General Discussion

bhikkhu

(10,789 posts)

84. Trade pacts haven't had such a big impact on trade

Fri May 29, 2015, 12:49 AM

May 2015

a few percentage points here and there. Shutting out China would have made a big impact, but that decision was back in the 70's. If China were not a trade partner the money might have just gone elsewhere. Its a complicated topic, but one part of the equation is energy, which is a fundamental resource for manufacturing. Our energy supplies were maxed in the mid 70's, and importing manufactured goods from nations with excess energy resources was a basic "law of markets" result that allowed the continued growth that developed economies expect.

You could say that global inequality was actually addressed by outflows of US wealth ( http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/global-monitoring-report/report-card/twin-goals/ending-extreme-poverty ), but it hasn't done a whole lot to improve opportunities here.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

126 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Forget the DU created issues. How does Hillary not have an opinion on TPP? [View all] morningfog May 2015 OP

I'm not going to be impatient waiting for one. arcane1 May 2015 #1

Suppose Hillary didn't want to step all over upaloopa May 2015 #2

No candidate can win on platform alone. morningfog May 2015 #3

Since she's no longer part of Obama's administration The Velveteen Ocelot May 2015 #5

Well, I here what you're saying, but... PatrickforO May 2015 #8

She didn't have a problem stepping on President Obama's foreign policy decisions. frylock May 2015 #11

What about stepping all over workers all over the place? TheNutcracker May 2015 #86

Perhaps she has one but does not wish to express it KamaAina May 2015 #4

You hit the nail on the head. JDPriestly May 2015 #101

It's kabuki theater. AtomicKitten May 2015 #6

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. Scuba May 2015 #111

+10000000 woo me with science May 2015 #118

She's going to tick off SOMEONE, no matter WHICH side she comes down on. Buns_of_Fire May 2015 #7

Profiles in Polling? MFrohike May 2015 #25

She can't triangulate out of a circle. Nt HooptieWagon May 2015 #36

Thus the catch-22. She has to say something now, or be accused of wafling. eloydude May 2015 #46

She's hoping to hide all of her opinions except the really innocuous ones Doctor_J May 2015 #9

That does seem to be the strategy, all right Art_from_Ark May 2015 #14

Being a citizen means less to most politicians these days than being a shareholder. nt raouldukelives May 2015 #112

Because the money she's raising is from people who have a stake in its passage. ibegurpard May 2015 #10

Everyone who knows about the TPP has an opinion. Autumn May 2015 #12

Pretty sure she does have an opinion, she just doesn't want to say it. DanTex May 2015 #13

A dangerous one - it is an immediate issue, and she has to say SOMETHING now.. eloydude May 2015 #48

Answer: there isn't a TPP to have an opinion on... brooklynite May 2015 #15

What a pantload Art_from_Ark May 2015 #20

There IS a TPA to have an opinion on, but she's been silent on that, too. Jim Lane May 2015 #24

Yeah, there's trade authority that every President since FDR has had Recursion May 2015 #63

If Clinton thinks the TPA bill is no big deal and should be approved, let her SAY so. Jim Lane May 2015 #73

Bluntly, activists in our party are going insane for no reason and it's hard for her to respond to Recursion May 2015 #76

Thanks, I see where our difference is. Jim Lane May 2015 #91

The problem with the XL pipeline is where it goes -- through really important farmland that JDPriestly May 2015 #102

No, you're just wrong there. Sorry, but you're blaming the wrong countries Recursion May 2015 #104

We need to get out of NAFTA in order to get out of the ISDS court. JDPriestly May 2015 #107

China, India, and Bangladesh all have a "lesser" form of MFN Recursion May 2015 #109

We should end any agreement that allows corporations to sue any sovereign state in any JDPriestly May 2015 #115

Leaving NAFTA would leave us in the US/Canada FTA which preexisted NAFTA? If we drop out of that too pampango May 2015 #113

We should go back to unilateral trade agreements until we get our balance of payments system JDPriestly May 2015 #114

You do want to go back to the Coolidge/Hoover days? No WTO, no trade agreements, pampango May 2015 #117

I know A LOT about arbitration. It can be great for disputes between equals, such as two JDPriestly May 2015 #120

Europe has its problems. What country or continent does not? But they have the best income equality pampango May 2015 #123

We will never "go back" to the environment that existed at the time of Coolidge and Hoover. JDPriestly May 2015 #121

If we do what you suggest we would be well on our way. There was not GATT/WTO. There were no pampango May 2015 #124

Sorry. I post an answer and then realize that is it is not complete. JDPriestly May 2015 #122

FDR would have thought the US would be what modern Germany is. Highly-paid workers, strong unions, pampango May 2015 #125

I agree that the reason we, the US do not compete well or work together well with the international JDPriestly May 2015 #126

Obama is for it. Warren and Sanders oppose it. Hillary? Eh, she'll tell you after its too late. morningfog May 2015 #40

What difference does it make if she's for it or against it? woolldog May 2015 #16

It makes a hell of a lot of difference to me Art_from_Ark May 2015 #23

you're not thinking this through. woolldog May 2015 #37

I am thinking this through Art_from_Ark May 2015 #42

How? Recursion May 2015 #96

I will explain that later on, in an OP Art_from_Ark May 2015 #97

I look forward to it! Recursion May 2015 #98

It will hurt our economy. JDPriestly May 2015 #103

NAFTA didn't. Why would TPP? (nt) Recursion May 2015 #105

NAFTA has severely harmed our economy. JDPriestly May 2015 #106

You aren't making an argument Recursion May 2015 #108

We losgt manufacturing and jobs to Mexico in particular. JDPriestly May 2015 #116

Makes a big difference to me. 840high May 2015 #67

Is this serious? MFrohike May 2015 #27

serious as a heart attack woolldog May 2015 #38

I hate to break it to you - The nomination process isn't American Idol eloydude May 2015 #54

Horseshit MFrohike May 2015 #61

That's a nice anecdote. woolldog May 2015 #69

There's where we differ MFrohike May 2015 #72

I hate to break it to you. There is a contested primary. morningfog May 2015 #41

TPP has a provision that Malaysia hates - restricting sex trade eloydude May 2015 #52

You're against restricting the Malaysian sex trade because Malaysian citizens want it to continue? Recursion May 2015 #77

No. I'm for TPP being dumped eloydude May 2015 #80

So you prefer our current free trade agreement with Malaysia? Recursion May 2015 #81

I look forward to the debates !! nt m-lekktor May 2015 #17

I won't support a TPP that is secret and JEB May 2015 #18

Great! Once there's a TPP you'll be able to read it like everybody else Recursion May 2015 #83

By then it will be a take it or leave it. JEB May 2015 #87

If they don't want it they can vote against it. Not that hard. Recursion May 2015 #88

She charges more than $17,000 and it takes longer for the larger checks to clear? peecoolyour May 2015 #19

kinda like Seinfeld was a show about nothing Motown_Johnny May 2015 #21

I have serious doubts it will be enough for the primaries. hifiguy May 2015 #32

Nobody will be able to get away with vague "move the country forward" platitudes this time around. arcane1 May 2015 #35

Indeed, if Clinton comes out arrogantly and condescending eloydude May 2015 #55

Yeah, the voters over and over have signalled their preference for wonky issues-driven campaigns Recursion May 2015 #82

She supports the trade agreement. She just doesn't want to say so yet. DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #22

My, my, guess some does not receive the news. Thinkingabout May 2015 #26

The people at Goldman haven't come up hifiguy May 2015 #28

Don't worry Art_from_Ark May 2015 #29

Chined in the basement, I am sure. nt hifiguy May 2015 #31

Way I'm hearing it, they have to hire another 200 more... eloydude May 2015 #57

And then more advisors to advise those advisors, and then... Art_from_Ark May 2015 #100

Quiet, please ! She's listening. libdem4life May 2015 #30

She's waiting to evolve in the most politically expedient direction. Like she did on her IWR vote. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #33

It is a matter of economics. edgineered May 2015 #34

The TPP is not finished, but she should come out for TPA and lobby House Democrats to get on board. tritsofme May 2015 #39

Why should House Democrats "get on board"? Art_from_Ark May 2015 #43

Nobody has an opinion on the TPP. Not one single person. Recursion May 2015 #44

That is incorrect Art_from_Ark May 2015 #45

There is no "the document" for them to read. Recursion May 2015 #47

Oh, for crying out loud Art_from_Ark May 2015 #49

That does happen, yes. More importantly most paragraphs will have 7 or 8 versions running around Recursion May 2015 #51

Yeah, lowest-common denominator consensus Art_from_Ark May 2015 #53

If it goes with the framework of the current bilateral agreements Recursion May 2015 #58

Seeing that the current TPP "proposal" has Malaysia pissed and Japanese citizens suing Japan eloydude May 2015 #59

The Malaysian government also pissed off a lot of Malaysians by breaking up a slave ring Recursion May 2015 #62

Right.. eloydude May 2015 #64

Well, we disagree about the impact of NAFTA Recursion May 2015 #68

What's your opinion on Windows 10? Or OS X 10.11? Ubuntu 16.04? (nt) Recursion May 2015 #50

Well being a beta tester for TM99 May 2015 #56

Not really; I have a Windows 10 Beta ISO too Recursion May 2015 #60

You are still missing the point. TM99 May 2015 #65

As far as that goes, as I said in #76 Recursion May 2015 #79

Batshit crazy? TM99 May 2015 #89

If I were raising money for a liberal organization I'd probably come out against it too Recursion May 2015 #90

Why are you even here? TM99 May 2015 #92

Because I'm a liberal Democrat. I've given labor and money to multiple D campaigns Recursion May 2015 #93

So party over principles. TM99 May 2015 #94

My principles won't do a damn thing for the environment, the poor, women, LGBTs, minorities ... Recursion May 2015 #95

This is veering off topic TM99 May 2015 #99

Well it is logical to side step forming a concrete position on this issue right now during her underahedgerow May 2015 #66

My guess is she is trying to take the temperature of the electorate BainsBane May 2015 #70

This is Clinton Politics 101....Check the wind, then set sail Joe the Revelator May 2015 #71

She has an opinion that includes objectives any agreement presented to Congress must meet for her Hoyt May 2015 #74

I don't see it as enormously important bhikkhu May 2015 #75

I don't know, trade has done wonders to reduce global inequality Recursion May 2015 #78

Trade pacts haven't had such a big impact on trade bhikkhu May 2015 #84

I'll agree that trade agreements' effects get overstated Recursion May 2015 #85

She helped negotiate it and said she supported it. Now, thanks to polling, her thinking has merrily May 2015 #110

kick woo me with science May 2015 #119