During the presidential debates of 1992, Ross Perot warned America about NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreements), a function at the epicenter of the emerging one world government/economic apparatus in which the Mexican, Canadian, and American globalists have chiefly used to de-industrialize America’s economy and send American jobs overseas, never to be repatriated. Perot symbolically characterized the entire program of shipping jobs overseas as being a great sucking sound.
Ross
Perot ran against George Herbert Walker Bush and Bill Clinton in 1992's presidential race. George Herbert
Walker Bush was the man who met with Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney,
and Mexican President Carlos Salinas in San Antonio, Texas on December 17, 1992
to ceremonially sign their names to NAFTA papers, spearheading and promoting the
agreement before their legislative and parliamentary branches. George Bush’s presidential tenure ended
before he was able to finalize the process of the agreement being enacted into
law, so the agreement was passed onto Bill Clinton for the finalization of the
enactment process.
After many
symposiums, NAFTA passed the House of Representatives on November 17, 1993 with
132 Republicans and 102 Democrats approving. It afterwards passed the Senate
with 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats approving.
The impasse
American citizens entrapped themselves in when having to choose between which
of the two men would be the nation’s next presidential figurehead and mouthpiece
for the globalists to use in hornswoggling the American people into accepting
the next step in forging the New World Order in 1992 is the same impasse
Americans have entrapped themselves in with Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Americans
still have not learned from their history. They still have not seen through the
smoke mirrors of the perpetual tussle between the Republicans and
Democrats notoriously in the media’s spotlight.
American
businesses are transporting themselves overseas to places where overtaxing
environmental regulations and bureaucratic restrictions exist much less. These
are places where labor standards are virtually nonexistent as well, and workers
can be legally paid slave labor wages and have health benefits be unprovided to
them. In other nations where our parsimonious American corporations are amalgamated with foreign corporations, how are American workers expected to compete with the foreign workers therein who are willing to toil for, say, 6 cents an hour
and seven days a week in jobs we Americans toil in here and expect to
be paid 8 to 12 dollars an hour for ? Corporations and businesses of all types will take the workers who are
much more inexpensive, leaving Americans to slide further into the pit of joblessness
and being subjected to more government assistance programs and foreign goods
and services.
Let us take a look at what has economically resulted from the enforcement of NAFTA. America has
lost 5.7 million manufacturing jobs between the years 2000 and 2010, calculated
at a total 33 percent loss exceeding the calculated losses during the 1930s
Great Depression. In that period, manufacturing accounted for 34 percent of all
jobs, but now manufacturing only accounts for 11 percent of all jobs. America has lost 42,400 factories since the year 2001, 36 percent of
which employed more than 1,000 workers and 38 percent of which employed 500 to
999 workers. Total manufacturing Gross Domestic Product in 2008 (at $1.64
trillion) represented 11.5 percent of the United States economic output, a
decrease from 17 percent in 1999, and 28 percent in 1959.
An article
from Yahoo Finance cited data from the Center for Economic and Policy Research saying “the United States economy has lost about one-third of its capacity to generate good jobs.” And that is with 34% of all American workers in 2010 having a four-year
college degree, an increase from 19% of all American workers in 1979.
During the scanty employment growth of the past 4 years, 58 percent of the jobs created were low-wage jobs, as indicated by the National Employment Law Project. 22 percent accounted for jobs with mid-wage incomes and 20 percent accounted for jobs with higher-wage incomes. The low-wage jobs pay $13.83 an hour or less. During our economic slump some 60 percent of the lost jobs paid mid-wage incomes while 21 percent paid low-wage incomes and 19 percent paid higher-wage incomes. When looking into 366 different vocations between 2008 and 2012, the National Employment Law Project recorded the median hourly wages for low-wage jobs were $7.69 to $13.83, mid-wage jobs were between $13.84 and $21.13, and high-wage jobs were between $21.14 and $54.44. Only 46 percent of the re-employed full-time workers were earning as much as they did at their former jobs. About one-third reported receiving a cut in their pay of 20 percent or more.
The RT reported this past October that only 4 of every 10 adults in the United States are employed. The unemployment reports released earlier in October saying
unemployment decreased to 7.8 percent are only in view of those who are not
only jobless but have withdrawn from seeking for any work. If you are seeking
for a paycheck, have submitted in job applications within the past 4 weeks, and
are working part-time, you are still considered as being a part of the labor
force. When looking at the employment to
population ratio, 58.7 percent of Americans are working, leaving in total 82
million or 41 percent of people unemployed.
All of the
those referenced numbers above signifying a moribund economy are what Obama’s
supporters will say has been “inherited” from the spoils Bush caused, much of
those spoils linking to NAFTA, and that it takes more than one presidential
term to stabilize an economy. Accordingly, in the eyes of his supporters, Obama is assoiled for any
noteworthy progress not being made that he promised to have be made during his
tenure. Contrarily, if Obama truly has been heroically and untiringly working
to salvage this economy from the pernicious policies of Bush, any reasonable
human being would rationalize that Obama’s administration would listen to the admonishments
being given by their Democratic associates in this video and the many other
American citizens and political leaders who have censured NAFTA over the years.
Many politicians have no intentions for terminating our participation in these unfair trade agreements
with every manufacturing market of the world so we can consume every good we
can manufacture domestically, have our Gross Domestic Product grow
exponentially and create millions of jobs here in America. Obama is trotting on
the way of the globalists despite the fact he proclaimed many times that “I don't think NAFTA has been good for America and I never have” as well as saying that
he “opposed NAFTA and voted against CAFTA”.
Much like how Mitt Romney has "flip-flopped" and repeatedly changed his stances on many issues, Obama has done so with this issue. Before being instated in the Oval Office, he promised multitudinously
to “renegotiate” our terms and standings with NAFTA and said we “should use the hammer as a potential opt out and as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.”
In this
video the CTV network queried as to whether or not Obama lied to Ohio about
NAFTA and reported that Obama had confessed about his false promises of renegotiation
on NAFTA saying “Don’t worry. It’s campaign rhetoric. Don’t take it seriously.”
Remember
when he told us during the Democratic presidential race in 2008 that
“globalization right now is creating winners and losers, but the problem is, it's the same winners and losers every time?”
Remember
when we were promised not free trade, but “fair trade?"
Where is
Obama now on these terms and agreements concerning NAFTA?
Obama’s administration
has been focusing on implementing new measures in the free trade zone with the
Trans-Pacific Partnership. Totalitarian redefinitions of intellectual property will be foisted onto the public with this agreement. In rewriting
copyright laws, internet user’s freedoms of expression along with their rights
and claims to internet privacy and acquisition of crucial information via the
internet will be eviscerated. In conjunction with stripping innovators of their rights and claims to copyrights, trademarks, patents, and perhaps geographical indications, this is designed to have innovators of varying
types be accused of copyright infringement in situations where copyright
infringement was not committed. The internet’s global infrastructure will be
transformed with this.
The
Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement--- “NAFTA on steroids”--- is merging Australia, Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Malaysia, and Vietnam with the United States in negotiating a treaty and restructuring social
contracts and the standards of worldwide trade, wage, and regulatory policies
without the mainstream press giving any detailed coverage on it, all at the
behest of the aristocrats systematizing the New World Order.
As the United States hectors economically fraught countries into joining under
the auspices of an unusual provision in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Canada
and Mexico have joined the Trans-Pacific Partnership this October in the
meantime having Japan and China scheduling to join later. While NAFTA has
provided ways for transnational corporations to base themselves on conditions
and territories where they can pay their worker’s slave labor wages and avoid paying
for their healthcare and pensions, The Trans-Pacific Partnership takes
everything a few steps further in giving transnational corporations the
legality to lower their worker’s wages even more, evade or self-exempt from
paying penalties for environmental damage, be non-compliant with laws intended
to protect the environment, consumers, and workers, and can sue governments to
receive compensatory funds for any laws that have impinged the transnational
corporations. Precedents being established by the Trans-Pacific Partnership
will endow transnational corporations with the prerogative of litigating
against countries’ laws, regulations, and court decisions in international
tribunal courts whose pronouncements in all ways trump that of any countries’
domestic judicial courts. Conflicts of interest
have no hindering legal impact on the consciences or aggrandizements and
careers of those who masterminded and support the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
The
Trans-Pacific Partnership aims to terminate Buy American laws. Only 69 members
of the House of Representatives seem to be aggressively opposing this, and it
can be read in a letter they wrote in “strong support of Buy American
procurement policies” articulating their concerns about how everything being
proffered will “adversely impact American jobs, workers, and manufacturers.” Furthermore,
they said, “This could result in large sums of U.S. tax dollars being invested
to strengthen other countries’ manufacturing sectors, rather than our own. At a
time when U.S. manufacturing only employs 11.71 million people, a 40% decline
from its peak in 1979 and the lowest since 1941, we simply cannot allow this to
happen.”
Unfortunately,
while members of both the Democrat and Republican parties signed their names to
this letter, the many Democrats and Republicans in support of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership agreement outnumber them. This comes as a new staggering eye-opener
showing how majorly dubious most politicians are, regardless of how much one politician exclusively and ornately declares himself/herself as having genuine intentions of good will (in reality no good will) for the American
people.
