PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
gosh, lib'ruls get so nasty when they lose.......
“United States-Mexico Trade Agreement.”
- Thread starter anatta
- Start date
You have a vagina.
I really do not think you know what you are Katzgar. Even that gender neutral thingy is too much for you.
It's called compromise. You want to go back to paying Mexicans minimum wage to do the same thing as UAW workers do, sucking the life out of manufacturing in America? Or do you feel they should get $23 - $28/hr which is unrealistically high for Mexico?
Once upon a time compromise was considered a good thing, at least to reasonable people.
No the point is, you are a gay transvestite.
Right, but this compromise doesn't serve the goal of bringing jobs back from Mexico to America because you didn't raise Mexican wages high enough so that American wages are competitive. So all you did was nominally increase Mexican wages, and those cost increases to the producer will lead to higher costs for American consumers of those products.
Even with the wage increase, the Mexican wages are still lower. So all you did was nominally raise Mexican wages, but you didn't raise them high enough that American wages would be competitive. So all you did was increase the cost to consumers.
Brilliant.
Your argument is that raising Mexican wages will somehow translate to US jobs, but the problem is that if low Mexican wages were the reason those American jobs left, raising the Mexican wage to a wage still lower than American ones creates what incentive for companies to bring those jobs back?
It's like when you doofuses lowered the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, but 21% is still higher than most of the countries to where jobs have been outsourced. So you didn't actually accomplish anything other than exploding the deficit because of the decline in revenue.
Nothing you people do has positive outcomes. It's always negative and always ends up hurting American workers.
Sounds like you advocate tariffs then.
Sounds like you advocate free trade with Mexicans earning the equivalent of minimum wage compared to Americans resulting in loss of American jobs.
None.
Here's my position:
I'm a globalist free trade advocate without tariffs. If Mexicans are willing to do produce the same as Americans at a lower wage then Americans need to find something else to do, maybe use their brain in health care, technology, engineering.
But this so called "free trade" with NAFTA has not been free trade at all. I agree with Trump's goal in having all countries eliminate all barriers for the purpose of truly having free trade.
No. I advocate for not ripping apart NAFTA and having no coherent plan with which its replaced.
If you're going to increase Mexican wages to achieve the goal of bringing jobs back to America, you're not going to accomplish that goal if you're raising wages to levels still below that of American workers. All you're doing is increasing the cost of the product. Not even 1 million Mexicans work in auto manufacturing; so it's hard to see how raising their wage nominally will positively impact US wages or labor growth. It is the exact same reason why lowering the corporate tax rate to 21% didn't bring jobs back...because that tax rate is still higher than most of the countries to where jobs are outsourced. But bringing jobs back was never the intent of the Russia Tax Cut; manufacturing a deficit crisis to cut Medicare and Social Security is.
All you seem capable of doing is constructing straw men to make you feel better about supporting a policy that will not deliver on its promises.
It's not Mexico that stole American jobs in auto manufacturing...it was robots.
Or instead, put a Universal Basic Income in place because you can't employ someone in a job done by a robot. And automation is only going to continue to reduce workforces, as it has since the cotton gin. Screwing around with trade deals like NAFTA, with no coherent strategy in place and with conflicting goals, will not benefit us at all. Particularly when the half-measures being proposed make no sense and don't serve the goals they are supposed to achieve.
What barriers exist now? The measures proposed by Trump are half-measures that don't address the underlying issues at stake. They're feel-good proposals that maintain the same structure. This isn't a new NAFTA. This isn't even NAFTA 2.0. This is NAFTA 1.5.
Too funny. I have an even better idea. Gubmint gives everybody enough money to own a yacht and live in a mansion.
I pretty much agree. A compromise.
Last edited:
You can't employ someone at a job done by a robot. And your hysterical hyperbole is meant to deflect away from the topic that will be a necessity as more and more jobs are taken by robots.
That serves what end? It doesn't bring jobs back to the US, because Mexican wages are still below that of US workers. All it does is increase costs to consumers. Hard to see how anything other than the shoring up of intellectual property and digital trade is a win for the USA.
Next those damn robots will unionize.
"Wall Street Journal: New Trump-Mexico trade deal ‘worse in many ways’ than NAFTA"
"The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board on Tuesday criticized President Trump over the trade deal he announced Monday with Mexico, calling it “notably worse in many ways” than the North American Free Trade Agreement."
"The editorial board pointed to the exclusion of Canada from the deal as one of its shortcomings"
"To break up the current three-country trade agreement, Trump would need approval from Congress, something he is unlikely to get"
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...xico-trade-deal-worse-in-many-ways-than-nafta
This is going to be just like three quarters of Trump's "big deals," a good photo op with promises and the superlatives but ultimately resulting in nothing.
But that won't stop him from describing it as the "greatest, biggest, largest, tremendous, etc.," and the lemmings will believe every word of it
"The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board on Tuesday criticized President Trump over the trade deal he announced Monday with Mexico, calling it “notably worse in many ways” than the North American Free Trade Agreement."
"The editorial board pointed to the exclusion of Canada from the deal as one of its shortcomings"
"To break up the current three-country trade agreement, Trump would need approval from Congress, something he is unlikely to get"
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...xico-trade-deal-worse-in-many-ways-than-nafta
This is going to be just like three quarters of Trump's "big deals," a good photo op with promises and the superlatives but ultimately resulting in nothing.
But that won't stop him from describing it as the "greatest, biggest, largest, tremendous, etc.," and the lemmings will believe every word of it