America, Hog Butcher for the World

[ucrdem]

That's from "Chicago," Carl Sandburg's 1916 tribute to the City of Big Shoulders:

CHICAGO

Hog Butcher for the World,
Tool Maker,
Stacker of Wheat,
Player with Railroads and the Nation's Freight Handler;
Stormy, husky, brawling,
City of the Big Shoulders:
They tell me you are wicked and I believe them. . . .

Some are complaining about the TPP seeing daylight finally and wondering how Obama, who cut his political teeth in Chicago, could be so heartless as to push us kicking and screaming into the global stockyard of 21st-C international commerce. Well, my question is, what's the alternative? An ever-deepening twilight of discreet poverty? A union of convenience with one of our former rivals? Or the perhaps the military option gloriously pursued by Obama's immediate predecessors? Because when you think about it there's no way we're going to sit out deals like TPP and TTIP and that being the case we might as well be grateful it's Obama at the bat and not Jeb or Ted.

[ucrdem]

1. What you need to know about the Trans-Pacific Partnership

PBS Newshour - June 23, 2015 at 4:41 PM EDT

TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP PRIMER

The Trans-Pacific Partnership heads the U.S. trade policy agenda for political, commercial and strategic reasons. Politically, the trade deal embodies President Obama’s famed “Asia pivot” and promises to be the centerpiece of Obama’s second-term legacy. Commercially, the Trans-Pacific Partnership countries account for about 36 percent of U.S. total two-way trade in goods and services. The United States already has free trade agreements with most of the Trans-Pacific Partnership members, but the pact would add Japan, Brunei, Malaysia, New Zealand and Vietnam to the list of U.S. free trade agreements partners. Moreover, the Trans-Pacific Partnership would upgrade existing U.S. free trade agreements, including the venerable NAFTA. Strategically, the Trans-Pacific Partnership will demonstrate to Asian partners that U.S. engagement in the region has an economic focus, alongside the obvious military dimension.

The trade deal negotiations are near the finish line and with the passage of fast track legislation they might be concluded by August 2015. The Trans-Pacific Partnership text, when finalized, will set precedents for global trade rules and advance trade and investment relations between member countries. The trade deal would also lead to greater economic integration throughout the region as it expands to new members, possibly achieving a long-held goal of free trade and investment within the entire Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation region.

First, the Trans-Pacific Partnership will reduce and eventually eliminate traditional market access barriers to goods, services and agriculture—with some small exceptions. Equally important, the trade deal will shape standards and rules in several areas that have few or no disciplines in the multilateral trading system governed by the World Trade Organization. Examples include competition policy, direct investment, labor and environmental standards, and state-owned enterprises.

Econometric estimates indicate that the Trans-Pacific Partnership will boost the real incomes of member countries by $285 billion over baseline projections by 2025, a gain of 1 percent that continues indefinitely. Japan and the United States would account for 64 percent of the total GDP gains. Exports of member countries will increase by $440 billion or 7 percent. Of course, these gains will require full implementation and national economic reforms to meet Trans-Pacific Partnership obligations and take advantage of new trade and investment opportunities.

As a “living agreement” the Trans-Pacific Partnership will allow for future accession by new members, as well as periodic updating of its provisions. Korea has announced its interest in participating, while Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Taiwan are assessing the benefits of Trans-Pacific Partnership membership. Within a decade, the trade deal could also become a framework for meaningful bilateral engagement between the United States and China.

more: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/full-dress-battle-awaits-know-tpp/

[MattBaggins]

2. Never met a false dichotomy you did fall head over heels for ?

You remind me so much of Bush

[ucrdem]

3. Well, what's the alternative?

For the last six months all I've heard is how bad NAFTA was. Well, it turns out NAFTA was pretty good:

But if you have a better idea I'm open to suggestions.