Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-29-2022, 08:09 PM
 
Location: USA
18,492 posts, read 9,161,666 times
Reputation: 8526

Advertisements

Yes, Bill Clinton signed NAFTA. It was a huge knife in the back of the American working class. It effectively ended private-sector organized labor in the USA. It’s a big reason why the (white) working class mainly votes Republican today. The economic fallout from NAFTA helped put Donald Trump in the White House.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-29-2022, 08:11 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
21,876 posts, read 25,146,349 times
Reputation: 19075
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
I seemed to remember both parties anxious to expand American markets with China, Russia -- anybody.

And NAFTA was fine...that's why when it was time to revisit, they mainly kept eveyrthing that was agreed to in the first place.
Yup, never was anything wrong with it. Trump needed to put his name on it and so he did. It's all good now. Trump approved, good for America.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2022, 08:30 PM
 
30,166 posts, read 11,795,579 times
Reputation: 18684
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
What a bunch of liberal BS.

As even you noted, Bush BEGAN NEGOTIATIONS FOR NAFTA, but it was passed under Clinton. No way to wriggle out of that.

Additionally, Clinton arranged for China's admission to the WTO..

Reagan got the ball rolling. I am a big fan of Reagan but he was wrong on this. Both parties were on board. The Bush administration negotiated the deal and Bush signed off on NAFTA.

Bush signs North American trade pact Clinton says he won't renegotiate

President Bush signed the North American Free Trade Agreement yesterday, and his successor-in-waiting Bill Clinton immediately announced that he would not seek the treaty's renegotiation.

North American Free Trade Agreement

The impetus for a North American free trade zone began with U.S. president Ronald Reagan, who made the idea part of his 1980 presidential campaign. After the signing of the Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement in 1988, the administrations of U.S. president George H. W. Bush, Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, and Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney agreed to negotiate what became NAFTA. Each submitted the agreement for ratification in their respective capitals in December 1992, but NAFTA faced significant opposition in both the United States and Canada. All three countries ratified NAFTA in 1993 after the addition of two side agreements, the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC) and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2022, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Canada
7,680 posts, read 5,529,153 times
Reputation: 8817
The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was signed by Reagon and the Canadian leader on January 2, 1988.

It was replaced by NAFTA which Bush and the leaders of Canada and Mexico signed on December 17, 1992

Clinton became President on January 20, 1993

The U.S. House of Representatives passed the NAFTA Implementation Act on November 17, 1993.
* Supporters: 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats.
* Senate supporters: 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.

Clinton signed NAFTA into law on December 8, 1993 and the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2022, 08:33 PM
 
45,676 posts, read 24,012,426 times
Reputation: 15559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
Yes, Bill Clinton signed NAFTA. It was a huge knife in the back of the American working class. It effectively ended private-sector organized labor in the USA. It’s a big reason why the (white) working class mainly votes Republican today. The economic fallout from NAFTA helped put Donald Trump in the White House.
Then why did Trump just reinstate NAFTA -- adding a few more things for dairy but basically leaving the rest in tact?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2022, 09:00 PM
 
Location: USA
18,492 posts, read 9,161,666 times
Reputation: 8526
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
Then why did Trump just reinstate NAFTA -- adding a few more things for dairy but basically leaving the rest in tact?
Because Trump is a politician. He tells people what they want to hear, and then does just the opposite.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2022, 09:07 PM
 
30,166 posts, read 11,795,579 times
Reputation: 18684
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnirene View Post
The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement was signed by Reagon and the Canadian leader on January 2, 1988.

It was replaced by NAFTA which Bush and the leaders of Canada and Mexico signed on December 17, 1992

Clinton became President on January 20, 1993

The U.S. House of Representatives passed the NAFTA Implementation Act on November 17, 1993.
* Supporters: 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats.
* Senate supporters: 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.

Clinton signed NAFTA into law on December 8, 1993 and the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.
Very good post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2022, 08:23 AM
 
23,974 posts, read 15,082,290 times
Reputation: 12952
Too bad the manufacturing went to China instead of Mexico.

If my iron, washer and hot water heater were being made in Mexico maybe the southern border would not be such a problem. All those Central Americans would be working in Mexico.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2022, 08:58 AM
 
21,430 posts, read 7,456,856 times
Reputation: 13233
Bill Clinton signed NAFTA
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
But you gotta admit......with the republican's blessing.
More than that, Ronald Reagan made the idea part of his campaign, NAFTA was negotiated from 1990 to December 1992 by the Bush Administration. George H W Bush was proud of it and wanted to be able to sign the preliminary agreement before he left office and did so on December 17 of 1992. Republicans supported it, and the only opposition in Congress came from Democrats, mostly associated with labor.

Clinton was not very liberal, he was picked because of his acceptability by southern whites, he was one of the 'New Democrats' so compromise with Republicans was in his blood. Clinton was able to add some side agreements the Republicans would not have pushed for, essentially his way of dampening Democratic opposition as much as possible. One of them was with regard to protecting Labor Unions and the other had to do with climate protections.

NAFTA was a failed attempt to encourage our Free Market corporations to invest somewhere in North America rather than Asia. It started with the assumption that many jobs were already lost to the USA into low labor cost markets (music to investors ears), so what were we going to do about it?

Personally I would rather see the economies of Central America, Mexico and Canada grow into prosperity over the PRC, Korea and Japan ... but the idea that capital is free to go and do whatever it wants to go is what we fought the Cold War (that includes Korea and Vietnam) over.

The same for oil industry price gouging, we fought the Cold War for their right to rake us over the coals whenever they had the chance. Yeah that is pure capitalism and some of us died to defend it.

Ultimately, China out competed Central America anyway and we got stuck with a flawed trade agreement with Mexico and Canada.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2022, 09:53 AM
 
78,414 posts, read 60,593,823 times
Reputation: 49693
My uncles steel mill jobs, good paying union jobs, went to China.

They were lifelong democrats and were angry.

Fast forward to 2016 and their displeasure with all of the off-shoring and on-shoring of cheap (illegal) labor was deemed RACISM.

They were called deplorables, told they should have gotten educations and could "learn to code".

That is the current state of affairs for private unions in this country. Outside of certain niche areas, they've lost their numbers, power and influence and have been largely cast aside in favor of more important voting blocs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:43 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top