Trans Pacific Partership

[stamperben]

No links, I think everyone here knows what this is - a trade deal. If you're unfamiliar with it look it up using your own sources of info. I'm surprised at the lack of attention this has had on these forums however. I've seen evidence that both the far right and far left oppose the deal while middle of the road Democrats and Republicans seem to support it. The "Fast track" deal regarding it is up for a vote in the Senate today I believe, a vote that would give Congress an up or down vote in the future after Obama has finalized the wording of the agreement - but with no way to make any changes to it.

For the record I am against it, just as with NAFTA under Clinton. It will be a job breaker for the U.S. allowing even MORE jobs to be shipped overseas. I am also against it for the way it is being dealt with for our elected officials, they only being able to read the draft in a basement room with none of their staffers present and without being able to take notes on it and they can only see it with the provision that they say NOTHING ABOUT WHAT THEY READ!

So, what's YOUR thinking on the TPP? (And please, let's keep the attention on the TPP and not rehash NAFTA, okay?)

 

[SepiaAndDust]

I'm against essentially allowing corporations to tax governments.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I've seen evidence that both the far right and far left oppose the deal while middle of the road Democrats and Republicans seem to support it. The "Fast track" deal regarding it is up for a vote in the Senate today I believe, a vote that would give Congress an up or down vote in the future after Obama has finalized the wording of the agreement - but with no way to make any changes to it.
<snip>
So, what's YOUR thinking on the TPP? (And please, let's keep the attention on the TPP and not rehash NAFTA, okay?)

Your assessment of who's for and against it mirrors my experiences. I'll admit, I haven't read much of the details, but just based on who's for it and against it, I really don't have a clue as to whether or not it's a good idea. Normally, I'd be inclined to trust some of the pundits I regularly trust (who happen to be against this plan), but there's one particular person I know who's started a couple of small, niche high-tech manufacturing firms (< 10 people usually) who leans fairly liberal, but sees this plan as important in helping him get his products into China. He's a pretty smart guy and this affects him more directly than any of the pundits, so I'm more inclined to trust him.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I'm against essentially allowing corporations to tax governments.

How will TPP do that?

 

[SepiaAndDust]

How will TPP do that?

Under TPP, global corporations can sue governments for the loss of future profits when those losses are a result of government actions.

Want more generic medication for the nation's poor and sick? Gotta pay the pharmaceutical companies.

Want cleaner air and water? Gotta pay the corporations that pollute.


Those examples are oversimplifications, of course, but the principle is true enough.

 

[football5680]

It sounds like it will hurt US Businesses and will simply lead to more jobs being shipped overseas. Right now even with tariffs, it is difficult for US companies to compete with the prices due to cheap labor in other countries and this deals seems like it would just kick down the door.

 

[wing2000]

We (the U.S.) espouse free enterprise....or maybe we don't. Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam got the message.

 

[TerranceL]

No links, I think everyone here knows what this is - a trade deal. If you're unfamiliar with it look it up using your own sources of info. I'm surprised at the lack of attention this has had on these forums however. I've seen evidence that both the far right and far left oppose the deal while middle of the road Democrats and Republicans seem to support it. The "Fast track" deal regarding it is up for a vote in the Senate today I believe, a vote that would give Congress an up or down vote in the future after Obama has finalized the wording of the agreement - but with no way to make any changes to it.

For the record I am against it, just as with NAFTA under Clinton. It will be a job breaker for the U.S. allowing even MORE jobs to be shipped overseas. I am also against it for the way it is being dealt with for our elected officials, they only being able to read the draft in a basement room with none of their staffers present and without being able to take notes on it and they can only see it with the provision that they say NOTHING ABOUT WHAT THEY READ!

So, what's YOUR thinking on the TPP? (And please, let's keep the attention on the TPP and not rehash NAFTA, okay?)

For the past few days I've been mulling over making a thread.

One of the scariest things about the TPP is the secrecy.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/...democratic-senator-blasts-obamas-tpp-secrecy/

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., today blasted the secrecy shrouding the ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.

“They said, well, it’s very transparent. Go down and look at it,” said Boxer on the floor of the Senate. “Let me tell you what you have to do to read this agreement. Follow this: you can only take a few of your staffers who happen to have a security clearance — because, God knows why, this is secure, this is classified. It has nothing to do with defense. It has nothing to do with going after ISIS.”

Boxer, who has served in the House and Senate for 33 years, then described the restrictions under which members of Congress can look at the current TPP text.

“The guard says, ‘you can’t take notes.’ I said, ‘I can’t take notes?’” Boxer recalled. “‘Well, you can take notes, but have to give them back to me, and I’ll put them in a file.’ So I said: ‘Wait a minute. I’m going to take notes and then you’re going to take my notes away from me and then you’re going to have them in a file, and you can read my notes? Not on your life.’”


“Instead of standing in a corner, trying to figure out a way to bring a trade bill to the floor that doesn’t do anything for the middle class — that is held so secretively that you need to go down there and hand over your electronics and give up your right to take notes and bring them back to your office — they ought to come over here and figure out how to help the middle class,” Boxer said.

In 2012, U.S. chief TPP negotiator Barbara Weisel said that “constantly evolving TPP chapter texts cannot be released to the public.” The same year, then-U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk claimed that secrecy was justified because openness and debate last decade killed talks surrounding the Free Trade Area of the Americas.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/opinion/dont-keep-trade-talks-secret.html?_r=0

National security secrecy may be appropriate to protect us from our enemies; it should not be used to protect our politicians from us. For an administration that paints itself as dedicated to transparency and public input, the insistence on extensive secrecy in trade is disappointing and disingenuous. And the secrecy of trade negotiations does not just hide information from the public. It creates a funnel where powerful interests congregate, absent the checks, balances and necessary hurdles of the democratic process.

Free-trade agreements are not just about imports, tariffs or overseas jobs. Agreements bring complex national regulatory systems together, such as intellectual property law, with implications for free speech, privacy and public health.

The level of secrecy employed by the Office of the United States Trade Representative is not typical of how most international agreements are negotiated. It’s not even how our negotiating partners say they want to operate. Yet it is the way that the Obama administration handles trade deals, from a failed anti-counterfeiting agreement more than two years ago to the TPP today. The trade representative’s office keeps trade documents secret as national security information, claiming that negotiating documents — including work produced by United States officials — are “foreign government information.”

The simple fact that they are too terrified to tell us what's in it is enough for me to hope that it never passes.

 

[bhsmte]

For the past few days I've been mulling over making a thread.

One of the scariest things about the TPP is the secrecy.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/...democratic-senator-blasts-obamas-tpp-secrecy/



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/opinion/dont-keep-trade-talks-secret.html?_r=0



The simple fact that they are too terrified to tell us what's in it is enough for me to hope that it never passes.

In reading some of the comments from Elizabeth Warren, the secrecy piece is what caught my eye as well. Granted, I don't know everything about it, but if you have to put a deal like this together in secret, it raises several red flags for me.

 

[stamperben]

Perhaps this trade deal should be called...
ObamaTrade

That'll get folks riled up about it.

We can then use ¡OBAMATRADE! to describe it everywhere.

(Although I'm not really crazy about this new "mad" smilie.)

 

[stamperben]

Here from VOX is a fairly comprehensive rundown on the TPP and FastTrack.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership, explained

 

[TerranceL]

An amazingly poor idea.

 

[TerranceL]

Ok, I tried the ever subtle bump via video but that didn't appear to do anything.

Do people REALLY not care about this issue? Have we all forgotten the joys and wonders NAFTA brought us? Liked watching your jobs go to mexico?

This is that many times over and it appears nobody but a small few care.

Taking a look at the first page of this forum it's depressing, this is a very important issue but because it's an issue created by both groups most of the forum doesn't appear to care.

I understand that politics has turned into little than a sport but c'mon where are you going to play when the political issues you've ignored cause you to lose the very stadium you play in?

 

[stamperben]

2 thumbs up for that TerranceL!

 

[stamperben]

I gotta wonder though, is it because those who identify with the tea party do not want to admit that they have something in common with the socialist types like myself?
I know they have no problem going against the GOP establishment.

 

[TerranceL]

I gotta wonder though, is it because those who identify with the tea party do not want to admit that they have something in common with the socialist types like myself?
I know they have no problem going against the GOP establishment.

I don't know if that much thought goes into it. I have a feeling they scan the OP doesn't see anything about (opposing political party) and ignore the thread.

Well, then again I have seen people on this forum who will tell you that Republicans or Democrats are servants of the devil themselves, so with those people I would definitely think you are right there.

 

[TerranceL]

The more I think about the more I think you are probably right.

It all comes down to the sports analogy. Die hard fans will sometimes treat the opposing teams fans like crud. It's just a game.

Here.. this is politics, "life and death" stuff. I think way too many people have aligned themselves so much with a party/side/issue that they can't conceive agreeing with people who they usually disagree with.

Then again whenever I make a thread like this that shares the blame equally it gets ignored for the most part too.

 

[stamperben]

A bump with a link for y'all.
Obamatrade.com

 

[Radicchio]

While there are pros and cons to any trade deal, the U.S. cannot sit on the sidelines while other countries enter into free trade agreements. Working in agriculture, trade is extremely important and we need TPP to remain competitive in the global marketplace. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is also in the works, which would improve trade relations with Europe.

 

[ananda]

If it's so secret that even board members/senators don't even know the details, isn't all the information about it in this thread all speculation?