Does anyone remember which sexual predator signed into law the NAFTA agreement? Now that we have that answered, why is it that the Democrats keep saying in their adds that Bush is the one who is letting companies go overseas and outsource labor, when it was actually Clinton who allowed it with the NAFTA agreement? What President in their right mind would go back on this agreement and probably sever ties with all of the countries involved? Once Billary signed it, the economy started going downhill. I was laid off twice due to the NAFTA agreement. Do you really think that the Democrats are for the middle and lower class? NAFTA destroyed the middle and lower class. Thanks Billary and the Democrats!
After thoughts?
2006-11-07 07:07:26 · 5 answers · asked by Bigbaddad 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
dba_gregg, how is Bush supposed to stop a process already put in place by Clinton for outsourcing? So Bush gets to alienate all these other countries by saying, "No, we can't work with you, this agreement was only for Canada and Mexico." Nice try, but the process was already put in motion with NAFTA.
2006-11-07 07:18:11 · update #1
Clinton signed NAFTA into law. More jobs were outsourced from 1993 to 2000 than 2001 to 2006.
The DNC has outsourced their "get out the vote" call centers and are paying overseas companies to troll blogs and message boards.
The Democrats don't care about the middle class, they care about middle class tax dollars.
2006-11-07 07:11:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nafta didn't affect "OVERSEAS" jobs only ones to mexico and canada. Also a republican congress passed NAFTA.
But if you are talking OVERSEAS like china, Bush and the republicans are the ones that have accelerated outsourcing of US jobs through their trade policies. Democrats have been calling for policies that would slow things down and allow workers and families to adjust, but they don't even get their measures up for a vote because republicans want outsourcing and their voting record (and who they take money from) proves it.
Additional Comments:
First off bush stopped many things that were put in place beforehand like removing the US from the AntiBallistic Missile treaty as well as the Kyoto Protocols, as well as overtime rules and bankruptcy rules that have been in place for over 200 years (the changes bush made by the way to that law ONLY affected the middle class, the rich kept their loopholes and the poor were unaffected.
Secondly, You have it all wrong. Bluster does not pass for facts. Bush had nothing to do with Nafta and everything to do with policies that have increased outsourcing including HUGE TAX BREAKS FOR COMPANIES THAT OUTSOURCE. Special rules that allow them to shift losses and profits overseas to avoid taxes in the US, and many other things that have accelerated the process.
You either have extremely innacurate information or you are intentionally trying to say 1+1 = 4.
2006-11-07 07:10:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
You actually think politicians care about you, lol. Both parties are only looking to benefit themselves. If they really cared they would be getting stuff done in D.C. instead of talking behind each others backs like little middle school girls. One party blames Bush, the other blames Obama, I don't care who did what, just somebody do something.
2016-05-22 08:12:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NAFTA may have defiantly been a problem. Although, I do think that the Dems benefit most by the elimination of the middle class.
2006-11-07 07:11:32 · answer #4 · answered by marcus93257 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
No, the Demorats taxing them to death did.
2006-11-07 07:10:39 · answer #5 · answered by Spirit Walker 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋