Comments on: Bush’s Blast against Latin America’s “False Populism” May Be Getting It All Wrong http://www.coha.org/populism/#utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=populism COHA is an NGO specialized in monitoring Latin American and Canadian Relations for more than 30 years... Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:53:19 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Hugo Fitch http://www.coha.org/populism/comment-page-1/#comment-355 Hugo Fitch Sun, 18 Nov 2007 16:58:15 +0000 http://www.coha.org/2007/11/15/populism/#comment-355 Interesting, but I dislike the all-too-frequent use of the term 'populist' when referring to LatAm leaders, as it seems to suggest they don't somehow deserve their support, or are simply delivering policies to appeal to the short term demands of their electorates. 'Popular' would be more appropriate, and would also cast Bush into a more accurate light.. These deals will never help LatAm, they will just sell US products and slave labour production to these countries. In Venezuela, a country with just about every agricultural climate available, the shops are full of massively over-priced imported foods. This is why these countries need reform, they have never had the chance to protect their internal markets from outside forces long enough for them to develop. I now live in the UK and my local supermarket is about 35% cheaper than in Venezuela, factor in minimum wages calculations and it's about 1000%. 'Free Trade', which the west does not practice itself, has gifted this situation to the poor and the hungry of the south. The people, politically divided, are now waking up and informing themselves across all these countries. The debates are vitriolic but at a much higher level than usually found in mainstream western press. Interesting, but I dislike the all-too-frequent use of the term ‘populist’ when referring to LatAm leaders, as it seems to suggest they don’t somehow deserve their support, or are simply delivering policies to appeal to the short term demands of their electorates. ‘Popular’ would be more appropriate, and would also cast Bush into a more accurate light..

These deals will never help LatAm, they will just sell US products and slave labour production to these countries. In Venezuela, a country with just about every agricultural climate available, the shops are full of massively over-priced imported foods. This is why these countries need reform, they have never had the chance to protect their internal markets from outside forces long enough for them to develop. I now live in the UK and my local supermarket is about 35% cheaper than in Venezuela, factor in minimum wages calculations and it’s about 1000%.

‘Free Trade’, which the west does not practice itself, has gifted this situation to the poor and the hungry of the south. The people, politically divided, are now waking up and informing themselves across all these countries. The debates are vitriolic but at a much higher level than usually found in mainstream western press.

]]> By: It isn’t supposed to work this way… « The Mex Files http://www.coha.org/populism/comment-page-1/#comment-346 It isn’t supposed to work this way… « The Mex Files Sun, 18 Nov 2007 01:23:36 +0000 http://www.coha.org/2007/11/15/populism/#comment-346 [...] automobiles) to the U.S., there isn’t much for the Bush administration to sell except rhetoric: Politicians find it exceedingly difficult to explain free trade’s virtues without drowning [...] [...] automobiles) to the U.S., there isn’t much for the Bush administration to sell except rhetoric: Politicians find it exceedingly difficult to explain free trade’s virtues without drowning [...]

]]> By: Humberto Benavides http://www.coha.org/populism/comment-page-1/#comment-326 Humberto Benavides Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:24:51 +0000 http://www.coha.org/2007/11/15/populism/#comment-326 Instead of the US government wasting their time and money trying to destabilize and sabotage democratically elected governments in South America which results in nothing but bad will, the United States may be wise to let these countries become socially and economically strong, as the whole of Latin America is a natural consumer of US exports the job sector can only benefit so much in both sides of the continent this I think is what means to be progressive, to do fair business for mutual benefit. Instead of the US government wasting their time and money trying to destabilize and sabotage democratically elected governments in South America which results in nothing but bad will, the United States may be wise to let these countries become socially and economically strong, as the whole of Latin America is a natural consumer of US exports the job sector can only benefit so much in both sides of the continent this I think is what means to be progressive, to do fair business for mutual benefit.

]]> By: Azucena Fillo Haro http://www.coha.org/populism/comment-page-1/#comment-318 Azucena Fillo Haro Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:17:16 +0000 http://www.coha.org/2007/11/15/populism/#comment-318 Free Trade Agreements by most Latin America countries seem to favor the U.S. while imposing conditions detrimental to countries trying to export their products into the U.S. markets. I live in Panama and I do not support the FTA with the U.S. since it will hurt our farmers making us more dependent on U.S. goods. A country that cannot support itself is a country dependent on others. A sign of weakness. I favor our own production to supply most of our goods. Free Trade Agreements by most Latin America countries seem to favor the U.S. while imposing conditions detrimental to countries trying to export their products into the U.S. markets.

I live in Panama and I do not support the FTA with the U.S. since it will hurt our farmers making us more dependent on U.S. goods. A country that cannot support itself is a country dependent on others. A sign of weakness. I favor our own production to supply most of our goods.

]]>