Thread: U.S. NAFTA Members Must Take On China

http://www2.eluniversal.com.mx/pls/impr ... abla=miami

U.S.: NAFTA members must take on China

BY OLGA R. RODRIGUEZ /Associated Press
May 14, 2005

SAN PEDRO GARZA GARC�A, Nuevo León U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez told a summit of Mexican, U.S. and Canadian officials Friday that much of the 11-yearold North American Free Trade Agreement needs to be updated so the region can compete with Europe and China.

Speaking to a group of business and government officials in this wealthy, northern town, Gutierrez said NAFTA, groundbreaking when it began in 1994, doesn't address issues raised by recent terrorism concerns and the emergence of economic powerhouses like China.

Canada, the United States and Mexico are already discussing ways to expand and modernize NAFTA with a still-developing agreement dubbed NAFTA-plus.

Gutierrez called on the three nations to change regulations and tear down remaining barriers to trade.

"Our mission is to ensure North America remains the most open, the most vibrant, competitive market in the world," he said.

He said a top regional challenge was balancing security along the border with the free flow of trade.

"Our borders must be sealed shut to terrorists," he said. "But they must remain open to trade." He warned that the European Union and China were trying to replace North America as the world's leading economic block, and said the only way the region can compete is by getting rid of outdated rules that make it difficult for companies to move their products within the three countries.

Gutierrez was scheduled to meet with his Mexican counterpart later Friday, and the two were expected to give a press conference immediately afterward.

The U.S. commerce secretary's comments helped wrap up this week's meeting, which has also focused on North American migration issues and energy shortages.

Earlier Friday, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Tony Garza said Mexico needs to reform its energy sector to keep from falling behind.

"Mexico must find a way to more fully exploit its energy resources because its competitiveness and the prosperity of its own people depend on it," he said.

Garza said border violence especially among drug traffickers continues to be a problem, and he called on both Mexico and the United States to work to stop it.

"The bottom line is that we simply can't allow drug traffickers to jeopardize all that we have accomplished," Garza said.

He defended his recent recommendation adopted by the U.S. government that the U.S. State Department extend a travelers' warning to Mexico.

"I did this not because I have any interest in criticizing Mexico, but because the safety and security of U.S. citizens is my primary responsibility, and I will not hesitate to speak out when their safety is at stake," he said.

Mexican business leaders used the meeting as an opportunity to call on U.S. President George W. Bush to follow through on promises to create a migration accord that would allow more people to work legally north of the border.

Fox is also pushing Bush to take up the issue again after the U.S. president approved new immigration measures that make it harder for undocumented migrants to get a driver's license and that allow officials to extend a wall along the CaliforniaMexico border.

BB -----is this guy RELATED TO Luis Gutierra {Congressman D-Ill}?

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez

If he is.......we're got some major digging to accomplish!
Could this be the "brother who graduated HARVARD LAW?????

May I ask a question? How is dissolving our border with Mexico going to make us competitive with China? By bringing wages down to China's level, which are already lower than Mexico's? I heard Bush say these same things in that American integration speech with Fox and Grant at Baylor, but he never explained HOW this was going to make us more competitive. From what I understand, we lost 3 million jobs to Mexico since the advent of NAFTA, but by 2002 2 million of these same jobs went to China.

I'm serious--can anybody explain this?

I'm reminded of how Bush keeps saying we should be "retrained" for new jobs to replace jobs lost to NAFTA and outsourcing, but he never says what these new jobs were/are.

Well let’s see, what new jobs Americans can train for:

Manufacturing - Nope its mostly gone
Technology Related - Nope Most of that is gone
Farming - Nope owned mostly by big business using illegal employees.
Bio-tech - For now until we get more cheap labor.
Medical - Already being opened to foreign workers.


No, there is no logical answer for us to have an “integrated America� or for anything else that Bush does or wants to do.

yeah that's pretty much how I see it too.

Originally Posted by BobC

May I ask a question? How is dissolving our border with Mexico going to make us competitive with China? By bringing wages down to China's level, which are already lower than Mexico's? I heard Bush say these same things in that American integration speech with Fox and Grant at Baylor, but he never explained HOW this was going to make us more competitive. From what I understand, we lost 3 million jobs to Mexico since the advent of NAFTA, but by 2002 2 million of these same jobs went to China.

I'm serious--can anybody explain this?

I'm reminded of how Bush keeps saying we should be "retrained" for new jobs to replace jobs lost to NAFTA and outsourcing, but he never says what these new jobs were/are.

Republicans are nortorious for bowing down to Big Business interests. China, Japan, Korea, you name it. They will all "own a piece of America' real soon or already do. They are all here already. Look at Toyota moving into Kentucky, as an example. It's 'made in America' but not an American product. They bought boatloads of workers along with them when they transferred here. If there are any jobs left over, they will hire people who will work cheap, and you know who those people are. It's a big NAFTA/CAFTA (or whatever you want to call it) racket. These rackets are only good for their own investors.