Nafta is not good to either America or Mexico. It is only good to businesses who go to Mexico then use cheap labor there.
The reason Nafta failed and does not work is because there are no stipulations in it that demand Mexico enforce their labor laws. This is what Ross Perot wanted added to Nafta that politicians left out.
Perot showed pictures of workers who lived on hills in cardboard boxes outside the plants they worked for. The reason is because (as I said before) there is nothing in Nafta that forces Mexico to enforce the labor laws.
So basically, a company can move to Mexico and still pay Mexican workers very low then they turn around and don't even lower the prices here. It's nothing but a way for companies to get richer and richer at the cost of mexican workers and american jobs.
2006-06-25 12:53:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by BeachBum 7
·
5⤊
0⤋
NAFTA must go as it is stagnating the U.S. standard of living - except for those in the investor class who invest in firms relocating down south. So long as you can find a Mexican to do work for a fraction of the wage that an American will, and can, do it, we are doomed to third-worldization. I am for bi-lateral trade deals and even tarriffs to counter the competitive advantages that countries have due strictly to their sub-human standards of living.
2006-06-25 13:21:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by rlw 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the goal was to bring a bunch of business to Mexico with easy access to the US, so as to improve their economy. That would theoretically mean less illegal immigration to the US cause there would be good paying jobs there, and good paying jobs there would ultimately mean a friendly easy access market for US goods. An improved economy there would additionally take away much of the power drug cartels & corruption have over their society. Also, because the US was at the time moving away from manufacturing, it gave us a way to exploit cheap labor in the interm, with them being thankful for being take advantage of, and sending the business there rather than places like China. We have our problems with Mexico, but they're not a tyrannical communist country we're scared of being at war with in the next 10 years, nor competing against us as a superpower. It would be much better for us if companies like WalMart moved everything they have in China to Mexico, much much better for us. It just hasn't worked yet because it hasn't been supported right.
2006-06-25 13:05:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by djack 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
We should change the NAFTA treaty to ensure labor rights and environmental protection. That will make free trade fairer, and stop companies from shopping for the most exploitable labor.
2006-06-25 12:36:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Duffman 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was bad for American farmers who can't compete with S. American labor costs and it's bad for Mexican farmers because now they a being forced to buy GMO seed from Monsanto where before they saved seed just like they did for centuries. the GMO seed is now interpollenating with the heritage seed screwing their ecosystem. But not worry, I just visited a question which states the world is ending so it's no big deal in that light.
2006-06-25 12:35:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by changRdie 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was good for big business; period. They got support from both Republicans and Democrats and I doubt anyone benefited on a small scale other then maybe a Mexican truck driver who got to roam the streets of the USA with his rig and Mexican drivers license.
2006-06-25 12:27:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by netjr 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Afta Nafta came disasta.
2006-06-25 12:30:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by helixburger 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
For consumers is very bad as goods that were normally made in Japan or the U.S. are now poorly been manufacture in Mexico. For the American Factory worker is also bad as they loose their jobs to poorly train personnel for even less money.
2006-06-25 12:32:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by lelekid4ever 5
·
0⤊
0⤋