An immediate bill to repeal Free Trade- NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT.. could save the Dem party.

[Union Yes]

Even if it doesn't pass.

It would paint a GIGANTIC bullseye on the back of ALL pro-FT, pro-Nafta politicians.

Those Pols would immediatly become vulnerable with a big ole 'defeat me' sign hanging on their back.

Elected Dems, help us identify the pro-FT elected politicians in Wshington, DC.

Identify them and we the people will defeat them come election time.

[HeresyLives]

1. This would kill the US___stone cold dead.

[notesdev]

3. Would it?

Amazing how not all that long ago we didn't have NAFTA, GATT, or any of these other "free trade" agreements and yet we were incredibly strong, vibrant, and self-sufficient.

How do you suppose we survived then, and why do you think it is not possible to do that again?

[HeresyLives]

4. Yes, absolutely.

It's a global world, and you either participate or you get left behind.

You didn't have any competition years ago, something you claim is vital.

Well now you have it, and your first impulse is to run and hide.

[notesdev]

10. Something I claim?

Funny, I don't see any such claim on my part.

If in this global world of yours one must participate or be left behind, I'll take left behind, because participation means reducing the entire human race to a tiny group of oligarchs and a broad mass of slave labor.

No thank you, I'd rather go back to the America we used to have - the one that produced more than enough goods to meet our own consumption needs, the one that was characterized by a strong and free people. If the rest of the world is content to live as slaves that is their choice.

[HeresyLives]

12. You are thinking of the immediate post WWII era,

when almost every other nation on the planet was trashed.

The US, coming late to the war, was spared that so you had no competition, and you boomed.

That was a one-off, and it's now long over with.

For years the US has insisted everyone else follow it into 'capitalism' as the only right way to live.

Well...they did. Surprise!

So now you have the very capitalism and competition you claimed you wanted.

Globalization means no such thing, that's some absurd wing-ding view of it.

But if you think you can hide and stay behind...join N Korea then...that's what they're doing.

How's that working out?

[notesdev]

13. Where are these claims you claim I claim

Cause it's funny, I don't see those claims under my name anywhere. Maybe my memory ain't too good, mind pointing me to it?

[HeresyLives]

14. DO stop taking everything personally,

and look at your country...something you claim to be a patriotic part of at least.

The US has said this kind of thing for eons, and the world took them up on it.

If you're actually part of some other country and ideology, you should say so.

[notesdev]

15. You addressed it personally

Setting up a strawman which has nothing to do with what I believe then demanding I refute it is dishonest in the extreme.

It's especially so when you ignore the vital other half to the equation, something else the US has said for 'eons' - that ALL people should have basic human rights respected.

Really, it's despicable that you set up the US worker as the party to blame for not willingly assuming the standard of living of slave labor abroad. You want to live as a slave, go to a country where it's not forbidden by that nation's Constitution.

[HeresyLives]

17. No, you are just tossing in red herrings.

I'm not the least interested in you personally, and neither is the rest of the world.

Try killing free trade tho and you doom your nation to death.

PS...the US has said no such thing about basic human rights. We haven't forgotten Selma or feminism even if you have. Nor do we ignore Prop 8.

I don't know who you think is living as a slave...Canadians? French? Brits? Italians?

And I said nothing about American workers.

[notesdev]

18. What kind of corporate dogma are you spewing?

"Try killing free trade tho and you doom your nation to death."

Funny, China is doing very well indeed with an extreme mercantilist trade policy.

Free trade is only beneficial between nations with similar standards of living where the free trade policy goes in both directions. In all other cases it is a parasitical relationship which works to the detriment of the nation with the more permissive policy.

[HeresyLives]

19. LOL enough with the outdated ideology.

China is trading with the world...and booming. You should try it sometime.

[Union Yes]

21. America is collapsing.

[HeresyLives]

25. Well, whose fault is that?

[JVS]

36. The free trade shills'

[Jim Sagle]

37. Fuckin' A. Free trade ain't nuthin' but shit and neither is anyone who peddles it.

[spoony]

49. By your reasoning, American workers

For not being able to "compete."

[notesdev]

23. Actually I propose doing exactly what they do for trade policy

Which is have a trade policy that benefits our nation first and foremost.

"Free trade" - where the other side of that trade is cheating and we allow them to get away with it - is NOT the right trade policy for our country.

The right trade policy is to have free trade with only those nations that truly do conduct free trade with us (which boils down to Canada and most of Europe) and to be mercantilist with respect to everyone else.

[HeresyLives]

28. Yes, North Korea thinks like that.

There are only 3 nations in NAFTA btw...you, Canada and Mexico.

You have free trade with other countries in other agreements. Israel for example.

You don't have free trade with the EU. You should.

Same with Brazil and Russia and India and China. It's called BRIC.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

35. And what Free Trade partners are cheating?

The US has free trade agreements with Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Chile, Israel, Jordan, Mexico, Morocco, Peru, Oman, and Singapore.

Please advise me how each of the above is cheating.

Please further explain how Panama, Korea, and Columbia with whom free trade agreements are pending congressional approval are cheating.

[eridani]

50. Yep. By exporting and by strictly regulating imports

And by refusing to allow financial parasites to fuck with their currency. And by ignoring intellectual property laws.

[spoony]

48. It's amazing this has to be explained on DU, isn't it? nt

[JVS]

58. It's amazing that this is tolerated on DU. Do a search of her, she's always spouting globalist...

crap.

[Union Yes]

20. Free Trade has already doomed America. Outsourcing our jobs is creating economic collapse.

Are you rich or a corporate CEO or what.

Or are you just stricken with an inability to open your fucking eyes and look around at the utter destruction FT has caused?

Take a trip through Michigan and have your eyes opened. See Detroit.

Mass unemployment is the result of FT.

Mass foreclosures due to job loss is a direct result of job outsourcing.

NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT/WTO have become the worst policies in American history and you're defending them?

[HeresyLives]

24. No, you just have competition now.

Did you think you'd have it all your own way forever?

It's a big world, and you are only one part of it.

Whatever happened to rolling up your sleeves, American ingenuity and know-how and all that?

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HeresyLives]

29. You mean you can't compete? You surrender?

Gee, that's exactly what I warned you about in my first post on this topic.

[HughBeaumont]

30. Because it's a wage issue and not a knowledge issue.

There's plenty of knowledge here. Corporations want us to work for cornflakes. Can't do it. America's soaring cost of living doesn't allow for it and wages have been stagnant for 30 years. Hard working people who have degrees and MBAs are in the same unemployment line as the hard-working Blue Collars. All the "work harder and harder" blather ain't gonna cure these sobering realities.

[HeresyLives]

31. Is it?

Well you have thousands, millions even, of people working for top wages.

Look it was inevitable that this happened. Automation has been replacing 'workers' for generations.

And capitalism depends on lowering costs and increasing profits.

So as long as you're on a capitalist, technological system this would happen no matter what else was going on in the 'outside' world.

High cost American labour would be eventually replaced by low cost labour elsewhere.

Or by robots.

You need to use brainpower to vault above it.

Complaining about the situation does nothing.

[burning rain]

39. So people who work in the service industry or manufacturing in the US...

have to accept penury, since their work isn't based on brainpower?

[HughBeaumont]

56. No, unbridled corporatism depends on stagnating wages and MEGAprofits.

Mere "profit" is not good enough anymore. That's the problem. We don't have a "capitalist" system peppered with sound social practices like Canada does; we have an unbridled corporatist model.

And if we're looking to lower costs somewhere, how's about starting with exorbitant CEO and executive salary and perk packages? Are you going to tell me that a CEO is 400 times smarter than their average worker; therefore, they deserve 400 times the pay? Back in the 70s, a CEO only made 30-40 times it's average worker. Why is it that the US is the only place that this is a runaway problem? Also, why do they walk away with multiple lotteries a year no matter how good or bad their companies do? Do they deserve their ridiculous salaries if the stock price drops like a brick and workers are laid off by the metric ton?

Steve Greenhouse, the labor and workplace correspondent for the New York Times, wrote what I feel is a book every American should read: The Big Squeeze. Although not a surprise to many of us, the testimonials in this book would throw more than a pound of disgust in the consciences of the average reader. Backed up by several hundred sources from surveys, think tanks, interviews and statistics, The Big Squeeze puts the kibosh once and for all on the myth that America is the greatest place in the world to work. Among the sobering statistics:

· Since 1979, hourly earnings for 80% of American workers have risen by just 1 percent (all stats factor inflation). The average wage was 17.71/hr in 2007, falling by 5 percent compared to 1979.

· If wages kept pace with productivity, the average full time worker would be earning 58,000/year. Instead, he/she earns 42,000/yr.

· 20% of families with children under 6 live below the poverty line.

· The typical American worker puts in 1804 hours a year. That's 135 hours more than the average British worker, 240 more than the French worker and 370 more hours than the German worker. That could be because we’re also the only industrialized nation that has no mandates regarding a minimum number of vacation days per year (unlike the Swedish and the French, who mandate 5 and 6 weeks, respectively). The good ol' Yew Ess Ay is also one of four countries (out of 173 nations surveyed) that do not provide paid maternity leave.

· Almost ¼ of the American workforce (33 million workers) earn less than 10 dollars an hour, which is less than poverty for a family of four.

· Just one third of laid off workers receive unemployment benefits, down from 50 percent a generation ago, and the federal program for UI and retraining has been de-funded by more than 10 billion dollars in the last quarter century.

· The typical CEO in 1976 earned (use that term loosely) 36 times what their average worker did. In 1993, it rose to 131 times more. Today, that disparity is now at 369 times more their average worker’s salary, down from 441 times more five years ago, but still lousy nonetheless.

· The American economy has lost one in five factory jobs since 2000.

· One out of six managerial employees worked more than 60 hours a week, according to a 2004 BLS survey. This statistic doesn’t include commute time.

· A Pew Charitable Trusts survey from 2004 found that men in their 30s had a median income of 12 percent less than their fathers did at the same age.

"Retraining" only works if your competition cannot do the exact same thing. What do they think, that Indians and Chinese DON'T have access to the same universities and opportunities we have? They can get the same degrees we can get. They have THOUSANDS that already HAVE the same degrees we have to get. And they will always, always ALWAYS be cheaper. Gonna get your Ph.D in math? Guaranteed there's already 100 Indians or Chinese or whoever that have them and are vying for your position.

Your corporatist talking points don't really square with reality.

[w4rma]

53. I see. HeresyLives is in support of non-American powers reducing America to rubble.

That's why you're so gung ho about our current trade policy: you want America disabled.

[corpseratemedia]

52. I am a feminist

and your argument is specious

unfair "free-trade" is anti-feminist

your argument:

a. american foreign or domestic policy (which is owned and subsidized by multi-national corporate conglomerates = US worker sentiment

b. US workers trying to save their livelihoods by not having their jobs outsourced = doom and gloom for America

Well, doom and gloom is here because of free-trade agreements. We've had ZERO job growth in the past 10 years. We have states and cities with infrastructures crumbling because the economic base has been off-shored, (and now approx. 1 in 5 homes in foreclosure) and we have a now permanently unemployed educated class of workers precisely because of free-trade. We are even losing p/t opportunities like copy-writing and accounting.

It's very evident that you aren't interested in the people on this site. Well many of the people posting here lost their jobs, some are on SS or disabled,unemployed, homeless, foreclosed, unable to get medical help...of course you aren't interested!

I'm sorry also that you speak "for the rest of the world." Who appointed you to speak for everyone else? What a cold nasty world, right?

[TheKentuckian]

33. What a bunch of crap! We have enough resources and people

for a closed economy if need be and certainly can get by quite well with fair trade.

Seriously, what benefit is it to the average American to pursue these suicidal policies? All this free trade does is kill our standard of living to make more money for the wealthy.

I was always against all of these pacts. I could suck up NAFTA (to lay groundwork for a wider base) but once it spread out of the hemisphere to serf and below standards of living, it is a severe disservice to our people.

The world gives us little more than cheap goods made from our own materials which in turn killed many small business and reduced opportunity. I'm pretty comfortable that we'd get by but have to pay more for our TV's and such while have better and more stable jobs.

You show me long term and sustainable benefits to the common citizen other than cheap luxury items and I'll change my mind but you're just talking loud and saying nothin' as far as I can tell. Almost taunting or something.

[Cosmocat]

42. It would kill the party D E A D ...

The MSM would EAGERLY carry the right wing's meme that the current economic problems are BECCAUSE of the Ds trying to destroy free trade ...

A major health care reform bill SHOULD be a major positive associated with the party and it somehow managed to get turned to shiite ...

The low hanging fruit is passing the senate version with reconcilliation on the tax parts, then going after wall street and the banks ...

[leftstreet]

2. Single Payer Healthcare could save the Dem party n/t

[HeresyLives]

9. Yes, it would.

Even Republicans have said that.

Every advanced nation has universal health care, except for the US.

[omega minimo]

5. Pardon me, "Union Yes" -- where were you when they were passed?

If you say "diapers,' that's okay then.

[Union Yes]

8. I was a gay man serving in the Army at that time. Nafta passed not long after Clinton shoved me ..

back in the closet with DADT.

I wrote/called Clinton's WH more than 100 times over his 8 years expressing my disgust for Nafta.

As a UAW member, I attended a UAW sponsored conference in 1999 regarding the destructive effects of FT. The conference focused on anti-FT activism.

You asked.:)

[omega minimo]

16. Thank you. Do you think the OP suggestion is possible?

:hi:

[elleng]

6. WE the PEOPLE must identify them,

and get rid of them. Seems to me any radical legislation BEFORE we do such would be a fool-hardy test.

[HeresyLives]

7. Well, that would be your entire govt, both parties.

Because all of them are aware how vital trade is to your economy.

[elleng]

11. correct

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

22. Yeah, because mercantilism and dependencia worked SO well

The problems with the US economy are of our own exclusive creation and have little to do with globalization, free trade or the outside world in general.

[HeresyLives]

26. Oh they have everything to do with globalization.

The concept of the 'outside' world, as if you are a world unto yourselves, is the problem.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

34. There are 300,000,000 of us, we have a little gravity of our own

In our country not only is ignorance not punished or stigmatized it is considered the highest expression of cultural authenticity. There aren't many countries where people wander around advertising their fucking morons and are celebrated for it.

In our country the wealthy are worshiped like a deity and virtually beyond reproach, if they have wealth, they must have wisdom. Look at people like Frank Lorenzo, Al Dunlop or Donald Trump. All three are total failures by any interpretation of the word. But their RICH so they must know what I am doing and the fact they destroy everything they touch is ignored. Their made celebrities and the country hangs on their every word. In most countries the wealthy are at the VERY least viewed with suspicion. While the everyman here will take up and fight passionately for their agenda.

Then there is our attention span, our economy runs in 90 day chunks - the ONLY thing that matters is the quarterly numbers so the bimbo on MSNBC says something nice about us so the retail investor retards will run our stock up. To this end they will emaciate themselves to the brink of death.

And lets not even get into the obscene costs of militarism.

[HeresyLives]

32. Well, it's late so I'm off to bed.

Thank you for a good discussion everyone.

[JVS]

38. Thanks for going to bed.

[midnight]

40. I like that idea...

[akforme]

41. A video full of predictions from 1994.

Here's an interview with Charlie Rose and a billionaire businessman Sir James Goldsmith who is against it and pretty much described our world today when he described what will result from GATT.


Click here to see the video

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

44. uhh... GATT ended in 1994 and was replaced with the WTO

[FreeJoe]

43. Yeah, because Smoot Hawley...

...worked so well. We're trying to avoid a depression, not start one. Get any basic economics book and read about trade. It's a good thing, not a bad thing.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

45. I don't think the results matter to them,

as long as the road to oblivion is ideologically sound.

[spoony]

47. "them" = Workers? Liberals?

You do know most people on our side oppose those bullshit treaties, right? Are you going to label all of us unrealistic purists? The road to oblivion is already paved with the complacency of moderates; that's what gave us rubbish like NAFTA.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

51. You dudes are calling for the abolition of the global economy,

I think unrealistic purists fits nicely,

And I wasn't complacent, I supported NAFTA enthusiastically.

[spoony]

46. Lol, nice to see the "let the market solve it" crowd so motivated

in this thread. Shows who's who.

[Meldread]

54. ...and the Democratic Party would be destroyed.

If we immediately repealed and brought an end to those things there would be three immediate results. First, unemployment would skyrocket throughout virtually every sector of the economy. Entire towns across America have bound themselves up in a more global economy, and they would be utterly devastated. Second, the prices of everything would rise. That's simple supply and demand, most of what we purchase is manufactured in other nations, and as a result of ending those trade agreements we'd quickly find that we no longer have the manufacturing base to support the demand hence the spike in prices. Third, as a result of the other two things we'd be thrown into a depression so deep that it could cripple our economy for at LEAST a generation.

I know free trade isn't popular, and there are certainly issues that I have with the agreements. We've allowed unfair competitive advantages against American workers when it comes to regulations that range from worker conditions to environmental concerns. We've allowed Free Trade to be turned into a race to the bottom. However, it is not the trade itself that has caused the problem, but rather those issues.

How do we handle the issue immediately? In our country we should:

- Make starting a new business a breeze. America has a strong entrepreneurial spirit, but a mass of state and federal laws can make starting a new business difficult. There are tons of hoops you have to jump through, and if the government could create an easy process that is subsidize we'd see many more American's deciding to start their own business.

- Subsidize the losses businesses face due to regulatory laws. This places us on an equal playing field with nations that have no regulatory laws, but still allows us to have our cake and eat it too. We can have a clean environment through regulation, and have a thriving business community as well.

- Establish some form of universal health care that does not rely on employers. Many other nations have already realized or are beginning to realize that it's silly to tie health care to an employer. Not only does it make health care less portable, but in systems where you have more freedom to select different types of plans (such as in Japan and France) from private insurers it can limit your options. Often you don't get to choose your own insurance company, and instead are forced to take whatever the company provides, and they have a financial incentive to pick the cheapest they can find. Fix the health care system, and millions of new jobs will be created just on that alone.

- More strongly invest in new business. If the government wanted to create new business fast, they'd establish a program that had banks take on 20% of the risk from new loans to small and medium sized businesses, with the government taking on the other 80% - this reduces risks to banks, allowing them to make more loans, and the increased credit would allow more businesses to be created and expanded.

- More sensible immigration laws. We want to draw the best talent from around the world. Allowing businesses to hire talent from around the world, and creating an easy path to immigration would help immensely. We'd want to encourage aspiring entrepreneurs in other nations to immigrate to the United States and start their businesses here instead. New ideas, new scientific breakthroughs, we want them to be done here in the United States.

- Improve the education system. We want the best education system in the world. I'd go as far as to say that we should not only have subsidized grade school education, but we should also subsidize (either in whole or in part) college and/or trade school education. The more educated American's are the more flexible we become and the more opportunities that open up to each of us.

- Invest more heavily into science and technology. We always want the United States to be on the cutting edge, several steps, if not miles ahead of all other nations. Investing in science and technology now ensures that the breakthroughs are American, and therefore create American jobs.

- Invest and improve in our infrastructure. Developing nations have a leg up on us here, simply because our infrastructure was placed down generations ago and theirs is being placed down right now. We need to think about the future, and create and design infrastructure that will give us the advantage in shaping it. This means not only learning from what is working in other nations, but pushing it further in an attempt to determine how it could improve our economy.

- Focus on exports. This can be done in conjunction with strongly investing in new businesses. If we understand what the needs are of other nations, we can create ways to fill those needs right here in the United States. This would increase our exports to other nations.

These are just some ways, off the top of my head, that the United States could maneuver itself to blow out all the other nations in terms of competition. It is good for everyone involved. It would result in higher wages, higher standards of living, more employment, and a more stable society.

[Mari333]

55. agreed. knr

[jtylerpittman]

57. Not going to happen

FT is here to stay. Fighting it is futile.