Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
1. So, are you going to support TPP if Obama figures out a way to handle currency manipulation.
Wed May 13, 2015, 12:32 AM
May 2015

Baker --

"The TPP matters in this story because it provides a venue through which we could see a reduction in the trade deficit, if the deal included rules on currency values."

Sounds to me your boy Baker is behind TPP if currency manipulation is in the mix.

I bet it happens, what you gonna do then to bash Obama and TPP?

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)
2. TPP is voodoo economics on steroids
Wed May 13, 2015, 04:36 AM
May 2015

It needs to be kicked to the curb and left for the sanitation engineers to take to the incinerator.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
3. No. Not as long as we have the huge trade deficit we have.
Wed May 13, 2015, 12:08 PM
May 2015

Not if it has trademark and patent protections that will put important cultural and scientific progress such as needed medicines out of the financial reach of many of us including our government that insures us. Did you listen to the whole thing. He talks about a hepatitis medicine that costs $25,000 and that can be produced in India for $1,000. Excessive patent and copyright protection is another problem with the TPP. And by the way our Constitution gives to Congress the authority to establish copyright and patent law. I would not want to change that.

Then the agreement will still set up these special commercial courts that give companies the ability to sue say Los Angeles where I live if it denies the companies the ability to frack within our city. Dean Baker specifically explains that while as Obama claims, the court cannot order the city of LA to allow fracking, it can fine us to the point that we have no choice but to allow fracking in our area which is highly susceptible to earthquakes.

No. We should enter into trade agreements that support human rights and that allow us to protect, yes, protect, the American economy and the American people.

Thus far, our trade agreements have caused serious damage to our economy and our country.
And the worst of it is that we provide and pay for an inordinate amount of the military monitoring of the seas and trade routes while other countries do not.

I am for trade but only on terms that protect our Constitution, our democracy (what we have left of it) and our ability to protect the human rights of others, as well as our economy.

We are a huge market. And what makes our market so attractive is that we have essentially one unified communication system, a fairly uniform culture, and one dominant language that is pretty universally understood within our borders. That makes it easy to market products here. Products can be packaged and then sold in our markets with great ease. We don't have a lot of dialects and other problems that make selling here more costly. Our market is very attractive. We should use that fact to leverage influence for us and to improve the world. Right now we are throwing ourselves at the world and wondering why we get no respect.

No to the TPP. I do not like the concept of free trade. We are putting our market out there like a harlot. Trading it for far less than it is worth. And giving away our economic future. It is simply morally wrong for us to do that to our children and grandchildren.

And the high-sounding rhetoric is empty because it is really just a lot of noise covering up a lot of pay-offs and corruption. Shame on President Obama for even thinking about this horrible agreement.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
4. Well, you obviously missed fact that minimizing currency manipulation would erase trade deficit.
Wed May 13, 2015, 12:53 PM
May 2015

That is also why many economists don't believe our current trade deficit means lost jobs like so many lay people believe.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
5. But you still have the abominable trade courts which aim to destroy our one person - one vote
Wed May 13, 2015, 02:41 PM
May 2015

constitutional system and our organization of the separation of powers.

The trade agreements are simply corporate coups, and I totally oppose them.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
6. Just admit it. If we find the anwser/solution to every issue you can imagine, you are
Wed May 13, 2015, 03:07 PM
May 2015

still going to find something you don't like, even if it's the name. You'll start over with the same objections if you have to, and just go in circles.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
7. Not true.
Wed May 13, 2015, 04:50 PM
May 2015

I suspect, strongly suspect that some of the advocates on DU that are for the TPP are paid employees, paid to spam in favor of that abominable agreement.

I still have not received any response that reassures me as to any of my questions about the TPP.

As for currency safeguards in the agreement, how in the world would they be enforced? Currency exchanges can be public or private. There is no way to insure a fair currency exchange.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
8. I'm not the only person opposed to the TPP and "free" trade.
Wed May 13, 2015, 05:09 PM
May 2015

Clinton advisor Joseph E. Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate in economics, just released a scorching report on economic policy. One of the highlights of the report is that trade deals like the TPP are largely to blame for our explosion of wealth inequality. The report calls for “rewriting the rules of our market economy to reduce those inequalities.” One of the pull-quotes in the report reads: “Inequality has been a choice, and it is within our power to reverse it.” That’s the stuff great stump speeches are made of.

If Hillary crafted a progressive Stiglitz-Warren economic policy, and made it the centerpiece of her campaign, she’d easily win over progressives and unite the party. It would be a master stroke of triangulation — the sensible and pragmatic thing to do. It’s the sort of thing you’d expect from a smart politician who recognizes that Elizabeth Warren has just been anointed the de facto leader of the Democratic Party.

http://thefloridasqueeze.com/2015/05/13/progressives-just-changed-the-2016-election-narrative-by-blocking-tpp-fast-track/

Smart people do not want the TPP. Corrupt people do.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Dean Baker on the TPP and...