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: "If the TPP would be as good for American jobs as they claim, there should be nothing to hide." [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)8. We've talked about this before on DU. Here's what I've found regarding NAFTA.
NAFTAs Impact on U.S. Workers
by 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.
The NAFTA doctrine of socialism for capital and free markets for labor also drove U.S. policy in the Mexican peso crisis of 1994-95, the Asia financial crash of 1997 and the global financial meltdown of 2008. In each case, the U.S. government organized the rescue of the worlds bank and corporate investors, and let the workers fend for themselves.
CONTINUED...
http://www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/
Which has resulted in lower standards of living for most Americans, but if you average in those at the top -- well, NAFTA's been great for business. How great? Glad I asked:

Wealth of worlds 400 richest billionaires rose $92 billion in 2014
Figure hits $4.1 trillion
By Andre Damon
wsws.org, 3 January 2015
The wealthiest 400 people in the world saw their combined net worth grow by $92 billion last year, hitting $4.1 trillion. The bonanza for the super-rich was underwritten by governments and central banks around the world, which fueled surging stock markets and record corporate profits by pumping hundreds of billions into the financial markets.
The figures were provided by the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, which was initiated in 2012 and tracks the wealth of the 400 richest people in the world.
The combined net worth of these 400 individuals is greater than the gross domestic product of Germany, the fourth largest economy in the world. The average net worth of each of the billionaires grew by $240 million, to $10.25 billion.
Since the 2008 financial crash, which triggered multi-trillion-dollar bank bailouts and the infusion into the financial system of trillions more in virtually free cash, the wealth of the super-rich has nearly doubled. The net worth of the Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans increased from $1.27 trillion in 2009 to $2.29 trillion in 2014.
SNIP...
Investor Warren Buffett, the worlds second richest man, according to the Bloomberg list, saw his wealth grow to $74.5 billion, up by $13.7 billion, or more than 22 percent, in the past year. Buffetts wealth has more than doubled since 2009.
Bloomberg noted that dozens of operating businesses the 84-year-old chairman bought over the past five decades churned out record profit over the past year. Buffetts business model has been to buy traditional industries such as railroads and food producers, then ruthlessly cut costs, making billions in the process. Buffetts businesses have profited handsomely from the ongoing fall in labor costs, which have been dropping year after year since 2008 as a result of falling wages and cuts in benefits for workers.
CONTINUED...
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/01/03/bill-j03.html
Economically speaking: For most of the people I know, the wealthiest times in human history haven't been all that great.
by 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.
The NAFTA doctrine of socialism for capital and free markets for labor also drove U.S. policy in the Mexican peso crisis of 1994-95, the Asia financial crash of 1997 and the global financial meltdown of 2008. In each case, the U.S. government organized the rescue of the worlds bank and corporate investors, and let the workers fend for themselves.
CONTINUED...
http://www.epi.org/blog/naftas-impact-workers/
Which has resulted in lower standards of living for most Americans, but if you average in those at the top -- well, NAFTA's been great for business. How great? Glad I asked:

Wealth of worlds 400 richest billionaires rose $92 billion in 2014
Figure hits $4.1 trillion
By Andre Damon
wsws.org, 3 January 2015
The wealthiest 400 people in the world saw their combined net worth grow by $92 billion last year, hitting $4.1 trillion. The bonanza for the super-rich was underwritten by governments and central banks around the world, which fueled surging stock markets and record corporate profits by pumping hundreds of billions into the financial markets.
The figures were provided by the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, which was initiated in 2012 and tracks the wealth of the 400 richest people in the world.
The combined net worth of these 400 individuals is greater than the gross domestic product of Germany, the fourth largest economy in the world. The average net worth of each of the billionaires grew by $240 million, to $10.25 billion.
Since the 2008 financial crash, which triggered multi-trillion-dollar bank bailouts and the infusion into the financial system of trillions more in virtually free cash, the wealth of the super-rich has nearly doubled. The net worth of the Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans increased from $1.27 trillion in 2009 to $2.29 trillion in 2014.
SNIP...
Investor Warren Buffett, the worlds second richest man, according to the Bloomberg list, saw his wealth grow to $74.5 billion, up by $13.7 billion, or more than 22 percent, in the past year. Buffetts wealth has more than doubled since 2009.
Bloomberg noted that dozens of operating businesses the 84-year-old chairman bought over the past five decades churned out record profit over the past year. Buffetts business model has been to buy traditional industries such as railroads and food producers, then ruthlessly cut costs, making billions in the process. Buffetts businesses have profited handsomely from the ongoing fall in labor costs, which have been dropping year after year since 2008 as a result of falling wages and cuts in benefits for workers.
CONTINUED...
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/01/03/bill-j03.html
Economically speaking: For most of the people I know, the wealthiest times in human history haven't been all that great.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
40 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

"If the TPP would be as good for American jobs as they claim, there should be nothing to hide." [View all]
Octafish
Mar 2015
OP
I also 100% trust Obama....in these times of a fascist coup do we really have a choice?
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#10
No, obviously this one would be passed by a majority in both houses so it would not
TheKentuckian
Mar 2015
#15
A knowledge of history and international law would be helpful in a debate about treaties versus international contracts.
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#16
It's jaw dropping isn't it? Still scraping mine from the floor after all these years.
2banon
Mar 2015
#39
That's what republicans say about our secret negotiations with Iran and other countries. n/t
pampango
Mar 2015
#3
And even more republicans (the base not the politicians) say that about NAFTA and other agreements.
pampango
Mar 2015
#7
To blame all bad economic events on something that is less than 3% of the economy is
pampango
Mar 2015
#9
Really? Then why did FDR reverse the republican opposition to trade? Why do Germany and Sweden
pampango
Mar 2015
#14
The lesson remains that when we have similar protections in place will be when we revisit such
TheKentuckian
Mar 2015
#18
Perhaps we agree that 'similar protections' are what the fight should really be about, then these
pampango
Mar 2015
#20
It was not a 'disaster' under Clinton. And it did not cause the 'disaster' under Bush. He did that
pampango
Mar 2015
#17
And a lot of foreign auto manufacturers moved facilities here. You can't just look at one little
Hoyt
Mar 2015
#28
True enough. What's the overall net impact on American autoworker employment numbers acompensation?
riqster
Mar 2015
#29
American cars were on a decline long before NAFTA. Computers/produ have affected demand for workers
Hoyt
Mar 2015
#34
What would you say if you learned that John Negroponte took full credit in Authoring NAFTA?
2banon
Mar 2015
#40