ARGUMENTS AGAINST NAFTA

abhishreshthaa

New member
ARGUMENTS AGAINST NAFTA

Most economists repeatedly stressed, NAFTA would have a small impact on both Canada and the United States. It could hardly be ay other way since the Mexican economy is only is only the 5 percent of the size of the U.S. economy signing NAFTA required the largest leap of the economic faith from Mexico rather than Canada or the united states.


Falling trade barriers are exposing Mexican firms to highly efficient U.S.and Canadian competitors that, when compared to the average Mexican firm, have far greater capital resources, access to highly educated and skilled workforce, and much greater technological sophistication.

The short run outcome is bound to be painful economic restructuring and unemployment in Mexico.


Fear a loss of national sovereignty. Mexican critics argue that country will be dominated by U.S. firms will not really contribute to Mexico’s economic growth but instead wee use Mexico as a low-cost assembly site, while keeping their high-paying, high skilled jobs north of the border.



ENLARGEMENT

One big issue now confirming NAFTA is that of enlargements. a number of other Latin American countries have indicated their desire to eventually join NAFTA .the governments of both Canada and united states adopting a wait-and-see attitude with regard to most countries .


Getting NAFTA approved was a bruising political experience, and neither government is eager to repeat the process soon. Nevertheless, the Canadian, Mexican and U.S. government begantalksin 1995 regarding Chile’s possible entry into NAFTA.


As of 2001, however these talks have yielding little progress primarily because of political opposition in the U.S. congress to expanding NAFTA.
 

rosemarry2

MP Guru
ARGUMENTS AGAINST NAFTA

Most economists repeatedly stressed, NAFTA would have a small impact on both Canada and the United States. It could hardly be ay other way since the Mexican economy is only is only the 5 percent of the size of the U.S. economy signing NAFTA required the largest leap of the economic faith from Mexico rather than Canada or the united states.


Falling trade barriers are exposing Mexican firms to highly efficient U.S.and Canadian competitors that, when compared to the average Mexican firm, have far greater capital resources, access to highly educated and skilled workforce, and much greater technological sophistication.

The short run outcome is bound to be painful economic restructuring and unemployment in Mexico.


Fear a loss of national sovereignty. Mexican critics argue that country will be dominated by U.S. firms will not really contribute to Mexico’s economic growth but instead wee use Mexico as a low-cost assembly site, while keeping their high-paying, high skilled jobs north of the border.



ENLARGEMENT

One big issue now confirming NAFTA is that of enlargements. a number of other Latin American countries have indicated their desire to eventually join NAFTA .the governments of both Canada and united states adopting a wait-and-see attitude with regard to most countries .


Getting NAFTA approved was a bruising political experience, and neither government is eager to repeat the process soon. Nevertheless, the Canadian, Mexican and U.S. government begantalksin 1995 regarding Chile’s possible entry into NAFTA.


As of 2001, however these talks have yielding little progress primarily because of political opposition in the U.S. congress to expanding NAFTA.

Hey mate,

Please check attachment for Project on Campaign Against NAFTA - An Irrational Attack on Free Trade, so please download and check it.
 

Attachments

  • Project on Campaign Against NAFTA - An Irrational Attack on Free Trade.pdf
    329.8 KB · Views: 0
Top