Emily Conrad: The Dark Side Of Global Trade Agreements
AMERICA ISN’T USING ITS INFLUENCE TO ADVANCE ITS IDEALS || By EMILY CONRAD || When you lookYou must Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.
AMERICA ISN’T USING ITS INFLUENCE TO ADVANCE ITS IDEALS || By EMILY CONRAD || When you lookYou must Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.
15 comments
Banning trade with a country because of human rights violations is what a statist would do…
The greatest remedy to indigent children in sweatshops isn’t taking their job from them…it’s making them rich enough so their kids(if they have them) won’t have to do the same.
Undocumented immigrants follow that rule of thumb.
I’ve done quite a bit of traveling in Central and S. America.
I have no animosity towards people trying to get ahead.
Most illegals from those regions are just trying to escape poverty- the fact that we here in the US have a giant unsustainable welfare system that many of them utilize is the US govt’s fault.
People wouldn’t be bitching about illegals so much if our economy was doing well enough to absorb them and US taxpayer money wasn’t being consumed to provide them with benefits none of the original immigrants received when coming here 100 years ago.
It’s a difficult, systemic problem/topic. It probably won’t ever be solved either…but I’ve enough experience with Latino’s to see a vast majority of them are hard workers even though some of them are taking the gifts given to them by crooked pols.
It’s human nature to some degree.
Like Mucho – 10++++++
REVEALED: One Weird Trick :: @1mu5
bp…
http://www.followcareersdevelopersoncite/break/lift...
The United States currently trades with all the countries that would eventually be a member of TPP. So the question is what impact would passage of TPP have on the human rights in these countries. It seems to me that anything that encourages their development would generally lead to better human rights. Also being a part of an international trade agreement would give the US more influence in their human rights record. Foreign investor property rights could naturally lead to development of greater native property rights. Rights to travel will also naturally expand as trade expands. This is an opportunity to open Vietnam more to the outside world.
Any of you remember the stinky protesters at the WTO in Seattle in 1999? Those fruitcakes and various other assortments of the tin-foil hat coalition is who you trade deniers are aligned with. The fewer restrictions there are on trade, the more free we are as individuals. To the extent that tariffs are lower than they were before, we enjoy more freedom and capacity to purchase that product. International trade is good for America, and Pat Buchanan’s Fortress America is not going to lead us to the promised land. The BO economy is the worst post-recession receiver since WW II, and you Smoot-Hawley-Hoover nuts will make it far worse if you have your way with trade.
If someone is going to bankrupt a country, they should at least smell nice.
Stinky protesters or BO economy?
Let’s start another couple of 10 year wars, what do you say? No protesters this time.
Don’t make protesters like they use to. Something about the draft.
WTO protesters stink, and so do their trade policy proposals.
So does the WTO
Like it or not, trade is a zero game. And if you’re wearing a shirt made in China, then you can rest assured that you didn’t support an American textile/manufacturing worker, an American farmer, etc. What you did support that was American was a GOP/Dem politician, a wall street investment banker, a shipping company, and a Wal-Mart. That’s the sad truth to globalization. Thus, buy local!