HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Obama's playing 3D chess ...

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:00 AM

 

Obama's playing 3D chess - TPP. We just gotta trust him.

Youse people bitching about Obama pushing TPP, just wait.

You recall when he was gonna renegotiate NAFTA? Well, he's going to complete the TPP negotiations and then tell Wall Street, "If you want me to sign TPP, you've got to give up NAFTA." That'l fix the bastards.

Just wait, you'll see. Obama is on our side.

He's been playing 3D chess all along.

And if you think this is a great plan, wait till Hillary gets to playing 4D chess with the banksters.

69 replies, 4421 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 69 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama's playing 3D chess - TPP. We just gotta trust him. (Original post)
Hoppy Apr 2015 OP
tridim Apr 2015 #1
Hoyt Apr 2015 #2
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #8
Hoyt Apr 2015 #12
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #14
Hoyt Apr 2015 #15
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #16
Hoyt Apr 2015 #17
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #18
Hoyt Apr 2015 #19
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #20
Hoyt Apr 2015 #21
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #22
Hoyt Apr 2015 #23
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #25
Hoyt Apr 2015 #27
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #32
Hoyt Apr 2015 #35
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #36
Hoyt Apr 2015 #40
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #41
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #28
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #33
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #37
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #39
Hoyt Apr 2015 #42
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #44
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #52
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #54
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #56
Katashi_itto Apr 2015 #24
Cheese Sandwich Apr 2015 #13
corkhead Apr 2015 #3
okaawhatever Apr 2015 #4
bvar22 Apr 2015 #5
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #30
bvar22 Apr 2015 #47
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #53
Doctor_J Apr 2015 #6
Hoppy Apr 2015 #7
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #10
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #9
AgingAmerican Apr 2015 #11
1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #31
treestar Apr 2015 #26
cali Apr 2015 #38
Hoyt Apr 2015 #29
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #43
Hoyt Apr 2015 #45
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #46
Hoyt Apr 2015 #48
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #49
Hoyt Apr 2015 #58
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #59
Hoyt Apr 2015 #61
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #62
HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #50
nadinbrzezinski Apr 2015 #51
pa28 Apr 2015 #57
Hoyt Apr 2015 #60
pa28 Apr 2015 #63
Hoyt Apr 2015 #64
pa28 Apr 2015 #66
Hoyt Apr 2015 #68
MrMickeysMom Apr 2015 #67
Hoyt Apr 2015 #69
Doctor_J Apr 2015 #34
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2015 #55
great white snark Apr 2015 #65

Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:03 AM

1. LOL

@ you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:04 AM

2. Well, TPP is a renegotiated NAFTA since Canada and Mexico begged to be part of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #2)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:31 PM

8. Damn I love it how you keep that begged

 

none begged

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/18/us-usa-mexico-transpacific-idUSBRE85H1LC20120618

http://www.international.gc.ca/media_commerce/comm/news-communiques/2012/10/09a.aspx?lang=eng

None begged. And you should stop using that... because like all else you are doing, this is quite inaccurate.

And yes, I will continue calling you on these inaccuracies.

They are expected, but that does not mean that this should not be called on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #8)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:06 AM

12. Hey, they weren't part of it initially, but the phones started ringing.. Wait till China can't

ignore it any longer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #12)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:08 AM

14. You keep mischaracterizing this

 

why this childish attitude?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #14)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:50 AM

15. Because I'm dealing with conspiracy theorists who believe Obama is trying to make us slaves.

I guess that's the reparations FOX news said were coming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #15)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:14 PM

16. If you think those who oppose the TTP region wide

 

are conspiracy theorists I cannot help you. But this opposition is NOT just in the U.S. And this opposition in the US is above 70 percent.

Nor is this JUST OBAMA. This is a neo liberal theory of economics that started under Reagan. If you wish to call that a conspiracy, you are welcomed to that. If you wish to continue mischaracterizing what is going on, by all means. Please proceed Governor.

ed. spelling

Further, when Larry Summers comes against it, you are in trouble, this is from the Financial Times back in March

"Some matters that are pushed by elements of the business community have little or nothing to do with the interests of the vast majority of American workers. These include pressuring other countries to change health and safety regulation, to extend and strengthen patent protection and to deregulate financial services. In these areas on grounds of fairness it is reasonable for us to strive for the principle of national treatment — no discrimination against foreign firms — but not to use inherently scarce negotiating power to alter other countries’ basic choices."


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/43920bae-c3f3-11e4-9019-00144feab7de.html#axzz3U6cEP8FD

I guess Summers is also a conspiracy theorist and a loon, by your own definition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #16)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:36 PM

17. Summers: "Nonetheless I believe that the right TPP is very much in the American national interest."

Also, from your own link:

"Crucially, TPP is necessary to let American producers compete on a level playing field, given the proliferation of arrangements that do not include the US. Currently, for example, Japanese and Southeast Asian producers get better terms in each others’ markets than the US does. Only through TPP do we have the chance to manage international competition in the interests of American workers through binding arrangements in areas such as labour and environmental standards.

So TPP should be judged not against a hypothetical past world where American workers did not face foreign competition but in the context of a world where trade integration in Asia is happening, with or without the US. Its merit will depend on US negotiating priorities."

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/43920bae-c3f3-11e4-9019-00144feab7de.html#axzz3U6cEP8FD


Are purposely misleading people, or is this like the Article 17 Mexican Constitution junk you were posting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #17)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:42 PM

18. Yes, he is... and I was not purposely misleading. Let me link to my

 

brain fart ok. We all tend to have them.

340. Forgive me 123

http://www.jacksonlewis.com/media/pnc/0/media.2380.pdf



Article 123 of Mexico’s Constitution, entitled “Labor and Social Security,” expressly recognizes and protects employees’ basic inalienable rights including, but not limited to: vacation, overtime entitlement, job stability, maximum work shift, maternity rights, social security rights, salary protection, profit-sharing entitlement, severance payment in case of unfair dismissal, freedom of association (the right to unionize), and collective bargaining rights, including the right to strike.


http://www.nationalemploymentlawcouncil.org/nonmember/agenda_PDFs/2013/Basics_of_Mexican_Labor_Law.pdf

Since nafta strikes still happen, but far less often because the unions have been weakened. So are those coming back? In particular the CTM is very much weakened.

And it gets worst.


The Mexican Congress is set to pass labor law “reform” this week that will be devastating for millions of workers’ legal rights and incomes. Here members of the independent electrical utility workers’ union (SME) demonstrate against the law. Photo: SME.
The Mexican Congress looks set to pass a piece of fast-track labor law “reform” this week that could be devastating for millions of workers’ legal rights and incomes.

The changes both pro-business parties are agreed on would undermine the 44-hour work week by permitting subcontracting and temporary or part-time work for the first time.

Additional changes that would make it virtually impossible to organize or maintain genuine unions or to strike were part of the legislation introduced September 1, but it appears that some of those changes may be withdrawn under pressure.


- See more at: http://labornotes.org/blogs/2012/09/mexico%E2%80%99s-labor-law-changes-undermine-worker-rights#.dpuf

These reforms, with the rest of the pro business reforms, are in preparation for TTP. There is also an extensive energy reform that essentially privatizes PEMEX, or close to it. Education reform that apes NCLB. I could go on.

I am sorry, my mind kept going to the series of articles I had to memorize by heart in HS. My point still stands. TTP will not be good for workers.



You might live in that fantasy, the rest of us are not. What we are seeing in San Quintin is exactly what we expect to see TTP trade zone. You should find out more on this. And you and your friend got your talking points from the same fucking pace.

So go argue with labor. There is a reason why labor trade zone area wide dies not want these types of treaties.
When dealing with real-time broadcasts, I tend to think the onus for avoiding spoilers is primarily on the person who wants to avoid seeing spoilers. Expecting to read social media and be protected from spoilers seems unrealistic. Skinner


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6527884

So no, I was not doing that on purpose

I am not using buggy whip false analogies. I am not calling this a conspiracy or conspiracy theorists. I am not calling two nation states beggars. YOU ARE.

So please proceed governor.

As to the rest of what Summers said, he still stated that this is NOT HELPING THE MIDDLE CLASS. But I expect you to mischaracterize all that is told you, This is your MO. Include your MO also distraction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #18)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:47 PM

19. Looks to me he says it's vital. You said he was against it. You can't spin that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #19)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:47 PM

20. No, that is not presicely what he said

 

and you are the one spinning like a top, out of control top.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #19)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:52 PM

21. Nope, I'm laughing hysterically right now. Have a nice day, seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #21)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:07 PM

22. I welcome your derision

 

it is kind of cute. Your derision for workers is extremely telling though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #22)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:22 PM

23. I just think there are different ways to helping workers, as does Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #23)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:24 PM

25. Like greatly weakening union rights

 

Ok.

Because that is what TTP will do by making things like the inability by labor to organize in Vietnam far more standard.

What do you think standardization is all about? You are a fan, we get it, but expect pushback.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #25)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:31 PM

27. Would love to see how the TPP will prevent Vietnamese from organizing.

As I understand it, Vietnam does not allow labor unions now, sans TPP. So, at worse TPP won't change that, at best it might encourage unions in Vietnam or improved worker rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #27)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:41 PM

32. What part of weakening workers rights thoughout the zoneq

 

are you still missing?

Why do you think workers zone wide, distrust this treaty? Oh I forgot buggy whips and conspiracy theories... it could not be because they are perhaps, correct, and even Larry Summers references that standardization of laws and agreements. You think that only includes environmental standards (which will go down as well, or patent law)?

These are serious concerns, but we get it, you are in favor of this... because well Obama. If this was done under Bush, dime on the dollar that you would oppose it. Well because, argle bargle we cannot trust Republicans. You do know the initial negotiations started under Bush... Yes the initial intent was signed in 2009, but the initial talks started in 2002... remind me, who was President then?


I find this actually quite disgusting. This blind partisanship and trust... so if you trust Obama on this, I am sure you trusted Bush too.

And I usually do not use Wiki, but this timeline is pretty good.

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #32)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:47 PM

35. Now you've changed your question, but read 1StrongBlackMan's response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #35)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:50 PM

36. Read my answer to him

 

those side agreements are dead letter. They have been since the grand daddy of them all, NAFTA. And I did not change the question. I pointed out who started this particular treaty.

Look, you will keep defending this, some of us will keep pushing back, Why? We have seen the result. So far just for the Korea Free Trade Agreement, that we were promised would lead to 70K US based jobs, instead has led to the loss of 40,000, and that is the MOST RECENT experience with these things.

By the way, by your own words, the South Koreans are going to "beg" to get in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #36)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:54 PM

40. I did.. This ain't NAFTA. The 40k calculation is based upon assumption that a trade

deficit with Korea represents lost jobs. That's patently wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #40)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:56 PM

41. So are the losses to NAFTA I supppse

 

and all is great and we are all imagining the effects. Silly workers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #25)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:35 PM

28. I'll duck in here ...

 

the US TPP Objectives establishes (where there are none), and protects (where there are), collective bargaining rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #28)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:43 PM

33. Like NAFTA did

 

like the Colombia FTA. what about CAFTA? Korea FTA? I could go down the list. That is usually noted for when the dirty unions point to it, but these side agreements are as good as dead letter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #33)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:51 PM

37. I'm not certain about the Columbia FTA, CAFTA or the Korean FTA; but, ...

 

I am pretty certain NAFTA did not include labor protections, including the right to collectively bargain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #37)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:54 PM

39. Yes it did, side agreements

 

which also included rights of migration (waiting for a lawyer to FINALLY GO THERE and use that law in a migration case), as well as environmental protections, They were put in after the Unions and the Sierra Club screamed holly murder.

I remember, perhaps you don't... but I do. I also remember how Mexican labor law was changed to fit the requirements of NAFTA. Labor protections were far better before NAFTA. And Mexican Labor law has once again been changed in expectations of TTP, to once again LOWER labor protections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #39)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:57 PM

42. Could you cite those labor law changes in anticipation of TPP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #42)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:57 PM

44. I already did to you no less

 

so keep ignoring what is quoted to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #39)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:15 PM

52. I've had this discussion earlier ...

 

a "side agreement" is, by definition, NOT the agreement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #52)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:23 PM

54. It is by defintion, under international law., part of the agreement

 

it goes with it. Since they are attached to the original agreement.

AFTER NAFTA treaties have had them in the agreement and they are just as much dead letter anyway.

Why do you think you had people leaving by the thousands Central America last summer? Why do you think you had a very well documented migration from Mexico to the US in the 1990s?

Last summer it was not just CAFTA, but it was one of the reasons and predicted by social scientists who study these treaties and effects on places like the country side of these nations. It was also predicted due to what happened with NAFTA.

I know some folks really want to trust that this time it will be diferent. But every other treaty has had nasty effects in worker protections and environmental protections, among other things.

Einstein put it best about insanity and doing things over and over again, it will not be different this time. More good paying jobs will flee the US, including whatever remains of the textile industry in the south. Our trade deficit will continue to grow, and worker protection will continue to go down. Oh and climate change, this does not help climate change whatsoever. It will have other nasty effects, like quite possibly ending made in America clauses for DoD contracting, which is just a bad idea from a national security point of view. It will definitely continue with the deindustrialization of the country.

It will also increase the transfer of wealth from the middle classes, whatever remains of them, to the upper 0.0001 percent.

This will stop, sooner or later, but winds and whirlwind come to mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #54)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:32 PM

56. okay. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #18)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:24 PM

24. +1000

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #2)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:16 AM

13. Mexico begging to be in TPP...

 

65,000 Protest TPP In Mexico, See Repeat Of NAFTA Mistakes

More than 65,000 people rallied at Mexico’s Monument to the Revolution and marched to the historic Zocalo Square to demand a new economy that puts equality, justice and human rights first.

Farmers, union, environmental and women’s activists gathered in Mexico City last week to take stock of the lessons from NAFTA and plan strategies to confront the next big threat: the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). One of the earliest lessons from the NAFTA experience was that people and environments in all three countries were affected. The stories from Mexico, Canada and the U.S. were remarkably similar: environmental destruction, threats to union and community organizing, and, in all sectors, a marked increase in corporate concentration as companies gained new abilities to move different aspects of production across borders in search of lower costs and higher profits.
...
https://www.popularresistance.org/65000-protest-tpp-in-mexico-see-repeat-of-nafta-mistakes/

Their corporations and political elites might benefit from it, but the people would suffer. Same as in the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:31 AM

3. I hope you are right but I am bookmarking for later praise or ridicule when this game plays out

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 01:27 PM

4. I hope you're right. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 02:03 PM

5. Chess is a game...

...where the Pawns (Working Class & Poor) are sacrificed to protect the Royalty.
.
.
.

By gawd, Obama IS playing chess,
and doing it well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #5)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:38 PM

30. If you play chess ...

 

you know that every piece on the board, except one - the King - is expendable, not just the Pawns.

That's why the analogy doesn't work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #30)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:04 PM

47. I know you don't like it,

...but it works well enough.


"Sacrificial Pawn" is a part of our lexicon.

Who ever heard of a "Sacrificial Bishop"???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #47)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:21 PM

53. Yes. Bumper-stickerism works well ...

 

in dumbing down discussions to a point where people think they understand.

Who ever heard of a "Sacrificial Bishop"???


Anyone/everyone that plays, or even understands, chess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 08:37 PM

6. he's giving the republicans enough rope to hang themselves. And he's the only adult in

 

the room

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:11 PM

7. The basis for the o.p. was from the Obamacare debates with the Repubs.

 

Things looked like they were going south. Tom Hartman said not to worry, we will get single payer. Obama is playing 3d chess while the repubs are playing checkers.

We know how that worked out. I can't wait to sign up for my single payer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Reply #7)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:34 PM

10. I was watching National Lampoon's European Vacation the other day. When they hit

Eric Idle's character and they offered to take him to the hospital, my first response was well at least he can walk into any hospital and leave without a bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:32 PM

9. Well whatever chess he's playing, the middle class is losing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sat Apr 18, 2015, 11:36 PM

11. Last time he played that so called, "Chess"

 

John Boner got 95% of what the GOP wanted and we got nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #11)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:40 PM

31. Really? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:25 PM

26. Why is it wrong the trust him?

We trust him with the nuclear codes.

I don't see why we have to micromanage on this particular thing.

I think this is becoming a derangement syndrome. Some people decided to make this their anti-Obama cause and ran with it. All trade agreements are horrible and should never be entered into. Not realistic in the 21st century, I'm afraid. I trust Obama's teams to negotiate it more than the Republicans. Though even the Republicans have no motive to make trade go in favor of another country rather than us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #26)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:52 PM

38. why should he be trusted on this over bernie or brown or warren-

 

to name just a few?

I think it's deranged to put aside critical thinking and substitute it with abject hero worship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:36 PM

29. TPP is a renegotiated NAFTa silly goose.

Mexico and Canada are one of the States involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #29)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:57 PM

43. It is NAFTA alright, ON STEROIDS

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #43)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:59 PM

45. Yep, corrects most if not all the problems cited by Robert Reich

in NAFTa.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #45)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:02 PM

46. Not according to the same Robert Reich you keep misquoting

 

Now you will tell me that is becuase it is because none pays attention to him anymore, so he is trying to stay relevant. Want me to find those posts hoyt?

I will save you that typing

Star Member Hoyt (18,690 posts)
80. Reich is just ticked Obama is improving on Reich's NAFTA.

In fact, Twitch still maintains the shortfall in NAFTA
was lack of worker and environmental standards. TPP corrects that. Reich is just ticked he's ignored by Obama and Clinton.

Krugman has been on both sides of issue.

Stiglitz is right about need to raise taxes, but seems to have missed it on TPP.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6529690

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #46)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:06 PM

48. He said he still supported NAFTA, just wishes it included better

Worker and environmental protections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #48)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:07 PM

49. No he has not

 

he really sounds really supporting here, NOT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #49)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:43 PM

58. Here he is. Your video shows just how pissed he is at Obama for ignoring him and doing a better


job of negotiating agreements.


http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Robert_Reich_Free_Trade.htm

A: I don’t think it was a mistake, but it wasn’t really a tremendous help. If you put labor and environmental standards into our trade agreements, it’s not a race to the bottom. If you have an environmental standard and a labor standard that, for example, bars all slave labor, guarantees the right to organize, maintains kind of minimum labor standards throughout the world, you are setting a floor for all nations. It’s not protectionism. This is a way of actually getting everybody up rather than having the bar continue to trend downward. We tried to do this in NAFTA, and, unfortunately, we couldn’t get the Mexican government support. We tried to have a labor and environmental side agreement. I think it would have been a much better agreement had we had that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #58)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:47 PM

59. Pissed is your tendentious characterization

 

like Mexico and Canada begged to become part of the process and we are afraid of buggy whip factories going away.

The video shows he is not in favor of TTP, which you said he was.

We get it, you WANT TTP. you LOVE TTP, but your tendentious ways of going about it are irritating to say the least. There are other words that apply here, but tendentious is the least annoying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #59)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:55 PM

61. NAFTA was OK since he was an advisor, TPP which is an improvement isn't OK because Reich

was no longer an advisor, stuck teaching public policy to freshmen/women at Berkeley (which would be a dream job for most).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #61)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 06:01 PM

62. Nope, it is because like many others

 

he did learn from that error. I see you are not learning from that error.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #48)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:11 PM

50. Oh, see, now -that's- not fair. Getting Reich to speak for himself

in a video!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #50)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:13 PM

51. And I did not know the video existed until I covered a

 

TTP educational event yesterday...

I really should pay more attention to these videos.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #29)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:40 PM

57. By "renegotiated" do you mean how banks can now sue governments for derivative losses?

Or that it has weaker environmental protections than NAFTA?

TPP contains a provision for bailing out derivative losses. Is this what re-negotiating NAFTA means?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026430716

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pa28 (Reply #57)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:52 PM

60. Wow, you are really misinformed. NAFTA included the very same provision, as have 2500 trade

agreements worldwide, even those between European Union states. Adding the term "derivatives" in the phrase -- futures, options and other derivatives (similar to futures and options), doesn't change the definition. It just grabs attention some folks.

You care to show how the environment protections are less than NAFTA?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #60)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 06:36 PM

63. Tell it to the Sierra Club. That's their opinion.

In a press release Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club says: “If the environment chapter is finalized as written in this leaked document, President Obama’s environmental trade record would be worse than George W. Bush’s. This draft chapter falls flat on every single one of our issues – oceans, fish, wildlife, and forest protections – and in fact, rolls back on the progress made in past free trade pacts.”


As for derivatives it's been added as a definition of an investment that was not present in NAFTA. It speaks for itself in black and white.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pa28 (Reply #63)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 06:38 PM

64. Rhethoric for the membership. Let's see some details.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #64)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 06:58 PM

66. NAFTA provided for complaints from member nations and financial penalties for failure to comply.

TPP contains no such enforcement mechanism, only "commitments" and guidelines for self policing. From the TPP leaked environment chapter.

From NAFTA:

The "action plan" may be significant for several reasons. First, it may provide an objective
way for the panel to measure progress toward better enforcement. Second, bureaucratic benefits
may develop in having an action plan imposed on a country. For example, an environmental
agency might use the plan as justification for a larger budget request for its regulatory staff.
Third, the action plan may embarrass a government into mending its ways.
Whenever a complaining party believes that an action plan is not being fully implemented, it
may reconvene the panel. n120 If the panel decides that the defendant country is not fully
implementing the plan, the panel must impose a "monetary enforcement assessment" within 60
days. n121 For 1994, the penalty is capped at $ 20 million.


"Re-negotiated" environmental self-policing plan from TPP:

Each Party further commits to:
take appropriate measures to protect and conserve wild fauna and flora that are at risk within its territory, including measures to conserve the integrity of designated natural protected areas;20
maintain or strengthen government capacity and institutional frameworks to promote sustainable forest management and wild fauna and flora conservation, and endeavor to enhance public participation and transparency therein; and
endeavor to develop and strengthen cooperation and consultation with interested non-governmental entities in order to enhance implementation of measures to combat the illegal take of or illegal trade in wild fauna and flora.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pa28 (Reply #66)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:04 PM

68. Once again Obama has you covered. Straight from the US Trade Rep's Blog

You are looking at old negotiating documents and here's what your Trade Rep is doing, notwithstanding your mistrust:

U.S. negotiators have made clear where we don’t agree with weaker TPP proposals on environmental provisions, and just how serious we are about making sure that the obligations in the environmental chapter are subject to the same enforcement processes as obligations elsewhere in the TPP, including recourse to trade sanctions.

It’s true that U.S. negotiators are fighting alone on some of these issues – but that’s exactly what they’re doing: pressing harder, not retreating. In December the trade ministers of the 12 TPP countries met for three days to tackle tough issues together, including in the environment chapter. There, the United States reiterated our bedrock position on enforceability of the entire environment chapter, as well as our strong commitments to provisions such as those combating wildlife trafficking and illegal logging.

The entire TPP negotiation, including on the environmental chapter, is ongoing. We will continue to work with Congress and with our stakeholders in the environmental community, as we have from day one, for the strongest possible outcome. Together, we can continue to call on TPP partners to join us in achieving the high environmental standards being proposed and advocated by the United States.

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/blog/2014/January/The-US-and-Environmental-Protections-in-the-TPP


Call up Michael Brune and tell him to prepare an award for Obama and his team.

Seriously, I would be very disappointed if things are not changed in the final draft, and bet my rear and reputation -- such as they are -- that the language will be tougher in the TPP, and perhaps other related environmental agreements that may apply.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #29)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:53 PM

67. Do yourself a favor before knitting things from your imagination on what TPP is or what NAFTA was..

Make sure you understand the provisions of NAFTA and what it did to Mexico, which was never good for expanding their infrastructure and enabling Mexico to manufacture and delivery safe goods to prosper their economy. Make sure you understand the provisions of TPP and do similar, because it is essentially an agreement for business to make "goods" anywhere they please with environmental controls no longer an obstacle for them.

NAFTA was more about actual trade than TPP is. Both have suppressed what might have been fair trade to Mexico or any other country in these agreements.

Understand that TPP is more about the conditions that international corporations can conduct business within these entities. Case in point is the oil and gas industry, who are attempting to drill on any public land. Should their industry fail to be able to extract their projected earnings due to the safety concern and pushback from other nations, the O&G industry "rights" trump any regulatory controls of the state for health and safety. This is so they can be given the right to recuperate projected revenues, should their product not come to fruition in the country in which it failed.

Just so you know, the usurping of local ordinances, state and national laws is real under this so-called "partnership"… After the ban on fracking in NYS, hydraulic fracturing would legally be allowed, being trumped via the TPP if a country under this agreement challenge their right to extract oil and gas. Nationals would be responsible for this. Corporations, therefore, wouldn't dont need any stinking laws to deny their corporation the rights to extract oil and gas or whatever they feel they have earning potential with whenever feasible. It's that bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #67)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:45 PM

69. The case you refer to -- Lone Pine Resources Inc. v. The Government of Canada (UNCITRAL) --

is not getting very far. It was filed in November 2012. To date the moratorium on fracking still in effect.

As of this date, Lone Pines is darn near bankrupt. Truth is, I could file a claim in Canadian courts over this, not that I support fracking because I don't.

In any event, Lone Pine has to appear before 3 arbiters -- one appointed by Lone Pine, one by Canada and the third agreed to by both parties. I think Loan Pine is screwed and will be paying costs of arbitration. Can't prove it because the official judgement has not been issued.

But the moratorium still is in effect and will be in the unlikely event Lone Pine prevails.

More telling -- notwithstanding this suit and others, Canada requested to be party to the TPP because it feels the good far outweighs any negatives.

Lots of things COULD HAPPEN, but are not likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:46 PM

34. And don't forget to add it to the list. It will probably be under,

 

"worked in a bipartisan fashion to pass the greatest economic bill in world history"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoppy (Original post)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:26 PM

55. Wait...is it 2011? People are still using the 3D chess insult?

 



Shout, shout, your insult's played out!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #55)

Sun Apr 19, 2015, 06:55 PM

65. Soon they'll be asking for all that hopey changey.

Been saying since 2011 that they needed new material. I guess it's too hard to think creatively when you're a solutionless contrarian 24/7.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread