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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brentspeak

(18,290 posts)
34. I see you've thrown in the towel
Mon Feb 3, 2014, 09:02 PM
Feb 2014

By trotting out the same old Pew chart which I've called you out on about 12 times already on this website. When all else fails in your attempt to pimp US Chamber of Commerce job-killing free trade propaganda, try to make it appear as if those opposed to today's job-killing free trade deals are no different than Tea Party Republicans.

But, yet again, what you always conveniently fail to highlight is that it was the Tea Party Republicans themselves who have been instrumental in passing the job-killing free trade deals in the first place. And it's been the Democrats who have been trying to stop them:


http://firedoglake.com/2011/10/12/job-killing-trade-deals-pass-congress-amidst-record-democratic-opposition/

Job-Killing Trade Deals Pass Congress Amidst Record Democratic Opposition

...

Given the strong Democratic opposition, ultimately it was the Tea Party GOP freshmen who passed these job-killing deals (Bush and Obama's brokered KORUS, Panama and Colombian deals) despite their campaign commitments at home to stand up for Main Street businesses, against more job offshoring and for Buy American requirements.


"Democrats favor stronger relations with China. Republicans favor getting tougher with China. Getting tougher with China may not be the liberal policy you think it is."

Actually it is, as is opposing today's "free trade" agreements:



http://firedoglake.com/2011/10/12/job-killing-trade-deals-pass-congress-amidst-record-democratic-opposition/

Record of Congressional Democratic Opposition to Democratic Presidents on Trade Pacts

-82.3% of House Democrats opposed the Colombia FTA (158 Democrats against, 31 for)
-67.7% of House Democrats opposed the Korea FTA (130 Democrats against, 59 for)
-64,1% of House Democrats opposed the Panama FTA (123 Democrats against, 66 for)
-60.6% of Democrats opposed NAFTA (1993)
-35% opposed the WTO (1994)
-65.56% opposed China PNTR (2000)

Record of Congressional Democratic Opposition to GOP Presidents on Trade Pacts

-62.6% opposed the Chile FTA (2003)
-62.14% opposed the Singapore FTA (2003)
-41.3% opposed the Australia FTA (2004)
-39.32% opposed the Morocco FTA (2004)
-92.6% opposed the Central America Free Trade Agreement (2005)
-40.4% opposed the Bahrain FTA (2005)
-87.6% opposed the Oman FTA (2006)
slightly more than half opposed the Peru FTA (2007)


Since it was Tea Party Republicans who helped pass the latest free trade deals, and since it were Democrats who've been opposed to the deals being passed, it appears as though you have a lot more in common with the Tea Party -- and lot less common in common with liberals and Democrats -- than you let on.

Recommendations

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

Other nations have very strong tariff systems in place. truedelphi Feb 2014 #1
Couldn't agree more! K&R It's pretty simple, B Calm Feb 2014 #2
+100. closeupready Feb 2014 #3
No. Getting rid of high tariffs was a big progressive win in the early 20th century. pampango Feb 2014 #4
"high tariffs" are one thing; like any other regulation, tariffs can and should be used TheFrenchRazor Feb 2014 #5
Ah, yes, you again, with the corporate propaganda brentspeak Feb 2014 #6
+1 B Calm Feb 2014 #7
I think FDR was a "globalist" too so the term does not bother me. n/t pampango Feb 2014 #9
Yes the RTAA was FDR's first step in reversing high tariffs followed by GATT and the ITO. pampango Feb 2014 #8
"corporations thrived under high tariffs then at the expense of the working class" brentspeak Feb 2014 #22
Exactly. Historically corporations have thrived and the working class suffered under both high and pampango Feb 2014 #26
You might need a lifesaver jacket brentspeak Feb 2014 #29
The VAT is not a tariff. The VAT effects the final cost of imports and domestic products equally. pampango Feb 2014 #31
You continue to make stuff up brentspeak Feb 2014 #32
Fine. So the "Import Turnover Tax" is "the equal of the domestic VAT". When you combine the two pampango Feb 2014 #33
I see you've thrown in the towel brentspeak Feb 2014 #34
You are really good at titles for your posts. :) pampango Feb 2014 #48
There is no voter "partisan attitude" about US policy towards China brentspeak Feb 2014 #50
Yes there is. Even the poll you reference shows republicans want more to 'get tough' with China. pampango Feb 2014 #53
Doesn't say much about the quality of your posts here brentspeak Feb 2014 #58
Ditto. The links you posted to make your case were to posts from a "banned troll". pampango Feb 2014 #60
You just nailed the problem with modern "free trade" agreements Armstead Feb 2014 #24
"What do you think these current "free trade" agreements are intended to do?" pampango Feb 2014 #27
Motives and sources of power are what is really important Armstead Feb 2014 #28
Are you really suggesting that the global economy in the 1920's - 1930's has any Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #51
I believe that history is relevant. And I believe that the experience of other countries is too. pampango Feb 2014 #54
So, you choose to ignore the question. Completely expected. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #55
You asked: "Are you really suggesting that the global economy in the 1920's - 1930's has any pampango Feb 2014 #56
Thanks for answering. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #57
kick B Calm Feb 2014 #10
Let me know how you plan to re-implement tariffs... Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #11
Want to be more specific on raw materials and energy we need? B Calm Feb 2014 #12
Nine million barrels of oil a day, for a start Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #13
The earth receives enough energy from the sun in B Calm Feb 2014 #14
Let me know when you have enough installed solar capacity for that. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #15
I say we start with the tariffs, maybe then we could B Calm Feb 2014 #16
Tariffs lead to trade wars. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #17
If we just had FAIR tariffs it would be a huge start! B Calm Feb 2014 #18
Define "fair"? Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #19
Not laissez-faire capitalism! B Calm Feb 2014 #20
So... Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #21
No - Fair means developing nations do not become colonies of multinational corporations Armstead Feb 2014 #25
Considering that we are the #1 exporter of raw materials to China brentspeak Feb 2014 #23
We export virtually zero oil. mathematic Feb 2014 #30
The US does not export oil. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #35
Uh, we import crude when we really don't need to brentspeak Feb 2014 #36
I see you don't understand economics. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #37
You claimed that the US can't produce 9 million barrels of oil/day brentspeak Feb 2014 #38
I linked you to figures that say the US doesn't. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #39
That wasn't you who said we need "9 million barrels/day"? brentspeak Feb 2014 #40
Either you're being wilfully obtuse or you're remarkably dense Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #41
So when you said that we need to produce 9 million barrels/day brentspeak Feb 2014 #42
No, I said the US needs to import nine million barrels a day. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #43
What I'd prefer you to clear up brentspeak Feb 2014 #44
Who said anything about tariffs on China? Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #45
The OP did not say uniform tariffs on every country for every product Armstead Feb 2014 #46
Again, you clearly don't understand economics. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2014 #47
re introduce tariffs frwrfpos Feb 2014 #49
Only two of the DU Corporate Warrior Brigade? It was a Sunday, I suppose. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #52
Free trade = Chineses wages + American prices - good jobs. nt TheFrenchRazor Feb 2014 #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Tariffs were very strong ...»Reply #34