Let's take the content of the TPP out of the equation for a moment

[marym625]

Let's pretend we know absolutely nothing about the TPP. That nothing has been leaked. That we don't know that corporations will actually have power over national law if a nation's law is detrimental to the corporation. That we don't know anything about how it will effect environmental law, currency, etc Just put it out of your mind

Let's consider just these things:

The treaty is secret. It is so secret that even being a member of Congress wasn't enough to give you clearance to read it. The treaty is secret to the press and the public. While Congress is allowed to read it (assumingly), they are not allowed to copy, take notes or share it in any way with the American people or the press.

Fast track allows for no changes or amendment. It's a straight up or down.

Fast track would cause the up or down vote to take place in 90 days. 90 days for a straight up or down vote on a treaty that has been negotiated for years. A very long treaty that would take well over 90 days to just examine, to learn possible repercussions to the American workforce, Unions, environment, banking regulations, international law, etc

The people in Congress that are against the TPP and TPA are, almost all, Democrats.
DeLauro, Miller Lead 151 House Dems Telling President They Will Not Support Outdated Fast Track For Trans-Pacific Partnership

http://delauro.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1455:delauro-miller-lead-151-house-dems-telling-president-they-will-not-support-outdated-fast-track-for-trans-pacific-partnership&Itemid=21

The people in Congress that are for the TPA and TPP are, almost all, Republicans.

Obama and Republicans Agree on the Trans-PacificPartnership … Unfortunately

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/22/opinion/obama-and-republicans-agree-on-the-trans-pacific-partnership-unfortunately.html?referrer=

Over 600 corporate advisers, which represents over 400 corporations, have access to and the ability to advise on, the TPP. However, unions, the American people and the press are not even allowed to see it. Even Congress has no part in the negotiations and, if the TPA passes, will have no ability to change anything, amend or even research with any real clarity

TPP Corporate Insiders

http://www.flushthetpp.org/tpp-corporate-insiders/

Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, is pushing for the TPP. She is from one of the wealthiest families in the US. She is a corporate shill who has taken advantage of people in the hardest time, when S&L were closed.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/19/1210299/-Penny-Pritzker-as-an-example-of-the-criminality-of-our-elites

http://inthesetimes.com/article/14948/3_troubling_things_about_billionaire_penny_pritzker

Thr Nike corporation promise of 10,000 jobs over ten years is insulting. A company that size, that moved over 90% of US jobs out of the country after NAFTA, ensuring a measly 1000 jobs a year, is a joke. Considering what we don't know about pay because of the TPP, and no guarantee of Unions, this announcement almost makes the argument against the TPP stronger.

Why should the TPP have to be passed for a US company, that makes most of its profits in the US, to guarantee that few jobs?

We have gone from being the greatest nation to just mediocre. Not a leader but, instead, on a fast track to the bottom. The bottom in education, in quality of life, in work/life balance, in treatment of women, minorities, the poor, the middle class, children, hunger and humanity. Though not all of this is attributable NAFTA, some are.

We know the harm that NAFTA has done. Why would we blindly allow another secret trade agreement,

So, just using the things we know as an absolute, why would anyone want to pass the TPA or TPP?

[Hoyt]

1. Brookings sums it up nicely --

Conclusion

Globalization is here to stay, and failure to pass TPA or to conclude the TPP will not change this. However, TPP is a key opportunity for the U.S. to continue to determine the terms of globalization and to ensure that its development supports U.S. growth and welfare.

The TPP is an agreement that will support a U.S. economic future that is geared towards innovation in high-end manufacturing and services. The TPP will also underpin a global economic system that is rules-based, consistent with U.S. values, and strengthens the ability of U.S. businesses to compete in TPP markets. Such a system will ensure that the U.S. benefits more fully from the global economy—and the opportunities here are significant. Currently, 95 percent of the world’s population lives outside the United States. Global middle-class consumption is projected to grow from $21 trillion in 2009 to over $56 trillion in 2030, with most of the growth happening outside the U.S. in the Asia-Pacific region. [8]

The TPP will also support other strategic goals of the U.S. in the region. As noted, the TPP is a central part of the U.S. rebalancing towards Asia. In this way, the TPP will underpin U.S. alliances with TPP parties such as Japan and Australia and provide opportunities for the U.S. to deepen its relationship with emerging strategic partners such as Vietnam.

Thus, the TPP is an important trade agreement that will produce economic and broader strategic gains for the U.S. The TPP negotiations can be concluded this year but achieving this will require Congress to pass TPA. It is time for Congress to act.


http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2015/04/09-trade-promotion-authority-trans-pacific-partnership-negotiations-meltzer

[marym625]

4. I thank you for this

But it doesn't really answer the question. This is an opinion based on what may or may not be in the TPP. Since we know NAFTA promised similar things and instead of promises fulfilled, we were royally screwed, these arguments don't hold water. Something we're already running short of.

Yes, we are becoming a much smaller world. But there are economies that being tied to would do much more harm than good. We also should be looking out for us first.

So, again, why should we so blindly pass an agreement that is at least approved by corporations and unknown to even unions?

[Hoyt]

11. We won't blindly pass the agreement, you'll see it before Obama submits it to Congress, assuming he

thinks it's good enough for us.

Besides, why do you blindly assume it's bad.

I'm sorry, I trust Brookings' analysis and Obama on this, until I see some reason not to do so.

[marym625]

15. I am not blindly assuming it's bad

I have good reason for that assumption. And waiting until it's submitted to find out is too late.

[cantbeserious]

10. All Supposition And Conjecture - However, Real Americans Lived Through The Past Trade Agreements

Not enough substance to even merit consideration.

[Hoyt]

12. Real Americans know trade agreements are not responsible for our problems that

started when folks realized transistor radios made in Japan, VW Beetles, etc., were better and cheaper than similar American products.

Technology is more responsible for our current problems, and avoiding the TPP will make that worse.

[marym625]

16. That's a ridiculous assertion

The jobs lost directly because of NAFTA are not a "could be" They are.

And to assume that not joining the TPP would cause further issue is exactly the kind of thing that got us where we are

We do not invest in education, in the kinds of jobs and degrees needed for the ingenuity of products. We don't invest in our country. America has been dumbed down so much that people can't even see that allowing corporations to run the world will be a detriment to the UD and the world.

[Hoyt]

18. Oh sure, let's let the "dumbed down people" (your term) run our agriculture, health, man-

manufacturing, service, etc., industries.

I firmly believe we need socially conscious businesses even if it has to be legislated through tax penalties, but letting "dumbed down people" (again, your term) run them, won't help.

[Vincardog]

21. But "socially conscious businesses" are illegal in the USA. By LAW every business' sole goal is $$$$

So said the USSC.

[Hoyt]

22. You don't actually believe that, do you? I admit many take a short-term view, but

social responsibility is not against he law.

Then again, many against TPP are taking a short term view, irrationally fearing their job will be sent overseas.

Seems to he common in USA, in all aspects of society.

[marym625]

34. real Americans

Irrationally. Short term view.

May I ask where you work?

[drm604]

32. Has Brookings been able to read the agreement?

That's not a rhetorical question. I'm genuinely curious. How much weight I give to their opinion rests on whether or not they know the exact contents of the agreement.

I realize that it's entirely possible that this agreement, while necessarily imperfect, is the best that can be reached, and better than no agreement at all, but it's difficult to judge with all of the secrecy.

[Hoyt]

33. Brookings reps are on the TPP advisory committees. They have a bunch of other articles too.

Nice to see a reasoned response.

[jwirr]

2. When we talk about how secret it was - we need to remember that it was NOT secret to business

lobbyists - they got to help write it.

And of course they were very careful to make sure that all of us would not get hurt?

[marym625]

5. yep!

There's a link to all the corporations involved in the OP.

I can't understand for the life of me, why anyone would want this

[malthaussen]

3. Because we trust Daddy, obviously.

I am sure Mr Obama would cry real tears if he knew you had such little faith in his judgement.

-- Mal

[marym625]

6. Well, I get a knew daddy

Or maybe mommy, fairly soon. Maybe I will be allowed out of my room by then so daddy will just have to suck it up

[malthaussen]

8. There are some content-based reasons one might support the TPP...

... but they, too, are based on a level of trust that is infantile (IMO), and require, if real and not just noise, a vision of the world that does not really exist except in theory at this point.

-- Mal

[marym625]

13. none that I know about

There is nothing worthy of losing more jobs and lowering pay for American workers.

[malthaussen]

14. Well, we could have a conversation about that.

But you'd have to be willing to suspend disbelief and indulge a little devil's advocacy.

-- Mal

[marym625]

17. Too tired and busy right now

Maybe later though

[cali]

7. good post.

I want to add that the tpa does much, much more than limit the vote to aye or nay on the tpp and the other 17 or more ftas that the USTR is working on.

Fact or Fiction: Does the Hatch-Wyden-Obama Trade Promotion Authority Bill Protect U.S. Sovereignty Over Domestic Policy?

http://infojustice.org/archives/34298

[marym625]

9. Great point

And thank you for that and the link

[Enthusiast]

19. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch! Thank you, marym625!

Pay no attention to the obfuscationists.

[marym625]

25. Thank you

I don't know how I missed the last few responses here. Sorry

[Demeter]

20. USA not just mediocre--still on the downward slide to hell and 3rd world existence

[swilton]

26. Precisely just look at the recent rail disasters

passenger and other-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141092057#post9

[marym625]

27. Very true

As I just said above, I don't know how I missed the last few responses here. Sorry about that

[Omaha Steve]

23. K & R

[marym625]

28. Thank you!

Sorry I missed this Monday

[swilton]

24. Very well thought out

One of the most nauseating memes that the Obama Administration has used countless times is that of 'reaching across the aisles'.....

[marym625]

29. Thank you

Yes, that aisle, depending on how you look at it, is either become so wide there is no way to reach even to the middle, or become non existent

[Elwood P Dowd]

30. That makes too much sense marym.

Get ready for a barrage of hits from the corporate front group crowd with their prepared list of talking points.

[marym625]

31. ha ha!

Good one!

Well I posted it Monday so I think I might be safe

Thank you!

[rhett o rick]

35. Excellent post. I want to point out again as I have a lot, that no one has done this

for the case in favor of. No one has come out with anything other than rhetoric. In fact here is a paragraph from my Senator Cantwell who is on the Senate Finance Committee:

“I firmly believe, however, that any trade agreement must ensure fair competition for domestic industries and requires trading partners to adopt labor standards and environmental protections.”

She "firmly believes". She also mentions, " I have consistently supported " and, "I do not want to see" and “I firmly believe," (again) and more, "an active trade policy must be accompanied by expanded educational", yes more, " I also offered an amendment " and more, "The Committee also considered". Ok, what did she say? She believes, she supported, she wants to see, explains what "must be", she offered amendments, and told us what the Committee considered. This is what we call rhetoric to be nice and bullshit otherwise.

What's missing? "I will not vote for an agreement that does not insure all of the following" followed by a list of protections.

The above is the boiler plate response from Sen Cantwell from Washington the State.

[marym625]

36. Thank you, Rhett.

Please note, I have not received one straight answer from anyone that supports the TPP. Not one. It's all about trust. I don't remember taking marriage vows with President Obama or anyone else in office

[rhett o rick]

37. I fear that a lot of people don't understand rhetoric. If someone says they "firmly believe" it

does not commit them to anything. Or like on the White House TPP website, "we are striving for" doesn't mean a thing.

If you are "striving for goodness" then will you promise not to sign or vote for anything less?

[marym625]

38. yep.

I think I told you this before, but my mom has her masters in rhetoric.

Elizabeth Warren is calling Hillary out on her silence. Could work

[Recursion]

39. Your premise that NAFTA harmed the US economy, while an article of faith here, just isn't true

That's my biggest annoyance with this; people completely ignore the actual numbers of what happened after NAFTA (things got better for American workers by every metric).

[Art_from_Ark]

40. Yeah,

tell that to the workers at Levi Strauss, Emerson Electric, Guardian Glass, Whirlpool, Zenith, and countless other factories that moved to Mexico as a result of NAFTA.

And tell that to the people of San Luis Potos, Mexico, who were sued by Metalclad under NAFTA because they didn't want Metalclad's goddamn toxic waste dump, and they lost.

And tell that to the people of Quebec, who had laws against fracking and were sued under NAFTA by American companies that thought they had a right just to frack wherever they goddamn wanted to in the province.

TPP is NAFTA and Voodoo Economics on steroids. And you are a shill for this abomination.

[marym625]

42. Thank you

I honestly think that some people here are paid to push for certain things. That or they have a great deal of money to be made with the passage of the trade agreements. And many are ill informed

I'm done with the poster you replied to. Not one fact. Not one link to back up his contentions and refuses to respond to direct questions.

I appreciate your trying to get through to him. I afraid that you are wasting your time. Sadly

[marym625]

41. absolutely false.