On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:26:36 -0700, Travis Pahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On 8/20/05, Lowell C. Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Does it always have to be an "all-or-nothing" deal? >> >> If it takes a 1000 page document to get freer trade than was had before, >> that would be a good thing. Of course one might wish for a one-sentence >> deal like "There shall be no import taxes on good from any party to this >> agreement nor shall any party to this agreement subsidize their goods to the >> detriment of other parties." Of course, then there's the question of health >> and safety regulations, import inspections, what constitutes an import tax >> and what constitutes a subsidy, and.... > >Those 'questions' are not really questions at all. People are fairly >good at determining what is healthy and safe. Subsidies and import >taxes are not to hard to define. These 'questions' are really just >excuses by special interests to get things they want passed. >From Article 3.12: "Each Central American Party and the Dominican Republic shall recognize Bourbon Whiskey and Tennessee Whiskey, which is a straight Bourbon Whiskey authorized to be produced only in the State of Tennessee, as distinctive products of the United States. Accordingly, those Parties shall not permit the sale of any product as Bourbon Whiskey or Tennessee Whiskey, unless it has been manufactured in the United States in accordance with the laws and regulations of the United States governing the manufacture of Bourbon Whiskey and Tennessee Whiskey." >1000 page documents have never made us freer. http://www.ustr.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/CAFTA/CAFTA-DR_Final_Texts/Section_Index.html I have read a lot of the text of this treaty. Basically it's a WTO treaty under GATT that eliminates tariffs and subsidies between member nations. However, the bulk of the document (aside from reduction schedules) consists of restrictions, exceptions and exclusions (as well as a couple ex-post-facto laws requiring refunds on certain textile trades dating from 2004). The sheer quantity of the new laws will make it almost impossible for any business smaller than a large corporation to fully comply with the treaty, and will deter and/or bar most small businesses from international trade. Conversely, there are far fewer restrictions on international investment, and the treaty even provides for investment protection by the government. There are even -fewer- restrictions regarding services; in fact, it goes so far as to -prevent- any such restrictions. The section on Labor is even smaller; it only -suggests- that each member country merely "strive" to meet only five poorly defined labor standards (from Article 16.8): "..... (a) the right of association; (b) the right to organize and bargain collectively; (c) a prohibition on the use of any form of forced or compulsory labor; (d) a minimum age for the employment of children and the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor; and (e) acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health. For greater certainty, the setting of standards and levels in respect of minimum wages by each Party shall not be subject to obligations under this Chapter. Each Partys obligations under this Chapter pertain to enforcing the level of the general minimum wage established by that Party. ....." It should now be painfully obvious who will benefit and who will suffer from CAFTA. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
