Blog Discussion Group Seven
Blog post due at 11:55pm on March 19 and comment due at 11:55pm on March 22.
Mexico
- To what extent are the elitist and hierarchical tendencies of Mexican politics found in liberal democracies?
- What bringing
- Mexican corporatism brings various social actors (e.g., labor, business professionals) into an officially sanctioned ruling coalition. While guaranteeing certain privileges for these groups (e.g., job security for unionized labor and subsides for businesses), it also limits such freedoms as choosing when to strike or how to allocate capital. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of such arrangements.
Question Two
ReplyDeleteYes, bringing Mexico into the free-trade agreement is a good idea. To explain this, you must look at the pros and cons. By bringing in Mexico, there will be an increased economic growth, a more dynamic business climate, lower government spending, foreign direct investment, global expertise, and transfer to other company’s latest technology. Of course, there are disadvantages. There will be increased job outsourcing, possible theft of intellectual properties since Mexico may now have the same protection patents, poor working conditions, degradation natural resources, and reduced tax revenue. Now we must ask, are the cons worth the pros? Well, in this case yes. There can be statutes put in place for environmental protections within work and effort to increase working conditions as part of the agreement. An economic growth and lower government spending is something many citizens have pushed for and expressed in favor of, therefore this a way to meet those wants. No trade agreement will be perfect; however, it is the reality of the circumstances that determine its use.
https://www.thebalance.com/free-trade-agreement-pros-and-cons-3305845
Question 2: Was bringing Mexico into a free-trade agreement with the United States and Canada a good idea or a bad idea for the three countries? Why?
ReplyDeleteTensions have existed between the U.S. and Mexico since Texas became US territory in 1845. This ignited a dispute, and war was declared by the United States on Mexico in 1946 (Kesselman, 407). Hostility towards the US increased in 1916 when U.S. troops walked onto Mexican soil in order to punish Francisco (Pancho) Villa for attacking U.S. territory (Kesselman, 409). Finally, a terrorist attack fell upon the Twin Towers on September 11th, 2001. Nearly 3,000 people were killed in the incident, which caused America to shift its priorities from working with other countries (including Mexico and Latin America) to increase legal migrations, to protecting itself and its citizens against future terrorist attacks (Kesselman, 412).
Despite past tensions, Mexico and the U.S., along with Canada, have come to an agreement called the USMCA. This free-trade agreement is beneficial to all three countries in multiple aspects. One of the most beneficial are the new labor provisions being put in place in the automobile industry. It requires "40 to 45 percent of automobile content to be made by workers who earn at least $16 an hour by 2023" (Kirby). This will help bring wages up to the U.S. and Canadian standards in Mexico. In addition, another provision will be put into play that "extends the terms of copyright from 50 years beyond the life of the author to 70 years beyond the life of the author. It also offers increased protections for biologics, certain types of drugs, from eight years to 10 years — which basically extends the period that a drug can be protected from generic competition" (Kirby). This is particularly beneficial to the U.S.
Even though the USMCA is supposed to be a major upgrade from NAFTA, Canada chose to preserve Chapter 19 in the new agreement because it sets up an independent mechanism to resolve special trade disputes between the countries. Canada also saw it as "a way to defend against protectionist trade policies by the US" (Kirby).
The list of benefits for all three countries goes on and on. So, yes, I do believe that bringing Mexico into the free-trade agreement was a wonderful idea.
Citations: Kesselman, Mark, Joel Krieger and William A. Joseph. “Introduction to Comparative Politics: Political Challenges and Changing Agendas.” Cengage Learning, 7th ed., BryteWave, 2016.
Kirby, Jen. "USMCA, the new trade deal between the US, Canada, and Mexico, explained." Vox, 2 Oct 2018. Web. https://www.vox.com/2018/10/2/17923638/usmca-trump-nafta-trade-agreement. Accessed 18 Mar 2019.
I agree with you that this is beneficial for all three countries if it is implanted properly. I think it will have a complicated implementation, and ensuring some of the agreed upon terms will be quite difficult to enforce. I fear though that the enforcement of a $16 an hour wage for 45 percent of the automobile workers will only drive up the cost of automobiles and also contribute to inflation, which would basically nullify the wage increase. But, I hope for the best and that this trade agreement will work and be beneficial for all three countries economically and diplomatically.
Deletehttps://www.vox.com/2018/11/30/18119700/usmca-nafta-replacement-g20-trump
What bringing Mexico into a free-trade agreement with the United States and Canada a good idea or a bad idea for the three countries? Why?
ReplyDeleteYes, mexico should be included in the free trade agreement with the US and Canada because in that sense all of north america is gaining from it. With all three countries being a part of this agreement there will be an increase of balanced, reciprocal trade that supports high-paying jobs for Americans and grows the North American economy. This agreement will bring many good things to all countries involved and it will bring farmers and ranchers a advantage in agribusiness allowing the food and agriculture trade in North America to expand and get stronger. This agreement will make a way for small and medium sized enterprises to gain from the agreement rather than being overpowered by large corporations. Additionally the deal will allow cars that are 75% manufactured in either the US or Mexico to have zero tariffs. With this it will allow for there to be more car manufacturing in North America by making the manufacturers use the parts that are in North America rather than using the cheaper parts from China. This will help Mexico with their wages and bring them up to those that are in the US or Canada. On top of all of that Mexico, with this agreement, will allow its workers to officially be a part of labor unions and extend labor protection laws to migrant workers. Altogether it is good idea for these three countries to be in the free trade agreement.
“United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.” United States Trade Representative, ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/united-states-mexico-canada-agreement.
Kirby, Jen. “USMCA, the New Trade Deal between the US, Canada, and Mexico, Explained.” Vox, Vox, 30 Nov. 2018, www.vox.com/2018/11/30/18119700/usmca-nafta-replacement-g20-trump.
I agree that Mexico should be included in the free trade agreement with the US and Canada. It is true that there will be an increase in balanced trade and high paying jobs, expand and strengthen agriculture, and bring automotive business national instead of from China. However, there may opposes who point out a few disadvantages. There will be increased job outsourcing, possible theft of intellectual properties since Mexico may now have the same protection patents, poor working conditions, degradation natural resources, and reduced tax revenue. It is ultimately a question of if the highs are worth lows. In this case, yes. The positives thoroughly out-weigh the negatives in the tri-country free trade agreement.
DeleteWas bringing Mexico into a free-trade agreement with the United States and Canada a good idea or a bad idea for the three countries? Why?
ReplyDeleteI think believe that the implications of this new trade agreement between Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. is slightly more complicated than whether it was a good idea or bad idea collectively. I think first off, the implication that the new USMCA is designed to replace the existing NAFTA is a step in the right direction. Some of the major changes from NAFTA to this USMCA benefit (on paper) workers in all three countries significantly. Such changes include, minimum wage increases on automobile production, union representation, and the ability to sanction others for labor violations. I think this is a step in the right direction for workers. Also, tariff agreements have subtly been renegotiated in a positive direction which is also good. The dairy industry changes between Canada and the US have also been considered mutually beneficial.
I also think that the notion of trying to better an open trade market with Mexico is good for both the US and Mexico. Compared to NAFTA, the implication seems to be more inclusive and mutually beneficial overall. But, these new changes present a very difficult task to ensure that these changes are enforced and regulated. Specifically with Mexico, this becomes a very difficult process to regulate when it comes to labor agreements and the minimum wage standard. I think that this new agreement is highly hopeful, but the application of it if passed will be quite difficult. Therefore, I think that the agreement is good, but could also be a difficult transition, and could evenly possibly fail. That is why I think it is more complicated than a good idea vs. a bad idea.
https://www.vox.com/2018/11/30/18119700/usmca-nafta-replacement-g20-trump
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/10/01/winners-losers-usmca-trade-deal/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3ab4fd45f990
In general, it is good business to have free trade agreements with neighboring countries. Canada and Mexico are buying more American-made goods and services than any other countries in the world. The inclusion of Mexico in the agreement also supports competition both in the US and Canada. It is imperative for businesses, both large and small, in the US and Canada to be vigilant in efficiency improvements and innovation in their core competencies. Manufacturing, services, and agricultural will all need to be aggressive in finding ways to develop best practices while ensuring compliance to regulations. It will also be important to recognize what each country does best and leverage those advantages. Free trade agreements are most effective when they create regulatory harmonization between countries and promote cooperation and automation between border clearance agencies. By establishing a rule of law that allows for the faster and more cost-effective movement of goods, free trade agreements make it easier for companies to operate — especially smaller companies that have fewer staff and resources available to comply with varying trade rules.
DeleteWas bringing Mexico into a free-trade agreement with the United States and Canada a good idea or a bad idea for the three countries? Why?
ReplyDeleteCertainly from the perspective of Mexico, this inclusion seems to be a good idea. At the moment, Mexican labor is cheaper than American labor, so many American companies would want to utilize the work as soon as possible. This utilization would allow for not only money but technology to enter into the country at an unprecedented rate, further advancing the country's wealth and status, eventually possibly its role in the global field as the country grows economically and technologically. There could, of course, be American companies that instead simply outcompete businesses in the country, such as large agricultural businesses willing to sell their produce cheaper than the farmer down the street. This can be avoided by removing or reducing the government subsidies currently being offered to the American companies, as well as introducing new subsidies and assistance to the smaller businesses.
From the American perspective, the issue becomes more difficult to interpret. Certainly American workers laid off because of NAFTA would argue that the free trade agreement was a bad idea, while the companies that benefited from laying those workers off would say that it was a good idea. It's a mixed bag with many pros and many cons, all of which have varying degrees of magnitude depending on any individual's preferences.
I want to be a physicist, which is not a profession that is threatened by cheaper labor from over the boarder. So, from my perspective, if Mexico only stands to gain from the deal and further develop as a nation, then more people in the country will have opportunities to contribute to the sciences, so I would have to say that the free trade agreement is ultimately a good idea, as it will likely go to benefit Mexico in a way that allows it to produce people who are in positions to contribute to science.
Source:
https://www.thebalance.com/free-trade-agreement-pros-and-cons-3305845
I share the belief that the USMCA is beneficial to all countries involved, and it's probably the most beneficial to Mexico. It's interesting that the agreement includes what's called the "Sunset Clause." After the first six years it's enacted, all countries involved must agree to maintain the USMCA after the 16-year period ends. Otherwise, the free-trade agreement will expire 10 years after that. A lot can happen in just one year, let alone six. I wonder what will happen if one of the countries decides to opt out sooner. Then again, why would they? It's good for all of them!
DeleteThe only drawback is Section 32.10: each participating country has to "notify the others three months before they start trade negotiations with a country defined as having a 'non-market' economy — namely, China" (McDougall). That means that the governments of each country have to have everything planned three months ahead in order to make negotiations with non-market economy countries, as well as continue to function as a government themselves. I can barely manage to plan a week ahead. I couldn't imagine trying to plan my life and decisions MONTHS ahead. The planning could be beneficial and help the countries manage their time and efforts wisely, however I believe that there is such a thing as "dying of anticipation", or becoming impatient. And the countries may change their minds about the negotiations before the three months is up. Do they still have to follow through? Or are they allowed to cancel? I'm hoping the latter.
Citation: McDougall, Andrew. "How the new USMCA strengthens Canada in future trade deals." The Conversation, 21 Oct 2018. Web. https://theconversation.com/how-the-new-usmca-strengthens-canada-in-future-trade-deals-104814. Accessed 22 Mar 2019.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2
ReplyDeleteNAFTA had six main advantages. The main one was that trade between Canada, Mexico, and the United States has tripled since it was enacted. The agreement reduced and eliminated tariffs. This will continue with the new agreement as well. In addition, our economic output grew which in turn created jobs. Foreign investment for each country including Mexico increased substantially. This results in real interest in other countries success. Having Mexico as a trade partner gave the US and Canada access to lower cost oil as a result of no tariffs. It is a great option to that of the Middle East. Competition between the 3 countries businesses helped lower product costs to all 3 countries. However, those companies that could not compete had to let go of some workers. This happened in all 3 countries. It also resulted in lower wages in all 3 countries and poor working conditions in Mexico. The environment in Mexico was also degraded as a result of increased chemical use by the US. The consensus however is that Mexico preferred being in the trade agreement and it did have benefits for all 3 countries. They are now part of the new USMCA agreement.
What bringing Mexico into a free-trade agreement with the United States and Canada a good idea or a bad idea for the three countries? Why?
ReplyDeleteIt would be a bad idea because nobody would be making any money of their Goods that are exported. If we had free trade between these theee countries one of the two other countries would start looking into to other nation we trade with and trying to cut us out of deals and take away from us . Which could result into a conflict between all the nations