Bernie doesn't "reject trade" he rejects the idea that trade has to be on corporate terms.

[Ken Burch]

Why shouldn't we try to shape a trade policy that doesn't force the planet's workers to compete in the willingness to work at the lowest possible wages?

Why shouldn't we try to have trade without a race to the bottom on environmental regulations and workplace safety rules?

Why shouldn't we at least make sure that no corporation can force any country to cut social and educational spending by claiming those are industry subsidies?

And why should we let corporations use internation tribunals to overturn the policies of sovereign governments, and therby make national elections meaningless?

Why, in short, can we NOT have trade with a human face?

[Rebkeh]

1. The bottom line is

Whom do these agreements work for? You can rationalize all you want, government has been effectively co-opted. Yes, it's more nuanced than that but where do loyalties lie? Let's be real, people at the top don't share power. They are businesses, self serving, profit is their bottom line. They are are not representatives, and certainly not elected.

Workers are not commodities. They are people.

[GreatGazoo]

2. they can't beat his real positions so they use strawman after strawman

He is for universal healthcare so they say "Bernie wants to destroy ACA...just like the GOP..."

The trade strawman is even worse perhaps because they add "NAFTA was great and not to blame for job losses" to the usual 'Bernie hates trade' or whatever the heck they claim this week.

It is disgusting.

[Haveadream]

3. Well said!

Thank you for a fantastic post. Labor regulations applying to our corporations (I'm looking at you, Mitt Romney) need to be enforced at the highest standard, wherever they are operating. Greed has always sought a way to exploit those who are the most vulnerable. Those who profit from the physical, mental and economic abuse of others should be charged with human rights violations.