TPP is in trouble, thanks to public interest
The public debate over the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership has been a lot more robust and educational than the one that preceded the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement more than two decades ago. During that fight, then-Washington Post editorial page editor Meg Greenfield didn’t see a problem with a six-to-one ratio of space for pro- vs. anti-NAFTA editorials. “On this rare occasion when columnists of the left, right, and middle are all in agreement ... I don't believe it is right to create an artificial balance where none exists.”
Today there are more economists in the news debunking the arguments put forth to promote the TPP, and this has contributed to the collapse of some of these talking points.
This week, economists Dean Baker and Paul Krugman warn that people should be suspicious of any agreement that leads its proponents to lie and distort so much in order to sell it. They called attention to President Barack Obama’s former Chief of Staff William M. Daley, who made the ridiculous claim in a New York Times op-ed that it is “because our products face very high barriers to entry overseas in the form of tariffs, quotas and outright discrimination” that the U.S. ranks 39th of the 40 largest economies in exports as a share of GDP. As Baker and Krugman pointed out, it is actually because the U.S. is a very large economy, and therefore the domestic market is sufficient for many U.S. companies.
...
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/5/tpp-runs-into-trouble-thanks-to-public-interest.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Or some such shit.
When has the public, press, or even his own congressional delegation ever NOT been "concerned" about an Obama initiative? NOTHING he proposes is worthwhile, NOTHING he says is credible, no success is ever remembered, even the most remote possibility of objectionable legislation (CPI for example) is endlessly rehearsed, resented, and recalled anew.
Sorry Al Jazeera, no sale. 