www.CostaRicaTicas.com

1) Very few of the strong supporters I've met (mostly wealthy Ticos) really understand it... they say it'll bring jobs in the service sector and a few specialty exports (the pro-CAFTA commercials highlight chayote farmers, great!) but seem clueless about how this will relate to lost jobs in agriculture and small, local industry and commerce. (Hint: 11 million Mexican farm families lost their land since NAFTA... there aren't enough call center or whatever jobs to soak these guys up, even if they were in the habit of hiring ex-campesinos.

2) As petroleum becomes more difficult to obtain (both geologically and politcally) the price of transport will continue to go up and up... doesn't make stretching economic supply lines as far as currently possible seem like a good idea. Plus, near sole reliance on the US as a trading partner could be suicide as our economy starts to spiral down in relation to Europe and East Asia. Regional integration is also a good idea for Costa Rica, but CAFTA will automatically lock the majority of CR's economy to the US, thus preempting greater integration with surrounding countries. (Latin America has in itself almost all the physical resources necessary for development.)

3) Historically, no country has ever successfully developed through "free trade." This is the biggest piece of professional economist propaganda bullshit out there. Economic historians know that first Europe, then the US, and then East Asia developed through selective tariff protection of and government credit to local industries. Examples... the British built their empire by forcing free trade on their colonies and using huge tariffs against foreign goods. The US broke course with this after the revolution, and shut out much cheaper British and European manufactured goods as a way to spur the development of American industry... long story short it worked.

The first Japanese car to hit the US market was a total bomb. No one wanted it. But the Japanese government kept guiding their own industries, with intelligence and research, all the while flat out STEALING US technological patents and trade secrets. (The US govt. let them do it because they were terrified that Japan, S. Korea and Taiwan would go Communist. Also because of racism they never imagined that the Japanese would actually outdo US industry.)

Compare the growth stats of countries that fully implemented the US created economic policies of the IMF and World Bank (L. America, Russia, and especially Africa) with those that for a long time said "Phuck you" to the IMF... Europe and Asia until very recently.

The point isn't that Costa Rica can follow Japan, but that the complete rejection of import substitution economics is propaganda, not good economics.

4) What happens to the losers? Even if there was a net gain (which I contest), who is going to cover for all the new unemployed, who happen to be the "unskilled" people who no new employer wants to hire? Well, I'll tell you one thing, when it comes to prostitution this will greatly increase supply and thus probably lower costs... over a period of 10 to 20 years I'd say, some of it is generational.

But I mean, how can you tell tens of thousands of people to just hang out and chill while the economic gains for "the nation" sink in? "Don't worry guys, just don't eat for a few years... with more rich people buying more crap, it could eventually trickle down to you in the form of more domestic servant jobs." No way, with way more competition for unskilled labor positions, the salaries will plummet. Once again, check Mexico.

5) Patent law will make many medicines more expensive, and could bankrupt La Caja. Privatization of phone and electricity sounds attractive to those of us who've dealt with ICE's beauracracy, but it also means that many rural areas will not recieve affordable service anymore. Cell phone rates are currently the cheapest in Latin America.

There are also many secret concessions in the works that will pass newly privatized sectors into elite hands, and Oscar Arias is all over this shit.

The privatization argument is the main one that gets people (mostly public workers) taking to the streets. The rest of this stuff is not even that widely talked about among the Cons.

6) Finally, there is this totally defeatism among supporters. They say "there's nothing we can do, there's no negotiating with the US and we have to much to lose." Okay, this is the one spot where they're on to something, and it's what will probably actually LET THEM WIN the referendum. (I'm keeping track of the polls cuz the managers I work with really want this to pass... they were majority negative, but the massive propaganda campaign and Liberacion control of govt. have taken their tolls.)

But what most people don't know is that CAFTA BARELY PASSED in the US Congress. Bush had to twist some serious arms and call in favors just to get it passed by a few votes, and now Republicans have lost control of congress. Of course Democrats don't yet have the balls to actually rollback anything it seems, but if a variety of Latin American countries got together (especially considering declining influence in the region right now) they could probably stand up to the US about fixing at least the worst parts of the treaty, parts about agriculture, privatizations, medical patents.

Or if the US says no, first of all most US companies will still stay. Second of all, those who vacate leave opportunities for local companies or more loyal foreign competitors. (Or they could go all out and nationalize some things, not that I trust the current govt. to run them well...)

So those are my 6 points. I'll add one final point for the readership here.
Anti-CAFTA rallies are fun, unique cultural experiences, and a GREAT place to pick up public university chicks.

Play the "I'm N. American but I think this stuff is wrong too" card. Trust me.

MrP...your zeal is comendable...but your stats lack reference sources. Are we just supposed so accept your declarations as fact because you state them?

Also, while many of us might be interested in this debate in some appropriate forum, many on CRt may not appreciate this forum used for this debate. Most of your arguements seem to be about USA losing jobs, etc to CR. Why should Ticos vote against that?

At the end of the day...most people dont have an educated opinion on these subjects...and no, they havent read the CAFTA...let alone the NAFTA agreements. I have...and I would opine that the issue isnt so much what they say as in how they are or are NOT implemented.

Personally I think governments should get out of the business of controlling markets and economies. They are very bad at it...and obviously never have the masses interests at heart. But, we the people continue to let them run with it...right into debt and inequitable agreements protecting the elitest few who contribute to their campaigns.

Ah...but I restrain myself from too much political commentary on this fine CRT board.

Back to the joys of discussing pu*sy...

_________________
All that a man achieves and all that he fails to achieve is the direct result of his own thoughts...

It is quite possible (I would say it's already been proven) that you can work deals between countries that are bad for the majorities living in BOTH countries. Strangely (not) these deals/treaties benefit the elite of both countries.

For those who don't like to talk about anything but panocha, when you see a topic like CAFTA or whatever, maybe just don't read the topic. I have sections I never read and topics I don't bother with. Try it, it's good for you.

_________________
"The only normal people are those you don't know very well." Joe Ancis

Two very good points:

Whether we live in the US, Costa Rica or anywhere else in the world, the vast majority of us are pawns (or, in the worst case...cannon fodder) on the big game board known as Planet Earth.

Like you, Bilko, I ignore threads that don't interest me. It's not only good for you, but it saves time.

_________________
Blue Devil

Pura Vida...enjoying life to the fullest...

i never really bought into the job protection argument,
its kind of like feeding a wild animal. they lose the desire to forage for food,
or is like sending money to the chica's, they lose the need to forage at the HDR?

i do agree rallies are a good place to meet local college age people, nothing like a girl hot & fired up with a cause?
you can have an intellectually stimulating discussion with a college age girl who does not pay taxes (n/a in CR) and have a mortgage,
who has an opinion on how to run the world

oh wait,
did you come here to stimulate your intellect?
whatever

I hear alot of the same points Mr P made from my ex students that are now in college. Lets Face it, the powers that be want it, so we just have to grin and bare it. Another thing I find funny about people (in general) most people talk about protecting the low end/ poor worker. What do they do to help them? Talking about it or saying that this is wrong for them isnt helping, giving them money, helping them find better jobs, that is helping!

I don't want to beat this topic to death, but it's not just students who protest. I am one of those wo talk about helping low end people and I also (call me a sucker) do something about it. I have a few girls I know personally whose families I help from time to time. I paid to fix a leaky roof, bought rice and beans, and am teaching of their K*ds English. I try to go with the 'teach them to fish' approach when possible but if I have to buy rice and beans (I went to the grocery store with the family and saw exactly what I paid for, btw) then that's what I do. I don't give money to crack addicts but when I see a situation where I might be helpful and know where the money is going, I don't feel guilty because I'm violating some precept of Social Darwinism.

I don't feel anybody is obligated to help the poor, or help anybody if they don't want to. But I would appreciate if those who don't care to help or choose not to help not disparage those who do care and do something.

_________________
"The only normal people are those you don't know very well." Joe Ancis

That is very commendable Bilko and if you are ever in town, i would surely like to buy you a beer and toast your goodwill. I guess everybody can choose to share their good fortune with others, I just dont like when people say they are looking out for the less fortunate but wont lift a finger to help them.

i think we all contribute to the local economy in CR, and Colombia and Nicaragua indirectly/directly

normally i favor free market with some flex,
since the CR has a hard time collecting the 13% sales tax we pay,
i see no issue collecting on import in such cases

one matter that would have me concerned is if CAFTA reduces the huge tariff on autos,
while i think it is excessive,
the roads here are already overburdened,

the more serious matter is over intellectual property rights
if this aspect is enforced
the hypocrite in me compels me to buy 1o years supply of generic viagra
(if mrpublic could do a good deed and let us know when Pizers patent expires)

Thanks to all who have contributed to this post. It's good to see that CRT members think about important issues that affect us all in the USA and Costa Rica as well.

Life ain't all about pu*sy, especially when it comes to P$P type of pu*sy.

NAFTA has proven to be a disaster for Mexico and CAFTA will do the same for any country that thinks their population will benefit.

I will never understand the motivations behind the type of greed that seems to be affecting many on this planet.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If I lived each day as if it were my last I would have been dead a long time ago" - Traylor Park

All the posts in this thread that concern NAFTA talk about how it has negatively effected Mexico. There is an additional signatory to NAFTA. What has been the effect positive or negative on Canada?

I know we have some Canadian members who might give us their thoughts and experience from the Canadian view point.

_________________
Pura Vida
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four
essential food groups:
alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat.
Alex Levine

OK...since most here have agreed to allow this thread toward hopefully productive exchange of ideas on free trade agreements, I have decided to tread into these dangerous waters with you professional mongerers...

No one here has yet stepped up to the plate with any actual data on negative effects of NAFTA or CAFTA. I have a bit of first hand experience since I moved and lived in Mexico 3.5 years when NAFTA passed. I drank the NAFTA koolaid as a marketing guy...and had a lot of interesting experiences while living there, personally and business-wise. While this subject cannot be covered adequately in brief to give it a balanced treatment, I will just provide a few links of info and short summary of my observations.

Like any agreement, especially trade wise, it is difficult for any government to enter a contract that is 100% beneficial to them only. When there are two sides to any agreement or contract, there is usually a lot of give and take required to arrive at an agreement. Any agreement that is totally one sided will not last long and not worth the paper its written on. In this case, NAFTA has survived over 13 years...so it cant be all wrong. I saw both positive and negative effects of the agreement in Mexico and the USA (sorry, not too versed on the Canada side of things). Again, this probably comes from the "give/take" needed to maintain relations.

Just because a contract is not perfect doesnt mean it is not an improvement. In my 3+ years living in San Jose CR, the anti rhetoric was primarily from socialistic to communistic minded "intellectuals" trying to whip up the uninformed, uneducated masses to a frenzy that they would somehow be worse off and MORE powerless under this agreement than they already are. I find that hard to believe...as I cant see how they can be any worse off than at present. The current system there thrives on graft and corruption...from the courts to the presidency and on down the line. In my view, a trade agreement can keep SOME aspects of this in check with international scrutiny of what goes on. If the TICOS dont want international scrutiny of their ways, then by all means they can stay in the international isolation they are already in...and they will suck hind tit to Panama and other regional countries that HAVE signed and are doing business that CR will now never see. How does that benefit the poor, uneducated Ticos? How does that put more colones and control in their pockets? You want them to continue being dependent on your good will and buying groceries for them at the market? Nothing wrong with those gestures...but it sure isnt changing anything for them in the long run.

I think most of the negative takes on NAFTA come from Labor activists, and small farmers and small business corners. It is unfortunate that ANY major changed of direction on a macro basis is going to effect negatively many micro sectors of business and systems. But on a macro level, I have to bring up that this change in trade dynamics is not just about NAFTA or CAFTA, but is about the greater "globalization" of our world's economic system. It is now more costly to be protectionistic in this regard. Even the USAs attempts for economic embargos and isolation of regimes such as Cuba, Iraq and others have backfired and only hurt the poor in those lands. This DOES NOT WORK. There is always another country (ala the French, Canadians, or Russians...and now China) who will step in and fill the gap. I'm afraid the days of $30 per hour broom pushers in Detroit are over. This has been coming for decades by anyone who has wanted to see it. Is it free trades fault if people in the USA are not prepared to compete? Is it free trades fault that Japanese and Korean car makers are kicking the Big 3's ass with smaller, more economical and fuel efficient cars?

Oh, I also get a kick out of people that say they are for "fair trade", not "free trade". Is there really a difference? I agree that many of our supposed "Free trade" agreements have been anything but. At the same time, lets not blame the concept because of bad interpretation or implementation.

These are all big problems we have to face...but in my opinion we cant blame or kill free trade just because we are not prepared to compete. That goes for USA, Mexico, or Costa Rica... . I personally believe in the model that if we have free and fair trade with all nations...we will not be bombing and occupying them. Everyone will want to keep THEIR house in order so as not to starve in the worlds market place. Yep...I'm a purist...and a Libertarian.

As for some NAFTA links...with some balance I hope...if you want the truth and balance of opinion...check some of these out. Myth versus reality?

http://alpha.dickinson.edu/departments/ ... ex.htm#pos
http://www.nasda.org/nasda/nasda/News_P ... ftarpt.pdf
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=424 ... sequence=1
http://www.ceocouncil.ca/en/view/?docum ... &area_id=1 (viewpoint from Canadian council of chief executives)
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Tradea ... BG1462.cfm
http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/1 ... 05de01.pdf (effects between USA and Canada)
http://www.econ.umn.edu/~tkehoe/classes/SanchezKarp.pdf
http://media.www.michigandaily.com/medi ... 4037.shtml (viewpoints from Labor perspective)

OK...I'm done. But if we are going to discuss this...it should have some meat of statistics and sound reasoning.

_________________
All that a man achieves and all that he fails to achieve is the direct result of his own thoughts...

I am surprized this thread exists. Politics is not permitted on here I thought. I could be wrong.

Berk....

because it may effect the price/availability of generic viagra/sildenafil,
if you don't need it, good for you

_________________
veni, vidi, viagra, veni

I actually never brought up lost jobs in the US, which I don't care about.

The 2 biggest issues are:

1) the lack of measures to alleviate the swift and severe negative effects on especially "unskilled laborers." (stupid technical term).

2) the short-sightedness of linking an entire national economy so centrally to one distant, much more powerful country.

I have yet to hear any specific responses to these complaints, here or anywhere else.

On the other hand, there are lots of ways to go forward even with standard "economic development" without signing CAFTA.