The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA for short, was a very constructive and intuitive tool. This sense of unification created a stronger relationship between the countries involved. Because of this joint agreement, we see a few beneficial changes. We see Mexican liberalism emerge, we see other countries following the NAFTA template and finally, we see tariff reductions that reduce prices for consumer products. This happens to be one of the worlds largest trading zones which has its economical benefits. With this new international relation method, Canada, Mexico and the U.S would no longer have to impose tariffs on goods amongst each other. This new way of trading, exporting and importing would be extremely efficient and monetarily frugal.
Part of the neoliberalism model was that Mexico and the United States would create a bind within their borders, that also includes Canada. The neoliberal portion of Mexico promised that this organization would increase foreign investment within the U.S and Mexico border. We have seen an increase in minimum wage in Mexico because of NAFTA. Under Clinton’s presidency, he signed NAFTA in 1994, among several other landmark legislations.
Because of NAFTA, we can see other countries that wish to emulate it. There is also a CAFTA or Central American Free Trade Agreement. Then further down to South America, we see Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay create a free trade association called MERCOSUR. We can see that this truly is an effective way to create connections and save money on heavy importing and exporting tariffs.
The benefits of NAFTA in ’94 provided strong property rights with patent, copyrights and trademarks. Before NAFTA, Mexico could not review any proposals prior to making a deal because it may not be vital to the national interest. Next, the organization limits the government's level of involvement with their own local content provisions. The organization also allows for travel visas for businessmen but excludes the working class. Those would just be a few provisions under NAFTA.
However, there are downsides to NAFTA despite all the good things that were stated. Because of the program Mexico has declined its minimum wage and has dropped in a developmental perspective. Under the neoliberal aspect, Mexico is an individualistic society. Since both countries would export some of the same types of goods, there would be a conflict of interest to whom could sell the better product and for cheaper. One main controversy would include the Mexican “campesinos” and corn, and how the corn tariffs would fluctuate and leave the workers with no jobs.
To summarize, NAFTA created a strong sense of unity but does come with a price. With this free type of market, Canadians, Mexicans and Americans could all benefit from free trade but with the economic instabilities, it causes fluctuations within the market itself. I think it is important to consider that this change was the benchmark for a few other nations to want to follow the similar footsteps, because without that type of change nobody else would want to be the innovator.
http://www.mexicosolidarity.
http://www.naftanow.org
No comments:
Post a Comment