General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLol. Top 10 Arguments in Defense of the TPP
(paraphrased, for the dear habitual alerters)
10) It's only a draft
9) Nothing has been decided
8) *It will protect the environment
7) **It will have strong labor protections
6) It will keep jobs from being outsourced
5) We don't know what's in it so how can you object?
4) It's just like people jumping on the President over Syria
3) Wait and see (a variation on it's only a draft)
2) we need Pacific Rim nations to lower tariffs
1) He's got this
* the same people berating others for not knowing much of what's in the TPP are sure that they know it's go great stuff in it. Never mind that they disparage the leaked texts as not being current.
** ditto
Scuba
(53,475 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Nobody has anything but abstract generalities to the effect that trade or regulation of trade is bad.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)DireStrike
(6,452 posts)Why is a grand international trade deal being kept secret?
Could it maybe be because all the other grand international trade deals have screwed the working class very, very hard?
let's wait till we're all decimated to make up our minds, cause at this point we know nothing about it!
That's the ticket, because all prior free trade agreements have booming positive effect on our economy and US workers !
http://americablog.com/2013/11/bill-moyers-trans-pacific-partnership-free-trade-agreement-death-democracy.html
-p
treestar
(82,383 posts)We are encouraged to go off with hair on fire without knowing how to debate other than to say all free trade agreements are bad.
Apparently we are going to have trade with other countries. Should it just be unregulated? If regulated, aren't we going to compromise with the other countries? Well, I did hear we were this big bully. But now we can be taken advantage of by New Zealand, etc..
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)In this case, it simply appears that some people want to look "cool" and in the know, and inform us it's all bad and get us to blindly follow, calling us corporatists or something that is supposed to sound bad, or other if we ask any questions.
The US will trade with other countries, it seems a good idea to regulate it as much as possible (we wouldn't be against economic regulation for trade within the US); so here is one attempt, yet not one underlying issue, and there are many, is really discussed. We're just supposed to swallow the argument that it is bad wholesale. No questions. Just go in lockstep.
For all we know, it could be a good agreement, a flawed agreement, one with advantages along with disadvantages in order to compromise with other countries.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)which obviously preemptively frames the opposing argument and the person who would make it in a disrespectful and demeaning way before any discussion has even begun.
I still think "hair on fire" would be a suitable counter-insult for "apologist" -- if the goal is to hurl insults
Even though I've grown accustomed to it, it still galls me to see this kind of talk. I'm used to it from the right ("Sheeple!" but I groan when I see it coming from the left.
I agree with your arguments. I'm very skeptical of the TPP. The secrecy is disturbing. Trade with the Pacific Rim countries is an existing fact. A framework doesn't necessarily make it any better or worse. Deep within my compromising soul there lies an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, fire-breathing environmental radical. More trade with distant countries easily means more pervasive and rapid environmental destruction of the earth's living systems. It means that the capitalist, "civilized" paradigm becomes more entrenched in other parts of the world. It means that US hegemony and "national interest" grows to encompass more of the planet.
It's probably a f%$king horrible agreement. But I agree with your argument that we don't know that for sure, and certainly no specifics have been given by the TPP opponents here.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)as offensive and over the top, what can't the little darlings get hidden?
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)and replies without being rude.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)I think you should apologize to cali.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)
* the same people berating others for not knowing much of what's in the TPP are sure that they know it's go great stuff in it. Never mind that they disparage the leaked texts as not being current.
Not true. Perhaps some, but by no means "all" or even most. Perhaps 1. Maybe 2.
I, myself, referred to the "proposals" in the leaked text.
For those of you who haven't read the leaked text, go here:
http://wikileaks.org/tpp/
You'll see that there are lots of different proposals and also opposition to almost all of them. Which demonstrates that although many of the proposals are good, nothing has been decided.
cali
(114,904 posts)And I never said all. I wrote a bit of satire. lighten up. and having read the leaked texts, the bad far outweighs the good imho.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)yep, exactly. I can't get my asshairs on fire over nothing that's been decided or I'd not have any asshairs left.
That might be a good bumper sticker for some here.
pampango
(24,692 posts)demonstrates that although many of the proposals are good, nothing has been decided."
Well said.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Can't have all that good stuff out there for people to see.
It's to good to publish! The American people are going to greet it with joy and happiness all around. That's what I was thinking when my job got shipped over seas.
Oh Joy!
-p
I can sense the excitement of the ring.
cali
(114,904 posts)ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Our trade imbalance with Asia is horrible and needs to be adjusted more in our favor. That isn't going to happen on its own.
So we need to negotiate a good trade agreement.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...which is trotted out for the TPP and every other treaty or piece of legislation that we get wind of through the press
5) We don't know what's in it so how can you object?
These same people have no problem at all with a process that locks out legislators from even reading the draft provisions, but allows corporate representatives full participation in the negotiations -- thus ensuring that corporate rights will have primacy over the rights of the general population. But of course we aren't allowed to say that, because, (circular argument alert) -- we don't know what's in it so stop saying that!!
Buns_of_Fire
(17,173 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Yes, by all means, I'd love to see those same detractors prove that we wouldn't have gone in, like Libya, had we all not gone 'HELL NO' over it.
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Perfect it is not, but it does LISTEN to the base.
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)I would say "understands that public outcry has consequences". Or "Is concerned with image management".
Before the last 8 years I would have expected these to be indispensable characteristics in an administration. Now we are supposed to be grateful for them.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)fadedrose
(10,044 posts)I unabashedly love this President and can't seem to blame him even when I should.
But keep it up because I like to know what's going on, and you do...
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)But he said, "Make me do it." I suggest we make him forget this God awful TPP.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)and tell him that this TPP is coming between us AND even god said it's awful.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Seems to me it's only TPP bad - no questions to be asked.
Not a one specific provision have you ever brought to the board for discussion.
cali
(114,904 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Other than to pretend you have some occult knowledge.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)freaks and liberal Democrats.
cali
(114,904 posts)I personally am hopeful that it won't pass, but last time it looked like it might be stopped and ended up passing by a handful of votes.
There are powerful forces in the house working on passing it. It's foolish to underestimate what house leadership when united, can bring to bear.
It could go either way.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)shut down/debt ceiling for how well "powerful forces" actually stack up in Congress.
I posted three threads that counter your OPINION it'll get through Congress.
cali
(114,904 posts)questionable argumentation tactics.
I Have NEVER said that I think it'll get through. I have said these things repeatedly: I am hopeful that it won't pass in the House and that the leadership of both sides will be bringing pressure on their members to vote for it.
Nor do I think that the shut down is definitive when it comes to the TPA. In that case, the leadership was not even a tiny bit united.
I think it's more useful harken back to the last time the TPA was passed in 2002- by a vote of 215 to 212.
As far as your conclusion that it won't pass, I caution against making that prediction as I caution against making the prediction that it will pass.
It's easy enough to see that as of now, the votes committed to blocking it do not exist in sufficient number. It's simple math. There were 151 dem signatories to the letter and 21 repub signers. There are 435 voting members in the house. 174 signers, 261 who as far as we know, haven't committed against it. And of course, people are free to change their minds down to the last second of voting.
Managers often don't bring things like this to the floor if they don't think they have the votes lined up. We'll see what happens
Hope I've cleared that up for you.
ananda
(28,856 posts)..
WillyT
(72,631 posts)After all... if President Obama supports it... it must be right.
Right?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)They're the usual anti-worker voices. How these conservatives continue to run rampant here, with their own little clubhouse no less, is sickening.
cali
(114,904 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Fucking disgraceful. They're the usual anti-worker voices. How these conservatives continue to run rampant here, with their own little clubhouse no less, is sickening. "
...is pretty typical of these threads. Seems they're all about pitting DUers againsts each other by misconstruing comments. I mean, attacking other posters isn't going to stop the TPP.
Also, where are the "conservatives" who "run rampant here, with their own little clubhouse"?
cali
(114,904 posts)and many of you are simply partisans who support anything that the President does or says.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)I realize there's a concerted effort to silence people here, but frankly, I think that that is about as dishonorable as you can get. Beyond that, there's a concerted effort to kick people off of DU by alerting and getting innocuous posts hidden
Can anyone really defend this hide?
lame. care to actually post a defense of the TPP?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4031368
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
"Or just keep on trucking with your PROpaganda. "
JURY RESULTS
A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Nov 14, 2013, 09:26 AM, and voted 4-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Personal attack. I'm so sick of this tired, completely unsubstantiated attack against ProSense.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Really?
I see there's some attempt there to malign the jurors. Seems appropriate to me.
cali
(114,904 posts)however, if you go to the thread where that was hidden, pro, youu'll find poster after poster appalled that it was hidden, who quite clearly see what's being attempted, pro.
And that someone alerted on this thread, pro, is truly laughable. Didn't work. soooo sorry, pro.
make that double pro.
"if you go to the thread where that was hidden, pro, youu'll find poster after poster appalled that it was hidden, who quite clearly see what's being attempted, pro."
You think that those attempts to intimidate the jurors validates the post?
cali
(114,904 posts)and biased. It's obvious that some of you long for nothing more than that DU be nothing but a cheerleading site for the President.
Not ever going to happen.
Oh, and you inspire me to keep fighting against the corporate agenda that the President is so gung ho for.
treestar
(82,383 posts)No one seems to dare to disagree, or they will get name calling. No one has even asked for support for the argument that this agreement is so horrible.
When the intellectual property issues came out, everyone jumped on the pre-conceived notion that it was all bad, with no analysis. At least that was an issue of substance that came out. Yet no one on the board really understands intellectual property. But they knew they had to trash whatever it was.
No one here on DU knows enough to "defend the TPP" or any part of it. But it does not really seem that its detractors really know either, or they'd pass on some ammunition that could be used to argue against it to people outside DU.
cali
(114,904 posts)on people or trying to get them kicked off. And yes, there's an active cadre dedicated to doing that.
And you are flat out wrong regarding the TPP. If you informed yourself, you could know quite a bit about it.
I have bothered to inform myself. It's simply another tactic to deflect to claim that not enough is known.
treestar
(82,383 posts)You have pre condemned it all, so we know that any individual issue that comes out, we know where you will stand.
You have also it seems tried to set yourself up as expert.
I know little to nothing about it. Nothing you've said gives me any ammunition to argue against it anywhere. Just saying "inform yourself" does not win votes or support. I remain neutral. Not everyone has time to do the hours of reading it would take to make an informed opinion. Those who set themselves up at experts need to persuade, not brag and direct those they want support from to obtain a degree in the subject. This is how the "corporatists" win out, but you're doing nothing different and not likely to overcome them with arguments they are the evil and anything they want must be bad. In fact that is now always true. They need us for customers and need us to be employed in order to buy their stuff.
The other countries involved, are they also getting screwed over too? Maybe they want access to the huge US market and see that as a good thing. (This is an observation for more to think about, not a "defense of the TPP" which for all I know, could be bad or good for us, but I don't presume our elected representatives and their appointed assistants are really all out to screw us over in favor of "the corporations."
cali
(114,904 posts)All you have to do is check out the multitude of post I've provided with numerous links to facts.
Your hyper partisanship and unquestioning loyalty to the President are blinding you to facts.
And if you did do any research you'd find that there's been quite a bit of dissent from other countries. I've posted povs from those countries repeatedly.
It's your responsibility to inform yourself. You don't want to.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Simply presented someone's conclusions that it is bad, bad, bad.
Has nothing to do with the President. He's likely more objective than you are and probably better informed, too. I also don't think he's trying real hard to screw us over in favor of "the corporatists," - this like most things will have its advantages and disadvantages but most likely be better than no regulation at all. Other countries don't have to obey our laws, nor we theirs, and the world has apparently decided that international trade is going to happen.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)KansDem
(28,498 posts)This excuse has been used repeatedly for the last 30 years. From "trickle down" to tax cuts for the wealthy, jobs were neither created nor kept from being outsourced.
I can't believe the corporatists are sill using this canard.*
________
*[font size="1"]Well, actually I can, but I can't believe the people are still falling for it...
[font size="2"]
KG
(28,751 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)How about "Americans would be better off with two meals a day, too much diabetes these days"?
cali
(114,904 posts)and the all encompassing "it's a bullshit issue".
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Remember it took Canada 193 years to get theirs right