General Discussion

merrily

(45,251 posts)

30. That's not the answer the Koch brothers get.

Sun May 24, 2015, 03:22 AM

May 2015

The issue is not exact wording and punctuation, much as it was not the the issue with the ACA, which we were not fully informed about.

"Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage."

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/14/politics/obamacare-voters-stupid-explainer/

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/224490-gruber-frequently-visited-white-house

By the time the treaty does exist in final form, we'll be told it's way too far down the road to do anything about it now.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/03/10/irans-foreign-minister-schools-gop-traitors-constitution-international-law.html

(The title of the article at the above link is misleading. The Constitution says it is the highest law of our country; and the highest law of our country requires the advise and consent of the Senate to treaties.)

Anyway, Catch 22.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

187 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can we agree that jobs are not the problem with TPP? [View all] ucrdem May 2015 OP

Nice charts. Expect *incoming* though! n/t freshwest May 2015 #1

Thanks fresh! ucrdem May 2015 #2

Worker rights protections, comparison of TPP to NAFTA: ucrdem May 2015 #3

Senator Warren Has Pointed Out The Truth - No Trade Protection Follow Through By The US cantbeserious May 2015 #6

Yes but she's looking in the rear-view. ucrdem May 2015 #8

If You Believe That anything Will Change With TPP - Well ... cantbeserious May 2015 #10

I got this neat mountain to sell him... eloydude May 2015 #135

Those who disregard their history are doomed to repeat it. merrily May 2015 #26

Right... daleanime May 2015 #155

Worker Rights, text and chart (bigger): ucrdem May 2015 #93

Nope. Not in the least. mikehiggins May 2015 #134

1.8 million new US jobs supported by exports: ucrdem May 2015 #4

If those charts are correct, we're doing just fine without the TPP, and will continue to do so. arcane1 May 2015 #126

Good point, but there's some variation in the numbers ucrdem May 2015 #127

Gee... why just exports, not *net* exports? MannyGoldstein May 2015 #129

You're talking about balance of payments? ucrdem May 2015 #131

It doesn't look that way to me. PETRUS May 2015 #137

Trade balance MannyGoldstein May 2015 #150

Okay. US trade balance seems to reflect total US trade volume ucrdem May 2015 #156

Doesn't seem terribly problematic? PETRUS May 2015 #162

The TPP already got someone a job ...making up those pdf's. L0oniX May 2015 #171

Jobs And Job Protection Is The Problem cantbeserious May 2015 #5

Yes, that's the idea of the thread, to identify how TPP is addressing these two issues. ucrdem May 2015 #7

Fool Me Once ... cantbeserious May 2015 #9

Okay but offshoring is created by tax incentives, not by trade deals. ucrdem May 2015 #12

Well I Guess Delusional Thinking Is Rampant And The Government Insists We Believe It cantbeserious May 2015 #17

Well, Carlin's a funny guy but he's definitely not the government . . . ucrdem May 2015 #18

As I See Things America Is A Shell Of Itself - Thanks To Bad Trade Deals cantbeserious May 2015 #19

It isn't secret. The reasons we can't see it is that it doesn't exist. ucrdem May 2015 #22

Yeah Right - Drafts Of The Document Do Exist - Even So, Why Can't We Read The Final For Review cantbeserious May 2015 #25

It's not a "rigged process," it's how our government works. ucrdem May 2015 #29

Yeah Right - How Much More Rigged Could The Process Be With The 1% Represented But Not The 99% cantbeserious May 2015 #32

Agreed, and remember the Congressional Budget Office found that NAFTA didn't cause job okaawhatever May 2015 #40

And Why Would Anyone Believe Anything The Government Says cantbeserious May 2015 #41

Because the Congressional Budget Office's data is highly respected. They are non-partisan & okaawhatever May 2015 #45

In The Modern Error - All Government Data Is Politicized - Why Else Have Secret Trade Deals cantbeserious May 2015 #49

The modern error seems to be everywhere these days. ucrdem May 2015 #52

It isn't a secret trade deal. It's a secret trade negotiation. Once the deal is finalized there will okaawhatever May 2015 #71

Interesting, I didn't know about the CBO study. ucrdem May 2015 #48

Yeah, that is part of the problem. There are too many moving pieces for the average journalist okaawhatever May 2015 #67

Deals written by lobbiests? AgingAmerican May 2015 #61

That's not the answer the Koch brothers get. merrily May 2015 #30

LOL, I doubt it. ucrdem May 2015 #36

No clue what your post is supposed to mean, but no worries. merrily May 2015 #43

I answered before your edits, which are equally baffling to me. nt ucrdem May 2015 #44

Before or after edits, your reply is not comprehensible to me, but, again, no worries. merrily May 2015 #46

So the charts in the OP are made-up hype and bullshit which should not be believed. bananas May 2015 #51

No, they are not. ucrdem May 2015 #53

If it doesn't exist yet, the charts are meaningless AgingAmerican May 2015 #60

It's an agenda. That's the title: President's Trade Agenda. ucrdem May 2015 #73

Do the GOP and corporate lobbyists have that agenda? AgingAmerican May 2015 #152

They have to be made up. earthside May 2015 #111

It is classified Top Secret AgingAmerican May 2015 #57

So I guess the OP is like Snowden revealing top secrets. L0oniX May 2015 #170

Well, since neither revealed any secrets, you have a point. nt ucrdem May 2015 #173

Offshoring is not created by tax incentives. lancer78 May 2015 #132

Growth of US manufacturing jobs: ucrdem May 2015 #11

What TPA is and isn't ucrdem May 2015 #13

Forgot to Rec. This is a bad time to get rated for more input. Almost 1 AM Pacific. Gotta go! freshwest May 2015 #14

Oh dang. Thanks for the heads up fresh. ucrdem May 2015 #15

p.s. that's the problem with this thing -- it's ginormous! ucrdem May 2015 #24

I can agree that whoring for corporations is what TPP is about n/t eridani May 2015 #16

Small business agenda: ucrdem May 2015 #21

Nothing says bullshit like corporate produced color glossy brochures eridani May 2015 #28

I thought you said corporations loved it? ucrdem May 2015 #33

Corporate bullshitters can afford glossy propaganda eridani May 2015 #35

El Salvador is not in the Pacific Rim. ucrdem May 2015 #38

El Salvador is in the Pacific Rim AgingAmerican May 2015 #65

LOL, you got me. But it's not a current TPP signatory. They are: ucrdem May 2015 #66

Then they are more fortunate than we AgingAmerican May 2015 #68

Nothing says bullshit like readersupportednews & common dreams. nt okaawhatever May 2015 #47

So sorry they aren't Republican enough for you n/t eridani May 2015 #139

No, they aren't accurate enough for me. I don't want propaganda, I want information. nt okaawhatever May 2015 #147

They are more accurate about TPP than anything the corporate whores have put out n/t eridani May 2015 #148

Nnnnnnope. cherokeeprogressive May 2015 #20

.... Art_from_Ark May 2015 #23

No, and jobs are by far not the only problem, either. Next question. merrily May 2015 #27

as GWBush called it, catapulting the propaganda. sure are pretty pictures n graphics tho nt msongs May 2015 #31

If you can't read the text, click the link and read the PDF in your browser. ucrdem May 2015 #34

Looks so slick as to be.. sendero May 2015 #97

Only a vicious amoral sociopath could be in favor of the following-- eridani May 2015 #37

Again? ucrdem May 2015 #39

You, like Senator Warren, don't do any research on the junk you post. For example, Hoyt May 2015 #116

Who should pay for it is obviously the little people eridani May 2015 #141

Usually when corporations fail, they pay arbitration costs. Hoyt May 2015 #142

As long as they don't mind killing their citizens to boost Big Pharma profits eridani May 2015 #146

Actually, you should read about drug costs in poor countries. Brand name drugs are Hoyt May 2015 #149

That's what the TPP is for--actively preventing ngegotiated drug prices. n/t eridani May 2015 #151

Well there goes more of our sovereignty but not the global corporations sovereignty. L0oniX May 2015 #172

Not about jobs, huh? Art_from_Ark May 2015 #42

Can you give any more info on the study? ucrdem May 2015 #50

Here's an article from the Japan Times that provides some background Art_from_Ark May 2015 #56

Okay thanks, but note the first one is two years old, ucrdem May 2015 #64

The last article is from last week Art_from_Ark May 2015 #72

Okay thanks. ucrdem May 2015 #75

No, the last article on my list is from this month Art_from_Ark May 2015 #76

Yes I gather. But I said your first link. ucrdem May 2015 #77

Okay #2 is from July 2013, and #3 is asking for transparency ucrdem May 2015 #87

oops .. wrong place ucrdem May 2015 #74

so basically the us would export cheap rice to japan questionseverything May 2015 #110

That table is far fetched shaayecanaan May 2015 #88

Sugar beets in Japan are used to make oligosaccharide Art_from_Ark May 2015 #90

That just reveals how fundamentally dishonest this is shaayecanaan May 2015 #140

So good that it's top secret!! AgingAmerican May 2015 #54

Republicans ALWAYS say their policies are good for jobs Enrique May 2015 #55

Because they aren't Republicans? Because NAFTA created millions of new US jobs? ucrdem May 2015 #58

I can think of at least 5 production facilities in my congressional district Art_from_Ark May 2015 #70

Well, they might move to Malaysia under TPP ucrdem May 2015 #78

Obama himself has blurred the partisan line. LWolf May 2015 #128

They polled the public and the public wants JOBS.... Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #59

Well, NAFTA delivered jobs by any metric ucrdem May 2015 #62

LOL!! Look how broad the definition of work is on that chart. Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #122

what on earth do you think that chart proves? Warren Stupidity May 2015 #133

The sun came up the day after NAFTA was signed. Elwood P Dowd May 2015 #136

That's the labor participation rate bhikkhu May 2015 #153

Now I understand why I heard there were Unicorns in the Appendix. n/t jtuck004 May 2015 #83

It's always been geopolitical. joshcryer May 2015 #63

LOL, Pat Moynihan talked about it. ucrdem May 2015 #69

So did Nixon. joshcryer May 2015 #79

I know but I didn't want to mention it. ucrdem May 2015 #80

They did test trials and it was a disaster. joshcryer May 2015 #81

Interesting. ucrdem May 2015 #82

Hey, I just saw this, Warren Buffet is advocating EIC modifications: joshcryer May 2015 #85

Another Warren to worry about LOL ucrdem May 2015 #89

"the WH is doing a poor job " < Don't be hard on them. It's not easy selling dog shit once the jtuck004 May 2015 #84

They're still trying to call those dog turds "saucisson" Art_from_Ark May 2015 #86

Researchers now say that eating a single serving of processed meat every day could increase your jtuck004 May 2015 #92

NO anything that gives multinational corporations more power is not going to give us more GOOD jwirr May 2015 #91

no, but I bet most of us can agree that your OP TheSarcastinator May 2015 #94

What pretty pictures. Well they have to wrap up a shit sandwich in nice packaging somehow. Katashi_itto May 2015 #95

I don't know what your point is anymore, really. djean111 May 2015 #96

I thought we were all dying to know what the eeeevuhl was hiding from us? ucrdem May 2015 #98

Oh, that is not what I said, and you know it. And enough eeeevuhl (cute marginalizing trick, BTW) djean111 May 2015 #102

Okay well alrighty then. ucrdem May 2015 #104

Dear Goddess. You are serious. sheshe2 May 2015 #154

You are serious when you do not think Obama and the GOP are NOT working together on Fast Track? djean111 May 2015 #158

LOL, a funny thing happened on the way to the forum today . . . ucrdem May 2015 #185

Since we can not read it PowerToThePeople May 2015 #99

Yes, it would be hard to read as it doesn't yet exist. ucrdem May 2015 #100

Well, no need for the TPA until it exists and we have read it. PowerToThePeople May 2015 #101

It won't exist if TPA doesn't pass. But voting for TPA isn't voting for TPP, ucrdem May 2015 #103

That does not have to be the case PowerToThePeople May 2015 #105

Well the tricky parts are still being negotiated, like Japanese agricultural tariffs ucrdem May 2015 #109

It is not only voting for the TPP but whatever sewage comes down the pipe on trade for six years TheKentuckian May 2015 #143

So when members of Congress go into that room where they can read the TPP, but not take notes or djean111 May 2015 #106

Now you know their dark secrets. ucrdem May 2015 #107

Kind of bullshit, saying we cannot read the TPP because the "agreement" does not yet exist. djean111 May 2015 #108

Well if you really want a sneak preview I'm giving you one. ucrdem May 2015 #112

No, you are giving me the Official Story. No thanks. djean111 May 2015 #113

Unmitigated bullshit. TBF May 2015 #115

Repetition is not truth. Chan790 May 2015 #138

I don't want the glossy sales brochure - TBF May 2015 #114

It's too complicated for your pretty little head. Just sign it. Spitfire of ATJ May 2015 #123

Good work, ucr. Obama and/or TPP haters won't read it, anymore than they'd read the final Hoyt May 2015 #117

Hey thanks Hoyt! ucrdem May 2015 #118

I won't mention the poster's name, but we had one who went from saying it's a "secret agreement" Hoyt May 2015 #120

LOL, that's progress, I guess ucrdem May 2015 #121

"Obama/TPP haters" AgingAmerican May 2015 #166

Nice shiny propaganda from the U.S. Government nadinbrzezinski May 2015 #119

I'd post that Joseph Goebbels award but I got a hide the last time I did. L0oniX May 2015 #169

It is far more sophisticated nadinbrzezinski May 2015 #176

Enforcement: dispute resolution in action, 2014 (pg. 35): ucrdem May 2015 #124

More on ISDS from USTR: ucrdem May 2015 #125

! Phlem May 2015 #130

This thread did not go very well lol. Rex May 2015 #174

Agreed. Phlem May 2015 #182

Corporate mission statements and ambiguous negotiating positions are not the deal TheKentuckian May 2015 #144

Possibly but it sure beats what we're getting from the pundits. ucrdem May 2015 #145

Even a great press would put little stock in corporate mission statements being conflated with TheKentuckian May 2015 #159

LOL, nice pretty charts. B Calm May 2015 #157

If you don't read it, you aren't considering both sides treestar May 2015 #160

It appears to me that many people are keenly aware of both sides. PETRUS May 2015 #161

Okay you didn't read it. ucrdem May 2015 #163

It is possible to read it yet not be fooled by it. PETRUS May 2015 #164

You think this thing can be reduced to five buzzwords? ucrdem May 2015 #165

What "thing?" PETRUS May 2015 #167

29 volumes of legislation negotiated between 12 nations and probably thousands of orgs ucrdem May 2015 #168

You left out part of my equation. PETRUS May 2015 #175

Marx and Engels were writing in Dickens' London ironically enough. ucrdem May 2015 #178

Two things: PETRUS May 2015 #180

Okay, but you didn't give me much to go on ucrdem May 2015 #181

It's more informative than "both sides," yet I don't see you pouncing on that terminology. PETRUS May 2015 #183

No one side of TPP is going to lead to all this doom and gloom treestar May 2015 #177

Exactly. ucrdem May 2015 #179

See posts 164 and what follows. PETRUS May 2015 #184

It's nonthinking and doesn't reach the issue treestar May 2015 #186

TPP at-a-glance ucrdem Jun 2015 #187