The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) took effect January 1, 1994. It is a trade agreement between all three of countries of North America, which are The United States, Canada, and Mexico. The Canadian Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney, the Mexican President, Carlos Salinas de Gortari, and former U.S. President George H. Bush spearheaded the agreement. Relationships between the countries were already on good terms, especially between The United States and Canada. Five years before NAFTA went into effect they signed the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement that eliminated all tariffs. It was only time before a more integrated agreement was put into effect for all of North America. The geographic location and the already…show more content…
The aim of the NAAEC was to set environmental regulations to aid in the development and improvement of the environment. The goal of the NAALC was to improve the cooperation of trade unions and other organizations to improve working conditions and living standards.
Like any other decision, agreement, or compromise there are positives and negatives, NAFTA is not exempt as its issues spark heated debates. The greatest benefit of NAFTA is blatantly obvious; trade and investment have drastically increased since the implementation of the agreement. In fact, The United States is the greatest benefactor, trade between the countries are hitting record highs. Canada and Mexico are the #1 and #2 importers of U.S. goods and services. Also they are #2 and #4 on The United State's largest exporters list. The trade between Canada and The United States is astounding; it's the largest flow of goods and services in the world, over $1 billion a day in goods crosses the border, mostly from agricultural and automobile products. Thousands of American jobs, as well as Mexican and Canadian, were created due to the increase in the amount of goods exported by each country. The increase of exports and the increase of jobs are positively correlated, as one goes up the other will follow and vise versa. Mexico has also felt the
NAFTA and Mexico Essays
1277 Words6 Pages
NAFTA and Mexico
In December of 1992 President Salinas of the Government of the United Mexican State, President Bush of the Government of the United States, and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of the Government of Canada signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); however, it was not ratified and fully effective until January 1, 1994. NAFTA, which established a free trade area among the aforementioned nations, consistent with the previously instituted General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), eliminates tariffs on goods produced by the signatory nations by 2005, removes most barriers to cross-border investment and to the movement of goods and services and improves intellectual property protection. The specific…show more content…
In addition to worker displacement, the prospect of environmental problems stemming from Mexico's lax enforcement of environmental standards has led critics to disagree with the institution of the NAFTA.
The move toward NAFTA by the United States Government can be attributed as a response to the decline in the U.S. productivity growth. Since the 1970, output per worker has slowed in its growth rate dramatically. Due to this decline, the United States had to look for ways to either stimulate growth in the service sector or rely on international trade to further American progress and growth. Prior to NAFTA's enactment, conducting business and investing in Mexico was a difficult process. Investors needed the Mexican Government's approval and were also required to meet specific investment guidelines. These requirements forced investor to export a set level of goods and services, utilize domestic goods and services, and transfer technology to competitors. Under NAFTA, investors and business professionals no longer need government approval to invest and are treated as domestic investors. NAFTA has increased intellectual property rights and allowed companies to obtain patents in Mexico and Canada. In the past, companies were hesitant to export research and development intensive goods because of the need of increased intellectual property protection;