Is TPP about Centrism or plain out corporatism? WTF, Obama, we are feeling betrayed

[mother earth]

especially given your recent statement about income inequality revelations being our greatest challenge.

Is anyone else feeling a sense of betrayal? TPP is not about serving what's right or what's needed on this issue, it's a very clear handover to the corporate elitism and new found personhood that has sparked this greatest challenge of our time, is it not?

When does the BS end? This is why we need real representation, these issues will only grow more profoundly and the descent hastened, under this TPP farce.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/08/tpp-trade-agreement_n_4409211.html

Obama Trade Deal Faces Backlash Over New Corporate Political Powers

You simply cannot claim truth about income inequality & then proceed to deliver the death blows.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. I too feel betrayed by this ...

It is wrong from start to finish.

Why, Obama......WHY?

[mother earth]

2. From HuffPo's above link:

The U.S. is also facing major resistance on bank regulation standards. The Obama administration is seeking to curtail the use of "capital controls" by foreign governments. These can include an extremely broad variety of financial tools, from restricting lending in overheated markets to denying mass international outflows of currency during a financial panic. The loss of these tools would dramatically limit the ability of governments to prevent and stem banking crises.

"The positions are still paralyzed," the December memo reads, referring to the Financial Services Chapter. "The United States shows zero flexibility."

[okaawhatever]

3. From what I understand, the underlying goal with TPP is to distance China and reduce their hold

on manufacturing. china has, through currency manipulation and no patent protection, made their manufacturing economy explode. This often has happened at the expense of other Asia-Pacific countries. One of the other goals is to increase trade between US and EU. I know corporate America will have a great deal of influence, but I don't think they're running the show as much as others do. We'll see when it's all said and done, but China is doing to Asia-Pacific manufacturing what Wal-Mart did to mom and pop or regional stores here iin the US. Gaming the system and forcing others out of business, once they have a near monopoly they will change their policies.

[djean111]

4. I don't think that the provisions granting corporations the right to sue governments over

lost opportunities for profit in a rigged court have much to do with China.
Trade provisions seem a very very small part of the TPP. I think the trade part is just a Trojan horse.

[sabrina 1]

5. It's a huge betrayal.

What we have learned over the past decade. Never pay attention to the WORDS, watch what they DO.

We are being sold out. Bigtime.

[jazzimov]

6. So, what is the TPP about?

Can anyone tell me that? NO. Because it is still being negotiated.
Is it about Centrism, or Corporatism, or is it the best thing since ice cream?
Nobody knows, because IT DOESN'T EXIST! it's still being negotiated!

And after the provisions have been decided, then it still has to go before Congress for a vote. Even if it is "fast-tracked", which doesn't look likely.

I typically don't support Free Trade Agreements, but this is just anti-Obama BS. Trying to stir up anti-Obama sentiments over nothing. Congratulations on your RW BS. You may think you are being Progressive, but you're playing right into the RW hands.

[mother earth]

7. Apparently, so is our president. I don't relish his tactics and the fact that this "negotiation"

has been conducted without the transparency promised and without regard to income inequality...your first question really belies your ignorance on TPP...go and read the article, and others that are cringe-worthy.

I guess HuffPo is RW BS too, are you kidding? Get real, you are buying into what you want to believe because dems don't do this, now do they?

I wish I could rally round this trade agreement that's being pushed, but the agenda is clear, and it has nothing to do with our ideals as dems. I don't try to stir up anti-Obama sentiment, but I'll be damned if I'm going to cheerlead this fiasco. It's a HUGE.. betrayal of democratic values.

It's a corporate giveaway, worst it devastates what few safeguards we have, it's a monster in the making.

You think the RW has orchestrated this? You need to follow this "trade agreement" and give it serious attention.

[solarhydrocan]

8. Both party platforms support the TPP

any opposition from the tea party is insignificant.

Democratic Party Platform
http://www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform

We remain committed to finding more markets for American-made goods—including using the Trans-Pacific Partnership between the United States and eight countries in the Asia-Pacific...

Republican Party Platform
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=101961

Because American workers have shown that, on a truly level playing field, they can surpass the competition in international trade, we call for the restoration of presidential Trade Promotion Authority. It will ensure up or down votes in Congress on any new trade agreements, without meddling by special interests. A Republican President will complete negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership to open rapidly developing Asian markets to U.S. products. Beyond that, we envision a worldwide multilateral agreement among nations committed to the principles of open markets, what has been called a "Reagan Economic Zone," in which free trade will truly be fair trade for all concerned.

Trans-Pacific Partnership: The biggest trade deal you’ve never heard of
Salon.com Tuesday, Oct 23, 2012
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/23/everything_you_wanted_to_know_about_the_trans_pacific_partnership/

Why isn’t trade a part of the election? After all, in 1992, Ross Perot made the last successful third-party run for the presidency, mostly on the strength of his anti-NAFTA rhetoric. Today, however, on the core question of these trade agreements, the parties basically agree. President Barack Obama has pledged to double U.S. exports as a core policy goal, and the Democratic platform lists the TPP as a “historic high-standard agreement” that will help accomplish this. The GOP platform pledges that “a Republican President will complete negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership to open rapidly developing Asian markets to U.S. products.” Both party leaders argue that exports are one key to creating high-quality American jobs...more

President Obama Speaks on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

It's a gang bang

[mother earth]

9. Truth, and both are corporate owned.

http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=5411&frcrld=1

More Power to Corporations to Attack Nations

Extreme Foreign Investor Rights & Private Enforcement Would Promote Offshoring, Attacks Against Our Laws


Under the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) "free trade" agreement, foreign firms would gain an array of privileges:

*Rights to acquire land, natural resources, factories without government review
*Risks and costs of offshoring to low wage countries eliminated
*Special guaranteed “minimum standard of treatment” for relocating firms
*Compensation for loss of “expected future profits” from health, labor environmental, laws (indirect or “regulatory” takings compensation)
*Right to move capital without limits
*New rights cover vast definition of investment: intellectual property, permits, derivatives
*Ban performance requirements, domestic content rules. Absolute ban, not only when applied to investors from signatory countries


A major goal of U.S. multinational corporations for the TPP is to impose on more countries a set of extreme for-eign investor privileges and rights and their private enforcement through the notorious “investor-state” system. This system elevates individual corporations and investors to equal standing with each TPP signatory country's government- and above all of us citizens.

Under this regime, foreign investors can skirt domestic courts and laws, and sue governments directly before tribunals of three private sector lawyers operating under World Bank and UN rules to demand taxpayer compensation for any domestic law that investors believe will diminish their "expected future profits." Over $3 billion has been paid to foreign investors under U.S. trade and investment pacts, while over $14 billion in claims are pending under such deals, primarily targeting environmental, energy, and public health policies.

[mother earth]

10. Ed Schultz is absolutely right, this isn't being done for US jobs or wage earners.

He's telling it like it is. I've never heard anyone accuse him of spewing RW BS either.

[Wilms]

11. ^