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: The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Warnings From NAFTA [View all]pampango
(24,692 posts)33. I agree. But, on some level, I think that high standards were Obama's original goal.
(One administration strategy) will be the pursuit of trade agreements that notably do not include China. The most important of these is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a trade agreement among a growing list of nations bordering the Pacific. It is the Obama administrations avowed aim to construct a TPP with standards so high especially rules regarding behavior by state-owned enterprises that China could never join without transforming its economic system.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/12/10/u-s-china-economic-relations-in-the-wake-of-the-u-s-election/
http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/12/10/u-s-china-economic-relations-in-the-wake-of-the-u-s-election/
Obama seems to know that we cannot compete with China by lowering standards. China will always win that race. China is vulnerable to an agreement that raises standards since it cannot join unless it does the same. This is the what European countries get out of the EU. Membership brings no tariff barriers but high labor and environmental standards.
...the negotiation is subject to the U.S. domestic politics. At the very beginning of the negotiation, the United States reminded other countries that the U.S. Congress would not accept a TPP without strong labor and environmental measures. Obviously, the United States aims to lower the comparative advantages of developing countries so as to create more job opportunities for itself.
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90777/8113289.html
The report indicates that the United States has been pushing for tough environmental provisions, particularly legally binding language that would provide for sanctions against participating countries for environmental violations. The United States is also insisting that the nations follow existing global environmental treaties.
But many of those proposals are opposed by most or all of the other Pacific Rim nations working on the deal, including Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Chile, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Peru. Developing Asian countries, in particular, have long resisted outside efforts to enforce strong environmental controls, arguing that they could hurt their growing economies.
The report appears to indicate that the United States is losing many of those fights ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/us/politics/administration-is-seen-as-retreating-on-environment-in-talks-on-pacific-trade.html
But many of those proposals are opposed by most or all of the other Pacific Rim nations working on the deal, including Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Chile, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Peru. Developing Asian countries, in particular, have long resisted outside efforts to enforce strong environmental controls, arguing that they could hurt their growing economies.
The report appears to indicate that the United States is losing many of those fights ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/us/politics/administration-is-seen-as-retreating-on-environment-in-talks-on-pacific-trade.html
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
45 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
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
As flawed as this thing seems to be, perhaps just another 'free trade' agreement is what Obama
pampango
Jan 2014
#10
The European arrangement is a great example of a 'high standards' trade agreement.
pampango
Jan 2014
#11
Just let corporations sue villages for hurting their future profits, judged by
magical thyme
Jan 2014
#13
Tell that to Europeans. They seem to make 'free trade', democracy and income equality coexist. n/t
pampango
Jan 2014
#23
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
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
Nestle corporation sued Maine village after Maine village for the right to drill for our water
magical thyme
Jan 2014
#39
From the OP: "As has frequently been noted, the TPP is not really about trade."
pampango
Jan 2014
#12
"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
The number of manufacturing jobs has been going down at at steady rate since 1955.
pampango
Jan 2014
#30
Manufacturing jobs have declined in all developed countries at the same rate as in the US.
pampango
Jan 2014
#34
It seems to me that NAFTA gets blamed for things that went on for decades and happened equally in
pampango
Jan 2014
#38
Unlike Everyone Else, Some Big Political Donors Know What’s in the Trans-Pacific Partnership
octoberlib
Jan 2014
#20