2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumTPP hate is just Neo-Nationalism and Neo-Reactionary
Many people this election season seem to seek a return to times long gone, when things were pleasant and nice and the streets were paved with gold. Our progress as a nation to a more intersectional and global society is being met with what I consider a NeoReactionary Movement, one that is designed to take us back to a horrible time when America was on top, a place we earned by keeping others on the bottom.
Globalization is here. There is no putting that genie back in the bottle. Many who seem to oppose the TPP apparently have no clue what the TPP is. Many seem to think that not passing the TPP will somehow bring manufacturing jobs back, jobs that most Americans won't do, even for 15 bucks an hour.
Neonationalism and Neoreactionary movements have absoultely no place in progressive politics. There will be some good and some bad in every trade agreement, but most of us on the left know how to make reasoned criticism and compromise with each other. Hypernationalistic and isolationism will not do a damn thing to improve our economic situations here at home. It will lead to a collapse of our way of life. We move forward as Progressives, not back. Those that find themselves nostalgic for administrations from 60 years ago need to understand something. Progressives do not go BACK. We move forward. If one is not interested in moving forward, but instead would rather go BACK? That is conservatism, not progressivism. That is not progressive in any way. The most progressive times are not behind us, they are in front of us, an step by step we will get to where we need to be.
Please cut out the Neoreactionary nonsense.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Neoreactionary_movement
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Manufacturing jobs are gone forever, especially in factories repatriating to the US. New designs in mechanical engineering make it cheaper to bring back manufacturing from China and automate the crap out of everything with a workforce less than a 20th of what was needed even a decade ago.
There will never be the massive numbers of manufacturing jobs anywhere in the world ever again!
It's time to move on.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)I'd been missing ya!
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Or just post this
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)The TPP is a carte Blanche giveaway to corporations,
bravenak
(34,648 posts)GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)This effectively nullifies a governments ability to enact laws against a corporation. Corporations do not deserve that power.
As such I think your argument that people opposing TPP are anti-globalization is not accurate. Globalization can occur without handing everything on a silver platter to corporations. Average people of all countries signatory to these trade deals should be fairly protected and a nation's right to protect the environment, or other types of restrictions they might place on corporations should not be able to be superceded via some world court.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Armstead
(47,803 posts)It's all designed to be so damn open and transparent -- as transparent as a wall of bricks.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Not just in the US but in any nation on Earth. So no TPP wouldn't allow corporations to nullify laws.
GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)where these kinds of stories are passed around. Where only one man can save us all.
Just like Flash Gordon.
treestar
(82,383 posts)why would any nation agree to that? None would.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Clinton signed. Did not seem to matter that twenty years later it's a popular program that Obama extended. Crazy theories abound. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Didn't sound so bad of Canada or Britain did it.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)didn't that piss you off a little? - under the wto. We could have paid a fine of millions a day or revoke the law which congress did faster than anything I have ever seen them do. the WTO is and organization, but they have trade agreements between nations as part of it's process.
ETA
Mostly we seem to have companies use it to push foreign countries into poverty or bend the corporate way
The obscure legal system that lets corporations sue countries
[link:https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/221/47001.html|
Corporations Use Trade Pact to Sue Countries]
When Canada moved to protect its citizens' health from a potentially harmful fuel additive, the chemical's U.S. manufacturer sued on the grounds that this would obstruct free trade - and in July succeeded in overturning Canadian law.
Another U.S. company, having used similar means to force Canadian authorities to rescind a ban on chemical waste exports, now says it will sue to be compensated for business lost while the ban was in force.
A third U.S. firm awaits the outcome of its complaint, that it had been prevented from opening a waste disposal plant because of environmental zoning laws in the Mexican state of San Luis Potosi.
Keystone Lawsuit Illustrates Enviros Big Problem With TPP
ISDS was an idea conjured up by European investors in the mid-20th century, when companies worried that revolutionary governments would nationalize an investment, like a coal mine. They wanted a way to hold governments accountable for their losses. But in the last two decades, as the number of trade deals containing ISDS has increased, suits have been put to a broader use, with companies alleging lost profits and suing not just when a government seizes a companys property but also when a government changes regulations in a way that seems to target one company.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)hollysmom
(5,946 posts)We lost in court you can not deny it. Trade war or paying the fines? seriously - stating it as if it were voluntarily may make it sound better to you but it wasn't and it shouldn't. It was not voluntary.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Canada placing tariffs on some of our goods as allowed by WTO. All of the lawsuits are more complex than most of those who blog on ISDS understand when you read the actual allegations and arbitration decisions. Heck one of the bloggers often quoted by the Nationalist, America First folks is a computer game developer.
treestar
(82,383 posts)then it's not so simple.
Just because "corporation" does not make the legal decision always wrong. And people characterize it the way they want to, in order to cut out the nuance.
treestar
(82,383 posts)word salad only convinces the gullible.
srobert
(81 posts)And thanks for supporting Lucy Flores. I seem to remember that Barack Obama advocated re-negotiating existing trade agreements with provisions to protect labor and the environment during a previous election. When I saw the video of the Carrier plant employees recently being told that the plant in Indianapolis (my home town) was moving to Mexico, I thought "I sure hope the President gets started on that soon before it's too late".
treestar
(82,383 posts)That statement is not enough.
GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)But 80-85% of the people creating the trade agreement were Corporate Bigwigs and lobbyists. Unions had a seat at the table but were stonewalled and were barred from sharing it with the membership.
The coalition created tried in vain to keep the details of the agreement a secret, but some of it leaked at least a year or so ago and what was in that leak was not good for the average American at all.
treestar
(82,383 posts)to the corporations." (Whatever that means). We need corporations to trade and make money. It is not us vs. them. We work for them and buy from them. They are part of global trade. There's no reason a trade agreement would alter that. What is the "giveaway?" How are they getting our money without giving us something in return? Are our US corporations OK while foreign ones are the enemy?
floriduck
(2,262 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)People have that right
floriduck
(2,262 posts)Arizona Roadrunner
(168 posts)As a person who has served on a local governments Board of Directors, I am VERY concerned about the TPP ISDS court process with results being the surrendering of governmental sovereignty to corporate interests, foreign and domestic.
Basically due to secretive deliberations, this judicial process is designed to favor corporate over governmental concerns and interests. This agreement should not allow corporations to use this judicial process, but should demand they use our existing judicial process as it relates to governmental entities. How many state and local governments can afford to be involved in such a process? Just by the threat of suits through ISDS, a climate where governmental units cave in will be created. Look at what has happened under NAFTA and the WTO as it relates to our right to know where our food comes from. Look at how a Canadian corporation is using NAFTA to sue the U.S. on the Keystone project.
This will mean that political topics such as minimum wage increases and housing and zoning laws may be pre-empted by just the threat of a suit through the ISDS process. Look at what happened with Egypt when a corporation tried to use a process analogous to the ISDS to prevent Egypt from raising their minimum wage laws. (Veolia v. Egypt)
Therefore, I recommend, in the national interest, this agreement not be approved. When people find out how this can be used to prevent them from finding out things such as where products are made, etc., there will be charges of treason and the political process will never recover the trust of the American citizens.
By not voting against the TPP outright, the Democrats have given Trump a great opportunity to tie the Democrats to the "establishment" and "corporate America". He can also use this position to raise questions about the Democrats "really caring about you and your job". This is a loser position for the Democrats for the "down ticket" candidates too. By the way, the US Chamber of Commerce is not worried about Clinton being "currently" against TPP. They figure after she gets into office, she will find a way for her to be "currently" in favor of it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/chamber-of-commerce-lobby_b_9104096.html
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Arazi
(6,829 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)We do not still live by the trade agreemrnts we made in 1812, and we will have more agreements after the TPP as well.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)and with so many potential signers, changes are forbidden
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Much of the static is from a bunch of 'henny penny's' running around spreading fear
Arazi
(6,829 posts)We get the TPP as presented and it's shit.
Stop spreading FUD
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Nothing is perfect on the first draft. Except my poems!
Response to bravenak (Reply #91)
Post removed
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Let us not get personal.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)I don't give a shit about who you are personally
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Just like certain jobs do not exist anymore to bring back to the us. Everything is not going to always work out in our favor. Sometimes we lose, and we did plenty of winning for a good long while in comparison to many nations. We are still far ahead of most.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)they have been doing a good job suing other countries into poverty with this trade court system. they have been doing it for decades - no one ever rewrites it. Cancel a contract because it seriously pollutes your land - too bad, we may have lied to you about the waste, but you have to follow through, we have been doing that in latin america for decades.
pampango
(24,692 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Especially in art, it trips me out.
TheBlackAdder
(28,076 posts).
Try to show support for it all you want, it is a central tool that non-participants use to undercut trade and become mercantile nations that slowly destroy the countries that they do business with. It's sort of like a Wal*Mart moving into a neighborhood, driving local businesses out of business, and then poverty sets in and the reliance on the cheap supplier/provider becomes even more necessary. As people lose wages, power, etc. they look for the lower cost stuff, which feeds the downward spiral. Central and South American countries are getting completely effed over by China, because they don't have to oblige in the NAFTA arrangements. They undermine the US/NAFTA goals of labor, investment and environmentals, buy cheap raw good and then sell slightly cheaper finished products that put local workers out of jobs. China brings over businesses and will not staff them with locals, but staffs them labor brought over from the mainland.
When I see articles and OPs like this, I realize the posters don't know or want to know the whole picture.
.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)It has been mentioned many many times and does not nean anything really. Applying book learning to world events in real time requires experience with how the world operates in reality, not merely theory.
People who deal in theory and refuse to look at reality get stuck in a box where they believe that they are right and it does not matter what the rest of us think. They are wrong and do not decide for us how we should go about things.
We are not going back to this maufacturing utopia. The world has changed since the nanufacturingjobs were here. It was not a utopia in the first place and many of those jobs were way dangerous and many functions are now AUTOMATED. Those jobs do not EXIST.
TheBlackAdder
(28,076 posts).
Your post shows you have no idea of what you speak, just pushing false narratives. Highlighting ignorance itself.
This is not "book learning" but active current analysis from multiple sources including various UN groups, and even the Clinton Foundation's AIDS program is covered and how well that benefited society.
Why don't you send them free food and used clothing to help drive local merchants out of business. Or buy a pair of Toms shoes so that few dollars of gifted benevolence provides a dispensation for contributing more. The only effective means to give to countries in need is by cash, but you have to make sure the right merchants are in place to deliver the funds.
Keep shoveling it.
.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)This Reminds me of the young adults at school who have not had the burdens of paying bills, taxes, voting consistantly, raising children- black and white thinking that helps absolutely no one get anywhere.
No nuance.
TheBlackAdder
(28,076 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)China is against it.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"The TPP would provide Brunei with special access to the U.S. market months after
its government adopted a new penal code that targets women and LGBT communities by making
same -sex sexual relations and adultery punishable by death by stoning.
Additionally, the penal code calls for flogging of women who have abortions and fines
and imprisonment for women who give birth out of wedlock.
The law also provides that marital rape is legal, so long as the wife is not under 13 years of age."
http://www.prideatwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/TPPFastTrackFactSheet.pdf
Controversial trade deal lacks LGBT-specific provisions
http://www.washingtonblade.com/2015/11/07/controversial-trade-deal-lacks-lgbt-specific-provisions/
The human rights aspects of the TPP are one of the reasons Hillary Clinton no longer supports the so called 'trade deal'. She is correct to oppose it.
katsy
(4,246 posts)Also google why doctors without borders oppose big pharmas welfare included in the TPP.
There are very valid reasons for the TPP to be reworked or killed.
The tpp allows for suing communities based on corporate perceived lost future profits because the citizens enact health, safety or environmental standards? Since when are corporations guaranteed a profit? Taxpayers would be on the hook for legal services to defend themselves from multi-national corporations? At the detriment of our schools libraries LE or fire depts? Fuck no. They are undermining our judicial system.
Fair trade is always welcome and healthy. The tpp is pure shit. Thats the only label necessary for it. Its neo-shit if anyone feels compelled to use this cool word LOL
bravenak
(34,648 posts)katsy
(4,246 posts)It's the one issue tgat should unite all people.
Society doesn't need tpp.
Want a decent trade deal? Get one that raises all boats including labor. Make the environment & human rights the centerpiece of trading in our market. You don't create an extra-judicial system that circumvents our laws and guarantees any business interests future profits.
What if people just decide to ban a certain pesticide that's hurting their community's wildlife & environment? Which social service do taxpayers cut to get representation in that corporate kangaroo court? Cut the education budget? Fire dept? Who the fuck guarantees future profits? Should we guarantee the local pizza guy a future profit if he supplies a school cafeteria should the school decide they don't want his pizza anymore? Fuck no.
We elect leaders to represent OUR fucking concerns. Of course corporate whores want to dismantle local & federal laws.
The tpp is rape & pillage by corporate fukwits who cant plan past their next earnings report fuck all!
DemFromPittsburgh
(102 posts)stupidicus
(2,570 posts)template as applied to racism, homophobia, etc charges by them.
Just because you and others think it is overused, misapplied, etc, doesn't mean that it is any particular case, much less disprove its existence as an ideology or the evil that flows from it.
https://www.google.com/search?q=TPP+and+neoliberlaism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
and I'd hazard the educated guess that if was the repubs pushing the TPP instead of BHO, all those now crowing about the exaggerators would themselves be the exaggerators.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Because often people are reactionary. Telling people they are neoliberal if they are not completely opposed to the tpp allows a special few to decide what progressivism is. They are wrong and do not understand the term.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)of like kind to suggesting that all such charges originate with figurative chicken littles.
labeling a specific policy/position/pursuit as "neoliberal" is easy enough, but branding a person as one over a single issue - not so much.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)I won't speak to the efficacy or lack of efficacy of any trade agreement but the demonization of trade by both the left and the right will not end well.
One of the main contributors to the economic depression that swept the world in the thirties and forties is that nations started to withdraw into their protectionist shells.
Building walls around our nation to keep out people and/or goods will not end well.
I pray my fellow Americans resist this noxious trend.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Protectionalism morphs into nationalism and we end up fucked over.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)DemFromPittsburgh
(102 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)DemFromPittsburgh
(102 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)sheshe2
(83,355 posts)K&R bravenak
bravenak
(34,648 posts)All sh wants is fairness and justice. No wonder I love you so much!
Cayenne
(480 posts)DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)The thing that really needs to stop is this attitude that isolationism is a good thing. It's NOT a good thing.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)Cha
(295,926 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Cha
(295,926 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Soon we will have neoliberal everything.
Cha
(295,926 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)HumanityExperiment
(1,442 posts)'Globalization is here. There is no putting that genie back in the bottle. Many who seem to oppose the TPP apparently have no clue what the TPP is'
Apparently you seem to fall into that category, here are the details, care to debate the facts on what TPP is?
Manufacturing jobs will be lost. As a result of NAFTA, the U.S. lost nearly 700,000 jobs. As a result of Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China, the U.S. lost over 2.7 million jobs. As a result of the Korea Free Trade Agreement, the U.S. has lost 70,000 jobs. The TPP would make matters worse by providing special benefits to firms that offshore jobs and by reducing the risks associated with operating in low-wage countries.
The TPP creates a special dispute resolution process that allows corporations to challenge any domestic laws that could adversely impact their expected future profits. These challenges would be hea rd before UN and World Bank tribunals which could require taxpayer compensation to corporations.
NAFTA, CAFTA, PNTR with China, and other free trade agreements have helped drive down the wages and benefits of American workers and have eroded collective bargaining rights.
The TPP will allow corporations to challenge any law that would adversely impact their future profits. Pending claims worth over $14 billion have been filed based on similar language in other trade agreements. Most of these claims deal with challenges to environmental laws in a number of countries.
The TPP would make it easier for countries like Vietnam to export contaminated fish and seafood into the U.S. The FDA has already prevented hundreds of seafood imports from TPP countries because of salmonella, e-coli, methyl-mercury and drug residues. But the FDA only inspects 1-2 percent of food imports and will be overwhelmed by the vast expansion of these imports if the TPP is agreed to.
Big pharmaceutical companies are working hard to ensure that the TPP extends the monopolies they have for prescription drugs by extending their patents (which currently can last 20 yea rs or more). This would expand the profits of big drug companies, keep drug prices artificially high, and leave millions of people around the world without access to life saving drugs. Doctors without Borders stated that the TPP agreement is on track to become the most harmful trade pact ever for access to medicines in developing countries.
Under TPP, governments would be barred from imposing capital controls that have been successfully used to avoid financial crises. These controls range from establishing a financial speculation tax to limiting the massive flows of speculative capital flowing into and out of countries responsible for the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s. In other words, the TPP would expand the rights and power of the same Wall Street firms that nearly destroyed the world economy just five years ago and would create the conditions for more financial instability in the future. Last year, I co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Harkin to create a Wall Street speculation tax of just 0.03 percent on trades of derivatives, credit default swaps, and large amounts of stock. If TPP were enacted, such a financial speculation tax may be in violation of this trade agreement.
The State Department, the U.S. Department of Labor, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International have all documented Vietnams widespread violations of basic international standards for human rights. Yet, the TPP would reward Vietnams bad behavior by giving it duty free access to the U.S. market.
Once TPP is agreed to, it has no sunset date and could only be altered by a consensus of all of the countries that agreed to it.
Other countries, like China, could be allowed to join in the future. For example, Canada and Mexico joined TPP negotiations in 2012 and Japan joined last year.
reference
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Another right wing post on DU.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I cannot stand rightwing nonsense and CTs.
David__77
(23,220 posts)It all depends on one's viewpoint and calculation of costs and benefits (and whose benefits and costs are included or excluded), in my opinion.
While a group may accrue net benefit, a specific individual within a group may accrue a net loss. I can understand people coming to different assessments.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)There will alway be losses and gains and we can re negotiate. I understand having reservations about portions that are not in our best interest but not the opposition to trade deals in general.
still_one
(91,965 posts)that created those jobs are gone.
We are part of the world economy.
When President Carter enacted the grain embargo against the Soviet Union due to their invasion of Afghanistan, it had very little effect because the Soviet Union acquired grain from alternative sources. When that embargo did end, commodity prices dropped significantly, so our farmers were hurt doubly. First by the actual embargo, and then when the embargo was lifted.
Simply disengaging from trade agreements will not cause jobs to come back, and in fact more jobs will be lost by it.
It will be new technologies and innovations, along with infrastructure building across a whole array of disciplines that will allow us to grow.
think
(11,641 posts)Only 28 House Dems voted for Fast Track.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/6/18/1394407/-These-are-the-28-Democrats-who-voted-for-fast-track-twice
The top House Democrat on trade still opposes the TPP
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/02/18/top-house-democrat-on-trade-opposes-trans-pacific-partnership/
The unions are against it.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/labor-unions-oppose-trans-pacific-partnership/
The environmental groups are against it.
http://www.sierraclub.org/compass/2015/10/more-dozen-environmental-organizations-warn-trans-pacific-partnership-risks
Doctors without Borders are against it.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2016/04/12/doctors-without-borders-among-more-than-groups-urging-congress-reject-tpp/HebB77Yi2tt5wwCOnA6z5O/story.html
It's really sad what is now being posted on this site and being applauded. Seriously.....
bravenak
(34,648 posts)This is about protectionism and notionalistic sentiments behind the opposition and the reactionary manner in which it is opposed. Opposition to particulars are sensible and warranted. Opposition to trade agreements and the TPP in general just because of false beliefs are not sensible.
think
(11,641 posts)aren't some nut jobs that are neonationalists.
Good grief...
bravenak
(34,648 posts)That might be a part of the problem
think
(11,641 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)think
(11,641 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)think
(11,641 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)So beyond that I direct my thought at nationalism and reactionary politics. Protectionism. Anti capitalism. Politics of the past. Nostalgia. Things that are not progressive.
melman
(7,681 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)People are counterreacting to free trade and globalisation and believe that they can bring manufacturing back and other jobs by utilizing protectionism, tarriffs, fees, increasing the cost of exports, etc.. Won't work. Many of the jobs are done by machines now.
Most of the criticism I see is generalized into an anti corporation/anti capitalism type of fear mongering.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Brunei wants to kill LGBT. Bigots call that 'good for profits'. They bash anyone who objects. 'You must let our friends kill your people or you are a nationalist!!!!' say the $$$ Before Humanity types.
DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)What she said, that you're failing to see, is that trade is not necessarily a bad thing. It's not a bad thing. As to manufacturing jobs coming back, it won't happen. Industries are too automated to allow for that level of manufacturing to come back.
I've said before, and many other have said before, that it's not all bad. There are sections which need to be reworked, that's a fact. But don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
alittlelark
(18,886 posts).... I am embarrassed for you for posting this - but then that's just me, when I am horrified by something I try to make justifications for the behavior of the person that has horrified me.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)alittlelark
(18,886 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)I am so hurt.
Response to bravenak (Reply #103)
Post removed
treestar
(82,383 posts)It's just a personal issue.
bullwinkle428
(20,627 posts)alittlelark
(18,886 posts)She will back it 100% as president, but needs to make us all feel as though she is against it until November.
Hekate
(90,202 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)will favor corporations over nations.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)JRLeft
(7,010 posts)trade agreements, we used to have trade treaties. Trade agreements are globalization on steroids aka neoliberalism (market based solutions). These trade agreements have lowered wages in the US, exploded income inequality, and virtually eliminated upwards mobility, but it has done wonders for the economic elite.
Sixty-two people have more money than 3.6 billion people. Globalization is all about finding cheaper labor to make a bigger profit. Corporations have been leaving China looking for cheaper labor. That is one reason why Malaysia is apart of the trade agreement even though it's a pro slavery state.
treestar
(82,383 posts)made between nations in any way corporations vs. nations? Apples and oranges. US corporations vs. other corporations.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)There won't be any bias there.
Lawyers are "biased" for their clients, and hell there is nothing wrong with that!
But the cases would be corporations vs. corporations. Most litigation is between corporations. Little guy vs. corporate cases are usually tort cases on contingency and thus perfectly winnable by the little guy. Small local businesses would not be involved in international trade arbitration tribunals. And a lot of them, the little guy employees' interests would be in line with the corporation they are working for.
It's much more nuanced than that. The trade agreement are meant to protect our country, our corporations we work for, as much as possible as opposed to other countries, so we can trade fairly with them. If anything these agreements force other countries up to our standards.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)What a pant load. Not surprising, given the source.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)You need to take a basic course in poly sci and look at the dark enlightenment, then get back to us.
alittlelark
(18,886 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)alittlelark
(18,886 posts)Either respond with something of value or BEGONE!!!!
Seriously - WTF?? I feel as though I am back in middle school with your posts/responses.
snot
(10,481 posts)make it easier for big corporations to ship our jobs overseas, pushing down our wages and increasing income inequality,
flood our country with unsafe imported food,
jack up the cost of medicines by giving big pharmaceutical corporations new monopoly rights to keep lower cost generic drugs off the market,
empower corporations to attack our environmental and health safeguards,
ban Buy American policies needed to create green jobs,
roll back Wall Street reforms,
sneak in SOPA-like threats to Internet freedom,
and undermine human rights.
https://www.citizen.org/TPP
bravenak
(34,648 posts)katsy
(4,246 posts)There's no ct there. It's all there by their own hand in b&w. No guessing necessary.
Trade agreements are good in general.
The tpp is shit. Every trade agreement that allows for a corporation to have veto ability over any nation's laws is garbage.
http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2014/09/15/345540221/philip-morris-sues-uruguay-over-graphic-cigarette-packaging
There is no benefit to any decent society in that vile corporate give away. The multinationals arent satisfied with corp welfare anymore. Now they want control over the law and who lives & dies.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/big-tobacco-puts-countries-on-trial-as-concerns-over-ttip-deals-mount-9807478.html
Reasonable people can't defend this shit. It's so not about protectionism. Protectionism is not prudent and had our interests truly been protected by the whore politicians who sold out this country to these fucking corporations, no one would be a protectionist. But the fuckers keep selling out working people, our health, our laws, our safety... they put everything on the chopping block. It's pure unadulterated greed and power.
Protectionism is the natural response to continually getting fucked over. Open markets are excellent... But these fuckers want the markets just to themselves & they rig it for max profit to boot.
bullwinkle428
(20,627 posts)resulted from previous trade agreements, as a cautionary tale of sorts when considering passage of the TPP.
http://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/BrokenPromises.pdf
Arazi
(6,829 posts)Clearly anonymous internet poster is better informed??!!11
JEB
(4,748 posts)Nice to read some realistic assessments instead of corporate propaganda.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)DonCoquixote
(13,615 posts)with makin g sure I's are dotted, cross t'ed, and promises kept. Yes, it is one thing to say the genie is not goign back in the bottle, it is another to make sure the genie does not go about breaking others.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Criticism is warranted and expected. Anti trade attitudes are not.
alittlelark
(18,886 posts)I like that!
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Go ahead, support this but know you're contributing to climate change catastrophes on steroids.
Blind allegiance has cast all sense aside. TPP is another nail in the planet's demise.
You and everyone else own that.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)nope
AllyCat
(16,036 posts)Actually being able to enforce our safety and environmental laws is reactionary?
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)they were discriminated against over domestic corporations and had already invested monies that are lost because of that, they might get a few million (although unlikely). Even then, they won't get the pipeline approved.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)We don't need no stinkin domestic laws anymore
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)gordianot
(15,226 posts)Be careful when identifying any Neo. Neo reactionary now there is a stretch, Neo conservative, European Neo Liberal and now someone attaches it to reactionary. Instead of calling people names it might work out to actually study the issues before providing labels. Apparently Hillary Clinton's statements of disagreement with TPP and NAFTA must be reactionary to some aspect with what amounts to corporate trade deals. Here is an idea lets return to the days of the East Indian Trade Company. Maybe we can equalize wages, lower the minimum wage, limit health care, ban Union membership, ignore State and Federal laws that gets in the way of international corporate profits.
Neo Reactionary
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)corporate arbitrators. And that is only one of its problems.
Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)melman
(7,681 posts)None at all.
Rex
(65,616 posts)The usual freak out occurs, the few are happy and the rest of us see it as nonsense. Happens every time. 2010 was an epic failure for this group, I am surprised they are rehashing old material.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Just like the small group who calls everything third way and sneers at 'identity politics'. So words just have absolutely no meaning anymore. I plan on neologisming soon.
Rex
(65,616 posts)You can pretend some words don't mean anything, the world will keep on going. Yes the Third Way and identity politics, so many experts on the subject now. Same in 2010 and the failure was epic.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Lock my post if you're so inclined, but I won't be associated with right wing horseshit I've been against for my entire adult life.
G_j
(40,366 posts)I come here less and less..
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)eridani
(51,907 posts)Funny how none of these horseshit pro-TPP posts ever mention the initials ISDS, no? I guess you are fine with being sued for $15 billion over not approving of Keystone XL? Geez--who would ever oppose such a thing unless they hated Canadians? That must be why.
Funny how people have been trading for millenia without rules granting corporations veto power over the decisions of elected governments. How did they ever manage?
Monk06
(7,675 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)the whole anti-TPP thing is a set up to confuse the gullible. People who know zip about economics, trade, hoping to gin up outrage over something they have no proof for, but the people who they want to reach have no proof otherwise.
"The TPP will ruin our economy and cost a lot of jobs." They've never proven that. Those asserting it have the duty to prove it, not just sit back and tell anyone questioning them it's their problem to disprove it.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)This is just like all the other times the sky was supposed to befalling.
TheKentuckian
(24,949 posts)vote in to represent our interests?
I know it is a crazy concept to wrap one's head around but a lot of us feel strongly about this and did before we even heard of Obama so it cannot be hand waved away because he is on the bandwagon with the Chamber of Commerce and elected TeaPubLieKLANS.