• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

? on NAFTA

jigs

Well-known member
if we elect a new President who has the balls to stand up to the establishment, can we pull out of NAFTA and other free trade agreements?
 

T99

Well-known member
I HEARD that all it would take is the president's signature to get us out of NAFTA (and I assume any other trade agreements). Does anyone know if this is true? I think I heard this on a talk show, that it wouldn't take a vote from Congress, just a signature.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
T99 said:
I HEARD that all it would take is the president's signature to get us out of NAFTA (and I assume any other trade agreements). Does anyone know if this is true? I think I heard this on a talk show, that it wouldn't take a vote from Congress, just a signature.

I don't know about the rest of the FTA's, but know it could happen for NAFTA--as under US law (Constitution) its only considered as a Presidential Agreement and not a treaty- because a treaty takes 2/3 majority of the Senate to ratify--which Billy Clinton could never get/ and never got--but went ahead and put into place......Fast Track- which most FTA's were signed under lately are unconstitutional according to most Constitutional lawyers- for the same reason.....

The founders of our country saw a reason for not giving the power of treaties to a President alone (who could be unduly influenced by favored corporate entities)- the reason they gave the ultimate power to the Senate- and required a 2/3 majority...The Congress has never passed a Constitutional amendment giving away that power- altho they have tried to do it thru bare majority vote with the Fast track law.....

My belief from all I've studied it- the belief of Lou Dobbs ( a conservative economic professor) and many others who still believe in the Constitution is that any President could pull out at any time- and probably legally/morally should.....
 

T99

Well-known member
I've heard some of the candidates mention NAFTA, saying that it needs to be "looked at." I think we've looked at it enough and it's time for action. Kucinich is the only one that I've heard say he'd get rid of it, day one. I wish Lou Dobbs would run!
 

per

Well-known member
Yep, take my ball and go home. The raw material to make the ball is to the north and the labor is to the south. You didn't use to have a reputation to cut and run. Why start now? Trade is a (although at times unbalanced) two way street. I would suggest that China should be your biggest worry. She will slowly take over your great country much like the US was able to dominate Canada.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
per said:
Yep, take my ball and go home. The raw material to make the ball is to the north and the labor is to the south. You didn't use to have a reputation to cut and run. Why start now? Trade is a (although at times unbalanced) two way street. I would suggest that China should be your biggest worry. She will slowly take over your great country much like the US was able to dominate Canada.

The WTO's/US Presidents failure to enforce any type of FAIR or FREE trade agreement with China--and just letting the multinational elitist corporate CEO's have free run to profiteering with anything they can cheaply get there or any of the other third world parts of then world that don't follow the labor, enviromental, and social equality laws that we do, while they also play games with their monetary value- and endanger the welfare of US consumers, is what has led this country to questioning all the trade agreements- and the backlash of folks that are now asking the government for FAIR trade- instead of FREE trade....I was a supporter of NAFTA until how I saw how it was written for the benefit of the major pharmaceutical, chemical, and industrial (Packers) industries that essentially didn't have to follow US law- and then Canadian ranchers/government started putting unecessary restrictions on US cattle as trade barriers by calling "ALL US CATTLE ARE DISEASED".....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Duncan Hunter would of gotten us out. I think Ron Paul will, too.

Edwards would too- Hitlary says she will put it on "time-out" until it can be revaluated and if need be renegotiated --but I feel that she may speak with forked tongue and only make it better for her corporate buddies....Especially if Tysons help her make another $100,000 on cattle futures... :roll:

These folks all know that any President/Congress can do whatever they want to with NAFTA- because it was never legally ratified...
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Expanding markets is a good thing. Unbalanced trade is a bad thing. Kind of like going overdrawn in your checking account.

The framers of the constitution were not dealing with closed borders. Our borders were open for all (e.g. Give us your poor, your hungry....) for way more longer than they have been closed. We have not had closed borders all that long. Also, back then, when they earned a dollar, they got to keep most of it.

China is not on the North American continent and is not part of NAFTA. Nor will it ever be. I don't know why we keep discussing NAFTA and China in some of these posts.

It seems to me our ancestors were more innovative than we are.

Some of you are arguing for socialism. Read your posts and you are not liberal, you are socialistic. We are going to have our very own iron curtain before it is over.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
per said:
Yep, take my ball and go home. The raw material to make the ball is to the north and the labor is to the south. You didn't use to have a reputation to cut and run. Why start now? Trade is a (although at times unbalanced) two way street. I would suggest that China should be your biggest worry. She will slowly take over your great country much like the US was able to dominate Canada.

China is our biggest concern, but that is only part of the same problem - a huge trade imbalance. We have a huge trade deficit with China because they aren't playing fair, and our politicians won't make them play fair because that will rock the boat for all of our corporations who are making money via China - screw the common citizen.

Free Trade agreements are another huge part of our trade deficits. EVERY Free Trade agreement that we're in has us in a trade deficit, every one, including NAFTA. Free Trade clearly benefits only the importers and weakens the rest of the nations. This begs the question, "Why stay in them?"

Another reason Free Trade must be shucked is the illegality of the wording in them. If you have any respect for the law, you can't support Free Trade as it has been presented. Congressional power can not constitutionally be transfered - and the Constitution is the highest law of the land, not just a "God-Da*#ed piece of paper" as George W. so eloquently put it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
backhoeboogie said:
China is not on the North American continent and is not part of NAFTA. Nor will it ever be. I don't know why we keep discussing NAFTA and China in some of these posts.

.

Guess how China first got access to the US? Thru NAFTA...By shipping tons of products into and thru Mexico into the US- which completely killed any chance of industry growing and creating good jobs in Mexico (which was to be a goal of NAFTA)...Instead the King like very rich elitists ruling Mexico used it as an entry point to the US for all the cheaper chinese products, so they could profiteer- and leave their poor and worker class out in the cold...
They turned NAFTA into a profiteering rape of their own people-as did many other multinational corporations use it to profiteer at the detriment to workers/producers of the US and Canada.....NAFTA was written by the elite- for the benefit of the elite.....All the loopholes in it that these legalized thieves work thru were left there by them on purpose....
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Oldtimer we have the same type of loophole in the assembly plants here. Foreign cars put together here, but designed and engineered overseas. The high dollar jobs remain overseas even tho the cars are assembled here.

We need to fix the loopholes.

We also need to exercise care individually of what we buy and where it comes from.
 
Top