Deal Reached on Fast-Track Authority for Obama on Trade Pact

[daa]

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — The leaders of Congress’s tax-writing committees reached agreement Thursday on legislation to give President Obama “fast track” authority to negotiate an ambitious trade accord with 11 other Pacific nations, beginning what is sure to be one of the toughest legislative battles of his last 19 months in office.

The “trade promotion authority” bill — likely to be unveiled Thursday afternoon — would give Congress the power to vote on the Trans-Pacific Partnership once it is completed, but would deny lawmakers the chance to amend what would be the largest trade deal since the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/17/business/obama-trade-legislation-fast-track-authority-trans-pacific-partnership.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

---

We are screwed again!

[truebrit71]

1. Total bullshit...

...But totally expected...

[jtuck004]

2. Just be quiet, and soon your problems will be over. n/t

[KansDem]

3. "...one of the toughest legislative battles of his last 19 months in office."

As it should be. This "partnership" is a load of crap designed to destroy what's left of America's workers and resources in order to further enrich the oligarchs.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

87. This will be the end of us ...

... And hopefully the dawning of a new revolutionary movement.

[TDale313]

4. Fuck!!!!

This is truly disgusting.

[djean111]

5. Can't wait to see who voted for it.

I sincerely doubt there is a chance that the whole reeking corporate mess will be given a down vote, so the people who voted for fast track, the people who vote yes on it within two months, and any politicians who support it or endorse it - no vote. I only vote for Democrats, not neoliberal corporate Third Wayers.

[subterranean]

27. +1

[daleanime]

38. +1

[PoliticAverse]

6. Reced for exposure. n/t

[LongTomH]

7. Read the article: The fight goes on!

The odds may be against us; but, they always were!

[MannyGoldstein]

8. The good news is it will be made public before voting:

"The legislation would also make any final trade agreement public for 60 days before the president signs it, and up to four months before Congress votes. "

This will give us an opportunity to stop it.

[DeSwiss]

10. Only the TuufFarry can stop it now.

[JoePhilly]

18. But why would the tyrant Obama allow you or anyone any time to "stop it"?

[MannyGoldstein]

20. LOL! nt

[Skittles]

97. yup - it's pathetic

[Hoyt]

28. Well, all those saying it wouldn't be available, are WRONG AGAIN. Maybe they are wrong about more.

Now do you believe the "it won't go public for 4 years" was just bull?

[1StrongBlackMan]

36. Amazing, isn't it? ...

the 4 months is more than enough time to light our hair on fire, if need be.

[druidity33]

84. well,

i think that's actually one of the adjustments that came out of this committee vote. So they were actually accurate about the 4 years thing because that was the only information about the deal to be had at the time.

[Hoyt]

86. Nope. The 4 years applied to negotiating documents where country's whined about

what they didn't like.. It did not apply to the final documents to be presented to each srate's governing body.. And obviously it didn't apply to the negotiating documents, because we have in fact seen them, at least those who cared to look.

[jwirr]

30. Glad about that. My guess is that it is people like DU and the Unions who have been paying

attention so far.

[SamKnause]

9. How can anyone admire or respect

Last edited Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:07 PM - Edit history (1)

anyone who supports this travesty ???

No 'Democratic' politician would vote for this fast track to hell.

Representative Alan Grayson spoke about the TPP on Democracy Now this morning.

This is a punch to the face of American workers.

WTF is wrong with president Obama ???

Does he really need the money and connections this trade deal will provide him ???

What a turncoat.

http://www.democracynow.org/

There are two short videos.

Scroll down to the second video (photo of Say no to the TPP) and third video (with photo of Rep. Alan Grayson).

[donnasgirl]

11. All excellent questions

[JDPriestly]

29. Thanks. Great link. Alan Grayson is so right.

Bernie Sanders -- the only senator elected on small donations. Vermont is a small state, but still that is remarkable.

[SamKnause]

33. You are most welcome !!!

[lark]

44. Trojan Horse President

strikes again, and again its the workers who pay such a steep price.

[SamKnause]

48. Democratic presidents always

seem to pass the shit that Republicans could never get away with.

This two party system is a big fuck you to all U.S. citizens.

They are different on social issues, but they all suck up to big money, global corporations, and Wall Street.

I hope president Obama enjoys his money and connections after he signs this travesty.

The Bushes and Clintons certainly have made out like bandits.

[Enthusiast]

52. ...

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[billhicks76]

99. Were Are The Obama Apologists?

They always blame the lack of true change on Republican obstructionism...BUT Obama is going to do this and screw us all. Whose side is he on?

[Skittles]

98. did you miss the latest apologist meme, SamKnause

it's all cool Obama will give us time to see it!!!

[Hoppy]

12. And the nuts and bolts of it is that we get screwed.

[Fearless]

13. *Surprise!*

[pa28]

14. As of now only 15 "Democrats" in the house support it and they'll need more like 35.

The president will now have to team up with Republicans (again) to whip enough votes for passage.

[totodeinhere]

22. That's right because some Tea Party congresspeople also oppose it.

So Boehner may not be able to count on his entire caucus to go along with it. Thus Democratic votes will be needed to pass it.

This may be a case of some elements of the left and the right uniting to kill this awful bill. Normally I would not be comfortable with allying myself with Tea Party people, but this issue is so important that I will accept allies wherever I can find them.

[INdemo]

103. There are so many Democrats owned by

the corporate mafia that we really can't assume Democrats are necessarily on our side.
So some may vote for it.Remember the amendments to the Dodd-Frank bill back in January, giving Wall Street
theft protection..Democrats voted for that so I don't trust their vote at all.

[dixiegrrrrl]

15. That GIANT GIANT sucking sound..........

Remember what Ross Perot said about NAFTA?

TPP is so much worse.

Anything that has to be created and passed in secrecy is not good, obviously.

[pampango]

43. Hail to that great republican - Ross Perot!

Of course he overlooked the fact that manufacturing employment and wages increased significantly after NAFTA, at least until Bush came along to wreck the economy.

[Enthusiast]

55. Yeah. That's why we all think NAFTA was so great just because you told us it is.

The effects of NAFTA have been so devastating that the President offered to renegotiate NAFTA when he was stumping for votes.

Just don't come to Ohio and tell us how wonderful NAFTA is.

Why does organized labor hate NAFTA if it was so fucking great? Why do the American people hate NAFTA?

NAFTA sucks!

[pampango]

60. Indeed he is 'renegotiating NAFTA'. 75% of TPP trade is with Canada and Mexico.

Who says "the American people hate NAFTA"?

[Enthusiast]

63. He will make it worse.

Absolutely worse, handing corporations sovereignty over the nation.

[former9thward]

61. No, jobs were lost almost immediately and continued.

NAFTA took effect in 1994 and 103,000 jobs had been lost by 1997 and 199,000 jobs had been lost by 2000.

http://epi.3cdn.net/fdade52b876e04793b_7fm6ivz2y.pdf

Manufacturing and services exports in particular grew slower after NAFTA took effect. Since NAFTA’s enactment, U.S.
manufacturing exports to Canada and Mexico have grown at less than half the rate seen in the years
before NAFTA. Even growth in services exports, which were supposed to do especially well under the
trade pact given a presumed U.S. comparative advantage in services, dropped precipitously after
NAFTA’s implementation. During NAFTA’s first decade, the average growth rate in U.S. services
exports fell by 58 percent compared to the decade before NAFTA, and has remained well below the pre NAFTA
rate through the present.



http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTAs-Broken-Promises.pdf

[pampango]

65. American wages and household incomes rose after NAFTA as did manufacturing employment until 2000.

That continued until Bush became president. If you want to blame the wreckage under Bush on some kind of delayed effect of NAFTA (thus Clinton's fault?) rather than his own tax and regulatory policies, be my guest.

[former9thward]

68. You claimed manufacturing jobs rose in the 90s.

Jobs were lost in the 90s since NAFTA. Besides my links your OWN chart shows that.

[pampango]

71. I claimed they rose after NAFTA. They did. You're right they declined in the early 1990's pre-NAFTA.

Manufacturing jobs also declined in the 1980's under Reagan and Bush I and again under Bush II. I think I see a partisan pattern there.

[former9thward]

73. They fell in the 90s since 1994.

Your OWN chart shows that. 199,000 jobs were lost to NAFTA by 2000.

[pampango]

76. No, they fell in the 1990's before 1994 then rose. That's what the graph shows.

And manufacturing wages and family incomes rose from the mid-1990's on until you-know-who came into office.

[bvar22]

62. I'm still waiting for my high paying NAFTA job!!!

I can still remember Bill Clinton selling NAFTA to the American People.
BIll said, "The American Worker can compete with any worker in the World!",
and he got cheers from the audience.

What the audience did NOT understand was that Bill was really saying,
The American Worker will be FORCED to compete with Slave Labor in 3rd World countries for their jobs."

Ross was right:

....but Bill was smoooooth!

Perot even correctly predicted that manufacturing jobs would return to the USA...
AFTER wages and benefits had fallen to 3rd World levels,
and the American Working Class & their children got hungry enough to cut each other's throats
for a minimum wage job.

[pampango]

70. If German workers "can compete with any worker in the world" I suspect Americans can too.

Germany workers make more than American and import and export 3 times as much as the US does. Somehow they (and other European workers) have not been "FORCED to compete with Slave Labor in 3rd World countries for their jobs."

Perot's claim about the "Giant Sucking Sound" (though an effective rhetorical gimmick) looked pretty foolish for the rest of Clinton's administration. The inauguration of fellow-republican Bush with his supply-side economic policies made Perot look like a genius. Perhaps Perot was thinking like a 'supply-sider' when he predicted the disaster that did not occur until his fellow supply-sider came into office and destroyed the economy.

[bvar22]

72. ARe you REALLY going to insist that good American jobs did NOT migrate to Mexico...

...because of NAFTA??!!!!!

Yeah.
And we have always been at war with EastAsia.

Gotcha.

[pampango]

74. "And we have always been at war with EastAsia." We have? Always?

What should we do about those damn "EastAsians"?

ARe you REALLY going to insist that good American jobs did NOT migrate to Mexico......because of NAFTA??!!!!!

Don't worry. I would never try to contradict that great republican economist and orator, Ross Perot.

[bvar22]

75. Dodge of question noted.

...and I don't believe your Duck & Dodge fooled anyone reading this thread.

[pampango]

80. I found your statement that "And we have always been at war with EastAsia" more interesting

than your belief in that great republican economist and orator.

I'm sure Germany has lost some good German jobs to Bulgaria when it joined the EU. They apparently don't fixate on that but concentrate on paying their workers well and competing in the world economy.

[bvar22]

120. Note to pampango:

The USA is NOT Germany or Bulgaria,
and is not part of the EU.
You're struggling mightily to force that comparison,
and losing.

[Snarkoleptic]

102. One major difference is that Germany has a VAT tax,

which helps protects their manufacturing jobs.

[ctsnowman]

100. Exactly!

[appalachiablue]

66. What, oh what will this country look like in 10-20 years from now? Unbelievable.

THIS changes everything. Serious discussion of reverse migration for the young ones if possible. They don't deserve THIS, on top of everything else.

[Dont call me Shirley]

16. Just called my 2 Senators and Representative. Whitehouse line is busy, surprise surprise.

Call your Senators, Representatives and Whitehouse to express your opposition to this global
corporate coup' d'états.

Whitehouse Comments: 202-456-1111

United States Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121

[Octafish]

17. Yay, Oligarchs!

And their cronies.

[Scalded Nun]

19. They will not even let it see the light of day before passing.

Personally, I think anyone supporting the process that has brought this about needs to be voted out of office. I do not give a shit what party they are in. I do not give a shit how much they support anything else. This is not some secret strategic security plan, it is a fucking trade agreement, and it affects this entire country!

So we are the little children who cannot understand the workings of the big, complicated world. Well, we might be children in their eyes, but we can vote. I see no other way to get us out of this deep shit our elected officials have gotten us in to.

[zeemike]

26. Any voting you do will be after the deal is done.

And they don't give a shit about that...if you vote them out there is a job waiting for them where they can spend more time with their family and make some real money. That is how democricy is bought.

And BTW, welcome to DU.

[A Simple Game]

21. Can we get Iran to join in the Treaty, then Congress will pay attention and try to stop it. n/t

[CANDO]

23. And as it went for NAFTA...

TPP will be blamed, and rightly so, on a Democratic President. I can't tell you how many times its been pointed out by Republicans to me who signed NAFTA. Things like this never matter who controls congress and ratifies it. It is always the Prez's baby.

[pampango]

35. I doubt Obama will attempt to avoid 'blame'. Unlike NAFTA, all the negotiations for the TPP were

done during by a Democratic administration - Obama's.

With NAFTA, the negotiations were largely done under Bush I then handed off to Clinton in 1993. He decided not to trash it - and probably anger Canada and Mexico which had spent years negotiating it - but to make some changes and then push it through congress. Who knows what NAFTA would have looked like if Clinton had been in on its beginning. While Clinton does get 'blamed' for NAFTA, it was not his project to nearly the extent that the TPP is Obama's project.

Democrats have always pushed trade. From Wilson and his "the removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade"; to FDR with his Reciprocal Tariff Act of 1934 and International Trade Organization; to Kennedy and the Kennedy Round of GATT and so on and son. Republicans fought all of these until Reagan.

[stillwaiting]

41. TPP negotiations began in 2005 under George W. Bush's Administration.

That's a good number of years that the Dubya Misadministration was working on this deal.

Obama has definitely put this near the top of his concerns during his two Administrations though. He's a FIGHTER for it.

[pampango]

46. "The original agreement was concluded by Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore on 3 June 2005."

After the inauguration of Barack Obama in January 2009, the anticipated March 2009 negotiations were postponed. However, in his first trip to Asia in November 2009, president Obama reaffirmed the US's commitment to the TPP, and on 14 December 2009, new US Trade Representative Ron Kirk notified Congress that President Obama planned to enter TPP negotiations "with the objective of shaping a high-standard, broad-based regional pact".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership#History

Obama took the TPP from a small agreement between 4 small countries and changed it into the 12-country agreement that it is today.

[stillwaiting]

56. Well, to be fair. EIGHT countries had agreed to enter into these negotiations prior to...

... his inauguration. Including the U.S.

Four more countries agreed to enter in to free trade negotiations after Obama's inauguration. And, just about all negotiations between the 12 countries have occurred under Obama's watch.

** All this info. can also be found at your wiki link.

[pampango]

77. The substantive negotiations have all been done during the Obama administration. No one would argue

with that.

[stillwaiting]

81. I'm not sure that the left will view that as a positive in the future.

It certainly seems like it will be one of his "accomplishments" though.

[pampango]

82. Perhaps not. Clinton could say NAFTA was signed (December 1992) before he came into

office. (I don't know that he has ever used that argument.) He was not involved in the negotiations that led up to the signing.

Obama will certainly not have that to hide behind.

[bvar22]

112. Revisionist History Noted.

Bill Clinton SOLD NAFTA to the American People promising high paying jobs to America in return.
He even campaigned on NAFTA.
YES. HE. DID.

[freshwest]

88. The link says it was signed in... 2005! More mess for a Democrat to clean up.

Looks like Obama has been trying to fine tune the thing. But it was a done deal before he got into office. Like NAFTA was for Clinton. It's a treaty, we don't abrogate them. It's his thankless job to enforce them.



I've always had some Isolationist tendencies and from what you posted on American history, I feel ignorant. Simplicity is something we crave, but it's just a place to let the mind rest, and we aren't gonna get it.

[TheKentuckian]

93. Done deal? That shit hasn't passed Congress, nothing binding in or on our law.

The Devil made me do and I did the best I could line of bull is preposterous.

[appalachiablue]

54. Correct, but the President will be way out of matters by then, like Clinton, other POTUS.

*WHAT AN ANTI-DEMOCRATIC, GLOBAL, CORPORATE COUP* to benefit The Global Investor Class-

[yurbud]

24. call, email, fax, write congress...

They may ignore us, but they won't be able to claim we supported it.

[totodeinhere]

25. Let have Hillary Clinton weigh in on this.

And if she supports it then she should not be the Democratic nominee. This issue is too important. Could Clinton support for fast tracking the Trans-Pacific Partnership be enough to get Senator Warren to change her mind and run? Or could this be the straw that broke the camel's back that gets Senator Sanders to run as a Democrat?

Yes the old Hillary Clinton supported so-called free trade agreements. Now lets see whether or not the new populist Hillary Clinton has changed her tune or not.

[zeemike]

32. I doubt you will ever pin her down on that one.

Besides she can say she is against it all she wants, because the blame will be on Obama...it is not her fault, and Obama will not be running for office...he can fall on the sword and take one for the team.

But the GOP can use it against the democrats and gain both the WH and a permanent majority in the congress...a perfect plan for them.

[Doctor_J]

85. "As far as TPP goes, Mrs. Clinton is strongly in favor of gay marriage rights"

And when it comes to Wall Street crimes, she will work for equal pay. As for the Keystone XL, she believes every woman should have the right to an abortion.

You will hear nothing from her on corporate coups

[GoneFishin]

89. Yep. You nailed it!

[dreamnightwind]

94. This post, in a few words, nails the whole game

I am always amazed how few recognize this. And if it isn't one of those issues that gets them to think our sell-out leaders are great progressives, they swallow the "it's the Republican's fault" B.S.

It's time for people to wake up to this reality. I suggest we start by holding one of the TPP's architects, Hillary Clinton, accountable, by not nominating her as the Democratic candidate for POTUS.

I loved the Bill Clinton quote upthread, and BVar's perfect contextualization of it.

"The American worker can compete with any worker in the world!"

LMAO

How can we compete with 3rd world labor rates and standards? Their costs of living are nowhere near ours. And why would we WANT to compete with them on their terms? It's a joke. They think we're stupid enough to fall for it, and too often, they are right.

[ctsnowman]

101. Excellent!

[BeanMusical]

114. Oh, that's good. +1

[PSPS]

31. Notice to the swooners: This is why real democrats like me use the term 'Obummer.'

[blkmusclmachine]

34. http://www.thecommentator.com/system/articles/inner_pictures/000/005/415/original/obama-laughing.jpg

[daleanime]

37. They are desperate to get this done....

before the mud can spatter on the next cycle of candidates.

[Jack Rabbit]

39. I guess that means American democracy will be officially dead and buried in 24 hours

We'll have to resurrect it from wherever the neoliberals think they ditch it.

[sulphurdunn]

57. American democracy

was pretty much dead after the coronation of George Bush.

[gregcrawford]

40. This treachery cannot be forgiven.

The good Obama may have done is obliterated by this obscene betrayal.

[Doctor_J]

104. Oh, but it MUST be!

Otherwise, Cruz!!...or...SCOTUS!!...or...gay marriage!!...or...something.

And, more to the point, nearly all of "the good Obama has done" is for the megacorporations, so this fits perfectly.

[lark]

42. Obama and the majority of congress totally f#ed us on this

So depressed. Don't think there is any saving this country, it's too rigged for the wealthy. God help us as we sorely need some intervention.

[Martak Sarno]

45. The Corporate States of America (2001 - )

America is truly becoming an "Obamanation."

It's time we as a nation commit politicide - removal (by vote, of course...uh huh) of all politicians who support this fetid and festering Corporate Divine Comedy.

“Through me you pass into the city of woe:
Through me you pass into eternal pain:
Through me among the people lost for aye.
Justice the founder of my fabric moved:
To rear me was the task of Power divine,
Supremest Wisdom, and primeval Love.
Before me things create were none, save things
Eternal, and eternal I endure.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.”

- Dante Alighieri

[Cryptoad]

47. Oh hell,,,, the Sky is FAlling!

[OnyxCollie]

49. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[pa28]

58. Joke's on us. Just like it always is!

[WillyT]

50. Great... The Democrats Always Seem To Find A Way To Shoot Themselves In The Foot...

Can't WAIT for THAT roll call vote.











Hmmm...

What if Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown, and others... did a Progressive Filibuster... a REAL Filibuster ???

[WillTwain]

51. I hope you all are retired or rich.

This is looking bad.

[chapdrum]

53. Too bad it's not just a nightmare

but another huge step in the willful selling out of the vast majority of the American people.
Can't wait to hear Hillary refute this.

[Enthusiast]

59. Of course the PTB would prefer a GOP legislature.

Last edited Thu Apr 16, 2015, 06:28 PM - Edit history (1)

This action will serve to depress Democratic voter turnout as we witnessed in 2010.

[FiveGoodMen]

69. Why should they prefer the GOP?

They get everything they want either way.

(I don't think the money people really care whether gays can marry)

[Enthusiast]

78. You're right about the gay thing, of course.

The PTB get almost every thing they want, true. With the exception of another unnecessary war. And we did get the Consumer Financial Protection Thingie®.

No question, our party needs to put some more daylight between them and the GOP with regard to policy.

[BeanMusical]

115. +1

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

64. I trust that President Obama will veto this.

[sendero]

67. But Republicans are the bad guys, our..

.... party would never do something like this.

[cascadiance]

79. Let's all call Pete DeFazio's office and ask him to primary Wyden today!

If we can get a quick response for him to do so, perhaps he'll get the message that when the congressional vote to pass Fast Track comes up he'll vote no, even if he worked to get it out of committee! It would also send a strong message to other members of congress that there will be a price to pay if they vote for this PIECE OF CRAP!

He's already spoken out on this the right way today!

http://defazio.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/defazio-responds-to-new-fast-track-legislation

[dreamnightwind]

96. Great idea if you live in Oregon

I'm in California, I'll see where Boxer and Feinstein (yeah right) are at on this one. And my rep Huffman, he is probably against it but I will check, and make some noise if he isn't clear.

[Doctor_J]

83. Let's add it to The List

[blackspade]

90. Fucked again by the corporate class.

[Triana]

91. We should be known as the United Federation of Multinational Corporations

after this hideous piece of shit passes. Because THAT is who and what will be running things. Not that they are not now, but TPP codifies it into law. Our government will be the corporations. And they will do as they damn well please - nevermind workers, human rights, the economy (esp local ones) or the environment.

I heard some turd on NPR this morning talking about it. When Diane Rehm brought up concerns about workers and wages the asshole didn't have an answer other than: "well yea it's going to fuck over American workers but it will be better for the US in the long run because we don't want to be left out of any trade agreements - that would hurt US economy"

FUCKING the workers over will hurt the US economy too. Possibly worse.

That's why this thing is S T U P I D.

Here's the thing: NO POLITICIAN - Hillary, Obama or otherwise - can pretend to give a DAMN about income/wealth inequality and support this TPP trade agreement. Because of TPP, income inequality is going to get MUCH. WORSE. They cannot reconcile their alleged "care" about wealth inequality with support of TPP. It's NOT reconcilable.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

107. .......

"well yea it's going to fuck over American workers but it will be better for the US in the long run because we don't want to be left out of any trade agreements - that would hurt US economy"

jeezus h. christ.

[BrentWil]

92. Global economic integration will continue with or without this deal...

The only question is rather we will attempt to shape it to encourage better treatment of workers and better environmental standards. Much better to be in the process than on the outside.

I will take a wild guess that this will be a minority viewpoint here.

[dreamnightwind]

95. K & F'n R

This country is FUBAR. Call your reps, I'll call mine. That won't be enough. I'm looking for movements that are planning to take this to the streets, they might pay a little more attention if they have to deal with some actual visible human beings. Anyone that knows of any such efforts, post it here please. If I hear of anything I'll do the same.

[Brewinblue]

105. And Hillary secretly giggles with delight,

while the oligarchs take command and our constitution sinks into the abyss.

[TBF]

106. Yup, if he gets it through she is off the hook. nt

[BeanMusical]

116. She sure does.

[turbinetree]

108. This is outragous

we the public have been given a no hearings, no public comment, and no matter how much we oppose this legislation its like we are talking to the proverbial walls----literally-----amazing-----and no matter how much we (100 million---voters and out of that at least 50+1 of the majority is telling them no, do not do this legislation-----no------can you hear us now----- no --------but they go and do it anyway--------amazing) tell them.
We have lost and continue to lose over 60,000 manufacturing production sites a year and countless jobs.
We are now losing service sector jobs, service sector jobs, attorney, civil engineers, you name it , the only thing that will be left is the proverbial ditch digger burying our jobs for the next trade deal, that will not be left----amazing

[ronnie624]

109. Big business and corporate lobbyists

Last edited Fri Apr 17, 2015, 01:22 PM - Edit history (1)

support this agreement because it will increase their profits, period. By definition, that means reducing the cost of manufacturing. How is this supposed to be accomplished without reducing wages and benefits for workers and eliminating measures that protect the environment? It simply is NOT possible for everyone to benefit from an increase in profits for shareholders and executives. Some, will have to lose so that others can gain. A corporation is a thermodynamic system; energy coming in, in the form of resources and labor, energy going out, in the form of capital (which is a highly inaccurate representation of usable energy), always at a net loss of energy. If a share of the outgoing energy increases for some, it has to be offset by a loss for others. No other view, is consistent with the Laws of Thermodynamics.

[DCBob]

110. I think many are over-reacting to this.

Its a trade bill not a middle class jobs bill.. of course the focus is on business. There are many legitimate reasons to push this but I think the most important is simply to increase trade and ties with our Asian friends which will help block China from dominating that region. No doubt there may be negative effects but the bottom line is the benefits far out-weigh the negatives.. imo.

[ronnie624]

113. It seems illogical to assume

that China should have no influence in its own region of the world; that a country, thousands of miles away, should "block" China and "dominate" Asia instead. This sort of competition for resources and market shares, is imperialist in nature, and increases the potential for future conflict.

Cooperation is the only thing that will enable us to meet the challenges we face, in the not too distant future.

[DCBob]

121. Of course China should have "influence" in the region but they are going way beyond that.

Have you seen their map of the China sea?



They claim to have rights of nearly the entire sea and are in disputes with almost every country in the region. Those countries welcome the US to counter balance China's aggression.

[ronnie624]

122. Actually,

there are a number of disputes, involving different groups of countries. It isn't all one sided against China.

There also happens to be some suspected oil reserves in the region; perhaps rather large ones. That couldn't possibly be a motive for US interest, no-siree-bob.

It's possible, I suppose, that the governments of some of these countries "welcome" US intervention, but a poll of the people, I suspect, might show something else, especially among those who have some knowledge of the history of US imperialism.

[DCBob]

123. For sure oil is main reason China has expanded it's claims thousands of miles off its shore.

What may be even more worrisome is this...



China is building a runway capable of handling military aircraft in disputed territory in the South China Sea, according to a recent satellite image released Thursday.

The runway on a reef in the Spratly Islands, an archipelago also claimed in part by Vietnam and the Philippines, could stretch to nearly 10,000 feet and expand China’s influence in a region where at least six countries have overlapping claims. U.S. officials have expressed growing concern over China using reefs to build artificial islands and expand its military presence in the area. China has acknowledged that the islands will serve both civilian and military purposes, according to the New York Times.

President Obama said last week that he had concerns of China using “its sheer size and muscle to force countries into subordinate positions.”

“We think this can be solved diplomatically, but just because the Philippines or Vietnam are not as large as China doesn’t mean that they can just be elbowed aside,” added Obama.

http://time.com/3826713/china-building-airstrip-disputed-south-china-sea-islands/

[99th_Monkey]

111. Goodbye America. It was good to know you.

Oh, and thanks Obama for all the "Hope & Change" jive-talk,
that put you in the White House to sell out America to highest
bidders.

[BeanMusical]

117. But, but, the TPP will be all champagne and strawberries for American workers, right?

Obama and Hillary wouldn't do something that would hurt the peons! Never!

[DrKZ]

118. Does American labor count at all?

I suppose this is going to be another job killer which kills American labor and continues to increase the worldwide proliferation of slave labor (which is the highest at any time in history). Way to go USA and all of your lobbyists writing bills for you ... What happens to American workers? Do you think that labors efforts on behalf of Democratic candidates means nothing at all?

[DrKZ]

119. Does American labor count at all?

I suppose this is going to be another job killer which kills American labor and continues to increase the worldwide proliferation of slave labor (which is the highest at any time in history). Way to go USA and all of your lobbyists writing bills for you ... What happens to American workers? Do you think that labors efforts on behalf of Democratic candidates means nothing at all?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-swenson/nafta-the-transpacific-clinton_b_5523327.html