Cheez Harry, Its OK for employers to steal the environment blind, graze like cattle with no responsibility and trust a blind hand while the workers are not allowed to think of profit for themselves. What kind of a human is that? I'll tell you what it is, its sick! Happy New Year.
REH ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Darryl and Natalia'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 4:24 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] FWD: NAFTA: North American Deal Dismal After aDecade > Daryll, > > Wallach is with Public Citizen - a Nader group as you know. > > They are tied to the protectionist unions who are against free > trade for fear it will affect their cushy jobs and pensions. The > fact that protectionism will raise prices to the other 280 > million Americans is not their concern. They are for themselves - > which they have a perfect right to be. > > But, they shouldn't be published as independent authorities on > the subject. > > Harry > > ******************************************** > Henry George School of Social Science > of Los Angeles > Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 > Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 > http://haledward.home.comcast.net > ******************************************** > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darryl > and Natalia > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 10:38 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Futurework] FWD: NAFTA: North American Deal Dismal > After aDecade > > Thanks for the stat's. > > Darryl > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: mcandreb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 2:05 PM > Subject: [Futurework] FWD: NAFTA: North American Deal Dismal > After a Decade > > > > > > Anybody surprised? And ten years from now? I'm with Michael > Gurstein on > > this New Years' prediction. > > > > Brian McAndrews > > > > ----------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > Published on Saturday, December 27, 2003 by the Inter Press > Service > > NAFTA: North American Deal Dismal After a Decade > > by Emad Mekay > > > > WASHINGTON - After 10 years a deal that all sides say > transformed trade > > and investment rules in North America has still produced far > fewer > > positive results than originally promised, according to its > critics. > > > > "Had they (original promises) come true, NAFTA would have been > an > > enormous boom and we would all be cracking champagne," said > Lori > > Wallach, director of the global trade watch program at > Washington-based > > Public Citizen, a consumer rights group. > > > > "But instead we have got the 10-year record and it's pretty > damn grim." > > > > When NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) was being > sold to > > the U.S. Congress and the public in Canada, Mexico and the > United States > > in the early 1990s, its promoters promised the deal would > create > > hundreds of thousands of high-wage U.S. jobs, raise living > standards in > > all three countries and improve environmental conditions and > transform > > Mexico from a poor developing country into a booming economy. > > > > But NAFTA's real-life damage to jobs, wages and the environment > after 10 > > years has made many people in North America furious about the > trade > > policies the deal was built upon (policies that provide the > foundation > > for subsequent agreements such as the forthcoming Free Trade > Area of the > > Americas, FTAA). > > > > "NAFTA's 10-year record demonstrates that under the NAFTA model > most > > people in the three countries were losers, while only a few of > the > > largest corporations who helped write NAFTA were the major > winners," > > Wallach said. > > > > Thanks to the deal, which celebrates its anniversary Jan. 1, > major > > companies -- like auto makers General Motors, Ford and Chrysler > -- can > > set up shop in Mexico, employ cheap labor in that country and > then > > export the finished products to Canada and the United States. > > > > NAFTA rules also limit each country's domestic policies to deal > with > > issues ranging from environmental health and food safety to > banking and > > truck safety regulation. > > > > Under the unprecedented investor rights sewn into the deal, > investors > > are allowed to demand compensation for "indirect > expropriation", which > > has been interpreted to mean any government act -- including > those > > directed at public health and the environment -- that > diminishes the > > value of a foreign investment. > > > > Following one such suit, the Mexican government was ordered in > August > > 2000 to pay nearly 17 million dollars to a California firm that > was > > denied a permit from a Mexican municipality to operate a > hazardous waste > > treatment facility in an environmentally sensitive location. > > > > U.S. workers were promised 170,000 additional jobs in each of > NAFTA's > > first 10 years, based on the deal increasing the trade surplus > with > > Mexico and lowering the pre-NAFTA trade deficit with Canada. > > > > But instead of the surplus, the United States now runs an > average > > 37-billion-dollar annual deficit with Mexico, and has lost > close to > > three million manufacturing jobs. > > > > Under one government program for displaced workers, the NAFTA > Trade > > Adjustment System -- for which only a relatively small number > of the > > deal's potential victims could qualify -- 525,000 U.S. workers > were > > certified as NAFTA casualties because their jobs were > transferred to > > Mexico. > > > > According to Public Citizen, despite the economic growth of the > 1990s, > > U.S. real wages are still below 1972 levels, while income > inequality has > > skyrocketed because of the shift from manufacturing jobs to > employment > > in services, where wages are far less. > > > > According to the Institute of Policy Studies, NAFTA has also > had a > > detrimental impact on the ability of U.S. workers to fight for > better > > wages and working conditions. U.S. employers now often threaten > to move > > to Mexico and other low-wage countries in order to fight unions > and > > restrain wages. > > > > The use of such threats in union organizing drives increased > from about > > 50 percent in the early 1990s to 62 percent in 1998 and 68 > percent in > > 1999, says the Washington-based institute. > > > > The U.S. government points to different figures to buttress its > pro > > free-trade arguments. According to data from the U.S. Trade > > Representative office, total trade among the NAFTA countries > more than > > doubled between 1993 and 2002. > > > > It says foreign direct investment by NAFTA partners in the > three > > countries jumped from 136.9 billion dollars in 1993 to 299.2 > billion > > dollars in 2000. > > > > Last week, the World Bank also said NAFTA was, overall, a > positive deal, > > especially for Mexico. For example, it triggered productivity > growth, as > > the country needed only about one-half the time to adopt > foreign > > technology during the span of the deal than it did before. > > > > But according to a recent report by the Global Resource Action > Center > > for the Environment (GRACE), NAFTA has displaced 1.75 million > Mexican > > farmers from their land, forcing them to migrate to the cities > or the > > United States. > > > > According to Lauren Carlsen, director of the Americas program > of the > > Inter-hemispheric Resource Center, an advocacy group based in > Mexico > > City, farm prices -- especially for maize -- have plummeted > during the > > deal's lifetime in the face of heftily subsidized imports from > the > > United States. > > > > Incomes in Mexico have also nose-dived. According to the Center > for > > Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) in Washington, in 10 years > income > > per person has grown by only nine percent in Mexico, about > one-fifth of > > the growth in the 1960s and 1970s. > > > > "No economist can honestly call that a success," said Mark > Weisbrot > > co-director of the CEPR. > > > > NAFTA was also promoted as a route to good jobs and improved > living > > conditions, especially via maquiladoras, companies that are > permitted to > > operate duty-free in nations that provide them with cheap labor > -- in > > the NAFTA case, U.S. firms setting up in Mexico. > > > > "Instead, we got low wages, sexual harassment, environmental > destruction > > and birth defects," said Marth Ojeda, director of the Coalition > for > > Justice in the Maquiladoras, herself a maquiladora worker. > > > > "Most maquiladora workers are very young, between 16 and 25, > because > > their eyes, backs and hands haven't given out yet -- their > hours are so > > long that their youth passes without seeing the sun," added > Ojeda. > > > > Workers and government services in Canada, the third NAFTA > partner, did > > not fare any better. > > > > Canada's former prime minister Brian Mulroney called the deal a > "cold > > shower" at its inception, something the country needed to go > from a > > so-called welfare state to one primed to compete in the > international > > sphere. > > > > But 10 years later, many critics say the business community has > actually > > exploited the deal to push for cuts in social programs, arguing > they > > were necessary to compete with the lower costs faced by U.S. > businesses, > > operating in a nation with generally lower levels of worker > protection. > > > > The clearest example of that, critics say, is the impact is the > scaling > > back of Canada's unemployment insurance. > > > > According to the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives, the > percentage > > of unemployed workers who qualified for this scheme (now known > as > > "employment insurance") dropped from 87 percent in 1989 to only > 39 > > percent in 2001. > > > > "We have lowered social spending so much that we have moved > from being > > first in the world in the United Nations human development > index to > > number eight last year," said Maude Barlow, chairperson of the > Council > > of Canadians, the country's largest public advocacy > organization. > > > > "And three target groups have been hit the worst: the > unemployed, > > low-income earners and the elderly," she added. "It's pretty > well time > > we stopped thinking that we are a kinder and gentler nation." > > > > If there is one major lesson of NAFTA that many analysts from > all three > > countries agree on, says the Institute of Policy Studies, it is > that > > "there is no guaranteed link between trade and investment > liberalization > > and improvements for workers or the environment". > > > > 2003 © IPS > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.557 / Virus Database: 349 - Release Date: 12/30/2003 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
