NAFTA appears to be irrelevant

[pathansen]

Think about it.

NAFTA stands for North American Free Trade Agreement.

If NAFTA never existed, we would still have the problem with massive job losses because of the following two reasons:

1. Most of jobs have gone overseas to Asian countries, mainly India and China. Not Mexico.

2. There has still been massive amounts of illegals coming to this country from Mexico, thus taking lots of jobs away from legal Americans. If NAFTA created all these jobs in Mexico, why would all these Mexicans be forced to move to the U.S. in search of work?

So NAFTA’s influence appears to be pretty insignificant.

[islandmkl]

1. uhhh....if you don't know how NAFTA works and all....

you might want to do a little deep research into the actual operational format for the industries involved...

or, just think #1 & #2 above explain it all...and then it won't really matter to you, anyway...

[redqueen]

2. You don't understand NAFTA.

Read up on the effects of NAFTA on immigration, for one.

*sigh*

[pathansen]

11. ?? How did it affect immigration?

[redqueen]

12. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5496448&mesg_id=5496738

[LSparkle]

3. Those jobs originally may have gone to Mexico, and have now moved on

to India, etc. NAFTA went into effect back in the 90s so we've had 10 years to
see its effects. You may call it insignificant now, but it was the crack in the
dam that started a lot of job flight.

[zulchzulu]

4. There's are a couple two new terms you can learn today

1. Outsourcing (the Clintons have their paws way into this)

2. China Most Favored Nation Status (signed by Bill, voted for by Hillary)

PAY THE FUCK ATTENTION!

[OzarkDem]

5. How were Clintons involved in outsourcing?

You must be referring to "offshoring", as well as "outsourcing", a common mistake.

Most of the policies that put it into high gear were during the Bush/Cheney administration. China was accepted into the WTO (w/ most favored nation status) in 2001, after Bush was elected. They put it into overdrive with tax incentives that encouraged both practices.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offshoring


US has had trade agreements with China for years, with the biggest opening coming under the Nixon administration. The US granted China MFN waivers every year since 1980. Clinton simply supported the renewal of the old MFN trade agreements because he wanted to keep peace in the area.

The problem was creating the WTO from GATT. The WTO took control of enforcing trade policies out of control of the US government (all governments actually). It made it much more difficult to control or restrict trade without collateral effects.

[smiley_glad_hands]

6. LOLCATS. eom

[OzarkDem]

7. ??

[zulchzulu]

10. So how are the Clintons involved in outsourcing you ask?

The Clintons have reaped significant financial rewards from their relationship with the Indian community, both in their personal finances and Hillary’s campaign fundraising. Hillary Clinton, who is the co-chair of the Senate India Caucus, has drawn criticism from anti-offshoring groups for her vocal support of Indian business and unwillingness to protect American jobs. Bill Clinton has invested tens of thousands of dollars in an Indian bill payment company, while Hillary Clinton has taken tens of thousands from companies that outsource jobs to India. Workers who have been laid off in upstate New York might not think that her recent joke that she could be elected to the Senate seat in Punjab is that funny. Pennsylvania has lost a LOT of electronics jobs through outsourcing...

PERSONAL HOLDINGS
2006: Bill Clinton Invested Tens of Thousands In An Indian Bill Payment Company. According to Hillary Clinton’s personal financial disclosure form, as part his ownership of WJC Investments, LP LLC, Bill Clinton held between $15,001 and $50,000 worth of stock in Easy Bill Limited, an Indian company. According to the company’s website, “Functioning as a one-stop bill payment shop, Easy Bill facilitates payment of utility bills as well as recharging of pre-paid mobile connections at a place the consumer is already familiar and comfortable with the neighbourhood store.” In addition to providing terminals throughout India where customers may pay their bills, the company also maintains a call center described as “a dedicated response centre for efficient customer service.”
Hillary Clinton 2006 Financial Disclosure Report, http://www.easybillindia.com /

2006: Bill Clinton Collected $300,000 From Cisco In 2006. Hillary’s personal financial disclosure forms indicate that Bill Clinton gave two speeches to Cisco Systems, each for $150,000 on 5/18/06 and 8/17/06.
(Hillary Clinton 2006 Financial Disclosure Report; 3,4)

CAMPAIGN FUNDRAISING

Hillary Clinton Accepted Almost $60,000 In Contributions From Employees Of Cisco Systems, Which Laid Off American Workers to Hire Indian “Techies.”
Clinton’s Presidential Exploratory Committee took $39,450 from Cisco employees during the first quarter of 2007. Cisco employees have also donated $18,900 to Clinton’s Senate committee between 1999 and 2006. Forbes reported, in a feature called “A Tale of Two Cities” that Cisco was laying off $60,000-a-year “techies,” while hiring new employees in Bangalore, India. “Cisco used only a few Infosys workers in Bangalore six years ago (in 1998); (by 2004, it used) almost 300 contract staff, plus 550 full-fledged employees in its own Bangalore office.” In 2006, Newsweek reported that “for Cisco, India is the new frontier, where it’s investing $1.2 billion to build a gleaming R&D campus that will employ 3,000 people.”
(FEC filings; Forbes, 4/12/04; Newsweek, 3/6/06)

Clinton Donor, Sant Singh Chatwal, Cited Clinton’s India Caucus Work Vowed To Raise $5 Million.
In March 2007, the Economic Times wrote, “(Clinton) has roped in New York-based hotelier Sant Chatwal as co-chair of her recently formed presidential exploratory committee to run for the 2008 White House race. (…) He is also creating an organization called Indian Americans for Hillary 2008.”

In April 2007, Mangalorean reported that Indian Americans for Hillary 2008 (IAFH) had already raised $1 million and “aimed to raise at least five million dollars.” A major fund raiser on June 24 hosted by Chatwal, the founder of IAFH; steel baron, Lakshmi Mittal, and businessman SP Hindujas, was expected to pull more than 1,000 guests. In June 2007, The New York Times reported that “two Indo-American receptions have a total of $450,000 in commitments.”

Chatwal Owed The City Of New York More Than $2 Million In Back Taxes, Fled Prosecution For Fraud But Was Arrested During Visit to India With Bill Clinton.
Sant Singh Chatwal, who raised more $200,000 for Sen. Clinton in 2000, owed New York City $2.4 million in back property taxes. In addition, during a visit to India with Bill Clinton, in May 2001, Chatwal was arrested by authorities there and charged with defrauding the New York City branch of the Bank of India out of $9 million he borrowed in 1994. He posted bail, then fled India, boarding a flight to Vienna despite an attempt by authorities to detain him. .
(New York Daily News, 11/24/02; New York Daily News, 11/7/00)

FDIC Charged Chatwal With Obtaining Improper Loans.
In a separate 1996 case, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. charged Chatwal with obtaining improper loans from the First New York Bank for Business, causing the bank to lose more than $25 million. Chatwal, who was a director of the bank, arranged more than $14 million in loans to himself and his businesses, often with no collateral, said the FDIC. He didn't repay the loans and the bank failed.
(New York Daily News, 11/24/02; New York Daily News, 11/7/00)

Clinton Co-Founded The Senate India Caucus, A Project Of The U.S. India Political Action Committee.
In 2004, Clinton co-founded and became the co-chair of the Senate India Caucus which was coordinated by the U.S. India Political Action Committee (USINPAC). Roll Call reported, “The goals of the caucus, which already has 31 members, include increasing trade with India and improving security against global terrorism.” Sen. Clinton said, “It is imperative that the Unites States do everything possible to reach out to India. This Caucus is dedicated to expanding areas of agreement with India and engaging in a candid dialogue of differences.” (Roll Call, 4/28/04; PR Newswire, 4/29/04)

2005: Anti-Offshoring Advocacy Group Gave Sen. Clinton A “Weasel Award,” Citing Pro-Outsourcing Comments Clinton Made In India.
The Press Trust of India wrote, “An American anti-offshoring advocacy group has awarded its first ‘Weasel Award of 2005’ to Democrat Senator Hillary Clinton for her recent remarks supporting outsourcing. The Delaware-based IT Professionals Association of America (ITPAA) representing over 1,200 IT professionals nationwide, said on its Web site that it presented this award to business and political leaders that it believes ‘betray the trust of the American people.’

Scott Kirwin, founder of the organization claimed that people were ‘tired of Democrats pretending they care about the problems facing average Americans. Senator Clinton’s actions prove they clearly do not.’ The ITPAA based its award on press reports of Hilary Clinton supporting outsourcing and assuring political and business leaders in India that the US would not attempt to save the jobs lost. ‘

"Outsourcing will continue. There is no way to legislate against reality. We are not in favor of putting up fences."
Hillary had said on Feb 28 in India, according to a report by the Asia Times. Kirwin also cited her position as co-chair of the ‘Friends of India Caucus’ in the Senate, a group of senators that supports issues important to India, including outsourcing and H-1B and L-1 visas, as another reason behind the ITPAA's decision to give the award to the prospective Democrat presidential nominee.”
(Press Trust Of India, 3/5/05; Link To Weasel Award)

2/05: On India Trip, Clinton Allayed India’s Fears That Outsourcing Would End.
The India Review wrote, “Senator Clinton allayed apprehensions in India that there would be a bar on outsourcing. ‘There is no way to legislate against reality. Outsourcing will continue,” she said. (India Review, 4/05, accessed, 6/7/07)

Sen. Clinton (D-Punjab) Joked That She Was Senator From The Punjab Region In India.
“At the fundraiser hosted by Dr Rajwant Singh at his Potomac, Maryland, home, and which raised nearly $50,000 for her re-election campaign, Clinton began by joking that, ‘'I can certainly run for the Senate seat in Punjab and win easily,’ after being introduced by Singh as the Senator not only from New York but also Punjab.”
(India Abroad, 3/17/06)

Clinton Says “Outsourcing Does Work Both Ways.”
Crain’s New York Business wrote, “Mrs. Clinton may be motivated by a desire to uphold the free trade legacy of the Clinton years. (…) In an appearance on CNN’s Lou Dobbs Tonight, she boasted about attracting 10 jobs to New York from India-based Tata Consulting. When Mr. Dobbs inquired if she had understood the degree to which Tata, which helps U.S. companies outsource, was stealing American jobs, Mrs. Clinton rejoined: ‘They’ve actually brought jobs to Buffalo. Outsourcing does work both ways.’” (Crain’s New York Business, 6/21/04; CNN, 3/3/04)

In An Interview With Lou Dobbs, Senator Clinton Defended Her Support Of Tata Consulting, A Company That Brought Ten Jobs To Native Buffalo Residents But Destroyed Thousands Of Jobs Over The Years.
Lou Dobbs asked Clinton, “Senator, a number of people pointed out to us, e-mailing us and calling us, saying, ask the senator about her helping Tata Consulting, a well-known outsourcer, open jobs --and office in Buffalo, New York. I’m asking you, did you really understand the degree to which they were involved in outsourcing jobs when you were there?” Clinton replied, “Well, of course I know that they outsource jobs, that they’ve actually brought jobs to Buffalo. They’ve created 10 jobs in Buffalo and have told me and the Buffalo community that they intend to be a source of new jobs in the area, because, you know, outsourcing does work both ways.” (CNN, 3/3/04)

Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) Is Famous For Pioneering The Business Practice Of Off-shoring.
The San Jose Mercury News wrote, “TCS, however, will go down in the annals of offshoring as the original high-tech body shop. Starting in the early 1990s, TCS blanketed the American landscape with legions of itinerant software programmers from India. (…) Tata pioneered an industry that eventually evolved into the dynamo of offshoring, or sending work to cheap labor markets overseas. (…) Tata’s methods have not been popular among U.S. technology workers, however, who complain guest workers suppress local wages and offshoring takes good jobs overseas.”
(San Jose Mercury News, 12/6/04)

Tata’s Buffalo, N.Y. Training Center Caters To The Needs Of The Company’s 8,000 Employees In The United States, 80 Percent Of Whom Are Workers From India.
India Abroad wrote, “At the Chrysalis Center TCS will host new employees in month-long training sessions to make them aware of the company’s history and culture and to hone their core IT skills that will bridge existing knowledge with advanced skills necessary to work on innovative projects for customers.” The center will also cater to the training needs of the more than 8,000 TCS employees across the US, 80 percent of whom are from India, according to Buffalo News.
(India Abroad, 7/30/04; Buffalo News, 7/20/04)

Gupta Said Democrats’ Stand On Outsourcing Was Poll-Year Rhetoric.
The Economic Times wrote, “Vinod ‘Vin’ Gupta (…) also believes that the Democratic Party’s stand on outsourcing is more poll year rhetoric than any serious economic policy statement. ‘We have to compete globally and US has to find the best product and services at the best cost. Tapping global resources will obviously make the US economy stronger,’ says Gupta whose own company InfoUSA outsources both technology support and database work to vendors in India. Gupta, who has helped Hillary Clinton and Al Gore in fund-raising efforts for their campaigns, is now involved in fund raising efforts for Senator Kerry.”
(The Economic Times, 3/29/04)

[AndyTiedye]

8. In Fairness it Must Be Pointed Out that We Had Nearly Full Employment under Clinton

[karynnj]

9. Yes and no,

Before NAFTA was implemented, there already was globalization and it was the cause of many of the effects that are blamed on NAFTA. The side agreements that were suppose to go with NAFTA provided a means to protect the workers on both sides - they never happened. In 2004, almost every Democratic candidate spoke of reviewing all the trade agreements - just as the 2008 candidates have done. In addition, Kerry spoke of removing parts of the tax code that actually gave preferential treatment to people moving their jobs over seas and replacing them with preferential treatment that kept the jobs in the US and did other things that made them good corporate citizens.

What they were reacting to was what we saw in the US and in Mexico - NAFTA has actually accelerated the movement of people out of rural areas to the cities and then into the US. The problems exceeded what was anticipated - reread the Gore/Perot debate. As to Mexico, it made things worse for the poor there - the opposite of what I expected. In 2005, I happened to catch part of the Portman hearings when he was being consider for the Trade representative. (Yes I know it is weird to have a TV tuned most often to C-SPAN 2!) Here was a description of the situation in Mexico from Senator Kerry:

"“Obviously, in the opposition to CAFTA in the Central American region is striking in and of itself. You’ve got small farmers, indigenous groups, environmentalists, bishops, parliamentarians. Many others have spoken out against it. And what they do is they cite the experience of Mexico as one of the reasons that they’re deeply concerned about it. In Mexico, real wages have fallen. Poverty has risen. More than a million small farmers lost their land. Many civil society groups and people of conscious believe that you’ve got an even, you know, worse enforcement mechanism and a worse starting point here. Tens of thousands of Central Americans have taken to the streets to protest this. They’re demanding a public referendum on the agreement. A recent Gallup poll found that 65 percent of Guatemalans think it’s going to harm rather than help their country. You’ve got a number of immigrant groups here in our country, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, CARACEN, Salvadorian American National-Network, others have come out against it.
Why do you think such a broad and diverse range of Central Americans here and there are against it? And what does that say about this consensus that is so necessary to proceed forward and make it work?”

The problem though is what is the solution to the problems caused by globalization here and in the third world. NAFTA seems to have possibly made things worse - or it may have been that even without NAFTA forces would have caused the same problem. The answer may be that people need to see that it is in the interest of everyone in every first world country that their workers have a decent standard of living. That is one of the reason that many are now pushing to include provisions that guarantee international workers rights. I liked what Senator Kerry said in his economic speech at Faneuil Hall last year (this was written as one of the speeches that would have defined a 2008 run - taken together they are incredible)

"“What was true in Roosevelt’s day is just as true today: we must promote the right of employees to collectively bargain for better wages and benefits — at home and abroad.
There’s nothing anti-business about being pro-union. And there’s nothing that contributes more to a socially responsible corporate community than workers who know they have a place at the table in key corporate decisions.
Under the Bush administration, the federal government has pursued the most strident anti-union policies in memory. I doubt they’ve appointed one judge who has voted for workers one time in their lifetime. Then how can they talk about spreading democracy to other countries and then tell workers that they don’t have the right to sign a card and elect a union to bargain for a better wage here in America?
Congress needs to finally enact basic labor law reforms like the Employee Free Choice Act, which preserves the right of workers to organize without intimidation. And, just as important, we have to promote workers’ rights abroad — because it’s right — and because it’s the only way to create a level playing field for U.S. exports.
American labor leaders understand this. Andy Stern, head of SEIU, has been to China six times in five years. As President, George Bush has only been there once — and I’m sure he didn’t once mention worker’s rights. James Hoffa, of the Teamsters union, sees China as a new frontline for the labor movement. He understands that, at its worst, the global economy is a race to the bottom that pulls the rug out from under American workers.
So we have to make it a race for the top — because globalization isn’t going to go away. We need to put our stamp on it and create a fair playing field — because empowering America’s workers means stepping up to bat for workers everywhere.
When Democrats took over Congress we said to this President — “no more trade deals unless you fight for workers’ rights.” We held his feet to the fire in a trade deal with Peru that does protect workers. But it’s not enough to have labor rights written on a piece of paper signed in the Rose Garden. We need countries to start enforcing them — and we need a President who actually wants them enforced.”
http://www.johnkerry.com/2007/10/1/faneuil-hall-speech-plan-for-a-21st-century-economic-strategy