United States and Free Trade

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Why not use free trade agreements to force through proper labour regulations, though?

You realize that homogenizing labor regulations between the US and Mexico would imply either sharp relaxation/abolition of much of Mexican labor law, or the sorts of regulations in the US that would make Bernie Sanders blush? Mexican labor law is incredibly stringent on labor protections. For instance, it is pretty much impossible to fire a worker (not even paying a fine), unless he deliberately assaults his supervisor (there is an exception for the so called "confidence employees": these can be fired, but have to be paid a lot of money - 90 days wages + 20 more days wages for every year of service). Downsizing, BTW, is not a legal ground for firing an employee - unless the company goes bankrupt, it cannot fire anyone. Add to this unions, that are, in many industries, much stronger than in the US. If Mexico insisted on applying Mexican labor law to the US, nothing would ever be produced North of the border. If the US insisted, as a condition of concluding trade agreements, remodeling Mexican law on US pattern (something I would wholeheartedly support), producing in Mexico would become much cheaper than it is now.

well, I suppose the important thing is the promotion of unions that are independent from the PRI aligned ones, no? As I understand it, the major issue with Mexican unions is that they're a) mostly undemocratic protection contracts dominated by employers b) corrupt and aligned with the PRI; and perhaps more crucially they give a privileged platform for the lucky formal workers, while leaving workers in informal sector in the cold? Could be wrong though.

[ag]

Why not use free trade agreements to force through proper labour regulations, though?

You realize that homogenizing labor regulations between the US and Mexico would imply either sharp relaxation/abolition of much of Mexican labor law, or the sorts of regulations in the US that would make Bernie Sanders blush? Mexican labor law is incredibly stringent on labor protections. For instance, it is pretty much impossible to fire a worker (not even paying a fine), unless he deliberately assaults his supervisor (there is an exception for the so called "confidence employees": these can be fired, but have to be paid a lot of money - 90 days wages + 20 more days wages for every year of service). Downsizing, BTW, is not a legal ground for firing an employee - unless the company goes bankrupt, it cannot fire anyone. Add to this unions, that are, in many industries, much stronger than in the US. If Mexico insisted on applying Mexican labor law to the US, nothing would ever be produced North of the border. If the US insisted, as a condition of concluding trade agreements, remodeling Mexican law on US pattern (something I would wholeheartedly support), producing in Mexico would become much cheaper than it is now.

well, I suppose the important thing is the promotion of unions that are independent from the PRI aligned ones, no? As I understand it, the major issue with Mexican unions is that they're a) mostly undemocratic protection contracts dominated by employers b) corrupt and aligned with the PRI; and perhaps more crucially they give a privileged platform for the lucky formal workers, while leaving workers in informal sector in the cold? Could be wrong though.

Yes, the unions tend to be corrupt. However, as far as you are concerned, they do "admirable" job raising production costs. And, of course, the unions are an important reason for the informal sector persistence: though, naturally, further strengthening of the unions would make the problem worse, not better.

And, of course, the unions that went from PRI to PRD (or became independent) in the post-PRI era are not at all any better.

[Citizen Hats]

Upton Sinclair, the famed socialist and author of The Jungle:


"The eloquent senator was explaining the system of protection; an ingenious device whereby the workingman permitted the manufacturer to charge him higher prices, in order that he might receive higher wages; thus taking his money out of his pocket with one hand, and putting a part of it back with the other. To the senator this unique arrangement had somehow become identified with the higher verities of the universe."

Of course, this was back in the days when organized labor felt secure in their capital advantage over the poor countries of the world, and supported free trade. 

[ag]

Upton Sinclair, the famed socialist and author of The Jungle:


"The eloquent senator was explaining the system of protection; an ingenious device whereby the workingman permitted the manufacturer to charge him higher prices, in order that he might receive higher wages; thus taking his money out of his pocket with one hand, and putting a part of it back with the other. To the senator this unique arrangement had somehow become identified with the higher verities of the universe."

Of course, this was back in the days when organized labor felt secure in their capital advantage over the poor countries of the world, and supported free trade. 

It is a funny quirk of contemporary America, that most of the, so called leftists in 2016 would have found themselves much more at home in McKinley's Republican party than among Bryan's Democrats back in 1896

[Frodo]

Just when everyone thought the Democratic Party was heading in a more protectionist direction:

Mayors Rise to the Defense of Free Trade

RONALD BROWNSTEIN  MAR 24, 2016

CHICAGO—

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[beaver2.0]

Just when everyone thought the Democratic Party was heading in a more protectionist direction:

Mayors Rise to the Defense of Free Trade

RONALD BROWNSTEIN  MAR 24, 2016

CHICAGO—

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well this seals it, I'm voting Trump in November.  He is the only one who recognizes the inherent good of the creation of barriers on sub-par Oriental imports to our nation.

[136or142]

Joseph Stiglitz' views on the TPP: http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/ei-controversy-and-the-ndp-s-future-1.3514222/nobel-prize-winning-economist-joseph-stiglitz-warns-canada-against-tpp-1.3514739

[Oakvale]

Joseph Stiglitz' views on the TPP: http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/ei-controversy-and-the-ndp-s-future-1.3514222/nobel-prize-winning-economist-joseph-stiglitz-warns-canada-against-tpp-1.3514739

Is poor Joe off his meds again?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sad to see he's arguing on the level of a right-wing chain email.

[Intell]

Upton Sinclair, the famed socialist and author of The Jungle:


"The eloquent senator was explaining the system of protection; an ingenious device whereby the workingman permitted the manufacturer to charge him higher prices, in order that he might receive higher wages; thus taking his money out of his pocket with one hand, and putting a part of it back with the other. To the senator this unique arrangement had somehow become identified with the higher verities of the universe."

Of course, this was back in the days when organized labor felt secure in their capital advantage over the poor countries of the world, and supported free trade. 

It is a funny quirk of contemporary America, that most of the, so called leftists in 2016 would have found themselves much more at home in McKinley's Republican party than among Bryan's Democrats back in 1896

Not really.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Upton Sinclair, the famed socialist and author of The Jungle:


"The eloquent senator was explaining the system of protection; an ingenious device whereby the workingman permitted the manufacturer to charge him higher prices, in order that he might receive higher wages; thus taking his money out of his pocket with one hand, and putting a part of it back with the other. To the senator this unique arrangement had somehow become identified with the higher verities of the universe."

Of course, this was back in the days when organized labor felt secure in their capital advantage over the poor countries of the world, and supported free trade. 

It is a funny quirk of contemporary America, that most of the, so called leftists in 2016 would have found themselves much more at home in McKinley's Republican party than among Bryan's Democrats back in 1896

Not really.

Yea, that ingnores a lot of other issues at work as well. McKinely's was a party by, for and of business at a time when business wanted gold and protectionism. To that exent those issues could be sold to attract progressives and labor to win the Midwest and New York, they were as a form of wedge issues to divide working class Northerners (primarily industrial) from working class Southerners (primarily agricultural). They were hardly friends of labor or progressivism, hence the battle between TR and Mark Hanna just a decade later, and how such groups increasingly found themselves on the outside of the party looking in over the course of the early 20th century.

[Derpist]

Joseph Stiglitz' views on the TPP: http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/ei-controversy-and-the-ndp-s-future-1.3514222/nobel-prize-winning-economist-joseph-stiglitz-warns-canada-against-tpp-1.3514739

Is poor Joe off his meds again?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sad to see he's arguing on the level of a right-wing chain email.

It's a pretty sad sign of what the modern "left" has become when anyone who questions their corporate dogma, ESPECIALLY those from the left, are mocked as knuckle-dragging troglodytes.

Is there anyone who disagrees with their agenda that they don't believe is too stupid to make their own decisions?

[136or142]

Joseph Stiglitz' views on the TPP: http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/ei-controversy-and-the-ndp-s-future-1.3514222/nobel-prize-winning-economist-joseph-stiglitz-warns-canada-against-tpp-1.3514739

Is poor Joe off his meds again?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sad to see he's arguing on the level of a right-wing chain email.

Are you serious?  While I also question some of the examples that he gave (although he merely said that a government could be sued, not that the suit would be successful, however even the mere threat of litigation could drive governments to pass legislation as watered down as possible in the areas that he mentioned) you must not be aware or the quasi judicial dispute settlement tribunals that Stiglitz correctly claims is tilted in favor of corporations and against governments.  My country of Canada has been taken to this international tribunal the most times of any country and has had to pay out tens of millions if not billions and has had to withdraw regulations passed by Parliament.

(Why can't ordinary citizens sue governments that pass laws or regulations that are largely without merit?  We could get all drugs legalized that way.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/01/14/canada-sued-investor-state-dispute-ccpa_n_6471460.html

I support free trade in principle, but other than those possibly rather odd examples that you cited everything that Stiglitz said in that interview is factually accurate. In fact, he didn't even did go as far as he could have.  While he cited the evidence that has shown that the blue collar workers have had much more difficulty in finding new employment (yet alone new employment that pays anywhere near as much as their old jobs did), he did not cite the evidence that shows how U.S free trade agreements with other countries have concentrated wealth in the U.S thereby contributing to the rising income inequality.  

In fact, given that everything else that he says is correct, and your post in un-researched ignorant and stupid snark, I'm inclined to believe that he is correct in those examples that you cited that he claimed.

The E.U has already said it will no longer sign free trade agreements that use these quasi judicial tribunals, at least not without the ability to appeal the rulings to the relevant national court.  At a minimum I believe the TPP should not be approved without such a similar system as to what the E.U proposes, and as such, I personally will be very happy when the TPP goes does in flames, as it deserves to.

[Gustaf]

Impressive level of sophistication from the US electorate on this issue.

[Gustaf]

Just when everyone thought the Democratic Party was heading in a more protectionist direction:

Mayors Rise to the Defense of Free Trade

RONALD BROWNSTEIN  MAR 24, 2016

CHICAGO—

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well this seals it, I'm voting Trump in November.  He is the only one who recognizes the inherent good of the creation of barriers on sub-par Oriental imports to our nation.

"Oriental imports"? I'm calling troll.