MARX ON NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement)
In the early 1990s Mexico sought to establish a trade agreement with the United States and Canada. The agreement was accepted by the three nations creating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). This regulation was put into effect on January 1, 1994 in order to eliminate most tariffs on trade between these three nations. The regulation’s purpose was to encourage and motivate economic activity between Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The goal of the trade agreement was very positive, but the outcomes were far more negative. NAFTA perfectly exemplifies the Marxist view of the consequences of capitalism. This agreement has sanctioned the alienation and exploitation of the working
…show more content…
This kind of competitive alienation is perfectly displayed in NAFTA. When companies and factories are moving it is going to cause for some people to their job, and this increases the competition within the work place among workers. This kind of competition took place within the United States when production began to move to Mexico for the workers cheap labor. “First, it caused the loss of some 700,000 jobs as production moved to Mexico. Most of these losses came in California, Texas, Michigan, and other states where manufacturing is concentrated” (Faux). The intentions of NAFTA were to stimulate the economic growth among the three Northern American nations, but companies were able to exploit the agreement by finding loop holes in order to make a better profit. By trying their best only to make as much money as they can, companies are creating an even bigger gap between the wealthy and the poor. “One of the main purposes of the agreement was to make U.S. firms feel confident that they could locate operations in Mexico without having to fear that their factories could be nationalized or that Mexico would impose restrictions on repatriating profits. This encouraged firms to take advantage of lower cost labor in Mexico, and many did” (Dean Baker). This competition is resulting in the …show more content…
Exploitation of the working class is clearly evident through NAFTA. This agreement allowed for companies to hold even more unfair control over their workers. “NAFTA strengthened the ability of U.S. employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits. As soon as NAFTA became law, corporate managers began telling their workers that their companies intended to move to Mexico unless the workers lowered the cost of their labor” (Faux). This type of trade agreement leads to companies only caring about the profits they make, and not about the well-being of their labor force. This was also clear in effect in Mexico, where small business were destroyed by NAFTA. “The destructive effect of NAFTA on the Mexican agricultural and small business sectors dislocated several million Mexican workers and their families, and was a major cause in the dramatic increase in undocumented workers flowing into the U.S. labor market. This put further downward pressure on U.S. wages, especially in the already lower paying market for less skilled labor” (Faux). NAFTA had been put into place in order to achieve the best possible trade system, but in return it has caused a major system of exploitation of the lower class. The wealthy capitalists are able to exploit workers for the best possible profit, something that Marx continually addresses as one of the
The factory workers are stuck in a complicated position where they are taken advantage of and exploited. While “exploitation occurs on any level” these factory workers do not have the opportunity to exploit others because they are the ones being exploited (Timmerman 7). Tension is created between the corporations, factory owners and workers, because the factory owners force the workers into harsh labor and intense working conditions that they were told
The goal of North American Free Trade agreement was to eliminate barriers of trade and investment between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The implementation of the agreement brought the immediate removal of tariffs on more than one-half of U.S. imports from Mexico and more than one-third of U.S. exports to Mexico. Within ten years of the implementation of the NAFTA agreement, all United States and Mexico tariffs would be gone. The only tariffs that would remain would be those that deal with U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico. However, these were to be slowly phased out within fifteen years of the initial implementation of the program. NAFTA also seeks to eliminate all non-tariff trade barriers.
This therefore creates an incentive to keep costs low and selling prices high which results in instability making these workers further reliant on the capitalist who buy their labor. This is a form of oppression and domination of the workers because the boss profits based on the exploitation of workers. Once these workers are being alienated, dominated, and oppressed there is a progression that happens. They are first alienated from their own labor; they are a part of just one piece of the labor that goes into making the product. This makes their jobs menial and tedious, the workers do not find joy or fulfillment in their jobs and no longer see their labor in the product. They are also alienated from one another, in this system people are placed in competition with one another and therefore they only look after themselves to make sure they get the best benefits. They are then alienated from their product labor, they work for a product that does not matter to them and that they have no passion for. The last form of alienation is that they are alienated from themselves; by being apart of this system, it does not allow us to contribute
The North American Free Trade Agreement—NAFTA—was an important agreement signed between three countries—the U.S., Mexico and Canada. NAFTA played an important role between each of these countries’ relations with one another through imports and exports. Throughout the presidential elections throughout the years, NAFTA has been highly debated on whether or not it has helped benefit the economy of these countries or if it has caused a lot detrimental issues. NAFTA promised many benefits for these countries, but not all of their promises were carried through; many views across the political spectrum also have their indifferences about NAFTA.
Moving factories overseas did create some low paying jobs in Mexico, but it also quickly depleted Mexico’s environment. Agriculture companies also gained profit from NAFTA. After the tariff is removed from US-Mexico trade, many US agricultural subsidies exported corn and other grains to Mexico below cost. This quickly drove the rural Mexican farmers out of business, and many farm workers lost their jobs. With no job and income, many workers were forced to immigrate illegally to the United States to find jobs, and many of them end up working on farms again. The farm owners in the US, competing with subsidies in Mexico also have to cut wages and living conditions in order to remain competent. The working and living condition of the farm workers are unbearable, but the migrant workers have no choice. In Fresh Fruit, Broken Bodies, author Seth Holmes lived and worked on a farm in Skagit Valley, Washington, experiencing the conditions of the workers first-hand. He said, “I often felt sick to my stomach the night before picking, due to stress about picking the minimum weight. As I picked, my knees continually hurt” (Holmes 88). Holmes thinks this is a result of the unfair trade agreement, and changing the policy could improve the conditions. He says, “Policies that shore up inequalities, like NAFTA and the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), must be renegotiated and health reform
Prior to NAFTA (Inc. April 2006), “… tariffs of thirty percent or higher on export goods to Mexico were common, as were long delays caused by paperwork…. NAFTA addressed this imbalance by phasing out tariffs over 15 years. Approximately 50 percent of the tariffs were abolished immediately when the agreement took effect, and the remaining tariffs were targeted for gradual elimination.” According to Kimberly Amadeo (2015), article 102 of the NAFTA agreement outlines its purposes which is to “Grant the signatories Most Favored Nation status, eliminate barriers to trade and facilitate the cross-border movement of goods and services, promote conditions of fair competition, increase investment opportunities, provide protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights, create procedures for the resolution of trade disputes, and establish a framework for further, trilateral, regional, and multilateral cooperation to expand the trade agreement’s benefits.”. This quotation, condenses the agreement by stating that the intentions of NAFTA which was an agreement created to ease trade on imports and exports, by eliminating tariff barriers, in order to encourage competition and venture opportunities. Although, free trade is supposed to bring wealth, strength, and prosperity it should also
The goal of NAFTA was to systematically eliminate most tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade and investment between the countries. NAFTA has allowed U.S., Mexico, and Canada to import and export to other at a lower cost, which has increased the profit of goods and services annually. Because the increase in the trade marketplace, NAFTA reduces inflation, creates agreements on intern...
In laissez-faire capitalism, there are no restrictions on business so the enterprising capitalists were able to obtain monopolies by combining with other companies or simply buying them out. By doing this, the owners could raise the price of their goods or services to an intolerable amount so that they could gain even more money. This often put the common working people out of a job because the owners could get children and poor European and Asian immigrants to do the same menial factory jobs for pennies a day. This angered the Unions of America because their livelihood depended on the American working class. The Unions then persuaded the government to regulate the business giants and control the amount of money the companies could take in by disallowing monopolies and child labor. The "Kings of Capitalism" disregarded the impact their actions had on the lives of the working class men and their families. Many went hungry because of the lack of jobs available and were forced to go into debt to the companies that was impossible to be repaid. The Robber Barons would do almost anything to gain more money and more power even putting hard working people out of their houses.
This is because it allowed for the emergence of the powerful Bourgeoise, "In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.” As Marx explained , the Bourgeois exploited the Proletariats through the means of the long hours the laborers had to endure to receive very low wages, which maximized Bourgeois profits. Furthermore Marx claimed that "The conditions of Bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them ...it has also called the into existence the men who are wield to those weapons -the modern workers.” The elites have created a very exclusive market, In order for the market to be placed effectively; the Bourgeoisie depended on the exploitation of others to remain wealthy. Marx perceived this tactic that allowed the bourgeoisie to overthrow their predecessors could be used against the bourgeoisie in the long term. Nevertheless, the way to abolish the Bourgeois was for the Proletariats to revolt against the factories in their areas and destroy the technology inside the factories, this allowed for the return of skilled
After only seven years under NAFTA, the outcome has not lived up to the expectations of the agreement to all three nations. The U.S. has experienced steadily growing global trade deficits for nearly three decades, and these deficits have accelerated rapidly since NAFTA took affect. Although U.S. exports to NAFTA partners had increased. The export deficit with these had also increased by 378% to $62.8 billion by 2000 (Salas, Carlos, & Scott, 2006). As a result, according to economist Robert Scott, NAFTA has led to over 766,000 job losses in all 50 states of the United States (Faux 2000). Both nations' exports to the U.S. have become cheaper while imports from the U.S. have become more expensive. This has caused investors in Canada and Mexico to build new and expanded production capacity to export even more goods to the U.S. market. Mexico spent virtually nothing on environmental law enforcement, which allowed corporations to get away with almost anything. Now, with the increasing industrialization as a result of NAFTA, the Mexican government struggles to even assess or understand the environmental impact these corporations are having. Every day for example, untracked, unmonitored hazardous waste from Maquiladora' (an assembly plant in Mexico ran by U.
The NAFTA is involved in this phenomenon because since the agreement involves Mexico it in turn creates job opportunities for the Mexicans and on top of that Mexican workers are part of an underdeveloped country which in turn means they are going to get less money due to the condition of their economy. And for American businessmen that is a very desirable quality in a potential employee due to how much profit the companies and factories will make simply by giving more low paying jobs to Mexicans and decreasing the American workforce. This source relates to economic globalization, because the NAFTA is essentially an economic agreement between major countries to save money and reduce trading taxes. This agreement causes an economic rise in all of these countries by causing an increase in jobs in Mexico and increasing companies’ profits in the US and
Globalization has become one of the most influential forces in the twentieth century. International integration of world views, products, trade and ideas has caused a variety of states to blur the lines of their borders and be open to an international perspective. The merger of the Europeans Union, the ASEAN group in the Pacific and NAFTA in North America is reflective of the notion of globalized trade. The North American Free Trade Agreement was the largest free trade zone in the world at its conception and set an example for the future of liberalized trade. The North American Free Trade Agreement is coming into it's twentieth anniversary on January 1st, 2014. 1 NAFTA not only sought to enhance the trade of goods and services across the borders of Canada, US and Mexico but it fostered shared interest in investment, transportation, communication, border relations, as well as environmental and labour issues. The North American Free Trade Agreement was groundbreaking because it included Mexico in the arrangement.2 Mexico was a much poorer, culturally different and protective country in comparison to the likes of Canada and the United States. Many members of the U.S Congress were against the agreement because they did not want to enter into an agreement with a country that had an authoritarian regime, human rights violations and a flawed electoral system.3 Both Canadians and Americans alike, feared that Mexico's lower wages and lax human rights laws would generate massive job losses in their respected economies. Issues of sovereignty came into play throughout discussions of the North American Free Trade Agreement in Canada. Many found issue with the fact that bureaucrats and politicians from alien countries would be making deci...
The definition of utopia is an ideally perfect place especially in its social, political, and moral aspects (dictionary.com). This paper will discuss the changes in capitalism since Marx’s critique in 1848. Marx’s fundamental critique remains correct today. Marx is still correct about his critique of capitalism because even though there have been changes made to capitalism to prevent some abuses, capitalism still produces inequality, reduces the family relationship, destroys small business, and enslaves.
In its essence, neo-liberalism advocates free trade, private enterprise, the free flow of capital across borders and, importantly, restrictions on the power of trade unions. These restrictions are important to study and discuss because the world today is no longer regulated by the orthodox laws of economics where supply equals demand (more or less). Instead, we witness radical inequalities and volatility in market conditions. Unemployment remains frighteningly high in many parts of Europe while many workers in parts of Asia and Africa suffer exploitation and work punishingly long hours in extremely poor conditions for a pittance.
Karl Marx In the mid 19 century, Europe came into one of the most dominant and followed philosophers of the time period. Karl Marx was an advocate for the idea of communism. Marx originally followed the idea of Hegelianism at Bonn University in Germany. There Marx studied and accepted the idea of Hegelianism, but quickly abandoned the ideology for communism (Karl Marx Biography 1).