The really question about TPP is; "Do we need to sell our stuff to the 5 Billion in the Pacific rim"

[FBaggins]

112. Sigh.... sorry I gave you the benefit of the doubt.

The post I replied to asked whether prior trade agreements had any positive effect on the 99%. I answered that, yes, they had made the products that the 99% buys more affordable. That's where your #87 came in.

Silly me to assume that you were replying in context. My apologies. What you actually meant was that you have nothing to add about the impact of trade agreements but just thought you would throw in there something that was true if we expanded it to a period unrelated to the conversation? Ok... now I've got it.

However, it doesn't matter that a claim of yours may have absolutely nothing to do with trade?

You've provided zero evidence that gains post-NAFTA were unrelated. All I did was point out that it certainly isn't evidence for the contrary position.

10% of 19.18, while not nuthin'. is not what America was promised about NAFTA.

I have no idea what promises you're thinking of... but if you told me that TPP would improve real hourly wages by 10% over a couple decades... I'd be pretty excited. Note that one of the benefits of appropriate trade (call it free/fair/whatever) is to lift poverty-stricken people up... and there's no question that it has done that for hundreds of millions of them. To do that and still make any gains in real wages in wealthy countries is incredible.

BTW, I wonder how many jobs were represented in by a single household in 1964 versus how many today?

Certainly fewer. There were far more middle class households with a single earner than today.