Brad, we're arguing at cross purposes. If the bill with were merely lower
tariffs, you would be correct. If the bill is going to be used to impose
neoliberal policies, then I would strenuously oppose it.
Shoddy argument.
As written, the bill offers countries a choice: do whatever is
required
What was the problem with Jesse Jackson's bill?
No problem with Jesse Jackson's bill--save that 218 representatives
wouldn't vote for it.
Brad De Long wrote:
Shoddy argument.
Now, you have convinced me.
As written, the bill offers countries a choice: do whatever is
required to get certified as a country moving toward a market economy
and get substantial market access; or don't get certified and don't
get any of the quota
Yes, African countries should be offered a better menu of choices
than the bill offers them. But whether the principal effect is to aid
or harm African development--and whether they ought to accept or
reject their package--ought to be *their* choice. You want to make
that choice for
