them to civilian automobiles. By the time David got hired, Breed was selling almost $800 million a year in air bags, sensors, steering wheels, seat belts and other car parts to just about all the major automakers. By the late Nineties, it had developed a strategy to buy up factories in both the United States and Mexico, moving production from north to south of the border. In addition to Davids workplace, Breed closed five other auto-parts factories across the U.S. in 1997, sending at least a thousand American jobs to Mexico and cutting labor costs on affected products by as much as ninety percent. But the company's orgy of expansion brought with it unbearable debt, and last fall Breed filed for bankruptcy. Company officials declined to comment for this article David Quinn didnt know it, but he was particularly vulnerable to such corporate maneuverings Being a young male without a college degree, he had a big bulls-eye painted on him. While the Dow was reaching delirious heights in the nineties, people with only a high school or some college education-most American workers -ended the decade earning less, in constant dollars than they had at the start. Being young in the Nineties hurt too: Entry-level wages fell more than seven percent, with mens wages dropping slightly more than those of women. And it happens that Indiana is one of seven states that suffered disproportionate NAFTA-related job losses their jobs to Mexico. The names of the departed were a gloomy roll call: Thomson Consumer ng One by one, factories that Indianans had worked in for generations were shutting down and send Electronics. Jay Garment. Magne Tek. Uniroyal Goodrich. Breed. Indianans blame NAFTA for job losses at 107 factories in their state so far Just how many americans have been hurt by NAFTA is unclear. The Clinton administrations, which sold NaFta to Congress partly on the promise that it would create jobs, sidesteps the question of exactly how many -if any -the treaty has created. The federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, which quantifies the workforce from every conceivable angle, chooses not to compile such a number nstead, the administration credits naFta only in general terms with helping to generate the current boom. Yet according to the Journal of Commerce, the U.S. went from having a $5.5 billion trade surplus with Mexico before NAFTa to having a whopping $16 billion trade deficit today, and the prestigious Economic Policy Institute estimates that almost 400,000 Americans lost manufacturing jobs due to NaFta in the agreements first three years Thats about the same number of jobs that have been created in the maquiladoras, or foreign-owned factories in Mexico, since NAFTA was signed. So one might conclude that there's been a huge transfer of wealth and that Mexican workers are profiting from the misfortune of their American counterparts. Mexican factory wages may be low by U.S. standards, but in the Mexican countryside people commonly earn as ten dollars a week -when they can find work. a job in an American factory, especially a new one, sounds better than whacking weeds with a machete in the hot sun or selling chewing gum to motorists on the streets of Mexico City. In raw terms, factories generate wealth-for those who work in them, for those who own them for those who market, advertise transport and sell the products they make. Shiny new American factories-built where once stood only a patch of beans or a few goats- sound like a dream come true for Mexicans The transfer of wealth, it turns out, has not been nearly so neat. David Quinn was painfully aware of how NAFTA had damaged his own life when, in January, he and I traveled together to Mexico. Our goal was to see whether we could find the worker who was doing his old job-to see, in essence, how Davids life had fared in translation. Id found David by calling trade activists around the country,them to civilian automobiles. By the time David got hired, Breed was selling almost $800 million a year in air bags, sensors, steering wheels, seat belts and other car parts to just about all the major automakers. By the late Nineties, it had developed a strategy to buy up factories in both the United States and Mexico, moving production from north to south of the border. In addition to David’s workplace, Breed closed five other auto-parts factories across the U.S. in 1997, sending at least a thousand American jobs to Mexico and cutting labor costs on affected products by as much as ninety percent. But the company’s orgy of expansion brought with it unbearable debt, and last fall Breed filed for bankruptcy. Company officials declined to comment for this article. David Quinn didn’t know it, but he was particularly vulnerable to such corporate maneuverings. Being a young male without a college degree, he had a big bull’s-eye painted on him. While the Dow was reaching delirious heights in the Nineties, people with only a high school or some college education – most American workers – ended the decade earning less, in constant dollars, than they had at the start. Being young in the Nineties hurt too: Entry-level wages fell more than seven percent, with men’s wages dropping slightly more than those of women. And it happens that Indiana is one of seven states that suffered disproportionate NAFTA-related job losses. One by one, factories that Indianans had worked in for generations were shutting down and sending their jobs to Mexico. The names of the departed were a gloomy roll call: Thomson Consumer Electronics. Jay Garment. MagneTek. Uniroyal Goodrich. Breed. Indianans blame NAFTA for job losses at 107 factories in their state so far. Just how many Americans have been hurt by NAFTA is unclear. The Clinton administrations, which sold NAFTA to Congress partly on the promise that it would create jobs, sidesteps the question of exactly how many – if any – the treaty has created. The federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, which quantifies the workforce from every conceivable angle, chooses not to compile such a number. Instead, the administration credits NAFTA only in general terms with helping to generate the current boom. Yet according to the Journal of Commerce, the U.S. went from having a $5.5 billion trade surplus with Mexico before NAFTA to having a whopping $16 billion trade deficit today, and the prestigious Economic Policy Institute estimates that almost 400,000 Americans lost manufacturing jobs due to NAFTA in the agreement’s first three years. That’s about the same number of jobs that have been created in the maquiladoras, or foreign-owned factories in Mexico, since NAFTA was signed. So one might conclude that there’s been a huge transfer of wealth and that Mexican workers are profiting from the misfortune of their American counterparts. Mexican factory wages may be low by U.S. standards, but in the Mexican countryside people commonly earn as ten dollars a week – when they can find work. A job in an American factory, especially a new one, sounds better than whacking weeds with a machete in the hot sun or selling chewing gum to motorists on the streets of Mexico City. In raw terms, factories generate wealth – for those who work in them, for those who own them, for those who market, advertise, transport and sell the products they make. Shiny new American factories – built where once stood only a patch of beans or a few goats – sound like a dream come true for Mexicans. The transfer of wealth, it turns out, has not been nearly so neat. David Quinn was painfully aware of how NAFTA had damaged his own life when, in January, he and I traveled together to Mexico. Our goal was to see whether we could find the worker who was doing his old job – to see, in essence, how David’s life had fared in translation. I’d found David by calling trade activists around the country