Last quote about NAFTA
All quotes about NAFTA
NAFTA's been ... improved a dozen times over the past 20 years. There's always opportunities to talk about how we can make it better. It has led to a lot of great jobs for a whole lot of people on both sides of the border and I very much take him at his word when he talks about just making a few tweaks. Because that's what we're always happy to do.
I know and I've always felt for Canada that we recognize that diversity is a great source of strength. I think Canadians have always been interested in the choices Americans make because the choices you make inevitably impact upon us … and how we make sure that we get that balance right between continuing to have a good relationship and standing for the things we believe in is what we expect of ourselves.
We've got auto parts criss-crossing the border six times before they end up in a finished product. You've got over $2 billion a day going back and forth. So, making sure that the border is ... secure but also smooth in its flow of goods and people is essential to good jobs on both sides of the border.
I know and I've always felt for Canada that we recognize that diversity is a great source of strength. I think Canadians have always been interested in the choices Americans make because the choices you make inevitably impact upon us ... and how we make sure that we get that balance right between continuing to have a good relationship and standing for the things we believe in is what we expect of ourselves.
NAFTA's been ... improved a dozen times over the past 20 years. There's always opportunities to talk about how we can make it better. It has led to a lot of great jobs for a whole lot of people on both sides of the border and I very much take [US President Donald Trump] at his word when he talks about just making a few tweaks. Because that's what we're always happy to do.
Mexico is now maybe our top customer for American poultry -- in the whole world. And Canada maybe is among the last. Among the worst. (In Canada) they slap a tariff -- I think it's something like a 200- to 250-per-cent tariff -- on poultry. It takes away a lot of incentive to try (our) Delmarva chicken when you have that kind of a tariff. Your thoughts on fixing that kind of imbalance if we have the chance to renegotiate NAFTA?
There was a sugar mill...that was loading a ship headed to refineries in the United States and when it was ready to leave the port, we suddenly learned that the export contracts were being canceled.
The prospects are for additional gas supply only to continue to increase, and right now we see over the next five years, at least, relatively flat prices for natural gas globally, so the question then becomes, Where does American natural gas fit in?
It will give them an opportunity to bring international technology and capital in to develop Mexico's deep water. Pemex never could have developed that. In the United States, there's been a huge benefit in the sale of natural gas to Mexico and also in the renewable-energy sector. Many of these companies buy GE equipment, for example. GE is a massive player here, particularly in wind turbines, so there's been a very significant boost to American commercial interests as a result of the development of natural gas and the power sector.
There's always opportunities to improve trade deals. NAFTA has been improved a dozen times over the past 20 years.
We have a very outstanding trade relationship with Canada. We'll be tweaking it. We'll be doing certain things that are going to benefit both of our countries. It's a much less severe situation than what's taken place on the southern border.
It makes no sense to introduce an agreement with border restrictions or tariffs.
The moment that they say, We're going to put a 20 percent tariff on cars,' I get up from the table.
Are we in trouble? I don't think so. Mexico has a world class team of negotiators. The U.S. shouldn't do too bad for themselves, but Mexico is not a pushover.
A new crisis is an opportunity to restructure, have better institutions. Be calm. Patience. Sell and inform about the benefits of NAFTA. We only hear the negatives, we only hear the bad guys talking.
We very much recognize that NAFTA is a three-nation agreement and were there to be any negotiations, those would be three-way negotiations. We all have to collectively be careful not to get ahead of ourselves.
NAFTA is a three-party agreement and any conversation we have regarding that ... will be a three-party conversation; it has to be.
Nothing in the new NAFTA should be a step backward. We will definitely not include any type of trade management measures, like quotas, or open the Pandora's box of tariffs. That will be disastrous in any process moving forward.
The fact that the President met with Congressional leaders on Feb. 2 and discussed NAFTA renegotiation does not mean the U.S. clock has started.
I can't see how it's possible at all. It would be very complicated to do and I don't think Mexico would ... ever go along with it.
It is very hard to tease apart the elements of the deal that I suppose Trump might think are a disaster with Mexico while leaving it intact with Canada.
"There have been times where we have differed in our approaches and that's always been done firmly and respectfully. The last thing Canadians expect is for me to come down and lecture another country on how they choose to govern themselves,". "Goods and services do cross the border each day...we have to allow this free flow of goods and services and we have to be aware of the integration of our economies".
"It's a much less severe situation than what's taking place on the southern border. On the southern border, for many, many years the transaction was not fair to the United States". "The last thing Canadians expect is for me to come down and lecture another country on how they chose to govern themselves".
"The last things Canadians expect is for me to come down and lecture another country on how they choose to govern themselves,"
[TPP] was at the top of Canada's agenda because they wanted to be a part of that new market. And the irony was that the Trans-Pacific Partnership effectively was the opportunity for the three North American partners to modernize and update NAFTA.
Canada is our largest export destination, and Mexico is our second largest. And I think the prime minister does not want that to be destroyed. There are a lot of things we could do to make ourselves more competitive, but let's not tear down the structure that has given so much to each of us. Our most efficient supply chains are in North America. You ask the state of Washington, What do you import?' And they say airplane parts. What do you export?' Airplanes.
If we were to cut off our supply chains for imports, we would be far less competitive in terms of our exports.
What a difference eight months and a new U.S. president make. Today, with NAFTA under threat, Canadians have radically changed the way they feel about the deal in a relatively short period of time.
It's a smart thing if Canada proposed this. It takes attention off of NAFTA. And from Trump's point of view, it contributes to softening Trump's image, and he's got a problem with women.
"Canada will have no position on the tax reform plan or the border adjustment tax idea until it is fully formed and is a concrete proposal,". "But I did make clear that we would be strongly opposed to any imposition of new tariffs between Canada and the United States; that we felt tariffs on exports would be mutually harmful to both Canada and the United States, and if such an idea were ever to come into being Canada would respond appropriately.". "I really felt I was pushing on an open door with everyone I spoke to".
Withdrawing from NAFTA would be devastating for the workers, businesses, and economies of our countries. Beneath all the debates, arguments, and attention-grabbing headlines, I think our leaders across the board understand this. To address areas open for modernization or improvement, we would insist on doing it in a way that doesn't disrupt the $1.3 trillion worth of trade that depends on NAFTA.
You don't create jobs by dismantling a relationship that works well.
First, let's do no harm. Let's preserve, protect, and advance the robust trade that supports both of our economies and millions of our workers.
AMLO is a populist, nationalist, anti-globalization, anti-NAFTA candidate, not unlike Trump himself. Regardless of his economic or other leanings (which veer toward leftist populism), the two personalities would make bilateral compromises all the harder.
We've gone from an outright short late last year to an overweight position relative to the index, just because there's a lot of bad news priced in. The real exchange rate is very, very cheap relative to history, and at this point, the bond yields are competitive with the higher yielding countries in EM.
The peso is cheap certainly and absent a big unfavorable change to NAFTA, you will make great money investing in Mexican bonds. But a change to NAFTA that's unfavorable, and who knows.
We said, If you're serious about repealing NAFTA, we're with you. If you're serious about taking on China, we're with you. If you're serious about rebuilding America's infrastructure, we're with you. So if the president's prepared to take that on, he can consider us an ally on that, and we'll consider him an ally.
I would like to speed it up if possible. You're the folks who can do it. We are working very, very hard and will be very soon, as soon as we get the go-ahead – we have the 90-day period that we have to think about.
We supported TPP strongly and wish [the president] would have embraced it. Protectionism isn't good for U.S. workers, consumers or the economy. That's the fear of changing NAFTA and walking away from TPP.
This came right out of left field. This nothing to do with Trump, but it has everything to do with NAFTA. Everything we've been led to understand is that by concentrating the Equinox production on our Ingersoll facilities, everything was going to be fine. There is a solution. They should halt plans immediately to shift the Terrain to Mexico.
The 20 percent tax, the idea that this is not about jobs as much as it is just a spat between to countries that have had very good relations. The spat should be about NAFTA. The spat should be about the way we set up trade with the Mexicans. I don't think the spat should be about not talking to each other, which is what Vicente Fox was saying.
This came right out of left field. This is NAFTA, this has nothing to do with Trump, but it has everything to do with NAFTA.
The main barrier to an import tax like that is that it could be in violation of NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement] or WTO [World Trade Organization] rules. And that's where the Trump team could potentially get more creative and declare this border wall as a national security issue.
There's an implicit threat that the U.S. still has more room to escalate, up to and including the potential repealing of NAFTA, which Trump technically has the executive authority to do. That comes with political, economic costs and even social costs, especially if we see people mobilize around this issue.
There are certainly risks to this trade as they go through the 22 chapters of Nafta. We have to clarify what that might entail.
If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting, . It has been a one-sided deal from the beginning of NAFTA (The North American Free Trade Agreement) with massive numbers of jobs and companies lost.
We're working on a tax reform Bill that will reduce our trade deficit, increase American exports and will generate revenue from Mexico that will pay for the wall, if we decide to go that route. I will not allow the citizens or the taxpayers of the United States to pay the cost of this defective transaction, NAFTA, one that should have been renegotiated many years ago, except that the politicians were too preoccupied to do so.
If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting (with Mexico's President Enrique Pena Nietro). The US has a $60 billion trade deficit with Mexico. It has been a one-sided deal from the beginning of NAFTA with massive numbers… of jobs and companies lost. If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting.
The U.S. has a 60 billion dollar trade deficit with Mexico. It has been a one-sided deal from the beginning of NAFTA with massive numbers.. ... of jobs and companies lost. If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly needed wall, then it would be better to cancel the upcoming meeting. Beginning today, the United States of America gets back control of its borders. We are going to get the bad ones out. The criminals and the drug dealers and gangs and gang members and cartel leaders. The day is over when they can stay in our country and wreak havoc.
We're going to start renegotiating on NAFTA, on immigration, and on security at the border. And Mexico has been terrific, actually terrific. And the president has been a really very amazing. And I think we're going to have a very good result for Mexico, for the United States, and for everybody involved.
Anybody ever hear of NAFTA? I ran a campaign somewhat based on NAFTA. But we're going to start renegotiating on NAFTA, on immigration and on security at the border, and Mexico has been terrific, actually, terrific. And the president has been really very amazing, I think we're going to have a very good result for Mexico, for the United States, for everybody involved.
What we want is to maintain free access for Mexican products, without restrictions, without tariffs and quotas. Any agreement that is proposed that infringes or endangers Mexico's social and economic interests and which harm the dignity of our nation will be unacceptable.
There could be no other option. Go for something that is less than what we already have? It would not make sense to stay, . The strategy for this treaty needs to be one in which everyone wins. It's impossible to sell it here at home if there aren't clear benefits for Mexico.
It's beyond all questions that should restrictions be made to the NAFTA area, they would first deal a significant blow to the U.S. economy. By putting up tariffs or import taxes, the U.S. would shoot themselves in the foot over the long term.
We have security agreements, both continental and multi-lateral -- Mexico does not. Mexico has a huge border problem with the United States in terms of immigration and drugs -- Canada does not.
If that's the case, there are 4 items that could be significant: the renegotiation of NAFTA, the introduction of a possible border tax, the straight imposition of tariffs and the labelling of China as a currency manipulator.
We are going to have trade, but we're going to have one on one. And if somebody misbehaves, we'll send them a letter of termination. 30 days and they will either straighten it out or we're gone.
Canada finds itself, frankly, in a really very special status. I don't think he should be enormously worried because Canada is held in very high regard.
All you have to do is stay. This is not about party, this is not about ideology. This is about country, our country. It's about serving the American people. We're going to start some negotiations having to do with NAFTA.
A White House official tells NBC News that as early as Monday, President Trump is expected to sign an executive order that will put in motion the renegotiation of NAFTA. President Trump is also expected to sign an executive order announcing his intention to withdraw from TPP, a trade agreement among 11 other Pacific Rim countries.
We are going to start renegotiating on NAFTA, on immigration and on security at the border. The regulations are going to be cut massively, and the taxes will be cut with them.
Great thing for the American worker, what we just did. We've been talking about this a long time. We're going to start renegotiating on NAFTA, on immigration, and on security at the border. I think we're going to have a very good result for Mexico, for the United States, for everybody involved. It's really very important.
Busy week planned with a heavy focus on jobs and national security. Top executives coming in at 9:00 A.M. to talk manufacturing in America. This is not about party, this is not about ideology. This is about country, our country. It's about serving the American people. We're going to start some negotiations having to do with NAFTA.
If Trump renegotiates NAFTA, as he has said he would, activity in these states would likely come under pressure.
They haven't said anything specific about any real problems that they have with us.
I don't think Canada is the focus at all. But we are part of NAFTA, and there are discussions that need to be had, and we'll be having them over the next few weeks.
We're going to start some negotiations having to do with NAFTA. Anybody ever hear of NAFTA? I ran a campaign somewhat based on NAFTA. But we're going to start renegotiating on NAFTA, on immigration, on security at the border.
Quite a bit of trade can be done through executive action, particularly NAFTA.
This is a man who has negotiated all his life. We have to be open to re-negotiating some points of NAFTA – to Mexico's advantage.
Anything that touches NAFTA could be considered to be good for people who are in the workforce if you're not looking at the later consequences of having to pay more for a certain product.
I think most people acknowledge NAFTA was negotiated a long time ago, that we should reopen this agreement. I'm optimistic that we can renegotiate that deal (in a way) that's both advantageous to us and advantageous to Mexico. That it's a win-win for both countries.
Tomorrow's going to be trade day, NAFTA, TPP withdraw and some stronger enforcement of trade deals.
Plan B is to look at a couple of local (U.S.) producers - we've looked but didn't approach them yet -- to see if there is any change in policy, in NAFTA or taxes. We'd be looking at this avenue pretty fast.
While I think NAFTA is ripe for modernization in labor practice, environmental practice and e-commerce, it also represents a boon to the U.S. economy. It benefits the U.S. consumer and creates U.S. jobs.
They're being kept alive by state-owned banks. To me that looks and feels and tastes a lot like artificial subsidies. I am not anti-trade. I am pro-trade. But I am pro-sensible trade, not trade that is to the disadvantage of the American worker and to the American manufacturing community.
As to Canada and Mexico, the President-elect has made no secret in his public remarks, nor have I, that NAFTA is logically the first thing for us to deal with. We ought to solidify relationships the best way we can in our own territory before we go off into other jurisdictions.
We're meeting with the prime minister of Canada and we will be meeting with the president of Mexico, who I know, and we're going to start some negotiations having to do with NAFTA. The president has been really very amazing and I think we are going to have a very good result for Mexico, for the United States, for everybody involved. It's very important.
Most of what's driving the peso today is [still] policy, what you might hear [at] the Trump press conference.
You may see the dollar reverse quite a lot if the press conference disappoints. Right now the market is pricing in a lot of positives.
The prospect of trying to put some trade barriers up between those countries is extremely troubling. Can you imagine adding a border tax seven times to these products that are passing back and forth between our borders? It would add enormous cost that no one can bear.
To be honest, there's very little that Mexico itself can do. I think the power here lies with the U.S. companies lobbying the Trump administration and saying: wait a minute, there's about 5 million jobs in the United States riding on this relationship with Mexico, and if we increase tariffs or walk out of NAFTA, those jobs will be at stake.
This is very different from going to a Ford plant – which actually wasn't about to move – and saying, Listen, we're going to keep these jobs here.' To bring those jobs back, you have to make it so it is punitive to make anything in Mexico. That means you either have to change the terms of NAFTA or scrap NAFTA.
It's not like Republicans are necessarily now going to turn on NAFTA. Trump will lose it. He will not be able to change NAFTA overnight.
I'm prepared to sit down and talk to him about trade. NAFTA is a problem. I think his position on trade is right on.
At the end of the day it's clear that the amount of U.S. investment in Mexico based on NAFTA will prevail.
Today there is a global flow of parts and technology. A lot of those Mexican-assembled units contain a very, very vast majority of U.S.-made mechanical components like engines and transmissions that are exported from the United States.
I have every confidence that this is a campaign promise that is designed to be broken.
Fundamentally, you have to look at the brand. Where is the brand located? Where is the engineering conducted? Where is the value added of the design done? Where does profitability return to for reinvestment?
We also export cars to Mexico and to Canada, so my guess is if he wants to look at unfair trade … he would need to look at the Germans before anything else, because we have a 10 percent tariff going into the EU, which hits all American-produced cars.
A lack of jobs could be a factor. There aren't enough of them.
We are NAFTA on wheels.
Before shale, the U.S. was importing a lot more gas from Canada.
Mexico can serve as a balance. It's important regionally because right now you have a whole bunch of growth in production in the Northeast, and now you have constraints on that production getting out. The fact you have Mexican demand increases can balance out where the supply might come from in the medium term.
It could very well be a case where there's some tweaking around on [NAFTA], as opposed to a big breakdown. Certainly, I am concerned a little bit about the Mexican economy. It's been a big driver of demand for U.S. gas. The supply chains are very well integrated between the three countries. Changing the rules of the game on account of NAFTA would be pretty challenging not just for Mexico but for U.S. companies.
Mexico is building some renewable projects along the border and that power is going to the U.S. It really is becoming more and more integrated. Virtually all of Canada's surplus oil goes to the United States. The United States is producing surplus crude oil. … It's refined and it goes to Mexico.
Mexico has become a very important market for U.S. gas producers and without it, we'd be looking at lower prices.
It's not so simple to say we're going to renegotiate the trade deals. We set up the system to create those inter-linkages. You just can't overnight legislate or executive order that away. If you try to do that, it's going to have negative economic impacts, not just for the economies on the border but for these specific industries, like energy.
If it wasn't coming in, Maine would run dry.
Without exports to Mexico, the U.S. market would not be where we are right now. It would be way lower. Producers may not be drilling as many wells. Without Mexico, it would be tough.
Mexico had a pretty high cost of power in the past, because the country used oil as a power-generation fuel, and natural gas there is more expensive because of pipeline bottlenecks. We would not be surprised if exports to Mexico by 2020 by pipeline would still be larger than U.S. LNG exports.
Instead of Mexico spending a fortune building new refineries, they are buying from the U.S., and it turns out energy exports are now an important contributor to the jobs in our economy.
This speaks to how extensive the energy cooperation is between these countries. It's almost as if the borders aren't really there. If you look at Canada and the U.S., they are part of the same cross-border electricity reliability councils for some regions. … It's not just natural gas, it's power lines, hydroelectricity and those are long-standing agreements and trade.
People just don't realize how integrated we are with these two countries.
The China-Mexico relationship is back on again. The election of President Trump and the associated threat to North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) probably was one driver for (Pena Nieto) to position Mexico to diversify its foreign economic engagements.
We've won big with NAFTA.
Trade between Mexico and the United States did not begin with NAFTA.
We're going to have less open economies; we're going to have trade barriers going up; I think Donald Trump is going to be looking at NAFTA, he's going to be looking at China very hard, and those were very clear parts of his campaign.
That means tighter financial conditions here in Canada, including the housing market, which was already subject to tougher macro-prudential regulations.
Even if trade isn't disrupted from Canada, the uncertainty over our trade position with the U.S. will, if anything, delay the turn in capital spending.
We might get some spillover effects, but I don't think it would necessarily be enough to overcome some of the uncertainty or anxieties about U.S. trade policy.
A bigger issue is these are really simple solutions that are being given [by Trump], that 'let's cancel NAFTA, let's cancel TPP and somehow that's going to get things okay in our country'. It's not going to be that simple and that worries me more.
Companies will quietly admit that (the North American Free Trade Agreement) is now 25 years old and needs updating. Of course, if we're updating or amending NAFTA, people get nervous.
In a renegotiation, one side can come in with requests, but the other side is going to expect concessions. We need to know what we're going to ask for and what we can give.
If U.S. workers are more expensive than Mexican workers, the only way to level the playing field is to do things that raise costs in Mexico.
There is no precedent in free trade negotiations for one side raising tariffs more than the other.
Closed and inclusive arrangements are not the right choice.
I personally think that President Trump will be very much like chairman of the corporation Trump is. He's a flexible business guy. He's going to realize he has a role to play.
Even if the United States doesn't want to engage in free trade, President Trump needs to know other countries do.
My main message to you ... and the message I delivered in Europe is don't just assume the worst.
There are elements that could be included, issues to do with the environment ... the labor issue is one I think that wasn't incorporated in NAFTA, just to mention some chapters that could be included in this modernization.
It (the North American auto industry) really only works if there are no borders. A revision of NAFTA for the auto sector - there's likely zero support for it.
Mexico is still an important market for Canadian exporters and bilateral business, but if anything did happen with NAFTA, we expect the Canadian government would be able to, fairly quickly, negotiate a deal with both Mexico and Canada.
We spoke to our members, and based on trade stats alone, the priority has to be the U.S. market.
Mexico's public debt ... is something we are revising and discussing with the market.
And we're facing this situation with well-capitalized banks.
The problem is that there is still high uncertainty and a lack of information on how much President-elect Trump will push on NAFTA revisions when he's in the White House.
It's just too early to say what changes would make President-elect Trump happy.
We both agreed that we have to work towards a relationship of trust, of a shared future, because our countries are highly important one to another.
Nieto's response to Trump's victory is the correct strategy. He has to strike a friendly tone. This is not the moment to be confrontational.
We're ready to talk so we can explain the strategic importance of NAFTA for the region. Here we're not talking about … renegotiating it, we're simply talking about dialogue.
We should look to having sufficient clarity, as quickly as possible, on what kind of proposals could come from the United States with regard to relations with Mexico. But we must also be aware, it's not very probable there will be such a radical proposal because the benefits are for both economies.
If Americans want to talk about NAFTA, I'm more than happy to talk about it.
We're ready to talk so we can explain the strategic importance of Nafta for the region. Here we're not talking about ... renegotiating it, we're simply talking about dialogue. Today the world is not competing by country, it's competing by region.
I think it's important that we be open to talking about trade deals. If the Americans want to talk about NAFTA, I'm more than happy to talk about it.
Even if they specifically target NAFTA, the implications for the Mexican economy would be relatively mild.
We'll need to talk with the others to change the limiting clause that meant us having to wait until the United States had completed the approval process.
There haven't been any effects so far because I think the economic players are waiting to see how campaign rhetoric translates into public policy.
We can't anticipate anything because we'd be anticipating something that wouldn't suit anybody, which is a trade war.
If you have a president who wants to renegotiate NAFTA then that can create uncertainty on exports and on capital expenditures. No company is going to make a big bet on Canadian investment as long as they don't know the rules of the game.
When the dust settles will depend on the reaction of Trump and the Fed. Markets have been sent into a frenzy because of poor positioning and the worrying rhetoric of Trump in the lead-up to the election. If both respond quickly, we could see some calm return the markets relatively quickly, as we did after June 23. Whether this applies to the peso will very much depend on what he has to say regarding NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement).
Dismantling NAFTA at this point would be pretty hard to do.
If he managed to pull off a surprise win tomorrow, you need to sell Kansas City Southern and the iShares Mexico Capped ETF. KSU in particular would make a terrific Trump short.
I would say that Cemex is the perfect example of the kind of company that gets hurt if Trump wins the White House, except for one thing – the wall.
The thing to keep in mind is that if we toss NAFTA down the train, it won't just be Mexican exporters that get hurt. Their whole economy will be put through the meat grinder, and the value of the peso is going to plummet.
In the case of a Trump victory, (the) Mexican peso will experience a sharp fall as anti-Mexican sentiment from Trump is likely to depress investor optimism about the future of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and the benefits that accrue to Mexico from free trade.
This isn't like the days when NAFTA was passed. Feedback comes almost instantaneously, which helps with crafting trade agreements and policies.
The profits are this.
The TV industry is characterized by particularly dense webs of cross-border supply chains with Mexico and China. There'd be chaos and a trade war.
The main reason for that is so the producers can respond quickly to fluctuations in demand.
It's pretty crazy that I'm disadvantaged for using U.S. labour.
You could never do that in America – at least not easily.
If Trump does try to blow up NAFTA, it will hurt Mexico. No question.
I hope when he sits down with the Mexican president, that the Mexican president will tell him how important NAFTA is for both of our countries, to tell him how those crossing the border aren't Mexico's worst. That they aren't rapists. To tell him this is a complicated issue.
It seems that both candidates would likely look to restrict trade to some extent. Trump appears to be the more severe in this regard, proposing tariffs on key trade partners and leaving NAFTA unless there were meaningful concessions. Clinton hasn't suggested equally aggressive tactics but has also said she would renegotiate NAFTA.
The possibility of a Republican win in the U.S. elections is certainly a factor that triggers weakness of the Mexican peso. Expect a lot of volatility because we don't know what will happen. Before, the U.S. elections were about immigration – and now immigration is second place in the agenda in the concerns or risk ranks. From the Mexican standpoint, the concern is NAFTA and whether the winner will revise the terms or the whole agreement.
Hillary Clinton can't tell a good trade deal from bad one. She was for NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement], which has cost almost a million jobs. The one that [Clinton] boasted in her economic speech that she went against was Central American Free Trade Agreement. That free trade deal worked out well for the U.S. in the form of trade surpluses with CAFTA countries.
Trump's actually been saying for decades that he thinks U.S. alliances are more of a burden than an asset, he's been saying for decades he against free trade deals like NAFTA. He's very volatile and contradictory day to day but he has been actually saying this for years.
Every policy that has failed this city and so many others is a policy supported by Hillary Clinton. Trade deals like NAFTA, signed by her husband, that have shipped your jobs to Mexico and other countries.
I think we are very troubled by the comments about trade. The arguments against trade that we've heard from the two candidates make for great politics. They make for terrible economics.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, before NAFTA went into effect, there were 285,000 auto workers in Michigan. Today, that number is only 160,000.
Though Bernie is exhausted and has given up on his revolution, many of his voters still want to keep up the fight. I expect that millions of Bernie voters will refuse to vote for Hillary because of her support for the War in Iraq, the invasion of Libya, NAFTA and TPP, and of course because she is totally bought and sold by special interests.
We've beaten the dickens out of the NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement]. But the fact is it's created all kinds of jobs here the United States.
We're going after Hillary Clinton. She will not be a great president, she will not be a good president, she will be a poor president. She doesn't understand trade. Her husband signed perhaps in the history of the world the single worst trade deal ever done. It is called NAFTA.
The trade regime that we are living in today, that has devastated this state ... has not changed since NAFTA. And that's what this is really about.
TransCanada has undertaken a careful evaluation of the Administration's action and believe there has been a clear violation of NAFTA and the U.S. Constitution in these circumstances.
We have to make responsible, to make criminally responsible everybody who is guilty over this fire and who is guilty of breaking the law.