The CAFTA Clash, Part II And III

Posted on Thursday, May 26 at 09:53 by sthompson
Under the Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) the agricultural sectors of the US, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic would be stripped of tariffs and similar trade protections. In the view of the opposition, this policy, now awaiting full ratification by the US and three other member countries, would perpetuate a trend in US farm policy that has fattened multinational agriculture organizations and starved smaller farms across the world. http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/1832 Labor Fears Free Trade Deal Will Prompt ‘Downward Spiral’ Part Three of Three on the CAFTA Clash by Michelle Chen May 25 - If Congress ratifies the pending agreement liberalizing trade among the United States, Central America and the Dominican Republic, union members in Kansas and factory hands in El Salvador may soon find their futures more tightly bound in two longstanding, parallel struggles: competing for the same jobs and fighting for the same rights. The Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), which would essentially eliminate international trade barriers in the seven member nations -- the US, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua -- has deepened the cleft between organized labor and multinational corporate interests on issues of global trade. While both sides see a globalized workforce as an unavoidable reality, they clash over the question of whether transnational trade and investment serve as a vehicle, or a roadblock to economic sustainability. http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/1848

Note: http://newstandardnews.... http://newstandardnews....

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Thu May 26, 2005 5:57 pm
    These so called free trade agreements have nothing to do with real trade. They're called trade agreements to cover the fact that they're international treaties to overrule democratic local, area and national decision making powers and replace them with dictatorial corporate profit demands at any cost. Every one of these treaties contains clauses demanding that the "agreement" is binding on society on any and every level of government. Let us remember that it was John Manley in his Trade Minister portfolio who started the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI)talks within the 29 OECD countries in secret in 1995. Canada would have signed it in 1997, but it was leaked in France and the resulting uproar over the loss of democratic rights blew it out of the Water. France was the first one to back out, fearing a revolution, but now the MAI is back in every treaty, including and especially the now being negotiated GATS at the WTO, that will open up everything for forced privatization to multinationals and the free import of slave labour to replace local workers. Yet, hardly anybody in Canada has ever heard of it and never will until it is too late. Let us also remember that during the disastrous FTA talks in 1988, the smiling face of little Tom D'Aquino was seen behind Mulroney in every photo. The guy has a "mission" to kill off Canada. Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC,

  2. Fri May 27, 2005 6:57 am
    I agree with you Ed, and this article not only points out the negatives of CAFTA but makes mention of the negatives of NAFTA as well, anything is good, as long as it is good for the U.S., and that is the problem. These trade deals are aiding in the increase in poverty worldwide. We must stand up to this!

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  3. Fri May 27, 2005 3:47 pm
    There's no point in standing up against anything while the theory is being taught exclusively in our universities, and around the globe, as the "science of neoclassical economics".
    Most of the European countries accepted the new EU Constitution with any public debate, just as we had to accept the FTA, NAFTA and almost the MAI, but the French are going to the polls to vote on it. At this time the polls are against acceptance, because that so called Constitution is little more, than the enforcement of the Chicago School's disastrous market economy theory, based on the "competitive equilibrium of market forces", which now is killing more people around the globe on a long term, daily basis, than WW1 and 2 ,plus the death camps of Stalin, Hitler and Mao put together. Yet, if you walk into any Candian university's economics department today, you'll hear its praises and enforced acceptance as "good, competitive, fiscally responsible economics". So, who has the courage to question the professors teaching this garbage anybody with the mental age of 10 can overturn in five minutes?
    Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.

  4. Fri May 27, 2005 3:50 pm
    Correction: It should read " accepted the new EU Constitution without any public debate" Ed Deak,



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news