General Discussion

TheMastersNemesis

(10,602 posts)

10. It Is Very LIkely To Be LIke NAFTA. It Will Be More Far Reaching.

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 11:28 PM

Sep 2013

For one it will encourage more jobs to be sent overseas. And worker and environmental protections will be subject to review by a WTO type board. If a law infringes on profit the aggrieved party can sue. The fact that TPP is so secret should tell you something. Grayson has read it but is BARRED from discussing a SINGLE detail of it. Plus "fast track" approval is being pushed which means an up or down vote. It would be pretty much a secret law passed without amendment.

It is like buying a car not ever seeing it or knowing what the model is until after the contract is signed. TPP smells terrible from every angle.

I worked at DOL and I know what the business world is up to. Most American workers are clueless and their anti labor and anti union sentiment plays right into the hands of the globalists.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

127 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I Simply Do Not Understand Obama's Support Of The TPP. [View all] TheMastersNemesis Sep 2013 OP

Of course he's a corporate Dem. polichick Sep 2013 #1

Wages of 23 cents an hour wow warrant46 Sep 2013 #72

Reality. grahamhgreen Sep 2013 #83

I am not stumped at all. 99Forever Sep 2013 #2

In A Way I Am Not Stumped Too. TheMastersNemesis Sep 2013 #4

Funny, that period you described is the one period of real wage growth in 40 years Recursion Sep 2013 #8

........ daleanime Sep 2013 #12

Yes? Recursion Sep 2013 #14

No, daleanime Sep 2013 #15

Agreed. progressoid Sep 2013 #22

Plus one. I share your impression. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #48

I support and share your expression also. n/t truedelphi Sep 2013 #104

I agree! n/t sabrina 1 Sep 2013 #123

More what? Meth? Fast food? Prisons? Th1onein Sep 2013 #32

Goods, in total, by inflation-adjusted dollar value Recursion Sep 2013 #33

You got a link for that assertion? Are you counting cooking hamburgers as manufacturing? Th1onein Sep 2013 #34

Why not? bu$h did. RC Sep 2013 #62

It's not good for jobs. and it's really not a trade agreement cali Sep 2013 #43

EFF certainly disagrees cali Sep 2013 #100

And in terms of copyright - it is especially about truedelphi Sep 2013 #114

Notice you didn't respond to my request to a link for your assertion. Figures. Th1onein Sep 2013 #86

Sorry, I assumed you could google Recursion Sep 2013 #88

You made the assertion, not me. Of course, when flipping HAMBURGERS are counted as manufacturing Th1onein Sep 2013 #95

Line cooks at McDonalds are not counted as manufacturing Recursion Sep 2013 #96

Sorry, no link. Th1onein Sep 2013 #126

True, you did not post any link to back up your claim that line cooks are counted Recursion Sep 2013 #127

Here's another graph of the change in manufacturing output and employment. pampango Sep 2013 #97

Huh. I thought I included that one Recursion Sep 2013 #99

Fast food was re-classified as manufacturing about ten years ago. pa28 Sep 2013 #70

The huge factories where McDonalds assembles hamburgers are classed as manufacturing Recursion Sep 2013 #89

Does that include McDonald's and Burger King? That statistic isnt helping American rhett o rick Sep 2013 #76

As I said, we're manufacturing more with much fewer people Recursion Sep 2013 #90

So manufacturing more isnt necessarily a good thing. We need to protect American rhett o rick Sep 2013 #93

I don't think we need to protect *manufacturing* jobs anymore than wheat threshing jobs Recursion Sep 2013 #94

It dismantled the big manufacturing concerns concentrated in the Midwest... WCGreen Sep 2013 #73

It may be good for the giant agriculture corporations but not for workers. rhett o rick Sep 2013 #75

Do you support the TPP? If so, please explain why. nm rhett o rick Sep 2013 #77

Did I say I support it? No Recursion Sep 2013 #87

. jsr Sep 2013 #19

Neither am I stumped: ye shall be known by your works and this and the Keystone Pipeline would indepat Sep 2013 #81

Maybe just a dirt magnet... pulling them out of the wall to get caught? Tigress DEM Sep 2013 #3

If he were doing that, "they" would have been caught and exposed long ago. truebluegreen Sep 2013 #80

He's already signed three "free" trade agreements MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #5

Ah yes, the f**king KORUS agreement. Chan790 Sep 2013 #59

I like to use the term COSTLY trade agreements.... It's more accurate and costly is the opposite grahamhgreen Sep 2013 #82

That's an excellent reframe of the term. truedelphi Sep 2013 #101

It's mostly about soybeans and wheat Recursion Sep 2013 #6

...... 99Forever Sep 2013 #17

"Some groups will be better off, others will be worse off." Exactly.. SomethingFishy Sep 2013 #21

Middle class? progressoid Sep 2013 #23

Looks like NAFTA slowed that decline, doesn't it? Recursion Sep 2013 #25

If all the US wanted to do was sell soybeans, Art_from_Ark Sep 2013 #27

We'd like to keep doing that, and expand it to other asian countries Recursion Sep 2013 #41

Who is this "we" you speak of? The 1%? The multinational corporations? Enthusiast Sep 2013 #49

Well, my family who grow soybeans, for one Recursion Sep 2013 #92

As Monsanto might say: Petrushka Sep 2013 #46

one more time: this is not really a trade agreement. cali Sep 2013 #45

Have you bothered to look into the effect that NAFTA had on the jobs in this country? truedelphi Sep 2013 #102

Jobs? Employment went up after NAFTA Recursion Sep 2013 #105

The emplyment going up had more to do with truedelphi Sep 2013 #111

TPP SamKnause Sep 2013 #7

Corporations and the 1% have not really changed since the 19th Century. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #50

As Krugman pointed out yesterday, deutsey Sep 2013 #57

I would say... Oilwellian Sep 2013 #98

You are right, of course.............nt Enthusiast Sep 2013 #106

Do we know exactly what is in it? dkf Sep 2013 #9

It Is Very LIkely To Be LIke NAFTA. It Will Be More Far Reaching. TheMastersNemesis Sep 2013 #10

Why doesn't just the secrecy itself get this put on the radar? dkf Sep 2013 #11

Just read this post and my stomach is sinking. dkf Sep 2013 #13

dfk...Public Citizen has the best detailed explanation and links KoKo Sep 2013 #64

They say that he is very smart. Could he be planning for his retirement? AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2013 #16

you're stumped whether he's a corporatist or not? Doctor_J Sep 2013 #18

Obama's support of TPP is easily explained. HooptieWagon Sep 2013 #20

Obama has some tricks up his sleeve mwrguy Sep 2013 #24

Oh, good grief, REALLY? Th1onein Sep 2013 #31

I think mwrguy is being sarcastic Skittles Sep 2013 #35

gfbnr'tbj]pobm WilliamPitt Sep 2013 #63

As Ed says "Lets Get To Work" Left Coast2020 Sep 2013 #26

MSNBC will slap Ed down. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #53

"Besides the TPP is primarily a GOP initiative." not according to this solarhydrocan Sep 2013 #28

You mean the person I keep hearing is our inevitable next president? hughee99 Sep 2013 #125

Saw printouts for this 2naSalit Sep 2013 #29

Nth dimensional chess and shit, doncha know? Th1onein Sep 2013 #30

Isn't this the 124on234x234 time were Obama is "supposed" to fuck something up and doesn't? uponit7771 Sep 2013 #36

Virtually every facet of his .. sendero Sep 2013 #37

+1 That's it, right there. n/t Egalitarian Thug Sep 2013 #67

I wish people would stop pretending that this is a free trade agreement. Democracyinkind Sep 2013 #38

I don't understand it either. Looking for a good explanation. n/t Laelth Sep 2013 #39

Soybeans Recursion Sep 2013 #42

You sure this isn't a move to lock up markets before China can enter them? Laelth Sep 2013 #47

We need tariffs, not trade deals! B Calm Sep 2013 #40

Exactly. Enthusiast Sep 2013 #55

I guess your response means you aren't very willing to kickstart truedelphi Sep 2013 #103

If tariffs magically produced a strong middle class, FDR would have been for them not against them. pampango Sep 2013 #107

We didn't need tariffs in the 1930's and 40's. We had a strong union labor movement back then and B Calm Sep 2013 #108

People were not making a "livable wage" in the 1930's. FDR lowered tariffs because pampango Sep 2013 #113

Everybody loved FDR, but just like Obama, I don't agree with everything he did. B Calm Sep 2013 #115

Indeed we disagree. I think Europe proves that FDR's ideas still work today. pampango Sep 2013 #118

Ronald reagan was a globalist too. I am more B Calm Sep 2013 #120

"... the Smoot Hawley Tariff caused almost 0 damage to our economy" seems to be damning with faint pampango Sep 2013 #122

you're stumped? really? piratefish08 Sep 2013 #44

I don't understand why you are stumped. LWolf Sep 2013 #51

Payback For His Corporate Benefactors cantbeserious Sep 2013 #52

among other things for me. Puzzledtraveller Sep 2013 #54

How is this confusing? TBF Sep 2013 #56

Good synopsis. DADT and gay marriage didn't cost the owning class money Doctor_J Sep 2013 #68

I don't understand why a lot of seemingly-liberal Democratic Congresspeople support it either. Chan790 Sep 2013 #58

Where do they get the majority of their enlightenment Sep 2013 #61

The Supreme Court's decision for "Citizens United" allowed Corporations KoKo Sep 2013 #65

+1000 !!!! orpupilofnature57 Sep 2013 #79

Obama may be able to get 'fast track' and the TPP itself through the Senate, but pampango Sep 2013 #66

Hell the House will fight just because they hate him. TBF Sep 2013 #69

Part of it is racism and ODS but their base has been skeptical of trade for a long time. pampango Sep 2013 #71

That actually makes a lot of sense - TBF Sep 2013 #85

The house approved Obama's Korea free trade deal w/ 219 R's and 59 d's. pa28 Sep 2013 #74

The deal that Bush had largely crafted years ago, no surprise they supported it. tritsofme Sep 2013 #84

A thinking person has to wonder just how many tens of truedelphi Sep 2013 #112

Maybe the reason you don't understand it is... gulliver Sep 2013 #60

Give an example. WinkyDink Sep 2013 #117

SCOTUS deciding to give corporations the Privilege of Owning orpupilofnature57 Sep 2013 #78

23 cents an hour is more than is paid either to Salvation Army for Good Will handicapped workers. lonestarnot Sep 2013 #109

Oh no! Not the "Precious Merican Sovereignty" card!!! RB TexLa Sep 2013 #110

Yes, American workers should lose out to "the world." WinkyDink Sep 2013 #116

People in most places know their country is a small part of a big world and pampango Sep 2013 #119

I don't think it's exceptional for working people wanting more job protection. Globalists B Calm Sep 2013 #121

Of course not. The question is - do we the real protection of strong unions, progressive taxes and pampango Sep 2013 #124