Docstoc

Americas

Document Sample
Americas Powered By Docstoc
					CHAPTER 8
          The Americas PRISMs
1. Do regional “free” trade
   agreements discriminate against
   nations outside the region?
2. Should the economic growth of
   developing nations hinge on
   opening their borders to “Godzilla”
   nations?
3. Should the U.S. evaluate NAFTA
   strictly on the basis of what it does
   for America?
4. Should U.S. immigration laws be
   strictly enforced?
5. Do Mexican immigrants
   contribute more to the USA than
   they receive from America?
6. Who should be responsible for
   the unintended negative
   impacts of free trade
   agreements on companies &
   workers?
THE PURPOSE OF
      NAFTA:
 To eliminate all
 tariffs between
Canada, Mexico, &
     the USA
Does NAFTA really stand for
     Not A Free Trade
       Agreement?
(Because only 3 nations
 benefit--the rest of the
  world still has to pay
tariffs to export into the
       NAFTA zone)
¿Cómo le compara NAFTA con el EU?
(How do NAFTA & the EU compare?)



NAFTA is much more modest in scope
 than the EU, since NAFTA does not
         seek political unity
 LAS ABCS DE LAS TARIFAS
“A” category goods: Zero
 tariffs immediately in 1994
“B” category tariffs: Lower
 tariffs 20% for 5 years
 (1999)
“C” category tariffs: Lower
 tariffs 10% annually for 10
 years (2007)
A category: Mostly U.S.
 exports: high tech products,
 pharmaceuticals, aerospace
B category: Low tech
 manufacturing: clothing,
 construction supplies, etc.
C category: Agriculture,
 service industries
 Each NAFTA nation is
 allowed to designate
   one industry (the
  nation’s “sensitive
     sector”) that
does not have to comply
with NAFTA regulations
    El sector sensible
(sensitive) de México: OIL
¿Por qué es la agricultura el
 sector sensible de los los
      Estados Unidos?
  Because the U.S.
 government doesn’t
  want to cut farm
       subsidies
(required by NAFTA)
 for fear of causing
   American farm
      instability.
      El sector sensible
          de Canadá




Canada wants to protect its small companies
    run by indigenous non-Anglo-Saxon
   peoples from fierce competition from
                 the U.S.
   What’s better than a
large slice of pie (economic
          growth)?
 (A slice from a larger pie)
           NAFTA PROGRESS
1. MX’s trade with the USA has doubled
   since NAFTA went into effect; exports
   to Canada have increased 40%.
2. 88% of MX’s trade is with the USA;
   11% of USA trade is with MX.
3. Between 1994-2000, MX received a
   record $74B in FDI
4. 20M new jobs have been created in
   the USA & overall wages increased in
   the first decade of NAFTA.
5.NAFTA export activity
  through Texas has
  created 250,000 new
  jobs in the state.
6.Overall FDI for all 3
  NAFTA members has
  increased
7.The Mexican fresh fruit
  & vegetable business
  has tripled
NAFTA’S CRITICAL MASS PROCESS
How “CanAmerIco” benefits from
   greater trade cooperation:

1. Stimulates trade &
   economic growth
2. Creates resource synergy
3. Attracts FDI
4. Expands the size of the
   economic pie
5. NAFTA caused a “critical mass”
   process of economic development
   in “CANIMERICO” due to drawing in
   larger FDI to the region, enhancing
   business infrastructure, & removing
   tariff protection from weak
   companies/industries in all 3 NAFTA
   nations.
6. Critical mass occurs when change
   produces more change &
   opportunity produces more
   opportunity.
     KEY NAFTA SOCIAL BENEFITS
            FOR MEXICO
1. Many attribute the emergence of
   Mexico’s second political party (for the
   first time since 1929) in 2000 was
   directly tied to structural political
   changes stimulated by NAFTA.
2. The number of Mexican illegal
   immigrants into the U.S. has been
   tempered by new jobs generated in
   Mexico by NAFTA . The current
   immigrant problem would likely be far
   worse without the free trade agreement.
Los nuevos servicios vienen con nuevo
        projectos de negocio
    (New services come with new
         business projects)
Pero el ganador más grande
       de NAFTA es…
 (But the biggest winner of
    NAFTA is… TEXAS)
 18 cents of each dollar stay
in the Texas economy in the
form of insurance, trucking,
      warehouses, etc.)
The poorest counties in Texas (light
shaded) stand to benefit most from
NAFTA by their close proximity of the
              border.
          IMPACT ON MEXICO
1. About 30% of maquiladora jobs were
siphoned off by NAFTA-created jobs in the
interior of MX
2. MX agriculture has suffered a net loss in jobs
& revenue due to U.S. agricultural subsidies
3. No increase in net manufacturing jobs in MX
due to its concentration in component parts
that are exported to the USA for product
assembly
4. Since 1994, MX’s non-oil exports have
increased 400% & foreign direct investment by
14 fold.
In the decade before NAFTA, Mexico’s average
annual per capita GDP grew at 0.1%,
compared to 1.8% in the decade after NAFTA.
However, post-NAFTA economic structural
changes forced on Mexico by the IMF (for
huge loans made to Mexico after its major
currency crisis in the mid-1980s) “wiped out
whole swathes of Mexican industry that had
been painstakingly built up” in previous years.
“The result was a slowdown in economic
growth, lost jobs, and falling wages.” In
effect, the IMF’s mandatory structural
changes in Mexico’s economy more than
wiped out the gains of NAFTA.
        IMPACT ON THE USA
1. A net increase of 914,000 new
manufacturing jobs minus a
decrease of 766,000 jobs wiped out
by increased imports from MX = a
net gain of approx. 200,000 jobs
2. Since the U.S. economy is 10X
larger than Mexico’s, the overall
impact of NAFTA on the USA has
been limited
    OVERALL CONCLUSIONS
 “NAFTA has shown that FTAs shift the
 composition of some jobs, with some
 winners & some losers, but cannot be
  expected to create a net job gain in
economies that are at full-employment,
     such as the USA & Canada. In
developing economies, such as MX, the
 NAFTA experience demonstrates that
  FTAs can’t be counted on to produce
       much employment gain.”
   OVERALL IMPACT OF NAFTA
    ON JOBS & EMPLOYMENT:
The increased FDI & business
    activity associated with
 NAFTA has not yielded more
  net jobs, but it has affected
 the pattern of jobs, boosting
     employment in some
industries, but wiping out jobs
            in others.
     INCREASE IN MEXICO’S
 POST-NAFTA EXPORTS TO THE U.S.
1981-1986: 6% increase
1987-1993: 12 % increase
1994-2000: 19.3% increase
2001-2005: 5% increase
MX’s exports to Canada
increased at a 14% average
annual rate..
MEXICO’S MARKET SHARE INCREASES
 IN THE NAFTA ZONE, 1985 vs. 2000
Simple manufactured
products: 4.5% of NAFTA
zone vs. 9.5%
Natural resources mfg: 3.1%
vs. 3.7&
Non-natural resources mfg:
2.9% vs. 10.6%
 When nations make major
economic changes, such as a
FTA, there are both intended
& unintended outcomes. The
 unintended outcomes, both
   good and bad, must be
considered in evaluating the
    success of any major
      economic change.
 UNANTICIPATED OUTCOMES OF NAFTA
1. Asian & European companies
   built factories in Mexico in order
   to export goods to the U.S.
   without tariffs
2. Many Mexican companies closed
   because they were no longer
   protected by tariffs
3. China began to siphon off jobs &
   FDI from Mexico
 Mexico’s infrastructure for
doing NAFTA business is not
     nearly big enough
NAFTA requires all manufacturers to
purchase a sizable % of their parts
from “CanAmerIco” (local sourcing
          requirement)
1. Canadians are worried that NAFTA will
   undermine Canadian competitiveness,
   eventually cutting into their socialist
   comforts (high minimum wage, free
   health care, etc.)
2. Due to the backing of large farming
   subsidies, American farmers are a major
   threat to most small MX farms
3. Overall, NAFTA has not compensated for
   MX’s innumerable social & economic
   problems: corruption, over-population,
   poor education, crumbling
   infrastructure, puny tax base, lack of
   credit, etc.
    NAFTA HEAD-BUTTING
1. Current legal action: Mexico
   imposed a 20% tariff on U.S.
   soft drinks sweetened with
   fructose corn syrup.
2. Mexico has charged the U.S.
   with anti-dumping tariffs
   over American beef exports
  A coalition of environmental & labor
groups have subjected Mexico to unfair
 trading practices in restricting access
(only 20 miles across the border) of MX
        trucks to U.S. highways.
THE BOTTOM
  LINE ON
   NAFTA
(from Post-NAFTA North America,
        by Isidro Morales)
1. “The NAFTA regime and transformation of
   state policies has so far been a success. It
   has not only produced anticipated and
   desirable policy outcomes, but has led to
   anticipated future positive outcomes and
   rewards.”
2. But the playing filed for the 3 partners has
   not been entirely leveled due to subsidies
   & “overzealous” use of sensitive sector
   products.
3. NAFTA has not yet brought about progress
   in the economic gaps between north and
   south Mexico.
4. NAFTA has not caused any deterioration in
   Canada’s welfare state as of yet.
5. NAFTA has been a “laboratory” for testing
   whether or not neo-liberal capitalism (with
   its emphasis on letting the market, rather
   than the state, control economic growth) is
   in the best interest of developing nations.
   “The regional regime has put pressures &
   tensions in state-market relationships in
   both Mexico & the U.S., deepening
   domestic cleavages between those who
   advocate the (exclusive) role of markets
   vs. those who wish to let firms stay
   embedded within social, political, &
   historical institutions. What is at stake is
   whether welfare policies will survive or be
   transformed after NAFTA’S restructuring of
   state capabilities.”
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Our southern border is as imaginary as the equator.
Our politicians cannot see it any more than those
who are crossing it illegally. Politicians wring their
hands on this issue as though they are being asked
to police the equator. If they cannot do the job then
they should turn it over to the private sector. There
are companies in America that would do an
excellent job of taking care of our immigration
problem on the southern border. Policymakers tell
us that fences will not work. Yet the White House
still has a fence around it. An estimated 12 million
illegals are in our country. How is it that we can
send men to the moon but we can’t send these
illegals home?
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Years ago HMOs lowered premiums and
  increased benefits until they gained control of
  the health care system. Then they tripled and
  quadrupled the premiums and cut benefits.
  The illegals from Mexico are following the
  HMO playbook. They come into our country
  and work for a third of the average wage.
  When they take over the food industry, field
  work, motel and hotel jobs, restaurant and
  landscaping, they will then go on strike, shut
  down mainstream America and then demand
  the high wages that the American people
  were being paid before they took their jobs
  away.
 Immigrant
   labor (10M
strong) is the
     largest
  international
industry in the
   Southwest
       USA
 THE IMPACT OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
        ON THE U.S. ECONOMY
•8.1 million: illegal immigrants
•$1.8 trillion: annual spending, U.S.
•$220.7 billion: annual spending, Texas
•$652 billion : annual contribution to
U.S. GDP
•$27 billion or more: the costs of
education, health care and
incarceration in six states, including
Texas
A 2007 report by the federation said
 the costs of education, health care
 and incarceration of undocumented
 immigrants in six states, including
 Texas, exceeds $27 billion annually.
"We need comprehensive reform that
 looks at our needs and addresses
 those needs," said the president of
 the group that examined data for
 500 sectors of the economy.
PROFILE OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN THE USA
1. Estimated 9.3M illegal aliens in
   2002; 50% Mexican and 23%
   other Latin American; 23% in
   California, 12% in Texas
   (approx. 1.1M), 10% in Florida
2. 6M of the 9.3M are believed to
   be employed, making up 5% of
   the total U.S. labor force.
3. Growth of the illegal alien
   population in America: 13M in
   1994; 16M in 1997; 17.4M in
   2000; 19.7M in 2003
4. Median weekly earnings of full-time
    illegal immigrants in America: $489
    versus $643 for legal Americans
5. Twenty thousand new H-1B visas
    were approved by Congress in 2004 to
    bring in skilled specialty immigrant
    workers (computer programmers,
    nurses) to the American economy
6. 75% of day laborers in the U.S.
  (including 2/3 of all workers in
  construction & agriculture) are illegal.
7. 2/3 of the 20M foreign-born workers
  in the Texas workforce are non-
  citizens.
          RECENT GLOBAL LABOR TRENDS
1. The overall % of immigrants in the European &
  American workforces is rising. Immigrants
  comprise approx. 15% of the American
  workforce today.
2. China & developing nations have doubled the
  amount of manufacturing they do for Western
  nations since the early 1990s.
3. The IMF estimates that the global labor supply
  has increased 4-fold since 1980.
4. In a recent study of 18 nations, the average
  real pay of workers has increased 0.24%,
  raising questions about how much workers
  have benefited from the world’s recent growth.
       ESTIMATED % OF IMMIGRANT
      EMPLOYMENT IN U.S. INDUSTRIES
Agriculture: 61%
Domestic housekeeping: 36%
Drywall installers: 27%
Landscaping: 26%
Maintenance: 26%
Meat handlers: 25%
Hand packers: 22%
Cement finishers: 22%
Roofers: 21%
Animal slaughter: 20%
Cleaning: 19%
Laundry: 17%
Apparel: 16%
Hospitality: 14%
Restaurants: 11%
Construction: 10%
“Recent efforts to heavily fine U.S.
 companies who employ illegal
 Mexicans have already caused
 serious disruptions in the
 operations of many American
 businesses, especially in
 agriculture. Many farmers have
 will produce only half of their
 normal crops due to growing labor
 shortages & many farmers have
 chosen not to plant at all.”
     SHOULD AMERICA CLOSE ITS BORDERS?
1. “Those who simply want to deport all
   unauthorized immigrants might be surprised
   at the economic result. I don’t think they
   would be very happy. It would cause a lot of
   dislocation in terms of trying to maintain
   industries such as agriculture, construction,
   and hospitality.”
2. “Curbing the use of immigrant labor would
   cause the Central Texas building boom to fall
   flat on its back.”
3. “There’s just not enough raw bodies in the
   construction trades. I don’t think that
   Congress recognizes the full impact of a
   closed border system.”
4. There’s an absolute numerical decline of
   Anglos in the labor force nationwide and in
   Texas. Without people from other cultures
   and origins coming here, we’d actually see a
   decline in the American labor force.”
5. “The jobs immigrants take are not the jobs
   Americans won’t do. Immigrants are doing
   the jobs at the prices that are offered.
   Roofers and cement mixers who used top
   make $15 an hour aren’t going to work for
   $8.”
6. “We’re not just workers. We’re not murders
   or criminals. We do important work. We
   work faster, for less money, and we do good
   work.”
“The U.S. has 12-15M undocumented
  workers employed primarily in
  agriculture, construction, food services, &
  tourism. With the low unemployment rate
  below 5%, where do we think we can
  realistically find people to fill unskilled or
  semi-skilled jobs? If every illegal
  immigrant was sent back to his country
  of origin, America would have a worker
  shortage across the board, not just in a
  few industries. Prices would skyrocket
  and it would take longer to get work
  done—if you could find people to do the
  work at all.”
“Looked at from a Christian
  point of view, nationalism
     is a very dangerous
   principle. The Christian
   understanding of who is
  our neighbor is not limited
 to those who look like us or
     who have the same
     citizenship papers.”
NATIONALISM &
PROTECTIONISM
       • Tariffs (taxes
        on imports)

       • Subsidies
        (domestic
        companies
        receive financial
        aid from their
        government)
Protectionism is
      seen by
developed nations
  as an outmoded
      form of
 nationalism that
  disrupts global
 trading patterns.
    Developing
nations see it as a
  defense against
      foreign
   exploitation.
 Why is
NAFTA not
  really a
free trade
   area?
(Because
   only 3
  nations
 benefit)
 MX’S CURRENT SOCIAL/ECONOMIC PROBLEMS
1. Rapid population growth (70m to
   100M in last 20 years) has outstripped
   good economic growth
2. Poor public education (national
   average of an 8th grade education)
3. Systemic corruption saps economic
   growth from the grass roots level &
   drives off investors
4. Low farm subsidies can’t compete with
   high USA farm subsidies
5. Mass urban overcrowding & under-
   employment
6. Because MX’s average age is
   one of the youngest in the
   world (22), a million job
   seekers enter the MX
   economy each year.
7. But the MX economy creates
   only 100,000 new jobs
   annually, clearly showing
   the need for NAFTA.
8. 19m more Mexicans in poverty than
   20 years ago, despite impressive
   NAFTA gains
9. Half of population unable to meet
   daily needs
10. 40% of rural Mexicans earn $1.40
   daily
11. Every day, 400-600 rural Mexicans
   move to urban areas, adding to the
   gross over-crowding & under-
   employment
12.China has used labor costs 75%
  lower (about 50 cents daily) than
  Mexico’s to pull away 300,000
  manufacturing jobs (especially in
  clothing) from 300 MX plants
13.Chinese workers are much better
  educated than MX workers,
  making it hard for MX to move up
  the “value-chain” in
  manufacturing
14.MX is overly dependent on
  unskilled labor jobs
     MEXICO’S CORN DEPENDENCE
1. MX’s corn productivity increased by
   30% from 1993-1999, but wages
   fell 20%.
2. MX corn farmers largely dropped
   out of the market when heavily
   subsidized American & Canadian
   corn flooded MX.
3. Then when the U.S. & Canada hit
   corn shortages in 1996, MX ran out
   of corn & the fatality rate of
   malnourished MX children soared.
     FTAA THREAT TO MEXICO

1.If the Free Trade
  Agreement of the Americas
  becomes reality in some
  form, Mexico will probably
  face tough competition
  from the labor cost
  advantages of many
  Central American &
  Caribbean nations.
   LATIN AMERICAN EXPORTS AS A
     % OF 2004 NATIONAL GDP
ARGENTINA: 25%
BRAZIL: 18%
CHILE: 41%
COLOMBIA: 22%
MEXICO: 30%
PERU: 21%
VENEZUELA: 36%
  LATIN AMERICAN IMPORTS AS A
    % OF 2004 NATIONAL GDP
ARGENTINA: 18%
BRAZIL: 13%
CHILE: 32%
COLOMBIA: 22%
MEXICO: 32%
PERU: 18%
VENEZUELA: 20%
    AVERAGE GROWTH RATE OF LATIN
     AMERICAN NATION, 1990-2000
ARGENTINA: 3.2%
BRAZIL: 1.3%
CHILE: 4.9%
COLOMBIA: 0.8%
MEXICO: 1.8%
PERU: 2.1%
VENEZUELA: -0.1%
LATIN AMERICA OVERALL: 2.0
 SOURCES OF FDI TO MEXICO
USA: 63% of MX FDI
EU: 26%
Canada: 3%
Japan: 2%
All other nations: 6%
 LATIN AMERICA PER CAPITAL GDP
Mexico: $9803
Costa Rica: $9481
Dominican Rep: $7499
El Salvador: $5041
Guatemala: $4313
Honduras: $2876
Nicaragua: $3634
1. Economic growth in several South
  American nations is spurring significant
  middle class growth (in contrast to the
  historical demographic profile of a
  small minority of upper class rich vs. a
  giant majority of lower class poor).
2. The new economic growth is based on
  proliferating small family businesses in
  contrast to the socialized government-
  backed state companies of the 1970s &
  1980s, which fell apart in the region’s
  debt crisis of the 1990s.
3. Under new government definitions of
  poverty, families that can provide for
  their own economic needs free of
  government support are classified as
  residing above the poverty level. Forty
  percent of Argentina’s families have now
  reached this level.
4. Economic growth projections for 2010
  predict that approximately half of Latin
  American families will move above the
  poverty level, & 15M Mexican
  households out of the 27M total by
  2012.
5. In both Brazil & Mexico, the incomes of
  the poorest half of the population are
  growing faster than the average, & the
  overall poverty rate is steadily declining.
6. Poverty has declined more in Chile than
  anywhere else in Latin America due to
  sustained new job growth & fewer
  children in families. Chile’s income
  distribution is also becoming less
  unequal.
7. “Latin America is going faster towards a
  middle class society than we could have
  imagined 20 years ago.”
Creation of a free trade zone from
       Canada to Argentina
              BEYOND NAFTA?
When NAFTA came into effect in 1994, 34
 nations in the Americas pledged to
 negotiate a regional free trade agreement,
 the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas,
 by 2005. The U.S. initially championed the
 FTAA, hoping it would erode high Latin
 tariffs against American exports. But at
 the 2005 Summit of the Americans
 conference, Latin American nations
 declined to pursue the FTAA for the time
 being, but Chile, Brazil, & Colombia
 pursued bilateral free trade agreements
 with the U.S.
In recent years, the Andean
 Community (Bolivia, Colombia,
 Ecuador, Peru, & Venezuela)
 developed much closer trade ties
 with the EU , eclipsing the amount of
 trade Latin American now does with
 the U.S. Brazil & Chile have the
 largest trading relationship with the
 EU overall. The EU now invests more
 in CAN (Andean Community) than
 the U.S. does, accounting for a
 quarter of all Latin American FDI.
LATIN AMERICAN FREE TRADE PROGRESS
1. 33 nations have worked since 1998 to put
   together a free trade zone in the Americas
   by 2005.
2. The Andean Community recently merged
   with MERCOSUR (The “Southern Common
   Market” nations of Brazil, Argentina,
   Paraguay & Uruguay) to form the South
   American Community of Nations.
3. The U.S. currently has unilateral FTAs with
   Chile, Colombia, Panama pending possible
   approval by Congress.
4. Mexico has free trade
   agreements with the EU, Israel,
   Japan, and several South
   American nations.
5. In addition to its free trade
   agreement with the U.S., Chile
   has also brokered free trade
   deals with Canada, China, the
   EU, South Korea, Mexico,
   Panama, Peru, Singapore.
               CAFTA
1. The Central American Free Trade
   Agreement (2005) removes tariff
   barriers between the USA & 6
   nations: El Salvador, Nicaragua,
   Honduras, Guatemala, Costa Rica,
   & the Dominican Republic
2. 80% of the goods from these 6
   nations were already free of tariffs
   before CAFTA went into effect
3. CAFTA has only 44M people &
   most are not yet middle class
   consumers.
“Latin American opponents of free
 trade with the USA worry that
 farmers, especially of corn,
 cotton, and wheat, will struggle
 to compete with their heavily
 subsidized counterparts in the
 U.S. They also worry that
 American corporations will try to
 take out patents on native plants
 that can be cultivated for
 medicinal purposes.”
4. Central American leaders
view CAFTA as vital in order to
force the region to upgrade
competitively—especially to keep
China from siphoning off FDI and
labor-intensive jobs from the region.
5. The U.S. feels CAFTA will also
  strengthen protection of American
  intellectual property (trademarks,
  patents, etc.) in Central America.
6. CATFA will increase the openness and
   accountability of Central American
   governments because their
   economies will be subject to close
   scrutiny.
7. CAFTA will also stimulate regional
   trade, since tariffs and other
   protectionist barriers will be largely
   outlawed. This will be especially
   important to Nicaragua, the poorest
   CAFTA member, which still has no
   paved roads to its Atlantic coast.
8. Economists estimate that
 CAFTA will produce only a
 .01% annual export gain
 for the U.S. economy, but
 total annual exports of the
 6 CAFTA nations to the
 U.S. should increase by
 nearly 15% ($2.7B).
   THE
CAPITALISM
 SPLIT IN
  SOUTH
 AMERICA
Since 2005, South American nations have
  diverged in capitalist ideology. Chile, Brazil,
  Colombia, & Mexico want to pursue “neo-
  liberal” (traditional non-socialist) capitalism
  based on close ties to the U.S. Venezuela,
  Bolivia, Ecuador, and Argentina favor a less
  pure form of capitalism mixed with varying
  degrees of socialism. (“21st century
  socialism”). This mixed capitalism is based
  on the governments running utilities,
  airlines, & the oil industries as well as
  forming joint ventures with large private
  corporations holding a large economic stake
  in Latin America.
1. The economic income gap between
   rich and poor is a major reason for
   growing uneasiness with capitalism.
   In many South American nations,
   the richest 20% own over 60% of
   the total wealth, while the poorest
   20% typically average only 5%.
2. Also high inflation (20%+) & the
   resulting high interest rates are
   commonplace throughout the
   region.
3. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has
  launched his own “Bolivarian
  Revolution” (named after Simon
  Bolivar, who liberated several South
  American nations from colonial control
  in the 19th century) designed to lessen
  the region’s perceived economic
  domination by the U.S. & Western global
  government organizations (the
  IMF/World Bank, & the World Trade
  Organization) & to promote greater
  trade cooperation from within the
  Andean Community.
“US clout in Latin America has sunk to
perhaps the lowest point in decades. Latin
   Americans now view the US as a banana
   republic.” The major causes are:
1.The US financial collapse which promises
   to have significant negative spill over
   effects for Latin America. “US lectures to
   Latin America about excess greed and
   lack of accountability have long run
   hollow, but today they sound even more
   ridiculous.”
2. Economic austerity measures pressed on
   Latin America by the US over the past
   decade.
3. The re-emergence of anti-American
   leftist leaders in several LA nations.
4. A significant decline of US
   investment in LA from 30% to
   20% over the past decade.
5. Rapid trade growth with LA by
   both China & the EU.
6. Russian provision of arms &
   military equipment to
   Venezuela.
7. Increasing trade of technology
   between LA & France. “Similar
   deals could have been made
   with the US had it been willing
   to share its technology.”

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:9
posted:4/21/2012
language:
pages:97