General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums100% corporate. 100%. All of the advisors to the admin on upcoming trade deals.
No advocacy groups. No unions. No environmental groups. No anti-poverty groups.
All corporate.
What does that say?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Atman
(31,464 posts)"Bend over."
cali
(114,904 posts)it also expresses the contempt that the USTR has for us and for the groups it excluded. It says that corporations really do have free run of this administration.
jsr
(7,712 posts)
Trailrider1951
(3,414 posts)from the politicians they have bought. 
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)
bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)
solarhydrocan
(551 posts)
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)
marmar
(77,072 posts)
B Calm
(28,762 posts)
polichick
(37,152 posts)
CrispyQ
(36,457 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"100% corporate. 100%. All of the advisors to the admin on upcoming trade deals. No advocacy groups. No unions. No environmental groups. No anti-poverty groups. "
...did you get that information?
Advisory Committees
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/intergovernmental-affairs/advisory-committees
Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations (ACTPN)
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/intergovernmental-affairs/advisory-committees/advisory-committee-trade-policy-and-negotiati
Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee (TEPAC)
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/intergovernmental-affairs/advisory-committees/trade-and-environment-policy-advisory-committ
cali
(114,904 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)Where's that information coming from?
I found those here: http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2012/june/transparency-and-the-tpp
Where'd you get your information?
"fail. do you even read your own links?"
That's not a response to the question.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)Not one of the consulting groups listed by the USTR is listed as having consulted or advised on the TPP.
NOT A FUCKING ONE.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)USTR works closely with its trade advisory committees throughout the negotiating process to solicit their comments, advice, and feedback on various chapters and negotiating positions, and to regularly brief them on progress in the TPP negotiations.
Over the course of the TPP negotiations, USTR has conducted more than 147 meetings with the trade advisory committees. Since June 11, 2010, USTR has posted 110 TPP documents to a website for cleared trade advisors to review and provide comments.
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2012/june/transparency-and-the-tpp
If USTR has conducted 147 meetings with the folks they themselves have listed as the trade advisory committee members in regard to TPP, then yea, consider yourself refuted. 100%.
cali
(114,904 posts)Look at the advisory members. And bullshit is what the USTR promulgates.
fuck, do some actual investigation. Start with Public Citizen, EFF. Get the fucking facts.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)There are definitely members from corporations and there are definitely members from non-profits groups and environmental groups and scientific groups and union related groups.
And no, I'm not going to do your homework for you. You've provided nothing in the way of information. ProSense asked you where you get your information and you got all pissy about her links while doing jack shit in the way of actually backing up your claim.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)And union representatives are in the minority here although workers are the majority in the workplace and among consumers.
Pete Peterson is well represented:
Jeffrey J. Schott Peterson Institute for International Economics
And here
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/intergovernmental-affairs/advisory-committees/advisory-committee-trade-policy-and-negotiati
C. Fred Bergsten Peterson Institute for International Economics
So we know that Pete Peterson gets his two cents in at all the trade negotiations and advisory boards. But the average working guy and consumers? Not so much.
I'm sorry. But your post just confirms the imbalance in representation in the administration's trade advisory and negotiating bodies. And the influence of the Peterson Institute in Obama's administration is way out of line in my opinion. Peterson is a vocal and persistent opponent of Social Security and working people. To give him so much sway in the Obama administration is a betrayal of the interests of working people.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)not been 100% accurate. But the point still stands. It appears that corporations are strongly influencing the TPP. Can that be refuted?
The TPP is being negotiated in secret. The administration wants to "fast-track" the treaty through to avoid debate.
There doesnt seem to be any argument in favor of the TPP only attempts at poking holes in the many arguments against.
Interesting though is that those trying to refute arguments against, wont take a stand of their own. Most dont even enter the discussion unless trying to refute.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You say "A."
Someone provides evidence that it is indisputably not "A."
Their response is called a refutation of your "A" claim.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Refuting A doesnt have anything to do with the discussion. It's simply a poor attempt at distraction. She and you are trying to change the discussion from the TPP to refuting some small part of the argument against.
If a witness saw a man rob a store and gave a description of the man and someone else points out that the description wasnt 100% accurate, it does not mean the store wasnt robbed.
The following are the issues that need to be refuted.
The TPP is being written/negotiated in secret.
It appears that corporations are strongly influencing the agreement.
It appears that TPP may have a significant impact on American jobs.
The administration is definitely trying to "fast-track" this agreement thru Congress.
The conservatives have come out in favor of this agreement.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)But it has EVERYTHING to do with what I posted ... the post to which you responded.
Rather than attempting to defend/excuse a clearly inaccurate statement, you probably should have latched onto my Post #133 http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4346292
But then again, that wouldn't have given you anything to whine about.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to discuss the issue which is the TPP.
"But then again, that wouldn't have given you anything to whine about." Do you think that is effective or can you just not control yourself?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I can't control myself when someone makes, then attempts to defend nonsense, then rather than just admit an error, plays the victim when someone laughs at their foolishness and whining.
Actually, I absolutely could exercise some control ... I just choose not to.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I'm still wadding through the documents that have found their way on-line.
See, silly me ... I prefer to KNOW what I am talking about, rather than parrot what a pundit (or internet hero) has said.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)commit themselves as favoring the agreement.
We know a lot about the agreement from what has been leaked.
We know a lot about previous trade deals.
We know that unions and environmentalists are against this agreement based on what they know.
We know that it is deliberately being kept from us by the administration.
We know that the conservatives seem to like this agreement.
We know that the administration is trying to ramrod the agreement thru Congress without debate.
But you dont have an opinion? I dont think you are fooling anyone other than possibly yourself.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Have I "disparaged the opposition to the agreement"? Is that what you call it when someone points out a misstatement of fact?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Whatever.
But to be clear, when someone presents information that counters another's claim, that is termed a REFUTATION. Agreed?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and this is done. It's really not that hard ... for emotionally secure/mature individuals.
I know ... Krusty don't play that, either. 
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Apparently just voting for a Dem no matter what, doesn't work out so well for we the people. Does the centrist 3rd way really need us anymore? I feel left out.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Or they would not have a presence on DemocraticUnderground. Imo, if they did not need us they would run as Republicans. The "Left" has gained much strength. The votes come from the left now. Real Democrats are left leaning. These 3rd way types are not Democrats, they need purged from the party.
Broward
(1,976 posts)as they pull the party further and further right. Now, if you don't support what was a rightwing position no more than 20 years ago, you're a left wing teabagger or something.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)As long as they hold the checkbook, ain't a gonna happen. Ever.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)The feeling I made a difference lasts till the 10:00 O'clock news. Then it's back to my regularly scheduled cynicism.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)That'll stop the TPP.
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)I mean, WTF is Obama thinking: proposing measures to create jobs and fight poverty, and all the while pushing for the most dangerous and destructive bill ever.
Of course, Congress has a say: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024339496
No Congressional support, no TPP. Still, a lot of what I've read is pure BS. LOL!
TBF
(32,047 posts)But where will these jobs be created? Where is he fighting poverty? Not in this country.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)TBF
(32,047 posts)The rest of us give a shit about people over profits. The third way, not so much.
"The rest of us give a shit about people over profits. The third way, not so much. "
...more nonsense.
TBF
(32,047 posts)In which countries will jobs be created?
What kind of jobs will be created?
Who will be eligible to apply for these jobs?
How much will these jobs pay?
Please be very specific with your answers.
"In which countries will jobs be created?
What kind of jobs will be created?
Who will be eligible to apply for these jobs?
How much will these jobs pay? "
...they say there is nothing like a silly question, but sometimes I question that notion.
Do you have a link to an existing Obama proposal that supported job-creation overseas? I mean, he's put forward a number of proposals, and some even involved enforcing trade agreements to protect American jobs.
Obama Announces Institute to Create Manufacturing Jobs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024336479
by TomP
Good timing for the speech today in Ohio.
The decision by a World Trade Organization dispute panel said Beijing was breaking WTO rules by requiring all yuan-denominated payment cards issued in China to work with the network belonging to China UnionPay (CUP), as well as requiring every merchant and ATM to accept CUP's cards.
<...>
White House spokesman Jay Carney called the ruling a "win" that showed "our determination to go after China's efforts to distort global trade rules".
"That is precisely why 3.5 years into the president's first term we have doubled the rate of WTO cases against China, versus the prior administration," he told reporters aboard Air Force One.
cnbc
This means a few more jobs:
"The WTO panel agrees that China's pervasive and discriminatory measures deny a level playing field to American service providers, which are world leaders in this sector," Kirk said.
"This decision will help US companies and increase American jobs as a more efficient credit and debit payment system in China enables consumers to buy more goods, including quality, made-in-America products," he said.
According to industry estimates, the United States will gain 6,000 jobs related to electronic payment services, the Obama administration said.
- more -
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/16/1110564/-Obama-Admin-Wins-Trade-Complaint-Against-China-At-WTO
The World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) Appellate Body yesterday upheld President Obama’s decision based on U.S. trade law to provide relief for American tire industry workers against surging imports from China of passenger and light truck tires.
In September 2009, Obama became the first president to enforce U.S. trade law when he imposed tariffs to protect domestic workers against a surge in tire imports from China. The original complaint came from the United Steelworkers (USW), and Obama’s decision led to a rebound in the tire industry.
http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/09/06/wto-upholds-obamas-tire-industry-relief-decision/
Partnering with Local Communities: The First Five “Promise Zones”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024336479#post30
Maybe, he'll reintroduce this proposal:
Macroeconomic Advisers on the American Jobs Act, proposed a year ago:
We estimate that the American Jobs Act (AJA), if enacted, would give a significant boost to GDP and employment over the near-term.
-The various tax cuts aimed at raising workers’ after-tax income and encouraging hiring and investing, combined with the spending increases aimed at maintaining state & local employment and funding infrastructure modernization, would:
-Boost the level of GDP by 1.3% by the end of 2012, and by 0.2% by the end of 2013.
-Raise nonfarm establishment employment by 1.3 million by the end of 2012 and 0.8 million by the end of 2013, relative to the baseline
Of course, it that had happened, Obama would be more or less a lock for reelection. Instead, having blocked the president’s economic plans, Republicans can point to weak job growth and claim that the president’s policies have failed.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/08/the-jobs-program-that-wasnt/
TBF
(32,047 posts)Lots of print and no answers. We've already experienced how those "trickle down" tax cuts work and frankly we're sick of being peed on.
You can let the boss know we're not buying it. NAFTA was bad and TPP will be even worse for American workers.
"Lots of print and no answers."
Yeah, that print is invisible ink. Nothing to see here...denial!
tkmorris
(11,138 posts)The poster asked 4 very pertinent questions. If you have answers, post them. Try to be succinct.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"it just doesn't say anything"
...is "it just doesn't say anything" you want to hear. Still, since simplistic nonsense is being demanded, I'll respond.
"In which countries will jobs be created? (The U.S.
What kind of jobs will be created? (Manufacturing and infrastructure)
Who will be eligible to apply for these jobs? (Americans)
How much will these jobs pay? " (Some will be high-wage)
Hey, feel free to read the details at the link.
LOL!
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The fact is that as long as we allow Chinese goods produced at slave labor wages with horrible environmental impacts to enter our country and be sold here without sizable compensation for the damage they do to our economy and environment, we are harming ourselves when we trade with China.
Obama's manufacturing stimulus plan will not work if the prices of the products produced are undercut by sloppy Chinese factories.
The damage that the sloppily made foreign imports cause to our environment because their short lives and planned obsolescence is horrible. Of course you can undercut American prices and manufacturing with junky products.
I don't think that Obama's manufacturing stimulus will work unless we impose some labor and environmental standards on imports and support our own manufacturing by imposing tariffs on certain foreign goods.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Obama's manufacturing stimulus plan will not work if the prices of the products produced are undercut by sloppy Chinese factories...I don't think that Obama's manufacturing stimulus will work unless we impose some labor and environmental standards on imports and support our own manufacturing by imposing tariffs on certain foreign goods."
...thanks for the expert predictions.
I'll revisit this comment when the initiave fails.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)TBF
(32,047 posts)Oh you are so clever. You kill me!
Just like the TPP will further kill the jobs in this country.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Well said.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Their labor practices are unfair and give them an economic advantage. Their environmental practices are even worse. We should be charging taxes for all Chinese import. We should tax them to compensate for the economic damage that their labor and environmental malpractices cause us.
So I don't find your list of wonderful claims against China to be very impressive. We should not even trade with an economic outlaw state like China.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)And tariffs on any nation that doesn't respect basic human/workers rights and environmental standards.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)The TPP will only create jobs in the poor nations like Vietnam. They have no purchasing power to buy our products. It will be a total loss for American workers.
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Your own post substantiates the argument that the Obama administration names to committees and posts pro-corporate and corporate representatives in numbers that far, far exceed those of representatives of consumer or employee or public interest organizations. The Obama administration can be said to the a corporate administration, and almost entirely corporate administration.
Your own post has definitively persuaded me of that fact. You would think that working people had no interest in limiting or expanding trade agreements, in fact almost no interest at all in the substance and fine print of the agreements. That seems to be the Obama administration's attitude on it judging from the information at the links to your post.
I encourage everyone interested in the trade policies of the Obama administration to follow the links provided in ProSense's post above. The information is quite revealing. I would like to read some comments by other DUers on what they find at those links. Some of you may recognize names or companies and add to my impression or even correct me. But I think those very links substantiate the argument that the Obama administration's trade policies are virtually dictated by the corporations. Any union or consumer participation is just for window-dressing. The majority of the citizens who are union members, working people indirectly represented by unions or consumers are in the minority on Obama's committees and advisory councils -- window-dressing at most. It most be frustrating to be a token union representative on one of Obama's trade commissions.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)despite your the spin, the OP claim:
"100% corporate. 100%. All of the advisors to the admin on upcoming trade deals. No advocacy groups. No unions. No environmental groups. No anti-poverty groups. "
...is 100 percent nonsense.
Now, excuse me. I have to go find the ever-popular Schweitzer 2016 thread.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)It is interesting that you will post about the TPP while a certain group of others wont. They are conspicuous by their absence.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"I find it interesting that some here, when backed into a corner, resort to the ridicule emoticon."
..."the ridicule emoticon"? Whatever it is, thanks for sharing what you find "interesting."
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"interesting"
Seriously, what's the "ridicule emoticon"?
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts) rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)will save us. Just believe. Just have FAITH. When H. Clinton-Sachs gives Wall Street the key to the Treasury, and gives us a ballon, have FAITH that it's for our own good.
Who are our enemies? The Republicans that want to kill our poor and elderly? Yes
The Damn-Dems that will sell us down the river for ________ (I really cant imagine what Conservative Democrats want. My only guess is that they adore the wealthy and idolize them, and hope that someday they will be invited to tea).
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)want their payment. And they're getting it.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)The tail chasing by some. Just yelling "corporatist" is exciting.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)With all your links I would think you would be able to show us the benefits.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
daleanime
(17,796 posts)
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)It is demonstrated that corporations are, in fact, NOT people, as they have far more power in this Country than any single person. I'm tired of working for them, I'm tired of my tax dollars going to bail them out, I'm tired of reading about food stamps being cut, poor people having to take drug tests to get the measly money TANF pays them... while quietly, these corporations are closing the lid on the coffin of our democracy.
I'm just tired. It's getting harder and harder to believe that we can really make a difference. I'm tired of having to kiss their asses at work. I don't dislike the President, maybe he has no choice in some of these matters, maybe it's not up to him, maybe he HAS been threatened, or something. The candidate was so very different from the President... and of course, that's always the case. I just hoped for something different.
What are our options here, anyway? Protest in mass numbers? Remember how that worked out during the Iraq war and the buildup to it? Protest zones, inaccurate media reporting, police brutality. Or OWS - again, more of the same, beaten down, demonized, imprisoned, scoffed at.
Since the Citizens United ruling, it has become even worse. These politicians generally don't wipe their asses without some kind of corporate permission. With the exception of a rare few... they're just working for their bosses, the same way we are.
Damn I'm tired.
colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)We have to get money out of politics - we need public funding of elections and throw "Citizens United" in the dustbin period, end of story other than getting voting procedures we can trust and impartial fair district drawing.
Maybe then we can rid the US of neo democrats - often liberal on social issues but bought and sold by big business and Wall Street just like the righties. The Bushes, the Clintons. The wry meme that the last liberal president was Nixon has a big kernel of truth in it and that's sad.
We're at a moment where Obama rebukes Elizabeth Warren for actually doing her job and asking Jamie Dimon some hard questions instead of kissing his ring. I would think that might even take a few Obamabots aback - on 2nd thought maybe not, they're in their own little fantasy land.
City Lights
(25,171 posts)The people are irrelevant.
is what I say. 
SHRED
(28,136 posts)All the flowery populist speeches in the world cannot cover up this President's corporatist ways. From trade to health care he has proven where his loyalty resides. Not allowing a public option into the debate and now the TPP? What's next? Keystone XL?
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)The advisory committee system, established by the U.S. Congress in 1974, was created to ensure that U.S. trade policy and trade negotiating objectives adequately reflect U.S. public and private sector interests. The advisory committee system consists of 28 advisory committees, with a total membership of approximately 700 citizen advisors.
USTR's Office of Intergovernmental Affairs & Engagement (IAPE) manages the advisory committee, in cooperation with other agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor, and the Environmental Protection Agency. IAPE is also designated as the state coordinator for the World Trade Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement, and provides outreach to official state points of contact, governors, legislatures, and associations on all trade issues of interest to states.
IAPE frequently speaks with outside groups in order to build support for a robust trade agenda and creates materials for public distribution.
Advisory Committees
Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations (ACTPN)
Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee (APAC)
Agricultural Technical Advisory Committee for Trade (ATAC)
Industry Trade Advisory Committees (ITAC)
Intergovernmental Policy Advisory Committee (IGPAC)
Labor Advisory Committee (LAC)
Trade Advisory Committee on Africa (TACA)
Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee (TEPAC)
Now click on the last link, for example:
DUTIES, FUNCTIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
The Committee shall be designated as the Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee.
The Committees objectives and the scope of its activity are as follows:
The Committee will provide the U.S. Trade Representative with policy advice on issues involving trade and the environment. It is anticipated that the U.S. Trade Representative will share the advice received with other relevant agencies interested in the subject matter.
The Committee shall at the conclusion of negotiations for each trade agreement referred to in Section 102 of the Act, provide to the President, to Congress, and to the U.S. Trade Representative a report on such agreement which shall include an advisory opinion on whether and to what extent the agreement promotes the interests of the United States
That's right AT THE CONCLUSION OF NEGOTIATIONS THE NAMED ARE INVITED TO COMMENT.
And you won't find the Sierra Club- or NRDC or WWF listed.
Prosense is wrong, wrong, wrong on this.
subterranean
(3,427 posts)Look at the member list of the Committee (TEPAC) you cited. Sure, it doesn't include the Sierra Club or WWF, but it does include the Humane Society, Environmental Defense Fund, Consumers Union, Oceana, the Center for Biological Diversity, and other non-corporate members.
Which does refute your claim that the advisors are 100% corporate. 80%, maybe, but not 100%.
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/intergovernmental-affairs/advisory-committees/trade-and-environment-policy-advisory-committ
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)a tiny, tiny minority of the total membership. Yet those under-represented groups of people make up the vast majority of Americans. Sorry, but the citizens of the US are getting a bad deal in these trade deals. The trade deals are the means through which big corporations profit from the overly indebted US markets, realize the profits in the third world at extremely low if any tax rates and then "invest" in the slavery of the third world's indigents. It is a racket, and the Obama administration is running it just as every Democratic and even worse, Republican administration has since at least 1985, maybe 1980.
Face it. "Free" trade is the way that our governments fool us into think that we can still buy something with our dollars. Imports are cheap. That makes Americans feel fat and happy when in fact we are, as individuals, living on borrowed money and borrowed time. Cheap imports are the substitute for good labor policies, policies that reward work and ingenuity. It's a crying shame, but as long as we have the dollar stores and Walmart and other import stores selling junk at prices we can afford, we can be turned into a "service economy" (read impoverished, dependent economy) to the profit of the corporations and their managers.
It's a scam. And the media presents it so that people don't really stop to look and see for themselves and think through how they are being scammed. Might as well put soda pop in a pretty bottle and sell it as fine wine. That's the kind of scam we are being sold.
pampango
(24,692 posts)countries proves that.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The imbalance in the representation on the trade commissions speaks for itself. In the US, labor, working people are under-represented in every facet of this administration. Sure, there are a few token seats saved for the unimportant so that they won't appear to be left out, but there are not enough seats to permit working people to have any influence.
I went to the trade commission sites that Pro Sense listed with an attitude of unbiased curiosity. I was shocked at what I found. It is worse than I could ever have suspected.
And, sorry, but while trade and good labor policy in the abstract are not mutually exclusive, just look at the record since Nixon opened up relations with China in the 1970s, and you will see a slow-starting but steadily increasing to a fever pitch of shift in our economy from manufacturing to service. And a service economy is inevitably a low-wage and inefficient economy.
Trade is good for those who buy and sell influence and who have money stacked up off-shore. The trade that we have encouraged through our give-away trade agreements is detrimental to the jobs, to the laborers of our country and to America in the long run.
The US economy has been harmed by every trade agreement we have entered into. We are trading on our past reputation as a major industrial power. Our GDP is a phony measure. It measures monetized exchanges in the public marketplace. Having lived in other countries in which much of the work is not as monetized as ours, I think the GDP as we measure it is not all that relevant to the success of the nation or economy.
Service jobs are pretty much a dead end. Increasingly, more of even our service jobs are performed overseas at low rates only to be billed here at high cost.
I think that the entire trade policy of the US is detrimental to the American people.
pampango
(24,692 posts)a strong safety net. Of course without those liberal policies you have a regressive, unequal society no matter what your trade policy is.
I think that our trade policy is the least of our problems. Progressive countries have the above-mentioned tax, union and safety net policies have the most strongest middle classes and most equitable distributions of income in the world. The fact that they trade more than a regressive country like the US may not be the reason for their strong middle classes. It may be that progressive countries simply choose to trade extensively because they think it benefits society and they already have the policies in place to make sure that everyone shares fairly in the proceeds of trade.
If we do not deal with our regressive tax system, anti-labor labor policies and nonexistent safety net, nothing we do with trade policy will help. Republicans in the US and conservatives in other countries have proven that they can construct a regressive, unequal society with high tariffs or low tariffs. FDR dismantled the republican-created high tariff version of corporate rule with lower tariffs, tighter regulation, a stronger safety net, progressive taxes and legal support for strong unions.
He realized what Germans and other Europeans understand today - it is how you structure your society from the inside, not your trade policy, that determines how fair and equitable your society is. Until we follow FDR's lead on this, we are just tinkering around the edges.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)And people who do service jobs are interchangeable. I could be as effective as a sales clerk in a department store selling imported goods as anyone. My skills would be sufficient. I can count. I can be pleasant. I can remember where things are. I can punch in on time. I might need a few weeks to practice and get up to speed, but I would be interchangeable with any other person who bathes and speaks good English in that service job.
People who do manufacturing or technical work have skills. Even if they don't have college degrees, they are not easily replaced in a job.
Because one employee is interchangeable with another in most service jobs, service employees have no leverage in the workplace. They can be too easily replaced. Training is not so costly. The leverage is almost entirely on the employer's side when it comes to labor negotiations.
In a country like ours in which liberal government and pro-worker policies and public attitudes are not prevalent, we need to have an economy that is based on manufacturing and the production of technology (in other words a valuable workforce) in order to have an economy in which labor has much of any voice.
As long as Americans can just import cheap shoes, cars, mowers, whatever from overseas, as long as we do not have a strong manufacturing sector in our economy, conservatives will dominate politically. Working people will not have much voting clout or economic clout.
That is why I think that "free" trade is bad for most Americans. It makes us dependent on the corporations because they provide us everything at low prices. Sooner or later those low prices will rise, but no one is thinking about that. Our dollar will not hold its value if we continue to have the terrible trade imbalance. Judging from past trade agreements, yet another agreement will just worsen our trade imbalance and increase our unemployment. Trade is good, but we need to have a more positive trade balance before we increase our trade with other countries. And we need to protect some of our industries against the low-wage economies with which we propose to enter into the TPP.
I suspect that our trade policy is mostly inspired by our wish to buy friends. You cannot buy true friends. True friendship is based on mutual respect. Our trade imbalance is a more important problem than we seem to be recognizing. We need to deal with it.
pampango
(24,692 posts)types of service jobs that to say "service jobs are "interchangeable" is ridiculous. I worked some manufacturing jobs when I was younger and nothing I did could not have been done by anyone else either. I was quite 'interchangeable' but that does not mean that manufacturing jobs are all interchangeable. If you have a study comparing the interchangeability of manufacturing vs. service jobs I would love to see it. If this is just your "common knowledge" that is another thing.
All developed economies are becoming service economies in terms of employment, even while manufacturing output continues to grow. All of the other countries on the chart below are more progressive than the US so their middle class remains strong even they, too, are becoming 'service economies'.
You can't by force of will recreate a manufacturing-based economy any more that you could have recreated an agriculture-based economy a hundred years ago. You can create a progressive society based on tax, union, regulation and safety net policies that recreates a strong middle class. It has been done in many countries. We do not have to reinvent the wheel or focus on fixing something (trade policy) that progressive countries embrace.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)You can require imported goods to meet certain quality standards.
We do neither. Either one would help compensate for the problems that foreign-made, mostly shoddy products do to our labor market and the world's environment. And that is exactly what we should do -- impose tariffs on imports especially from countries with which we have a large balance of payments deficit and exclude from sale in our domestic markets goods that do not meet our quality standards.
I bought a used stove about 28 years ago. (Approximately 28 years ago. Not sure of the number of years.) It was old and made in the USA. I kept it and used it for maybe 23 years. Then I bought a new stove a few years ago. Already, the pilot light on it on one side of the burners is creating a problem. And guess what, it is built so that I cannot get into the stove and re-light the pilot. It's a shoddy product. The metal is already starting to rust. And I have kept very good care of it. That is an environmental problem. When a product like a stove or a washing machine is manufactured shoddily and breaks down and has to be replaced frequently, the negative impact on the environment is terrible. And that is what is happening with these cheap imports. They are not worth what the Made in the USA products were.
We should impose tariffs on imports. That would help us maintain quality manufacturing. I note that the German economy, which is the powerhouse of Europe, has fewer manufacturing jobs than in the past but is way ahead of other economies in that respect. Germany also has good labor policies. It has an apprenticeship system that trains workers for their specialties. Germany produces in general very high quality products and is an innovator-nation. The liberal employment policies are partly a result of historical traditions that go back arguably to the Middle Ages but they are maintained by the strong labor organizations that Germany has. Even under imperial rulers, the kaisers, were cautious about harming their excellent manufacturing workers.
But Germany (at least when I was there) has a high VAT or value added tax which is like a sales tax and through that means obtains revenue from the sale of all goods including imports. That helps Germany raise the money to support its social support system.
I have proposed replacing some of our income taxes with a VAT tax which would produce revenue that could be used to subsidize our own industry by, for example, providing the money to support subsidies for health insurance costs of manufacturers and employees. DUers respond that such a plan would harm low-income workers because it would hit them hard. I still think it is a good idea because the money from the VAT could be used to subsidize services for low-income workers.
So, just looking at a chart does not tell all the story. Germany uses the VAT to compensate for some of the damage that "free" trade does to its industry.
pampango
(24,692 posts)His construction of GATT (which led to the WTO) involved multilateral control of trading rules. He did not want to see a return to the tariff wars caused by the unilateral tariff increases by republican congresses and signed by Coolidge and Hoover.
The only way we could unilaterally impose whatever tariffs we want would be to withdraw from the WTO and abrogate our existing trade treaties. That kind of cowboy diplomacy would make many of our republican and tea party 'friends' very happy.
While I agree that the VAT plays a very productive role in Europe in terms of funding their very good safety net, you and I both know that the VAT is not a tariff since in raises the price of imports and domestically-produced goods by the same amount. It is somewhat regressive in nature (kind of a FICA on steroids) but it is used for a progressive purpose and is widely supported in Europe.
treestar
(82,383 posts)You can see the people here who are determined to remain in the dark and declare the end of the world.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)You're now refuting the rejection of facts and the OP still hasn't provided any evidence to to support the OP claim.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)I know how hard you work and it must be very difficult to keep track of it all, but do try.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"I know how hard you work and it must be very difficult to keep track of it all, but do try."
I saw the link to that list...in that thread, and the OMG!
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)fallacy known. And Phase C is resort to ridicule. And Sid's signature emoticon.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)It has reassured me that my decision to stop playing the game will not be one of my regrets at the end.
bobduca
(1,763 posts)mandatory PPR for any who point out this obvious pattern.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)when actually we will only get 15. Do you or her refute that the TPP should be in the open? That it shouldnt be fast-tracked? That it, like NAFTA, CAFTA, etc. will drive another nail in the coffin of the middle class?
Give us some arguments of why Pres Obama is doing this instead of pointing out that another poster is wearing white after Christmas.
ancianita
(36,022 posts)That's the implication here. I'm glad for ProSense's clarification, but it doesn't merit any implied dismissal of the OP.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Cali should just amend her/his comment to indicate a hyperbolic comment ... or maybe, just strike the 100% claim, and say:
"There are not enough advisors to the admin on upcoming trade deals that represent my concerns."
subterranean
(3,427 posts)While non-corporate, non-profit groups do have some presence on the advisory committees, they are greatly outnumbered by the corporations and their surrogates. It's safe to assume that this will be reflected in the committees' recommendations.
JHB
(37,158 posts)People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary.
--Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
librechik
(30,674 posts)every once in awhile it becomes really important. And then there's nothing we can do about it.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)"triangulation," etc.; forever searching for compromise with the insane GOP.
We're being played. In 11 dimensions.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)Autumn
(45,049 posts)Recommended.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)TBF
(32,047 posts)and hopefully the third way will be defeated along with it.
Enough already.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
TBF
(32,047 posts)he's an administrator for the very wealthy.
My focus is entirely different. As an advocate I see nothing in this bill that will help the majority of working Americans.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Yes, after negotiations are FINISHED, and with Fast Track, Congress can do nothing about anything.
Now, there's a legacy! And Hillary is very very pro-TPP.
TBF
(32,047 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)Heard a Congressman talk about the TPP on C-Span months ago. When he made claims of transparency, he said that it's been shared with "stakeholders." The average viewer would think that means that it's been made public. The average viewer would be wrong. US citizens are not stakeholders in this trade deal as far as Congress/ALEC/Koch/Pres are concerned.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)
lark
(23,091 posts)and we're screwed. It tells me there's not nearly enough difference between the 2 parties - both are pro 1% and fuck the 99% - BOTH. There are a few "real" Democrats in congress, (Sanders, Warren, Brown) but not nearly enough. We are screwed, I say again. I am really worried about our future, it's not looking good at all for the working class.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)the administration that we elected to be the anti-Dubya Bush Administration.
If we want more of the same we will support Hillary.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)is a member of the Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations. He must be there to "make 'em a deal they can't refuse." on transportation. I suppose.
TBF
(32,047 posts)sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Wall Street runs this country. The scene in DC is nothing but a Dog and pony show.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
senseandsensibility
(16,995 posts)No justification for this.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)CHANGE!
Cleita
(75,480 posts)and big pharma allowed to consult. Doctors and patients arrested and told to hit the road.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Thank you, cali.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)''When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. –Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.''[/center]
- You'll note that it didn't say a goddamned thing about any corporations being equal to a human being. Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em all and their slaves too.
K&R
valerief
(53,235 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)Hotler
(11,415 posts)
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
blackspade
(10,056 posts)And that the fix is in.
They may have over-reached this time though.
It will depend on how the corporate media decides how to hide the details from the public.