You All Screwed Yourselves!!

Discussion in 'UPS Union Issues' started by Char, Nov 1, 2007.

  1. Char

    Char New Member

    Its funny how you all complain about the pensions and retirement benefits. The even funnier part is that you all demanded it. You all demanded that someone else be responsible for your retirement. Now you have it and look what you have. It is no different than Americans wanting free health care and social security. Someone else picked the plan and now complain that it is crap. The only way to fix this is to get new people off this system.

    I'd rather take whatever contributions UPS makes to a so-called retirement package in my paycheck. I can make far better decisions regarding my retirement than a bunch crooks who are not vested in the decisions they make for others. I am an 8 year part time employee. If UPS paid me all the money they pay in health, welfare, and retirement I could have retired in 6 more years while remaining a part time employee. Retired at 35 would have been great. If governement had taken social security and medicare taxes and placed them in a personal savings account instead of throwing it in a big pot and dishing it out others no one would have to worry about retirement or healthcare. Congress would not have so much power over people. They would not be able to spend my money on someone else. They would not be able to keep people dependent on them.

    Instead of getting higher wages year after, that money gets dumped into the black hole that is the pension program.

    Someone on another thread said something like "The pension is saved isn't that what matters most?" There is no gurantee that this will save the pension plans. Just like raising taxes on the rich won't save social security.

    The more you people rely on others to make decisions for you (whether its the government, ups, or teamsters) the more unhappy and dissatisfied you will become. At the same time you give greater power to others over your life, the more you become dependent on them.

    Thanks you to all the UPSers that allowed this to happen, and thank you to all Americans that allowed the government to do the same thing.

    Char
     
  2. Cole

    Cole New Member

    On the bright side I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
     
  3. blue efficacy

    blue efficacy Active Member

    I'd take a 401(k) match over the pension myself.

    But remember a lot of us unskilled laborers aren't very good at financial planning. We are just box jockeys, which doesn't require much in the way of intelligence. So if some of the less intelligent among us made bad choices and lost their retirement money, they'd be complaining. Either way, people will complain.

    Like I said I personally would like to see pensions go away. But lots of people just don't know how to manage their money intelligently.
     
  4. Char

    Char New Member

    This is not meant to offend anyone but I know alot of you union guys are liberals or democrats (only god knows the reason why,) just pick the companies you guys hate the most and invest in them. I own Wal Mart, Exxon, a little Halliburton, a sliver of google, a basket of pharmecuticals, and gold.

    Why gold, gold has never been worth $0. I started buying gold in 1998 when it was $250/oz. It is now worth about $800/oz. If you purchased only 1oz per week from 98 to 07 you would have about $150,000 in profit and a net worth of around $300,000 maybe $400,000.

    When Bill Clinton allowed the oil companies merge (Exxon Mobile, Chevron Texaco, etc) oil was about $10 or $15/barrel. The price could only go up for 3 main reasons.

    1. $10-$15/barrel is obscenely low and could only go up from there.
    2. Oil company mergers mean less competition which in turn means higher prices.
    3. The United States has not increased refining capacity since the 1970s (thank you environmentalists and the Democrats they own) while demand for gasoline was growing from economic prosperity and population increases. Insufficient refined product means either shortages which require rationing and high prices or import refined product which raises prices.

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

    Wal Mart offers low prices that attract large segments of the population not just poor people. You can accuse them of paying low wages or they don't offer good healthcare, but the fact of the matter is that their wages are comparable to its competitors and they offer the same crappy healthcare options that most companies offer entry level paid employees.

    It is a smart investment.

    Halliburton is a company that is capable of doing jobs very few companies if any, are able to do. Libs love to say that they carry favour with Republicans but the fact is Democrats are just as cozy. They grow steadily in revanue every year, stock splits, dividends, $25/per share 1998, $39/per share today.

    American Pharmecuticals companies are the only ones discovering new drugs that save lives and improve the quality of life. Since most other countries that would otherwise be capable of competing have socialized government run healthcare. Which means price controls which in turn means less funds for reasearch and developement which means less revanue.

    Another safe bet.

    Google is a little more risky. In fact, I amazed that I still hold it but it is only a matter of time before they will suffer the fate .coms experienced in the late 90s.

    The risk is high but the potential payout is also high.

    Other than that, be married before you have kids, finish high school/college before you get married. Don't depend on governemnt/ don't trust the govenment or anyone else for that matter to take care of you or make decisions that are in you and your familys best interest for you. Finally live within your means.

    And if any politician democrat or republican tell you that they want to give you something for free (healtchcare, retirement, baby bonds, prescriptions, child care, etc) know that nothing is free and the only thing they seek is your freedom and self reliance.

    You don't need a college degree to figure this out, just a little common sense. It 1998 when I started planning, I was 19 years old.

    Char
     
  5. brownmonster

    brownmonster Man of Great Wisdom

    Char, you are a young person that has a financial clue. What the hell happened to the rest of your generation?
     
  6. Fredless

    Fredless APWA Hater


    we work in the back for nothing...trying to get through college so we don't have to deliver boxes the rest of our lives.:wink:
     
  7. BrownShark

    BrownShark Banned

    Wow,

    I would like to thank Rush (Char) Limbaugh for contributing to a UPS debate. This has to be the most ignorant post yet to date.

    Your point about social security is so far off base its not even funny. 3 presidents are solely responsible for putting social security in the RED and the road to recovery for this program looks bleak.

    Presidents Reagan, Bush 1 & Bush 2 have "borrowed" hundreds of billions of dollars from this fund and left a little note saying "I.O.U" each time without a justified program to repay this money.

    For Reagan, his battle with the "cold war" cost the taxpayers trillions of dollars and now, his spending has hundreds of useless strategic bombers sitting in a Nevada desert mothball base. These planes never flew a mission or spent a day at a military facility anywhere in the world. The many defense programs he spent the money on never saw the light of day ie: star wars. (Strategic missile defense system) President Reagan was the first President in the history of the United States to take the federal deficit over 1 Trillion Dollars.

    For Bush 1, his infamous words "read my lips, no new taxes" came back to haunt him, when the bill for all the overspending of Reagan finally caught up with him. He indeed raised taxes and was forced to take money out of the social security fund to pay for a brief war with Iraq.

    This money was NEVER Repayed either.

    Our current President tops them all. Not only has he taken billions from the social security fund for defense spending, hes also cut vital programs for veterans to the tune of 900 million a year to pay for his war of choice.

    Like his mentors (Reagan/Bush) he also has no plan to pay it back and with all the baby boomers getting ready to withdraw from the plan, there isnt enough money to pay out and remain solvent.

    In the 6 years he has been in office, President Bush has taken the federal deficit over 9 Trillion dollars, this sets an all time record for federal deficits and in fact, our current deficit is more than all the federal budgets combined from George Washington thru Ronald Reagan.


    You wrote: " It is no different than Americans wanting free health care and social security."

    As an employee of UPS, do you pay for your healthcare? If not, why not surrender that priviledge and pay the cost yourself. Why take advantage of the collective barganing process and then call others greedy?

    Tell UPS HR that you want to make your own contribution to the health care plan that you are on. Why not set a trend for all the others with your mindset.

    As far as social security is concerned, if the three presidents I have mentioned NEVER BORROWED from this fund, it would be a fully funded and operational program today.

    During the Clinton Administration, and by cutting useless defense programs, President Clinton put 20 billion dollars back into social security.

    When you say "WE ALL SCREWED OURSELVES", hows that?

    Are you some kind of financial guru, yet work as a part timers at UPS?

    You expect us to believe you have the savy to invest your money wiser than everyone else?

    Privitazation of social security and pensions is a complicated one.

    Currently, there are HUNDREDS of private pension funds going to the PBGC because they failed in the private market. These single employer plans were also victims of the ENRON, WORLDCOM etc... scandals that plagued this country in the 80's and 90's.

    The PBGC is facing a crisis of its own, and in fact is currently 40 billion dollars underfunded. Large corps like Delta and American Airlines have dumped their pensions into the PBGC with the blessing of the Bush Administration.

    In his 7 year tenure, more companies have dumped their pensions into the PBGC than in any time in history of the PBGC.

    You blamed the workers why????

    Central States Pension fund took a huge hit during the Enron, World Com scandals and that cost billions. This was no fault of the employees.

    Bad decisions on investments happen everyday. The private sector is no more immune from bad decisions than is the Teamsters.

    Maybe you should consider a job with the board of Trustees of the CS funds and guide them to success with your insights??

    Otherwise, leave your Rush Limbaugh impressions at the door.

    Peace.
     
  8. BrownShark

    BrownShark Banned

    "When Bill Clinton allowed the oil companies merge (Exxon Mobile, Chevron Texaco, etc) oil was about $10 or $15/barrel. The price could only go up for 3 main reasons.

    1. $10-$15/barrel is obscenely low and could only go up from there.
    2. Oil company mergers mean less competition which in turn means higher prices.
    3. The United States has not increased refining capacity since the 1970s (thank you environmentalists and the Democrats they own) while demand for gasoline was growing from economic prosperity and population increases. Insufficient refined product means either shortages which require rationing and high prices or import refined product which raises prices.

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out."" (END QUOTE)

    Char,

    Your facts and data in this synopsis are incorrect. Quite humorous indeed. When Clinton Left office, the price of crude was sitting at $25.00 a barrel and the average price of gas during his administration never went above $1.65 a gallon.

    Lets go back into the way back machine for a second and take a look at what happened to the gasoline markets.

    During Reagan, gasoline companies were growing at an alarming pace.

    Competition for the customers resulted in price wars at stations across the USA, I doubt if you were even in diapers at this time.

    This was good for the consumers and the station owners who were making about 15 cents per gallon profits.

    For the Oil companies, profits were not high enough, refining capacity at this time was set at 4% per refinery. (there were 96 refineries at the time)

    As Reagan left the White House in a shambles, Bush 1 took control, he being an oil man with many oil friends, got together with his coalition of energy staff (all OIL COMPANY EXECUTIVES) and created the countrys new energy plan for the next 4 years.

    The first thing on the agenda was the SHUTTING DOWN OF 37 REFINERY PLANTS IN THE USA. This was not due to environmental concerns or left wing wackos or psyco actors bent on keeping the environment safe.

    This was about PROFIT. You see, my young impressionable friend, refineries were only operating at a 4% capacity at the time, and that kept the supply of gas plentyful and without interuption.

    Wall Street was demanding higher profits from its oil sectors and the way to accomplish this was to reduce the number of refineries and increase the operating capacity of each refinery to around 40%.

    This instant gain made oil raise sharply over his term and the oil industry began to learn how to manipulate the markets.

    When Bush was finally tossed back to Texas, President Clinton took control and was faced with a hostile OPEC, who in connection with the Bush staff and represented by former white house chief of staff JAMES A. BAKER (personal lawyer for the Saudi Oil shieks) tried to get Clinton to maintain the rising cost of oil.

    Clinton refused and opened up the reserves as opec cut production in order to cause fuel prices to go up. This action caused the prices to drop and Clinton was able to stablize fuel prices for 8 years.

    Under Bush 2, the cost of oil per barrel is reaching $100 dollars a barrel, great for investors, bad for the economy and its citizens. The refining capacity at this time cannot handle the demand side for fuel here in the states and this was by design not coincedence. This you can thank Bush 1 for accomplishing.

    Fuel today is causing americans financial hardships across this country.

    No one in the Bush administration seems to care, and before you blame environmentalists for preventing new refineries, remember this, there is no incentive for oil companies to do so.

    This would bring the price of fuel down to levels around $1.50 a gallon.

    Your oil investments wouldnt be so wise then.

    Peace.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2007
  9. Mystakilla

    Mystakilla New Member

    Very interesting reading from the both of you. I see and understand both point of views, however we cant be pointing fingers at who did this or who did what.

    Char does have a valid point, if you feel you can invest in something yourself and make it worthwhile then why worry about a fight over a pension that someone else is going to control when someday you may never have it anyway?

    The majority of people count on having a pension or some type of backup plan for when they retire because they dont know how to invest or are scared to lose money when in fact everything requires some risk.
     
  10. BrownShark

    BrownShark Banned

    Char,

    You wrote: "Wal Mart offers low prices that attract large segments of the population not just poor people. You can accuse them of paying low wages or they don't offer good healthcare, but the fact of the matter is that their wages are comparable to its competitors and they offer the same crappy healthcare options that most companies offer entry level paid employees.

    It is a smart investment. " (end quote)

    also you wrote:

    "Other than that, be married before you have kids, finish high school/college before you get married. Don't depend on governemnt/ don't trust the govenment or anyone else for that matter to take care of you or make decisions that are in you and your familys best interest for you. Finally live within your means. " (end quote)


    Char,
    What exactly is your point here? These two positions condradict each other.

    First you gleemingly honor Walmart for bringing us low prices that make it a benefit to all americans.

    Then, you tell us to stay in school, get an education, dont have kids before you get married and dont depend on government.

    Ok, hooray for the red white and blue!! Thats the American spirit at work!!!

    but wait a minute?

    Walmart depends on a communist nation and its people to offer us these low prices. This communist nation has no rights for its people and change isnt in the wind, yet you would support a company who would do business with such a nation.

    Walmart subcontracts out to business that buy children from their parents in villages at age 10 to 11 to work in factories and does not allow them to leave until they have worked off what they paid to buy them.

    These children DO NOT get a chance to go to school, they DO NOT get the opportunity to get an education, they DO NOT get to go to college, they DO NOT get to get married.

    Doesnt this fact contradict in your mind at some point when you tell us to follow your insight for a better life while at the same time dooming other human beings to a life of poverty just to save you a few bucks on a T-shirt from Walmart?

    China is still a communist country. Its people suffer everyday. You'll say we are paying them .20 cents a day and thats market rate for them in the job market in china. Would you have your children working under those conditions? Of course not, as long as its other peoples children and your cool with it.

    Please, dont preach what you dont really believe, if you did, you would condemn ANY company who exploits children on any continent.

    Peace.
     
  11. VTBrown

    VTBrown Member

    In all honesty.......

    I'm all for the Pension going away. I have 5 years in now and I have serious doubts as to a Pension even being here in 20 years.

    Give me the matching funds UPS pays in and allow me to do a matching 401k and I'd be happier then.......
     
  12. Char

    Char New Member

    I didn't write this to get into political debate. Perhaps I should make it clear, on scale of 1-5 I give Democrats a 1 and Republicans a 2. Neither party has the interest of the people at heart. They only care about seizing your freedoms by offering you freebies to vote for them. Our once great REPUBLIC has turned into a democracy.

    'Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes itself,
    exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not
    commit suicide.' John Adams

    Under Clinton gas prices went down to $.99/gallon at one point this equals about $10-$15/barrel.

    You are correct that prices stablized, unfortunately it stabilized at an artificially low price which is why we are experienceing such dramatic increases. Government should have stayed out of it. The strategic oil reserve is for emergencies, not to score political points by artificially lowering the price.

    I don't know about your refining capacity at %4 it sounds insanely low. If refineries were operating at %4 than that would justify shut downs. Regardless, refineries today operate at %110. If you don't want politicians manipulating oil prices then don't don't give them so much power to regulate the oil industry. If you really want to lower the cost of gasoline, lift drilling and refining restrictions and eliminate the taxes. If you eliminate the high taxes on gas then you eliminate the incentive for government to keep prices high. You may be right that Bush doesn't care what the cost of oil is. But neither does any of the democrats. The more oil costs, the more the government gets in revanues to buy your votes.

    As for China and Wal Mart, you can blame both Clinton and Bush (Democrats and Republicans) for the allowing of China to dump cheap goods on American shores. But you can't blame Wal Mart for having to compete. If you go into Target and K Mart and just about any other retailer they all sell the same Chinese crap.

    As for social security. The raiding of these funds started under Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War. Every President afterwards continued to raid it. But please do read the Constitution and remember that a President can only spend what Congress allows them to spend. Democrats have controlled the House and Senate longer than the Republicans. This doesn't make Republicans any better than the Democrats or vice versa. And while your reading the Constitution, please tell me where it gives authority to Congress to raise funds for retirement. I'll give you hint, it would be under Article 1 Section 8. Social security was a scam when it was created. All it did was give the government more power to tax your hard earned money and spend it on others who don't deserve it and to secure power for Democrats for decades to come. If Roosevelt and Truman had listened to Patton and MacArthur The Russians and the Chinese would have been irrelevent if not free countries today. Reagan had to fight the Cold War the way he did. The big problem came when after the fall of the Soviet Union we cut all those useless defense programs and intelligence programs under Clinton that now they are a threat again. Dems said oh the peace dividend. While we were pouring more into welfare programs keeping Americans dependent the Chinese became stronger and now the Russians are rearing their ugly heads again. And make no mistake about it, It is communist Russia and China that are driving the muslim extremists. The muslims do the dirty work while the Chinese and Russians hands are seemingly clean. If you know history you would easily see this. All the fall of the Soviet Union did was give an opportunity for the communists to regroup and and change strategy. If you wish I can explain this further in another post.

    As for companies dumping their pensions, its the same problems as with social security. You can't pool everyones money together and then dole it out. Those who pay more will get less in return, those who pay less will get more in return but the bottom line is than no one will get enough. But that is the beauty of liberalism, the equal distribution of misery. Look at GM, their welfare programs for its employees is bigger than its car manufacturing/selling business. This also goes for all the other failed pension plans. A company can only pay people for so long not to work before there is not enough money to go around. Think about why pensions are no longer used. It's because they are extremely risky and bound to fail.

    As for my financial savy. It doesn't take a genious to spot good investments. Just pick companies that you like that do well. Yes I am a part timer at UPS, but like most part timers I have another full time job, and I go to college full time. You all can depend on government for you social security and medicare when you retire, and depend on UPS and teamsters when you retire :cursing: I on the other hand do not have to depend on all those crooks for my retirement. If I get even a fraction of what they promise it won't matter to me. I have taken steps necessary to secure my future regardless of government, ups, or teamsters. The only thing thing I want from this contract is more money in my wages so I can invest more in my future based on decisions I make, and not the decisions made by a bunch of crooked politicians and crooked unions reps make for me.

    Char
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2007
  13. RockyRogue

    RockyRogue Agent of Change

    I'm about 5 years younger than you. But, I agree with everything you wrote. Its a very well-thought out explanation of a financial management plan. Sadly, I haven't taken some of the advice you gave, particularly as far as investments :crying:. I've got a pile of student loan debts I have to service after graduation in about six months. I'll start an aggressive investment strategy at that point.

    LOL, BM. There are a couple of them. I'm about 5 years his junior but I agree with what he wrote. My father is the financial whiz of the family and we've had a bunch of conversations about financial management. I told him something a few weeks ago and he said, "Its INCREDIBLE how well you're managing your money. I didn't have a clue at your age." We're out there. Its becoming harder and harder to find others like me, though. The ones that are interested are more interested in getting rich quick rather than responsibility. -Rocky
     
  14. pkgdriver

    pkgdriver Member

    I'm with ya on that VT
     
  15. BrownShark

    BrownShark Banned

    Char,

    Excellent response. I appreciate the comments. I will not disagree with all your statements, but If you will, let me take a couple of points and offer you a counterpoint.

    Briefly, With regard to your statement abouts about China and Russia raising thier ugly heads again.. We have to blame President Bush Directly for that. It is HIS fault solely.

    Why do I say that??

    Its simple, Reagan outspent Russia 5 to 1 until Russia ran out of money. Oil prices were low, and the russians were on a course with bankruptcy. China was suffering as they were not exporting enough goods to support their military ambitions.

    Today, as Bush takes this country further into the abyss of wars and his actions causes the price of OIL to rise to levels unheard of, Russia is the Biggest Winner!! The high price of OIL is rebuilding the Russian economy and its military is once again capable of being rebuilt with the huge OIL profits. If President Bush had kept prices of crude low, the Russians would be out of business in a few more years, instead, they are once again rising to superpower capacity. China will one day dominate this country with its trillions in on hand cash and super infrastructure of industry.

    We on the other hand are becoming a nation of debt, a weakoning dollar and the elimination of industry. These are the begining of a third world nation.

    As we preach freedom, we then imprison ourselves to a life of suffering at our own hands.

    Next point:

    You wrote: "As for China and Wal Mart, you can blame both Clinton and Bush (Democrats and Republicans) for the allowing of China to dump cheap goods on American shores. But you can't blame Wal Mart for having to compete. If you go into Target and K Mart and just about any other retailer they all sell the same Chinese crap. " (end quote)

    I dont blame any politician for this, I blame Americans for supporting it and buying the stuff. Look at whats happened so far, Poisoned dog food, poison toothpaste, lead in paint & banned substances in oils, paints and stains. This is only the begining.

    We can disagree on how it all started, but it all ends with the dollar.

    Under Bush 2, more companies have moved their operations off shore and into third world countries just to take advantage of peoples poverty.

    Lets take Mexico for instance, Americans wonder why the people of Mexico are coming to this country by the millions. Americans do alot of complaining, and both political parties preach about curbing the problem, yet neither the American public nor the Political parties of this country are ready to address the real problem.

    It is always real easy to "treat" a symptom, but tougher to "treat" the real problem. In Mexico, there has to be a reason the population would rather risk death or imprisonment than stay in thier native land.

    Its simple, the secretary of commerce for Mexico released the statistics for 2007 with respect to employment. Currently, 41% of all the jobs available in Mexico are provided by American Companies. Of those companies, the average yearly wage rose to $4500.00 A YEAR in 2007.

    Yes, $4500.00 a year. No healthcare, No pensions No nothing. For this, the mexican people live in shacks in towns with no paved roads, no phones, no TV, no Radio, no supermarkets, no schools...etc. etc...

    With only $4500.00 a year in wages, and with a 45 hour workweek, that gives each employee of these American companies $86.53 a week gross, minus what the companies charge them to work there, Uniforms, shoes, gloves and in some cases, housing.

    On $86.53 a week, the mexican people cant afford to pay attention.

    Why stay in a country that would treat its people in this fashion when they can make it into this country and find a job within days of arriving, live in home with a roof on it, drive on roads that are paved, send their children to schools, watch television in their native language, eat nice food, go to a building that has everything you could ever want to eat in your lifetime and the best part, make about $75.00 to $100.00 tax free a day??

    We as Americans can bitch and moan about immigrants all day long, but until we hold the American Companies responsible for chasing them out of Mexico and into our Home Depot parking lots then we will just have to live with it.

    In the last 6 years, more immigrants have come here and helped many companies grow and while the fun lasted, everyone from the the President to the average Joe looked the other way.

    What everyone failed to realize, was their were two principles at work here.

    First, a short term gain for businesses who prospered using this cheap labor force. New companies sprouted up and the President boasted about the entreprenuer spirit higher than ever.

    Second, the long term loss of having these folks in this country and them getting married while here, having children here and laying down roots.

    The real loss is now being felt by all Americans, the short term gain for business has run its course and now the rest of America pays.

    Children in schools, over crowded hospitals, drivers on highways without licenses and insurance and so on...

    These factors are costing us Millions of dollars and the price keeps getting higher everyday.

    Our thirst for cheap prices isnt really cheap after all when you factor that the cost of everything else has gone up skyhigh.

    If I save $100.00 a month walmart while shopping, I spend it on higher property taxes each month to pay for prisons, policemen & schools..

    Why not really fix this problem and begin with Mexico. Why not stop American companies from exploiting people and sending them here so we "the taxpayers" subsidize their greedy operations.

    Why not force these American companies to pay a living wage to the people of Mexico and work to fix their infrastructure and keep them in their own country.

    Well, you and I know the answer to that question, its not profitable to do that. Neither political party wants to take that on, lets just keep bitching about it and do nothing.

    Today, you and I can debate this issue till the sun burns out, but at the end of the day, its our thirst for cheap prices as American consumers, and the corporate thirst for profits that will leave the illegal immigrant problem at status quo.

    As i said at the begining, I will not disagree with everything you said, I can agree that we both are right and wrong on issues but our insight is dead-on with the fact the "we" have the ability to look at the situation and form an opinion.

    Peace.
     
  16. Mystakilla

    Mystakilla New Member

    Holy smokes, feel like im reading novels here. :w00t:
     
  17. Cole

    Cole New Member

    In all seriousness char makes some valid points, and the more fiscally responsible we learn to be the better off we will be. I for one have a lot to learn as far as learning to invest more wisely etc...

    And for the record I am not a liberal nor a Democrat, but I consider myself an Independent Conservative. That said I do support labor, and obviousley more Democrats support that side, at least to our faces, but they did largely help push NAFTA and other bogus bills.
     
  18. BrownShark

    BrownShark Banned

    Cole,

    Let me clear up something for you. NAFTA was a Republican Project created during Reagans Administration, but not brought to congress until Bush 1, it failed.

    Then in 2000, Clinton took office as well as the Republicans taking control of the house and senate. They brought up the bill again, and after a serious threat of a veto, modified the bill and President Clinton signed it into law.

    NAFTA, CAFTA and other Republican programs were designed to help US industry leave America and take advantage of the poor around the world.

    We could talk for days on this issue, but lets leave it with NAFTA isnt a Democratic bill.

    Peace.
     
  19. Mystakilla

    Mystakilla New Member


    There was considerable opposition in all three countries, but in the United States it was able to secure passage after Bill Clinton made its passage a major legislative initiative in 1993.
     
  20. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    LOL, reread what you just said. The republican version was defeated. Clinton modified it and passed it with a democratic house and senate. Thats a democratic bill now that went through a democratic congress and got signed by a democratic president.