Quote:
Originally Posted by Darin Younce
Just curious but when you talk about jobs being shipped over sea's , are you referring to the NAFTA Agreement ? Also , didn't Bill Clinton sign the NAFTA Agreement ? Finally the WIA was inacted in 1998 so that also would have been during the Clinton administration, so could it be possible that Clinton , not Bush stretched the truth concerning creating jobs. Like
I said just curious , not trying to start anything
I won't "start" anything, either. But, I DO think it is good to have an informative debate about this subject. I'm leaving out right now, so MY participation will have to wait.
If anyone wants to start it before I get back, I hope they'll put it on a separate thread. Now.... about your misconceptions....
Clinton "ratified" the agreement, and signed several "side agreements" that were designed to keep Mexico from having an unfair advantage, i.e. they would have to meet certain environmental and labor standards. Dubya pretty much turned a blind eye to the failure on their part to do so.
Bush I, actually signed the initial agreement. Notice, however, that I said "government" and thereby didn't exclude Clinton from the folley.
And, in fact, the changes in our trade pollicies started during the 80's. So, we know who THAT was, right?
Do yourself a favor, Darin.... and don't fall for all the political grandstanding on this issue. Read the following links for a better understanding, and any OTHERS you might have time to find (I'm out of time right now):
http://www.multied.com/Documents/Cli...ningNaFTA.html
http://www.fpif.org/commentary/0012trade.html
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V113/N47/nafta.47w.html
My comment about Dubya was exclusive to the way he has ADAMANTLY maintained that he is creating jobs, when the economy and the people of America know otherwise.
For MY part, I will try to confine my further comments on the issue to the FACTS, and not try to blame it all on Dubya! :lol:
A serious discussion of Nafta, and its effects on our economy, is a complicated one, and shouldn't be reduced to partisan soundbytes.