ucrdem
ucrdem's JournalPew Research, May 27: "Free Trade Agreements Seen as Good for U.S."
By a margin of 58 percent to 33 percent, Americans believe that free trade is good for the nation. Such sentiment is particularly strong among Hispanics (71 percent) and 18-to-29 year olds (69 percent). Support for the principle of free trade is broadly shared across gender, race, age, income, education, and party divisions. And it’s not a new phenomenon. Numerous Pew Research surveys over the years have found that most Americans think that global trade and economic engagement is good for the country.
Most Democrats favor free trade:
Notably, there are only modest partisan differences in views of the impact of free trade agreements on the country and people’s personal finances. About six-in-ten independents (62%) and Democrats (58%) say free trade agreements have been good for the U.S., as do 53% of Republicans. Nearly half of independents (47%), 42% of Democrats and 39% of Republicans say their family’s finances have been helped by free trade agreements.
More Positive Views of Financial Impact of Trade Deals Than in 2010, 2009:
The new survey finds that overall views about whether trade agreements are good for the U.S. are 10 percentage points higher than in 2011 (58% now, 48% then).
Moreover, the share of Americans who say their finances have been helped by free trade agreements has risen since 2010. At that time, negative impressions of the financial impact of trade deals outnumbered positive ones by 20 points (46% to 26%). Today, 43% take a positive view of the financial impact of free trade agreements, up 17 points since 2010, while 36% take a negative view (down 10 points).
more: http://www.people-press.org/2015/05/27/free-trade-agreements-seen-as-good-for-u-s-but-concerns-persist/
U.S. adds 280,000 jobs in May, easing some economic worries
The U.S. economy added 280,000 jobs in May, the largest gain in five months, the government reported Friday, dispelling concerns over sluggish growth earlier this year.
The gain was well over the monthly average of 251,000 since May 2014.
“This is a good report,” said Robert Kleinhenz, chief economist of the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation. “Despite the weak first quarter GDP reading, momentum in the economy is holding up.”
The official unemployment rate ticked up slightly to 5.5 percent from 5.4 percent, but that was because more people were looking for work, encouraged by an improving job market.
A year ago the nation’s jobless rate was at 6.3 percent.
more: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/percent-664848-year-jobs.html
The functions you will lose if you switch to Windows 10
Google translated from a French site...
........................................................
06/02/15 at 3:31 p.m.
If you have a PC running Windows 7 or 8, you can upgrade free to Windows 10 . But you lose the way some features that you may be using everyday on your old edition of the OS. Microsoft has just released the list of "impaired functions" with Windows 10. And if there is nothing fundamental, better still to know. Here they are.
-- Media Center, which had finally survived Windows 8, takes this time for his reverence. If you installed a previous version of Windows (including through Windows Media Center Pack 8) will be removed from your OS when you switch to Windows 10.
-- You can not play a DVD with Windows 10 without additional software. But it was already the case in Windows 8 ... And just going through the Store ( or download the old VLC) to fit everything in order.
-- Fans Of Windows 7 desktop gadgets, you will have to choose: Microsoft had already removed in Windows 8, but users who directly pass from July to October must be a reason: the clock or weather in a corner of office is the past. Place the tiles!
-- If You are on Windows 7, also make a screenshot of your high scores on the Solitaire, Minesweeper and Hearts. For these three games will be annihilated during your transition to Windows 10. You can however download new and beautiful versions from the Windows Store.
-- If You still use a USB floppy drive with your PC, do not panic if it does not work under Windows 10. Microsoft has decided not to include the driver in the OS, it will be necessary to download it from Windows Update.
-- Finally, a small change for users of the suite Windows Essentials : it will pass you the onedrive app to use the one built into Windows 10.
http://www.01net.com/editorial/656350/les-fonctions-que-vous-perdrez-si-vous-passez-a-windows-10/
The Hollande-Sarkozy re-match France doesn't want
French President Francois Hollande (R) descends the steps of the Elysee Palace to greet former president and current UMP conservative political party head Nicolas Sarkozy, in Paris January 11, 2015.
Tue Jun 2, 2015
Nicolas Sarkozy vs Francois Hollande: the re-match. With both having tightened their grips on their parties in recent days, a 2017 repeat of France's 2012 presidential election now looks like the most likely scenario.
The snag is that three quarters of the French do not want either the current president or his predecessor to run again, polls show -- a fact that could boost the protest vote for the far-right National Front while making for a low turnout that would give any mainstream victor a weak mandate for reforms.
. . . .
Sarkozy consolidated that comeback at a weekend convention, with grassroots members chanting "Nicolas! Nicolas!" after he won more than 80 percent approval for his plan to re-name the party "The Republicans". Two months earlier, he steered the party to victory in mid-term local elections.
A few days earlier, Hollande -- the most unpopular French president on record and challenged within his Socialist party just a few months ago -- saw party members overwhelmingly back his policies in a vote before a June 5-7 party congress.
Even critics on the left of the party acknowledged that a rebellion against his increasingly centrist line had run out of steam, combined with signs that the stagnant economy has started to turn around.
"It's time to move on ... grassroots supporters have made clear they don't support the backbenchers," said Karine Berger, a Socialist lawmaker associated with the party's left wing.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/02/us-france-politics-idUSKBN0OI0F120150602
Vacances d’été : les Français partiront plus mais dépenseront moins
Plus de la moitié des Français interrogés partiront en vacances en France cet été
le mercredi 3 juin 2015
Selon un sondage Ipsos-Europ Assitance révélé par France Info ce mercredi, 63% des Français comptent partir en vacances cet été. C’est cinq points de plus que l'an dernier. Cependant, ils partIront avec un budget en baisse.
Vous serez plus nombreux à partir en vacances cet été. C'est la première fois depuis trois ans, selon le baromètre annuel sur les intentions de vacances des européens Ipsos-Europ Assistance que vous révèle France Info.
63% des Français comptent de partir cet été, c'est cinq points de plus que l'an dernier. Mais si les Français partent plus, ce n'est pas forcément pour dépenser plus. Le budget vacances est même à la baisse : 2.180 euros en moyenne, soit c'est 46 euros de moins que l'an dernier.
Les Français retrouvent la route des vacances mais changent leurs habitudes. Plus de la moitié d'entre eux resteront dans l'Hexagone. Certains voyageront moins cher notamment en choisissant le covoiturage (environ 20% des personnes interrogées s'y intéressent, essentiellement les jeunes). Pour baisser le budget vacances, les français misent également sur l'échange de logement, maison ou appartement. Un choix qui séduit là aussi les jeunes, mais surtout les familles avec enfants ou ceux qui comptent passer leur vacances en ville.
Des vacances économes que les français partagent avec leurs voisins du sud, Espagnols ou Italiens dont les budgets restent contraints. Alors que ceux des Allemands ou des Britanniques repartent à la hausse. En moyenne les européens comptent dépenser 2.390 euros cet été, soit 180 euros de plus que l'an dernier. 60% des Européens prendront la route des vacances, soit six points de plus qu'en 2014.
http://www.franceinfo.fr/actu/societe/article/vacances-d-ete-les-francais-partiront-plus-mais-depenseront-moins-687523
Rick Santorum on Hillary Clinton: 'We’ve Taken Her On'
Apparently Sanitorium is announcing today per ABC news:
The former Pennsylvania Republican senator turned two-time presidential candidate is in a “great place” to begin “countering a big, top-down, statist approach that Hillary Clinton has advocated,” he said in an exclusive interview with ABC News’ Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos today.
“We’ve taken her on; on everything from moral and cultural issues on the floor of the United States Senate,” said Santorum, who spent several years in the upper chamber alongside then-Sen. Clinton.
Santorum – who wrote “It Takes a Family,” a treatise on the ills of big government, in response to Clinton’s 1996 book, “It Takes a Village” – also touted his book’s success as an indicator of his ability to defeat Clinton.
Critics are saying, “‘you know what, this breakdown of the family that Rick Santorum talked about 12 years ago is really one of the central issues in rebuilding America again,’” he told Stephanopoulos.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rick-santorum-announcing-run-president/story?id=31332366
This should be good . . .
NPR on TPP: "It's A Beast"
Just How Big Is The Asia Trade Deal Obama Wants? It's A Beast
MAY 26, 2015 9:03 AM ET - DANIELLE KURTZLEBEN
{snip}
The 12 nations involved in TPP make up about 36 percent of global gross domestic product, or GDP, according to data from the International Monetary Fund. That sets the TPP well apart from the 14 free trade agreements the U.S. currently has in effect with 20 countries (to be fair, the U.S. accounts for nearly 23 percent of global GDP by itself).
Not only that, but these nations together account for about one-third of global trade, according to the Brookings Institution.
. . . . Another way the TPP is gargantuan is tougher to quantify in a bar graph: its scope. It not only covers basic trade issues like tariffs, but also a variety of other areas like labor and environmental and intellectual property. The size and scope of TPP matter because they are at the center of the debate. The Obama administration sees the deal's broad reach as positive — the agreement, the administration says, will open up the U.S. to all kinds of new markets and business.
Agribusiness companies, for example, are excited about having new avenues for their products. The labor and environmental provisions, the administration also argues, will force other nations to up their game on those issues, "leveling the playing field."
Not only that, but the TPP's size is all the more important for the one economic superpower that isn't included in it: China. One of the administration's top arguments for the deal is that in negotiating TPP, it "writes the rules" for trade with a large swath of eastern Asian countries before China can with its own trade agreements.
{snip}
However, some wish the pact went further — environmental groups like the Sierra Club, for example, believe the provisions won't do enough to address overfishing.
{snip}
If Congress grants the administration fast-track (also known as Trade Promotion Authority), it will mean two to four months for public comment before Congress gives the deal an up-or-down vote, with no amendments or debate.
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/26/408832953/just-how-big-is-the-asia-trade-deal-obama-wants-its-a-beast
ISDS up close and personal: Philip Morris, FUD vs TPP
Stiglitz warns in last week's HuffPo of the dangers of ISDS, by which the evil Kenyan is secretly plotting to enable the corporatocracy to strangle us in our sleep and topple the Statue of Libertarian, muhahaha. Writes Stiglitz, like Paul Revere with a thumbdrive full of news that TPP is coming:
The labeling is working. It is discouraging smoking. So now Philip Morris is demanding to be compensated for lost profits.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-e-stiglitz/trade-agreements-amount-to-corporate-takeover_b_7302072.html
So the labeling is working, smoking is declining, the regulations haven't changed, but the fact that a US tobacco company is acting assholish is Obama's fault as usual, but never mind that. Let's see what's actually going on with this case:
{snip}
• Full transparency in cases. Governments must make all pleadings, briefs, transcripts, decisions, and awards in ISDS cases publicly available, as well as open ISDS hearings to the public. One key objective of these provisions is to allow governments that are party to the agreement, as well as the public at large, to carefully monitor pending proceedings and more effectively make decisions about whether to intervene.
• Public participation in cases. Tribunals have the clear authority to accept amicus curiae submissions. In U.S. cases, amicus briefs have been submitted by a variety of NGOs, including the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, and Center for International Environmental Law. (Documents in all investor-State cases filed against the United States are available on the State Department website.)
• Mechanism for expedited review and dismissal of frivolous claims and claims outside the tribunal’s jurisdiction. This mechanism enables respondent countries, on an extremely expedited basis, to move to dismiss (1) frivolous or otherwise unmeritorious claims (akin to provisions under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) and (2) claims the tribunal is not empowered to resolve.
• Denial of benefits for sham corporations. This provision prevents the use of shell companies to access ISDS.
• Restriction on parallel claims. This provision prevents a party from pursuing the same claims both in ISDS proceedings and domestic courts (i.e., restricting “forum shopping”).
• Statute of limitations. A three-year statute of limitations protects respondents against old claims, which are difficult for governments to defend in part because access to documents and witnesses becomes more difficult over time.
• Challenge of awards. Both parties to an arbitration have the option to challenge a tribunal award.
• Consolidation. On request, tribunals may consolidate claims raising common questions of fact and law, which may increase efficiency, reduce litigation costs, and prevent strategic initiation of duplicative litigation.
• Interim review of ISDS awards. Parties to the arbitration are permitted to review and comment on a draft of the tribunal’s award before it is made final.
• Prudential exception. This exception provides that nothing prevents countries from taking measures to safeguard the stability of their financial systems. If such measures are challenged, this provision allows the respondent country and investor’s home country to jointly agree that the prudential exception applies and that decision is binding on the tribunal.
• Tax exception. This exception defines and limits the coverage of government tax measures under the investment provisions. In addition, this provision provides that if the respondent country and investor’s home country agree that a challenged measure is not expropriatory, that decision is binding on the tribunal.
• Mechanism for treaty Parties to issue binding decisions on how to interpret treaty provisions. A binding interpretation mechanism enables TPP countries to confer after the agreement has entered into force and to issue joint decisions on questions of treaty interpretation that bind all tribunals in pending and future cases.
• Independent experts on environmental, health, or safety matters. In most ISDS cases, the disputing parties retain and appoint the experts. This provision provides arbitral tribunals with the power to appoint experts of their own choosing on environmental, health, and safety matters to ensure maximal objectivity in the evaluation of claims challenging such measures.
• Limitations on obligations: Clear limiting rules and definitions, including guidance on interpretation on the obligations frequently subject to litigation, to safeguard against subjective or overbroad interpretation – for example, the incorporation of U.S. Supreme Court standards on indirect expropriation and a clear tying of the “minimum standard of treatment” obligation to requirements under customary international law (i.e. the general and consistent practice of states that they follow from a sense of legal obligation).
The case record is instructive. Tribunals adjudicating ISDS cases under U.S. agreements have consistently affirmed that government actions designed and implemented to advance legitimate regulatory objectives do not violate investment obligations. In the Chemtura v. Canada case, for example, an ISDS panel rejected a claim that the Canadian government’s actions to ban the use of chemical product breached Canada’s NAFTA obligations. In rejecting the investor’s claim, the tribunal showed deference to the government’s scientific and environmental regulatory determinations. Similarly in the Methanex v. the United States case, an ISDS panel underscored the right of governments to regulate for public purposes, including regulation that imposes economic burdens on foreign investors, and stated that investors could not reasonably expect that environmental and health regulations would not change.
{snip}
Despite having 50 ISDS agreements in place, the United States has never lost a case and nothing in our agreements has inhibited our response to the 2008 financial crisis, diluted the financial reforms we put in place, or has challenged signature reforms like the Affordable Care Act or any of the other new regulations that have been put in place over the last 30 years.
https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2015/march/investor-state-dispute-settlement-isds
.............................
So first of all, the Phillip Morris case is between two countries bound by a non-US FTA; secondly, it's had no effect on the regulations in question; third, TPP includes multiple safeguards to protect against similar litigation, and 4th, if "sovereignty" was ever a real issue, which I doubt, the record shows that the US has never lost an ISDS dispute, i.e., has so far managed to avoid surrendering its sovereignty to Philip Morris.
So maybe Joe has some catching up to do?
...........
Warning: the OP above contains
Can we agree that jobs are not the problem with TPP?
Yes, the WH is doing a poor job of selling this thing, as usual, and doubtless there are legitimate questions to be answered before passing it, but can we cross labor issues off the list? Because creating millions of new, HIGH-PAYING, secure US manufacturing jobs is one of the main reasons Obama is so anxious to get this deal done. Altogether though it's a complex undertaking with many components and is not well-served by hot-button AM radio slogans. More on labor issues from a doc called "The President's Trade Agenda 2015," link below:
Of special interest are the NAFTA-TPP comparisons on pg. 24.
link: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/President%27s%20Trade%20Agenda%20for%20Print%20FINAL.pdf
WaPo: "Why Obama’s key trade deal with Asia would actually be good for American workers"
3 pro-labor economists explain why TPP benefits American workers:
............................
Why Obama’s key trade deal with Asia would actually be good for American workers
By David Autor, David Dorn and Gordon H. Hanson
March 12, 2015
There are several reasons to support the TPP despite globalization concerns. First, the TPP — which seeks to govern exchange of not only traditional goods and services, but also intellectual property and foreign investment — would promote trade in knowledge-intensive services in which U.S. companies exert a strong comparative advantage. Second, killing the TPP would do little to bring factory work back to America. Third, and perhaps most important, although China is not part of the TPP, enacting the agreement would raise regulatory rules and standards for several of China’s key trading partners. That would pressure China to meet some of those standards and cease its attempts to game global trade to impede foreign multinational companies.
{snip}
But if the TPP has little downside for the U.S., what’s the upside? Why bother with the deal at all? The reason is that the TPP is about much more than manufacturing. Most notably, it promises to liberalize trade in services and in agriculture, sectors in which the United States runs large trade surpluses, but which the World Trade Organization, despite 20 years of trying, has failed to pry open internationally. Successfully exporting information and computer services, where the U.S. maintains substantial technological leadership, requires more than low tariffs. It also requires protecting patents against infringement and safeguarding business assets and revenues against expropriation by foreign governments. To the extent that Obama succeeds in enshrining these guarantees in the TPP, the agreement would give a substantial boost to U.S. trade.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/03/12/why-obamas-key-trade-deal-with-asia-would-actually-be-good-for-american-workers/
..............................
So yes, real economists support the TPP.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora la Reina de los Angeles
Home country: US
Current location: East of East L.A.
Member since: Sun Jan 20, 2013, 08:15 PM
Number of posts: 15,512
