General Discussion

susanna

(5,231 posts)

80. Yes. Wonderfully stated. n/t

Reply to JDPriestly (Reply #63)

Sat Jan 31, 2015, 02:17 AM

Jan 2015

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

156 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The point of TPP is to boost US exports. That's why PBO is behind it. [View all] ucrdem Jan 2015 OP

Might want to have a look at Think's thread. Scootaloo Jan 2015 #1

I noticed the writer admits that he is completely uninformed. ucrdem Jan 2015 #4

The AFLCIO has not received any information they requested. WaPo has their information for the story think Jan 2015 #7

Evidently the writer of your post is unaware of the internet ucrdem Jan 2015 #9

WaPo quoted the author of the research the jobs claim is made on. think Jan 2015 #14

Petri says job growth would oustrip job loss ucrdem Jan 2015 #16

Exactly. Andy823 Feb 2015 #146

Does the AFLCIO traditionally have a right to information from the Fed. Gov't while still in BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #13

Clearly candidate Obama felt so since he stated he would invite the AFLCIO to renegotiate NAFTA /nt think Jan 2015 #15

Well, that was *before* he understood what being president would be like. Then, when he entered the BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #39

He learned that only corporate big wigs get to make US trade policy? /nt think Jan 2015 #41

Oh brother. Um...no. eom BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #44

Well what did he learn that would make him decide to exclude labor from the discussion? think Jan 2015 #49

Swiftboating. It's no secret that labor is against anything that they perceive to be NAFTA-esque. BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #56

And why do you suppose that labor is against anythng NAFTA-esque. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #60

I'm not saying it's a BAD thing. I'm just pointing out their prejudice. BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #72

A secret trade document that the largest corporations helped write and you blame labor think Jan 2015 #61

I trust this president more than Labor. Sorry, but I haven't really had good experiences with Labor. BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #71

151 Democratic representatives from the house is alot of congress people to call out think Jan 2015 #79

You're entitled to your opinion. Anyway, do you know what the president wanted to fast-track BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #89

That bastion of conservative and libertarian ideology, the US Chamber neverforget Jan 2015 #103

Oh, hey, good, Union bashing from suppossed Democrats LondonReign2 Jan 2015 #105

how is that wrong exactly? Skittles Jan 2015 #54

Mahalo ucr Cha Jan 2015 #2

Thanks, Cha! ucrdem Jan 2015 #5

The PResident is after real Jobs for Americans.. we'll see what else he likes about this when Cha Jan 2015 #6

I think you are 110% right on the money. ucrdem Jan 2015 #10

KICK! Cha Jan 2015 #17

Were the 151 Democratic congress persons who raised their concerns "swiftboaters"? think Jan 2015 #42

Have Democrats in Congress ever really gotten President Obama's back in the past six years? BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #50

Dismissing the concerns of 151 Democratic congress persons is fairly egregious think Jan 2015 #58

Not dismissing those concerns. I'm questioning them. Fast-tracking TPP would mean that Republicans, BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #87

The link went to bed I guess madokie Jan 2015 #93

Why would Republicans add tons of amendments Oilwellian Jan 2015 #112

It is Democrats in congress complaining about Fast Track and NOT Republicans. think Jan 2015 #128

Make that 3. sheshe2 Jan 2015 #66

Thanks sheshe! ucrdem Jan 2015 #84

You are welcome urc.... sheshe2 Jan 2015 #88

Make it 4 madokie Jan 2015 #94

whoops ucrdem Jan 2015 #3

Thanks for posting this! I was looking for it in order to try and understand why Pres. Obama is BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #8

Thanks, BCD! ucrdem Jan 2015 #11

But the good stuff was just TheObamaDeception©. TheAnti-Christ© always does that. freshwest Jan 2015 #21

Or...they just say, "Don't believe him!" or "Sales pitch! I'm not buying it", forgetting, of course, BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #40

Even here I think a lot of it is madokie Jan 2015 #95

I didn't want to see it that way, but when I read some posts here and on other BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #113

I've learned that many of the people who I thought were alright madokie Jan 2015 #115

I've been disillusioned by many Liberals and Progressives who I thought were color blind, but BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #118

"... President Obama has yet to do anything that would harm the American worker ..." Scuba Jan 2015 #101

Yep. Hence the negative job growth since 2012 - Oh wait! BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #111

I have no hate for the President, but I don't figure the loss of 60,000 manufacturing jobs ... Scuba Jan 2015 #116

That's not how your posts come across, Scuba. Rarely do I see you praise the president BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #121

You must have missed a lot of my posts. Scuba Jan 2015 #135

You said Jamaal510 Jan 2015 #24

My thoughts exactly. I love Ed Schultz, but he's been wrong many times before compared to President BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #47

That and to push up wages in Vietnam and Honduras Recursion Jan 2015 #12

Thanks for that Recursion . . . ucrdem Jan 2015 #18

Obama claimed in 2008 that NAFTA cost America 1 million jobs. Was he wrong? think Jan 2015 #46

And rice. The U.S. has the BEST rice around. BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #43

Rice growing requires water. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #67

--->"Unlike China that has NO non-GMO rice"<---Source Please nationalize the fed Jan 2015 #75

No. No suggesting that at all...seriously or just for shits and giggles. I'm pointing out that BlueCaliDem Jan 2015 #91

First, before any new trade agreements, we have to get our balance of payments numbers under JDPriestly Jan 2015 #63

Yes. Wonderfully stated. n/t susanna Jan 2015 #80

But Stiglitz and Moyers hate Obama rusty fender Jan 2015 #129

Thank you, JD. We lose out every minute that we make deals with overseas Nay Jan 2015 #137

Thanks for posting fadedrose Jan 2015 #19

Exactly, I think he's out to get the best deal he can get for US workers. ucrdem Jan 2015 #20

Not as many haters as there were fadedrose Jan 2015 #117

What exactly is a "US export"? moondust Jan 2015 #22

From what I've read it's pharmaceuticals, instruments, media, ucrdem Jan 2015 #23

As for soybeans, moondust Jan 2015 #25

How the auto jobs and manufacturing Obama saved... I remember when American cars were the standard. freshwest May 2015 #149

Thanks freshwest! ucrdem May 2015 #152

American jobs to India, Russia, China, and the former Soviet Bloc. nt TheBlackAdder Jan 2015 #114

I see we've entered the "It's Actually a Good Thing!" part of the process. /nt Marr Jan 2015 #26

Yes, the corporate propaganda pushers for the 1% are out in full force. Elwood P Dowd Jan 2015 #27

He didn't run against free trade agreements, and if this was NAFTA, ucrdem Jan 2015 #29

Some people here act like Obama ran on a radical left-wing platform YoungDemCA Jan 2015 #53

Rose colored glasses. joshcryer Jan 2015 #65

He specifically promised to renegotiate NAFTA. Marr Jan 2015 #76

Yes, here let me take your job. It only hurts for a little while. And look at how good you will JDPriestly Jan 2015 #70

Excuse me for being skeptical. JEB Jan 2015 #28

"U.S. Call for Environmental Defense in Trans-Pacific Partnership": ucrdem Jan 2015 #30

Nice sales pitch. JEB Jan 2015 #31

Campaign speech. 2naSalit Jan 2015 #33

If it's such a sell-out, why is it taking so long to finish? ucrdem Jan 2015 #35

Then why the sections allowing corporate thugs to overrule elected governments? n/t eridani Jan 2015 #32

Can you post those sections? ucrdem Jan 2015 #34

All there in Wikileaks. eridani Jan 2015 #68

Right, the secret IP agreement that's been leaked once a month ucrdem Jan 2015 #73

It's the trade courts. The courts patterned after the NAFTA courts. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #74

Okay but the treaty being negotiated isn't NAFTA. ucrdem Jan 2015 #78

Could you, ucrdem, please post the TPP agreement since you are advocating for it so strongly? JDPriestly Jan 2015 #77

Happy to oblige: ucrdem Jan 2015 #83

That is not a trade agreement. That is an absolutely worthless, vague and very general JDPriestly Jan 2015 #86

How can one oppose it, or bash Obama, for that same reason? Hoyt Jan 2015 #90

One can oppose trade agreements in general. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #98

I guess if one thinks we are self-sufficient and should stick to the rest of the world. I don't. Hoyt Jan 2015 #124

Several reasons. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #131

I don't think you get where you want to be by isolation, particularly in the long run. Hoyt Jan 2015 #133

I'm not suggesting isolation. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #136

AAAAAAAAMEN. nt Nay Jan 2015 #139

I agree - vagueness of the language leaves the actual action open to a whole bunch of differing jwirr Jan 2015 #127

Good idea. But the paper is just full of noble-sounding intentions. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #132

That's not an intellectually honest question YoungDemCA Jan 2015 #55

Horsehit. This abomination exists to enable corporations to sue governments eridani Jan 2015 #69

"The point of TPP is to boost US exports" Joe Turner Jan 2015 #36

American jobs were going with or without NAFTA. NAFTA gets blamed for a lot of junk Hoyt Jan 2015 #38

American jobs were going with or without NAFTA Joe Turner Jan 2015 #48

Not like they were starting in the late 1990s after NAFTA, GATT/WTO Uruguay round, MFN for China Elwood P Dowd Jan 2015 #59

Thank goodness, one of only a few threads not bashing Obama for selling us down the river with TPP. Hoyt Jan 2015 #37

we're just supposed to BELIEVE, Hoyt Skittles Jan 2015 #51

It's the other way round on DU treestar Feb 2015 #145

I disagree Skittles Feb 2015 #147

There is the question of how people work for those corporations treestar Feb 2015 #148

With TPP Obama certainly is selling us down the river Joe Turner Jan 2015 #52

This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Jan 2015 #45

Before we enter into any more trade agreements we need to fix our balance of payments numbers. JDPriestly Jan 2015 #57

That, and to leverage consumer products as automation comes online. joshcryer Jan 2015 #62

Well, this is sure to piss Putin off!! Major Hogwash Jan 2015 #64

Unless it lowers imports more, it's just more of a race to the bottom Populist_Prole Jan 2015 #81

KnR to read more about the TPP later.... Hekate Jan 2015 #82

I think we're going to pleasantly surprised ucrdem Jan 2015 #85

Thanks so much ucrdem. great white snark Jan 2015 #92

I wasn't one of the ones who liked it when he said God is in the mix. Jamastiene Jan 2015 #96

Boost Exports, yeah jobs, oil and US Dollars is the only thing that will be exported ChosenUnWisely Jan 2015 #97

That thing will be a calamity. BeanMusical Jan 2015 #99

Exports are 40% of Germany's economy; 9% of the US'. Imports are 35% in Germany; 13% in the US. pampango Jan 2015 #100

We've heard this song before.. sendero Jan 2015 #102

I want to thank the Third Way "Democrats" for their input in this LondonReign2 Jan 2015 #104

So anyone with a different opinion is "Third Way" and a member of the BOG? Nice. pampango Jan 2015 #107

Anyone who thinks a treaty that is negotiated in secret, LondonReign2 Jan 2015 #120

All international treaties are negotiated 'in secret'. Should liberals oppose all treaties? pampango Jan 2015 #122

Folks seem uninformed..as you say treaties are ALWAYS negotiated in secret, voted in in public. Duh. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #126

Extolling the virtues of the Third Way? LondonReign2 Jan 2015 #130

Nice spin. I said "even if I disagree with the rest" and "reject most of what they peddle". That pampango Jan 2015 #134

lol Bobbie Jo Jan 2015 #138

Illogical knee-jerk reaction? YoungDemCA Feb 2015 #140

It's an illogical knee-jerk reaction to despise the Third Way for trying to LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #141

I think that pretty much nails it, scary. Broward Jan 2015 #108

I also want to thank them for rec'ing the thread. It is nice to have a concise list. Warren Stupidity Jan 2015 #110

Yep, that basically sums up the "arguments" on display here. QC Jan 2015 #123

We had a hell of a storm three years ago and Jesus suggested we go with a metal roof. Autumn Feb 2015 #142

"extremely child like and well, just fucking stupid" QC Feb 2015 #143

Some people will believe any damn thing. 99Forever Jan 2015 #106

Stuck in spin cycle. Call the repairman. Warren Stupidity Jan 2015 #109

How is there an assumption of knowledge, let alone accuracy. The fucking deal is a secret. Yeah lonestarnot Jan 2015 #119

fact checker: imports would increase by virtually the same amount as exports bigtree Jan 2015 #125

True. As is the case the other FTAs Populist_Prole Feb 2015 #144

Logic checker: increased trade means increased jobs...for both partners. Obama is correct. Fred Sanders May 2015 #153

reality check bigtree May 2015 #155

For that claim to be true, the TPP would need to cover countries with trade barriers jeff47 May 2015 #150

So let's have a full and open debate on TPP in Congress rurallib May 2015 #151

the only "export" under TPP would be filthy, Earth-warming fossil fuels- tar sands oil& fracked gas TimeToEvolve May 2015 #154

Oh Boy ! kentuck May 2015 #156