One cannot simultaneously want the TPP and economic justice for the 99%

[MannyGoldstein]

They are violently mutually exclusive.

They absolutely know it's awful for the already-eviscerated 99%, otherwise they wouldn't hide behind an unprecedented veil of secrecy. They are sociopaths.

Wake up! We are being disembowled by sick, sick people. If we don't fight back, and quick, we will be dinner.

[NYC_SKP]

1. Well that is as obvious as the day is long. K/R

[sabrina 1]

2. They are sociopaths. And who wants the TPP AND economic justice? I thought

they were two separate groups?

[Phlem]

9. No they are not! Why are you such a hater!

Yes it's sarcasm now but you know what it's like here.

Just let that sink in for a moment and realize that you talk to those people, here in DU.



-p

[sabrina 1]

28. Well I talk to people who claim to want both but I can't say I ever

understood how anyone could make that claim.

But what do we know, the 'Left' that is?

[QC]

32. Sabrina never really loved him!!!1

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. Absolutely right, my dear Manny...

It makes me sick, and very sad.

And angry.

[msongs]

4. yes but one can PRETEND to want economic justice for the 99% until one gets the TPP passed! nt

[BrotherIvan]

5. But how does one fight?

All of Congress will support this because their masters will tell them to. This is what thirty years of investment has bought for the corporations. We can't get rid of fucking Citizen's United, though it is universally hated. We can't jail bankers or hold companies who contaminate our rivers and our oceans accountable. We're barely hanging on to social security. We cheer the profits of health insurance companies as some kind of victory though we are just now realizing the deductibles are too high for anyone to use their wonderful plans. We lost. How on earth are we to fight this?

[jtuck004]

8. That's one of the better questions. Sunlight is probablhy the cure, but you can't bring enough alone

So here are people interested in the same thing...

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/01/stopping-fast-track-one-way-we-can-block-tpp

http://stoptpp.org/events/

http://www.exposethetpp.org/

Here's a link to a search on a search engine:

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=stop+tpp

Find a group you like, that you can trust, and work together.

[DeSwiss]

11. By not fighting.

However, it requires a level of courage heretofore unseen in these parts.

The courage to follow your own mind.

What you KNOW to be right.

Not what some poll says.

The willingness and intent to do absolutely nothing.

No. Thing.

Collective nothingness.

Enough of us doing that, can really fuck their shit up.

Because, it is we who runs their things.

And that's the only way we ''fight.''

We don't. Fighting and conflict is their game.

- Nothingness, is our GREATEST POWER.

[ronnie624]

96. I get it.

But we also need the ability to organize on a massive, grassroots level, and that is being gradually taken from us.

[DeSwiss]

112. That's what the Internets are doing.

- And why TPTB want control of it.

[ProgressSaves]

6. Krugman said it was nothing really to tout if you're for it or grieve over if you're against it.

I look to Krugman for all advice on economic issues.

When he tells me to worry about the TPP, I'll start shouting it from the rooftops.

[jtuck004]

7. Sneaky way to calm down the opposition whlie your friends pass it.

The Industrial Unions of old had to contend with spies, infiltrators, liars, and thieves, underhanded filth who pretend to be your friend while working against you.

They are still with us and are very good at what they do. One still needs to take care and think about who is best served by the advice they are given.

Not saying what he is or isn't, but that advice sure helps out the people who want to ram it through.

[moondust]

33. Krugman is probably not the best advisor on trade.

Paul Krugman was himself a “supposed authority” who gravely misled the American public on how to think about free-trade globalization. As threatening losses and dislocations accumulated for the US, the celebrated economist was like Voltaire’s Dr. Pangloss, assuring everyone not to worry. Pay no attention to those critics dwelling on the dark side of globalization, he said. Economic theory confirms that free trade is the best of all possible policies in this best of all possible worlds.

Why Was Paul Krugman So Wrong?

[Egalitarian Thug]

36. Dr. Krugman is both brilliant and on the right side, socially. But keep in mind that he is

also good friends with Dr. Stiglitz and they frequently disagree in this area. So consider where Dr. Krugman is coming from, he's a millionaire and became so it this system. Do you think that he has any interest in changing that system to make it work for everybody, or would he think it better to tweak it to be less harsh for those who are excluded from it?

Just a thought.

[truedelphi]

54. Krugman is a lily livered guy living inside the plush ivory

tower of academics. Occasionally he says something noteworthy, but given how he tried to rally the middle class troops to support President Clinton in passing NAFTA, I can't trust him.

He also doesn't know beans about the lower middle classes, or even the middle class. But that doesn't stop him from making "learned" proclamations about so many facets of middle class and lower middle class life.

[morningfog]

120. You return trolls are so easy to spot. Good Riddance. I'll catch you again next time.

[DeSwiss]

10. K&R

- This is what you get when corporations are allowed to become persons. And it's also what you get when it takes billions to ''elect'' a government.

Seen that way, the corporations are merely getting the laws they paid for........

[ScottyEss]

12. Little harsh, don't you think?

I can't be that bad if a Democratic President is pursuing the treaty and a Democratic Senate is considering fast tracking it.

It doesn't make any sense.

[Scuba]

18. Ever heard of the Third Way?

They may call themselves Democrats, but they work hard for Republican values.

[ScottyEss]

23. But a D is a D know matter how R.

[Scuba]

24. Not in the eyes of many of us who are loyal to ideals rather than party.

[ScottyEss]

79. Well, I know a certain someone who's

Posting privileges were banned for engaging in a heated discussion about this very topic. The other individual is a long timer on this site, with apparently some pull.

[840high]

104. Many of us are

loyal to ideals.

[antiquie]

26. Millionaires and billionaires vs The People ~ nt

[ScottyEss]

80. What does nt mean? I see it in many posts.

[ZombieHorde]

153. nt = No Text in body of post. nt

[think]

154. nt = no text in the subject part of the response. The title is the full reply /nt

[Phlem]

73. This ^^^^

Last edited Sun Jan 12, 2014, 10:18 PM - Edit history (1)

"But a D is a D know matter how R."

That is exactly the problem.

-p

[ScottyEss]

22. "The System"? So what is the point of participating here at DU

If our elected officials are controlled by "The System"?

[L0oniX]

37. Silly question. Democracy is an illusion.

[ScottyEss]

41. It's exactly the right question, because nobody here is talking

About overcoming the system. The only purpose of this sight is to elect more Democrats, regardless if policy, I might add.

[progressoid]

65. Hmmm...what's that word I'm looking for...BULLSHIT.

"nobody here is talking about overcoming the system"

BULLSHIT

"The only purpose of this sight (sic) is to elect more Democrats, regardless if (sic) policy, I might add."

MORE BULLSHIT

[ScottyEss]

78. You haven't read the TOS of this site.

Thank you for grahamer (sic) checking my phat (sic) fingered iPhone typing and autocorrect skills. It strengthens you argument.

[progressoid]

83. OMG, you're right. I've been here for 9 years and have never read the TOS.

Thanks for pointing that out. From now on I (and hopefully everyone else here) will fall in lockstep with what ever the Party says.

Of course, as a long time member, you have seen how we rarely disagree and have no desire to change the system. It's a veritable love fest with our leaders. So, fear not, the TOS shan't be broken.

[ScottyEss]

84. Perhaps you should debate MADem regarding

Ds regardless of policy an only through the system.

It's been my experience that the long timers here chase away those, like myself, who don't worship at the alter Obama, or Hillary, or any Wrong Way Third Way Democrat that comes along.

Actions matter to me, and using "the system" to excuse a Democrat who pushes a Republican policy is not my idea of being a Democrat.

But since you've been here so long you probably know the secret handshake that lets you criticize Blue Dogs, like our president, without mysteriously, and cowardly, having their posting privileges revoked.

[progressoid]

85. Well, I've been banned from BOG so...

I guess I don't know that particular secret handshake (BOG = Barack Obama Group).

Nor do I support DLC/Third wayers. If fact, I would say most of the people in this thread don't (it does have 78 recs). A lot of DUers, like me, are critical of the President and our party's shift to the right, yet manage not to get posting privileges revoked.

Dissent is welcome as long as you aren't a giant douche.

[Rex]

121. Take it as a badge of honor, the best posters on DU are banned from the BOG.

Hopefully whoever is POTUS in 2016, will not get their name and forum high jacked by control freaks with an agenda to embarrass this website.

[progressoid]

125. Yeah, it's not like I would visit it deliberately.

But they kept popping up on the Greatest Page and I would respond. Silly me.

[SidDithers]

86. Wow. Seriously??...nt

Sid

[SidDithers]

90. ...

Sid

[markpkessinger]

87. "It's been my experience . . . " since when - January 2 when you joined the site?

You write:

It's been my experience that the long timers here chase away those, like myself, who don't worship at the alter Obama, or Hillary, or any Wrong Way Third Way Democrat that comes along.

< . . . . >

But since you've been here so long you probably know the secret handshake that lets you criticize Blue Dogs, like our president, without mysteriously, and cowardly, having their posting privileges revoked.

Pray, tell, what is this "experience" of which you speak? Your profile says you joined the site on January 2, 2014. So, based on 10 days of membership, you claim to speak from your "experience?" And then you go on to imply that those of us who regularly criticize Blue Dog Democrats, the Third Way, President Obama or Hillary Clinton (and I am among those who have been quite critical of all of the above) -- people who fundamentally agree with you -- are part of some in-group that has special pull or influence? Sorry, but it sounds to me like you were the person whose posting privileges were suspended, and have now signed up under a different name.

There are a considerable number of regular posters/commenters on this site who have frequently felt compelled to post OPs and comments that have been highly critical of the President, of Hillary Clinton, the Third Way, Blue Dogs, etc. I have been among them. There are also a considerable number of regular posters/commenters who vigorously defend any or all of the above against such criticisms. I have certainly had my share of sharp exchanges with those defenders. But I have never had my posting privileges threatened as a result. I have seen no evidence of any conspiracy to remove people from either group.

So I have to wonder, what was the point of your joining the site 10 days ago? If I am reading you incorrectly, I apologize, but it sure looks as if you joined the site 10 days ago as a disgruntled, former member, whose posting privileges were suspended, who then rejoined under a different name with the intent of airing his grievance over a suspension.

[LanternWaste]

106. Never mind. Poster has been invited by the admins to leave.

Never mind. Poster has been invited by the admins to leave.

[SidDithers]

105. Hahahahaha...

Come back soon, again.

Sid

[socialist_n_TN]

53. Where else are you going to find ....

people who could be convinced that the system needs to be overthrown for something better? Left populism has always been fertile recruiting ground for anti-capitalists.

[MattBaggins]

35. Did you forget your sarcasm tags

[pampango]

13. One can't be for higher/progressive taxes, stronger unions, an effective safety net, a strong middle

class and not agree with you on the TPP? Why are they 'mutually exclusive'? Europeans have some of the most progressive societies, most equitable distributions of income and the strongest middle class in the world. AND they have twice the 'free trade' the US has. And they have given up some degree of 'national sovereignty' to achieve this.

NAFTA needs to be renegotiated to include labor rights and environmental protections. There are provisions on these in the TPP. Are they enforceable enough? I don't know. If they are not I will oppose it, but the only way they will become part of trading rules is through negotiation.

[solarhydrocan]

14. When is this NAFTA renegotiation going to take place and

who will do it?

Renegotiating NAFTA on hold, Obama says
February 20, 2009

President Obama on Thursday warned against a "strong impulse" toward protectionism while the world suffers a global economic recession and said his election-year promise to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement on behalf of unions and environmentalists will have to wait...

..."Much of the rhetoric that may be perceived to be protectionist is more reflective of political maneuvering than policy," the Canadians concluded in a memo after meeting with Austan Goolsbee, a senior campaign aide and now a member of Obama's Council of Economic Advisers.

When the memo became public, Obama advisers rejected the idea as absurd and insisted that he was serious about changing NAFTA. Obama even suggested that the United States might opt out of NAFTA if the standards couldn't be improved to America's satisfaction.

But some longtime observers of the U.S.-Canada relationship said Obama's current position appears to confirm the impression that Canadian officials got from the meeting with Goolsbee...>
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Renegotiating-NAFTA-on-hold-Obama-says-3171311.php

[pampango]

16. Since Canada and Mexico are part of the TPP (which will supercede NAFTA), I would say the

renegotiation is in process.

[Fumesucker]

25. Do you have links that indicate NAFTA will be repealed if the TPP passes?

Because otherwise NAFTA will still be in effect.

[pampango]

47. The Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (1988) was superseded by NAFTA.

It was superseded by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93United_States_Free_Trade_Agreement

The provisions of the US-Canada deal were replaced by NAFTA. (Otherwise, we would have left the former alone and just negotiated an agreement with Mexico.)

Likewise, the provisions of NAFTA will be replaced by those of the TPP if it passes. (Otherwise, we would just negotiate a new agreement with the other TPP countries, leave Canada and Mexico out and leave NAFTA in effect with them.)

When you work out a new trade agreement with a country, it supersedes the old agreement if there is one. There would not be much point in it if that were not the case.

[Fumesucker]

92. Only a relatively small part of the TPP is about trade per se though

What about the rest of it?

[pampango]

94. Agreed. It a bit of a misnomer to call it a 'free trade' agreement, perhaps why those words are not

in its title. All the previous agreements prominently featured the term 'free trade agreement'.

This one is much more about how countries treat their unions, their environment and intellectual property; about currency manipulation and subsidies for state-owned enterprises; and how disputes are resolved between member countries. At least those are what the chapter titles would lead you to believe.

Obviously, we won't know how if which provisions, if any, are strong and enforceable. The irony is that if provisions are strong and enforceable, the 'national sovereignty' folks will howl about foreigners making decisions. OTOH, if provisions are just 'pretty words on paper' without enforcement, they will be rightly criticized for that.

What do you think of the non-trade parts of it?

[TheKentuckian]

27. What provisions? What labor and environmental protections?

[pampango]

50. We know they are in there but don't yet know how strong and effective they are.

Updates Labor and Environment:

Updated provisions reflect the United States’ most recent trade agreements, to require trading partners to adopt, maintain, and not waive or derogate from measures implementing internationally recognized core labor standards in a manner affecting trade and investment and multilateral environmental agreements to which the United States is a party, with the same dispute settlement and remedies as for other enforceable obligations.

Updates Negotiating Objectives for the 21st Century:

Addresses Currency Manipulation: New negotiating objective for the first time directs that trade partners avoid
manipulating exchange rates, such as through cooperative mechanisms, enforceable rules, reporting, monitoring,
transparency, or other means, as appropriate.

Protects U.S. Sovereignty:

New provisions affirm that trade agreements cannot change U.S. law without Congressional action.

http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/TPA%20One%20Pager.pdf

China and the Heritage Foundation have been complaining about the labor and environmental provisions but none of us mere mortals know what the specifics are.

[Kermitt Gribble]

34. Labor and environmental groups were not invited to the negotiations.

Sorry, but there's no way I'm going to trust corporations and politicians to negotiate what's best for labor and the environment. On top of that, with the secrecy of these negotiations, we will not find out what labor and environmental rights are included until after it is passed.

[ScottyEss]

45. And yet somehow one can be for Obama and

Against the TPP even though Obama could put an end to this whole charade.

How is that possible?

[SidDithers]

49. Wow. Seriously??...

Sid

[cui bono]

55. Care to elaborate on what about that post makes you say that?

Are you for the TPP?

[SidDithers]

57. No...nt

Sid

[cui bono]

58. No you don't care to elaborate or no you are not for the TPP? n/t

[Bradical79]

133. by not being a single issue voter? -nt

[Faryn Balyncd]

15. Nor can one want the TPP and transparent, non-corrupt governance simultaneously.

[L0oniX]

38. Love the Mafia your with.

"My country right or wrong” is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying, “My mother drunk or sober.” -– G. K. Chesterton

[DireStrike]

39. Wait what?

How can you possibly support a major trade treaty being negotiated in secret, trying to be passed in secret, and also be for transparent, non-corrupt government? You can't. I would like to hear you argue otherwise. Or am I misreading your post?

Manny's claim is a little tougher to make, primarily because we have no fucking clue what is in the TPP. But it is still quite good considering what we DO know: every free trade agreement has screwed the working class, and this one is being pushed by the same people in secret, with no input or oversight from anybody except rich businessmen and politicians. Odds are very, very good that this is a terrible thing about to happen. I think the odds are so good that a bit of hyperbole such as Manny's is warranted.

[L0oniX]

42. DU doesn't have a good "mocking" emoticon.

I only expect 3rd way DLC centrist Dino Dems to embrace the Mafia style TPP.

[DireStrike]

44. I see.

I took "love the mafia you're with" to mean "I love the mafia you're with, trying to force their opinion on everyone" instead of "love the mafia you're with - it's the only one you've got!"

Thanks for clarifying.

[Enthusiast]

17. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch.....nt

[Scuba]

19. Kick

[jsr]

21. There is a reason for the extreme haste and secrecy.

[truedelphi]

108. Yes there certainly is.

Bad enough that the Corrupt and Corporate Controlled media serves as lap dogs, but even so, the Administration does a lot of what it does in a place where the sun don't shine.

[woo me with science]

117. It's unconscionable.

They not only don't work FOR us, they are functioning as our predators.

[99Forever]

29. The TPP is a Declaration of War on American workers.

Treat anyone that support this travesty as you would any sworn enemy, because that is exactly what they are.

[Populist_Prole]

43. Harsh words, but they need to be spoken

I'm with you on that!

[marmar]

30. C'est vrai. K&R.

[mother earth]

31. TPP = Rise of Corporate Plantations nt

[geek tragedy]

40. Lol, the hyperbole and hatred in this post is pretty classic. "sick, sick" "sociopaths" "violently

mutually exclusive"

lol

[cui bono]

56. What is false about those terms? n/t

[geek tragedy]

68. Besides the fact it's hate speech directed at

a bunch of people the OP has never met based on a treaty whose provisions haven't been agreed upon, masquerading as clinical diagnosis?

[cui bono]

69. Yes, besides that, which is your opinion. n/t

[geek tragedy]

70. .

http://m.

[cui bono]

71. The dude abides!

[Armstead]

137. I hate phony trade deals because they have helped to ruin America...

...and they're not all that great for average workers in the rest of the world either.

They are also making the environment, national sovergnty and civil society subservient to the dictates of the Corporate Elite.

They are Sociopathic Capitalism rum amuck.

Wanna call that hyperbolie too? feel free as we take another step towards global feudalism.

[geek tragedy]

139. Nope, I generally agree!

I believe the issue is a little more complicated, but I don't recall a trade pact being criticized as overly protective of workers and the environment .

[Armstead]

142. The complications are a smokescreen.

They are simply a form of blackmail.

"Follow the rules set down by Big Corporations or you don't get to participate in the global economy."

It really is that simple.

[grahamhgreen]

151. not at all. The TPP is a tragedy.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

46. But politicians (and some here on DU) can pretend they do.

[SidDithers]

48. Sloganeering will save the day!!...nt

Sid

[Fumesucker]

62. Nice slogan, Sid

[SidDithers]

63. CTRL-V for Victory!! is a good one too...

and was especially handy for posters like Hannah Bell / HiPointDem.

Sid

[Fumesucker]

64. Loo slips stink ships!

[MannyGoldstein]

72. Better Believe It! nt

[CreekDog]

76. I miss them very much.

However, the gods smiled on me and as a consolation prize Elton John posted throughout one of my threads.

[SidDithers]

77. You lucky (Creek)Dog, you...

Sid

[Ed Suspicious]

51. Frightened that this will go through, I'm wonder what the hell to do about it then.

[truedelphi]

59. I keep wishing some legal type would sue for these "Agreements" to be

Abolished.

Once up on a time, back in the days of the 1800's, anything of any great significance had to be dealt with inside the passing of "An Act."

"An Act" required a two thirds majority of Congress. And there was none of this secrecy, either.

Now these types of significant legal actions are named "Agreements." By naming them "Agreements" they are passed with a simple majority.

BTW the people who are politically noteworthy and who are against these "Agreements" are almost all Libertarians. If the Democratic Party leadership doesn't get a bit of wisdom, and get it soon, they will continue to lose people to the libertarian side of the political spectrum. Young people don;t want to be hassled for smoking or growing weed; and they don't want to continue to deal with the insane lifestyle that has kept so many young people out of decent jobs.

The nation doesn't even need to return to being a manufacturing giant. We simply need people who will not allow for SALLIE MAE collection agents to be from third world countries, etc. And to allow for the growing and selling of pot. (Obama Administration's Eric Holder brought about the direct loss fo over 10,000 well paying jobs, many of them with decent wages, and many in rural areas, all because of going back on the Administration's promise to leave Calif. dispensaries alone!)

[Hoyt]

52. I am serious, how will scrapping the TPP help us?

I really am trying to understand the opposition to this. I understand it might help the 1%ers, but until they are taxed properly, damp near everything helps them.

[truedelphi]

60. Visit the folowing links, and then you will know more about

How harmful it is. There were also decent articles over at Huffington - but I can't visit that site without getting cookies on my computer that turn my HD's workings into marmalade.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/13/trans-pacific-paternership-intellectual-property
####
http://www.studlife.com/forum/staff-columnists/2013/11/21/the-trans-pacific-partnership-bad-for-innovation-bad-for-citizens-bad-for-america/
####
https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/11/14-5
####
https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp
Above article states: (1) IP chapter: Leaked draft texts of the agreement show that the IP chapter would have extensive negative ramifications for users’ freedom of speech, right to privacy and due process, and hinder peoples' abilities to innovate.

(2) Lack of transparency: The entire process has shut out multi-stakeholder participation and is shrouded in secrecy.

####

http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/tpp-five-worst-things-found-in-the-wikil
####

[Hoyt]

67. All I saw was great fears about copyrights and such.

I'm sorry, but if someone writes a book, a song, has a patentable idea, etc., I'm fine with them getting paid or retaining some rights in that. I'm not fine with those rights being stolen by corporations or otherwise. If that is part of TPP, then I'll get ticked.

As to lack of transparency, that is conspiracy type stuff as far I as read on those links. I suspect most folks wouldn't understand what they are reading/hearing if they were privy to it all. Truthfully, I suspect a lot of the development of Social Security, Civil Rights, etc., legislation were cloaked in secrecy too to keep alarmist from going crazy.

I still want to know how this will hurt us. I'm not saying it won't, or that life won't get tougher in the future for reasons apart from TPP, but all I'm seeing is bunch of fear of the unknown.

[ronnie624]

97. Read up on how NAFTA harmed Mexico. Extrapolate from there.

No conspiracy theories are necessary. The trend, based on existing methods, is easily understood.

[Hoyt]

101. Truthfully, I don't think there is any creditable proof NAFTA ITSELF caused problems. The world has

been in an economic depression/recession for some time. The fact that we or Mexico have fared poorly since NAFTA, does not mean NAFTA was the culprit. Countries that weren't part of NAFTA have had issues during the period too. And, Mexico made a number of economic policy blunders -- unrelated to NAFTA -- during the last 20 years that contributed to their plight.

If NAFTA were the reason for Mexico's problems, wouldn't they back out of it?

As to TPP -- once again you have not been able to cite anything concrete that is an issue with the TPP, just some comment that the trend after NAFTA proves the TPP is bad policy. I'm sorry, that doesn't indicate anything.

[truedelphi]

107. Yes and there used to be one or two people here who believed that

JFK died from a natural occurring brain hemorrhage.

To each his or her own, I guess.

[Hoyt]

110. Actually, I have never believed anyone but Oswald did it. This TPP, however, sure has become a

conspiracy theory.

What cracks me up are folks who complain about the lack of transparency, yet they are quick to say they know all these things that are wrong about it and that it is a conspiracy to stick it to Americans.

At the same time, people in each of the other countries say it is an attempt for America to stick it to them.

The truth is more like, people are afraid of change and when they are getting shafted in a number of ways, they are afraid of anything like the TPP. This thing is still being negotiated. I have faith that those responsible will do what is best for us AND other countries in a world where we are continually interrelated.

I admit that some big corporations may come out ahead in any trade deal nowadays. But, that doesn't mean the trade agreement is the problem, it may be the system of taxation or incentives involved aren't up to the task of getting wealth to those who actually produce it (and, yes, need it).

Again, show me some concrete examples of where the TPP hurts us.

[Bradical79]

128. I think you need to read up on it.

You seem to be pretty far behimd the 8-ball. The reason you see people very knowledgeable about the tpp simultaneously complaining about lack of transparency is due to leaks. A draft of the entire agreement ended up online.

[Hoyt]

129. You too can't produce a concrete example of how it will hurt. And, I doubt you have the credentials

to determine the long-term impact of such a trade agreement, or what might happen if it is not negotiated. It's not like things have been going swimmingly all these decades without a trade agreement. I guess you are one of those who will say, "I like Krugman, but he is wrong on this."

[Bradical79]

130. Like I said

do some reading. You are clearly not in any position to have a reasonably intelligent conversation on the subject.

Also I didn't come here to post lengthy specifics of the tpp, I'm posting from a phone. I answered a specific query that you made about how people know about the tpp when there is such a lack of transparency. It made it pretty clear that you are not even up to date on what info is public and where it came from. Maybe you'd be less hostile if you would use google to aid in educating yourself on the subject before trying to defend something that has been discussed on this forum for months. I'll try to post some specifics when I get home though.

[Hoyt]

131. Surely you can respond with a a phrase of a few words, if you know of negative consequences.

Now if you have to go read the conspiracy theorists to come up with something negative, that is telling.

I have faith that the TPP -- if enacted -- will help preserve what is preservable. I don't expect it, or any other kind of trade legislation, to make things much better than they are now. We are in a technological revolution that is simply not going to produce the number of jobs we need. Protectionism, if of any benefit, is only short-term.

Therefore, we have to find a way to maintain some level of trade world-wide to preserve as many jobs as possible. And, we need to develop better safety nets, taxation systems, disincentives for exporting jobs, etc., to ensure the populace is not left to fend for themselves on the streets. Refusing to pursue these type trade agreements will be a serious mistake, but I suspect the Obama-is-out-to-destroy-us crowd will make it tough to pass.

[Bradical79]

132. Actually I'm going to go back to some of the original documents

that are available and reference them directly as part of an OP. You ask for specifics, you will get them.

[Hoyt]

136. Sounds fair, I will read them. Thanks

[Armstead]

140. Your blind faith is touching

The very nature of the "free trade" scams of the last 30 years are designed to undermine national sovergnty, donestic regulations and workers, and place all of society at the mercy of Big Business Oligarchs.

They have very luttle to do with actually opening up trade. Instead they use the ability to trade as blackmail to force nations to submit to the will of the Corpirate Insiders who draw up these deals.

Why the hell do you think they keep them secret, and then try to ram them through legislative bodies as "fast track?"

If they were so wonderful, wouldn't the people who push them want the public to know what is in them?

As for evidence -- Deals like TPP already have a track record. Look at what has happened to the economy. Coincidence? I THINK NOT.

[Hoyt]

145. We do know about them.. Some folks just don't understand them, so they are bad.

Fact is, we were fucked long before NAFTA and before TPP was even considered.

You haven't provided one concrete problem that The TPP would produce, in unlikely event it is enacted. Just some vague screed that they are bad. We don't know how they are bad, but they are bad.

What has happened to the economy isn't tied to any trade agreements. Hell, the TPP doesn't exist as of yet. As to "national sovereignty, " that sounds like something tbaggers get all excited about.

If corporations are profiting from a trade agreement unfairly, tax the hell out of them. But I don't think trade agreements are why large corporations are profiting. It's more like it takes a lot of money/investment to keep this crazy economy producing anything nowadays. We need some major changes in how we live and what we expect from the economy. In the meantime, we need some trade agreements and rules for international conduct. We aren't returning to the days when American aut, appliance, etc. manufactures ruled. When we finally shut down our arms industry, we will really be screwed as far as jobs, and it has nothing to do with trade agreements.

[Armstead]

146. National sovergnty means the government is allowed to govern

Thats not teabagger stuff. It means the us cannot enforce an environmental regulation or other standard if some corporate beholden trade body rules against it.

AAnd yea, you are right. The rotten trade agreements are not the only reason workers and the domsteic economy are screwed...But they have been major contributor. SO WHY THE FUCK DO WE WANT MORE OF THEM TO MAKE THINGS EVEN WORSE?

You seem to comprehend the big picture...So I find your defense and/or apathy about the vehicles for our destruction like TPP to be so baffling.

[Hoyt]

148. Why should we impose our environmental laws on others. Heck, most are better than ours.

Haven't got a problem with saying other countries with our 1960s environmental record need to improve quickly. But why the fuck - you seem to like the word - should we impose our laws on others, like our bombs on others? Some of their laws are better than ours.

[Armstead]

149. Free Trade is about gutting better laws -- not improving bad ones.

[ronnie624]

113. NAFTA's Impact On Mexico

http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/downloads/nafta-and-mexico.pdf

[Union Scribe]

156. Yuck. Now I know why you only post about guns usually.

Your apologia for globalists ripping apart workers' rights is odious at best.

[marmar]

61. Just looking at a few of the responses. A very few this time ........

...... When you can't come up with a cogent counter-argument to the OP, accuse the OP and those who are in agreement of sloganeering, hyperbole and hatefulness, and toss in an LOL for good measure.

[Phlem]

74. +1

-p

[rhett o rick]

66. Manny.... It's all in the definitions. Everyone knows that the 0.01% knows best

how to distribute the wealth. Their definition of "economic justice" just differs from yours slightly.

Since they are wealthier, then they are smarter and know much more that the 99%. So they should have the wealth and dole it out. Pun not intended.

[jazzimov]

75. Why not? What's in the TPP?

Oh, that's right - NOBODY FUCKING KNOWS. It hasn't even finished negotiations, yet.

I'm generally against FTA's, but I'll wait until I know what's in it before I say anything. So far, it looks like it won't even get off the ground.

[MannyGoldstein]

82. Details:

[Fumesucker]

93. We'll have to pass it to see what's in it

[ronnie624]

98. You won't know until after it has passed.

Here's a taste:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/13/trans-pacific-paternership-intellectual-property

[Marr]

102. You'll wait until it's "old news", and then dismiss it as such, you mean. /nt

[whistler162]

135. Wood pulp mostly.....

at least in my toilet paper products.

[raouldukelives]

81. K&R Every investor in Wall St is paying for it. No one works harder for it than them. nt

[truedelphi]

111. + 1. n/t

[woo me with science]

119. They are the only ones with representation anymore.

[BelgianMadCow]

88. I second your wake-up call

It's like here in Europe, how can we condemn the US "in the strongest possible terms" for the spying, after hearing Greenwald and planning on hearing Snowden AND pursue a FTA with the same Big Brother at the same time?

[polichick]

91. But one can fight for the TPP and talk about economic justice for the 99%.

[X_Digger]

95. I wonder where our resident TPP cheerleaders are.

They're conspicuous in their absence.

[ronnie624]

99. A few are here.

Their posts are typically vacuous.

[woo me with science]

100. This is an important post.

Your First Way incarnation sees clearly and does not mince words.

It is important to be clear about what we're really dealing with here. This is not a squabble between different factions in a democratic system. This is the deliberate *dismantling* of representative government and subversion of our institutions of democracy by infiltrating corporatists, in order to work AGAINST the people they claim to represent.

They are not "centrists." They are corporate fascists.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4222551

[BelgianMadCow]

115. True.

:Kick:

[840high]

103. k/r

[MisterP]

109. "TPP is being pushed by The Only HopeTM for economic justice: ergo, it'll serve the 99%"

[sabrina 1]

114. No, they cannot Manny.

[woo me with science]

116. Worth kicking again.

The corporate Dems are gearing up to feign a "concern" about inequality, because it is an election year.

Watch what they do, not what they say.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

118. The title of the OP is self-evidently a falsehood.

A correct statement might be "if one wants both the TPP and economic justice for the 99%, one is misguided".

[Zorra]

122. oh, pooh-pooh! The TPP will bring prosperity, opportunity, and bouquets of fresh elderberries

to the 99%, and especially indigenous folks, everywhere.

Just like NAFTA did.


NAFTA at 20: Lori Wallach on U.S. Job Losses, Record Income Inequality, Mass Displacement in Mexico--1/3/14

Mexico: Rural workers and indigenous denounce 20 years of destruction 1/8/14

January 14, 2014
"Failed Everywhere It's Been Tried"
The Deadly Wages of Free Trade
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/14/the-deadly-wages-of-free-trade/

Back in the mid-1990’s, the signatories to the North American Free Trade Agreement promised that the border town of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico would become the model city for the new “free trade” pact. Indeed, it has become a model city for NAFTA, but not in the way its architects had intended. Thus, rather than becoming a showcase for economic development and prosperity which “free trade” promised to usher in, Ciudad Juarez instead has become a city plagued by murder rates equivalent to nations at war, and has witnessed the bizarre phenomenon of “femicide” which has violently claimed the lives of around 400 girls and young women since the passage of NAFTA. [1]

In a similar vein, the port town of Buenaventura has become the poster child for the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. Even before the FTA was finally ratified by Congress and signed into law by President Obama in October of 2011, violence began to plague Buenaventura as armed paramilitary groups vied for control of the new ports being built in preparation for the influx of trade which the FTA was to bring. Thus, in September of 2011, acclaimed human rights advocate, Father Javier Giraldo, S.J., wrote to U.S. Ambassador P. Michael McKinley of

the permanent genocide that is being carried out in Buenaventura, where the neighborhoods and the Community Councils around the port are being invaded by paramilitaries supported or tolerated by the armed forces. They cut people in pieces with horrifying cruelty throwing the body parts in to the sea, if any of them dare to resist the megaproject for the new port. This included the expulsion of people living in the poorest areas and it includes the expropriation of the plots of garbage dumps where these people, in the midst of their misery, have over decades tried to survive. [2]

pdf Heading South
U.S.-Mexico trade and
job displacement after NAFTA

Economic integration and deregulation hurt workers in Canada, Mexico, and the United States

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

[woo me with science]

123. kick

[woo me with science]

124. "They are violently mutually exclusive."

Thank you.

[cantbeserious]

126. Where We Are Today - How We Got Here - Who Sold Us Out

What The Corporate Oligarchs And 1% Are Doing Today

How Corporate Oligarchs And The 1% Have Systematically Undermined US Democracy And The Middle Class

How The Liberal Class Sold Out To The Corporate Oligarchs And 1%

[TBF]

127. Truth. K&R nt

[whistler162]

134. Okay? Why can't we have Toliet Paper Products,

and economic justice for the 99%.

If you use a acronym at least provide a definition! Kinda ruins your ranting.

[frwrfpos]

138. reccing hard

perfect post.Cuts to the chase

[Armstead]

141. Sociopathic Capitalism

Thats a meme I would like to see spread.

WE don't have the excuse some had about NAFTA "We'll have to trust that it will be good."

We now know how awful these treaties are and the results.

And yet, hypocrites like President Obama and Hillary want to do it again, on a larger scale.

In the distant past one could possibly say supporters of NAFTA FREE TRADE deals were naive or misguided. But now we know exactly what these deals do.

These are bad deals for the vast majority of the population. They are only windfalls for the corporate elite.

THat's not rocket science anymore.

[polichick]

144. Good term for it - and yes, everyone knows what these deals mean now.

[MisterP]

147. now it's "we'll fix it later" (the important thing is to buy time)

[grahamhgreen]

152. Also, refer to them as COSTLY trade agreements - the opposite of free.

[Bradical79]

143. Correction and a thread Im going to make

First a wanted to make a correction to something I wrote elsewhere in this... but I put the free trade supporting trolling forum member on full ignore so I can't see the thread anymore :-P I believe I had said the full TPP had been leaked online, but I'm pretty sure it has just been the section regarding copyrights and that sort of thing, which has some pretty nasty stuff in it (like giving copyright holders power over buffer copies, for example).

Secondly, I'm going to compile specific reasons why the TPP is a bad deal with sources and links to expert commentary. This is something I was planning to do anyway for myself so it would be easier to discuss, but I'll share as an OP since a lot of people don't seem aware of what this thing is.

[MannyGoldstein]

155. That'd be great. nt

[me b zola]

150. R&K