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
S. Korea places arbitrary safety regulations to keep my company's products out of their market Kolesar Jan 2014 #1
how about trade agreements that don't travel so far afield and stick to, you know, actual, trade cali Jan 2014 #2
"actual, trade practices of actual governments?" Kolesar Jan 2014 #5
As flawed as this thing seems to be, perhaps just another 'free trade' agreement is what Obama pampango Jan 2014 #10
You have NO Right to sell your crap in S. Korea fasttense Jan 2014 #7
That was obtuse . Kolesar Jan 2014 #8
The European arrangement is a great example of a 'high standards' trade agreement. pampango Jan 2014 #11
Thank you. People don't have a right to go where they aren't wanted. LuvNewcastle Jan 2014 #16
The problem is, the people have no say. ronnie624 Jan 2014 #40
"What is your solution to those trade barriers?" Enthusiast Jan 2014 #9
Just let corporations sue villages for hurting their future profits, judged by magical thyme Jan 2014 #13
+1. These free trade agreements undermine democracy. octoberlib Jan 2014 #18
Tell that to Europeans. They seem to make 'free trade', democracy and income equality coexist. n/t pampango Jan 2014 #23
They aren't making lowest-common-denominator trade agreements. (nt) jeff47 Jan 2014 #27
Exactly. They prefer 'high-standards' agreements. n/t pampango Jan 2014 #29
And if we were doing that, the TPP might be a good idea. We're not doing that. (nt) jeff47 Jan 2014 #31
I agree. But, on some level, I think that high standards were Obama's original goal. pampango Jan 2014 #33
"High Standards" bvar22 Jan 2014 #41
I did not mean to defend 'voluntary' self-oversight by corporations. Quite the opposite. pampango Jan 2014 #42
Then WHY are you pimping the "High Standards" that have so far been completely absent... bvar22 Jan 2014 #43
I don't consider posting what I find about the original goals of the TPP to be 'pimping'. pampango Jan 2014 #44
I've often wondered what would happen... Buns_of_Fire Jan 2014 #25
Nestle corporation sued Maine village after Maine village for the right to drill for our water magical thyme Jan 2014 #39
The secrecy of this thing should be what's highlighted... orpupilofnature57 Jan 2014 #3
NAFTA: 20 years of regret for Mexico solarhydrocan Jan 2014 #4
From the OP: "As has frequently been noted, the TPP is not really about trade." pampango Jan 2014 #12
From your post: "NAFTA was all about trade" solarhydrocan Jan 2014 #21
Good points. Here are my reponses: pampango Jan 2014 #26
NAFTA - leveling the playing field to a swamp for workers KG Jan 2014 #6
"This is in spite of the fact that Mexico had the second slowest growth on any country in Progressive dog Jan 2014 #14
Makes you think that the US would have lost those jobs eventually to wherever Mexico lost them pampango Jan 2014 #15
read Meyerson's article. cali Jan 2014 #17
Myerson concludes: pampango Jan 2014 #22
Wages went up. Number of jobs went waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down. jeff47 Jan 2014 #28
The number of manufacturing jobs has been going down at at steady rate since 1955. pampango Jan 2014 #30
As long as you ignore population growth. jeff47 Jan 2014 #32
Manufacturing jobs have declined in all developed countries at the same rate as in the US. pampango Jan 2014 #34
I'm not the one saying it's all NAFTA's fault. jeff47 Jan 2014 #35
It seems to me that NAFTA gets blamed for things that went on for decades and happened equally in pampango Jan 2014 #38
Exactly Progressive dog Jan 2014 #19
Unlike Everyone Else, Some Big Political Donors Know What’s in the Trans-Pacific Partnership octoberlib Jan 2014 #20
The most telling ProSense Jan 2014 #24
Message auto-removed Name removed Jan 2014 #36
whatever, honeypie. cali Jan 2014 #37
K & R AzDar Jan 2014 #45
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Trans-Pacific Partner...»Reply #31