“What happened to NAFTA?”

Facebook friend: “What happened to NAFTA?” 

From my chat with friends on Facebook.

NAFTA  or the North American Free Trade Agreement was "replaced" in July 2020. It is now called USMCA or United States-Mexico-Canada-Agreement. Critics say NAFTA led to job losses and wage stagnation due to many U.S. companies moving to Mexico; obvious reasons. USMCA vowed to fix that. What happened? Then President Donald Trump initiated USMCA but since he lost in the election to Joe Biden in 2020, he wasn't really able to implement the "repair" of the "unfair" trade exchange. 

       What happened when President Biden took over? A record number of illegal migrants crossed the border. I guess that’d be Mexico's response: Send the U.S. more workers, poorly paid and untaxed. And Joe's version of the deal was let 'em in so U.S. firms would have more "convenient" workers, untaxed and measly paid, but paid for by taxpayer money so they could stay while waiting for asylum, if ever. (If they get asylum, they get paid the legal way, of course, as workers). 

       The POTUS at the time of NAFTA’s  inception in 1994 was Bill Clinton. He also signed pretty much the same deal with China in 2000; with Jiang Zemin. Same result. U.S. companies moved to China. Mr Trump tried to fix it via his trade pact with Xi Jinping or modification of the deal in January 2020. But (again) Joe Biden took over as POTUS before the new agreements were implemented. From that point? 

       Mr Biden sent Treasury chief Janet Yellen and State secretary Antony Blinken to Beijing on two separate occasions, twice each, but no "rewrite" or whatever deal was signed or agreed upon. Joe sent a new crack economic team in October, I think, but the CCP opted to wait till November 5 was over. 

       Fast forward, post-November 5. Mr Trump expects to sit with Xi again so before that happens, Donald issues tariff “threats,” which was actually somehow included in the agreed pact in 2020 but Joe opted not to abide by it. Some say it was China that refused to abide etcetera. So Trump's "threats" are basically new pre-chess moves before the negotiation actually happens.
      Meanwhile, back to Mexico: Before he sits, Donald Trump issues tariff threats as well to President Claudia Sheinbaum, pressuring her to stop migrants from crossing to the U.S. from her end. Logic: Migrants would find it hard to cross if they are already stopped at Darien Pass or Rio Grande or the desert leading to the borders. Weeks ago, Mexico responded by stopping two trucks of migrants in Mexico reportedly carrying fentanyl etcetera. (Chess move by Mexico.) 

       We can now add the cartel issue and largely ineffective Merida Initiative (created in 2008) to the insight. Canadian PM Justin Trudeau talked with Mr Trump as well a few weeks ago. Scant details were reported per their talks though. Canada is the U.S. top trading partner. Etc etcetera. 🇺🇸🇨🇦🇲🇽

Free Trade and Stuff.

From my chat with friends on Facebook.

Free trade. Should be. Sans kickass economic and political textbook lingo, let me offer an insight based on history to current geopolitics. Fair trade. Cool. 

       Yet "unfair" ways such as market dominance and inequality of bargaining power or info control have always been dominated by the West. True, (Scottish) Adam Smith coined the term in the 16th century yet those that refused to join the Western monopoly (British East India Company?) were forced to. 

       In Asia, we can refer to the two opium wars in China and Admiral Perry's "gunboat diplomacy" in Japan in the 1800s. And per Bretton Woods of 1944 at the tailend of World War II, that market/negotiating dominance was cemented via IMF and World Bank and the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency. 

       In the Middle East, that market rule was laid out via "arms for oil" as integral chips in bilateral agreements (think the Rockefellers and J. Paul Getty, for example). And so when China formally joined WTO in 2001, BRICS was born in 2009, the Arab world "revolted" via Arab Spring (started 2010) and Russia joined WTO in 2012, Western capitalists got super worried. 

       Add that China's 5 huge state-owned banks balanced IMF etc al and again China gathered 14 Asia Pacific economies and formed the RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) two weeks after Joe Biden won as POTUS in 2020, the West resorted to its old, antiquated tactics to influence trade agreements: Military brinkmanship and proxy war. 💸🏢💸

Left Then, Left Now. Left…

From my reaction to a Facebook post. 

WHEN I left Manila in the late 1990s, I was nursing wounds from the organized Lefts RA/RJ shudder (which still hit me somehow when I was living in New York City, but I digress on that subject). 

       The divide between Left and Right in America is no brainer. Before he died in 2010, Howard Zinn predicted a worst divide that'd rival the 1860s civil war. (That was before Donald Trump was even invited to the Tea Party.) 

       The liberals and progressives are like the old Left vs old Right. The liberals imbue a stance that reminds me a lot of the old Conservative elitism. The ideological overreach is high purity exceptionalism (sic). Meanwhile, the progressives held on to old advocacies, esp. anti war and pro working class. 

       In the last election, the Democratic Party ran on a platform of vilification over tight, clear policies or gut level imperatives. Of course  the "hate Trump" narrative was the anchor as The D “talked" with the working class and his relatively dovish foreign policy playbook appealed to the progressives. 

       The internet, of course, aided in pushing the new Left inwards. They relied on juvenile memes and third hand info over old school groundwork out there, community organizing, tactical alliance pursued calmly. Still, the Left refuses to accept its flaws and continues the insults, post-Nov 5. 

       Conservatives will always be conservative per tradition, add religiosity. But the Left continues to widen its crack without even knowing it or acknowledging it. 🌬💨💓

Chat Stuff: The Shooting of a CEO.

From my chat with friends on Facebook.

I don't think one man's elimination of one highly-paid CEO shook the ruling class at all. Would that mean America's health care now drastically changes (for the people) because Batman could be targeting the CEOs now, one by one? Despite its headline mojo, the recent hit is an "ordinary" crime that falls into ordinary law enforcement or police work. Soon forgotten. 

       Meanwhile, "peaceful organizing" and anti-war advocacy focus on a much larger, global picture. Although I am not very happy with the current peace/anti-war movement, the mere fact that the current super hawkish U.S. government ends its 4-year swath of destruction and deaths via wars--is credited as well to progressive activists. But work doesn't stop even if a semblance of peace or ceasefires happen next year. Less war is possible per legislation and continuous advocacy. 

       A street hit by a vigilante against a symbol of corporate greed or evil is simply an intermission hero worship. The story remains the same in America Inc. ⚖️😒💸

What's up, 2025? Goodbye, hawks?

From my response to Facebook chats etcetera.

JOE Biden and the Washington hawks messed things up in just four years. And these wars are still burning. Donald Trump? Let's see. 2016 was far different from 2024. Joe is hawkish; Donald is mostly dovish. That matters, sure, but the powers (BRICS mainly) that Washington faces right now aren't dumb and they got the (trade) leverage. 

       President Biden's U.S. representation just vetoed a new UN. ceasefire resolution in Gaza etcetera as Joe okayed a new Ukraine offensive with American-procured weapons vs Russia, few days after Vladimir Putin talked with Berlin's Olaf Scholz. Mr Biden leaves these rubble and ruin to The D. Forget the collateral damage?

       But let's see how T plays ball this time. He already provoked some SNL-styled ruckus via his fantastic pre-hires (to get his haters busy) as he obviously strategizes in the backroom with his POTUS part 2 guys, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. 

       My dots: Mr Musk recently met with Iran's U.N. ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani in New York. I believe it was more economic than political. Note: China is Iran's top trade partner. Tehran's new moderate leadership doesn't want a war; economic recovery has been hobbling. 

       Elon and China? It's no brainer. Elon wants their silicon. Vivek, think India. (China and India just shook hands per border dispute.) Of course, the Left would be ecstatic if Trump fails. But I dig watching. ☮️☮️☮️

MY angle: China is Iran's top oil/natural gas buyer. But China doesn't like wars (at least from the Deng Xiaoping years, post-Mao). Bad for business or the CCP's trade expansionism (refer to Belt and Road Initiative).

       Meanwhile, Tehran's moderate leadership, regardless of the Supreme old man, is pressured to fix the economy. Mr Musk has a huge factory in Shanghai. But China's BYD rules the global overall EV market though Elon's Tesla is #1 per brand name. He can't really compete with BYD since China got the silicon (BRICS buddy Russia is #2 in silicon production). 

       So if Elon Musk can help cool the war's heat in the Middle East, everybody will be happy. (Elon gets Chinese silicon as well. Meanwhile, Tehran isn't really hot and high on Mr Trump's mouth. So send Elon and Vivek instead.) ☮️☮️☮️

Privileges and The Privileged.

From my Facebook conversations.

SPEAKING as a relative foreigner in America, from a country which was a colony or commonwealth of the U.S.? As most of my people and all my kin here, entry wasn't so easy. (I won't go into how hard it is to get a visa for a mere 1 month visit.) But we came here already (college-) educated back home yet we still have to upgrade our education so we work/ed three jobs to gain those higher ed to earn better pay. 

       These days, Asians are the most educated and highest earning household in America (better than white Americans) with lesser debts. 

       What is "privilege/d," I ask. Privilege is earned wherever we go. "Privilege" in America? Adherence to the law, acceptance of diversity, respect of individual choices (including who to vote and right to concur or reject or ignore). Yet Privilege is mostly seen with the relative comfort that many enjoy: government safety nets, many consumer products to enjoy, freedom to be individual weirdnesses or coolnesses. 

       In fact, we tend to be so comfortable or pampered in America that we seem to overread, exaggerate or misdefined words of misery that we never really experienced (or life that others have lived through and survived from). Such as Nazi Germany, dictatorship, extreme poverty, misery in war, fascism, genocide, real homelessness etcetera. Privileges drive many to "easy depression" or worse, self-inflicted pain or mass shootings. And 24/7 of unmitigated mental agony and emotional horror because this side of the divide is displeased with how an election went. 

       That grief, by the way, isn't borne out of problematic personal economics in the last 4 years, or deepening funk among the young, or two ongoing wars elsewhere where U.S. taxpayer money "aids" to mow people down and destroy environments. 

       The grief. That grief, I don't understand at all. 

       Many years ago, I rode Greyhounds for three consecutive years, big cities and small towns, to try to understand America via its people, not its politics (only 60 or below percent vote). I felt I knew somehow. I edited Asian newspapers in New York City and Los Angeles, wrote for mainstream papers, and published one in Asheville. I organized events coast to coast. I live with white Americans, and have relationships with American women. But America's loneliness and self-hate still baffle me. 

       Yet when I wake up in the morning, despite the grimness of Facebook drama, all I see are the blessings of America far away from home and family. And a dog and two cats in bed, with me. 🪇🎼🎺

• 
  

Facebook Friend: “Privilege is easier access to resources that others may not have from birth. In a true free market system everyone has equal access to the resources needed to compete.”

• 
  

Indeed. So why are we complaining? Because a new POTUS is up? Yet whoever is in White House, America still controls global trade via several global/regional trade organizations and agreements? Regardless of China or BRICS. I don't think America will ever lose all these privileges just because leadership sits in 4 or 8 years.

       This is America Incorporated (to quote Bruce Springsteen from his old song). Dem prez sits, their own corporate powers rule; GOP prez sits, their own corporate powers rule. All the same. 🪇🎼🎺

Memes and Elon Musks and Stuff.

From my response to Facebook chats etcetera.

SIMPLISTIC, uh huh. 

       <>U.S. economy is aided by consumer activity ("millions of poor people and other people" continually buying. Check "contained" unemployment vis a vis spike in goods prices etcetera). <>U.S./China trade pact of 2000. When major American corporations built factories in China. Now there are 8,000+ U.S.-owned companies operating there. There were 66 American billionaires in 1990; there are 801 now. Last time the U.S. was in trade surplus was in 1975. And the U.S. remains as the world's #1 consumer market while military spending exponentially spikes ($840+ billion vs China's $200+ billion; in 2023, the U.S. spent $916 billion). While minimum wage stays $7.25 but unemployment will not ever go to the 1930s level. 

       <>Washington's political leadership is The Issue. Government can fix it but it chooses not to due to the obvious. Although the rich will get unstoppably richer due to the evolution of global trade, U.S. poor can still be less poor if the government wills it. 

       Read up on China's "Common Prosperity" program and why privately owned Alibaba donated $15.5 billion to the program in 2021, for example. How their billionaires are compelled to share countryside development for the people. China's major industries, except Big Tech, are state-owned. But then Americans hate anything Chinese, so… 💸💵🗽

ELON and EVs. 

       Here are some to ponder: <>Top EV market is China (not the U.S., by a long shot). Top 5 countries with the highest share of EV sales: Norway (80 percent), Iceland, Sweden, Netherlands, China (22 percent). The US, 6 percent. I believe Mr Musk's interest is China and political clout would give him (economic) leverage on the table. Already, he has a Tesla "gigafactory" in China etcetera. But what he needs in abundance are minerals that China and its BRICS and RCEP partners have. Plus silicon, the emerging next standard for EV energy storage. China has the most silicon, lopsidedly owns most of the global supply. Second is Russia. Meanwhile, the top selling EV brand in the world is Tesla Model Y but China's BYD is the top EV seller, overall.

       X is simply Mr Musk's playground. Reason why he bought it. It may not earn him money or he knew he could lose but he believes he can use it to his advantage for political ends. Easier to handle than a major newspaper, I guess? Like Jeff Bezos' Washington Post. Though Elon may buy a newspaper, too. But this guy knows how to juggle business and politics as his buddy. 🚗🚚🚕