Free Trade of the Americas Agreement

[American Voice]

I gather that you folks are confronted with a national parliamentary election sometime in the near future. Are any of the candidates discussing the proposed Free Trade of the Americas Agreement?

In the 1980’s, principally with private capital raised by American-based Citicorp, the Itaiupu hydroelectric project was developed to provide for the electrification of the Piranha River basin in Brazil. The intention was to develop the basin as a vast industrial complex. That development has been stalled largely by liberal-backed policies inhibiting local production there by imposing trade restrictions here, in the U.S. It is, therefore, unlikely that the proposed free trade agreement, "extending NAFTA down to Tierra del Fuego,” as the first President Bush once put it, is the project of “liberal forces.” Are the Canadian conservatives mentioning this? Is the labor party wagging a finger?

Down here in the States, this deal is considered to be something of an inevitability. Is it mentioned at all in your debates up North?

 

[Andem]

Debates? There's nothing to debate here. These trade agreements are created to benefit one group, and that's about as far as it goes. Corporations in the United States see the most profit from these agreements..

Infact, you will also see the American people suffer from trade agreements setup by their government.

I'm really too tired to go into specifics right now, but I'm sure someone else will jump in.l

 

[TenPenny]

Typically, the US will go along with a trade agreement until it isn't in their "interest"; look at the softwood lumber issue. The US won't even go along with the rulings, because they don't want to.

 

[Andem]

This is a pretty old topic, but I'd like to start it up again to get the general idea on how everyone feels about trade agreements.

On one hand we have increasing number of Americans who are starting to go against these agreements because of the loss of jobs to the third world.

On the other hand, why have the main political candidates really debated these issues when they are, for the most part, on of the country's main priorities. It boggles me to know that even people like Jack Layton don't really advocate this loud enough for all Canadians to hear.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Free Trade of the Ame

We need trade agreements, just not the ones we have.

The developed world got rich through trade, not just through dominating smaller, weaker countries; but through trading with other wealthy countries.

If you look at Canada and the US...both are wealthy countries and both owe that largely to trade with each other. We have done best when things were the most equal between us and the trade deals benefitted both without being detrimental to either.

Look at what's happening now. We have a trade deal between Canada, the USA, and Mexico that is detrimental to the long-term interests of all three countries and benefits nobody but the corporations. The jobs move to the cheapest areas, not just wage-wise, but in terms of workers' rights. The environmental standards are allowed to slip to the weakest legislated among the three countries. Constant spurious accusations of dumping are placed by the most powerful partner.

Now consider what could be. A time-frame could have been set out to bring wages and workers' rights up to the highest of three countries, with more trade opening up as those standards were achieved. Same with environmental standards. A mechanism to severely penalise a country making false allegations of dumping could have been put in.

Instead of looking at trade as a means to fulfill amoral corporate interests, it can be used to raise the lowest standards up to the level of the highest. Instead of a race to the bottom, we could all experience a slow, steady climb to the top.

The FTAA fell apart in Cancun and Miami because too many countries wanted no part of the race to the bottom that was being offered to them. What is replacing it is bi-lateral bullying with threats of aid being cut off and loans called in.

Canada needs to back away from NAFTA and the FTAA and go back to the table. If Venezuela can put the fear into a protectionist like George Bush, so can Canada. If Canada works with Venezuela (and Brazil, and Colombia and........) then we can work out a deal that benefits everybody.

If Canada does not do that, we can expect more of the same.

 

[vista]

The truth is I find it fascinating the changes in my perspective over recent years... I find it at times difficult to come to terms with my new political persuasion - which I believe to be right (left) on the mark.

In the end, capitalism has been a failure - the state of the world with Peak Oil and infinite growth on a finite planet is an attest to that. Too, market forces will not solve this crisis.

BUT, I do own stocks and hope they will do well - my oil & gas stocks are up 22% this year - my golds are down but are coming back and will be the new currency. I sold off everything else at the end of last year. I never would have thought...

Here is an excerpt I printed some time ago...

The Global Cheap-Labour Economy

Michel Chossudovsky Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa
excerpt from: The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order

The globalization of poverty endorses the development of a worldwide cheap-labour export economy. Poor countries do not trade among themselves: poor people do not constitute a market for the goods they produce.

Consumer demand is limited to approximately 15 percent of the world population, confined largely to the rich countries. Poverty is "an input" into the cheap-labour economy (on the supply side).

Everybody wants to export to the same European and North American markets: oversupply obliges Third World producers to cut their prices; the factory prices of industrial goods tumble on world markets in much the same way as those of primary commodities. Competition between and with developing countries contributes to depressing wages and prices.

Ironically, the promotion of exports leads ultimately to lower commodity prices and less export revenue from which to repay the external debt. In a bitter irony, the most successful exporting economies are also the World's largest debtor nations.

Moreover, the economic stabilization measures imposed on the South and East backfire on the economies of the rich countries: poverty in the Third World contributes to a global contraction in import demand which in turn affects economic growth and employment in the OECD [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development] countries.

For every job lost in the developed countries and transferred to the Third World, there is a corresponding decline of consumption in the developed countries.

Part-time employment, early retirement, the practice of attrition (which shifts the social burden of unemployment onto the younger age groups) bars an entire generation from the job-market.

This system is characterized by an unlimited capacity to produce. Yet the very act of expanding production - through relocation of material production from the "high wage" to the "low wage" economies - contributes to a contraction of spending (by those who have been laid off) which leads the world economy ultimately to the path of global stagnation.

While NAFTA enables American and Canadian corporations to penetrate the Mexican market, this process is undertaken largely by displacing existing Mexican enterprises. The US "exports its recession" to Mexico. Poverty and low wages in Mexico do not favour the expansion of consumer demand.

The formation of NAFTA has contributed to exacerbating the economic recession: the tendency is towards the reduction of wages and employment in all three countries.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Whoever thought up infinite growth with finite resources was a bit of an idiot all right. I'm no economist, but it just doesn't make sense. It never would have taken hold if people had been told the truth either. People from my parents' generation never even considered that oil could run short until the energy crisis of the 1970s. People of my generation were told of the magic of science for the first half of our lives.

The thing is that people did know and some acknowledged it. A lot of people who lived through the Depression understood it on a very personal level, but we were taught to disregard them.

I don't think it was a purposeful conspiracy, just a lot of people with their heads stuck in the sand hoping beyond hope that the party would never end, that some magic solution would come along.

We know better now. Things are still being candy-coated by the powers that be and the press, but the cracks have been appearing ever more steadily for a long time now and they are getting increasingly hard to plaster over.

 

[Jo Canadian]

 

[coldstream]

I read John Ralston Saul's recent book on the 'Collapse of Globalism' and I knew it was complete and perhaps intentional misreading of the prospects of the continued imposition of Global Free Trade, by any means possible. By bribary, threat, political overthrow, peaceful and bloody.. by propagandizing its supposed inevitability and desirability as a 'cure' for world poverty. The war in Iraq, the entire Anglo American political agenda's sole aim is to forward this global trade organism, especially to eliminating all sovereign national borders to investment and commercial regulation. All of these in future will be governed by tightly oligarchal controlled supranational agencies.. specifically the WTO, the World Bank and the IMF.

Look into the crazed, wild eyes of George Bush in his current trade mission speeches in Japan, South Korea and China, and you'll no there is no sign of defeat, no intent to in any way back away from that objective. Look at the stupidity in the face of Mexican President Vicente Fox, as he identified some innocuous personal comments by the anti-imperialist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as an affront to his NATION, identifying his own sorry person completely with identity of his country.. and you'll realize that there is utter desparation and committment to Free Trade agenda. That they will make complete fools of themselves, in forwarding this mission.

These leaders were chosen by oligarchs for their easy manipulation, through ignorance, personal corruption and manipulability. The next WTO effort to put an end to all sovereign national priviledge with respect to trade, natural resources extraction, currency, regulation is coming up. These people are quite mad, beyond reason, they'll stop at nothing... even though the complete realization of their objectives can only lead to a world economic collapse of unknown depth and duration.. and the inevitable Third World War that will result.. and this one will be nuclear.

 

[Karlin]

The main thing about Trade Agreements with the USA is this :
THEY WILL NOT ABIDE BY THE RULINGS OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM.

S o why would any nation be foolish enough to put a pen to paper in any deal with these criminals?

"Criminals" is not too harsh a description - laws were broken and reparations ordered and they refuse. It is no different than if you loan me $100 and I simply say "too bad" and never give it back to you.
Would you loan me money again AV?

----
Pres. Chavez is my hero on Free Trade politics.
American Voice, have you read the posts about Chavez [Venezuelas President] on this forum? or in the news?
He has declared Bush to be evil and a threat to freedom. I agree.

 

[PoisonPete2]

Yes, Bush is a thief. He owes me 5 billion dollars. Not to be trusted. Corporations are psychopathic in their nature and must be reigned in by democratic governments. Thus Chavez is going the right way. It is time for Bolivia to nationalize its water rights. You cannot have 'free trade' with agrarian based economies when the Americans subsidize their sugar, corn, wheat, barley, cotton, etc. etc. Let us strive for 'fair' trade and help young economies to mature into equal trading partners. Unfortunately american trade has a hidden corporate agenda.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Free Trade of the Ame

It's not just American trade though, Pete. Martin is in there like a dirty shirt, Harper would be even worse by most accounts.

The doctrine of unfettered capitalistic free trade that is pushed by the western/northern countries has made the poor countries poorer and placed restrictions on them that have encouraged corruption and human rights abuses. The rich western/northern countries never would have become rich if they had to abide by the rules we force (through the IMF, World Bank, trade deals, aid deals, and our ever-present corporate interests) on the developing world today.

 

[Jo Canadian]

Martin chides Bush at APEC summit

Prime Minister Paul Martin used a multinational meeting in Busan, South Korea, Friday to air his softwood lumber grievances with U.S. President George W. Bush.

In a closed meeting that also included the leaders of Mexico and Peru, Martin told Bush his stance on the ongoing lumber dispute jeopardizes the expansion of free trade.

Speaking in French to reporters later, Martin said he told Bush, "If you can't agree with your best ally, Canada, and you have the same problem with Mexico, how can you convince the other Latin American countries that free trade is a good thing?" More...

 

[GL Schmitt]

To quote a bit of myself :? from the In The News forum: WTO Rules against Canada thread:

. . . Since our United States trade partners have shown a consistent disinclination for living up to their contracts, Canada should, and must, consider all contracts with the trade partners in the United States of America in jeopardy of non compliance, withdraw from the NAFTA tripartite agreement, and seek another market for its softwood, and indeed, any other commodity it presently markets to America. . .

http://www.canadiancontent.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9275

( My, my! This feels rather incestuous. 8O )

I also agree with the Rev's reply: "Don't hold your breath on that. ."

Still, that doesn't make it bad advice.