🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <362eca71$0$6390@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
Steve Hancock  <steveh@shell12.ba.best.com> wrote:
>http://www.freerepublic.com/ (forum)
>
>Topic: White Water
>
>U.S. TRADE DEFICIT WORST SINCE 1992:A
>CONSEQUENCE OF NAFTA&GATT

	Nope.  Here's a quick way to fix our trade deficit:  a deep US
recession!  Yes, if we had a bad recession, our imports would fall and with
them our trade deficit.  Would you be happier then?

>
>Daily Republican- http://www.dailyrepublican.com/
>10-21-98 Howard Hobbs 
>
>Wednesday October 21, 1998 
>
>US Trade Deficit Worst Since 1992
>Consequence of the NAFTA and GATT agreements weakening U.S. in world
>markets.
>
>By Howard Hobbs, Editors' Desk 
>
>WASHINGTON - It is anticipated that the Clinton administration's trade deficit will
>reach or exceed $300 billion.
>
>The Commerce Department reported on Tuesday that the Clinton administration's
>trade deficit worsened by $2.2 billion in August to $16.77 billion. A sharp increase
>in overseas imports and a sudden decline in American exports resulted in the U.S.
>economy's worst performance since Bill Clinton entered the White House in 1992. 
>
>Deficit is the logical consequence of the NAFTA and GATT agreements weakening
>U.S. in world markets. It is much worse than any in recent memory. It is already
>$170 billion for the year.
>
>Conservative estimates place the Clinton trade deficit in 1999 at $300 billion and
>cutting sharply into growth. It is generally considered the political poison pill for the
>administration.
>
>Despite continued growth of the Chinese economy, exports to China have slowed
>dramatically and imports of Chinese-made goods have exploded as the Chicoms
>desperately seek to sell goods here that would ordinarily be sold elsewhere in Asia.
>That manuever increased the monthly U.S. deficit with Beijing to $5.9 billion, a level
>previously only seen in the onerous trade imbalance with Japan. 
>
>Making matters worse, the Chinese communist government in Beijing is showing
>precious little interest in any move to open their markets or to participate in the
>globalism represented in the Clinton sponsored World Trade Organization. 
>
>Until the deal with China fell apart, this week, the Clinton White House had openly
>boasted that China's entry into the WTO was his best foreign policy achievement.
>
>Even more dubious was what happened after the Clinton White House moved to
>help bail-out Mexico. The biggest deterioration in the American trade balance came
>in Mexico, where the peso has weakened markedly as economic recession spread
>through Latin America.
>
>Taking advantage of favorable currency exchange rates of the dollar over the peso,
>the U.S. imported a marked increase in automobiles, auto parts, and cellular
>telecomm equipment from Brazil, Latin America's largest economy. 
>
>The Clinton administration and the International Monetary Fund then discovered
>that Brazil's economy had stalled out. This, produced so much worry in Washington
>that the U.S. and the IMF quickly worked out a complete bailout package of $30
>billion for Brazil, all wrapped up and strategically placed deep inside the Omnibus
>Budget Bill passed by Congress late in the week, without public disclosure.
>
>Meanwhile, major U.S. steel companies are complaining to the Clinton
>administration that Asian countries are dumping inferior steel products on the U.S.
>market at below cost prices forcing U.S. steel workers out of work and U.S. Steel
>mills to shut down. 
>
>Adding insult to injury, Commerce now confirms data that the deficit rose 15.3
>percent to $74.8 billion in August while imports rose to $91.6 billion. With such a
>concrete measure of the effects of Clinton foreign policy on the U.S. and his key
>role in presiding over the global economic downturn no wonder the Clinton White
>House wants to keep this under wraps until after the November 3rd election. 
>
>� Copyright 1998 HTML Graphics By The Daily Republican Newspaper. All
>rights reserved. 
>
>
>
>Posted by: hope () *
>10/21/98 18:14:22 PDT