Washington Post: "TPP will help neither workers nor consumers"

[Faryn Balyncd]

Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty will help neither workers nor consumers


By Katrina vanden Heuvel, in The Washington Post





. . . With tariffs already low, current trade treaties are focused less on tariffs and trade than on “harmonizing regulations” for investors. But these regulations concern worker rights, consumer and environmental protections, economic policies that are the expression of our democracy. Too often, “harmonization” is simply an excuse for corporations to institute a race to the bottom. . . . . . .U.S. negotiators forcefully demand other countries pay a price for greater access to the U.S. market. But that price generally involves one or another corporate lobby, not the interests of the American people. So our drug companies get protections against the introduction of generic drugs, driving up prices abroad. Our agribusiness gets protection for its genetically altered foodstuffs. Wall Street gets rules making the sale of arcane derivatives easier.

The TPP is a classic expression of the way the rules are fixed to benefit the few and not the many. It has been negotiated in secret, but 500 corporations and banks sit on advisory committees with access to various chapters. The lead negotiator, Michael Froman, was a protege of former Treasury secretary Robert Rubin, and followed him from Treasury to Citibank, the bank whose excesses helped blow up the economy before it had to be bailed out. Although corporations are wired in, the American people are locked out of the TPP negotiations. And, as Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said, “Members of Congress and their staff have an easier time accessing national security documents than proposed trade deals, but if I were negotiating this deal I suppose I wouldn’t want people to see it either.”

The brutal negotiations of the TPP haven’t been about tariffs but about protections and regulations. Last week, the draft chapter concerning the “Investor-State Dispute Settlement” mechanism was leaked to Wikileaks and the New York Times. Essentially, the chapter allows a company to sue for taxpayer damages if a government (federal, state or local) passes laws or take actions that the company alleges will impinge on future expected profits. The “tribunal” is a panel of lawyers, drawn from a small group of accredited international lawyers who serve both as judges and advocates. If successful the companies can collect millions in damages from governments. The provisions are so shocking that the TPP mandates that the chapter not be declassified until four years after the TPP goes into force or fails to pass. . . . . The administration says we shouldn’t worry about this, because the United States has never lost a case and that the dispute mechanism is basically designed to be used on countries with weak or corrupted legal systems. But as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has noted, Philip Morris has already sued Uruguay because of its new anti-smoking regulations that have been lauded globally. A French company sued Egypt for raising the minimum wage; a Swedish company sued Germany for phasing out nuclear power.

How do trade treaties that undermine workers, cost jobs and create a private, corporate global arbitration system get through Congress? The answer, of course, is the corporate lobby that writes the rules mobilizes big money and armies of lobbyists to drive them through. Most Democrats oppose the treaties, but the Wall Street wing of the party tends to support them. Conservatives would naturally oppose secretive global panels that can force taxpayers to pay damages to companies, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable round up votes to get the treaty passed. . . . . So remember, when the president argues that it is vital that “we” write the rules, “we” means not the American people, but corporate and financial interests. . . . . President Obama has dramatically called inequality the defining challenge of our time. But the reason the 1 percent capture virtually all of the income growth in this society, the reason working families are struggling simply to stay afloat, is that the rules are rigged by the powerful to favor themselves. Our trade policies are clear examples of that. America’s middle class will continue to sink until “we” means the American people, not Wall Street and the corporate lobby. . . . .



http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trans-pacific-partnership-treaty-will-help-neither-workers-nor-consumers/2015/03/31/145e98ba-d727-11e4-ba28-f2a685dc7f89_story.html

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Be ready to get attacked based on the source.

Last edited Thu Apr 2, 2015, 06:29 AM - Edit history (1)

I've noticed the Washington Post is generally sneered at by many on site.

(Edit: A day later, I'm pleasantly surprised to see that you didn't get attacked for that (unless it was by people on my ignore list, whose comments I can't see, heh. )

[99th_Monkey]

4. Except in THIS case, the author is Editor & Publisher of The Nation

The Nation is highly regarded by most everyone on DU except the most hard-core Third Way Knuckle-draggers.

[Fuddnik]

7. Probably so,

But Katrina vanden Heuvels credentials are impeccable.

[ND-Dem]

23. Why do you say her credentials are impeccable?

[sabrina 1]

27. That depends on whether the article is favorable or unfavorable to topics like the TPP,

Oil Drilling in the Arctic, Droning in the ME etc.

[marym625]

2. K&R!

[bvar22]

3. K&R

...for more exposure.


With THIS and his latest Drill, Baby,Drill energy policy,
we might as well elected a Republican.

[99th_Monkey]

5. K&R nt

[djean111]

6. A French company sued Egypt for raising the minimum wage; a Swedish company sued Germany for phasing

out nuclear power.

THIS is what some of are trying to warn against - the TTP - and the TTIP - will enable corporations to attack anything they feel threatens profits - wages, benefits, environmental concerns. Anything.
Anyone who says this is good for anybody but the corporations is, IMO, a big damned tool.

[Jack Rabbit]

8. K/R

I'm too cynical nowadays to think this thing won't pass.

Get you pitchforks and torches out. We're coming for the 1%.

[fasttense]

9. If the TPP had been in affect during FDR's

day and age, corporations would have brought suits against the US over Social Security, FDIC, unemployment insurance and the Civilian Conservation Corp. This trade agreement will slow down all progressive social advances.

[Fumesucker]

10. Holy Gini Coefficient Batman! vanden Heuevel got a piece in the Bezos Gazette?

That's quite remarkable never mind whatever she happened to say.

[99th_Monkey]

11. Yes. So never mind the content

nothing to see here.

[antigop]

12. so where are the Third Wayers? nt

[Dragonfli]

13. Likely trying to dig up dirt on Katrina vanden Heuvel /nt

[antigop]

14. conspicuously absent. nt

[Elwood P Dowd]

16. Waiting for the email from The Heritage Foundation with the latest talking points? (nm)

[sabrina 1]

28. They've been slow to respond today. The Arctic Drilling will take a while to 'explain'

with mere talking points, probably the same ones we got after the lifting of the Ban on Offshore Drilling. That was only 18 days before one of the worst environmental disasters in the Gulf.

Things are moving along nicely for Corporations.

[840high]

15. K/R x100

[Thespian2]

17. K & R

When does the revolution start? Oops! Forgot. Corporations control the US military as well as the government.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

18. K&FuckinR. nt

[salib]

19. "The provisions are so shocking that the TPP mandates that the chapter not be declassified until..."

"The provisions are so shocking that the TPP mandates that the chapter not be declassified until four years after the TPP goes into force or fails to pass".

This is absolutely outrageous.

NO FAST TRACK.

[Hoyt]

29. To be fair, it's the negotiating document that is supposed to he classified, but obviously isn't.

The final document without all the notes on alternatives, items for further discussion, etc., assuming Obama finds it worth submitting to Congress, will be available for all to see (and likely misinterpret).

[Dragonfli]

51. Or so you keep saying, repeat a lie enough times and it becomes true to those listening

keep up the good work!

[Hoyt]

55. Thems the facts. Look it up yourself, quit relying on people trying to boost member/readership.

[Dragonfli]

56. Good! Repeated again, keep up the excellent work /nt

[antigop]

20. Hillary's Business Legacy at State Dept (leading part in drafting TPP)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=67554

[JDPriestly]

21. Kicking a million times. (WIsh I could.)

The editorial is just so, so, so right. Painfully right. Thanks.

[Oilwellian]

22. Just as we've been saying all along

Yeah, where are those trade lovin' Third Way New Democrats? I want First Way Democrats back in control of our party.

:kick:

[merrily]

45. Many of us do. Too bad for us.

At the Presidential level are Super Delegates, a change in the party created for the purpose of being able to override the results of primary votes that would otherwise result in nomination of a liberal for President. Proposed after McGovern lost and instituted on the pretext that Mondale's loss was due to Mondale's wild eyed liberalism, rather than to at least 10 or 20 other important factors.

I guess, though, at some point, they thought we sheeple might have a problem with that, so now, they just discourage primary challenges apparently.

Not only at the Presidential level, either.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251401080#post55

[Art_from_Ark]

48. The Third Wayers

want to make us Third Worlders

[joshcryer]

24. It's geopolitical.

When are journalists going to make the academic argument and stop writing emotional pieces laden with soundbites on what anyone informed on the matter already knows?

[merrily]

32. LOL!

[joshcryer]

33. Oh, my late night mockery commences.

Is this going to become an ongoing thing?

[merrily]

34. You seem to want it be ongoing, or you would not have replied.

As is obvious, and as I've told you before, you can end it by not replying to me, yet you do.

My intent was to post three letters of the alphabet and one character of punctuation and move on to something else, which I did. I returned after a half hour only because I noticed the My Posts tab had gone yellow.

[joshcryer]

36. This is not your OP.

But I get a derisive "LOL!" from you anyway, one of many. Enjoy your "laughs." Like how you "LOL'd" about a very serious "bit" regarding vaccines.

Your character is exposed, not mine. I shouldn't have to "not to reply to you" when you initiate the hatefulness.

My intent was to post three letters of the alphabet and one character of punctuation and move on to something else, which I did. I returned after a half hour only because I noticed the My Posts tab had gone yellow.

"LOL" indeed.

Please leave me the fuck alone with the nastiness. Thanks.

[merrily]

37. Thanks for proving my point, yet again.

Again, Josh, how many posts I make to you in your sole control, unless I voluntary walk away, asI have many times and will do it again, right after this post. You walked away only once, and only because four people on the thread joined me in condemning your ugly, low down shameful claims about me that you advert to again on this thread. (Posters also sent supportive pms, btw. I never realized how many people appreciated my posts, so thanks for that.)

BTW, since when can a DUer reply to a post within a thread only if it's his or her own OP?

Please leave me the fuck alone with the nastiness.

Again, you know how to achieve that result. My prior reply to you simply made clear that you need not reply to me. However, if you do reply to me, don't pretend to be surprised if I reply back, something that is obvious and something I've said it to you explicitly many times anyways. Yet, not only did you reply to me again provocatively, but you escalated.

BTW, right back at you, many times over. I never said anything to you as nasty as the ugly claims you made up about me. My LOL! to you was nothing compared to the ugliness of your replies.

Your perennial victim act fails again.

And now, as I have many times before, I will walk away from this particular interchange. Say what you will. I won't be reading it or replying.

[joshcryer]

38. Since when was "LOL!" a legit response?

Since literally dozens of times you've replied to me personally. Literally, dozens of times. All you do is respond to me with "LOL!"

Disgusting hateful nastiness. Leave me the fuck alone. You complain about "My Posts" being highlighted? How about all the times you highlighted my own "My Posts" with your nasty "LOL!" commentary?

I'm defending myself right now and you fucking dare to pretend better? Shame on you. Shameful.

Your perennial victim act fails again.

Anyone can Google it. The shame is yours, and yours alone. Disgusting. You are verging on stalker behavior at this point. But I don't call out the stalkers. I confront them for their nasty behavior.

Consider yourself confronted.

BTW, you will recognize that I don't kick hateful nasty threads when I wake up. My motto is, let them sink, so in reality, you always have the nasty last word. I refuse to kick threads that have sunk to the second page, even if hateful, nasty characters put in their toxic words. So go right on the fuck head and put in your increasingly insulting commentary. I won't kick it and I won't alert on it.

This kind of response is all you provide to me, the majority of the time: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6449663

Anyone can Google it.

[Dragonfli]

52. It appears very simple to me, Merrily merely finds you amusing

No need to convince yourself of complex attack schemes and other paranoid nonsense, she finds you amusing, posts LOL, not too complicated. Simply ignore the laughter, or take pride in the fact that many of your posts are funny, I find you amusing as well, the only difference is I just laugh at you without typing it.

[joshcryer]

39. merrily admits literally to continual mockery.

Unless I "end it by not replying to" them.

Literally.

Is this not any other definition but harassment?

Relevant quote of the post I'm responding to:

You seem to want it be ongoing, or you would not have replied.

As is obvious, and as I've told you before, you can end it by not replying to me, yet you do.

Threatening someone defending themselves that they will continually be harassed if not responded to itself constitutes harassment. People should be able to defend themselves when they are harassed.

[Dragonfli]

53. What a delicate flower you must be, do you have any idea how rediculous you sound to actual victims

of harassment? You must live a very sheltered life to find "LOL" harmful and damaging to your fragile and apparently easily bruised gentle soul.

Perhaps a discussion board is too rough a place for you, I say that out of concern, some people can be crushed by harmful words, but to feel such victimization over virtual laughter, is definitely a sign that you are too fragile to discuss politics on a public discussion board. My Goddess, a passionate debate must cause you to curl up in a fetal position if LOL hurts you so much.

[joshcryer]

59. Where did I say that?

I'm pointing out the character of the poster, not expressing feelings.

I find the continual berating hilarious, because it proves the character of the posters in question.

It seems you have a similar character.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

40. "...on what anyone informed on the matter already knows"

Which we only know because it was leaked, AGAINST the wishes of the administration and the huge number of corporations involved with drafting it?

Remember, no one here would have been 'informed on the matter' until 4 years AFTER it went into effect, if all had gone as those in power wanted.

And btw, 'It's geopolitical' is a nice soundbite, but it's not. It's 'geocorporate'. This is an agreement to benefit multinational corporations. It's not to benefit workers, it's not even to benefit countries. It's an agreement to make it easier for companies to take more money FROM countries, FROM taxpayers, to allow them even more power over people (who aren't rich). That's the 'academic' truth out there.

Sure, they'll tell you countries will benefit, just like they told us that about NAFTA and CAFTA and all the rest. But it's 'trickle down' writ large. It's the claim that 'What's good for Goldman Sachs is good for America.' That because companies will 'make more revenues' (ie, separate more people from more money and give them things that are worth less than they actually paid for them) there will be more 'economic growth' that will benefit countries and citizens. And we've all seen what a lie that is.

The 'economy' grows, while most of the world gets poorer, and a few get richer. They ought to call this the Hokey-Pokey Trade Agreement, because that's what it's all about.

[joshcryer]

41. Not really.

We knew about ISDS, for instance, from public commentary by Elizabeth Warren. But an academic would see that was biolierplate and that, indeed, ISDS favors the US and the US has never lost a case under that process. Because, naturally, ISDS is tilted heavily in the US's favor.

A journalist, one who gets paid from clicks, will throw something like that out there to draw controversy. They are literally unable to write about how it is literally, quite literally, how international law is drawn up and how the US has never lost a case. It's something they simply cannot write about even if they knew it.

It is absolutely geopolitical, as it boxes in Russia and China. Whether it is corporate is irrelevant since both Russia and China want their own corporate infiltration in US capital.

This is not a defense of TPP, it is merely a call for a more academic analysis that skips over the buzzwords and gets to the reality of the matter. Americans value cheap goods from Asia and to provide those cheap goods while distancing America from Russia and China necessitates environmental, labor, and intellectual property standards that Russia and China are remiss to accept.

We'll keep our cheap labor, our slave labor in Asian countries, but the idea is that we'll move away from China and Russia as providers. Because we are supposedly better. That's the reality. Most here won't accept it, because they're supposedly great consumers who aren't reliant on slave produced products. But the mere fact that you are accessing the internet on a device produced there proves that as completely false.

And until we as consumers accept that, nothing will change. Well, until automation comes back to the US anyway. At which point the whole landscape changes. Living wage / basic income will be the problem for the next decade. But no one is discussing that now because they're too obsessed about literally irrelevant trade agreements that will have almost no impact.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

42. If that was the case, it wouldn't exist.

literally irrelevant trade agreements that will have almost no impact.

You wouldn't see the President 'obsessing' over an 'irrelevant' trade deal with 'almost no impact'. And the corporations that wrote most of the text of the agreement don't give a squat about Russia or China any more than they do the US. They care only about themselves, and are only worried about how they can be more powerful than countries. They can't figure out how to reach their ideal of simply being 'outside the laws' of those geopolitical units, so instead they're working to actually write the laws that govern them. And they're doing that exactly so as to make sure those laws benefit them, not the rest of us.

[joshcryer]

43. Few US politicians want to talk about basic income.

Bernie Sanders comes close, but even his his most recent Reddit AMA he didn't advocate it, he merely supported other countries doing it. That's pretty damning.

TPP is a distraction. Most informed politicians, and I think Bernie Sanders, if he's remotely informed, knows this. It's a very short term stop-gap for what's coming. And it's coming in a decade or so. Everything we do now with regards to trade? It will have little to nothing to do with the results of technological change in the next decade.

Watch this video and tell me how TPP is a big deal compared to the issues we'll be facing in the coming years:

Please tell me, honestly, after you watched the video, how TPP has any relevant effect to what things such as self driving cars will do. It's some scary stuff.

And no top level or even medium level US politician is discussing the issue. We are in so much trouble. People do not grasp it. TPP is a distraction. And don't think that corporations don't know what is happening. They do, and they are adapting. Warren Buffet recently joked about self-driving cars destroying the insurance agency, don't think that Berkshire Hathaway is not doing literally daily analysis to their bottom line. In reality the corporations know what's coming and the government is behind. This is far scarier than anything imaginable.

Literally fascism.

[Enthusiast]

44. +1 an entire shit load.

[hughee99]

25. Why would it? It's not designed to help either group.

The people negotiating it aren't there to represent the interests of workers or consumers.

[merrily]

31. Of course not. That's why we elect Democratic politicians. Oh, wait.....

How could I forget? We do that so we don't have to say hello to President Cruz and in case a Supreme Court Justice passes away or steps down (Lord knows, no one is going to impeach any of them for conflict of interest or anything.)

[Man from Pickens]

26. It will be wonderful for Clinton Foundation donors

as intended and paid for

boy would I love to see those emails, but OOPS she deleted them HOW CONVENIENT

[merrily]

30. "TPP will help neither workers nor consumers"

Was there ever any doubt of that?

Another news flash: More drilling in Alaska is not likely to help the environment, either.

Still, driving the point home is worthwhile.

[Art_from_Ark]

35. Some people here try to claim that that is not the case

We have to wait until it's been ratified and implemented before we can make any assessment of it, doncha know?

[merrily]

46. Thing is, it will be ratified. Republicans certainly aren't going to oppose it.

If ever there was any doubt, which there wasn't, McConnell dispelled it. And Obama is not going to veto. The only hope maybe, is a Dem filibuster, but they'll have the excuse that negotiations have gone too far and too long and we'd wreck foreign relations if they don't at least get a vote on the merits.


And no one is going to listen to us.

[djean111]

47. The TPP (and TTIP) is the equivalent of ALEC writing the laws for the whole world, not just

the states.

[99Forever]

49. And yet...

... The Republican party, POTUS and as best as can be determined, Hillary Goldman Sachs Clinton, are very interested in seeing to it that this monstrosity is crammed down our throats.

Tell me again about why I should support these people.

[Autumn]

50. Kick!

It helps the corporations.

[hifiguy]

54. K and R!

The TPP should be killed with an ax and buried on the back 40.

That is all.

[colsohlibgal]

57. The Biggest Bitter Pill/Back Stab From Obama

His presidency resembles little to nothing of his stirring populist rhetoric while running in 2008. A lot of us feel more conned than usual.

His bait and switch is pretty similar to Bubba's in 1992. Those two could have sold snake oil in the past.

Through it all bless the Obama apologists, the task has been getting harder and harder but most of them still try their best.

Of course then there are the oblivious who just don't pay a lot of attention or wear blinders, some combo of the two.

[WillyT]

58. K & R !!!