How Clinton engineered the wipeout of the American middle class to pave the way for a low wage entitlement dependent nation that will accept totalitarianism by Boudicca
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
NAFTA was a piece of legislation that was unprecedented in its scope and economic consequences as it conferred dictatorial powers of implementation to the executive branch of government without any congressional oversight whatsoever. Moreover, NAFTA established secret working groups that are publicly funded, totally unaccountable to anyone and they operate off the radar of congressional and public scrutiny.
NAFTA passed in both houses of Democratically controlled Congress in 1993. In the Senate, it passed with 61 yeas and 38 nays. In the House, it was much closer at 234 yeas to 200 nays. The Republicans in the House really came through for Clinton by providing 132 Yeas to counter 156 Democratic nays. Still, 40% of the Democrats in the House voted for NAFTA.
The vote itself is more than a bit intriguing. Many of NAFTA's congressional supporters ended up presidential candidates or high ranking congressional and government officials. On the Senate side, the big name Democratic who voted for NAFTA include Bill Bradley, Tom Daschle, Christopher Dodd, Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, John Kerry and Joe Biden. All of these Democrats had made various bids for the presidency or vice presidency of the United States (Ted Kennedy's presidential bid was squashed when he let an innocent woman drown). Interestingly, big name NAFTA supporting Republicans include John McCain, Bob Dole (defeated by Clinton), Mitch McConnell (current Senate Minority Leader) and many other Republicans in Congress were none too eager to assist Bill Clinton in the sellout of the American worker.
On the House side, NAFTA supporters included big name GOPers as Dennis Hastert, Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, John Boehner, Newt Gingrich and Ron Portman, all of whom rose to leadership positions in the House or the Bush Administration. Democrat Nancy Pelsoi, who voted yes on NAFTA, ended up Speaker of the House.
Clearly, these traitorous rogues were handsomely rewarded with greater political power for engineering the systematic dismantling of the world's greatest manufacturing legend in all of human history.
But the wholesale slaughter of the American middle class doesn't end with NAFTA. It was immediately followed up by another Clinton initiative and victory with the aid of a Democratically controlled Congress subjecting America to the World Trade Organization, another boondoggle that savaged the American worker and has resulted in Chinese poison foods and other dangerous products entering U.S. markets.
In discussing the WTO, Republican Newt Gingrich admitted that by "transferring from the United States at a practical level significant authority to a new organization" that America would indeed experience radical changes in our system of governance. In his own words, Gingrich summarized the WTO, "This is not just another trade agreement. This is adopting something which twice, once in the 1940's and once in the 1950's the U.S. Congress rejected. I am not saying that we should reject it; I, in fact, lean toward it. But I think we have to be very careful because it is a very big transfer of power."
Not only did Gingrich vote for NAFTA, he was an active participant in using a lame duck session of a Democratic Congress in 12/94 to get the WTO quickly approved before newly elected Republicans, who had swept the 11/94 elections, were sworn into office. At that time, Republicans tended to vote in favor of U.S. sovereignty and against entangling the U.S. is complex trade deals that were potentially destructive to the interests of the American worker and American interests.
NAFTA was further strengthened by the passage of the Dominican Republic-Central American-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) in July 2005 when Caribbean nations were added. Also, Bush has followed in the steps of Clinton and is aggressively strengthening the anti-American worker agenda of Clinton. To facilitate a more expeditious implementation of NAFTA/CAFTA/WTO, Bush signed the Security and Prosperity Agreement (SPP) with Mexico and Canada, which created more unaccountable layers of secretive government bureaucracy to merge the U.S. with Mexico and Canada via the North American Union.
What are the effects of NAFTA/CAFTA on the American economy?
The Economic Policy Institute published a study of the effects of NAFTA on the U.S. worker more than a decade after its 1993 passage. The results are alarming.
Despite its name, the primary purpose of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was not to facilitate trade among separate sovereign societies. Rather, it was to promote an integrated continental economy and establish the rules to govern it.
Twelve years later, it is clear that the costs to workers outweighed the benefits in all three nations.
The 1 million jobs displaced by NAFTA trade, primarily in manufacturing, would have paid $800 per week or more in 2004. The average job in the rest of the economy paid only $683 per week, 16% to 19% less than trade-related jobs. Growing trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have pushed more than 1 million workers out of higher-wage jobs and into lower-wage positions in non-trade related industries. Thus, the displacement of 1 million jobs from traded to non-traded goods industries reduced wage payments to U.S. workers by $7.6 billion in 2004 alone.
NAFTA alone is responsible for the loss of at least 1,000,000 good paying U.S. jobs, mostly in manufacturing while at the same time wages continue to be driven down.
Other job killing Clinton initiatives, besides NAFTA and the U.S. joining the WTO, include Clinton praising the approval of China into the WTO with the statement "This landmark act will extend our economic prosperity at home while increasing the prospects for more openness in China".
Again, Clinton lied and continued his ruthless manipulation of the American worker (Bush is no different). There was no extension of economic prosperity in the U.S. resulting from America joining the WTO and approving the entry of China into the organization. In an Economic Policy Institute (EPI) analysis, the results of trade with China equated to staggering job losses in America.
Contrary to the predictions of its supporters, China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) has failed to reduce its trade surplus with the United States or increase overall U.S. employment. The rise in the U.S. trade deficit with China between 1997 and 2006 has displaced production that could have supported 2,166,000 U.S. jobs. Most of these jobs (1.8 million) have been lost since China entered the WTO in 2001.Between 2001 and 2006, jobs were displaced in every state and the District of Columbia. Nearly three-quarters of the jobs displaced were in manufacturing industries. Simply put, the promised benefits of trade liberalization with China have been unfulfilled.
Many economists blame the catastrophic trade imbalances between China and the U.S. as no more than China deliberately keeping its currency devalued while imposing slave wage rates. EPI suggests that this equates to a 40% Chinese subsidy on exports.
As a matter of policy, China tightly pegs its currency's value to that of the dollar at a rate that encourages a large bilateral surplus with the United States. Maintaining this peg required the purchase of about $200 billion in U.S. Treasury Bills and other securities in 2006 alone.1 This intervention makes the yuan artificially cheap and provides an effective subsidy on Chinese exports; best estimates are that the rate of this effective subsidy is roughly 40%. China also engages in extensive suppression of labor rights; it has been estimated that wages in China would be 47% to 85% higher in the absence of labor repression.
As the Chinese cleverly manipulate their currency to give subsidized Chinese products price advantages in foreign markets, this is at the expense of the American worker. More importantly, there is no way that the American worker can possibly compete with the slave wages in China.
China's inhuman labor practices are legendary. Recently, UPI reported an incident about 31 Chinese workers who were forced to work as slaves in a brick factory owner by a Communist Party official. They were emaciated and were fed nothing but bread and water. The workers had burns all over their bodies from being forced to carry bricks that had not cooled.
Such is the reality of Clinton and Bush defined "prosperity" and "free trade". The Clinton and Bush gangs represent the two premier crime families in America and we must absolutely work to permanently banish them from future power and political office before American becomes just another third world hovel.
Why have they wrought so much misery upon the world and Americans? Because their only agenda is to abolish constitutional governance and deliver the United States of America to the U.N. gang of global socialist thugs and its elitist masters. After all, the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton agenda has never been anything but subservience to the powers brokers who financed their extended stays to the White House.
More to the point, after 4 years of Bush 41, 8 years of Bill Clinton, 8 years of George Bush and possibly 8 more years of the Clintons, does America really need nearly 3 decades of rule by a two family sharing monarchial and dictator powers?
Haven't they done enough damage already?
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 113
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Boudicca only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Boudicca is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.