While free trade can be awful for the reasons you name, it strikes me that most of the legislation offered as "free trade" bills have very little to do with free trade. You can, after all, institute free trade between a group of nations in a very short treaty. Simply list the tariffs to be repealed. These treaties run into reams in practices because they are not merely "free trade" treaties. They are an actual transfer of power from governments and individuals to large corporations. For example, the "takings" clauses which say that any regulation which costs corporations money is a "taking" and deserves to be compensated. (There are very narrow exceptions -- usually decided by very business friendly secret tribunals, in which businesses essentially act as judges in their own case.) In short, takings clauses essentially give business property rights in our bodies -- not a "free trade" position by any reasonable definition of the word. I guess the problem with bringing this up, is that it might seem to imply that a "real" free trade bill would be Ok; when it would still be a disaster... -- Gar W. Lipow 815 Dundee RD NW Olympia, WA 98502