On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 03:40:39PM -0700, Scott Eric Merryman wrote:
Paul Krugman has an article on NAFTA you might find interesting.
snip
If job creation isn't the point of NAFTA, what is? Another possible
justification is the classic economic argument that free trade will raise
U.S.
Mexican real GDP increased 5.2 percent, and the real value of the peso
was quite high in 1994, both factors that would have boosted U.S. exports
to Mexico. As a result, it is unlikely that NAFTA and its lower trade
barriers were the only influence on bilateral trade flows. To isolate the
effects
I recently visited a web page by a political scientist
that seemed to suggest that NAFTA was a failure. I'd
-jsh
Could you summarize the evidence he/she presents?
Fabio
John,
Paul Krugman has an article on NAFTA you might find interesting.
HOW IS NAFTA DOING? It's Been Hugely Successful - As A
Foreign Policy
http://www.pkarchive.org/trade/nafta.html
He writes
NAFTA's defenders are saddled with a big public relations problem: The
agreement was sold under
