Home | About | Donate

NAFTA 2.0 Signed: A Deal for 'The Corporate One Percent'

#1

NAFTA 2.0 Signed: A Deal for 'The Corporate One Percent'

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, U.S. President Donald Trump, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sign the new trade agreement to replace NAFTA on Friday, Nov. 30, 2018. (Screengrab via CBC News)U.S.

#3

Another Trump deception. Nancy Pelosi should like it as she voted for the original NAFTA. Two peas in a pod.

4 Likes
#6

Well, if people keep sleeping and acting like victims then this is what happens.

1 Like
#7

This is exactly what the neocons have always wanted~ the push for the US to become a third world nation where the surviving 99% will have to fight each other for jobs with pay scales that rival those in Bangladesh sweatshops in order to survive.

We are in the End Game, folks. The New World Order is fast becoming accomplished.

By the way, the “Blue Wave” appears to have meant nothing. (Big surprize!)

9 Likes
#8

Apparently the Blue Wave is going to be irrelevant unless they are armed and dangerous.

1 Like
#9

Too bad so many well meaning, new progressives like O.C. will not get much change done in Con… gress as long as they are in the corrupt, Democratic Party.

5 Likes
#10

The Council of Canadians’ Sujata Dey sez: “(I)n the closed door negotiations of the USMCA, corporations came up with new rights …”

Almost makes one wonder who was behind that “closed door.” Do you suppose it was family farm groups, healthcare consumers and progressive activists?

6 Likes
#11

From the article:

“…corporations will continue to ship U.S. jobs to Mexico where workers are paid as little as $2 an hour.”

Butbutbut—I thought Pwesident Twump wanted to stop all the caravan people??? What the hell does he think this will do??? AAUUGGGGGHHH!!!

#12

So we the people are at fault for not knowing what’s being written by corporate lobbyists behind closed doors, and then rammed through with no public input?

Got it. (rolls eyes)

3 Likes
#13

Another more appropriate acronym would be USCAM…

#14

From NAFTA to SHAFTA

2 Likes
#15

Nothing new or unexpected. On one point noted in the article, the issue of raising wages: The US is a capitalist state. Businesses are for-profit entities, not social service agencies. Wages are raised only if it becomes necessary in order to secure enough workers.This is no longer necessary. Since Reagan, US corporations have gone international, and are no longer dependent on US workers or consumers. US job losses since the 1980s have far exceeded job gains. Democrats ended actual welfare aid in the 1990s, and we lost over 6 million mfg. jobs alone since 2000. Behind every worker stands a line of equally-qualified people who are desperate for the chance to replace them, willing to work for less. After all, there’s nothing to fall back on today. There is simply no reason to pay more.

2 Likes
#16

Bill Clinton stuck us with NAFTA, and before launching her 2016 campaign, Hillary Clinton worked hard to get the TPP through Congress. Both were marketed as “bold progressives.”

2 Likes
#17

I wasn’t implying a preference. My original comment was simply
“SHAFTA”, but the damn program wouldn’t allow a single word response,
for some inexplicable reason.

Ain’t technology grand?

#18

But how could they do much anyways, being a minority? The reality is they have no power. The moderate democrats have the power. There are not even enough of them to stop this Nafta 2 from being passed if they all stood together and voted against it.

#19

Not by progressive they weren’t. They are both neo-liberals. Always have been.

#20

Throw in the fact that unemployment has to be at a rate high enough so that wages can be kept low. So that there will always be that line of others to take one’s place.
Automation actually took more jobs away than overseas. Just like the industrial revolution changed how work was done, so has automation.
The problem for coal miners and others is that when jobs are lost, the country doesn’t do anything to help those who suffer. As you said welfare is dead and we don’t do any real retraining of people for different work.
There are jobs that we could create to help, but since the almighty military drains so much along with the subsidies to the rich and their corporations, we don’t have the money. Nor the will.

1 Like
#21

What about the ISDS corporate puppet court?

1 Like
#22

Yes. A court completely filled with corporate appointments. Not an election in sight. So much democracy, I don’t think I can stand it.

If we enact Medicare for All we will face action by the insurance industry because of disruption of expected future profits. Such in the nature of corporate rule (Fascism).

1 Like
#23

Good point.