some job gains along the border in service and retail sectors resulting from increased trucking activity, but these gains are small in relation to the loses, and are in lower paying occupations. The vast majority of workers who lost jobs from NAFTA suffered a permanent loss of income.
Second, NAFTA strengthened the ability of U.S. employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits. As soon as NAFTA became law, corporate managers began telling their workers that their companies intended to move to Mexico unless the workers lowered the cost of their labor. In the midst of collective bargaining negotiations with unions, some companies would even start loading machinery into trucks that they said were bound for Mexico. The same threats were used to fight union organizing efforts. The message was: If you vote in a union, we will move south of the border. With NAFTA, corporations also could more easily blackmail local governments into giving them tax reductions and other subsidies.
Third, the destructive effect of NAFTA on the Mexican agricultural and small business sectors dislocated several million Mexican workers and their families, and was a major cause in the dramatic increase in undocumented workers flowing into the U.S. labor market. This put further downward pressure on U.S. wages, especially in the already lower paying market for less skilled labor.
Fourth, and ultimately most important, NAFTA was the template for rules of the emerging global economy, in which the benefits would flow to capital and the costs to labor. The U.S. governing classin alliance with the financial elites of its trading partnersapplied NAFTAs principles to the World Trade Organization, to the policies of the World Bank and IMF, and to the deal under which employers of Chinas huge supply of low-wage workers were allowed access to U.S. markets in exchange for allowing American multinational corporations the right to invest there.
CONTINUED...
http://www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/
So, there's that.
BTW: President Obama, despite his vow as candidate to amend NAFTA, never has.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
239 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Looks like the world is filled with them, no? But then, otoh, we have seen some of what is in that
sabrina 1
May 2014
#11
But is that a bad thing? Throughout history many Conspiracy Theories turned out
rhett o rick
May 2014
#21
I wonder why there's a "lack of knowledge of what is going on in the negotiations"
arcane1
May 2014
#2
Good on you. So, why do TPP negotiators get multi-million dollar bonuses from Wall Street?
Octafish
May 2014
#15
conspiracy: the act of secretly planning to do something that is harmful or illegal
Tierra_y_Libertad
May 2014
#7
Stellar post. I wish you would break this down and make an OP, or several.
woo me with science
May 2014
#19
I knew he was a corporatist from the beginning, and wasn't even in my Top 3 to vote for, but he
Ghost in the Machine
May 2014
#42
debbie was-shultz said the same thing about people claiming the gop was rigging elections
leftyohiolib
May 2014
#26
He should have directed that to the tea party and its New World Order conspiracy theorists.
pampango
May 2014
#30
Oh, they all strung those three words together. I think that tea partiers take those words to mean
pampango
May 2014
#51
But you can't criticize Republicans, you have to reach across the aisle and work together!
Scootaloo
May 2014
#40
Yeah, got to be 'bipartisan', I guess. But it causes much consternation among liberals who
pampango
May 2014
#55
What makes you say that? Conservatives rely on conspiracy theories much more than liberals.
pampango
May 2014
#209
Just because there's a conspiracy theory doesn't mean there's no conspiracy... nt
backscatter712
May 2014
#34
For the side show of irrelevance: He also indicated the Democratic Party has conspiracy theories.
Octafish
May 2014
#48
You are right, nothing we say matters in DC. That is obvious, and that paragraph is amazing.
sabrina 1
May 2014
#90
Okay, put in corporatism where I said capitalism. Same deal for the rest of the post. n/t
Tobin S.
May 2014
#70
Boy, you can really tell when a Third Way type doesn't need your vote anymore. /nt
Marr
May 2014
#45
What was that about being more free to pursue his agenda during the second term?
woo me with science
May 2014
#68
Setting aside conspiracy theories, the reality in these trade agreements is that they
JDPriestly
May 2014
#46
Maintaining jobs is also important in a global market. Like I said, things could be worse doin nutin
Hoyt
May 2014
#233
Wages were flat for 20 years (fell for 7 years right) before NAFTA, rose from 1994-2000 then
pampango
May 2014
#226
Doesn't really matter what is going on in negotiations. Congress must approve any proposed agreement
Hoyt
May 2014
#111
So you're OK using far-rightwing sources to support your criticisms of the Obama administration?..nt
SidDithers
May 2014
#206
I don't agree with the TPP, but I disagree that the US Government criminal or evil
davidpdx
May 2014
#123
Nothing theoretical about it. It is harmful, and they are trying like hell to ram it through.
GoneFishin
May 2014
#126
And, that might be overly kind. It's amazing he remains so cool with some of this criticism.
Hoyt
May 2014
#139
Of course people have a "lack of knowledge" -- BECAUSE HE AND HIS F'n CRONIES WONT REVEAL ANYTHING
Armstead
May 2014
#136
What was wrong in NAFTA? It preceded the only increase in real wages in the past 40 years.
Recursion
May 2014
#138
My 3D game job got shipped to India or China. There was an operation in our company
Phlem
May 2014
#147
They started offshoring in the 1960's. How did NAFTA signal that 30 years before?
Recursion
May 2014
#155
Wow, he just called anyone who believes it is correct to question our leaders an "N" word.
fleabiscuit
May 2014
#159
One reason, it's not finished. I don't think any of it has been presented to Congress.
Hoyt
May 2014
#182
So all the Unions who worked so hard to get him in office are now conspiracy nuts ?
classykaren
May 2014
#179
Nobel Prize went to the fired economist who pointed out the real issues in global finance.
Octafish
May 2014
#185
People, you really need to read the actual quote instead of slurping the spin of this 'article'.
brett_jv
May 2014
#193
When a group conspires to keep and enact something in secret - that is a conspiracy
on point
May 2014
#202