On 5 Sep 2006 12:48:22 -0700, "Tracey1212" > wrote:

>
>George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr. wrote:
>> On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 05:46:14 GMT, Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>> MURDERERS > wrote:
>>
>> >I suspect there will be a run on roofing nails too. We need to bring
>> >a halt to this merger with mexico that Bush and the congressional
>> >traitors of both parties are stuffing down our throats.
>>
>> I bought a copy of NAFTA, and read the parts which were readable. Lots
>> of it was not readable - consisting of long lists of all kind of stuff
>> and what the current and future tariff rates would be. Twine, twisted,
>> cotton, 13 percent. Twine, twisted, nylon 13 percent on and on and on.
>> But the actual comprehensible part, on the rules? It was clear to me
>> that what Nafta does is
>>
>> level the playing field. To the benefit of the US.
>>
>> Remember all the talk about how the playing field was rigged against
>> us? It was. Example - Mexico. We were paying a tariff of about 3
>> percent on average for stuff made in Mexico sold in the US. But they
>> were screwing our goods, charging the Mexicans a fifteen percent
>> tariff, on average, for our goods. That was a playing field really
>> tilted against us. It wasn't fair.
>>
>> So what Nafta does is mainly stop them from screwing us. They have
>> agreed to lower their tariffs way down, to zero for a whole bunch of
>> stuff. And we agree to lower our tariffs on their stuff, often to
>> zero.
>>
>> So instead of playing on an unfair playing field, we can now compete
>> with Mexican goods on a level playing field.
>>
>> Why in God's name would you be opposed to that?
>>
>> WHy do you favor the old system, where our companies got royally
>> screwed when they tried to sell stuff into Mexico?
>>
>> While their stuff got off so light when it came in here?
>>
>> THere is also a chapter on a court to resolve disputes. Seems
>> reasonable to me to have a court to resolve cheating etc. I don't see
>> a problem with that.
>>
>> AND THATS IT. That's all NAFTA is.
>>
>> It's not the Spawn of Satan.
>
>Nearly 37 million US jobs have been deported south of the border to
>some latin dump as a result of NAFTA. So, why would you be opposed to
>that, dingbat?

That's illogical. Please explain the mechanism whereby a reduction of
our tariffs on their stuff from three percent to zero, while they
reduce their tariffs on our stuff from 15 percent to zero

could possibly cost us jobs?

How would that work in your mind? What sane business decisions before
and after NAFTA would lead to the result you claim?

And it's not true, what you said about zillions of lost jobs. First,
as part of Nafta, a fund was created to compensate US workers who lost
their job because of Nafta. The number of US workers seeking
compensation was tiny. It was like 80,000 or something. A very very
small number for the size of our workforce.

After NAFTA passed, the US created jobs at a furious pace, averaging
about two hundred thousand new jobs every month. Month in and month
out, year in and year out. We had FABULOUS job growth following Nafta.

When a US broom maker loses his job beacuse Mexico makes brooms for
less, but then gets a job as a concierge in a hotel, that is not

a lost job

it's a change of jobs

And the new jobs created after NAFTA passed paid more than average,
too.

The claim that a guy making tools in Ohio had to get a job at
McDonalds - is refuted by the economic data.

Which shows - newly created jobs in the US paid more on average than
the old jobs.

If you think you're right - explain the logic.

How could leveling the playing field harm us rather than help us.

Should we now change tariffs - so the UK imposes a twenty percent
tariff on our goods while we impose a three percent tariff on theirs?
Is that what you want?

Why?