High Toll on U.S.: business industry: across the board, sector by sector and industry by industry, NAFTA has destabilized the economy, leading to job loss and lowered standards of living for American workers.On September 26, 2006, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI EPI exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. ) unleashed a broadside against the North American Free Trade Agreement North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), accord establishing a free-trade zone in North America; it was signed in 1992 by Canada, Mexico, and the United States and took effect on Jan. 1, 1994. (NAFTA NAFTA in full North American Free Trade Agreement Trade pact signed by Canada, the U.S., and Mexico in 1992, which took effect in 1994. Inspired by the success of the European Community in reducing trade barriers among its members, NAFTA created the world's ) in the form of a briefing paper by EPI economist Robert E. Scott
Robert E. Scott (born 25 February, 1943 in India) is Law Professor at Columbia Law School. , Professor Carlos Salas of Mexico's El Colegio de Tlaxcala, and Bruce Campbell of the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives. In the opinion of Scott, Salas, and Campbell, NAFTA has been a tragedy for all three nations. Scott, writing of NAFTA-related problems in the United States, noted: "In the United States workforce, NAFTA has contributed to the reduction of employment in high-wage, traded-goods industries, the growing inequality in wages, and the steadily declining demand for workers without a college education." According to Scott, those who have lost high-wage jobs have had to take substantial pay cuts to get jobs in the growing service-sector economy. The employment trend has resulted in a much lower standard of living for many Americans. "Growing trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have pushed more than 1 million workers out of higher-wage jobs and into lower-wage positions in non-trade related industries," Scott notes. "Thus, the displacement of 1 million jobs from traded to non-traded goods industries reduced wage payments to U.S. workers by $7.6 billion in 2004 alone." According to Carlos Salas, the situation in Mexico has not differed substantially from that in the United States. South of the border too, NAFTA has not lived up to its billing. According to Salas, "Since NAFTA took effect, Mexico has experienced a continual increase in the precarious nature of employment." Not surprisingly, NAFTA has also hurt the Canadian economy. "Not only has NAFTA failed to deliver the goods Verb 1. deliver the goods - attain success or reach a desired goal; "The enterprise succeeded"; "We succeeded in getting tickets to the show"; "she struggled to overcome her handicap and won" bring home the bacon, succeed, win, come through it promised, its effect on the well-being of a large majority of Canadians and on the social cohesion of society has been negative," Bruce Campbell notes in the Canadian section of the EPI report. The facts are in: NAFTA is an economic disaster for all three nations. Nevertheless, internationalist policy analysts at leading think tanks and within the Bush administration, as well as in both Canada and Mexico, have been pushing hard for further integration of the three NAFTA nations, something many have begun to call a North American North American named after North America. North American blastomycosis see North American blastomycosis. North American cattle tick see boophilusannulatus. Union. Built on the creaky creak·y adj. creak·i·er, creak·i·est 1. Tending to creak. 2. Shaky or infirm, as with age; decrepit: creaky knee joints; a creaky regime. foundation of NAFTA, such a union would be an unmitigated un·mit·i·gat·ed adj. 1. Not diminished or moderated in intensity or severity; unrelieved: unmitigated suffering. 2. disaster of world-historical proportions because NAFTA itself, as an examination of important sectors of the economy shows, has been and continues to be nothing short of catastrophic in its effects. |
|
||||||||||||||||||

Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion