"Proponents of the Central America Free Trade Agreement have conveniently ignored this fundamental fact: the effect of trade on incomes in Central America and how to alleviate the adverse consequences of trade liberalization on the poor"
About this Quote
Lynch’s line is a warning shot at the glossy, press-release version of free trade: the promise that lowering tariffs will automatically lift everyone. The key word is “conveniently,” a quiet accusation that omission isn’t accidental but strategic. He’s not just disputing the economics; he’s challenging the sales pitch. By framing the “fundamental fact” as two linked questions - what trade does to incomes, and what happens to the people who lose - he forces proponents to own the full distributional story, not just the aggregate gains.
The intent is legislative and political: re-center CAFTA as a choice with winners and losers rather than an inevitability draped in technocratic inevitability. He’s asking, implicitly, why the burden of adjustment is treated as collateral damage instead of a design problem. That second clause (“how to alleviate...on the poor”) is doing heavy moral work. It positions social protections, labor standards, and transition assistance not as after-the-fact charity but as the missing half of the policy.
Context matters. In the early 2000s, CAFTA debates in Washington were a proxy fight over NAFTA’s legacy: booming trade volumes alongside wage pressure, precarious work, and weakened bargaining power. Lynch taps into that hangover. The subtext is that “free” trade isn’t free for workers without leverage, and that championing liberalization while ignoring compensatory measures isn’t economic realism - it’s politics that outsources its human costs.
The intent is legislative and political: re-center CAFTA as a choice with winners and losers rather than an inevitability draped in technocratic inevitability. He’s asking, implicitly, why the burden of adjustment is treated as collateral damage instead of a design problem. That second clause (“how to alleviate...on the poor”) is doing heavy moral work. It positions social protections, labor standards, and transition assistance not as after-the-fact charity but as the missing half of the policy.
Context matters. In the early 2000s, CAFTA debates in Washington were a proxy fight over NAFTA’s legacy: booming trade volumes alongside wage pressure, precarious work, and weakened bargaining power. Lynch taps into that hangover. The subtext is that “free” trade isn’t free for workers without leverage, and that championing liberalization while ignoring compensatory measures isn’t economic realism - it’s politics that outsources its human costs.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Stephen
Add to List
