Changing Political Events : Mexico, Canada And The United States

One of most talked about issues to those who live in on the U.S.-Mexico Border is the economy. The economic relationship between the United States and Mexico began in the colonial era, but it was not formalized and strengthen until the North American Free Trade Agreement was enacted and ratified by both countries, with the addition of Canada, in 1993. Mexican government “made it clear that the enhancement of foreign direct

The effects of NAFTA on Mexico, U.S, and their economic situation have impacts on political interests. There was main objective of Mexico in pursuing free trade area with the United States or with other countries to stabilize the Mexican economy in sustainable way and promote economic development by attracting huge foreign direct investment means of increasing exports, in house manufacturing and creating jobs. NAFTA would improve investor confidence in Mexico has directly impact to increase export diversification, create job market increase wage rates, reduce poverty, improve standard of living, quality and economic growth

"In 1994, both countries [Mexico and the United States] signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which has increased their mutual trade and foreign direct investment. Between 1994 And 2005, the US-Mexico foreign direct investment flows increased substantially from 16,968 billion to $71,423 billion. By 2007, the Mexican commercial relationship with the U.S. almost tripled from $297 billion to $930 billion." [2] This mutual increase in business inherently has had an attendant growth in "the number of foreign enterprises who have situated in each country." [2] With this increase in international business and trade comes cultural shifts and increased globalization and differences in managerial functions.

The first elements Zuloaga points out is that “the protection of the Mexican cultural industry never came up”. (Zuolaga,2001) Indeed, the NAFTA agreements made between major world powers, it is expected that many will question the validity of these agreements on an equality scale for Mexico, known as a weak country on many levels.

The pope is coming to visit Mexico for a week. Many Mexicans hope that his visit will help with the corruption and violence that Mexico is currently battling. This is the first time any pope has been invited to the national palace, which is odd because Mexico has the second largest population of Catholics in the world. Apparently, even priests have been targets of violence from vicious gangs and drug cartels. The priests now have to watch what they say in their sermons for fear of retaliation. The article touches on a resort that used to be a hotspot for vacationers and is now one of the most violent cities in the world. A nearby community is also one of the poorest in Mexico now because of this violence.

“It is important to realize that NAFTA is not the opening up of Mexico,” said Jonathan Heath, a Mexico City economist. “The opening up of Mexico had occurred before NAFTA. NAFTA is the consolidation of that opening up and what it really represents is the locking in of trade liberalization for Mexico.”

the Mexican agricultural industry had to compete with the far more industrialized US farm industry. Even though the amount of exported products tripled since the institution of NAFTA [according to the economist], most of those exports were maize. The United States was producing a greater amount of grain products and importing them cheaply into Mexico. The amount of American imports overwhelmed the Mexican market and forced them to sell to America and Canada. The theory the United States held was NAFTA would decrease the amount of Mexican immigration. However, this hurt the Mexican economy enough until around 2008 to force millions of Mexicans into the United States, doubling the Mexican-born population to twelve million in 2013 (Sergei, M. 2014).

When countries have needs but not the capacity to satisfy those demands they enter into trading through the exchange of surplus, produce to help their trading partners. Canada, Mexico, and the United States created a treaty to establish a relationship that can benefit everyone in this process known as NAFTA. This agreement has been criticized and has been blamed for hurting the US economy more than helping. Although speculations may be misguided, I do not know much about this agreement, and I must research multiple sources. This paper seeks to understand if NAFTA has produced significant benefits for Canada, Mexico, and the United States economies.

The relationship with Mexico is vital to the United States and the economy of North America. It is one that cannot be ignored or treated with carelessness, especially in the regions where it has impact on the lives and livelihood of millions of people. September 11, 2001 changed the way the United States would secure its borders from neighboring Canada and Mexico, and those who enter it with the intent to do harm, forever. The border with Mexico in particular became a matter of special focus out of fear that terrorists might use the relatively porous Southwest border as an entry point into the United States to carry out further terrorist attacks against the homeland (Lee, Wilson, Lara-Valencia, de la Parra, Van Schoik, Patron-Soberano, Olson, Selee, 2013).

NAFTA is also seen as part of the neoliberal reforms linking the United States, Canada, and Mexico in a regime of free trade. The policy on the Mexican side aims at easing the entrance of foreign capital and

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was designed to create trade that was mutually beneficial for all North American countries. Yet a recent change in the U.S. administration has threatened continued trade between the three major players – the U.S, Canada and Mexico. New President Donald J. Trump’s promises to renegotiate NAFTA have both Canada and Mexico on edge, and without stability, can possibly force Mexico to opt out of the agreement altogether. While NAFTA has holes in its implementation, this agreement has aided in economic growth, tripled foreign investment, and lowered prices within the US.

A comparable interaction between the Mexican government and that of the United States would be the implication of NAFTA which was a trade agreement signed by Canada, the U.S. and Mexico eliminating tariffs on imports/exports and disbarring trade barriers. The United States intention was for NAFTA to secure the Southern border, secure the access to petroleum investments already existing in Mexico, and corroborate political support from Mexico in the never-ending democratic crusade the United States feels entitled to. “Despite its title, NAFTA was not primarily concerned with ‘free trade’. By 1990, tariff and even nontariff barriers to U.S.-Mexican commerce were already low. NAFTA was concerned primarily with investment.” NAFTA also not so coincidentally didn’t mention anything about undocumented workers coming into the U.S. This evidence proves that NAFTA’s purposes were indeed set on stability of investments. Mexico’s actions also point to that of seeking stability. The Mexican government sought social peace through the lifting of tariffs and negotiating with the U.S. NAFTA also gave the president at the time, Carlos Salinas de Govtari, an opportunity to advance his economic

Throughout the 1990’s up until the present, Mexican-American political relations have been very inconsistent in their endeavors to define what the relationship should and will be between the two different countries. The massive influx of Mexican immigrants has commanded attention from the governments of both countries. This has resulted in attempts to make a working partnership acknowledging the fact that the peoples of Mexican decent have grown into the largest minority group in the United States and there are many issues to be hammered out by both countries in establishing just economic and political relations. However this effort has encountered many setbacks

Mexican dependence on the U.S. is notable. After the failure of the drive to diversify trade patterns in the 1970s and eighties (the local equivalent of Canada's Third Option policy), a 'realist' approach began to mark the nation's traditional nationalist and protectionist economy. From opposition to excessive U.S. dependence, Mexico moved to welcome it as inevitable. With time, the Mexican economy became even more dependent on the United States than the Canadian economy.2

It has been ten years since the signature of the NAFTA agreement among Canada, U.S., and Mexico. For Mexico, this was a decisive step away from a protectionism model toward a