Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If not Hillary, Who? [View all]solarhydrocan
(551 posts)19. Do you support the Trans Pacific Partnership?
Hillary does, and worked on the content.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership: A Trade Agreement for Protectionists
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-baker/the-trans-pacific-partner_b_4172087.html
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) stands at the top of the Obama administration's trade agenda. The argument from its supporters is that this agreement is part of the never-ending quest for freer trade. The evidence from what we know of this still secret pact is that the TPP has little to do with free trade. It can more accurately be described as a pact designed to increase the wealth and power of crony capitalists.
At this point, with few exceptions formal trade barriers, such as tariffs and quotas, are not very large. If lowering or eliminating the formal barriers that remain were the main agenda of this pact, there would be relatively little interest. Rather, the purpose of the pact is to use an international trade agreement to create a regulatory structure that is much more favorable to corporate interests than they would be able to get through the domestic political process in the United States and in the other countries in the pact.
The gap between free trade and the agenda of the TPP is clearest in the case of prescription drugs. The U.S. drug companies have a major seat at the negotiating table. They will be trying to craft rules that increase the strength of patent and related protections. The explicit purpose is to raise (as in, not lower) the price of drugs in the countries signing the TPP.
Note that this goal is the opposite of what we would expect in an agreement designed to promote free trade. Instead of having drug companies at the table, we might envision that we would have representatives of consumer groups who would try to negotiate rules that could ensure safe drugs at lower prices. Instead of using a "trade" agreement to try to push drug prices in other countries up, we could actually use trade to bring the price of drugs in the United States down to the levels seen elsewhere...SNIP MORE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-baker/the-trans-pacific-partner_b_4172087.html
At this point, with few exceptions formal trade barriers, such as tariffs and quotas, are not very large. If lowering or eliminating the formal barriers that remain were the main agenda of this pact, there would be relatively little interest. Rather, the purpose of the pact is to use an international trade agreement to create a regulatory structure that is much more favorable to corporate interests than they would be able to get through the domestic political process in the United States and in the other countries in the pact.
The gap between free trade and the agenda of the TPP is clearest in the case of prescription drugs. The U.S. drug companies have a major seat at the negotiating table. They will be trying to craft rules that increase the strength of patent and related protections. The explicit purpose is to raise (as in, not lower) the price of drugs in the countries signing the TPP.
Note that this goal is the opposite of what we would expect in an agreement designed to promote free trade. Instead of having drug companies at the table, we might envision that we would have representatives of consumer groups who would try to negotiate rules that could ensure safe drugs at lower prices. Instead of using a "trade" agreement to try to push drug prices in other countries up, we could actually use trade to bring the price of drugs in the United States down to the levels seen elsewhere...SNIP MORE
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-baker/the-trans-pacific-partner_b_4172087.html
Hopefully the nominee will be someone that does not support the TPP.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
102 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
A "campaign in waiting", my ass. It's a propaganda campaign, intended to intimidate
winter is coming
Nov 2013
#72
In case you haven't noticed, everyone's popularity has gone down. People are sick of politicians.
Beacool
Nov 2013
#86
Elizabeth Warren would make an excellent candidate. She thinks well on her feet and
bluestate10
Oct 2013
#7
She said she is not running and has endorsed Hillary so she is not an option. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2013
#43
You mean we shouldn't expect the person touted as true to their values to be just that?
stevenleser
Nov 2013
#65
I am a huge Hillary fan, but I don't understand the need to call it for her now...
cynatnite
Oct 2013
#8
I don't think a focus on the White House is why the GOP does so well at midterms...
bobclark86
Nov 2013
#48
Don't forget their young white offspring who I bet couldn't even name the last 5 prez & VPs nt
Laura PourMeADrink
Nov 2013
#102
I can only think of 3 people in Congress that carry themselves like candidates...
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
Oct 2013
#35
The Republicans are not likely to offer a candidate that sensible people can vote for.
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#34
Clinton II will be a kick-ass/take names/no prisoners president and we all know that.
DonCoquixote
Oct 2013
#29
You must have half of DU on ignore if you believe "we all know that". n/t
winter is coming
Nov 2013
#55
Warren's good. Unlike Clinton, she's an intellectual titan, progressive and people *like* her.
Smarmie Doofus
Oct 2013
#40
For starters? How about someone who's not an Old Rich White Establishment Person?
cherokeeprogressive
Nov 2013
#47
...and the progressives have MONTHS to sit behind their computers complaining...
brooklynite
Nov 2013
#93
We don't have to go dredging the same lakes for the same tired candidates you know.
ScreamingMeemie
Nov 2013
#61
a populist liberal such as Warren or Sanders, and I don't give a damn if people think they don't
liberal_at_heart
Nov 2013
#74