Maquiladoras (Mexican assembly plants that absorb imported components and produce goods for export) have become the emblem of trade in Mexico. They left the United States for Mexico, hence the debate about the loss of American jobs. Revenues in the maquiladora sector had increased by 15.5% since nafta in 1994. [68] Other sectors have also benefited from the free trade agreement and the share of non-cross-border exports to the United States has increased over the past five years [when?], while the share of exports from border states has declined. This has led to rapid growth in non-cross-border metropolitan areas such as Toluca, Leén and Puebla, all more populated than Tijuana, Ciudad Juérez and Reynosa. The doctrine of mercantilism dominated the trade policy of the great European powers for most of the 16th century until the end of the 18th century. According to the mercantilists, the main objective of trade was to achieve a “favourable” trade balance that would allow the value of its own exports to exceed the value of their own imports. Following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the EU insisted on trade agreements with some Central and Eastern European countries and established some bilateral trade agreements with Middle Eastern countries in the mid-1990s. The United States also continued its own trade negotiations and in 1985 concluded an agreement with Israel and the trilateral North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Mexico and Canada in the early 1990s. Many other important regional agreements have also been adopted in South America, Africa and Asia.
Detailed descriptions and texts of many U.S. trade agreements can be accessed through the Left Resource Center. Clinton signed it on December 8, 1993. The agreement came into force on 1 January 1994. [24] [25] At the signing ceremony, Clinton paid tribute to four people for their efforts to reach the historic trade agreement: Vice President Al Gore, Council of Economic Advisers Chair Laura Tyson, National Economic Council Director Robert Rubin and Republican Congressman David Dreier. [26] Clinton also said, “NAFTA means jobs. U.S. jobs and well-paying American jobs.
If I didn`t believe it, I wouldn`t support this agreement. [27] NAFTA replaced the old Canada-U.S. free trade agreement. There has always been a risk that the end of the transition period would mean the loss of wider international access to the market that we have enjoyed in the context of EU membership.