Zaznacz stronę

In free trade, the trader is the master and producer of the slave. Protection is only the law of nature, the law of self-preservation, of personal development, ensuring the highest and best destiny of man`s race. [It is said] that protection is immoral […]. As protection accumulates and increases by 63,000,000 [the U.S. population], the influence of those 63,000,000 people increases in the rest of the world. We cannot take a step towards progress without benefiting humanity everywhere. Well, they say, „Buy where you can buy the cheapest.” Of course, this applies to work as well as everything else. Let me give you a maxim a thousand times better than that, and that is the maxim of protection: „Buy where you can pay most easily.” And it is in this part of the world that work earns its highest rewards. [41] Instead, the number of Mexican immigrants more than doubled, again from 1990 to 2000, when it approached 9.2 million. According to Pew, the river has reversed — at least temporarily.

Between 2009 and 2014, 140,000 more Mexicans left the United States than they entered, likely due to the impact of the financial crisis. One of the reasons NAFTA did not cause the expected decline in immigration was the peso crisis from 1994 to 1995, which plunged the Mexican economy into recession. Another is that the reduction in Mexican tariffs on maize has not encouraged Mexican maize producers to grow other, more lucrative crops. This led them to abandon agriculture. A third reason is that the Mexican government has not kept its promises of infrastructure investment, which has largely limited the impact of the pact on production in the north of the country. These trade benefits often escape attention because, while costs are highly concentrated in certain industries such as auto manufacturing, the benefits of an agreement like NAFTA are widely distributed throughout society. PROPONENTS of NAFTA estimate that about fourteen million U.S. jobs depend on trade with Canada or Mexico, and that the nearly two hundred thousand export-related jobs created each year by the pact pay an average of 15 to 20 percent more than the jobs lost. But while Mexico is „beating us economically” on trade, imports were not the only ones responsible for the real growth in trade in goods of 264% from 1993 to 2016. Real exports to Mexico more than tripled over this period, increasing by 213%. However, they outpaced imports with 317%.

NAFTA has boosted Mexican agricultural exports to the United States, which have tripled since the pact`s implementation. Hundreds of thousands of jobs in the auto industry have also been created in the country, and most studies have shown that the deal has boosted productivity and lowered consumer prices in Mexico. Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders, who opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, called it „a continuation of other disastrous trade deals such as NAFTA, CAFTA and normal, sustainable trade relations with China.” He believes that free trade agreements have led to the loss of American jobs and the fall in American wages. Sanders said America needs to rebuild its manufacturing base with U.S. factories for well-paying jobs for American workers, rather than outsourcing to China and elsewhere. [126] [127] [128] According to Chad P. Bown (senior researcher at the Peterson Institute for International Economics) is unlikely that „a renegotiated NAFTA that restores barriers to trade will help workers who have lost their jobs – regardless of the cause – to take advantage of new employment opportunities.” [154] Despite the debate over its long-term implications, NAFTA is undoubtedly one of the most important trade agreements in recent history. The immediate objective of NAFTA was to increase cross-border trade in North America, and in this regard it has undoubtedly been successful.

Lowering or eliminating tariffs and removing certain non-tariff barriers to trade, such as Mexico`s local content requirements. B, NAFTA triggered an increase in trade and investment. Most of the increase came from U.S.-Mexico trade, which was $481.5 billion in 2015, and U.S.-Canada trade, which was $518.2 billion. Trade between Mexico and Canada, despite being by far the fastest growing channel between 1993 and 2015, was only $34.3 billion. On the other hand, critics of the deal argue that it was responsible for job losses and stagnant wages in the United States, due to low-wage competition, companies moving production to Mexico to cut costs, and a growing trade deficit. Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) and Robert Scott of the Economic Policy Institute argue that the increase in NAFTA imports in two decades has caused a loss of up to six hundred thousand jobs in the United States, although they admit that some of this import growth would likely have occurred even without NAFTA. Eliminate barriers to trade in goods and services and facilitate the cross-border movement of goods and services between the territories of the Parties. Nevertheless, NAFTA has achieved its objectives in some respects, increasing trade between the United States and Mexico to $481.5 billion in 2015 and trade between the United States and Canada to a total of $518.2 billion. That`s an increase of 255 percent and 63.5 percent, respectively, according to the Mexican Embassy in Canada. .