How Two Secretive Global Trade Deals Will Further Enrich the American Elite

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/world/how-two-secretive-global-trade-deals-will-further-enrich-american-elite



In polite circles in the United States, support for free trade is a bit like proper bathing habits: It is taken for granted. Only the hopelessly crude and unwashed would not support free trade.

There is some ground for this attitude. Certainly, the US has benefited enormously by being able to buy a wide range of items at lower cost from other countries. However, this does not mean that most people in the country have always benefited from every opening to greater trade.

And it certainly does not mean that the country will benefit from everything that those in power label as "free trade". That is the story we are seeing now as the Obama administration is pursuing two major "free trade" agreements that in fact have very little to do with free trade and are likely to hurt those without the money and power to be part of the game.

The deals in questions, the Trans-Pacific Partnership ( TPP) and the US-European Union "Free Trade" Agreement are both being pushed as major openings to trade that will increase growth and create jobs. In fact, eliminating trade restrictions is a relatively small part of both agreements, since most tariffs and quotas have already been sharply reduced or eliminated.

[msongs]

1. our president and congress working for their true masters nt

[djean111]

2. I am pretty sure the details of these pacts, if and when made public,

will make "Loyalty Day" a mockery of a holiday.
Loyalty to a country that is only loyal to corporate interests? feh.

[marmar]

3. k/r

Important piece, which naturally means it will sink like a stone in GD.

[xchrom]

4. true -- but

sadly so.

[pampango]

5. "eliminating trade restrictions is a relatively small part of both agreements, since most tariffs

quotas have already been sharply reduced or eliminated."

Germany and other European nations have stronger union protections than does the U.S., and labor believes the trade talks could pressure U.S. officials into strengthening U.S. laws. “People in labor see this as an opportunity, not as a threat,” said George Kohl, a senior director at the Communications Workers of America (CWA).

European trade union representatives will be lobbying EU negotiators to pressure the U.S. to strengthen its labor laws in the context of the trade talks, said Owen Herrnstadt, director of trade and globalization for the International Association of Machinists. And with a labor-friendly White House, unions would have a president predisposed to helping them improve labor standards working on their side. Herrnstadt said he “fully expect that the European trade unions will voice their position with EU negotiators.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/283913-unions-hope-us-eu-trade-talks-can-be-lever-to-change-labor-laws

(One administration strategy) will be the pursuit of trade agreements that notably do not include China. The most important of these is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a free trade agreement among a growing list of nations bordering the Pacific. It is the Obama administration’s avowed aim to construct a TPP with standards so high — especially rules regarding behavior by state-owned enterprises — that China could never join without transforming its economic system.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/12/10/u-s-china-economic-relations-in-the-wake-of-the-u-s-election/

...the negotiation is subject to the U.S. domestic politics. At the very beginning of the negotiation, the United States reminded other countries that the U.S. Congress would not accept a TPP without strong labor and environmental measures. Obviously, the United States aims to lower the comparative advantages of developing countries so as to create more job opportunities for itself.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90777/8113289.html

The point of these agreements is not to "eliminate trade restrictions" like tariffs. China does not like them because they perceive that the agreements contain "strong labor and environmental measures" that "lower the comparative advantages of developing countries" (specifically lower wages and weaker environmental regulations).

If these agreements are not primarily about lowering tariffs and other 'trade restrictions' (as the OP states) but about adding "strong labor and environmental measures" (as China fears), they could be a good deal. Since Canada and Mexico are part of these negotiations, "strong labor and environmental measures" would apply to our NAFTA partners as well, something missing in the original NAFTA and not added subsequently.

[snagglepuss]

6. .