Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (2398)	6/22/2003 12:49:50 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 20773

I think we'd have to go back to Carter. He made some rather bad decisions, but there was nothing shameful about them. He made bad decisions for the best and most noble reasons. :-) I'm not SURE that's better. I can't decide. I think Nixon said that the things that make you a good president are the same things that would make any parent not want their kid to BE president. He might have been right about that. I've always admired Nixon's intelligence (same with Clinton). Most politician's lie- but if they are going to lie, I'd at LEAST like to think they are brilliant, and that they are going to accomplish something great. Bush always seems like such an eejit. I think we can expect him to mess the country up. (even more)

To: Dale Baker who wrote (2398)	6/23/2003 6:08:49 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Interesting that Chile got their free trade agreement eventually despite opposing the US on Iraq. Just another indication that the US is not calling the tune for the international community, but rather playing its part in a multitude of voices and interests. Or maybe some common sense is overcoming the petulant gestures from the White House. Chile: A Giant Step toward Free Trade across the Americas? Wed Jun 11, 8:41 AM ET Add Business - BusinessWeek Online to My Yahoo! By Geri Smith in Santiago, with Paul Magnusson in Washington Osvaldo Rosales, Chile's chief trade negotiator, smiled when he got the long-awaited phone call. The Bush Administration had at last scheduled the signing of the U.S.-Chile free trade agreement for June 6. "We finally have a Pope!" he declared. Santiago had waited a decade for the trade pact and wrapped up talks with Washington late last year. Then, the Administration kept Chile waiting months to ink the agreement because Chile had refused, as a temporary U.N. Security Council member, to back the war on Iraq (news - web sites). Despite the delay, the pact is an important step forward for U.S. policy in Latin America. When George W. Bush entered the White House, one of his top goals was to create a free trade zone from Canada to Chile -- the Free Trade Area of the Americas [FTAA], an idea initiated by a 34-nation Summit of the Americas in 1994. Then came September 11, and Washington had other priorities. But U.S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick kept plugging away. Now, the free-trade initiative is coming back into focus for the Bush team. The region accounts for 37% of all U.S. trade and some $155 billion in American investment. The deal with Chile -- the region's first such accord since the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993 -- could pave the way for a hemispheric trade pact far bigger than NAFTA. Once approved this fall by the U.S. Congress, the U.S.-Chile pact will immediately eliminate tariffs on 85% of goods traded between the two countries and provide protections for U.S. intellectual property exports such as software and pharmaceuticals. Zoellick hopes the deal will prompt hitherto-reluctant Latin countries to move faster to approve a hemisphere-wide pact that would slash tariffs, guarantee investors' rights, and boost American business in the region. Zoellick's strategy is twofold. He is still hoping to meet a 2005 deadline for an agreement for a grand FTAA that would encompass 800 million people and a $13 trillion economy. But it's slow going. Brazil and Argentina, for example, resist granting full intellectual property protection to U.S. companies and want the U.S. to lift curbs on their agricultural and steel exports. So, while working on the FTAA, Zoellick and his team are also negotiating separate deals. After the Chile pact, he aims to sign an agreement with Costa Rica, El Salvador (news - web sites), Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras. "It's an incentive for others to move ahead" with the FTAA, says Deputy USTR Peter Allgeier. Zoellick also seems willing to compromise: In a recent visit to Brasilia, he proposed focusing the hemisphere-wide pact simply on lowering tariffs and guaranteeing investor rights. Thornier issues would be negotiated bilaterally. For Washington, the main thing is that Latin markets keep opening up. Certainly Chile agrees. "Some believe it's perilous for developing countries to sign commercial agreements with industrial countries, but we are proof that it's not," says Chilean Foreign Minister Maria Soledad Alvear. Chile already has free trade agreements with Canada, Mexico, the European Union (news - web sites), and South Korea (news - web sites). Since opening its markets, Chile has doubled the size of its economy and halved its number of impoverished citizens. That's a powerful example for the rest of Latin America.