Bizzaro World: Life in the modern United States

Fellow Bloggers,

Here it is, my first BLOG entry.  Over time, I will be writing on a whole host of subjects but for today it's just the latest illogical, nonsensical, drivel coming out of the Presidential campaign.  The argument by the Democrat candidates is that NAFTA has been bad for America because it has caused the loss of ~1 Million manufacturing jobs and that it should be modified or even repealed.  As with any issue, my very simple formula is to: 1. Do research to understand the history and relevant data, 2. Form an independent opinion, 3. Seek to understand the agendas at work behind the issue, 4. Educate my friends (and fellow voters) about it.  So here goes.

The data from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, would indicate that not only has NAFTA not been bad for America, labor has had a very good run since it took effect on January 1, 1994.  

Jobs:

Cumulative jobs added from 1994 - 2007 (14yrs post-NAFTA): +26,782,000

Cumulative jobs added from 1979 - 1993  (14yrs pre-NAFTA): +20,912,000

Increase in Total Jobs added since NAFTA: +5,870,000

Cumulative Manufacturing jobs lost from 1994 - 2007 (14yrs post-NAFTA): -2,891,000

Cumulative Manufacturing jobs lost from 1979 - 1993 (14yrs pre-NAFTA): -2,652,000

Increase in Manufacturing Jobs lost since NAFTA: -239,000

Since NAFTA the U.S. economy has CREATED 26,782,000 new jobs, 5,870,000 more than were created in the 14 years before NAFTA.  This represents a 28% increase in the job production rate.

During the same time 2,891,000 Manufacturing were jobs were lost, but only 239,000 more than were lost in the 14 years before NAFTA.  This represents a 9% increase in the manufacturing job loss rate.  Interestingly, the total lost manufacturing jobs were almost fully offset by the creation of 2,836,000 new construction sector jobs in the 14 years following NAFTA.

So the economy grew total jobs at a rate more than three times that which it lost manufacturing jobs.

Unemployment Rate:

The average unemployment rate in the 14 years pre-NAFTA was 7.0%.  In the 14 years since NAFTA the average unemployment rate has dropped to 5.1%.  So since NAFTA there has been a 27% DECREASE in unemployment.

Given these data, what could possibly be the reason for portraying NAFTA as bad for American workers?  The obvious answer is that by giving anti-NAFTA speeches in heavy manufacturing states like Michigan and Ohio the candidates hope to win votes from people who may have lost their jobs due to changes in the export rate and plants shutting down or moving out of country.  But to portray NAFTA as bad for U.S. workers in general is simply not accurate.  Why would we not seek to enter into more trade agreements that support a 28% increase in job growth and a 27% decrease in unemployment?

In my humble opinion,

Freedom Fighter

REFERENCES:

(See http://www.bls.gov/ces/home.htm  B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by major industry sector, historical)