US and Mexico trade: this deal could be a big, big deal
More work to be done, but this is promising:
But the deal left open the question of whether Canada, the third country in NAFTA, would agree to the changes — and Trump himself said he wanted to throw out the name NAFTA altogether.
“They used to call it NAFTA,” Trump said. “We’re going to call it the United States-Mexico trade agreement. We’re going to get rid of NAFTA because it has a bad connotation.”
US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said the agreement was “absolutely terrific” and would modernize a trade deal that had “gotten seriously out of whack.” He said he hoped Congress would approve it with broad bipartisan support.
Does Congress do anything with bipartisan support anymore?
And if this really is successful, will any of Trump’s critics give him credit?
To answer your questions: No and No. And just so you don’t think I’m dumping on the Democrats, those answers would apply if we had a Democrat controlled Congress and President.
I listened closely to what Lighthizer has said and one thing that jumped out at me is that the NAFTA trade deal had “gotten seriously out of whack”. I thought, why of course it has, time has passed, economic situations have changed everywhere, it would be remarkable if it were still in a not out of whack status. The upshot of that is that any and all trade deals should have a expiration date or time based renegotiation trigger.
If the details of this trade agreement shape up to be about as positive as they are being reported then Democrats would be fools not to support it. Vote to improve trade with Mexico and improve the working conditions for Mexicans and Americans. Give Trump credit and then go back to bashing all the other things he does that aren’t as obviously positive. If not, Republicans will rightly use your no vote against you in November.
Ach. Trade agreements make for modest welfare improvements if that. They can be important for special interests who receive carve-outs. See Jagdish Bhaghwati on this point: what they are is a collection of carve-outs.
Dinah Shore was a big deal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05pU6l4PEJw
anyone knows if this deal will be uphold by the incoming socialist administration when the current president steps down?
Steve “The upshot of that is that any and all trade deals should have a expiration date or time based renegotiation trigger.”
I believe as well that all legislation that sets up regulations or departments or agencies should have an expiration date — one with real consequences, unlike the debt ceiling’s one-way escalator (always going up).
Why in the world would anyone even think there’s a serious deal, let alone a seriously big one?
At various times Trump has claimed that the wall is being built, that Obamacare has been repealed, that he turned around the economy…I could go on.
Until facts prove otherwise, his trade negotiations should be viewed like the North Korea summit…he does less than nothing, gives away a lot, and claims total success.
Manju — what exactly has Trump given away in any negotiation so far, except a photo op?