NAFTA rhetoric may harm ties - 03/02/2008 - MiamiHerald.com
My response:
Andres,
I think you are being too harsh saying that Obama and Clinton's statements as irresponsible as Republicans on illegal immigration, considering that some Republicans' comments are borderline racist. However, let me comment on somethings missing in your article. I am all for free trade. As a matter of fact, one of the few areas where there is a consensus among Economists is free trade, but let's put some context. Ohio, a big manufacturing economy is hurting, mainly due to jobs lost to globalization. This is also the state where the primary and may be the national election will be decided. Hillary has asked for a "time-out" and Obama wants to keep "improving fairness in labor and enviromental" standards. I worry more about what does a "time-out" mean -- suspending NAFTA? The fact of the matter is that when you have $20 hour vs. $1-2 hour you cannot close that gap even without NAFTA. This is where China applies. Free Trade will be very difficult with China. The U.S. starting losing its manufacturing industry long before NAFTA. The big issue is that it is also losing the technology industry. We have all called customer service to help us install our wireless router for example and somebody from India or Costa Rica helps us set it up. The U.S. biggest comparative advantage continues to be to attract talent from all over the world who innovate and stay in the U.S. Unfortunately, try explaining that to labor unions in Michigan and Ohio, which are key to get the National nomination.
Posted by: Carlos Erban
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment