NAFTA AT 10

Steven Taylor reports that the accord has been generally good for the U.S. and terrific for Mexico–which was pretty much what most of us who supported it predicted. Trade isn’t a zero sum game and anything that makes our neighbors to the south more prosperous is good for us, too.

FILED UNDER: Economics and Business
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. melvin toast says:

    Indeed, it’s much easier to calculate jobs “lost” due to nafta vs. jobs generated. The expansion of the economy comes as a result of cheaper goods which allows more available dollars to chase yet more products. Economic growth comes as a result of efficiency, otherwise it’s a zero sum game. Individuals tend to stimulate efficiency while governments seem to discourage it. So yes… we benefit.

    BTW, it’s interesting to me that bleeding heart liberals don’t seem to care about poor third world countries when it’s our manufacturing jobs at stake. In particular, that it’s somehow a crime to go to a third world country and pay people there higher than the going rate to manufacture stuff for us because the going rate is a dollar a day. I guess they’d prefer we just pay domestic union workers and let the third world starve.