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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: America is about to make a horrible mistake all over again [View all]jeff47
(26,549 posts)50. Because there's no reason to not believe it.
the "good parts" would be the openly available USTR's Negotiating Objectives
No, those are the claimed goals of the TPP. There is no reason to believe that those goals are being achieved. Nor is there any reason to believe those goals are achieved by the specifics in the agreement.
Remember, we constantly have to battle Democrats who believe NAFTA was good for US jobs.
Trade agreements will NEVER be a "liberal nirvana", and it has never been cast as such
OH MY GOD SOMEONE USED HYPERBOLE!! THAT IS NOT ALLOWED!!!!
The counter-argument is that the "job loss" argument is speculative, based on previous agreements that did NOT have worker and environmental protections in the trade partner countries.
Apparently you're not familiar with NAFTA. It had a retraining program and supposedly required worker and environmental protections. Those protections were poorly designed enough to be meaningless. And without the specifics of the TPP, we have no reason to believe they got it right this time - the same people swore they got it right last time.
It doesn't require much in the way of worker and environmental protections to stem the tide of labor arbitrage
That would be true if worker and environmental protections were the main driver of higher US labor costs. They aren't. Cost of living is.
especially when the off-shoring trend is already reversing itself do to the inefficiencies that have been realized, e.g., the design/engineering to production to design/engineering lag, the customer service language barrier issues, etc.
Except the jobs that are being "re-shored" do not come remotely close to offsetting the jobs lost. "Re-shored" manufacturing is far more automated than it was when it left the US. So you bring the factory back to the US and hire 5 workers instead of 500.
Design/engineering didn't leave the US to begin with, and customer service jobs offer nothing like the pay and benefits of manufacturing jobs.
the bigger concern regarding STEM jobs is the broken American H1-B program
Yes, I left that out since I was talking about those who lose manufacturing jobs. Even without H1Bs, anyone over 40 will have a very hard time moving into STEM from manufacturing. You really need at least 4-year degree to even make an attempt at entering the field. Some retraining won't cut it. Add in the massive age bias in most STEM hiring, and that older person will have a very hard time switching to a STEM job.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
123 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
Well NAFTA was literally a Republican deal, originated, negotiated and signed by George Bush
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#3
Why did Clinton "walk through" a republican deal? He sold it to Americans! Myself included.
RiverLover
May 2015
#5
Bill kept NAFTA because he was wrong. Why did the author of this piece leave Bush out of the NAFTA
Bluenorthwest
May 2015
#10
The reason that Bush wasn't mentioned is a distraction from the point of the OP.
rhett o rick
May 2015
#69
+1! Warren gave good ex of this, a French company that sued Egypt because Egypt raised its minimum
RiverLover
May 2015
#97
Well, you kind of miss one important point -- the state can sue the corporation in their own courts.
Hoyt
May 2015
#112
Can you point to one case where the corporation won on raising minimum wage, anti-smoking campaigns?
Hoyt
May 2015
#114
Definitely Poppy's brain child. On the other hand Bubba did a lot more than merely walk it through.
merrily
May 2015
#30
I'll bet many of us mocked Ross Perot and his "giant sucking sound," though. J/S.
WinkyDink
May 2015
#4
Not me. I didn't vote for Perot, but whatever else you may have thought of him,
maddiemom
May 2015
#6
Same, I knew these bastards were waiting like a spider in a web to ship high-paying jobs elsewhere.
BlueJazz
May 2015
#19
No regrets for me at all voting for Perot. He was far from ideal I understand that also.
Person 2713
May 2015
#31
Right? He came across as a dweeb, really a shame. The message got lost in the messenger. nt
RiverLover
May 2015
#12
My Favorite Wingnut uses that phrase all the time in attacking Clinton.
Jackpine Radical
May 2015
#35
Its getting old. Really old. We're the perpetual Bad News Bears, always losing to corporations
RiverLover
May 2015
#15
Healthcare reform failed every previous time (for the last 50 years), too ...
1StrongBlackMan
May 2015
#43
Failing to pass proposals and actually passing failures is a nonsensical comparison
TheKentuckian
May 2015
#76
I love it when advocates of single payer attack ACA as "just insurance reform"...
Recursion
May 2015
#106
Apparently you don't, since you mentioned Europe. I don't think any European country
Recursion
May 2015
#110
No, every country we trade with does not get onto status. It's what used to be called most favored
hedda_foil
May 2015
#92
So without NAFTA, "they" would have stayed in the US for another "year or two" and then "moved
pampango
May 2015
#75
According the CEO types in this country Americans don't WANT manufacturing jobs....
Spitfire of ATJ
May 2015
#38
Raise your hand if you think this makes her extremely vulnerable in the general
BrotherIvan
May 2015
#57
Every president must leave office, but not before setting in motion the means to fuck over
whereisjustice
May 2015
#85