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.

Technology Stocks : COMS & the Ghost of USRX w/ other STUFF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (8770)	11/6/1997 10:54:00 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 22053

Fast track authorization would allow Clinton to negotiate free trade agreements with S. American countries. These treaties would then be voted yea or nay by congress with out amendments. Every president since Nixon has been given this authority. Unions ( who are protectionists for their own selfish reasons )and the Democrats they bankroll are fighting this and may succeed in blocking it. A no vote would be a signal that USA is turning away from a policy of lowering trade barriers. The gradual freeing up of world trade is one reason the world ( and US ) has been prospering the past few years. Remember, one of the things that triggered the 87 event was fear of a trade war with Japan.

To: David Lawrence who wrote (8770)	11/7/1997 10:14:00 AM
From: Jeffery E. Forrest	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 22053

HELP!!! I thought I had ironed this out, but I still keep losing my bookmarks. I guess I'll start from the beginning. HOW DO I SAVE MY BOOKMARKS USING NETSCAPE NAVIGATOR??? Could I have accumulated too many bookmarks? I don't remember this happening up until recently.

To: David Lawrence who wrote (8770)	11/7/1997 12:48:00 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22053

Briefing: The House has delayed its fast track trade vote until the weekend at the request of the White House. Clinton is still scrambling to get the needed votes for passage. We still expect him to succeed, though the vote will obviously be very close. Here's an exerpt from WSJ that explains it better than I did. Fast track is an expedited process used to approve broad trade bills; it doesn't allow amendments or legislative stalling. Other nations would be reluctant to negotiate in earnest with the U.S. without fast track for fear that Congress would rewrite trade deals. Killing fast track wouldn't immediately hurt U.S. trade. Indeed, the U.S. would still be able to pressure Japan and China through trade sanctions. However, the measure could have great symbolic and practical significance. Other nations see it as a symbol of U.S. commitment to open markets. And many multilateral deals, such as creating free-trade zones in South America or Asia, or concluding global pacts on agriculture and patents, must be eligible for fast track or they could be picked apart in Congress. Trade experts worry that a defeat would signify the end of a decades-long expansion of trade and global integration, and mark the beginning of an era of caution in international economics. That could rattle jittery financial markets and embolden protectionist forces around the world that could argue that even the U.S. is rejecting the open-market model. "The vote sends a message," says trade historian I.M. Destler of the University of Maryland. A defeat would signal "a victory for protectionism." Organized labor has fought ferociously against fast track because of fear that expanded trade undermines wages and jobs at home. Unions have argued that trade deals must include labor safeguards that are enforceable by trade sanctions -- a demand rejected by U.S. businesses and their GOP allies.