Decision ‘08

CAFTA In Senate Today

Things are looking hopeful for passage of the Central American Free Trade Agreement in the Senate today, but the House is not scheduled to take it up until July, and it is expected to face a tougher fight there. Few things get my unhesitating support regardless of circumstance, but free trade is one of them. The critics who claim that measures such as NAFTA cost the U.S. jobs are just flat wrong; these measures, instead, enable capital to be employed where it is most efficient, and less prosperous countries have a significant advantage over advanced industrial nations when it comes to low-skill labor. Keeping jobs of this sort in the U.S. artificially only hurts the competitiveness of the U.S. economy and takes money out of the pockets of consumers…

3 Responses to “CAFTA In Senate Today”

1 louielouie Says:
June 30th, 2005 at 5:55 pm
jobs are not the problem with nafta-ish types of relations.
international treaty entanglements are my problem with nafta.
i.e.,
california gas station determines additives in gasoline (type) are causing cancer in locals.
california gas station decides to stop buying gasoline (type) and switch to another (type) gasoline.
california gas station gets letter from canadian company, that produces cancer causing additive to gasoline, threating lawsuit if change goes into effect, citing agreements contained in nafta.
result, california gas station has two options.
go out of business.
or, continue selling cancer causing gasoline and face lawsuit(s) from community.
p.s. canadian company producing cancer causing additive exempt from prosecution due to clause contained in nafta.
i don’t want some worldocrat in toronto setting the dates and quotas for hunting season(s) in oklahoma. things that are indeed happening as we speak.
2 Mark Coffey Says:
June 30th, 2005 at 7:06 pm
louielouie, I must plead ignorance to the situation you speak of…very interesting…
3 Jojo Says:
July 1st, 2005 at 4:46 am
louielouie, NAFTA doesn’t stop private businesses from choosing different suppliers. NAFTA concerns artificial limits imposed by government; your example only applies if it is California State *mandating* the use of a new type of gasoline.