John Kerry on TPP: "95 percent of the world’s consumers live beyond the borders of the US"

[ucrdem]

Secretary of State John Kerry at Boeing Renton Factory on “The World Wants What America Makes,” May 19, 2015:

{snip}

As I speak, exports support about 11.7 million American jobs. And that number is only going to go up. Why? It’s pretty simple; it’s really simple math: 95 percent of the world’s consumers live beyond the borders of the United States.

And if for some reason we just decide to give up and not to do business with them, to shut down because we think somehow it’s a loss of a job here, believe me, a lot of other people will welcome that at our expense.

{snip}

And the anger and frustration that has come from that has translated into opposition to trade itself, when the real focus ought to be on the other policy reforms that are necessary to address that concern. For example, on improving tax policy, on strengthening international labor and environmental standards, as is actually being done in these two deals that I’m talking about. The solution lies not in shutting the door to trade itself, but in transforming the system to make it work for everybody.

The truth is, the only people we know or I know who would benefit from a decision by the United States not to participate in the TPP would be international competitors. And believe me, they would be delighted.

Read more: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2015/05/20150519315756.html#ixzz3av6aPogD
.............................................

So basically Kerry is saying that focusing on job loss is a red herring, and I'm inclined to agree: NAFTA didn't produce a net US job loss or wage decline and TPP won't either. More on the statistics that show that here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026700031

[RKP5637]

1. If 95% of the world wants our stuff, then why do we import so much from China? n/t

[ucrdem]

2. I don't think that's exactly what he said

but the answer is that it will be easier to sell American wares once these big trade agreements are in place, and that includes agricultural products as well as instruments and of course entertainment and Boeing planes.

[RKP5637]

4. Thanks! n/t

[sendero]

9. utter horseshit..

.... China and other foreign countries don't buy our products for a host of reasons, none of which any "Agreement" can address.

People who believe that this bullshit agreement will result in other countries buying our stuff are FUCKING IDIOTS.

[ucrdem]

12. The statistics say otherwise:

Total volume of U.S. exports of trade goods from 1987 to 2014 (in billion U.S. dollars):



Source: http://www.statista.com/statistics/186577/volume-of-us-exports-of-trade-goods-to-the-world-since-1987/

[sendero]

16. No ..

.... they don't.

You show up with a message of bullshit about the TPP. Your posts are 100% bullshit all the time and you post non-sequitur horsecrap that you act as though proves your idiotic point. It doesn't.

One does not have to even know the contents of this travesty to know it is a complete anathema to working people. Republicans like it and corporations wrote it. End of FUCKING STORY.

[ucrdem]

17. Yes, they do. nt

[sendero]

18. Na na na/...

.... that is all you have. The TPP is a piece of shit for 99.9% of Americans and the fact that corporations wrote it in secret and Republicans love it is all any person with half a brain needs to know.

[840high]

48. +1

[GoneFishin]

103. +1. POS. It's obvious to anyone with two brains cells to rub together.

[In_The_Wind]

30. The jury said:

11:06 PM

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Fri May 22, 2015, 11:02 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

No ..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6714487

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Inappropriate, disproportionately rude compared to the previous post.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri May 22, 2015, 11:06 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: agree with alert
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: That's the way he rolls.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Just FYI for the alerter. Sendero is telling the truth about this poster and in my opinion posters fabricating information should expect to be hidden.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Attack the post, not the author.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Cha]

62. The OP is about SOS Kerry's OP on TPP and that he agrees. He's not "fabricating" anything.. but,

it's okay if someone is Raging & calls him a "fucking idiot" because the jury is stacked with the same kind of people.

Got it.

[Major Hogwash]

89. Wow, that's disgusting.

Especially the comment from #6.
This was an obviously rude comment, but the meme at DU is that the TPP is bad, since so many anonymous DU people say it is.

[Dawgs]

100. "meme at DU is that the TPP is bad, since so many anonymous DU people say it is."

Uh, almost all Democrats in Congress also say it's bad.

So do economists, labor unions, and environmental groups.

The only people that like it are a very small number of Democrats, almost all Republicans, and corporations.

That should be enough for any Democrat to be against it.

[GoneFishin]

104. Even they probably don't like it, but are rich enough not to care about working Americans.

[pampango]

115. In fact republicans (non-politicians) oppose it and Democrats (non-politicians) support it.

The only people that like it are a very small number of Democrats, almost all Republicans ...

You have it backwards. Polls show that the only group that likes TPP is Democrats, particularly liberal ones. "Almost all republicans" hate it with a passion, particularly conservative republicans linked to the tea party movement.

That should be enough for any Democrat to be against it.

Interesting. If the premise is reversed, is the conclusion to be reversed too?

[Dawgs]

141. Nope. Polls show that Democrats are more for free trade than Republicans.

The poll you're thinking of doesn't ask about TPP specifically.

Nice try though.

[Major Hogwash]

142. Uh . . . except they don't.

In fact, half of the Democrats in the Senate want this trade agreement to pass, but they want to add to it.
Which is not going to be allowed now.

Yet, there is a significant difference in disagreeing with what someone said, and saying what the other person has been claiming is just 100% bullshit all of the time.

[Dawgs]

144. Uh, being against it until something is added is not "wanting this agreement".

It means they don't like it unless something is added. That means they're against it.

Your second sentence doesn't make any sense to me.

[Major Hogwash]

148. So, it's a mystery why they would vote to give the President fast track authority!

Wow --- they're ALL against it!!!!!!!!!!

[Cha]

63. "Your posts are 100% bullshit all the time and you post non-sequitur horsecrap that you act as

proves your idiotic point."

Boomerang you post right backatcha.

The Title is a direct quote from whom I'm replying to. It didn't get a hide.. so I'm pretty sure it's okay to quote it back to him.

[pampango]

113. Nice post. "Your posts are 100% bullshit all the time ..." Thanks for adding to the discussion.

China and other foreign countries don't buy our products for a host of reasons, none of which any "Agreement" can address.

The other poster responded with a chart showing a dramatic increase in US exports ("foreign countries buying our products). I don't see how that is a "non-sequitur horsecrap".

[PETRUS]

20. Think about this.

We make parts in Ohio and send them to Michigan for assembly. Then we close the Michigan plant and ship them to Mexico for assembly. What happened? Exports went up!!!

[Elwood P Dowd]

22. U-turn exports. Make 1,000 radiators in Michigan and ship them to the Ford factory in Mexico where

cars are assembled for export to the USA. We count that as an export. Those Mexicans sure love buying billions of dollars in car parts from us every year.

[ucrdem]

25. $1.4 trillion in exports does not come from shuffling radiators. nt

[Elwood P Dowd]

28. And 10 trillion dollars in trade deficits the past 30 years came from horrible fake free trade deals

that ALWAYS benefit the mega-rich Wall Street crowd, giant multi-national corporations, and wealthy Washington politicians while the gap between the richest 1% and the bottom 80% is at record setting levels. The excuses for this giant corporate power grad TPP turd are bad enough from the repukes who love it so much, but coming from people claim(?) to be Democrats is disgusting.

[ucrdem]

37. Link?

TIA.

[Elwood P Dowd]

66. Actually, its worse than 10 trillion. Figures from 1989 to early 2015.

Over 11 and headed to 12. From the US Census Bureau.....

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0004.html

[Elwood P Dowd]

68. This thread sounds like Heritage Foundation fake free trade lovefest taking place right here on DU.

They love them some repuke backed legislation, corporate written investment/outsourcing scams masquerading as free trade, and talking points from mega-millionaires like John Kerry. They've got their TPP pom-poms and TPP shooters ready to go for another round of more corporate control of our laws and more misery for us flyover little people.

[ucrdem]

70. John Kerry is pushing Heritage Foundation repuke legistlation?

I don't think so.

[Elwood P Dowd]

72. Heritage, CATO, and the repukes are 100% behind the big TPP turd. Some of the talking points

I have heard from those clowns are identical to what Kerry and the TPP cheerleaders are saying here on DU.

[ucrdem]

73. Oh? You're keeping up with CATO and Heritage Foundation?

Please, say more.

[Elwood P Dowd]

79. All I need to to do is read your TPP posts. You and them are two TPPeas in a pod. (nm)

[Scootaloo]

84. Google's a fascinating tool

Yup, both CATO and the Heritage foundation are on board with the TPP.

Know who's not?

Democrats. Labor Unions. Human Rights Watch.

[cali]

77. yes

[ucrdem]

82. You two might want get your stories straight. nt

[Major Hogwash]

87. Don't worry about it much, ucrdem.

While 2 or 3 people float around in cyberspace calling you names, or saying you never prove anything of what you say, the real world just keeps spinning on its axis.
With no problem, whatsoever.

If these 2 or 3 people want to trash John Kerry, let them.
If they want to throw Kerry under the bus, let them.
Don't waste a whole lot of your time defending Kerry.
That is, unless you want to, of course.

Because, rest assured, back in reality, their comments don't mean anything.
While the rest of us live in a reality-based universe, the crap they are spewing at DU doesn't add up to anything.

These are the same 2 or 3 people who have been trashing President Obama for years at DU.
They threw President Obama under the bus years ago.
Except wait, whut?, . . they didn't . . . because back in Reality Land, President Obama is doing well.
Very well, thank you very much.
In fact, he is doing his job as President exceptionally well.

I think you are a good person, ucrdem.
And I don't want you to let them get under your skin.
Take my advice and "don't let the bastards get you down".

There are 2 or 3 Debby Downers posting at DU, a couple of Wendy Whiners, and a few Carl Complainers, but what they are saying at DU doesn't have any effect on President Obama, or what is going on in the real world.
All they are doing is making this site a very unfriendly site for President Obama's supporters to come to.

Whether it is the ACA, the Keystone XL pipeline, the Iran nuclear deal, or the TPP, there will be a few who will whine, complain, and make dozens of posts telling everyone what a big loser they think President Obama is.
To which I say . . . phhhht, is that all ya got?

[ucrdem]

111. hey thanks, yeah I noticed some are a little weak in the truth department. nt

[ucrdem]

110. Actually, you're misreading the numbers. nt

[ucrdem]

112. It's never reached ONE trillion:

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/historical/gands.txt

[pampango]

117. In 2014 our trade deficit with our 20 "free trade" partners was $65 billion (3% of trade with them).

In our trade with them exports are about 48.5% while imports are about 51.5%.

With the rest of the world our trade deficit was over 10 times larger ($665 billion) though total trade amounts are similar with 'free trade' and non-'free trade' countries. Our exports are 35% and our imports are 65% of total trade with them.

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/

It would appear that our trade with 'free trade' countries is almost balance while our trade with the rest of the world is way out of balance. Draw your own conclusions from that.

The horrible trade deficits you referred to come not from "free trade deals" but from countries with which we have no 'deal'.

... repukes who love it so much.

No they don't. Their base hates it though their politicians love it. The Democratic base, OTOH, is the only group that does like TPP.

[GoneFishin]

105. Exactly. Many of the statistics are bastardized like that. Taxpayer funded weapons exports

in some statistics are counted as exports. When it comes to the way they fudge the statistics it's a goddamned shell game.

[ucrdem]

109. Why yes, they are. nt

[ucrdem]

108. Incidentally the 2014 trade deficit was less than one trillion:

2014 : U.S. trade in goods with World, Seasonally Adjusted
NOTE: All figures are in millions of U.S. dollars
Month Exports Imports Balance
January 2014 132,268.7 190,711.0 -58,442.3
February 2014 130,479.9 188,229.6 -57,749.7
March 2014 134,731.5 195,631.9 -60,900.4
April 2014 134,192.6 198,510.9 -64,318.2
May 2014 135,968.0 197,850.4 -61,882.4
June 2014 135,831.8 195,110.3 -59,278.5
July 2014 138,069.5 196,447.1 -58,377.6
August 2014 138,508.9 196,740.1 -58,231.2
September 2014 135,594.5 196,545.5 -60,951.0
October 2014 138,004.4 198,050.2 -60,045.8
November 2014 135,859.5 193,786.8 -57,927.3
December 2014 133,687.4 197,160.1 -63,472.7
TOTAL 2014 1,623,196.8 2,344,773.9 -721,577.1

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0004.html

That's $722 billion, not $7.22 trillion. A trillion is a million million.

[Elwood P Dowd]

139. I'm talking about the cumulative total since the 1980s. Its several trillion total. (nm)

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. We all can play those games, but I prefer something approaching full data

[ucrdem]

29. I prefer data with links. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. I hope you enjoy primary sources

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, TUESDAY, MAY 5, 2015CB 15-76
BEA 15-20
FT-900 (15-03)



* See the navigation bar at the right side of the news release text for links to data tables, contact personnel and their telephone numbers, and supplementary materials.

U.S. Census Bureau
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
NEWS
U.S. Department of Commerce * Washington, DC 20230
U.S. INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN GOODS AND SERVICES
March 2015


The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, through the Department of
Commerce, announced today that the goods and services deficit was $51.4 billion in March, up
$15.5 billion from $35.9 billion in February, revised. March exports were $187.8 billion, $1.6
billion more than February exports. March imports were $239.2 billion, $17.1 billion more than
February imports.

The March increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit
of $14.9 billion to $70.6 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.6 billion to
$19.2 billion.

Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $6.4 billion, or 5.2 percent, from the
same period in 2014. Exports decreased $11.7 billion or 2.0 percent. Imports decreased
$5.3 billion or 0.8 percent.

Goods and Services Three-Month Moving Averages (Exhibit 2)

The average goods and services deficit increased $1.9 billion to $43.3 billion for the three
months ending in March.
* Average exports of goods and services decreased $2.4 billion to $187.8 billion in March.
* Average imports of goods and services decreased $0.5 billion to $231.1 billion in March.

Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $2.1 billion from the three
months ending in March 2014.
* Average exports of goods and services decreased $3.9 billion from March 2014.
* Average imports of goods and services decreased $1.8 billion from March 2014.

Exports (Exhibits 3, 6, and 7)

Exports of goods increased $1.5 billion to $127.1 billion in March.
Exports of goods on a Census basis increased $1.3 billion.
* Capital goods increased $1.5 billion.
o Civilian aircraft increased $0.5 billion.
o Civilian aircraft engines increased $0.2 billion.
o Electric apparatus increased $0.2 billion.
Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.2 billion.

Exports of services increased $0.2 billion to $60.8 billion in March.
* Transport, which includes freight and port services and passenger fares, increased
$0.1 billion.
* Travel (for all purposes including education) decreased $0.1 billion.

Imports (Exhibits 4, 6, and 8)

Imports of goods increased $16.4 billion to $197.6 billion in March.
Imports of goods on a Census basis increased $16.4 billion.
* Consumer goods increased $9.0 billion.
o Cell phones and other household goods increased $1.7 billion.
o Other textile apparel and household goods increased $1.3 billion.
o Furniture, household goods, etc. increased $1.0 billion.
* Capital goods increased $4.0 billion.
* Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $2.7 billion.
Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.1 billion.

Imports of services increased $0.8 billion to $41.6 billion in March.
* Transport increased $0.6 billion.
* Travel (for all purposes including education) increased $0.1 billion.

Real Goods in 2009 Dollars – Census Basis (Exhibit 11)

The real goods deficit increased $16.0 billion to $67.2 billion in March.
* Real exports of goods increased $1.3 billion to $118.8 billion.
* Real imports of goods increased $17.3 billion to $186.0 billion.

Revisions

Revisions to February exports
* Exports of goods were revised downward less than $0.1 billion.
* Exports of services were revised downward less than $0.1 billion.

Revisions to February imports
* Imports of goods were revised upward $0.5 billion.
* Imports of services were revised downward $0.1 billion.

Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (Exhibit 19)

The March figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with South and Central America ($2.9),
OPEC ($0.7), and Brazil ($0.4). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with China
($37.8), European Union ($11.0), Japan ($6.3), Germany ($5.6), Mexico ($4.8), South Korea
($2.6), Italy ($2.1), India ($2.0), France ($1.5), Canada ($1.4), United Kingdom ($0.2), and
Saudi Arabia ($0.1).

* The deficit with China increased $10.5 billion to $37.8 billion in March. Exports increased
$0.4 billion to $9.3 billion and imports increased $10.9 billion to $47.1 billion.
* The deficit with Japan increased $2.0 billion to $6.3 billion in March. Exports increased
$0.2 billion to $5.6 billion and imports increased $2.2 billion to $11.9 billion.

NOTES:
* All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments
basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted
statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in Exhibits 1-20b of this
release. For information on data sources, definitions, and scheduled release dates through
December 2015, see the information section on page A-1 of this release. The next release
is June 3, 2015.

* For definitions of goods on a balance of payments basis, goods on a Census basis, and net
balance of payments adjustments, see the information section on page A-1 of this release.

NOTICE

New U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis International Trade and Investment Country Factsheets

On May 4, 2015, the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) released a new data application on
its Web site. The International Trade and Investment Country Facts application provides
information on U.S. trade in goods and services, direct investment, and the activities of
multinational enterprises for individual countries and country groupings. Users select a country
from an interactive world map or a searchable menu. The application generates a country factsheet
with graphs and tables showing the latest data on U.S. trade and investment with that country.
The factsheet can be downloaded or printed in PDF format. The application also generates data
tables containing more detailed statistics that can be downloaded in Excel format.

The application can be accessed from (www.bea.gov/international/factsheet). If you have
questions, please contact BEA’s Balance of Payments Division at
([e-mail]).

New U.S. Census Bureau Report on U.S. International Trade in Goods

On July 30, 2015, at 8:30 a.m., the U.S. Census Bureau will introduce a new release, “Advance
Report: U.S. International Trade in Goods.” This report will:

* Be released monthly, 4-7 business days in advance of the “U.S. International Trade in
Goods and Services” report (FT-900).
* Present advance statistics for the reference month. For example, the July 30 release will
feature advance statistics for June 2015.
* Contain statistics for international trade in goods on a Census basis by principal end-use
category.
* Include both seasonally adjusted and not seasonally adjusted statistics.
* Not include statistics for trade in goods on a balance of payments basis or statistics for
trade in services, both of which will continue to be featured in the FT-900.
* Be available at (www.census.gov/trade).

In accordance with Section 7 of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Statistical Policy
Directive No. 3, OMB granted the Census Bureau an exception to the previously approved schedule
for the release of the FT-900. OMB granted the exception for the sole purpose of publicly
releasing advance monthly statistics on trade in goods.

The new report will present two sets of statistics: “Advance” statistics, which reflect partial
coverage, and “Final” statistics, which reflect complete coverage and correspond to the most
recently published statistics in Exhibits 6 and 13 of the FT-900. Sample exhibits of the new
report are available at (www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/notices/20150405_advrelease.html).

The release schedule for this report through December 2015 is as follows:

Statistical Month Date Day

June 07-30-15 Thu
July 08-28-15 Fri
August 09-29-15 Tue
September 10-28-15 Wed
October 11-24-15 Tue
November 12-29-15 Tue

If you have questions, please contact the Census Bureau, Economic Indicators Division, on
[phone], option 4, on [phone], or at ([e-mail]).

Upcoming Revisions to Goods and Services

On June 3, 2015, the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) will release
“U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services: April 2015” and “U.S. International Trade in
Goods and Services: Annual Revision for 2014.” With these releases, statistics on trade in goods,
on both a Census basis and a balance of payments (BOP) basis, will be revised beginning with 2012,
and statistics on trade in services will be revised beginning with 1999. The revised statistics
for goods on a BOP basis and for services will also be included in the report “U.S. International
Transactions: First Quarter 2015 and Annual Revisions” and in the annual revision of the
U.S.International Transactions Accounts (ITAs), both to be released by BEA on June 18, 2015.

Goods

Revised statistics on trade in goods will reflect 1) corrections and adjustments to previously
published not-seasonally-adjusted statistics for goods on a Census basis, 2) recalculated
seasonal and trading-day adjustments, and 3) newly available and revised source data on BOP
adjustments, which are adjustments that BEA applies to goods on a Census basis to convert them
to a BOP basis. BOP adjustments are presented as net adjustments in this release.

Services

Revised statistics on trade in services beginning with 1999 will reflect the reclassification
of repairs related to Foreign Military Sales from exports of government goods and services n.i.e.
(not included elsewhere) to exports of maintenance and repair services n.i.e. This
reclassification will result in more accurate international account statistics and will bring
BEA’s statistics into closer alignment with international guidelines, which recommend that
services supplied by and to governments be classified to a specific services category where
possible.

Revised statistics on trade in services beginning with 2012 will also reflect 1) newly available
and revised source data primarily from BEA’s surveys of international services transactions, 2)
revised seasonal adjustments, and 3) revised interpolations of quarterly source data to monthly
statistics (see the information section on page A-4 of this release).

A preview of BEA’s 2015 annual revision of the ITAs was published in the April 2015 Survey of
Current Business. If you have questions, please contact BEA’s
Balance of Payments Division at ([e-mail]).

To learn more about the FT-900 and other economic indicators the Census Bureau publishes, join
the Economic Indicators Division for the “Investigating Economic Indicators” Webinar series.
For more information, visit (www.census.gov/econ/webinar).

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/trade/tradnewsrelease.htm

[ucrdem]

33. No charts at link but thanks for playing. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. The link is the latest release from the Federal Government

but truly thanks for playing.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, TUESDAY, MAY 5, 2015CB 15-76
BEA 15-20
FT-900 (15-03)

The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, through the Department of
Commerce, announced today that the goods and services deficit was $51.4 billion in March, up
$15.5 billion from $35.9 billion in February, revised. March exports were $187.8 billion, $1.6
billion more than February exports. March imports were $239.2 billion, $17.1 billion more than
February imports.

The March increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit
of $14.9 billion to $70.6 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.6 billion to
$19.2 billion.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/trade/tradnewsrelease.htm

Go argue with the feds. I play with this shit regularly, but if you do not know the difference between highly manipulated data and the primary data, ain't my fault. I gave you the HORSE'S mouth.

[ucrdem]

36. Still no link for the charts. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. So you want old charts over the LATEST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RELEASE?

how funny you are.

But since you insist

http://www.globalization101.org/zh/the-trade-balance/

http://www.data360.org/index.aspx

Go have fun. And as I said, go play with the United States Federal Government and educate them while at it. It seems they missed YOUR memo.

[ucrdem]

42. Yes, suspiciously old charts. It seems the US trade deficit is, in fact, declining

from its peak in 2005. Hint: who was president in 2005?

In 2009, the United States measured a trade deficit of $378.6 billion ($1.6 trillion in exports minus $1.9 trillion in imports.) After recording relatively large trade deficits during the 1980s, U.S. trade deficits declined substantially during the first half of the 1990s. At the end of the twentieth century, however, the deficit began increasing again, and peaked in 2005. It has since slowly been reduced. As of May 2011, the U.S. has a trade deficit of 50.2 billion USD.

http://www.globalization101.org/zh/the-trade-balance/

So Obama has brought down the record trade deficit racked up by Bush-Cheney -- from $379 b in 2009 to $50 b in 2011 -- but we're supposed to reject this trade deal because the deficit is too high?

Another miracle of Randy-nomics.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. And the May of this year data is also old

You funny.

Pro tip. Economists know this trade deficit is a real thing. So does the Department of Commerce. I gave you very current data. Want it again?

[pampango]

118. More than 90% of our trade deficit comes from countries with no 'free trade' agreement.

Less then 10% of the trade deficit comes from the 20 countries with which we do have such agreements despite the fact that US trade is roughly equal between "free trade" and non-'free trade' countries.

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. Except that there was no deficit with Mexico

For example, and now there is

[840high]

49. Bullhinky

[Exilednight]

102. But what are we exporting? The bulk of US exports is military

Related hardware and civilian aircraft - which in turn often converted to military use at some point.

[ucrdem]

26. And speaking of China . . .

Value of U.S. agricultural exports to China from 1990 to 2012 (in billion U.S. dollars):



source: http://www.statista.com/statistics/279003/value-of-us-agricultural-exports-to-china-since-1990/

[cali]

78. and speaking of the tpp...... China is not a partner nation in it

[jazzimov]

134. Exactly! And that's the point that so many are missing.

As Krugman says, trade fees are so low right now that a Free Trade agreement won't do much. BUT, if we don't do something - China will.

[Major Hogwash]

88. Good point.

Especially since President Obama already met with the Chinese President earlier this year to discuss trade with them, and how the TPP would not affect our trade with them.

[rhett o rick]

52. Funny that so many disagree. Only the corporate puppets agree with Kerry. No one has explained

how the workers will benefit. Maybe higher profits for industries, but no one has explained how this will help workers.

And history proves that these Free Trade agreements don't help America workers.

[sabrina 1]

53. If it's so great, don't give us his or anyone else's interpretation of it, STOP TREATING

our Reps and the American like two year olds. Just SHOW US. Go through the normal Constitutional Process and let Congress do its JOB. Let them study it, let them debate it, let the American people SEE IT.

This is just pure BS. And insulting besides.

I oppose it, nothing they tell me about it, is going to change that. I have no clue what they are signing away in our name.

WE are ADULTS.

I live the Paternal attitude: 'Look children, Daddy knows best, don't bother your little heads over this, Daddy will take care of it. You need to trust your father'.

BS!

[grasswire]

59. when we export agricultural products, our own citizens are deprived...

...of that product at a price we can afford. So what's the use in that?

[ucrdem]

65. Because we are Biafra?

You have got to be kidding.

[scarletwoman]

3. Exactly. nt

[RKP5637]

5. I'm certainly not an expert, but it seems to me these deals are not always favorable

to the US in a balanced manner for the entire populace of the US. For some, it is very profitable, but, and I hate to use this term, it does not always trickle down to the masses IMO.

[ucrdem]

6. The sentiment is out there, no doubt about it

and many people strongly oppose TPP for that very reason:



But I think what Kerry is getting at is that if you look at what's really going on, it's not the treaties or the trade they produce that causes the displacement, it's other policies, for example tax policies that encourage off-shoring. The treaties themselves don't produce this effect but they get blamed for it by the media, who then transfer the blame to the closest Democrat, for example Bill Clinton, which is convenient for the businesses that engage in these practices and the RW that enables them.

[RKP5637]

8. Good points! n/t

[ucrdem]

27. Thank you!

[treestar]

133. that's just the stuff we see

but I googled it and found we are still the world's largest manufacturer. We make bigger things.

[djean111]

7. ....and we want medicine to be more expensive for all of them!

[msongs]

10. kerry ignores (of course) that TPP is about corporate control n has zip to do with consumers nt

[TexasBushwhacker]

11. 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day

They aren't buying our shit or anyone elses.

[PowerToThePeople]

14. But, they can build our stuff. n/t

[ucrdem]

15. TPP is between US and 11 Pacific rim countries

including Japan, also Canada and Mexico, so many countries aren't in the scope of Kerry's remarks, most of which I omitted, but he starts by explaining what TPP is and who the signatories are.

[davidpdx]

86. It is worth noting that the 11 countries is suppose to be a starting point

I know South Korea said no to the TPP and I'm sure other countries in the Pacific rim did as well. Being a resident in South Korea, I am glad they said no. If it passes, I don't know how long they'll hold out though.

[Marr]

13. Or more importantly, 95% of the people who will work under slavery conditions. /nt

[ucrdem]

19. They would if there were no regulations to prevent employers from abusing them

but TPP is essentially 29 volumes of regulations, including labor regulations.

[A Little Weird]

101. Really? Have you read it?

Could you give me a link? Last time I checked it was still classified.

[Hekate]

21. KnR ucrdem

[ucrdem]

23. Thanks Hekate!

Kerry makes the case:

[Doctor_J]

31. everyone knows at this point that the administration has their lies straight

Most of us just recognize them as such, however. Even cheerleader Krugman's hopped off the bandwagon. NAFTA replaced manufacturing jobs with service jobs. The president jumped over to the republicans' side, blatantly, and of course the BOG joined him in his fight against the dems

[ucrdem]

34. Kerry is lying? On which points exactly?

[Doctor_J]

38. uhh, that this piece of shit will be good for Americans?

Not too quick, are you?

[ucrdem]

40. Can you identify the specific statements that are lies?

[subterranean]

55. I'll tell you one.

He strongly implied that if we don't pass the TPP, it means the U.S. will suddenly stop doing business with the rest of the world and shut our doors. As if it would be impossible to continue trading without the TPP. That, of course, is obviously untrue, and no TPP opponent has ever suggested that we do that.

[ucrdem]

58. I don't see him saying that, but exports HAVE dropped in the last two years

From $1.6 trillion in 2013 to $1.2 trillion in 2014:

http://www.statista.com/statistics/186577/volume-of-us-exports-of-trade-goods-to-the-world-since-1987/

So the point that the US needs to focus on facilitating trade is germane.

[subterranean]

67. I was referring mainly to the second paragraph in your excerpt.

I think the drop in exports since 2014 can be attributed to the stronger dollar rather than any trade barriers.

[Hoyt]

41. Krugman got chewed out by some of his readers and decided it wasn't worth trying to

Last edited Sat May 23, 2015, 01:04 AM - Edit history (1)

convince them as he said months ago -- people blame NAFTA for things caused by other factors.

He's still saying it is not the "job destroyer" people think. He just doesn't think it's worth arguing with people who think a corporation making a buck is a bad thing (even when there are labor and environmental protections, and profits are taxed properly and plowed back into positive things).

[ucrdem]

44. Probably. I noticed that his beef is with the secrecy, not the deal itself

and secrecy as far as I can tell is a 100% bogus issue. Which I imagine he knows.

[Hoyt]

56. Yes, he even gripes about he ISDS that he knows is in NAFTA and hundreds of other agreements.

[ucrdem]

61. Weak. Wyden's reasons for voting against his own bill were also weak.

Someone is really putting the pressure on and I don't think it's Bernie or Warren. I wonder what's going on.

[Cha]

43. Thank you, ucr!

[ucrdem]

45. Hey thanks Cha . . .

Mahalo!

[Cha]

46. Facts from SOS John Kerry but of course so many don't want to hear that.. 'cause Fear Mongering/

Fund Raising wins again.

Mahalo to you, ucr!

[ucrdem]

47. If it ain't FUD it ain't real is how the ODS crowd rolls.

Seriously messed up.

[Cha]

57. Yeah, I love being in the

fact based minority on DU.

So many against the President and John Kerry.. I trust them both.

[ucrdem]

64. Isn't it! Hard to stay postive with so much full-bore wingnuttery flying aound

Major props to SoS Kerry for staying above the fray on this one. It's great to see him back on the stump. Bet he doesn't miss it!

[Cha]

71. They are both intelligent, caring men who have earned my trust.. why wouldn't I.. as opposed to

trusting those who have done nothing but rage on them for years? Or the ones who've been caught in a "lie and moving goal posts" and "Fundraisers"!

tiny circle.

[ucrdem]

146. Yep.

The song remains the same. And once it's alllllll straightened out and it turns out surprise, the FUD was wrong, the media and public will have "moved on" LOL.

[MBS]

93. Ditto, ditto, ditto

[ucrdem]

145. Ditto back atcha MBS!

[MBS]

94. yeah.

Distressing to see Dems susceptible to fact-free hysteria here.Obama and Kerry have laid out their case well, and I trust them on this.

One thing that I keep coming back to-- if we don't lead on this, China or someone else (or -shudder- a future US administration who doesn't care about labor or the environment) will.

[Cha]

96. "..if we don't lead on this, China or someone else (or -shudder- a future US administration who

doesn't care about labor or the environment) will." Exactly, MBS

Yeah, this is Deja vu all over again.. 2010 the same way.. lots of fearmongering. Not caring a whit that the poor people who didn't have health insurance could now get it! And, all the other great things that ACA/AKA/Obamacare .. would help with. Like Saving LIVES.

[sheshe2]

76. Hey sweetie................

Late, I have to go.

With you on this.

[Cha]

83. "The solution lies not in shutting the door to trade itself, but in transforming the system to make

it work for everybody." John Kerry.. from ucr's link, she..

"So let me be clear: If we pick the wrong culprit, we will cut off our nose to spite our face. And so as orders shift from us to the rest of the world’s producers, the result would be boarded-up windows and “going out of business” signs in places from one end of America to another. We could see dockworkers with pink slips in their hands instead of container ships steaming into and out of ports. We could even see aerospace companies shutting down some of those assembly lines because there’s been a reduction in the incentive for people to buy planes from our country. The truth is, the only people we know or I know who would benefit from a decision by the United States not to participate in the TPP would be international competitors. And believe me, they would be delighted."

I trust SOS Kerry and President Obama on the TPP.

It's so Déjà vu to be among the few who do.. but, I've seen this act before with ACA/AKA/Obamacare. It was just as ugly then as it is now.

Mahalo, she

[Major Hogwash]

90. As far as I'm concerned, it's worse than that. Much worse.

"There's a cancer on the presidency."

Remember that famous line?

Well, in my opinion, there's a cancer on the DU forum.
And Skinner and Earl have done nothing to cure it.
They have let the hate spread to the point that it is impossible for anyone to join this site now and believe it should be called "Democratic anything" anymore.

There are more anti-Obama threads started here on a daily basis than there are positive threads about the President.
I agree with you about this, also, that it is a sort of a deja vu thing.
Especially knowing what we know about President Obama.

It's just like when Dubya Bush said there were WMD in Iraq, and we went to this forum, and others, and said, no, there isn't.
Yet, now, it's opposite George time . . Obama is a liar, and he doesn't care about Americans, or about American workers.

And then people wonder why The Magistrate doesn't post here anymore.
Christ almighty, watching grass grow is more illuminating than reading any of the tripe at this site!
And The Magistrate was no dingbat . . that would be Robb . . who also doesn't post here anymore either!

[Cha]

95. I remember Robb.. and of course, The Magistrate! I miss 'em..

I just laugh at it now. I took it more seriously in 2010 and left for 2 years... now, I've had the experience and know it's just so much crap from the same ol same ol.

I know it doesn't affect how the President does his job and gets things done.. all the boring hate means less than zero in the real world.

Obama's favorability ratings are still on the rise.. much to the consternation of those who rant, rave, and rage.

As for Skinner and the Admins.. I give them a pass.. they're really good Dems and support President Obama.. they just want their board to be an open discussion free for all within reason.

Wait until the General.. we'll see who wins.. but, whomever it is, everyone will be behind them or they will be taking a time out.

[Major Hogwash]

97. Robb was very kind to me when I first came here to DU.

His kindness had a profound affect on me, because he was so kind and funny.
Especially since I had just spent a year posting on a pro-Kerry forum during the 2004 Presidential race.
Taking a lot of heat from some very nasty trolls who had posted there.

Robb was one of the first members at DU to poke fun at me for my moniker.
I told him that it was alright to make fun of my nickname, but that he should focus on what I was saying rather than what my name is.
Or for that matter, who I really am in real life.

Because I noticed that some people's egos got out of whack after Kerry lost in 2004.
And a lot of people at DU seemed to lose their sense of humor.
And then, for some of them after Obama was elected President, their political compass seemed to go haywire, as well.

The Magistrate was exceptionally fair to everyone at DU when he was a moderator.
And he always called everyone Sir or Madam in his replies.
To show some kind of respect towards the person he was replying to, I guess.
It was a great idea, and it became his trademark.

I hope they are both doing well.

[Cha]

98. I remember going round and round

with The Magistrate in the 2008 Primaries. Hillary VS Obama.. Good times!

That's so cool that you had a good connection with Robb when you came on DU.. 2006(I just looked). that means a lot when you're new anywhere.

I hope they're doing well and grantcart, too!

[Major Hogwash]

143. It was like a carnival here back then.

In 2008.
Members that I thought would support Obama right off the bat, instead supported Hillary, almost as if there were no tomorrow if she was not chosen as the nominee.

Then there were several discussions about the possibility of a brokered convention.
Grantcart even thought there was a good chance of that happening at the national convention that summer.

I was pretty sure that Hillary would eventually concede to Obama, and not force a brokered convention.
So, when cooler heads prevailed and she did concede, I thought that was going to ensure that everyone here would get behind Obama and help him beat McCain.

Instead, there was thread after thread started about Obama's preacher, who somehow or the other became a bigger issue than the national depression we were facing.
At the very same time that we were losing 750,000 jobs a month!!
It is not without some speculation that most of the members who were concentrating on posting about Obama's preacher, and seemed not to be interested in much of anything else, are no longer able to post here.

The 2012 race was not as bad, in my opinion, mostly because Romney never started out with as much credibility as McCain did in 2008.
Romney was such a pathetic liar, easily caught up in his own lies.
And then, of course, his "47 per cent speech" that he gave in front of donors sank his chances of ever getting in to the White House except as a guest!

[MFrohike]

50. Please

Your NAFTA statistics completely omit the two bubbles that occurred during that time period. Without controlling for the massive expansion of credit during those events, any claim you make about NAFTA and jobs is the equivalent of a blindfolded monkey throwing darts. You might hit something, but it's not because you were aiming at it.

[rhett o rick]

51. Ah the love for John Kerry and the hell with the unions and workers of this country.

Do any economists support Kerry's bull crap?

Trade is only a small fraction of this piece of crap. It is a corporatist's dream.

[grasswire]

60. and I'm sure that Heinz is looking forward to the TPP. nt

[Elwood P Dowd]

69. Reading the posts above, it almost seems as if the Heritage Foundation and RNC ended their

TPPep rally, and some of them decided to visit DU. TPP shooters galore out tonight.

[neverforget]

74. I never thought

I would see the day that Republicans are to be trusted on DU with the future of the economy.

[rhett o rick]

116. It's not that they trust Republicons they completely trust anyone labeled Democrat.

Many would shun Kerry immediately if he were to change his label to Republicon. And if Christie would change his label to Democrat, they would support him immediately. It has nothing to do with either ideologies or principles, it's the label.

Democratic posters that support the TPP do so because Pres Obama supports it. They are oblivious to the fact that most Republicons also support it. It doesn't matter what's in it or what it will do, it just matters that Pres Obama supports it.

[ucrdem]

121. So we should never trust a Republican who changes labels?

Really?

[rhett o rick]

136. Nice try, but your logic fails. I said we should judge by principles not labels.

And it seems you don't trust Sen Warren. Do you trust Clinton that lied about WMD in Iraq?

[ucrdem]

119. WaPo: 3 pro-labor economists on why TPP benefits American workers

Why Obama’s key trade deal with Asia would actually be good for American workers
By David Autor, David Dorn and Gordon H. Hanson
March 12, 2015

But if the TPP has little downside for the U.S., what’s the upside? Why bother with the deal at all? The reason is that the TPP is about much more than manufacturing. Most notably, it promises to liberalize trade in services and in agriculture, sectors in which the United States runs large trade surpluses, but which the World Trade Organization, despite 20 years of trying, has failed to pry open internationally. Successfully exporting information and computer services, where the U.S. maintains substantial technological leadership, requires more than low tariffs. It also requires protecting patents against infringement and safeguarding business assets and revenues against expropriation by foreign governments. To the extent that Obama succeeds in enshrining these guarantees in the TPP, the agreement would give a substantial boost to U.S. trade.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/03/12/why-obamas-key-trade-deal-with-asia-would-actually-be-good-for-american-workers/

[BillZBubb]

135. The republicans have three climate scientists who say global warming is a hoax.

[rhett o rick]

138. The exceptions that make the rule. nm

[rhett o rick]

137. They fail to mention how that translates into benefits for workers. Benefits for

corporations don't always help workers. They help profits.

Also, they didn't discuss the more important aspects of the TPP, like will big pharma be able to squash generics? will corporations be able to override national and state regulations? and much more.

[JDPriestly]

75. Kerry clearly has no or very little experience with the trade courts and has not

looked at the kinds of cases that are increasingly being brought.

De Fazio points to some of the detrimental decisions of those courts. Kerry needs to listen to De Fazio and do his homework on that subject. The court decisions cannot be appealed and are neither transparent nor required to be consistent and really fair. There is no way to enforce respect for our laws, fair labor standards or environmental standards in other countries via a trade agreement short of taking military action.

Further, Kerry admits that the benefits of "free" trade are not distributed in any healthy or fair way within our society. He admits that we need to change many of our laws in order to respond to the changes that "free" trade impose on our society, changes like job losses, like having to deal with people in foreign countries who are hired as cheap service representatives for big companies and often do not speak our English or really understand or care about our ways of doing business or our culture. It can be very annoying to call your phone company, give out your credit card number and maybe other personal information to someone in a far-away country who has your personal data when you know that you cannot bring criminal charges against the person in any police department or court if that person uses your information in some way that you do not want.

Kerry's speech is not persuasive at all to me.

He admits we need to change our laws BEFORE entering into any more agreements like the TPP. He knows that at this time, these agreements are impoverishing Americans and harming our economy. His argument, boiled down to its core is that these agreements are inevitable.

He is wrong. They are not inevitable. We already have very low tariffs. The point of this agreement is not to lower them more. And the agreement cannot establish any enforceable labor or environmental laws. It will take the national will and the denial of free trade to countries that do not impose fair labor and environmental conditions, not granting more free trade privileges to such countries, to use trade to obtain better labor and environmental standards.

Trading in the US, exporting to the US, should be a reward for democratic societies, for societies that demonstrate fair labor and environmental standards.

The Kerry speech is pure hogwash as far as I am concerned.

The Obama administration is, as usual, kissing up to big corporations, last week Nike and now Boeing.

Take care to change American law to give Americans a share of benefits from free trade before you sign TPP into law. And don't agree to international trade arbitration courts. They are horrible.

[Major Hogwash]

91. "The Kerry speech is pure hogwash as far as I am concerned."

Ah'ma warning ya, Preistly, be careful how you use that term, ya galldarn idgit!!

[JDPriestly]

80. I have to add another comment to this thread.

Kerry says "95 percent of the world’s consumers live beyond the borders of the US."

May I add that very few in that 95 percent who are not already buying our products can afford our prices.

The TPP will not change that fact. The TPP will not lower our balance of payment deficit one notch. It will make it easier for countries to sell to Americans, but it will not make it easier or more likely that people in other countries, many of whom are very poor, will buy more from us.

The speech is just silly and full of nonsense. Sorry. I like John Kerry, but that speech is just talk. It does not have much to do with reality.

[Elwood P Dowd]

81. He was also wrong about NAFTA. Friends in Ohio that lost jobs because of it,

and Kerry was a big supporter of it, went over to the dark side.

[eridani]

85. So fucking what? TPP is agout corporate dictatorship, not trade

What kind of a jackass thinks that unless you let tobacco companies sue governments for health warning labels on cigarettes, people will quit buying airplanes, apples and wheat?

[MBS]

92. Thank you, UCRdem

It's a thoughtful speech, and I hadn't seen it elsewhere. .
Glad to read the full text.
I wasn't a fan of NAFTA, but I'm with Obama and Kerry on this one.

[WinkyDink]

99. "strengthening international labor....standards"-----THAT? Is how you know he's lying. LYING.

[Wounded Bear]

106. Translation...

The American consumer is just about sucked dry. We're looking elsewhere to sell our shit.

[onecaliberal]

107. We don't make anything here any more. What the hell is he talking about?

It's not rocket science. When these companies can pay someone 50 cents per hour to make a product, that they would need to pay 8 dollars an hour to make in the states. Which I still consider slave wage, what does sec Kerry think the companies will do?
It will further drive down wages in this country. There are NO jobs to replace the ones being shipped overseas. Why does this fact escape them. It's just not that difficult to figure out.

[BillZBubb]

114. Kerry is full of it. His argument is laughable on its face.

First the strawman that people opposed to abominations like TPP are against trade. That is so pathetic a charge as to deserve contempt.

As others have pointed out, most of those "consumers" Kerry is talking about live on subsistence income. They aren't buying much of what we are selling. Also a significant portion of them aren't in TPP nations.

Worse is the foolish point that we don't have to worry because these trade deals protect workers and the environment, so competition for US jobs will be fair. It hasn't happened yet on a trade deal. US real median wages have been stagnant for decades because of trade deals. Income inequality keeps getting worse. Unions are dying. The public keeps getting the sold the same bill of goods by people like Kerry. The only people who make out are the 1% and the multinationals.

[lumberjack_jeff]

120. Yet, nearly 100% of the people whom you represent live within these borders.

I don't give a shit about free trade until you can make me understand why sending my job overseas is a benefit to ME.

[ucrdem]

123. Kerry: "the US has added 12.3 million jobs over 62 straight months of private sector growth"

the United States has added 12.3 million jobs over 62 straight months of private sector growth – the longest streak on record. We’ve put more people back to work than all of the other advanced economies combined. And a big cause of this turnaround is that our exports have reached a record level. They are up nearly 50 percent since 2009.

Read more: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2015/05/20150519315756.html#ixzz3ayqK4ZTk

So what he's getting at is that it isn't trade deals that steal jobs; trade deals ADD jobs. It's other policies, like tax incentives for offshoring, that send those jobs overseas.

[lumberjack_jeff]

124. Men today have to work 50 hours to earn what their fathers did in 40

[ucrdem]

127. LOL, tell me about it.

Dunno what to add but I think that might be a different issue.

[lumberjack_jeff]

129. No. It's the same issue.

Global trade agreements are for the express purpose of suppressing first world wages and bypassing democratic autonomy over rules of copyright, trademark and patents.

[Rex]

125. SO what, this is a giveaway to the richest people on the planet.

Sorry John, love ya man but this TPP is poison to the American labor force. UNLESS someone wants to come out and give details on worker protections...which I guess cannot happen since it is all hush hush.

This is a bad deal for America, maybe we should help the millions of homeless that desperately need work HERE in America FIRST? Yeah, that would be best.

[ucrdem]

126. If TPP is NAFTA on steroids employment and wages are going to go through the roof.

So that should help a little eh?

[Rex]

128. So, nothing about the millions unemployed still from the 2008 giveaway?

Sorry, but no we had no outsourcing until NAFTA came along and fucked it all up...I remember since I lived during that stupid decision. Clinton should have realized when Bush Sr. pushed NAFTA...it would only benefit the 1%. Which it has done greatly, since wealth inequality is higher than any time in RECORDED HISTORY.

BUT yeah...employment and wages...I understand you gotta push that line hard.

[ucrdem]

130. Yep employment and wages. Notice the pattern:

p.s. who was president in 2008?

[Rex]

132. People have less than they did in the 1970s and work more for less.

You can go on and on and on with all the charts you want to. REAL people that lost pensions and wages to overseas workers, will remember and vote accordingly.

[Major Hogwash]

147. Hahaha!!!!

Now that's pownage!

[treestar]

131. Makes sense

For a while we could be 4% of world population and use up some higher percentage of resources than the rest of the world combined. But it's not going to stay that way.

He's right - it is ridiculous to be against trade.

[ljm2002]

140. I have two issues with Kerry's remarks...

..."95 percent of the world's consumers live beyond the borders of the United States.

(snip)

...And the anger and frustration that has come from that has translated into opposition to trade itself, when the real focus ought to be on the other policy reforms that are necessary to address that concern."

One: Half of that 95% live on incomes that barely sustain them now (*), and they are unlikely to be buying exports from rich countries like our own anytime soon. Implying that 95% of the world are potential consumers of our products is dishonest.

Furthermore, referring to any population as "consumers" is corporate-speak -- a demeaning way of referring to humans as if they exist primarily to be harvested for gain by the grand poobahs of trade, aka multinational corporations. Which of course is exactly how the multinationals see them, and exactly how most of our politicians see them (and us) as well.

Two: that those who oppose trade agreements like the TPP oppose "trade itself". That is also dishonest. I have yet to hear anyone opposing the TPP state that they are "against trade itself", or promoting isolationism. If any are making those arguments, they are in a tiny minority -- but it's easy to argue against those positions, so break out the straw men and full speed ahead, eh?

Kerry claims that the TPP strengthens international labor and environmental standards, yet fails to talk about enforcement mechanisms. Current issues in South America put the lie to effective enforcement w.r.t. labor provisions in existing trade pacts; and allowing Malaysia to be a signatory to the TPP while they turn a blind eye to human trafficking shows us clearly that this is not a priority for the negotiators.

Of course, there are indeed some strong enforcement mechanisms in the TPP: namely, the trade dispute rules, where the incentives heavily favor a race to the bottom in both labor and environmental protections.

(*) https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-global-poverty -- "Nearly 1/2 of the world’s population — more than 3 billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. More than 1.3 billion live in extreme poverty — less than $1.25 a day."

[polly7]

149. I don't understand his claim that 95% or the world's consumers live beyond the borders of the

United States. Yes, 95% of the world's population is outside the U.S., but millions of those are unable to purchase much of anything at all. Those in nations decimated by war who barely find the means to manage a meal a day for their children, whole cities built on toxic dumps of the trash we send them in LA to sort through and try to sell our junk. All of those working for 1.50 a day to produce more of it for us to use and toss - what are they supposed to be able to purchase? Unfair trade deals that make it impossible for farmers in poorer nations to sell their produce for livable prices. You have to have money to be a consumer.

I remember the mud-cakes in Haiti.

(Sorry, this was supposed to be a reply to the original post).

[Elwood P Dowd]

150. They're using trade as a cover for more corporate profits and more corporate control of

our local, state, and federal governments. Its a scam like all the recent fake free trade deals are scams. The damn TPP thing was first cooked up by the Bush Crime Family in 2007.

[polly7]

151. I hate every one of these 'Free' trade deals.

Corporate coups, every stinking one of them. I just wonder how Kerry can claim such a thing, knowing of the extreme poverty in so many areas of the world, it doesn't even make sense. Ok, now that I've thought about it, I guess any ridiculous claim will be used - I honestly just thought he was above that. He must really, really want this one.

[Elwood P Dowd]

153. Kerry lives in the Washington money bubble. He is a big money corporate dem just like

Bill Clinton became. They are in the club, and we ain't. Obama wants to join the club.

[merrily]

152. What percentage of manufacturing occurs outside the US?

How can manufacturing insde the US compete with manufacturing that pays labor a few cents an hour and leads to suicide attempts among workers.

Which of our recent trade agreements is working well for US labor?