House Passes 3 Free Trade Agreements

[Silcc69]

Years after they were agreed to by the U.S. and their respective governments, the House of Representatives voted in a bipartisan fashion this evening to pass free trade agreements for Panama, Colombia and South Korea.
The first bill, for Colombia, passed 262-167. Thirty-one Democrats voted with 231 Republicans to pass the bill, while nine Republicans and 158 Democrats opposed the measure.
The second bill, for Panama, passed 300-129. Sixty-six Democrats voted with 234 Republicans to pass the bill, while six Republicans and 123 Democrats opposed the measure.
Finally, the third bill, for South Korea, passed 278-151. Fifty-nine Democrats voted with 219 Republicans to pass the bill, while 21 Republicans and 120 Democrats opposed the measure.
House Speaker John Boehner applauded the successful votes, thanking both President Obama and President Bush for working “in good faith to ensure they become law,” but he said their passage was long overdue.
“With passage in the House and Senate today, a key component of the Republican jobs plan will be sent to the president for his signature,” Boehner said. “These significant trade pacts will provide new opportunities for American small businesses, farmers and manufacturers to expand and hire more workers. And frankly, it shouldn’t have taken this long for it to happen.
“While a Democrat-controlled House sat idle, other nations expanded their trading ties and American competitiveness suffered,” he said. “These common-sense agreements reverse that trend, level the playing field, and provide American job creators access to new customers and markets to sell their products.”
Boehner said that while the FTAs equate to new jobs for Americans, “more work must be done to achieve the level of private-sector job growth America needs,” adding that the bills “represent the type of permanent reform that must be our focus.”
“Americans are struggling with the results of a failed, short-sighted ‘stimulus’ approach. To encourage robust and lasting private-sector job growth we must listen to job creators and break down the government barriers that discourage investment in America,” he said. “These job-creating bills show that, despite our differences, there is meaningful common ground among the two parties in Washington. To put Americans back to work we must continue seeking out those areas in which we agree, rather than picking fights over those where we don’t.”


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/house-passes-three-free-trade-agreeements/


We shall see were this leads to......

[Ben]

I've mentioned on this site before that, according to the so-called "Father of Capitalism" Adam Smith, the core of free trade is the free circulation of labor. (And the real Adam Smith, if one actually reads him, was anti-capitalist. However, he did give an argument for markets. And the argument was pretty clear. He said that under conditions of perfect liberty you get perfect equality.) Meaning you can go anywhere you want. Is this good? Well, in a supposed democratic society that'd be -- and should be -- up for meaningful debate.
All these so-called agreements are specifically designed to make sure that income travels upwards....
Anyway, if we actually had free trade with Mexico and Canada, well, people would have free movement between arbitrary borders. I mean, borders really don't have any legitimacy. The so-called border between Mexico and America was taken by force, by violence. I mean, how is that legitimate? I mean, that leads you to much broader questions about the nature of nation-states and their supposed legitimacy.

Ralph Nader - The Negative Effects of "Free" Trade - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpvFlaZ0oeo)

Discussion on Globalization - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHJPSLgHemM)

[Bobby Domino]

I'm all for free-trade; it seems to be working well in Europe.
Meanwhile I'm still confused why we can't buy Canadian pharmaceuticals. Free-trade, right? And ask the Mexicans how NAFTA helped their country. The USA is always trying to have it both ways. We've got lots of work ahead of us, ladies & gents....

Side note: does that mean the price of my cocaine will drop?

[Stavros]

Ben you cannot isolate a 'labour theory of value' in Smith without also emphasising the need for free markets, given that in Smith's day there were so few of them, and which is the reason why there were so-called 'bourgeois revolutions' that liberated markets from their subservience to the Crown, be it the English or the French crown (this also includes Haiti not just France). The free circulation of labour in free markets might be more accurate.

On this side of the pond, I think we are amazed that Congress has managed to pass anything, other than wind...

[Ben]

I'm all for free-trade; it seems to be working well in Europe.
Meanwhile I'm still confused why we can't buy Canadian pharmaceuticals. Free-trade, right? And ask the Mexicans how NAFTA helped their country. The USA is always trying to have it both ways. We've got lots of work ahead of us, ladies & gents....

Side note: does that mean the price of my cocaine will drop?

Most people are, I think, for free trade. But, well, I want agreements that benefit people, all people, working people.
And, yes. Why can't America import cheaper pharmaceuticals from Canada??????? Because, well, big pharma don't actually support free trade. They're opposed to it. Again, that flies in the face of actual free trade.
But no one is for actual free market capitalism... I mean, the essence of free market capitalism is no state/government intervention. None. What corporations want is a powerful Nanny State to protect their interests. So, free markets are a total fantasy. I mean, maybe free market capitalism would be a good thing. Who knows. It's never been tried. And never will. (But the goal of the "free" trade treaty, according to noted economist Dean Baker, was to lower wages for working people. I'm opposed to that. As most people are, unquestionably.)
But Ross Perot warned us about free trade agreements that suit the sole interests of transnational corporations and transnational corporations alone....

Giant Sucking Sound - Ross Perot 1992 Presidential Debate.flv - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkgx1C_S6ls)

[Stavros]

Ben I think you understand that freedom in all things begins as an aspiration until people realise there should be limits, the argument about what those limits should be, where their boundaries should be, and who should decide, are as old as Plato and Aristotle. If you look at the issue in its historical contexts, you find that issues around freedom relate to issues of the day, which is why Adam Smith wanted to see free markets -because markets were controlled by the state which drew taxes from products -the emergence of 'market towns' which were free from royal taxes was a gradual process -Shakespeare's birthplace, Stratford-upon-Avon was a market town, and prosperous because of its status (granted by Henry the Eighth), which is also how WS came to be educated in a school whose teachers were all graduates of nearby Oxford -the townspeople could afford it. Free markets thus also became linked to prosperity where the money people made could be invested as they chose -and it is not insignificant that edcuation was a priority for their children, just as welfare for the poor was also.

We are apt to forget that the growth of government in terms of its bureaucratic reach is less than a hundred years old; in the UK the creation of a small welfare sector after the First World War was not considered a 'threat' whereas the growth of government after 1945 was based on the state taking ownership of the national transport network, most of the education sector, creating a nationwide health sector, nationalising the coal and steel industries, and creating government departments to manage all of these activities -nothing like this happened in the USA, not even under FDR and the New Deal, and in the USA 'states rights' has always built into your system a necessary tension between the local and the national -possibly to the long term benefit of the USA, even if it means the range and quality of services in some states is better than in others -and probably because of its wealth -eg, Massachusetts does better than Alabama.

As I have said time and again, we are all caught up in an argument about how far the state should intrude into our lives, from taxation through to personal issues like marriage. There is never going to be an end to this debate, and the goal posts will shift over time, but freedom must remain an aspiration, an ideal, a hope, because it is all too easy to become cynical about politicians in DC or Whitehall lining their pockets with public money, employing their boyfriends/wives/lovers, telling lies and so on.

Freedom must be our weapon against them, because without us, they are nothing.

[Bobby Domino]

just need to post so I can subscribe to the thread...

[hippifried]

Hmmm... So when did the House get a sayso in treaties?

[russtafa]

:shrugi dont agree with free trade .the workers of the USA competing against China or similar countries i really cant see how this will benefit the workers of the USA. it will benefit Australia but i am not an economist

[beandip]

Yea, Free Trade is awesome.

We get cheap shit at Walmart made in China that breaks 45 minutes after you get it home.

We decimate our manufacturing base here in USA.

We give China greenbacks that are worth less and less each month...and they get this:

http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/

So
Much
WIN
I don't know where to begin!

[thombergeron]

Yea, Free Trade is awesome.

We get cheap shit at Walmart made in China that breaks 45 minutes after you get it home.

We decimate our manufacturing base here in USA.

We give China greenbacks that are worth less and less each month...and they get this:

http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/

So
Much
WIN
I don't know where to begin!

I don't know if you're aware of this, but China is the largest market on earth. As China develop its way out of the Bronze Age, they buy more shit from us:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IMPxpMEVxdw/TlwHrlS8rXI/AAAAAAAAPpo/Y1Iv8bwTjFU/s1600/china.jpg

There's your win, baby.