Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Positive and negative consequences of nafta
Positive and negative consequences of nafta
Positive and negative consequences of nafta
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Positive and negative consequences of nafta
NAFTA is a trade agreement signed by the North American nations of Canada, Mexico and the US. In terms of combined GDP between the countries, it has created the largest trade bloc in the world. The NAFTA is a result of many years of negotiations, starting in 1986 under President Ronald Reagan, and finally signed on the 17th of December in 1992 under President George H. W. Bush. It became fully implemented in 2008 under President Barack Obama. The trade agreement was largely implemented as a result of the growing global trend towards free trade between countries. The economies of these three countries have been interdependent to a degree for a long time. Because of these reasons, the NAFTA has eliminated almost all tariffs between the US, Canada and Mexico, and helped lessen the difficulties previously imposed upon free trade and investment in North America. In doing so, it has both helped and damaged the economies of its countries. Although it has increased trade in North America, reduced grocery and oil prices and increased foreign investment, it has also lost the US jobs, led to the exploitation of Mexican workers and created a multitude of environmental issues. The NAFTA has dramatically increased trade between Mexico, Canada and the US. It has tripled from an amount of $297 billion USD in 1993 to $1 trillion USD in 2007. This is due to the provision is NAFTA that have eliminated trade barriers, which has spurned foreign investment. Before NAFTA, businesses had a more difficult time trading with partners just across the border to Canada or Mexico. Tariffs prevented the trade between these nations from reaching their zenith, and NAFTA has helped curtail this trend. Some industries are simply more profitable to pursue in the ot... ... middle of paper ... ...rth American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) —." USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). Web. Robert, E. Scott. "The high price of 'free' trade."Economic Policy Institute. N.p., 17/11/2003. Web. Rothstein, Jesse, and Robert E. Scott. "NAFTA and the States—Job Destruction Is Widespread (EPI Issue Brief #119)." Economic Policy Institute. 1 Sept. 1997. Web. Slait, Jackie. "The Environmental Impact of NAFTA." Valli Sharpe-Geisler for Secreatary of State. 16 Sept. 1997. Web. Strachan, Maxwell. "U.S. Economy Lost Nearly 700,000 Jobs Because Of NAFTA, EPI Says."Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post. 15 May 2011. Web. "The Problems of NAFTA." NAFTA Customs. Web. Tiemann, Mary. "NAFTA: Related Environmental Issues and Initiatives." Foreign Press Centers. 1 Mar. 2000. Web. "World Crude Oil Prices." U.S. Energy Information Administeration. 2 June 2011. Web.
All walks of life are presented, from prevailing businessmen of white-collar status, to those of the working class and labor industry, as well as individuals who deal in the black market of smuggling illegal immigrants across the border into the U.S. Hellman’s work explores the subject of Mexico’s economic situation in the 1990s. NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) closely tied the United States and Mexico during this period, as well as similar policies such as GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) that were also created. These issues pertaining to economic policies between the two nations, Mexico and the United States are seen highlighted throughout her work.
... middle of paper ... ... The Web. The Web.
In this paper I will discuss the history and practices of the Maquiladora industry. I will discuss its background, its problems, the benefits it offers to United States companies, and the impact the NAFTA has and will have on the industry. In addition, I will make a suggestion on a possible strategy the Maquiladoras can adopt in order to address the challenges brought on by the NAFTA, to ensure it remains a strong force in the future.
After three years of debate NAFTA was established in 1994. Fears concerning NAFTA included job creation, loss and transfer, wages and infrastructure. (Ganster/Lorey 188-189) However, with the implementation of NAFTA the economy grew. Ganster and Lorey reveal that bilateral trade increased by $211.4 per year from 1989 to 2004. Commerce grew by 20 percent in the first six months of 1994. There were advantages and disadvantages of NAFTA, nevertheless, NAFTA “intensified the integration of the two economies rather than distancing them.” (Ganster/Lorey 190)
The North American Free Trade Agreement—NAFTA—was an important agreement signed between three countries—the U.S., Mexico and Canada. NAFTA played an important role between each of these countries’ relations with one another through imports and exports. Throughout the presidential elections throughout the years, NAFTA has been highly debated on whether or not it has helped benefit the economy of these countries or if it has caused a lot detrimental issues. NAFTA promised many benefits for these countries, but not all of their promises were carried through; many views across the political spectrum also have their indifferences about NAFTA.
Very high population rates do not correspond with working labor force, in that (Polaski 2004) the Mexican labor force grew from 32.3 million immediately before NAFTA to 40.2 million in 2002, meaning that Mexico needed almost a million jobs a year simply to absorb the growth in labor supply. Many theorists suggest that a free trade zone will increase employment, by the increase demand for labor therefore creating a vast rapid workforce. However, NAFTA has greatly impacted manufacturing employment, by producing a low small net gain in hobs in Mexico, in that jobs created in export manufacturing have barely kept pace with jobs lost in agriculture due to imports (Polaski 2004). There has been a visible weakening in domestic manufacturing employment, related in part to increase import competition. In addition, the cause of a decline in domestic manufacturing employment is caused due to the relocation of the maquiladora factory workforce, which the United States has relocated the maquiladora assembly plants to China and Indonesia, because of low wage, cheaper labor workforce, skilled workforce, and less environmental protection laws. The maquiladora assembly plants in the late 20th century have disappeared
United States. National Economic Council. Domestic Policy Council. President’s Council of Economic Advisers. Office of Management and Budget. (2013, July). The Economic Benefits of Fixing our Broken Immigration System by the Executive Office of the President. (Research in brief) Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov
NAFTA's promoters promised 200,000 new jobs per year for the U.S., higher wages in Mexico and a growing U.S. trade surplus with Mexico, environmental clean-up and improved health along the border. The reality of the post-NAFTA surge in imports from Mexico has resulted in an $14.7 billion trade deficit with Mexico for 1998. By adding the Mexican trade deficit to the deficit with Canada, the overall U.S. NAFTA trade deficit for the year 1998 is $33.2 billion dollars. In the last five years we have gone from a pre-NAFTA trade surplus of $4.6 billion with Mexico to a $14.7 billion deficit. Using the Department of Commerce trade data in the formula used by NAFTA proponents to predict job gains, the real accumulated NAFTA trade deficit would translate into over four hundred thousand U.S. jobs lost.
Ewing, Walter. "The Many Facets Of Effective Immigration Reform." Society 47.2 (2010): 110-117. Academic Search Complete. Web. 4 Nov. 2013.
The NAFTA is involved in this phenomenon because since the agreement involves Mexico it in turn creates job opportunities for the Mexicans and on top of that Mexican workers are part of an underdeveloped country which in turn means they are going to get less money due to the condition of their economy. And for American businessmen that is a very desirable quality in a potential employee due to how much profit the companies and factories will make simply by giving more low paying jobs to Mexicans and decreasing the American workforce. This source relates to economic globalization, because the NAFTA is essentially an economic agreement between major countries to save money and reduce trading taxes. This agreement causes an economic rise in all of these countries by causing an increase in jobs in Mexico and increasing companies’ profits in the US and
The goal of NAFTA was to systematically eliminate most tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade and investment between the countries. NAFTA has allowed U.S., Mexico, and Canada to import and export to other at a lower cost, which has increased the profit of goods and services annually. Because the increase in the trade marketplace, NAFTA reduces inflation, creates agreements on intern...
Rao, S. , P. Sharma, and R. Acharya.Canada–U.S. trade and foreign direct investment patterns. Calgary: Calgary University Press, 2003.
Lynch, R., & Oakford, P. (2013, March 30). The Economic Effects of Granting Legal Status and Citizenship to Undocumented Immigrants. American Progress. Retrieved July 2, 2014, from http://americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2013/03/20/57351/the-economic-effects-of-granting-legal-status-and-citizenship-to-undocumented-immigrants/
Chasek, P. S., Downie, D. L., & Brown, J. W. (2014). The Development of Environmental Regimes: Chemicals, Wastes, and Climate Change. In P. S. Chasek, D. L. Downie, & J. W. Brown, Global Environmental Politics (6th ed., pp. 101-173). Boulder: Westview Press.
Gerking, Shelby, and John H Mutti. Costs And Benefits of Illegal Immigration: Key Issues For Government Policy. 61.1 (June 1980): 71-85. Print.