Did the American people request a new trade agreement? Why is this on the agenda at all?

[J_J_]

I just don't understand why this is needed and why anyone is pushing it.

Why is this the last thing Obama needs accomplished?

America has plenty of problems, and needing a new trade agreement isn't one of them.

[mmonk]

1. I'm interested in the replies to this question as well.

[Kablooie]

2. The "American People" today consist of only the 1% and large corporations.

The rest of us aren't supposed to matter.
That's why a secret trade agreement is Americas #1 priority right now.

[Populist_Prole]

15. +1

The 99 percent/working class are far far below the radar of the beltway, the media and intelligensia. Their bubble is so big it has become reality. I've come to realize this over time by carefully thinking through their mantras vis-vis events. Sure, their are some ( plutocrats ) with utter contempt for us, but what I've found is that it's not so much a matter of them liking policies because they harm us....that is, they don't go out of their way to screw us; it's just how they see the world.

[RKP5637]

27. Exactly! There is smoke and mirrors to make people think they count, but really, it's just

a mirage. Only money and large corporatiosn count in USA. Inc. We the people are in the way.

[Cleita]

3. Because corporations, some not even American but global, want it.

It's a mystery to me as to why Obama wants this so we can fill our shelves with cheaply made goods that haven't created a single living wage job over here.

[bigwillq]

4. It's no longer about what the people want. (nt)

[840high]

5. Hasn't been for a long time.

[bigwillq]

9. Correct (nt)

[Autumn]

6. Corporation are people too my friend.

Obviously they wanted it and since they are the only people who count... Well there you go.

[corkhead]

18. This time I checked to make sure someone else hadn't already written exactly what I was about to

almost verbatim

[cali]

7. Beyond "I don't know", all I can add is that trae agreements are always

on the agenda in every administration and this one has been cooking since the bush administration. There are 17 trade agreements in the USTR pipeline.

I don't reflexively oppose trade agreements, but we need a new template moving forward.

[Lint Head]

8. Lobbyists for Corporate Fascists requested it.

The "People" no longer matter in our country. We are "marks" for political scam artists. Nothing more. Money is The Supreme Being that we bow down to.

[RKP5637]

29. The entire gov. + corps is a scam against we the people. Exactly as you said, we are "marks!" n/t

[randome]

10. Did the American people demand infrastructure repair? Did we demand that CU be overturned?

If we're going to let our representatives get away with setting the agenda, then they will do whatever appeals to them.

This country is running on automatic. The GOP is toothless, our infrastructure is crumbling, climate change is getting worse and the electorate is disengaged.

Under these conditions, why not a trade agreement?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[Cleita]

11. Thom Hartmann now reading off the thirteen Democrats who turned their

coats yesterday. Among them my Senator DiFi. God damn her.

[TheNutcracker]

13. When will Californians do their job and get rid of this sell out to BIG OIL?

Her record sucks!

[jeff47]

22. There's been two senators I am proud to have voted against.

Helms and Feinstein.

[TheNutcracker]

12. I kick you to the greatest, as it should be WE THE PEOPLE

great question!

[pinboy3niner]

14. I wouldn't be so hasty to do that for this hit-and-run poster. nt

[Populist_Prole]

16. Plutocrat view

Heard Noam Chomsky say this of policy making in the US. I hope I have the words right to his poem:

"The poor complain, they always will; but that's just idle chatter. The system works, for all of us; or at least those of us that matter".

[TheHardWay]

17. It would be wrong not to...

I hate to say it but I too have no idea why the things happen as they do.
In times like these I can refer back to the constitution, in those first few lines I find the common republican basis for all that they do...
" We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

They impose what their will is on the world as they see fit to impose it according to their expression of a "more perfect union". They have the funds and everybody is watching them.

We all have the power to do the same.

[mmonk]

33. If we have the power, why no voice?

Why wasn't it our idea?

[SamKnause]

19. I sure as fuck did not request a new trade agreement.

I wasn't consulted.

No one ask if I was for, or against a new trade agreement.

I did not get to vote for, or against any of the disastrous trade

agreements we have already been forced into.

My government does not care about my opinions.

My government does not represent the needs or wants of the people.

My government takes its marching orders from global corporations, Wall Street,

and The Military Industrial Complex.

My government is corrupt.

My government is destroying this country.

My government sold we the people to the highest bidders.

My government is deceitful and dishonest.

My government sold all its power and control to entities they can

no longer control !!!!!!

[840high]

25. As long as they have

a D after their name - that's all that's important.

[Bucky]

20. It's about containing China as a trading entity. They won't say that, of course

China's size makes it a potential trade agreement bully. The TPP allows its trade partners to use US trade as a counterweight.

[jeff47]

23. Except this agreement won't do shit for that.

That argument is predicated on the US being the "essential" market. That all these countries will only trade with the US because....um....reasons. But it is the argument many neoliberals hang their hat on.

There's nothing in the TPP that prevents any agreements with China. And there's no particular reason to think the US is the only market. In fact, the TPP makes it much easier for US capital to build factories in Vietnam to sell goods to China.

[Bucky]

28. You're right (and that's why you're wrong)

The Vietnamese would far rather have US capital (which is really international capital) building their factories than investments from China... which would come with far more geopolitical strings attached. Vietnam fears trade domination from China for a host of geopolitical and history reasons.

I never said the TPP is about preventing sales to China. It's about keeping trade options open to countries that fear domination by China in trade agreements.

I'm not a fan of TPP either, but the motivations for it are a little bit more complicated that screwing over the American middle class and small businesses.

[GeorgeGist]

37. Ooga booga ...

the 'we're not as bad as them' meme is growing tiresome.

[jwirr]

21. You are forgetting: Corporations are people to.

[pampango]

24. There were some who were not happy with NAFTA and other existing agreements.

At least some were unhappy about the lack of labor and environmental standards in trading rules.

America has plenty of problems, and needing a new trade agreement isn't one of them.

I tend to agree. Trade affects about 23% of the economy. Our regressive tax system, anti-labor legislation and weakened safety net affects 100% of our economy and our lives. FDR pursued expanded trade and progressive trading agreements but it was after he had dealt with taxes, union empowerment and the safety net.

[Elwood P Dowd]

32. FDR would have NEVER allowed the giant corporations and their lobby to write trade legislation

that created an avenue for them to close 50,000 American factories and locate them thousands of miles away in order to take advantage of slave wages and lack of environmental/labor laws.

As far as the social safety net goes, the repukes and fake dems are slowing destroying it rather than improving it, so now we have a double whammy. Our future is bleak, and the free trade hits only make it much worse.

[pampango]

35. I agree. He tied trade agreements to labor rights and

other issues. That would have lifted wages in other countries. His ITO would have regulated corporations as a part of trade rules.

Our future is 'bleak' due to our regressive policies on taxes, union support and the safety net. Trade has little to do with it.

Countries with progressive taxes, support for unions and strong safety nets have strong middle classes. And they have much more 'free trade' than we have. If 'free trade' hurt workers and the middle class, those countries would be worse off than the U.S. They are not.

[whatchamacallit]

26. The answer is

here:
http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf

[99Forever]

30. Furthermore..

Does anyone think that this dynamic would change under another Clinton administration?

[randys1]

31. We or the American people need something if we are honest.

But this trade deal likely isnt it.

What we need is drastic investment in manufacturing here while slowly raising tariffs so that we can make some of the shit we buy

[Marrah_G]

34. Because it is what the large corporations want

At some point people have to realize that most of these congress people do not work for us and nor do they give a shit what happens to us. They won't leave congress poor.

[swilton]

36. There are so many things this country needs

other than a trade agreement that disadvantages the working people who pay the taxes.......

Health care
Education
Gun control
Green jobs
nuclear disarmament
Environmental clean-up
The list is endless....