But the 'Free Trade Agreement' isn't.  Why do you need a 1500 (or 
however many it actually is) page document to define 'Free Trade'.  It 
should be one page with two words on it: "Free Trade"

Dave Lag wrote:

> Tony Smith wrote:
>
>>>> Free Trade Agreeement with the US.  We got screwed.  We liked it.  So
>>>> they
>>>
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> Now, this one I can't agree with. When you have a free trade agreement,
>>> *both* sides win. Sure, you have selected industries that go 
>>> bankrupt, but
>>> the benefit to consumers (cheaper goods) far outweigh the losses of 
>>> a few
>>> underperforming companies. Macroeconomics 101.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, that's how it's *supposed* to work.  Practice differs from theory.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>
> Indeed, individual US politicians and lobbyists  carry so much weight 
> that even when free-trade arbitrators rule agaist them they still 
> block goods using "legal" end-runs to protect their home turfs.
>
> D
>

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist