Quotes of All Topics . Occasions . Authors
NAFTA is an ancient treaty.
I opposed NAFTA in 1993 and '94.
Mexico is much bigger than NAFTA.
Only Barack Obama consistently opposed NAFTA.
We're absolutely open to making NAFTA better.
I'm an optimist about NAFTA merely being updated.
A scenario without NAFTA is something we have to think about.
NAFTA has been a great success for the three countries involved.
There are lots of things where NAFTA can be updated and upgraded.
E-commerce, telecom - those things have to be captured by the new NAFTA.
If I win, day one, we are going to announce our plans to renegotiate NAFTA.
NAFTA will continue to regulate the relationship between Mexico and Canada.
The precondition to negotiating NAFTA is that we can't go back to the past.
We have to find common grounds. NAFTA is 22 years old. We need to modernize it.
I'm at a point in my life where I'm not going to be writing about NATO or NAFTA.
But for labor groups, there is no debate: Nafta hurt American jobs and household earnings.
Ah, the first NAFTA was really, had a lot of disastrous elements for Canada's environment.
We've lost tens and hundreds of thousands of jobs because of the way NAFTA was negotiated.
It certainly was difficult to sell NAFTA because it's always difficult to sell open markets.
The mistake we made in the 1990s was overestimating the potential of NAFTA's positive impact.
We recognize that NAFTA is a three-country agreement, and we need a three-country negotiation.
We don't want to repeat the unintended consequences that surfaced following the NAFTA agreement.
Obviously, what we had under the original NAFTA was very good. Canada prospered greatly from it.
NAFTA is a trilateral agreement, and it would make a lot of sense to have trilateral discussions.
NAFTA and GATT have about as much to do with free trade as the Patriot Act has to do with liberty.
All you have to do is come to Ohio and say, 'I think NAFTA is a lousy deal,' and everybody cheers.
If what is on the table is something that is not good for Mexico, Mexico will step away from NAFTA.
Since NAFTA was put in place, Mexico has lost 1.9 million jobs and most Mexicans' real wages have fallen.
Since its enforcement, NAFTA has been more than a trade agreement. It has made us think of ourselves as a region.
Donald Trump spoke to the experience of ordinary working people when he dubbed Nafta the 'worst trade deal ever made.'
NAFTA was much more popular among US corporations than GATT, because NAFTA is highly protectionist in ways that GATT is not.
If NAFTA goes away, it's not the end of the world. It certainly is not the end of trade between Mexico and the United States.
I didn't know how we were going to get jobs out of NAFTA, but I tend to be suspicious of these things, like NAFTAs and WTOs and so on.
We know that trade, NAFTA, the free and open trade between Canada and the U.S. creates millions of good jobs on both sides of the border.
Nafta has been responsible for a race to the bottom in standards across North America, with working conditions declining along with wages.
I am going to renegotiate NAFTA. And if I can't make a great deal - then we're going to terminate NAFTA and we're going to create new deals.
My grandfather was the architect behind NAFTA, and that has created so much economic opportunity, not only in our country, but in Latin America.
NAFTA was conceived to avoid discrimination against goods. A U.S.-Mexico treaty on immigration should be devised to prevent discrimination against people.
The real end winner of NAFTA is going to be Mexico because we have the human capital. We have that resource that is vital to the success of the U.S. economy.
As for the expected boon to the Mexican economy, we have seen none of these gains, and instead we have seen NAFTA's detrimental impact on the Mexican workers.
Let me first clarify that NAFTA is a trilateral agreement. The decision of walking away is not of Mexico or Canada. The decision of walking away is of the U.S.
I think NAFTA has been extremely beneficial to the United States, in many ways, but there's no question after 23 years it needs to be updated, to say the least.
We have to bake labor provisions into the core of an agreement. TPP would do that. Under NAFTA, countries had to simply promise to uphold the laws of their own nations.
NAFTA, by itself, will not collapse. The possibility is that the United States leaves the treaty, but the treaty itself would keep regulating relations between Canada and Mexico.
The rules of origin in NAFTA need some tightening. Rules of origin are what let material outside of NAFTA to come in and benefit from all the taxes and tariff reductions within NAFTA.
The whole idea of a trade deal is to build a fence around participants inside and give them an advantage over the outside. So there's a conceptual flaw in that, one of many conceptual flaws in NAFTA.
The effect of Bill Clinton's NAFTA and Hillary Clinton's Colombian Free Trade Agreement has been devastating to Michigan and most of the rest of the country, and accounts for the appeal of Donald Trump.
I think partly the decline in the peso was due to worry about renegotiation of NAFTA, but I think we also need to think about some other mechanisms for making the peso/dollar exchange rate a bit more stable.
Some really large businesses that get a lot from China would like a NAFTA Superhighway system because it would reduce costs for them to transport containers from China and, as a result, increase their margins.
In Illinois, we've seen job losses from agreements like CAFTA and NAFTA. Those agreements didn't help American workers - and they haven't brought improvements to the lives of workers in other countries, either.