NAFTA: A Case Study

http://www.npr.org/2013/12/26/257255787/wave-of-illegal-immigrants-gains-speed-after-nafta. NAFTA boosted regional trade but had some undesirable effects. The Mexican government used to subsidize corn. It kept the crop price high so small farmers could stay in business. And it kept corn product prices low so poor people could eat. The trade agreement removed tariffs in order to lower costs and encourage investment between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The Mexican government ended its corn subsidy, and the U.S. government continued to subsidize highly productive American corn producers. Seventy-five thousand Iowa farmers grew twice as much corn as three million Mexican farmers at half the cost. U.S. corn flooded Mexico. Illegal immigration led to massive militarization of the border. In Mexico, manufacturers built new factories for cars, TVs and other goods, replacing some jobs that used to be in the U.S. NAFTA benefited corporations operating in all three countries, but it led to flat or lower wages for the working classes in all three

Impact of NAFTA on Mexico’s manufacturing industry – Effect on Productivity, Wages rates, Incomes, and Investments in FDI

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).

I am currently in the process of relocating to Montreal, I am a Canadian citizen, educated in the NAFTA region Canada, Mexico and the United States in International business and law enclosed my profile https://www.linkedin.com/in/jose-luis-garcia-a734036/ . I want to move as soon as possible. I would like to know more about the opportunity, please let the know the best day, and time to reach you.

There is no easy solution to solve the problems of undocumented immigration between the United States and Mexico. The United States has no control on what other countries do and how they treat their people. If Mexico isn’t looking out for their people they will continue to migrate. United States has been the country where help is given and Mexico is very poor so they come here looking for the American dream. The North American Free Trade (NAFTA) Agreement’s history began in 1980.It’s purpose is to help with reduce trading costs, increase business investments in Mexico, Canada and United States. In 1984, Congress passed the Trade

The NAFTA obligations that UPS claims Canada has breached is mainly Section A of Chapter 11, Chapter 12, and Chapter 15. More specifically, Canada breached Article 1102 and 1202 - National Treatment; Article 1105 - Minimum Standard of Treatment; Article 1502(3)(a) and 1502(3)(d) - Monopolies and State Enterprises; and lastly Article 1503 – State Enterprises. Due to the limitations of this project, only Chapter 11 and Chapter 12 will be discussed.

On “January 1994, the United States”, Canada and Mexico went into the “North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)”, making the biggest facilitated commerce region and wealthiest market on the planet. The “NAFTA” is the mainly complete provincial exchange ascension ever arranged by the “United States” and is booked to be completely executed. In “1996, U.S.” two-route exchange merchandise under the “NAFTA” with Mexico and Canada remained at “$420 billion a 44 %” expansion because the “NAFTA” was agreed upon.

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.

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), came into effect on January 1, 1994, creating the largest free trade region in the world, generating economic growth and helping to raise the standard of living for the people of all three countries participating. By strengthening the rules and procedures governing trade and investment, the NAFTA has shown to be a great base for adding to Canada’s prosperity and has set a valuable example of the benefits of trade liberalization for the rest of the world. NAFTA was designed with many economic results in mind. Hopes were that not only trade would be easier, cheaper, and easier for all countries involved, but economic wealth and growth would follow. The support for NAFTA was spilt among the

Overall though, NAFTA has accomplished some goals, but has drastically failed in others (Weintraub). Even though there have been some benefits from the North American Free Trade Agreement, the loss of jobs, increase in illegal immigration, negative environmental impact, and change in the job markets in the USA and Canada have been very detrimental to the two nations, often at the expense of Mexico’s rapid industrialization. Approximately, 1,015,291 US jobs have been lost directly because of NAFTA since Mexico is a region with a lower cost of operation so the jobs market can’t compete with Mexico (Anderson and Bourassa). Since the United States has monopolized the food industry, for the most part, in North America, they have displaced around 9.3 million Mexican farmers that have either left for the city or illegally immigrated to the United States (Anderson and Bourassa). Environmental impacts have been negative in regions such as the “maquiladora zone”, which is along the Mexican-American border because of the increase in factories in the area, which has caused an increased in population and overall traffic and urban expansion, which has killed the desert environment of the region (Anderson and

This is done to attract manufacturing of goods in Mexico. “The U.S. tariff schedule provision known as 9802, formerly known as 806/807, greatly assisted the development of the Maquiladoras industry. This permitted U.S. goods to be exported to Mexico and face a duty only on the value added when the finished product is imported back into the United States”. In 1996 40% of all Mexican exports to the U.S. were from the Maquiladora program. Also the U.S.-Mexico Chamber of Commerce conceived a group named “Transformation 2000”, whom would inform and educate all manufactures on the Maquiladora programs by the year 2001”.

Even though the impact of NAFTA has fundamentally changed Mexico in many ways; now, people have access to electronic appliances, expensive clothes and luxury cars, the treaty never met it promises. For example, the migration from Mexico to the United States, did not stop as president Bill Clinton argued. According to the article, “A fair farm bill”, the president of the time, Bill Clinton argued that NAFTA would eliminate the necessary large-scale of migration from Mexico because of the creation jobs and other redundant projects. However, that was not the case due to the fact that in between 2002 and 2005, Mexico defeated countries such India, the Philippines and Turkey in the role of global migration (Institute). Furthermore, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy states on the article “A fair Farm Bill” that during the period of 2002 and 2005, “… the number of unauthorized immigrants from Mexico increased by 1.5 million to 6.2 million, with a calculation of 500,000 undocumented Mexicans entering the United States per year.” The provided data proves that NAFTA

The North American Free Trade Agreement, otherwise known as NAFTA, has been a topic of hot debate since before its ratification in 1994. From economists to diplomats and from politicians to blue-collar workers, most everyone had opinions and speculations on how NAFTA would affect the nations – be they positive or negative assumptions. Now 23 years later, the effects of this treaty binding the United States, Canada & Mexico are being fully felt and can be examined in depth. One area of major concern for the United States during the negotiations for NAFTA – immigration from Mexico – has continued to garner attention nationwide throughout the years the treaty has been in effect. How did the ratification of this tripartite agreement for free

The major goods and services traded between Mexico and the US are agricultural products and US exports of private commercial services. These to go major goods are imported and exported between US and Mexico. According to USTR.gov, "United States goods and private services with Mexico totaled an estimated $536 billion in 2012. Would exports totaled 243 billion! Imports totaled $293 billion. The total US goods and services trade deficit with Mexico was $49 billion into thousand and 12. "Since US and Mexico our neighboring countries, most of the important export come at a better value priced tag for consumers since shipping cost is much lower than other trading partners such as China and Europe. Trade in private services with Mexico (based

In the event of NAFTA’s collapse, a debate will start on whether Canada should adopt a neoliberal or Keynesian approach to economic policy. Free trade has shown itself to be incredibly beneficial to the Canadian economy. Moreover, Canada would not fall to the same detriments that plague less developed nations under a neoliberal policy. Canada’s neoliberal policies would also positively affect those in less developed nations. As such, it would be prudent for Canada to adopt neoliberal policies in the wake of NAFTA collapsing.