It brings us more beuracracy, more laws, and more regulations AND it is unconstitutional. That is NOT what we need to be more free and in fact moves us in the opposite direction that we should be headed in. I think you are confusing the name of the act with what it actually does. Just like the PATRIOT act does not have anything to do with patriotism, NAFTA and CAFTA have little to do with FREE trade. To move torwards a free economy all we need is for the government to get out of our way, not create an international agency to manage our 'free trade'.
On 8/22/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Travis Pahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked: > > >> Now, if you can show me that one or the other of these led to less-free > >> trade, then you've got a case. > > >Show me it led to free trade and you have a case. > > I just Googled for cato AND (nafta OR cafta) and got, not only CATO's, but > also Heartland's pronouncements. They're ALL in favor! Heartland's > headline on CAFTA is typical, to the effect that CAFTA's not perfect, but > is good. CATO sings the praises of 10 years of NAFTA. > > The trouble is, you complain that they're not perfect. "Show me that it > led to free trade", i.e. total freedom in trade. Hell, show me ANYTHING > that EVER led to FREE ANYTHING, in the sense of total freedom!! > > The perfect is the enemy of the good. However, CATO does tell you the > benefits of NAFTA over 10 years. Paradise, no. > > In Your Sly Tribe, > Robert > _______________________________________________ > Libnw mailing list > Libnw@immosys.com > List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw > Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw > _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
