An alternative view on life, politics, and computers
CAFTA
Published on April 3, 2005 By Calor In Politics

Those who think that the right of American politics is all about Jesus should think again. Conservatives have a religion they are much more faithful to despite far more evidence that it's a fraud. That religion is free trade.

Free trade as a concept is fine. Eliminate trade barriers between countries to allow both parties access at the other's market.  But in practice, it doesn't work so well when one party's par capita GNP is massively higher than the other. That's where you get Ross Perot's "giant sucking sound".

Permanent friend trade status with China has flooded the US with cheap Chinese products that have put thousands of Americans out of work. We're working our way up the chain to outsource our R&D and engineering jobs to China and India as well. 

"Free" trade with Mexico has seen countless American manufacturing jobs shifted south of the border where pollution controls are nil and wages tiny. 

And what has this "free" trade done for Americans? Those left with jobs get slightly cheaper goods. But American companies don't get new markets.  China buys very little from America.  Mexico even less. 

And now Bush wants to expand this wonderful policy to Central America, a land with the gross national product of a modest-sized American city.  What are these people going to buy? What are we going to export to Nicaragua other than high paying manufacturing jobs?

Bush defenders try to point out that cheaper goods helps us all. That's only true if people have jobs that can pay for adequate housing. The Bush administration's trade policies will slowly create a generation of Americans that work at two levels - the high paid managers of foreign workers and everyone else who will work in the retail retail service industry at very low wages. 

With any luck, CAFTA won't pass any time soon. But given the right's blind faith in universal free trade, I won't hold my breath. Americans desperately need a President who is President of all people, not just people who hang out at the countryclub.


Comments (Page 2)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Apr 04, 2005
Bush policy did not prevent an attack on America. He attacked a country that had nothing to do with the asttack on 9/11. Bush does not safeguard our border which allows any terrorists to come into the U S. Bush is the president. He responsible for the current policies. We did not have a deficit when Bush took office and the trade deficit is 50% worse since Bush took over. How about addressing this!
on Apr 04, 2005

So now would you like to print a retraction, or an apology?

Did you agree with EVERYTHING Clinton did?

whether i agreed with anyone or not isn't the issue (nice try tho).  my question was prompted by your demand for an apology or retraction because, despite your statement opposing free trade, i've yet to see you admit any dissatisfaction with bush's policies. 

on Apr 04, 2005

I was not aware that he ever supported Clinton. Maybe I missed something.

according to jim yardley of the new york times, on 4/24/2000, while dedicating the 'world trade bridge' in laredo, tx, bush vowed--if elected--to tear down trade barriers from alaska to 'the tip of cape horn'.

on Apr 04, 2005

does anyone completly agree with EVERY policy any President has put forth?

exactly the point of my question regarding drmiler's unwavering support for bush.  apparently at least one person does.

on Apr 04, 2005
does anyone completly agree with EVERY policy any President has put forth?

exactly the point of my question regarding drmiler's unwavering support for bush. apparently at least one person does.


Do you have your head on straight? After me saying I do NOT support free trade. *How* can you say Bush has my unwavering support for all his policies? Is not what we're talking about a Bush policy that I have stated that I'm against? Wake up!
And BTW......

it's called "supporting our president after he makes a decision, even if you disagree with it, I do not agree with many things bush says or does, but as a good american after POLICY is made I support it.
on Apr 04, 2005
Unfortunately, they can’t even get free-trade right. They can’t even respect their own trade agreements. That’s why the WTO authorised over a dozen countries to impose trade sanctions on the US.
on Apr 04, 2005
Have we forgotten that it was a Democratic president who pushed NAFTA to beging with?
on Apr 04, 2005
That is correct. The problem is the Republican president can not see it is not working!
on Apr 04, 2005
Have we forgotten that it was a Democratic president who pushed NAFTA to beging with?


---glad some 1 brought that up....
on Apr 04, 2005
That is correct. The problem is the Republican president can not see it is not working!


Ohhhh, so now it's Bush's fault that a "democrtic" president pushed through a piece of junk legislation? Why Bush? Why wasn't it squashed in the first place? Especilly since it didn't work from the get-go.
on Apr 04, 2005
it's called "supporting our president after he makes a decision, even if you disagree with it, I do not agree with many things bush says or does, but as a good american after POLICY is made I support it.


So, a president makes a decision. I think it is the wrong decision. As part of explaining this decision, a president says something. I do not agree with what is said. These words and decisions that I disagree with become policy. I have to support it or I am a bad American. Hmm. So freedom only extends to when something I disagree with becomes policy, at which point I must agree with it or be a bad American. Interesting.
on Apr 04, 2005


Reply By: drmilerPosted: Monday, April 04, 2005That is correct. The problem is the Republican president can not see it is not working!Ohhhh, so now it's Bush's fault that a "democrtic" president pushed through a piece of junk legislation? Why Bush? Why wasn't it squashed in the first place? Especilly since it didn't work from the get-go


but of course it's Presidents bushes fault,, so was the murder of jfk, and rfk, the war in vietnam, the first gulf war.. all poverty, all crime, it's all bush the juniors fault.

There gene feel better now that I lied with you?
on Apr 04, 2005
Why wasn't it squashed in the first place? Especilly since it didn't work from the get-go.


why is it being expanded? and why are you defending bush in this instance when you claim to oppose the policy? my head is on tight enuff to see you don't deserve an apology or retraction. can't we even get a 'hey he's screwing up here' from you?
on Apr 04, 2005
hey he {bush} ain't pefrect and screws up/ hows that? I see what is and what ain't and am not blinded by ideology.
on Apr 04, 2005
Me? apolologize to drmiler? In your dreams. I have nothing to apologise to you for. Nada. Zilch. I retract nothing. I do not support that dipshit asshole we have for a president, and I do not apologize for my disdain for his blindly patriotic supporters. Jingoism is dangerous, and I will not apologize to any jingoistic slob, and certainly not drmiler. Sheesh...............
4 Pages1 2 3 4