北美自由贸易协定的缺点

1、北美自由贸易协定的缺点:北美自由贸易区有很多缺点。首先和最重要的是，是，北美自由贸易协定使它可能为许多美国厂家将作业移到成本较低的墨西哥。保持工资下降，在这些行业中竞争的制造商。第二个缺点是很多墨西哥的农民提出了业务美国补贴农产品。北美自由贸易协定墨西哥劳动和环境保护的规定没有强大到足以阻止那些工人被剥削。美国的就业机会被丢失:在墨西哥，劳动是便宜的因为许多制造业从高成本的美国各州搬他们生产的一部分。1994 年至 2010 年，墨西哥与美国的贸易赤字总额美元 972 亿，取代 682,900 美国的就业机会。(然而，116,400 2007 年以后，发生的可能是金融危机的结果)近 80%的损

2、失属于制造业。加州，纽约，密歇根州和德克萨斯州受灾因为他们有高浓度的植物搬到墨西哥的产业。这些行业包括汽车、 纺织品、 计算机和电器。(来源: 经济政策研究所，"自由贸易的高成本，"2011 年 5 月 3 日)美国工资被镇压:在这些行业中的并不是所有公司都搬到墨西哥。那些使用移动期间联盟组织驱动器的威胁。当它成为了选择之间加入联盟或失去工厂时，工人选择工厂。工人没有工会的支持，小小的议价能力。这压抑工资增长。1993 年至 1995 年，搬到墨西哥的行业的所有公司的 50%用于关闭工厂的威胁。到 1999 年，那率已经上升到 65%。墨西哥的农民被关:由于北美自由贸易协定

3、，墨西哥失去了 130 万的农场工作。2002 年农业法案资助美国农业的净农业收入的 40%。当北美自由贸易协定取消了关税时，玉米和其它谷物出口到墨西哥低于成本的价格。墨西哥农民无法竞争。同时，墨西哥减少其补贴到农民从农业收入总额的 33.2%在 1990 年至 13.2 %2001 年。大多数的这些补贴无论如何去墨西哥的大农场。(来源: 全球化，暴露的自由贸易，2003 年 2 月 25 日; 神话国际论坛经济学人 ，关税和玉米饼，2008 年 1 月 24 日)女工被剥削:北美自由贸易协定扩大边境加工程序，美国拥有的公司从事边境附近要便宜装配产品出口到美国的墨西哥工人这增长到 30%的墨西

4、哥的劳动力。这些工人有"没有劳动权利或健康保护，工作日伸出 12 小时或更多，如果你是一个女人，你可能被迫采取验孕测试时申请一份工作，"根据大陆社会联盟。(来源: W、北美自由贸易协定的经验教训，2001 年 4 月 20 日)墨西哥的环境恶化:针对北美自由贸易区的竞争压力，墨西哥农业综合企业使用更多的化肥和其他化学品，成本 $ 360 亿每年在污染。农村农民扩大到更加贫瘠的土地，导致森林砍伐速度每 630,000 年公顷。(来源:卡内基，北美自由贸易协定的承诺和现实，2004年)北美自由贸易协定，墨西哥卡车呼吁免费访问:未在北美自由贸易协定内的另

5、一项协议。北美自由贸易协定将允许卡车从墨西哥旅行在美国超出当前 20 英里商业地带限制内。成立了由运输部(DoT) 的示范项目审查这的实用性。在 2008 年，众议院终止这一项目，并禁止点允许的北美自由贸易协定过未经国会批准执行这一规定。美国国会担心墨西哥卡车将提出道路危险。他们都不受相同的安全标准作为美国卡车。此外，北美自由贸易协定的这一部分被反对美国卡车司机的组织和公司，他可能已失去业务。目前，墨西哥卡车必须停止在 20 英里极限，有他们的货物转移到美国卡车。也是一个互惠的问题。北美自由贸易协定，也就可以无限次的访问整个墨西哥美国卡车。一项类似协定工作井之间的其他北美自由贸易协定伙伴，加拿

6、大。然而，美国卡车更大，携带更重的负荷。这违反了墨西哥政府的尺寸和重量限制。文章更新 2014 年 4 月 19 日NAFTA has many disadvantages. First and foremost, is that NAFTA made it possible for many U.S. manufacturers to move jobs to lower-cost Mexico. The manufacturers that remained lowered wages to compete in those industries.The second disadvanta

7、ge was that many of Mexico's farmers were put out of business by U.S.-subsidized farm products. NAFTA provisions for Mexican labor and environmental protection were not strong enough to prevent those workers from being exploited.U.S. Jobs Were Lost:Since labor is cheaper in Mexico, man

8、y manufacturing industries moved part of their production from high-cost U.S. states. Between 1994 and 2010, the U.S. trade deficits with Mexico totaled $97.2 billion, displacing 682,900 U.S. jobs. (However, 116,400 occurred after 2007, and could have been a result of the financi

9、al crisis.)Nearly 80% of the losses were in manufacturing. California, New York, Michigan and Texas were hit the hardest because they had high concentrations of the industries that moved plants to Mexico. These industries included motor vehicles, textiles, computers, and electrical appliances. (Sour

10、ce: Economic Policy Institute, "The High Cost of Free Trade," May 3, 2011)U.S. Wages Were Suppressed:Not all companies in these industries moved to Mexico. The ones that used the threat of moving during union organizing drives. When it became a choice between joining the union or losing th

11、e factory, workers chose the factory. Without union support, the workers had little bargaining power.Mexico's Farmers Were Put Out of Business:Thanks to NAFTA, Mexico lost 1.3 million farm jobs. The 2002 Farm Bill subsidized U.S. agribusiness by as much as 40% of net farm income. When

12、NAFTA removed tariffs, corn and other grains were exported to Mexico below cost. Rural Mexican farmers could not compete. At the same time, Mexico reduced its subsidies to farmers from 33.2% of total farm income in 1990 to 13.2% in 2001. Most of those subsidies went to Mexico's la

13、rge farms, anyway.(Source: International Forum on Globalization, Exposing the Myth of Free Trade, February 25, 2003; The Economist, Tariffs and Tortillas, January 24, 2008)Maquiladora Workers Were Exploited:NAFTA expanded the maquiladora program, in which U.S.-owned companies employed Mexi

14、can workers near the border to cheaply assemble products for export to the U.S. This grew to 30% of Mexico's labor force. These workers have "no labor rights or health protections, workdays stretch out 12 hours or more, and if you are a woman, you could be forced to take a pregnancy test wh

15、en applying for a job," according to Continental Social Alliance. (Source: W, Lessons of NAFTA, April 20, 2001)Mexico's Environment Deteriorated:In response to NAFTA competitive pressure, Mexico agribusiness used more fertilizers and other chemicals, costing $36 billion pe

16、r year in pollution. Rural farmers expanded into more marginal land, resulting in deforestation at a rate of 630,000 hectares per year. (Source: Carnegie Endowment, NAFTA's Promise and Reality, 2004)NAFTA Called for Free Access for Mexican Trucks:Another agreement within NAFTA has not

17、been implemented. NAFTA would have allowed trucks from Mexico to travel within the United States beyond the current 20-mile commercial zone limit. A demonstration project by the Department of Transportation (DoT) was set up to review the practicality of this. In 2008, theHouse of Represent

18、atives terminated this project, and prohibited the DoT from allowing this provision of NAFTA to ever be implemented without Congressional approval.Congress was concerned that Mexican trucks would have presented a road hazard. They are not subject to the same safety standards as U.S. trucks

19、. In addition, this portion of NAFTA was opposed by the U.S. truckers' organizations and companies, who would have lost business. Currently, Mexican trucks must stop at the 20-mile limit and have their goods transferred to U.S. trucks.There was also a question of reciprocity. The NAFTA agre

20、ement would also have allowed unlimited access for U.S. trucks throughout Mexico. A similar agreement works well between the other NAFTA partner, Canada. However, U.S. trucks are larger and carry heavier loads. This violates size and weight restrictions imposed by the Mexican government. Articl

21、e updated April 19, 2014NAFTA is highly controversial. Do the pros of NAFTA outweigh the cons?ProsNAFTA, or the North American Free Trade Agreement, is the world's largest free trade area. The agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico links 450 million people and the $19.24 trillion in goods

22、 and services produced by the three countries. Trade has increased from $297 billion in 1993, the year before NAFTA was enacted, to $1.2 trillion in 2012 (most recent estimates) .NAFTAUS Free Trade AgreementsInvestment AgreementGlobal World TradeAgreementEstimates are that NAFTA increases economic o

23、utput in the U.S. by as much as .5% a year.Some service industries, such as health care and financial services, see an increase in exports. Farm products also reap the benefits of NAFTA's lower tariffs. U.S. consumers also benefit from NAFTA. Mexican oil can be imported for less, lowering the co

24、st of gas in the U.S. and decreasing reliance on oil from the Middle East. Lower gas prices means food can be transported more cheaply, as well. For more, see NAFTA Advantages.ConsNAFTA led to the loss of 500,000-750,000 jobs in the U.S., thanks to companies moving across the border to Mexico. As a

25、result, workers in those industries affected by NAFTA could not bargain for higher wages.NAFTA created negative consequences for Mexico, too. NAFTA allowed government-subsidized U.S. farm products into Mexico, where local farmers could not compete with the artificially low prices. As Mexicans lost t

26、heir farms, they went to work in sub-standard conditions in the maquiladora program.Does NAFTA's Pros Outweigh Its Cons?NAFTA's disadvantages are significant. Can anything really justify the loss of entire industries in New York or Michigan, worker mistreatment for remaining workers in the U

27、.S., or in the maquiladora program, and environmental damage along the border?However, from an economic perspective, NAFTA is a success. Without it, the U.S. could not compete as effectively against the European Union (now the world's largest economy) or China and its trade agreements. That $1.2

28、 trillion in increased trade is really needed after the 2008 financial crisis. Even more people would be unemployed without it.Perhaps NAFTA should have been designed with better protections. At the same time, free trade agreements are a necessity for the U.S. when competing in an ever-more-globaliz

29、ed world. Article updated August 23, 2014北美自由贸易协定是高度争议。北美自由贸易协定的优点大于缺点吗?优点北美自由贸易协定,或北美自由贸易协定,是世界上最大的自由贸易区。之间的协议,加拿大,美国和墨西哥链接4.5亿人和19.24万亿美元的商品和服务产生的三个国家。贸易增加了从2970亿年的1993美元,去年颁布了北美自由贸易协定,到1.2万亿年的2012美元(最近的估计)。据估计,北美自由贸易协定在美国经济产出增加了。每年5%。一些服务行业,如医疗保健和金融服务,看到出口的增加。农产品也获得北美自由贸易协定的好处的低关税。美国消费者也受益于北美自由贸易

30、协定。墨西哥石油可以进口少,降低天然气的成本在美国和减少依赖石油来自中东。更低的油价意味着可以运送食品更便宜,。,北美自由贸易协定的优势。缺点北美自由贸易协定导致的损失500000 - 750000年在美国工作,由于公司搬到墨西哥边境。因此,这些行业的工人受到北美自由贸易协定为更高的工资不能讨价还价。北美自由贸易协定为墨西哥创造了负面影响。北美自由贸易协定允许政府补贴的美国农产品到墨西哥,当地农民无法与人为的低价格竞争。墨西哥人失去了他们的农场,他们去上班在劣质边境加工程序的条件。美国公司也退化墨西哥环境来保持低成本。,北美自由贸易协定的缺点。北美自由贸易协定的它的优点多于缺点吗?北美自由贸易

31、协定的缺点明显。什么真的能证明整个行业的损失在纽约或密歇根州,剩下的工人在美国工人虐待吗、或在边境加工程序和环境破坏边境吗?然而,从经济的角度来看,北美自由贸易协定是一个成功。没有它,美国无法有效竞争与欧盟(现在是世界上最大的经济体)或中国及其贸易协定。1.2万亿美元的增加贸易2008年金融危机后真正需要的。更多的人将失业。也许北美自由贸易协定应该设计有更好的保护。与此同时,自由贸易协定是一个美国的必要性时参加一个ever-more-globalized世界。文章更新的2014年8月23日ImpactObama, Peña Nieto and Harper at the IXNort

32、h American Leaders' Summit(informally known as the Three Amigos Summit) in Toluca.NAFTA's effects, both positive and negative, have been quantified by several economists, whose findings have been reported in publications such as the World Bank's Lessons from NAFTA for

33、 Latin America and the Caribbean,16 NAFTA's Impact on North America,17 and NAFTA Revisited by the Institute for International Economics.18CanadaLike Mexico and the U.S., Canada received a modest positive economic benefit as measured by GDP. Many feared declines failed to mate

34、rialize, and some industries, like the furniture industry, were expected to suffer but grew instead. Canadian manufacturing employment held steady despite an international downward trend in developed countries. One of NAFTA's biggest economic effects on U.S.-Canada trade has been to boost bilate

35、ral agricultural flows.19 In the year 2008 alone, Canada exports to the United States and Mexico were at $381.3 billion, and imports from NAFTA were at $245.1 billion.20A book written by Mel Hurtig published in 2002 called The Vanishing Country charged that since NAFTA's

36、 ratification more than 10,000 Canadian companies had been taken over by foreigners, and that 98% of all foreign direct investments in Canada were for foreign takeovers.21MexicoMaquiladoras (Mexican factories that take in imported raw materials and produce goods for export) have become the land

37、mark of trade in Mexico. These are plants that moved to this region from the United States, hence the debate over the loss of American jobs. Hufbauer's (2005) book shows that income in the maquiladora sector has increased 15.5% since the implementation of NAFTA in 1994. Other sectors now benefit

38、 from the free trade agreement, and the share of exports from non-border states has increased in the last five years while the share of exports from maquiladora-border states has decreased. This has allowed for the rapid growth of non-border metropolitan areas, such as Toluca, Le

39、ón and Puebla; all three larger in population than Tijuana, Ciudad Juárez, and Reynosa.The overall effect of the MexicoU.S. agricultural agreement is a matter of dispute. Mexico did not invest in the infrastructure necessary for competition, such as efficient railr

40、oads and highways, which resulted in more difficult living conditions for the country's poor. Mexico's agricultural exports increased 9.4 percent annually between 1994 and 2001, while imports increased by only 6.9 percent a year during the same period.22One of the most affected agricultural

41、sectors is the meat industry. Mexico has gone from a small player in the pre-1994 U.S. export market to the 2nd largest importer of U.S. agricultural products in 2004, and NAFTA may be credited as a major catalyst for this change. The allowance of free trade removed the hurdles that impeded business

42、 between the two countries. As a result, Mexico has provided a growing market for meat for the U.S., leading to an increase in sales and profits for the U.S. meat industry. This coincides with a noticeable increase in Mexican per capita GDP that has created large changes in meat consumption patterns

43、, implying that Mexicans can now afford to buy more meat and thus per capita meat consumption has grown.23Production of corn in Mexico has increased since NAFTA's implementation. However, internal corn demand has increased beyond Mexico's sufficiency, and imports have become necess

44、ary, far beyond the quotas Mexico had originally negotiated.24 Zahniser & Coyle have also pointed out that corn prices in Mexico, adjusted for international prices, have drastically decreased, yet through a program of subsidies expanded by former president Vicente Fox, production has r

45、emained stable since 2000.25United StatesThe U.S. Chamber of Commerce credits NAFTA with increasing US trade in goods and services with Canada and Mexico from $337 billion in 1993 to $1.2 trillion in 2011, while the AFL-CIO blames the agreement for sending 700,000 American manufacturing jobs to Mexi

46、co over that time.26Trade balancesThe US goods trade deficit with NAFTA was $94.6 billion in 2010, a 36.4% increase ($25 billion) over 2009.3 The US goods trade deficit with NAFTA accounted for 26.8% of the overall U.S. goods trade deficit in 2010.3 The US had a services trade surplus of $

47、28.3 billion with NAFTA countries in 2009 (the latest data available).3In a study published in the August 2008 issue of the American Journal of Agricultural Economics, NAFTA has increased U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico and Canada even though most of this increase occurred a decade after it

48、s ratification. The study focused on the effects that gradual "phase-in" periods in regional trade agreements, including NAFTA, have on trade flows. Most of the increase in members agricultural trade, which was only recently brought under the purview of the World Trade Organization, was du

49、e to very high trade barriers before NAFTA or other regional trade agreements.27InvestmentThe US foreign direct investment (FDI) in NAFTA countries (stock) was $327.5 billion in 2009 (latest data available), up 8.8% from 2008.3 The US direct investment in NAFTA countries is in nonbank holding c

50、ompanies, and in the manufacturing, finance/insurance, and mining sectors.3 The foreign direct investmentof Canada and Mexico in the United States (stock) was $237.2 billion in 2009 (the latest data available), up 16.5% from 2008.31JobsMany American small businesses depend on exporting the

51、ir products to Canada or Mexico under NAFTA. According to the US Trade Representative, this trade supports over 140,000 small and medium-sized businesses in the US. 2According to the Economic Policy Institute, California, Texas, Michigan and other states with high

52、concentrations of manufacturing jobs were most affected by job loss due to NAFTA.28EnvironmentFor more details on this topic, see NAFTA's Impact on the Environment.Overall, none of the initial hypotheses were confirmed.citation needed NAFTA did not inherently present a systemic threat

53、to the North American environment, as was originally feared. NAFTA-related environmental threats instead occurred in specific areas where government environmental policy, infrastructure, or mechanisms were unprepared for the increasing scale of production under trade liberalization.citation needed&#

54、160;In some cases, environmental policy was neglected in the wake of trade liberalization; in other cases, NAFTA's measures for investment protection, such as Chapter 11, and measures against non-tariff trade barriers threatened to discourage more vigorous environmental policy.29 The most serious overall increases in pollution due to NAFTA were found in the base metals sector, the Mexican petroleum s