www.CostaRicaTicas.com

Tman,

We are of the same mind here. Over 1/2 of the voters who voted for our current President believed (probably still believe) that Iraq was involved in 9/11 and that we (the USA) found Sadaam's WMDs. It would be great to require a passing grade in civics and current events to be able to vote. It would be even better if the test was required to run for office.

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

Geez, Bilko, next you'll be telling us there is no Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy or Easter Bunny. You're taking all the fun out of being a "dittohead".

Thanks for ruining it for me! I thought Santa, Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny were real.

_________________
[url=http://www.amishrakefight.org/gfy/]

Gee Spanky you really are gullible EVERYONE over the age of 10 knows there is no Fairy buying teeth , no rabbit hiding colored eggs and giving away baskets of candy .

Important reminder he is making a list a checking it twice, going find out who is naughty or nice. So straighten up, you have less than 13 weeks to be a good boy. Sure you do not want to find coal in your stocking Christmas morning.

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

ID, then you haven't been listening. This HAS been one of the points made by even the most neutral CAFTA people. And Counte Dante mentioned only half of the story. As much as he'd likes to pat our farmers on the back for their productivity (which in fact is very great due to the prevalence of large scale agribusiness cropland and extensive use of labor saving machinery and petro-fertilizers), the other half is the humongous federal subsidies that we pay to all sectors of the industry (from milk to meat, sugar, corn etc.). Mexico has already discovered about this under NAFTA. We like to think about the negative consequences of that pact on the US worker, but it hasn't been all roses for Mexico either. It has been devastating for the Mexican farmer and that in turn is a large factor in the sudden and explosive growth in illegal immigration from the poor rural areas of Mexico that began around the same time that NAFTA went into effect.Its no different here, so don't look down your noses at the tico politicians and media. Big corporations today are global corporations. They have the money to spread influence and put the politicians and media in their pocket WHEREEVER it serves their interests, inlcuding the US. Case in point, US energy policy. How was it formulated? Dick Cheney calls in his Big Oil executive buddies into a close room and out pops their plan. Who stood to benefit from NAFTA in the US? It WASN'T the already hard pressed manufacturing worker, who have watched their rolls and real income declined since NAFTA was passed. Rather, it WAS the MNC's who spent millions on PR to get NAFTA passed and their shareholders who watched their stock prices soar afterward.Sure they're scared but that doesn't mean they don't have good reason. Sure they're uncertain but thats because they've heard conflicting reports and the tico media, politicians and other moneyed interests have been only telling them part of the story. I'm glad you've made money off of NAFTA, but don't mistake prosperity on Wall Street (which reflects corporate profits) with prosperity on Main Street or Calle Central (which reflects the experience of the average citizen). Is the Mexican economy falling apart? Maybe not for the Mexican elite but, as Bilko pointed out and judging from the throngs of illegal immigrants that have crossed over their border since NAFTA went into effect, it doesn't seem to be working too well for many Mexican citizens.

Here is a highly informative article on the subjext of the upcoming CAFTA vote in CR:http://americas.irc-online.org/am/4575

One part in particular relates to this distinction between increased economic activity on the one hand and improvements for the working person on the other.

Does this mean I think CAFTA doesn't have any merits? Not quite. ICE is grossly inefficient with lots of "featherbedding" (do-nothing jobs). A little competition will probably do them some good. I;m not so sure what the net effect of those changes will be. It will also put a lot of those do-nothing ICE employees out of work and make the rest actually do something for their paycheck, which doesn't sound like such a bad thing either. However, ICE and all its various affiliates plus other similar quasi-govt enterprises make up a large portion of the tico workforce and significant job losses by them will mean that many ticos won't be able to share in any of the possible benefits of CAFTA.

Both sides? There's more than 2 sides here. There's certainly the US MNC's. There is also the local CR politicians and moneyed elites who are bought off by the MNC's. But who if anyone is really representing the interests of the average tico in all of this, or for that matter the interests of the average US citizen? For example, CAFTA does nothing to protect worker's rights (except in five specific instances)and is committed to prevent violations only "if commerce is affected", in other words only if it hurts the MNC's.
I'm completely with you on requiring citizens to be better informed if they are going to weigh in on national policies that affect all of us, but who would that leave? As for the first part, we should be very careful about dipping into US politics here as some of that other 1/2 are also CRT members.

Yesterday I made the trip to Grecia and Sarchi. The amount of anti Cafta material posted outside SJ was overwhelming. As I pointed this out to my travelling companion, I asked her thoughts and if she would be voting Sunday?

Her response blew me away, in part she said,' we do not know enough about this to approve. I will vote no'.

My sense here the past two weeks is, the Central Valley is a stronghold for the Pro side. Outside SJ, I believe the Anti Cafta group has done a good job scaring the be jeebers out of the locals.

Well perhaps I have watching the wrong CR TV stations and reading the wrong CR newspapers. Perhaps you would be kind enough to give me some links, associated with neutral CAFTA people, who support your ascertain.Preferably Costa Rican since they are the ones most directly effected.

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

Well, I already gave one source in my last post, which was written by a tica professor. But these issues are nothing new and not isolated to CAFTA. They've been raised over and over in just about every FTA the US has been involved inover the last few decades. The US is continually involved in one suit or another in the WTO court over its huge agricultural subsidies. And that one gripe against the US has arguably been the biggest impediment to getting developing countries to sign on to agreements reducing trade barriers (our big gripe against them typically revolves around intellectual property rights). Here are links to articles explaining why the last round of GATT talks in Doha collapsed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5209010.stm and purl[http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/21/business/wto.php[/url]. Of course, the EU is not exactly without responsibility of their own, as they have huge farm subsidies too. But the US only offering to CAP its agricultural subsidies at $17B rather than reduce it from the already huge $9B it already spends was cited as the main reason by various leaders from the LDC's.

But what about CAFTA in particular? What CR newspapers and TV stations do you read and watch? I'm guessing primarily the english language versions which are also the most likely to be sympathetic to a US takeover of the CR economy. Its not the expat community that really stands to lose from this agreement, few if any of them work for ICE or make their money from farming. Of course, from a self-interested perspective, CAFYA must seem great for ex-pats - cheaper telecommunications, fewer duties on expensive imported goods and no decline in their income which is usually derived from sources outside of CR. However the title of this thread is why regular ticos are against the pact.

But even if you've also been checking out spanish language media, what makes you think any of them are any less biased (or corrupted) in this debate. The have advertisers and other links to government and the business community, which stands to gain from CAFTA. In fact, even in normal times, its not always easy to tell in CR media where the advertising ends and the news begins. CR may be the most effected but that doesn't necessarily put them in the best position to judge this neutrally. Sometimes you actually have to step back to do that properly.

Here is another article from the LA Times outlining the dirty tricks that the Arias administration and big business in CR have gone to get this thing passed. http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-cafta21sep21,1,5655967.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-business&ctrack=1&cset=true. Okay, its not a CR newspaper but I'm sure reports of the government memos must also have been reported down there.

The memo was written by the VP and close associate of Oscar Arias, who has since been forced to resign as a result of the leak in an attempt at damage control. The core of the proposed strategy is a fear campaign that, according to the memo, would stimulate four kinds of fear: fear of loss of jobs, fear of attack on democratic institutions ("make NO the equivalent of violence and anti-democracy"), fear of foreign influence ("insist on the connection of NO with Fidel, Chávez, and Ortega"), and fear of the impact of rejection of CAFTA on the government (financial instability, lack of governance). The memo also recommends, among other things:
1) INVENTING labor leaders to serve as pro-CAFTA figureheads,
2) launching a publicity blitz (Costa Rican press reports that the proponents have already spent $500 million dollars on publicity compared to anti-CAFTA expenditures of $30 million),
3) conducting a smear campaign against the opposition,
4) threatening local government officials with a cut-off of funds and an end to future political aspirations: "... any mayor who doesn't win his canton will not get a penny from the government in the next 3 years."
5) uniting big business behind the agreement, while presenting a public face made up of civil servants.

However, if you think that in such an environment and, with such organized and powerful opposition by the power elite, that undoubtedly does stand to gain from this agreement, that the CR media is the best place to go for unbiased information, well, you're entitled to that opinion.

I am not going to get into a long drawn out debate on a matter that has little interest to most on the board. If you would like to discuss this in a private setting I will be very happy to oblige. I certainty appreciate you allowing me the privilege to be entitled to my own opinion. Your most kind.

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

This debate may be long and drawn out but it is EXACTLY on target with the topic of the thread (OTOH, asides about what one meant by "you have a right to your opinion" are off target). If other members have little interest in the subject at hand, they can simply not click on "Why are the Ticos not accepting CAFTA?. However, there are at least some members who ARE interested and have contributed positively to the discussion.

As for your parting dig, I was not GRANTING you a right to an opinion. I was simply stating the manifest fact that you and I and everyone else here have always had that right to our own opinions. But I think you already knew that.

Whatever... you're most welcome anyway.

The whole vote with your heart thing cracks me up. In other words, you guys don't know the facts so , "Vote with your Heart". If we did this in the US, we would have voted Elvis Presley for president.

Could we have just one thread where Prolijo and Irish Drifter don't hi-jack it and get into a childish pissing contest???

Okay Pro you want to discuss this fine.

You cite:

http://americas.irc-online.org/am/4575

The lady is certainly entitled to express what she considers the relevant points about CAFTA. However it should be noted that she writes for Center for International Policy a Washington think tank. They appear, on a cursory glance, to have a preconceived agenda as many think tanks do. There's appears to be against CAFTA as there are a number of articles, expressing that view point on their website.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5209010.stm

Has absolutely no relevance to CAFTA. Is an article about European opposition to the stance taken by the United States in negotiations concerning the World Trade Organization. While the dispute is about US farm subsidies it has no correlation to CAFTA.

http://www.latimes.com/business/printed ... &cset=true.

While I could not open this link as you must be a subscriber it is not important. The "dirty tricks" proposed by Second Vice-President Kevin Casas and PLN legislator Fernando Sanchez were well covered in the local press. Certainly the Aries administration was embarrassed and Casas was forced to resign and Sanchez was stripped of two key legislative posts. Like US politics dirty tricks in Costa Rica are equally shared. Are you aware opponents of CAFTA started, in the legislator, a untrue story that Raytheon had purchased land and was going to open an arms factory in CR when CAFTA passed? How about the one that New York City Yellow cab was going to force out the red cabs when CAFTA passed? Both sides, like in the US, are guilty.

How about Otton Solis, leader of the anti CAFTA movement, filing a formal complaint against The United States Ambassador accusing him of meddling (against the law in CR) in internal politics. Then Mr. Solis invites Senator Bernard Sanders, I-Vermont, and Congressman Michael Michaud, D-Maine, to come to Costa Rica and speak against CAFTA.

If the treaty is so lopsided in favor of the US why did it pass the United States Senate by one vote? That only occurred after a lot of arm twisting by President Bush and happened when the Senate was in control of the Republicans his own party.

I am neither for or against CAFTA as it is for Costa Ricans to decide. If it negatively impacts me I can leave and go elsewhere. You do not even have to leave your life in Tampa if it negatively effects Costa Rica. Costa Ricans do not have that luxury.

Unless you and those other posters on this thread have read the 63 page document and understand it and are citizens of Costa Rica and can vote on Sunday your opinion matter none. I have neither read it and I can not vote so lets quit wasting time discussing it.

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

whatever. .........

CAFTA is not a free trade agreement by any stretch of the imagination. It has rules and regulations written on hundreds of pages, which will be implemented over 20 years, which will make trade in some areas somewhat more free. A true free trade agreement could be written on one page. There would be no reason to have more than one page. It would simply state that free market competition would be allowed and required and would not be interfered with in any way. This would apply to all countries doing business with Costa Rica and would also apply to all transactions within Costa Rica. It would also say that no taxes or tariffs or duties would be allowed on any imports or exports by the countries involved. It would further state that no subsidies of any kind could be paid to producers by the governments of any countries involved. This covers most of the big items. A few more sentences would clean up the rest.

The key word is FREE. When trade is FREE, some people will be better off (usually consumers) and some people will be worse off (usually some producers). However, any economist worth his salt will say that the net result will be that the country as a whole will will be better off.

The real issue of CAFTA, as with about anything the politicians and the government stick their noses in, is FAIR VS. FREE. You cannot have both at the same time. Everyone agrees what FREE trade is. However, every human being has his own idea of what FAIR trade is, and there may be millions of different views about what is FAIR. When governments make laws based on FAIR trade, the laws will favor the most powerful political groups, but will likely make little economic sense and will likely be harmful to the country economically. FREE trade will make a country richer, but some will feel that it isn't FAIR (but many will think that it is FAIR). FREE trade allows the chips to fall where they may.

The quality of cellular phone service, internet service , trouble free electricity, and insurance in this country (just to name a few) is very poor. The reason is that they are government monopolies. As with all government monopolies, most employees are inefficient and don't work very hard. I know of one full time ICE employee who gets paid for eight hours a day, but usually works two or three hours a day. He has gotten away with this for years. The result is big, fat payrolls which are paid by the taxpayers, but the quality of their services are very poor.

Competition, as a minimum, will improve the quality of the services, and many overpaid worthless employees will lose their jobs. TOO BAD. The taxes saved can be diverted to other worthwhile causes, or else cut, leaving taxpayers with more of their own money which they will spend or invest, which in turn will create more demand for something which will require more workers to be hired.

FREE trade will make the countries involved richer. However, CAFTA is not a FREE trade agreement. It only marginally increases FREE trade, and only in certain areas.