Pros And Cons Of Nafta

America’s economy is flat lining. We are bleeding jobs and hemorrhaging revenue. One out of every seven citizens is on financial life support and our government needs to do something stat. One of the first steps in the road to recovery is repealing the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, because it is dangerous to our economic stability and future.

Since its creation in 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is a major issue of debate in the United States. The most important issue with NAFTA is how the agreement affects the U.S. economy. NAFTA has had a broad impact on the U.S. economy through creative destruction, globalization, job restructuring, and isolationism. All of these components have had both positive and negative influences on the U.S. economy. Creative destruction creates new jobs to replace the ones that were originally ended by NAFTA, globalization expands ideas, products, and business, but also causes the U.S. to lose money, job reconstruction recreates jobs to fit the functions of NAFTA and sometimes causes workers to lose their original jobs, and isolation

NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, has been getting a lot of not so favorable, and sometimes, controversial headlines in recent years. Some critics blame it for the current labor shortages in the United

3. I hoped to find sources which would show that the American economy did not improve that much since the NAFTA implementation and that a large percentage of American jobs were lost, which resulted in an adverse impact on the economy. I used the library database search for fifteen sources. I selected all databases, full text, peer-reviewed and scholarly articles and included the words NAFTA, economy and jobs. I also borrowed six books related to NAFTA from the local college library and then searched for five credible websites online. I used the meta search

There are many good and bad about the NAFTA. I do believe that it has been effective in some cases it has increased some revenue for some of the goods that come from other countries. one example the United states has imported oil for less than what it use to be. In some cases, some food can be transported for less and reducing some of the grocery bills. NAFTA, as most political assertions, has it's great and awful viewpoints. It started, between the three North American nations The United States, Mexico, and Canada. Those that made this arrangement trusted that by disposing of the duty and non-levy hindrances, it would expand exchange, make employments, and lower costs between the united states, Mexico, and Canada

Many people don’t pay attention to what the government does or the deals it makes. They walk around, like blind mice, blundering through their small corner of the world, completely oblivious. People like this buy whatever they see that they want to get. But, how many people think about the laborers and slaves in a small country nine-thousand, three hundred, and fifty eight miles away? Not many. Truthfully, very few of us think about the quality of lives the workers live. The thing is, when you buy a good, you support everything and everyone involved in that product. Most people don’t realize what happens behind the scenes in the making of everyday products. When the government makes a trade deal, all our imports and exports are affected.

In turn, individuals are typically driven by self-interest. The central objective of the TPP is to cause trade within the 12 countries involved to be less costly. This could go one of two ways; American Companies could have the opportunity to trade cost-free with 11 other countries, or American Companies could move their businesses elsewhere, where labor is cheaper, and ship their products back to America for a cheaper price. The average American Citizens tends to see this with a glass-half-empty approach because of two factors. A majority of the money that would come from relocating labor overseas would only benefit the upper class of America, and because of the impacts of a prior trade agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). When NAFTA was enacted on January 1, 1994, many large companies moved their labor elsewhere (i.e. Mexico or Canada). According to a research group the Economic Policy Institute, NAFTA cost us upwards of 800,000 jobs. Therefore, it is only reasonable to assume that the potential TPP agreement will have similar affects to the NAFTA

It is important to note, however, that Mexico’s struggling economy is not entirely the result of it’s own actions. On January 1, 1994, a trade deal promoted by US President Bill Clinton was put into effect. The North American Free Trade Deal (NAFTA) intended to “unite” the economies of Canada, the US, and Mexico by diminishing trade barriers between them, adding jobs and lessening the wage gap between Mexico and the US. The first major disaster of NAFTA occurred when heavily subsidized US corn saturated the Mexican market

However, in 1993 negotiations created union-backed protests across the nation against the creation of a free-trade zone, while at the same time prominent economists and government officials still predicted NAFTA would lead to hundreds of thousands of jobs and more sales of U.S. products abroad. Since the inception of NAFTA in 1994 those jobs did not materialize because simply put trade can both create jobs and destroys jobs. Of course, increases in U.S. exports can potentially create jobs. However, increases in imports can reduce jobs because imports displace goods otherwise made in the United States. Ultimately, some of the results that followed as a result of NAFTA ended up eroding labor conditions for two nations with some of the worst impacts felt south of the border.

NAFTA has brought positives, but has also dealt with some negatives. US and Canada have lost quality manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Likewise, Mexico farmers

As mentioned earlier, NAFTA has remained controversial, even before its birth. The main argument that many politicians have given against NAFTA is that they fear it would turn countries such as Canada into permanent branch plant economies. The farmers in Mexico have been opposing NAFTA because they believe that all the subsidies that the US farmers get from their government undermines the Mexican agricultural prices, which in turn is forcing many of the Mexican farmers out of business. Many sectors in

Measuring the overall economic impact of NAFTA, is challenging due to the effect of other factors such as recession, inflation, economic growth, and currency fluctuations in the economy. It appears that NAFTA neither caused a significant job loss that was predicted by opponents nor the large economic growth foreseen by proponents. Particularly in the United Stated the impact was relatively modest since the trade with Canada and Mexico accounts for a low percentage of the U.S. GDP. Nevertheless, all three countries went through the adjustment period to a more open trade and investment policies (Villarreal & Fergusson, 2014).

The month of October is themed “Every Purchase Matters” for Fair Trade USA. This annual awareness campaign rings together a diverse range of corporate, nonprofit, producer and consumer partners with more than 100 events – including fund-raising parties, and promotions across the United States. These events raise understanding and knowledge of the Fair Trade movement with “social, economic, and environmental empowerment” for the farming population and consumers all across the globe (Economics, 2010). In Addition to Fair Trade USA, Cohort 4 believes that the general American population does not support free trade as well. “NBC news and Wall Street Journal did a poll and the results were interesting. Sixty nine percent of Americans believe that free trade agreements with other countries have cost jobs in the United States. While eighteen percent believe that they have created jobs” (Harwood). During the recession it is easy to see that many Americans are out of work. Since many products used in the U.S.

The dynamic nature of American political economy is evident in the fundamental changes in its trading policies. We live in an era of global free trade, where the food we eat are imported from Latin America and the furniture we store our Made-In-China shirts are from Asia. We share information over the Internet, exchange goods with people on the other side of the world, and benefit from free trade on a daily basis. As much benefits as free trade has brought to Americans, however, there are downsides to this globalization. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) provides excellent example of these drawbacks.

Since over 95% of American’s manufacturing companies are considered to be small, with less than 100 workers, the trade agreement could be a crippling blow to the industry. American jobs will be lost and American workers will be laid off. Consumers will suffer, business will suffer, and ultimately America will suffer.