Brazzil

How many Latin and South American countries are against FTAA. Just 3, namely Argentina, Brazil and Venezuela.

Not even Uruguay and Paraguay are against the FTAA. They even said publicly they wish they could open negotiations. But due to the Mercosur laws, they cannot go forward.

As to Morales, the guy who said to be anti-neoliberalism, and that he will be the "nightmare" of the USA has a curious attitude now !
- Now HE wishes to open negotiations with the FTAA because as he said : he has goods to sell.
- As to his anti-neoliberlism, complaining that Bolivia was not paid a fair price for their Gas, can anyone explain why just 1 week ago he signed a new contract with Brazil and argentina for a gas price of US$ 3.25 per mcf....WHILE the free market is at around US$ 8.- per mcf ???????

Why did these 3 junkies not agreed on a fair price...as they are saying all along ???????
Is Us$ 3.25 a fait price when the free market is at US$ 8.00 ?
I understand tqat Argentina and Brazil have all the good bad reasons to buy as cheaply as possible, even at a much lower price than the free market, but they are quite critical then to sell their own goods at the free market price, when that price is even above what their local price is !

If there is a common sense, just explain it clearly !

Therefore and once more, by now, you have only 3 Latin/South Americans countries
against the FTAA, out of a total of around 35 countries or so.
Some of your countries have even already signed the FTAA agreeement and they are more than HAPPY to have done it !

Have the best economies in South America and know what they are doing. If Paraguay and Uruguay, for example, knew how to fuel their economies would they be two of the very poor nations in SA?

Really ?
Does Mexico has not a better economy than
Argentina ?
Is Argentina not in a 12 to 14 % inflation annual course.
And is Chile not better than Brazil and Argentina.
So your ....could be...is only could be....but not factual.
Please review your copy and come back with facts not wrong assumptions.

As to Paraguay and Uruguay, just read again official statements from Lula and Kirchner.
They clearly said that they did not do enough for these 2 countries. And afterall they are very poor because they are member of Mercosur.
And Venezuela has only oil, NOTHING ELSE. Just nothing else.
They dont produce much agriculture, not much more industrial and consumer goods and are non existent in financial services.
If you consider these facts as a WELL RUN COUNTRY, you are not very cleaver and educated.
This said whatever the reasons are, you have
all South American countries that are in favor of the FTAA, except only 3 countries, but by reading here and there it looks like the majority is against the FTAA.

THIS IS SIMPLY A VOLUNTARY LIE !

Cheers.

Brazil :
- has the lowest economical growth rate for the last 3 years, under Lula mandate, of ALL developing countries. Even on an annual basis.
- has the highest interets rates of the world.
- has the second highest Wealth inequality.....in the world....after Sierra
Leone.
- has only 10 % of youths in University.
- the country can export tens of billions of US$ in agriculture, declares itself the garden of the world, but has hunger and under nourrished citizens by the millions and millions, preferring exporting food rather than feed their own citizens.
- reduces foreing debt but simulteanously increase their government debt by a stunning 20 % in ONE YEAR (2005)!
- has around 50 % of the population in poverty with very low income.
- has only 10 % of the active workforce paying income taxes.
- has a very bad tax collection.
- red tape, bureaucracy, archaïc laws, dont favor a healthy development.

Argentina is not a well run country either !
- Otherwise they would have not gone bankrupt not so long ago. If they do better now, it is simply because they did not repay
US$ 100 billions to lenders.
A little easy, knowing it is at least the 4th time they went bankrupt in the past.
- despite their bankruptcy, Argentina still has a 75 % debt to GDP. Not really healthy.....despite having already cancelled unilaterally....US$ 100 billions !!!!!

Come on now ! Be serious, with facts...not with undocumented assumptions !

WHEN YOU PUT IT LIKE THIS... IT IS SOUL-DESTROYING!!!!!!

THIS IS REALLY SORROWFUL!!!! MOURNFUL!!!!

Butcher Bush, the better any nation is!

Long Live Osama

Long Live Osama...???????????????????????
As a muslim I'm certain you would want to.....................
GIVE PEACE A CHANCE.

Dear Readers,

don't miss the point. Without greater participation from all sectors of civil society, trade deals like NAFTA, CAFTA-DR, or even a proposed FTAA seal the special economic privileges of those with the most assets and political influence. No wonder that a majority of Latin American governments are tempted to enter into an FTAA, trading away policy options for an opening of the U.S. market. Regardless of your political perspective, these trades are complicated in terms of assessing who wins and who loses in the long run. The point of the paper is to encourage more folks to participate, so that more and broader interests are treated in negotiations.

ALSO FRIENDS OF STALIN, CASTRO, MAO-TSE-TUNG, AND POL POT,

BUT...

ENEMIES OF PERSONAL FREEDOM, LIBERAL DEMOCRACY, AND THE RULE OF LAW!

Brasil and the US have so much in common they should be working together...not apart.
And thanks to the Muslim above that denounced Osama Bin Laden. Violence is never an answer. I hope Latin America and the US and actually all the world will start to work make the world better for everyone . "Pissing contests" get us nowhere. From an American.

Brazil and the US do have a lot in common. They both killed off the indigeneous population, they practiced slavery for centuries leaving the former slaves and their descendants to fend for themself. Made an art of killing and f-cking people over in the name of their f-cked up God and virgin Mary.

And they call a Muslim "violent" and a "terrorist" killing in the name of his f-cked up God. Violence is THE answer. Europeans have proved that for the past 500 years. That is why today they own all of the world's wealth.

And they call what they do "peace" and "progress". ROFL :grin

I can see both sides of this argument but two wrongs don't make a right.

Slavery is one of those topics that no-one wants to talk about or address and is usually swept under the carpet which makes no sense at all.

When one is dealing with deep unhealed historical wounds, it is never easy coming up with the right solution which at times may seem really painful.

However, from my research, in Europe the countries of France and England are actively trying to put right these cruel acts of their colonial legacy so some Brazilians may find these articles interesting.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/world/europe/4662442.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/world/europe/5442473.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/uk4694896.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4742049.stm.

Hope its useful.

White people DON'T want change. They want to keep the centuries old "whites only" privilege system going. If black people seriously think they want change then think again and think hard. White people own 90% of the world's wealth and they are not going to give it up freely.

Black people are living in a dream world if they think they will ever get white people to "talk" about slavery. They could care less. The Muslims on the other hand are sick of "talk" and are preparing to take action. They are not as deluded as the black people when it comes to seeing the true nature of white people.

increasing numbers of brazilians are entering u.s.a through smuggling routes across mexico. others enter with tourist visas. and overstay.both criminal offences.the overwhelming majority of americans want enforcement of our laws to adress this problem

Talk is cheap. I'm black but I don't see it as that clear cut (black/white- oppressed/opppressor). Indians owned Indians, some blacks owned blacks, the mulattos are not necessarily black, Muslims?? Ha! Muslims were trading African slaves before, that's why a lot of Africans were already Muslim by the time Transatlantic slavery started. Africans traded slaves hence slave "trade". And there are poor whites. It's not that clear cut. There are ethnic conflicts everywhere anyway.