Skip to main content

View Diary: How neoliberalism ruined Mexico (43 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The question nobody is asking - bingo! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lrhoke, redstar

    We're so wrapped up in what to do with 12 million illegal immigrants, until recently few people have stopped to ask WHY this problem developed in the first place.  So many of us accept this at face value, it's just a natural occurance.  Wrong.  This is a premeditated scheme to take money from the poor and put in corporate & shareholder bank accounts.  Deliberate in every way imaginable.  

    Al Gore, Bill Clinton should be ashamed for ramming through NAFTA despite overwhelming opposition.  George Bush? I expect fascists like him to look out for his corporate buddies.  

    The sad part is now, years later when it's pretty fucking evident that NAFTA is a failed trade policy and obviously opened the door for millions of illegal immigrants, Mr. Gore and other globalists refuse to admit mistakes and demand we continue ahead.  Mission Accomplished, indeed!

    •  NAFTA was an attempt to do what the European (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Union did for Europe.  The countries in the European Union definately benefited from the trade there, did they not?  It also happened to bring them peace too.  So the theory and practice behind NAFTA works, but it there are other conditions that has kept Mexico poor...Don't go blaming NAFTA...

      •  uh? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        redstar, pkbarbiedoll

        The statistics are overwhelming that NAFTA is absolutely bad news plus NOT THE SAME as the EU and what the EU has done....

        they spent decades bringing the various nation-states into equilibrium and have done enormous work with workers rights and so forth as part of that agenda..

        no comparison.

        by BobOak on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 11:30:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's part of the point... (0+ / 0-)

          The results have not been the same, but the goals are the same and the results are possible as the EU shows.  Portugal, Ireland and Spain were hardly equal with France, Britain or Germany when the EU formed, or when they were added to the EU.  But internal changes Portugal, Ireland and Spain made to their economies helped spur growth and the free trade from the EU area (which is still limited there) helped the growth along even further...That's what the goal of NAFTA and all free trade agreements are.  It's not a cure all, but it helps - but for real growth to occur, it still takes internal changes within a country.

          •  no it's not (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            They are not even close to the agendas and you are confusing "free trade" with globalization, which is not the same...


            by BobOak on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 11:44:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  What do you think NAFTA stands for? (0+ / 0-)

              What do you think the EU was/is?  Nafta is the North American Free Trade Agreement.  The EU started as the European Economic Community.  While the EEC wanted full integration (to create something similar to the US) it is in effect, a free trade agreement.  That is so due to the fact that the US basically has a free trade agreement among the states of the US.  People and goods are free to move between the states and cannot be subjected to import or export tariffs.  That's what a free trade agreement seeks to do.  I am not confusing free trade with globalization...

              •  duh (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                Look I'm not interested in engaging in useless're wrong and maybe I'll bother to write up a diary on the differences later.  In the meantime, I suggest you do some reading.  You can start with Ralph Gomory maybe or try reading the history of the EU and NAFTA. We have many education materials for you on our site.


                by BobOak on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 12:26:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm not saying they aren't different... (0+ / 0-)

                  They evolved out of different circumstances and under different conditions.  And the EU has gone much further in integration, going beyond the economic.  But it was European opening up of their borders and reducing the interstate tariffs that have allowed them all to prosper.  NAFTA was more confined, but had the same economic aims...

      •  Not so. You're forgetting that the EEC rather (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        rapidly transitioned to open borders and free movement of labor.

        Core EU had similar social protections, labor regulations, tax regimes.

        Mexico and the US? Not exactly.

        In any event, NAFTA wasn't sold that way.

        Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all -9.50, -5.74

        by redstar on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 11:47:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Note what you say... (0+ / 0-)

          The EEC transitioned...

          That mean's it wasn't part of the original intention.  And even still, the EU does not have identical social protections, labor regulations or tax regimes.  They vary widely between the member states and have done so.  There has been some attempt at harmonization, but it is not complete or total.  But that still has come after all countries have become richer and more equally so.

          •  They don't vary all that wildly among the EU-15 (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            with the exception of the odd duck country which insisted on the social opt-out, which is still much closer to the mean EU-15 than Mexico is to the US.

            Many of the new entrants, like Poland (chosen for size), on the fact of things look as disparate from the EU as Mexico to the US, but then, you have to consider income inequalities too, with for instance Mexico having a significantly higher gini coefficient than Poland or the other new entrants. Income inequality is an indicator of abject poverty and precariousness of existence, which feeds emigration as sure as anything.

            Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all -9.50, -5.74

            by redstar on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 01:04:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're telling me that policies between the EU-15 (0+ / 0-)

              don't vary widely?  Britain and Sweden are in sync? Ireland and France/Germany?  What, on some smaller policies yes they are, but on lots of the big issues, they still vary wildly enough that there is a difference...

              And with the EU-15, when Portugal joined in 1986, they were at around 54% of the average EU country then.  Greece was pretty out of whack to when they joined a few years earlier...

              •  The UK and Sweden are far more in synch, (0+ / 0-)

                as regards income distribution, social programs and fiscal policy, than Mexico is with the US.

                That's a no-brainer.

                Ditto Greece, Portugal, Spain viz France, Italy, Germany and Benelux in the '80's.

                Keep channelling Friedman though, it's fun to see Dems admit to it.

                Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all -9.50, -5.74

                by redstar on Wed Jun 13, 2007 at 05:45:56 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (130)
  • Community (65)
  • Bernie Sanders (44)
  • Elections (40)
  • 2016 (38)
  • Climate Change (33)
  • Environment (32)
  • Culture (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (29)
  • Science (28)
  • Republicans (26)
  • Media (25)
  • Civil Rights (24)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Education (23)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Law (21)
  • Economy (19)
  • Congress (17)
  • Labor (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site