Dear President Obama, If TPP is as great as you say...

[whereisjustice]

Why not tell us more about it?

* Tell us how many new jobs will be created here in the US?

* Tell us how much our wages will increase?

* What new regulatory agencies will be created to monitor compliance with the agreement?

* Who will pay for regulatory services? Corporations or tax payers?

* Are ALL provisions of the agreement subject to monitoring and are there SERIOUS penalties for violations?

* Will the largest US corporations, who pay near zero taxes, start paying taxes as a result of this agreement?

* What prevents companies from continuing to flood India and China with jobs?

* How will jobs and wages be monitored over time to assess the impact of the agreement?

* If job and wage growth doesn't meet expectations, what provision exists to end the agreement?

Every working man, woman and (child labor in Asia?) knows trade deals absolutely suck for the middle class and below. NAFTA crushed communities across the US. It meant lower wages and higher costs. Standard of living plunged. Poverty and prisons have been a growth industry ever since.

When all the rhetoric about open markets and new opportunities in Asia is added up, TPP is an exclusive benefit for massive corporations who want lower wages. Companies like Microsoft, Google, Intel, who pay the smallest fraction of taxes, have found China and India too expensive. They want something even cheaper.

People are working harder for less pay. Our kids are working harder for fewer opportunities on graduation. Our health care and education costs are driving us into deep debt. TPP is just a continuation of fucked up abstractions designed to transfer wealth from the middle class and below.

Stumped? How about this one simple question?

Why did you give us this incredibly divisive trade bill at a time of record inequality and economic disparity in the US?

It's a pretty fucked up thing to do to the working class.

[merrily]

1. Shhhh. Democrats do no wrong to workers. Everyone knows that.

Heard Bubba say on TV the other day that Poppy had negotiated NAFTA. Yes, we know, but his time in office ran out before he could get it passed. You took the baton pass from him, got it passed and signed it. Own it.

[jwirr]

3. Bill actually said that NAFTA was Poppy's fault? He is certainly

getting delusional. Who is he blaming all the other "mistakes" he made to help the 1% on?

[HughBeaumont]

6. Poppy DID help author it.

However, no one exactly coerced Clinton when he signed it into law in December of 1993.

[jwirr]

10. Yes, it was Poppy's bill but we elected Clinton and he should

not have followed the man we defeated.

[merrily]

9. Not in those words. But, when the adverse effects were mentioned, his

comment was that Bush negotiated it and Bubba tried to leave the impression that he really did not have much of an option but to conclude the deal.

With the most favorable "translation" from Clinton to English that I can think of, I guess the implication was "We needed a trade deal of some kind, and this is the one Poppy negotiated, so I was stuck with the terms. If I had negotiated it, it would have been a better trade deal" Not his words at all, but, as I said, this is the most favorable interpretation I can give his comment.

Yes, the Clinton way is, when something goes wrong (and it probably will), take no responsibility. Blame it on someone or something else--vast right wing conspiracy (Lewinsky), Republicans, mean media, whatever. So, yes, Bubba did indeed try to give the impression that the adverse results of NAFTA were Poppy's fault.

[bbgrunt]

36. ....and never admit or recall the intense lobbying you did to

get it passed.

[merrily]

38. Bubba was a fan of lobbying hard to produce "a veto proof majority."

The Republicans wanted many of the things he wanted, so his WH did not have to work too hard to get their votes on those things. Rather, a Democratic President and his advisors worked hard on Democratic Senators and members of Congress.

Then, as stuff hit the fan, the excuse of a "veto proof majority" was dragged out. I've seen it on DU many times.

Guess what? The only way anyone knows if a veto proof majority exists is to exercise the Presidential veto power. Because the votes that the WH got by arm twisting would have gone the other way after a veto. And, in any case, our Constitution indisputably sets up a balance of power, including via Presidential veto and Presidential "pocket veto." If you didn't want a bill to become law, Mr. President, you should never have given it the imprimatur of a Democratic President, full stop.

[bbgrunt]

49. exactly. nt

[Divernan]

80. Bill has convinced himself to believe his own revisionist history.

He views the world through the lens of his massive acquired wealth.

I agree, he does appear to be getting delusional. Absolutely astounding what he said in response to Colbert's question as to why Sanders & Trump are doing so well.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017298975

And I quote Bill Clinton: "People think the system's rigged against us & the rich get all the gain."
How delusional is that, that he claims to be part of "us", i.e, the un-rich?

Well, DUH, Bill the system IS rigged and the rich are getting all the gain! And no one has worked that system better than you and the Mrs. in accumulating your vast millions in the past decade.

Hillary's gross income in 2014? In excess of $30 million
http://www.davemanuel.com/pols/hillary-clinton/

Average 2014 Income: $30,522,506**

Min. Gross Income: $30,372,511
Max. Gross Income: $30,672,501

Name: Hillary Clinton
Last Filing: May 15th, 2015

Clintons' personal wealth is intricately intertwined with the Clinton Family Foundation "charity".
In an analysis of public records and Clinton Foundation data, The Washington Post found that there was an overlap of Bill and Hillary Clinton's charitable work and their growing personal wealth.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-clintons-speech-income-shows-how-their-wealth-is-intertwined-with-charity/2015/04/22/12709ec0-dc8d-11e4-a500-1c5bb1d8ff6a_story.html

Bill Clinton was paid at least $26 million in speaking fees by companies and organizations that are also major donors to the foundation he created after leaving the White House, according to a Washington Post analysis of public records and foundation data. The amount, about one-quarter of Clinton’s overall speaking income between 2001 and 2013, demonstrates how closely intertwined Bill and Hillary Clinton’s charitable work has become with their growing personal wealth.

Bill Clinton was paid more than $100 million for speeches between 2001 and 2013, according to federal financial disclosure forms filed by Hillary Clinton during her years as a senator and as secretary of state. The Post analysis shows that, among the approximately 420 organizations that paid Bill Clinton to speak during those years, 67 were also foundation donors that each gave the charity at least $10,000. Many of those funders were major financial institutions that are viewed suspiciously by liberals whom Clinton has been courting as she seeks to secure the Democratic nomination — and avoid a vigorous primary challenge from the populist left.

Four major financial firms — Goldman Sachs, Barclays Capital, Deutsche Bank and Citigroup — collectively have given between $2.75 million and $11.5 million to the charity, which is now called the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. Between 2001 and 2013, their combined speech payments to Bill Clinton came to more than $3 million.

The Post analysis also revealed aspects of Bill Clinton’s paid speaking career during Hillary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department that were not clear from her public filings. Those included: The role played by dozens of companies and organizations, some of them associated with foreign governments or with interests before the U.S. government, in serving as secondary hosts for a number of the speeches. In her filings, Hillary Clinton typically disclosed only the primary sponsor of each speech. One such “sub-sponsor” was Boeing, a major government contractor whose interests Hillary Clinton promoted in her official duties at the State Department.

[HughBeaumont]

4. Hopefully when Bernie becomes President, Democrats will come back.

Not these corporate quislings we've been getting lately who have done nothing but fuel the "BOTH PARTIES ARE TEH SAMESIES" crowd.

[merrily]

11. First, we have to help him get there.

I'm not looking one day past the primaries. Not his VP, not his Cabinet, not his administration, nothing.

[daleanime]

62. Amen....

we've got a lot of work lined up, let's take care of it piece by piece.

[markmyword]

22. If It's So Great....

If the TPP is so great, WHY was it written BEHIND CLOSED DOORS?????
Why weren't the American people allowed to see it as it was written?
Why were ONLY lobbyists, corporation CEOs and other special interest people, allowed to WRITE this????

That alone tells me they have something to hide!!!
Every politican in ALL those countries involved in the TPP should vote NO for it!
The TPP over rides OUR CONSTITUTION and any laws on our books!!!! EPA, Food and Drug, ALL of our laws!!!
Why would you vote for that?
Secret tribunals, whose judges are the corporate lawyers that wrote the TPP!
This is a corporate Constitution, for the corporation and by the corporation!

[closeupready]

27. GMAFB. They have to PASS the bill FIRST so that we can find out what's in it.

[whereisjustice]

5. From fucked up gun policies to fucked up trade policies it just keeps rolling along

It's insane... what kind of people do this to themselves? It's like we have a collective disorder compelling us to hurt ourselves.

And when the data is accumulated that proves we made horrible policy choices and we are injuring ourselves unnecessarily - we're right back at it doing the same thing again!

This is the America that people want? That Democrats want? Corruption, joblessness, poverty, violence?

[merrily]

8. Supposedly, it makes Democrats more electible, even though it is NOT what Americans want.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12777036 (Let's talk polls.)

The 2010 and 2014 spoke volumes about the success of the electability strategy on every level of local state and federal government, didn't it though? Worst results for Democrats since the Hoover era--and Third Way reacted immiediately--by promising to double down. '

[pampango]

14. I didn't see anything at the link regarding TPP, trade agreements or trade in general. Did I miss

something?

[LuvNewcastle]

7. Clinton got NAFTA passed FOR Poppy.

[merrily]

12. Maybe for Al From.

[LuvNewcastle]

16. He is one of Poppy's sons, though.

There's really no telling what the truth is. We'll never get it from Clinton, anyway.

[merrily]

19. According to Al From, Al From was responsible for Bubba's becoming President.

Not sure I buy it, but obviously, the ties are there.

[HughBeaumont]

2. It's for corporations to know and for us to never find out.

Worker displacement in America will surely increase even more exponentially than it already is.

You know, because permanently out-of-work people and robots can buy products and services (a conundrum that NO ONE has an answer for).

Funny how the architects and corporate enforcers of supply-side and "Free Trade" are never the persons affected negatively by either one.

[merrily]

13. Yep, the dark humor joke about work in the US used to be

"Want fries with that?" aka: Graduate college (or grad school), work at McDonald's. Now a robot will be asking.

[retrowire]

20. beep beep boop boop? lol n/t

[NorthCarolina]

15. Well, you may hate it, but Big Pharma loves it so how do you explain that?

Just playing devils advocate. I hate the TPP too.

[Art_from_Ark]

78. It could be that Big Pharma got to extend patents by 7 years

and even though they wanted 12 years, it's still a win for them.

[kelliekat44]

17. Give him a chance. He's doing just that now by traveling around and talking concerned citizens. nt

[TBF]

29. This is sarcasm, correct?

He's been in the white house 7 years now - and "traveling around and talking (to) concerned citizens" AFTER supporting a bill is helpful?

[zeemike]

18. Most of those questions were answered about NAFTA

And they told us how many jobs it would create and how good it would be for us.
But it was all bullshit and I would expect the same glowing bullshit about the TPP,

You don't ask con men whether the deal they are offering you is a good one or not...you know their answer.

[Omaha Steve]

21. K&R!

[AzDar]

23. I no longer believe him, anyway. So much squandered political opportunity...

[stupidicus]

24. do you mean like how it's fascism on steroids

where we don't have just a marriage of the govs and corps, but a situation where the corps have their jackboots on our collective throats?

What I don't understand is why using the "socialist" label to bludgeon Bernie with is OK, but properly labeling this BS thusly appears to be off limits....

Oh that's right, it's part of the program http://www.politicususa.com/2015/10/07/gop-self-made-punishment-tolerating-intolerable.html that shoulda included others in the "tolerance" indictment.

This is just one on many reasons I've argued for better than a decade now that civilty is way overrated in our current and recent past political landscape, and actually is a disservice and harmful considering the consequences of incorrect labeling...

[1StrongBlackMan]

25. Well President Obama HAS answered all of those questions ...

But stay tuned ... the once beloved Paul Krugman is diving into it; though the early DU response to his early reporting is not very accepting.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/10/paul-krugman-explains-latest-draft-tpp

[JDPriestly]

83. That article is just horrible -- no specifics -- no detail.

I am normally a Mother Jones fan (and subscriber), but that article is not worth its bandwidth.

And the person who wrote it does not understand what the international tribunals in these trade agreements are about -- which is undermining self-government.

The tribunals are not consistent with democracy or self-government. That goes for the NAFTA trade court, the WTO trade court, any trade court.

Democracies do not exist to pay extortion money to corporations. And that is what the verdicts of these trade courts amount to.

[flor-de-jasmim]

26. Unless this is a move to...

a) promote Bernie (I keep seeing headings about how he will ride this to the WH);
b) be a wake-up call to the American people

Obama HAS to know that people will get riled up over this.

[jalan48]

28. It's curious how little support is being shown on DU for the TPP by Obama supporters.

Their silence can only make one think they are ashamed of their President for pushing this trade package. I would think we would have had at least one OP in support but I haven't seen it, only feel good photo shoots of Obama doing something else. As big and important as this issue is for Americans how is it possible no one here appears to support him? It continues to beg the bigger question of why he is pushing the TPP on all Americans.

[TBF]

31. "Why he is pushing the TPP on all Americans"

He is simply doing as he is told by the people he works for. I'll give everyone a hint - he only works for "you" if you are part of the 1%.

There's a always a reason -

[jalan48]

33. I find it hard to believe everyone on DU believes that.

I understand why he may be doing it, but why the silence on this huge issue from his supporters? I doubt the ones on here are in the 1%.

[TBF]

46. You may find it hard to believe but it's the truth.

I worked on his campaign. We voted for him because it was the best we could do. I breathed a sigh of relief when Bush finally got on the helicopter and left DC, and I'm sure many others did as well.

That is why so many of us are pushing hard for Bernie this time. We got Bush out, we've had our transition president (for lack of a better word - and we will not elect another dem who gives in to the corporations), and now it is time to change things. I guess things can still get worse in this country and they will continue to unless we make some very concrete systemic changes.

Why are people not defending TPP? Because they can't. There is nothing there to defend. It only helps the corporations and the very wealthy.

[jalan48]

47. I am in total agreement.

It's just that this is such a big issue, one of the biggest of his administration. The fact that ordinary Democrats, people on fixed incomes or in poverty will simply support the TPP because Obama does is more than disheartening. Not to mention the fact that this will be 'Obama's trade agreement' in all future elections. He's screwing the country as well as the Democratic Party on this one. It's like an economic Iraq War. Who supports it and why.

[TBF]

52. It is certainly disheartening -

People definitely remember that NAFTA was passed by Bill Clinton. This is why so many folks see the parties as the same. We know full well that the parties are not the same when it comes to what I call the civil rights issues (equality for all races, genders, orientations, etc), but it is behavior like this that leads people to wonder whether there's a difference on economic issues.

[A Simple Game]

35. Most are probably waiting for direction from Hillary.

Until Hillary says definitely whether she is for or against, the followers are left flopping in the wind just below the weather vane.

Can't support President Obama and then find out that Hillary is against it, that wouldn't look good.

[jalan48]

37. Maybe so. But I keep waiting for the pro-TPP arguments here on DU.

Obama is THE Democrat. He not only supports the TPP, he is advocating for it. There has to be at least one person here on DU that will stand up for his position on the TPP. It's as if the issue doesn't really exist for many rank and file Democrats on here, they choose to look the other way. Their silence is eerie.

[whathehell]

43. I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you..

I think most neither know or care. Blind loyalty. If Obama likes it, THEY like it.

[MisterP]

45. that'd just bring more attention to it, nu? they may even have learned from their little "POC are

TERRIFIED at Sanders rallies" and "Clinton is the last, best hope for peace in the new millennium" sallies

[Egnever]

72. What nonsene

When the agreement is published as it will be soon then the folks you are looking for to support it will.

Many people are tired of the inane bullshit coming from people proclaiming giant conspiracy theories based on nothing but rumor and innuendo.

When there are documents to point to once again as there will be soon I am quite sure you will see plenty of people willing to support portions of it at least if not the whole thing.

The idea that 11 independant nations all got together to screw the working class is such unmitigated rubbish it is mind boggling to see so many subscribe to it.

[jalan48]

73. Thanks for the post. You're the first person I've seen on DU to defend it.

It will be interesting to see what the debate is about. I understand that debate will be limited for each speaker to a set number of minutes. Apparently, Congress is short on time.

[yallerdawg]

30. All your questions answered.

Won't mean one damn thing, you all have some other agenda.

But here is another link to ignore.

https://ustr.gov/tpp/

[FairWinds]

39. Want to read some amazing Orwellian Double-Speak?

How the TPP promotes transparency in negotiations . .

This is for an agreements that is STILL SECFRET !!

I am gob-smacked at the sheer audacity . .

https://ustr.gov/tpp/#promoting-transparency

[yallerdawg]

40. From your link...

During TPP negotiations, the Administration has:

• Supported provisions in the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) legislation
governing Congressional consideration of TPP that require the text of the
agreement to be made available online to the public at least 60 days before
the President signs it.

• Published detailed summaries of U.S. objectives in negotiating all aspects of
the agreement.

• Solicited public comments on negotiating aims, priorities and concerns.

• Held public hearings inviting input on the negotiations.

• Consulted with and sought advice from Members of Congress and staff,
including by holding over 1,800 Congressional briefings on TPP.

• Ensured that every Member of Congress was able to review full TPP text
in the Capitol with staff members during the negotiation process (including
elements that were still under negotiation).

• Provided Members of Congress with plain English summaries of TPP
chapters to assist Members in navigating the negotiating text.

• Previewed U.S. proposals with Congressional committees before taking
them to the negotiations.

• Provided access to review text during the negotiation process to the entire
Congressionally-mandated trade advisory committee system, including
representatives from small business, state and local governments, labor
unions, NGOs, and environmental groups.

• Organized events during negotiating rounds for stakeholders to present
their views to our negotiators directly.

• Throughout the TPP negotiations, the Administration held over 1,800
Congressional briefings on TPP, published detailed summaries of U.S.
negotiating objectives, solicited public comments on negotiating priorities
and concerns, and held public hearings on TPP.

• The Administration fully supported provisions in the 2015 TPA legislation
that require the text of the agreement to be made available online to the
public at least 60 days before the President signs any agreement.

• We have also appointed a Chief Transparency Officer to consult with
Congress on transparency policy, coordinate transparency in trade
negotiations, and engage and assist the public.

[FairWinds]

42. Please Ol' Yaller, don't add to the mountain of BS . .

You're just re-posting what the Trade Rep site says.

Do some analysis of your own, OK?

For example, THIS is outrageous:
"text of the agreement to be made available online to the public
at least 60 days before the President signs it."

Don't you grasp that the TPP will very likely be VOTED ON AND
APPROVED BY CONGRESS MORE THAN 60 DAYS BEFORE HE SIGNS IT.

So we are supposed to be grateful that it will be made public AFTER it is voted on?
(and it is STILL not public by the way!)

No, I am not grateful at all.

[yallerdawg]

48. Remember the end-of-the-world Trade Promotion Authority?

This specified 60 day public review before any free trade agreement is approved by Congress. Much less signed by the president.

You all act like this is some kind of done deal. Not even close.

Remember the 11 other nations that have to sign off?

[FairWinds]

54. Hey Yaller - You are still wrong, way wrong.

You say, "This specified 60 day public review before any free trade agreement is approved by Congress. Much less signed by the president."

That is NOT what the Trade Rep Document (which YOU posted) says. It says . .

"text of the agreement to be made available online to the public
at least 60 days before the President signs it."

Those two are not the same thing at all.

Do you read what you post before you hit that button?

[yallerdawg]

56. Do you check the law before you misinform people?

This is now part of the US Code.

But in English...

At the same time, the trade promotion bill, hashed out over months of arduous negotiations, adds new hurdles to completion. Under the legislation, the president may not even sign a final agreement for two months, and Congress cannot consider the deal for two additional months while the public gets its first complete look at the accord. That delay will most likely push any consideration of the Pacific accord well into the presidential election season, a difficult political environment in which to consider the largest trade agreement since the North American Free Trade Agreement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/business/trade-pact-senate-vote-obama.html?_r=0

Do you have some citation referencing this, or just more 'opinion'?

[Egnever]

71. Many people are way past rational thought on this

They have been spoonfed the misinformation for so long they can't even acknowledge reality anymore.

The funny thing is once it is posted for all to read, as it will be before a vote is taken, 90% of the folks screaming about secrecy wont bother reading it.

This place is strange that way. The people here like to pretend they are interested in facts but reality is they are as immune to them as the Republicans they mock if the facts don't agree with their world view.

[yallerdawg]

74. I would like to think Democrats would read it...

and consider the pros and cons, listen to the arguments, make informed decision.

I expect Democrats to do that. That is one of our core attributes. We are more reasoned and informed than that other party.

[muriel_volestrangler]

44. Have you found the full agreement yet? (nt)

[yallerdawg]

50. No party has published the final version yet.

TPA is the fast-track process which triggers about a 90 day required passage, or it's done.

The 11 other countries have their own approval process, and who knows who will post it online first.

You can bet it is coming.

It has to be submitted to the House at which time the US will definitely have it available online. Fast-track has set time limits, so conjecture is the soonest Obama could possibly sign would be in December.

11 other countries have to sign off, too.

[muriel_volestrangler]

53. Since it's been agreed, the last excuse for keeping it secret has disappeared

The claim was that talking about what was being proposed would spook someone, and then nothing could be agreed. But they have agreed it, so the world ought to be told what they're being asked to swallow.

[yallerdawg]

55. The world is not being asked.

12 sovereign nations are agreeing to this.

11 of them are not subject to Congress. They are not subject to the Supreme Court. This is an international agreement. With lots of other parties standing on the sidelines.

The Congressionally-approved laws regarding this process include when the Executive Branch can submit the agreement to Congress and the time-limits fast track triggers.

It's coming. The 'secret' document will be published for the whole world to weigh in on!

[whereisjustice]

61. What is the raise workers can expect with this agreement?

That website has zero value. It doesn't answer a single question I raised. It is all fluff with mind numbing nonsense words like "Better" "stronger" "promote" "best deal" "good".

LOL

How much more take home pay will I get? We haven't had a wage increase in decades. Meanwhile, costs are soaring.

Oh, wait I bet I know!

There is no wage increase because workers are going to get fucked. Just like EVERY agreement that sends jobs to low wage, unregulated labor markets in Asia, Mexico, Central America, South America.

Except that CEOs will get a wage increase, that's for sure.

Yeah, we have another agenda. That's because we are not the CEOs who are destroying the American workforce.

Our agenda is to carve out a stable career, education, health care be able to retire, take care of our families.

And our agenda conflicts with our political elite and every workers political enemy - Wall Street banks.

[yallerdawg]

64. So, companies which do export trade have on average 18% higher pay for workers.

Also, have a future.

Sorry you missed that in all the "words."

[whereisjustice]

66. 100% Bulllshit.

We are offshoring at record levels.

Obama needs to tell us what we can expect for a wage increase.

By US I mean workers not owners/CEOs/executives.

TPP will increase the income of individuals in these wage brackets by how much?
0 - $50,000 per year,
$50,000 to $150,000 a year
$150,000+

Simple. How much?

[hughee99]

32. I wouldn't presume to know what President Obama's motivations are for supporting this,

but I'll bet the TPP does a great job of protecting the very same companies that former presidents make a lot of money from in speaking and consulting fees.

[Blue_Tires]

34. Even if he already answered those questions, would anybody here believe them?

Asking for a friend...

[1StrongBlackMan]

51. LOL! We must have the same friend ... I met her at meeting of Democrats. n/t

[whereisjustice]

63. He's not saying because, as a mature leader of US, we wouldn't believe him anyway?

I guess he's going to take his Made in China ball and go home.

[Blue_Tires]

84. Well, anything is preferable to tinfoil hysteria...

[whereisjustice]

88. even cancer, ebola or one of your replies?

[Octafish]

41. When it can't stand the light of day, there's a problem.

UNDEMOCRATIC ACTION IS A CLUE THE PEOPLE ARE GETTING THE SCREW.

[YoungDemCA]

58. International trade is insanely complicated

I won't presume to be an expert on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Maybe you should ask an economist? Intellectual expertise is underrated around here.

I do know, however, that protectionism is a failed policy that was historically the domain of right-wing economic nationalists. Why so many on the Left are falling for those arguments is baffling.

[whereisjustice]

59. Bullshit. It's insanely complicated because right wingers keep saying we are too

stupid to know how to look after our own best interests.

Sort of like you are implying. Right wing nationalists. Stir up shit much? It's the right wingers in both parties who want this deal. Because their beneficiaries are Wall Street banks. NOT the middle class and below.

Here is what is known - every drop of ink on that agreement is there for corporations to get access to a large new market for cheap unregulated labor. Period.

No snark, no flip comment about not being an economist, nothing absolutely nothing can erase the history of shit that gets handed families by these deals.

And for every tear jerking story about the 1% who profit, there are millions who have been fucked.

They said it was the unions so they moved to Mexico.

Then they said Mexico was too expensive so they went to China.

Then to India to cut costs even more.

Then they went bankrupt and the people who GM fucked over bailed them out.

Now they want to exploit Vietnam.

That's how it goes with rosy cheeked 3rd way types, flush with talking points for a stinking rotten deal for American workers.

This isn't about protectionism. This is about corporations who pay near ZERO taxes going overseas for dirt cheap labor while crushing the economy in the US. You can't have it both ways. Corporations want to stay here for our low taxes but they don't want to pay for the infrastructure they use.

We tried NAFTA and we got fucked. What a line of shit we were sold. Much like the lines of shit we are now being sold.

We are going to get fucked again with wage declines, the poverty the increased costs. We are being plundered by the rich.

Simply fuck that shit.

[Enthusiast]

76. Protectionism isn't even in the same universe.

[PowerToThePeople]

60. "It's a pretty fucked up thing"

The definition of third way.

[HatTrick]

65. How about just tell us what's in the damm thing!

That the public doesn't even know what's in the TPP is unamerican, and it should be illegal that we don't know what's in it.
More proof of who really owns this country.

[Jeneral2885]

67. But

Singapore loves the TPP.

[Doctor_J]

68. But the republicans are angry, so that means it's great!!!!1121!!1!

And so what if every liberal in congress hates it? They never liked Obama, probably because he's black.

The establishment democrats, including the president and Mrs Clinton, don't give a shit about working people. The president in particular, not having to win any more elections, doesn't have to pretend. Hillary comically made a half assed, triangulated rejection of it today, leaving room to flip back when needed.

It's discouraging what the party has become. It will remain a minority until it stops straddling the middle of the road.

[whereisjustice]

69. I just got the dreaded "memo"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027242079

[yallerdawg]

70. I know where the 100% bullshit is.

Thanks for bringing sheer fantasy to the discussion.

Not unexpected.

[emsimon33]

75. K&R

[davidpdx]

77. K & R

I am not happy about TPP and I think it's a done deal. Congress voted to allow fast-track and they are going to have the 1% lobbyists who wrote this lined up to pressure them to pass it.

While I am happy I voted for Obama, this is the single most disappointing issue of his two terms in office. I'm not going to disparage or bash him, I just think this is a mistake.

Once the TPP is passed there is no going back despite who we elected as our next president. The future has been written by the 1% lobbyist.

Once the countries that have agreed to this pass it, then you are going to see pressure put on other countries like South Korea to join it as well.

[KG]

79. c'mon. asian sweatshop workers need your jobs! don't be so nationalistic!

[Sunlei]

81. Here is what will happen & it will be public for a time so you can read for your self

Obama must wait at least 90 days after notifying Congress of the deal before he can sign it and send it to Capitol Hill, and the full text of the agreement must be made public for at least 60 of those days.

Congress is expected to receive the legal documents to start the 90-day clock later this week. Lawmakers will then have 30 days to review the deal before it is made public.

The next step will be for the U.S. International Trade Commission to conduct a full economic review of the deal. The agency has up to 105 days to complete that work.

Under the terms of “fast track” trade legislation approved by Congress this summer, lawmakers will not be able to amend or filibuster the TPP pact. The only leverage they have is to fully approve the deal or reject it in its entirety. Fast-track also ensures that it takes only a simple majority to pass the deal, but that majority support is far from guaranteed. Obama has battled trade skeptics in both parties this year in his quest to secure the expedited rules. The additional negotiations have done little to sway critics within his party.

This is from a Washington Post article

[JDPriestly]

82. K&R. Well said.

[d_legendary1]

85. Its not bad enough that corporations want to screw the U.S. worker

but we also gotta finance the spiky dildo they're gonna hit us with? Now that is the American effing way!

[mhatrw]

86. We all suck for asking why we should support this agreement.

None of us would believe all the great reasons anyway!

[whereisjustice]

87. Just trust that this agreement won't fuck us over like last ones? I'm not baaaaah-ing it.