A Quote by Noam Chomsky

NAFTA was much more popular among US corporations than GATT, because NAFTA is highly protectionist in ways that GATT is not. — © Noam Chomsky
NAFTA was much more popular among US corporations than GATT, because NAFTA is highly protectionist in ways that GATT is not.
NAFTA and GATT are quite similar. They both have highly protectionist elements. They're kind of a mixture of liberalization and protection designed to expand the power of transnational corporations. They're very basically investor's rights agreements. One crucial part in both is the "intellectual property right," which is a funny way of saying that corporations, like pharmaceutical companies, will have near-monopolistic rule over future technology. This now includes product as well as process rights.
NAFTA and GATT have about as much to do with free trade as the Patriot Act has to do with liberty.
During the debate over NAFTA President Clinton said, 'I believe that NAFTA will create a million jobs in the first five years of its impact.' WRONG. According to the Economic Policy Institute, NAFTA has led to the loss of more than 680,000 U.S. jobs. I voted against NAFTA and other bad trade agreements and am fighting to stop the TPP.
The rules of origin in NAFTA need some tightening. Rules of origin are what let material outside of NAFTA to come in and benefit from all the taxes and tariff reductions within NAFTA.
The message is NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) is there. NAFTA has helped both our countries enormously. We live up to the terms of NAFTA. We ask you, our best friend and most important trading partner to do the same thing.
The main selling appeal of NAFTA to US corporations is that it gives them an advantage in the North American market over their European and Japanese competitors.
Everything is in place - after 500 years - to build a true 'new world' in the Western Hemisphere... And what happens if we don't pass NAFTA? I truly don't think that 'criminal' would be too strong a word for rejecting NAFTA.
Part of the NAFTA legislation required studies of labor practices, and there was quite a good study that came out by a labor historian on the use of NAFTA to undermine and destroy unions.
You know that if you [Hillary Clinton] did win, you would approve that [Trans-Pacific Partnership], and that will be almost as bad as NAFTA. Nothing will ever top NAFTA.
I think Canadians, by and large, during the American election, every time Donald Trump talked about NAFTA, we felt that he was talking about Mexico. Now, if Donald Trump tears up NAFTA, there is still a Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. And we all assume that we will revert back to that agreement, which is essentially the same as NAFTA except Mexico is no longer at the table. I think, you know, that is what we are hoping for.
I am going to renegotiate NAFTA. And if I can't make a great deal - then we're going to terminate NAFTA and we're going to create new deals.
Since its enforcement, NAFTA has been more than a trade agreement. It has made us think of ourselves as a region.
In my state [ Maryland] we've lost jobs to NAFTA, we did not gain jobs from NAFTA. But I think it's very difficult when your state is right up against the northern border, you do see things differently.
I think a lot of scapegoating has been done on NAFTA. The reality is, a lot of the jobs have been lost mostly to technology. And that is something that happens well beyond the reach of NAFTA or any other trade agreement.
Mexico is much bigger than NAFTA.
When it [NAFTA] was sold, we were supposed to get two or three times more exports to Canada or Mexico than they exported to us. It's been the exact opposite.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!