Ron Paul Against NAFTA, WTO, CAFTA and All Free Trade Agreements

[GHook93]

He says he is for free trade and these agreements don't provide free trade. He says they bastardize the system for the elites. I fully support withdrawal from the WTO. This is an antiAmerican organization that sanctions the US, but allows China to do whatever they want. I am against NAFTA. We turned a trade surplus with Mexico into the 2nd largest trade deficit in world history. I do like CAFTA though. And we don't have FTA with China, rather they took over our consumer goods manufacturing sector when Clinton tore down the trade barriers with them. No protections against China seems like a losing proposition.

Question is why is Paul the only candidate (including Obama) to see at least the WTO and NAFTA as bad deals from for the US?

And is he right in his opposition to NAFTA, WTO and all FTAs?

Ron Paul on Free Trade
Free trade agreements threaten national sovereignty
I opposed both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization, both of which were heavily favored by the political establishment. Many supporters of the free trade market supported these agreements. Nearly six decades ago when the International Trade Organization was up for debate, conservatives and libertarians agreed that supranational trade bureaucracies with the power to infringe upon American sovereignty were undesirable.

 

[konradv]

He says he is for free trade and these agreements don't provide free trade. He says they bastardize the system for the elites. I fully support withdrawal from the WTO. This is an antiAmerican organization that sanctions the US, but allows China to do whatever they want. I am against NAFTA. We turned a trade surplus with Mexico into the 2nd largest trade deficit in world history. I do like CAFTA though. And we don't have FTA with China, rather they took over our consumer goods manufacturing sector when Clinton tore down the trade barriers with them. No protections against China seems like a losing proposition.

Question is why is Paul the only candidate (including Obama) to see at least the WTO and NAFTA as bad deals from for the US?

And is he right in his opposition to NAFTA, WTO and all FTAs?

Ron Paul on Free Trade
Free trade agreements threaten national sovereignty
I opposed both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization, both of which were heavily favored by the political establishment. Many supporters of the free trade market supported these agreements. Nearly six decades ago when the International Trade Organization was up for debate, conservatives and libertarians agreed that supranational trade bureaucracies with the power to infringe upon American sovereignty were undesirable.

Beware of people who would collapse the world economy on "principle". I don't give them any credit for using the word. All it seems to mean is "that way I don't have to think".

 

[paulitician]

Obviously he's right. These deals have been horrific for American Workers. No entangling alliances.

 

[Contumacious]

He says he is for free trade and these agreements don't provide free trade. ]

Managed Trade Is Not Free Trade

by Laurence M. Vance, July 11, 2011

As libertarians have long pointed out, trade agreements like the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and organizations like the World Trade Organization (WTO) are not free-trade agreements and organizations. Rather, they are managed-trade agreements and organizations that abdicate power to an international body, and in direct violation of the Constitution. As Congressman Ron Paul stated,

We don’t need government agreements to have free trade. We merely need to lower or eliminate taxes on the American people, without regard to what other nations do. Remember, tariffs are simply taxes on consumers. Americans have always bought goods from abroad; the only question is how much our government taxes us for doing so.

CAFTA and other international trade agreements do not represent free trade. Free trade occurs in the absence of government interference in the flow of goods."

.

 

[GHook93]

Obviously he's right. These deals have been horrific for American Workers. No entangling alliances.

WTO has been disasterous for America. It's become the mechanism to take away the American economic advantage and allow China to get away with IP theft, slave wages and unlawful devaluation of their currency.

NAFTA is beyond a disaster.

However, CAFTA is very beneficial. We have a trade surplus with every CAFTA country.

 

[Toro]

Obviously he's right. These deals have been horrific for American Workers. No entangling alliances.

WTO has been disasterous for America. It's become the mechanism to take away the American economic advantage and allow China to get away with IP theft, slave wages and unlawful devaluation of their currency.

NAFTA is beyond a disaster.

However, CAFTA is very beneficial. We have a trade surplus with every CAFTA country.

The philosophy to which you are adhering is not free trade. You are a believer in mercantilism if you believe that a trade surplus is inherently good and a trade deficit is inherently bad.

And the reason why we have organizations such as the WTO is so that it is more difficult for countries to steal IP and devalue currencies. Countries are going to do that regardless. In a trade agreement, you bound them by the rule of law. That is, when they wish to abide by it. The United States has often broken the rules of trade agreements when it has been politically expedient to do so, whether that is Canadian softwood lumber, Mexican trucking or offshore gambling.

And the "slave wages" comment is the type of thing you hear at OWS rallies. It is a rallying cry of extreme leftism.

 

[paulitician]

These deals have only brought depressed wages to our nation. American Wages haven't been the same since these terrible deals were signed. You combine these deals with massive Illegal Immigration and that has spelled disaster for American Workers. I don't think the American Worker will ever recover. It's very sad.

 

[sealybobo]

The conservative mantra is "let the market decide." But there is no market independent of government, so what they're really saying is, "Stop government from defending workers and protecting the middle class, and let the corporations decide how much to pay for labor and how to pit us against cheap labor in China and India.

The "middle class" is not the natural result of freeing business to do whatever it wants, of "free and open markets," or of "free trade." The "middle class" is not a normal result of "free markets." Those policies will produce a small but powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" mercantilist class, and a huge and terrified worker class which have traditionally been called "serfs."

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Somehow I don't think Ron Paul's ideas will be any better for the middle class. He's right to be against NAFTA, but for all the wrong reasons. Libertarians make no sense. Not to us and not to the righties. Sorry but its true.

But thank you Ron Paul for at least admitting NAFTA and CAFTA and the WTO are fucked up. Another thing he agrees with liberals on. Maybe rigthies should take a closer look at the Democratic party. We hate the Federal Reserve too, want pot and prostitution legalized, hate the military industrial complex fighting wars all over the world and we hate NAFTA too! Join a union.

 

[Paulie]

The conservative mantra is "let the market decide." But there is no market independent of government, so what they're really saying is, "Stop government from defending workers and protecting the middle class, and let the corporations decide how much to pay for labor and how to pit us against cheap labor in China and India.

The "middle class" is not the natural result of freeing business to do whatever it wants, of "free and open markets," or of "free trade." The "middle class" is not a normal result of "free markets." Those policies will produce a small but powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" mercantilist class, and a huge and terrified worker class which have traditionally been called "serfs."

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Somehow I don't think Ron Paul's ideas will be any better for the middle class. He's right to be against NAFTA, but for all the wrong reasons. Libertarians make no sense. Not to us and not to the righties. Sorry but its true.

But thank you Ron Paul for at least admitting NAFTA and CAFTA and the WTO are fucked up. Another thing he agrees with liberals on. Maybe rigthies should take a closer look at the Democratic party. We hate the Federal Reserve too, want pot and prostitution legalized, hate the military industrial complex fighting wars all over the world and we hate NAFTA too! Join a union.

You hate the federal reserve??? Without the Federal Reserve monetizing all the debt it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the government to take the Keynesian approach that the democrats love so much.

 

[sealybobo]

These deals have only brought depressed wages to our nation. American Wages haven't been the same since these terrible deals were signed. You combine these deals with massive Illegal Immigration and that has spelled disaster for American Workers. I don't think the American Worker will ever recover. It's very sad.

Why not? Step one is go after the illegal employers. Stop attacking people who are coming here and FINDING work. I would sneak over to Canada too if I could make $200K. Wouldn't you? But if the jobs dried up, they would go back home and stay. This is not an impossible thing to solve. Employers know when they are hiring an illegal. And the government can check. But that would take regulations and oversite and the GOP won't have that. Bleeding heart liberals aren't keeping the illegal workers here. We don't pay their rent.

Step 2 is to bring back the word tariff. Of course we should still trade with the rest of the world, but it should be fair trade. Every other nation protected their vital industries except for the USA. Do you think that is because our workers make the most? Of course!

Bring back the unions. Reagan started breaking them and they went from 35% of our workforce to 12%. They don't have the power they once had. But they still have the auto workers, teachers, police and firefighters. A lot of them are voting for Obama because the GOP is anti union.

4. Corporations and rich people need to start paying their fair share again. Clearly they aren't paying nearly what they did back when Clinton was in office and back then, we had surplus'.

And when American factory workers start making $35 hr, the economy will be good again. Republicans cried about these workers but they don't care that CEO pay is now 320 times the average worker. 5 years ago it was 270. Republicans need to realize that this gap is a problem. The rich can't spend enough, and we haven't gotten a raise in 30 years.

 

[sealybobo]

The conservative mantra is "let the market decide." But there is no market independent of government, so what they're really saying is, "Stop government from defending workers and protecting the middle class, and let the corporations decide how much to pay for labor and how to pit us against cheap labor in China and India.

The "middle class" is not the natural result of freeing business to do whatever it wants, of "free and open markets," or of "free trade." The "middle class" is not a normal result of "free markets." Those policies will produce a small but powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" mercantilist class, and a huge and terrified worker class which have traditionally been called "serfs."

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Somehow I don't think Ron Paul's ideas will be any better for the middle class. He's right to be against NAFTA, but for all the wrong reasons. Libertarians make no sense. Not to us and not to the righties. Sorry but its true.

But thank you Ron Paul for at least admitting NAFTA and CAFTA and the WTO are fucked up. Another thing he agrees with liberals on. Maybe rigthies should take a closer look at the Democratic party. We hate the Federal Reserve too, want pot and prostitution legalized, hate the military industrial complex fighting wars all over the world and we hate NAFTA too! Join a union.

You hate the federal reserve??? Without the Federal Reserve monetizing all the debt it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the government to take the Keynesian approach that the democrats love so much.

They are private bankers who are making a killing on the interest we owe them. Did you hear soon the interest on the debt will be one of the biggest contributors to the debt? We could be running that ourselves and charge ourselves zero interest.

 

[sealybobo]

The conservative mantra is "let the market decide." But there is no market independent of government, so what they're really saying is, "Stop government from defending workers and protecting the middle class, and let the corporations decide how much to pay for labor and how to pit us against cheap labor in China and India.

The "middle class" is not the natural result of freeing business to do whatever it wants, of "free and open markets," or of "free trade." The "middle class" is not a normal result of "free markets." Those policies will produce a small but powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" mercantilist class, and a huge and terrified worker class which have traditionally been called "serfs."

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Somehow I don't think Ron Paul's ideas will be any better for the middle class. He's right to be against NAFTA, but for all the wrong reasons. Libertarians make no sense. Not to us and not to the righties. Sorry but its true.

But thank you Ron Paul for at least admitting NAFTA and CAFTA and the WTO are fucked up. Another thing he agrees with liberals on. Maybe rigthies should take a closer look at the Democratic party. We hate the Federal Reserve too, want pot and prostitution legalized, hate the military industrial complex fighting wars all over the world and we hate NAFTA too! Join a union.

You hate the federal reserve??? Without the Federal Reserve monetizing all the debt it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the government to take the Keynesian approach that the democrats love so much.

Reagan and Bush loved it too and so will Romney. Since you Ron Paulers are going to suck it up and vote for Romney, please stfu. First step is to convince the idiot cons to go along with Ron Paul before you come after us. And since you didn't even come close to convincing the cons you were right, don't get mad at me.

 

[Paulie]

The conservative mantra is "let the market decide." But there is no market independent of government, so what they're really saying is, "Stop government from defending workers and protecting the middle class, and let the corporations decide how much to pay for labor and how to pit us against cheap labor in China and India.

The "middle class" is not the natural result of freeing business to do whatever it wants, of "free and open markets," or of "free trade." The "middle class" is not a normal result of "free markets." Those policies will produce a small but powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" mercantilist class, and a huge and terrified worker class which have traditionally been called "serfs."

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Somehow I don't think Ron Paul's ideas will be any better for the middle class. He's right to be against NAFTA, but for all the wrong reasons. Libertarians make no sense. Not to us and not to the righties. Sorry but its true.

But thank you Ron Paul for at least admitting NAFTA and CAFTA and the WTO are fucked up. Another thing he agrees with liberals on. Maybe rigthies should take a closer look at the Democratic party. We hate the Federal Reserve too, want pot and prostitution legalized, hate the military industrial complex fighting wars all over the world and we hate NAFTA too! Join a union.

You hate the federal reserve??? Without the Federal Reserve monetizing all the debt it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the government to take the Keynesian approach that the democrats love so much.

They are private bankers who are making a killing on the interest we owe them. Did you hear soon the interest on the debt will be one of the biggest contributors to the debt? We could be running that ourselves and charge ourselves zero interest.

You're pretty far left on the economy, so explain to me where you think you're going to be able to get spending initiatives without the Fed there to backstop it? You can't borrow it from China without the Fed there to finance the debt, so that leaves only tax increases.

Do you realize how much taxation you would need to be able to afford the kind of spending the democrats want, in the absence of a Fed?

You can't be economically liberal and hate the Fed at the same time, unless you're just a straight up communist that would prefer the government to run industry everywhere and tax the living shit out of us to provide it all.

 

[sealybobo]

You hate the federal reserve??? Without the Federal Reserve monetizing all the debt it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the government to take the Keynesian approach that the democrats love so much.

They are private bankers who are making a killing on the interest we owe them. Did you hear soon the interest on the debt will be one of the biggest contributors to the debt? We could be running that ourselves and charge ourselves zero interest.

You're pretty far left on the economy, so explain to me where you think you're going to be able to get spending initiatives without the Fed there to backstop it? You can't borrow it from China without the Fed there to finance the debt, so that leaves only tax increases.

Do you realize how much taxation you would need to be able to afford the kind of spending the democrats want, in the absence of a Fed?

You can't be economically liberal and hate the Fed at the same time, unless you're just a straight up communist that would prefer the government to run industry everywhere and tax the living shit out of us to provide it all.

1. Tax the rich and corporations more. We did it before and they didn't go broke and it worked. What's the problem now? If they leave the country, we tariff them.

2. Spend less on war. MUCH LESS

3. Increase wages. People make more, they pay more taxes.

4. Eliminate government waste. Real government waste, not Planned Parenthood, the EPA, Schools, infrastucture, medicare, post office or social security. These are the programs the GOP are trying to kill.

5. This problem isn't unsolvable. But the people on the right including Ron Paul will fight us every step of the way just like they did when we got the New Deal passed or civil rights or unions. I guess class warfare is a never ending thing.

 

[sealybobo]

You hate the federal reserve??? Without the Federal Reserve monetizing all the debt it would be IMPOSSIBLE for the government to take the Keynesian approach that the democrats love so much.

They are private bankers who are making a killing on the interest we owe them. Did you hear soon the interest on the debt will be one of the biggest contributors to the debt? We could be running that ourselves and charge ourselves zero interest.

You're pretty far left on the economy, so explain to me where you think you're going to be able to get spending initiatives without the Fed there to backstop it? You can't borrow it from China without the Fed there to finance the debt, so that leaves only tax increases.

Do you realize how much taxation you would need to be able to afford the kind of spending the democrats want, in the absence of a Fed?

You can't be economically liberal and hate the Fed at the same time, unless you're just a straight up communist that would prefer the government to run industry everywhere and tax the living shit out of us to provide it all.

So Ron Paul supporters don't want to nationalize the banking system? I thought they understood the private bankers who own/run our federal reserve were the problem? They stole all the gold and now our money is backed by nothing. I'm not happy about that. Are you?

So you like the Federal Reserve the way it is?

 

[Paulie]

They are private bankers who are making a killing on the interest we owe them. Did you hear soon the interest on the debt will be one of the biggest contributors to the debt? We could be running that ourselves and charge ourselves zero interest.

You're pretty far left on the economy, so explain to me where you think you're going to be able to get spending initiatives without the Fed there to backstop it? You can't borrow it from China without the Fed there to finance the debt, so that leaves only tax increases.

Do you realize how much taxation you would need to be able to afford the kind of spending the democrats want, in the absence of a Fed?

You can't be economically liberal and hate the Fed at the same time, unless you're just a straight up communist that would prefer the government to run industry everywhere and tax the living shit out of us to provide it all.

1. Tax the rich and corporations more. We did it before and they didn't go broke and it worked. What's the problem now? If they leave the country, we tariff them.

This just sounds like an aggressive war on the rich. If they leave the country because of the tax burden, punish them for it? Seriously?

3. Increase wages. People make more, they pay more taxes.

How?

4. Eliminate government waste. Real government waste, not Planned Parenthood, the EPA, Schools, infrastucture, medicare, post office or social security. These are the programs the GOP are trying to kill.

Many of those programs are failures. Our education system has gone down the drain since the Feds took over. Medicare and SS are seriously in jeopardy and flawed to no end. Harry Reid's case for saving the post office is that seniors like their junk mail

I'll agree on war spending though.

 

[sealybobo]

You're pretty far left on the economy, so explain to me where you think you're going to be able to get spending initiatives without the Fed there to backstop it? You can't borrow it from China without the Fed there to finance the debt, so that leaves only tax increases.

Do you realize how much taxation you would need to be able to afford the kind of spending the democrats want, in the absence of a Fed?

You can't be economically liberal and hate the Fed at the same time, unless you're just a straight up communist that would prefer the government to run industry everywhere and tax the living shit out of us to provide it all.

1. Tax the rich and corporations more. We did it before and they didn't go broke and it worked. What's the problem now? If they leave the country, we tariff them.

This just sounds like an aggressive war on the rich. If they leave the country because of the tax burden, punish them for it? Seriously?

3. Increase wages. People make more, they pay more taxes.

How?

4. Eliminate government waste. Real government waste, not Planned Parenthood, the EPA, Schools, infrastucture, medicare, post office or social security. These are the programs the GOP are trying to kill.

Many of those programs are failures. Our education system has gone down the drain since the Feds took over. Medicare and SS are seriously in jeopardy and flawed to no end. Harry Reid's case for saving the post office is that seniors like their junk mail

I'll agree on war spending though.

Absolutely punish any corporation that goes to another country because the labor is too expensive here. You can't sell your shit here if you can't make it here. Someone else will take your place and find a way. And tariffing you will make things fair. Because you only pay $3 a day and we want to make $35 hr.

How do we make more money? Two ways. Increase the minimum wage. Step two, unionize. Because CEO pay was 270 times what we make 5 years ago, today it is 320 times. But we didn't get a fucking raise? Nothing? Fact is, we make the same that we made 30 years ago, but the rich have never been richer. And you don't see a problem with it. Meanwhile, the economy is crashing and you think its Obama.

Pick one. It has to be one or the other.

Ok, last point. Your position on government programs is flawed. Sorry, but you have swallowed Rush's and Fox's position on government. Stop doing that. You seem fair and reasonable. Let me explain with one example.

The GOP on their way out the door in 2006 or 2008, I forgot, but during a lame duck session when the GOP were on their way out, they passed a law that made Post office workers fund their pensions in advance for the next 75 years. There was no reason to do such a thing. And Republicans don't even like the idea of Pensions, so why would they pass such a law? I'll tell you why. Because they want to destroy the Post Office and privatize it. And steal that trillion dollar pension in the process. The post office would have plenty of money if they didn't have that 75 year obligation. So the GOP don't just say government is broken, they prove it.

Now, if you think this will benefit you, let me tell you that I went to a UPS to mail a letter to Switzerland. Very small package. $60. I went to the Post office and it was $9. The corporations want to eliminate government and when they do, they will take advantage of every penny you make. Don't be a sucker. You will need social security and medicare. Don't let them break it. Meanwhile, they are breaking it!!! Wake up people!!!

 

[Dr.Drock]

Do Obamabots think the more they repeat the lie of "Ron Paul supporters are just gonna vote for Romney" the more likely it'll become reality?

I hate fiscally liberal big government corporate bribed fascists, that's both Obama and Romney.

 

[ThinkCritically]

They are private bankers who are making a killing on the interest we owe them. Did you hear soon the interest on the debt will be one of the biggest contributors to the debt? We could be running that ourselves and charge ourselves zero interest.

You're pretty far left on the economy, so explain to me where you think you're going to be able to get spending initiatives without the Fed there to backstop it? You can't borrow it from China without the Fed there to finance the debt, so that leaves only tax increases.

Do you realize how much taxation you would need to be able to afford the kind of spending the democrats want, in the absence of a Fed?

You can't be economically liberal and hate the Fed at the same time, unless you're just a straight up communist that would prefer the government to run industry everywhere and tax the living shit out of us to provide it all.

So Ron Paul supporters don't want to nationalize the banking system? I thought they understood the private bankers who own/run our federal reserve were the problem? They stole all the gold and now our money is backed by nothing. I'm not happy about that. Are you?

So you like the Federal Reserve the way it is?

Sealybobo, is funny how close you are to a devout Paul supporter yet so far away at the same time.

Paul and his supporters are not happy with the Federal Reserve at all.
Are you familiar with John Locke?

 

[Oddball]

Now, if you think this will benefit you, let me tell you that I went to a UPS to mail a letter to Switzerland. Very small package. $60. I went to the Post office and it was $9. The corporations want to eliminate government and when they do, they will take advantage of every penny you make. Don't be a sucker. You will need social security and medicare. Don't let them break it. Meanwhile, they are breaking it!!! Wake up people!!!

UPS package gets to Switzerland in 3-4 days....USPS package, 3-4 weeks.