View Poll Results: Do you think USA was better off Pre-NAFTA?

Voters
25. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    15 60.00%
  • No

    10 40.00%
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 62

Thread: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

  1. #41
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    That's a cute strawman . Is that your attempt to pivot from your confusion when you thought I had described NAFTA as a Keynesian project?
    It was a mistake.

    You going to keep dancing away from the manufacturing job loss data post-NAFTA?
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  2. #42
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    It was a mistake.
    good for you.

    You going to keep dancing away from the manufacturing job loss data post-NAFTA?
    already answered: see where I point out that unemployment fell after NAFTA and continued to fall.

  3. #43
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post



    already answered: see where I point out that unemployment fell after NAFTA and continued to fall.
    That is not an answer in two ways, your post concerned MANUFACTURING, I showed correlation and causation between manufacturing job loss and NAFTA.

    You have NOT shown causation with NAFTA and general employment.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  4. #44
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    That is not an answer in two ways, your post concerned MANUFACTURING, I showed correlation and causation between manufacturing job loss and NAFTA.

    You have NOT shown causation with NAFTA and general employment.
    No... you are trying to make this about manufacturing, because NAFTA accelerated trends inside our manufacturing sector which were net beneficial for the economy, but hard on that particular sector. I could use the same logic to talk about how automobiles are incredibly economically destructive because they wiped out the horse-and-buggy industry

  5. #45
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    No... you are trying to make this about manufacturing,
    Um...er....I'm afraid you were talking about it, and any discussion of a trade deal invariably includes manufacturing:
    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Trade deals didn't leave us with high unemployment and very little mfg jobs.
    _________________________________________

    because NAFTA accelerated trends inside our manufacturing sector which were net beneficial for the economy, but hard on that particular sector.
    This is absolutely double talk, if it "accelerated (the manufacturing) sector" (whatever that means), it would not "be hard on it".

    Again, I showed NAFTA directly caused huge losses in US manufacturing employment. That is not an "acceleration" other than the destruction of jobs. But knock yourself out to provide reference for your claim.


    I could use the same logic to talk about how automobiles are incredibly economically destructive because they wiped out the horse-and-buggy industry
    Except that one can show that the replacement industry not only created much higher levels of better paying employment, it also was much greater in efficiency.

    Now, again, I am still waiting for you to show that NAFTA caused a lowering of unemployment.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  6. #46
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    New York, New York
    Last Seen
    03-11-16 @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    551

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    I can't believe people still think free trade is a bad thing. The elimination of trade barriers around the world is a big part of the reason that the average standard of living is higher than it ever has been in the history of the human race. Just watch this 4 minute video if you don't believe me:

    Hans Rosling's 200 Countries, 200 Years, 4 Minutes - The Joy of Stats - BBC Four - YouTube

  7. #47
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    All Excellent Points. I would like to add that when you count only "jobs lost" but not "jobs added", as the OP and other detractors try to do, they are being fundamentally dishonest (if not intentionally by someone who repeats it, then by those who gave them the numbers). If we lose 200,000 manufacturing jobs but add 1.2 million jobs, we haven't lost jobs, we've gained jobs.
    Yep. Unfortunately employment opportunities brought about by increased trade doesn't tend to make the news cycle for sensational purposes, but export supported jobs have increased by over 2 million in that same time span.

    http://www.trade.gov/mas/ian/build/g...ian_003978.pdf

  8. #48
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    Um...er....I'm afraid you were talking about it, and any discussion of a trade deal invariably includes manufacturing:
    A) that was me quoting the person I was responding to
    B) I completely translated "MFG" into something else

    This is absolutely double talk, if it "accelerated (the manufacturing) sector" (whatever that means), it would not "be hard on it".
    Sure, it's double talk, if you selectively edit it in order to change the meaning. It accelerated trends inside of manufacturing, which were away from early 20th century line models that utilized large amounts of low-skill labor and towards higher informatization and use of technology.

    Except that one can show that the replacement industry not only created much higher levels of better paying employment, it also was much greater in efficiency.
    Indeed it was superior in efficiency - which is why it occurred. Resources do not seek out lower return areas unless they are pushed there by exogenous factors (politics). You are focusing in on the losing side of creative destruction in an attempt to pretend that the positive does not outweigh it.

    Now, again, I am still waiting for you to show that NAFTA caused a lowering of unemployment.
    I already showed you where unemployment fell after NAFTA, just when you claim we lost all of those obsolete manufacturing jobs - and a351 (above) points out to you where your "200,000 jobs lost" is met with an increase to our export sector by ten times that number.

  9. #49
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by Voltaire X View Post
    I can't believe people still think free trade is a bad thing.
    There is a lot of money that wants to be protected from competition, and thus has a vested interest in convincing whomever it can to do so.

  10. #50
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership - the Expanded NAFTA

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    A) that was me quoting the person I was responding to
    A lie, these are your words:

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Trade deals didn't leave us with high unemployment and very little mfg jobs..
    B) I completely translated "MFG" into something else
    ?????


    Sure, it's double talk, if you selectively edit it in order to change the meaning. It accelerated trends inside of manufacturing, which were away from early 20th century line models that utilized large amounts of low-skill labor and towards higher informatization and use of technology.
    That is a new highly creative claim....that you once again....cannot bring yourself to cite to anything supporting it. ALL manufacturing world wide has improved its use of information. That was not caused by NAFTA.



    Indeed it was superior in efficiency - which is why it occurred.Resources do not seek out lower return areas unless they are pushed there by exogenous factors (politics). You are focusing in on the losing side of creative destruction in an attempt to pretend that the positive does not outweigh it.
    You have it upside-down again, NAFTA lowered barriers, allowed business to seek cheaper labor in manufacturing and import the products.......while NAFTA lowered barriers in Mexico on US corn, causing massive destruction of their domestic corn production.



    I already showed you where unemployment fell after NAFTA
    You have still not shown that NAFTA was the cause. I showed you NAFTA caused massive US manufacturing job loss, countering your denial of this fact.


    just when you claim we lost all of those obsolete manufacturing jobs
    "Obsolete" auto manufacturing employment? Funny, we are importing higher levels of autos, produced by some "obsolete" auto builders in other countries.



    - and a351 (above) points out to you where your "200,000 jobs lost" is met with an increase to our export sector by ten times that number.
    Funny thing...I searched for ANY reference in the document in post 47 to NAFTA being responsible for that.....and the computer said "no".

    No wonder you did not cite anything from it to support your claim that:

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Trade deals didn't leave us with high unemployment and very little mfg jobs..
    Last edited by Gimmesometruth; 01-11-14 at 09:38 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •