General Discussion

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)

186. China's political influence or the influence of Chinese Money?

Fri Nov 6, 2015, 12:25 PM

Nov 2015

I've never really understood this fully. I don't really have see the need or have a desire for another cold war enemy. I don't really see much political threat from Chinese philosophy or mode of governance. Some of the nations we're going into the deal with have pretty rotten records of exploitation even unto slavery.

However, I easily imagine how American and European financial institutions want Chinese play in regional finance curbed. I can see how multi-national corporations want to protect the system exploits global asymmetries for profit. And I can see how the US government would want a lot of surplus Chinese money to be invested in US treasuries.

I can readily see how this works for big corporations and government--the two favorite action domains of the neoliberal New Dems.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

200 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Full Text of TPP Released to Public... And It's HORRIBLE [View all] Segami Nov 2015 OP

The American people have at least 60 days to examine the proposed TPP Hortensis Nov 2015 #1

BEFORE he can sign it? Baitball Blogger Nov 2015 #3

Nope. And ITM, please don't trust sensationalist doomsday stories. Hortensis Nov 2015 #8

Huh? Unknown Beatle Nov 2015 #96

"And then there's this" from WHAT, though? Hortensis Nov 2015 #100

Oh, I get it now. Unknown Beatle Nov 2015 #110

Please send pictures. :) Hortensis Nov 2015 #122

Okay Unknown Beatle Nov 2015 #125

The view is spectacular, I have to admit. :) Easy maintenance yard, too. Hortensis Nov 2015 #126

It's a damn nightmare for sure. BeanMusical Nov 2015 #196

My god are you delusional n/t moonbeam23 Nov 2015 #120

Moonbeam, I'm not sure what to make of that. Hortensis Nov 2015 #124

i've been here since 2004 at least moonbeam23 Nov 2015 #134

Okay. I do feel that is quite an exaggeration, though. Hortensis Nov 2015 #155

Not officially NobodyHere Nov 2015 #9

I think we can assume they will, ultimately on behalf of business. Hortensis Nov 2015 #44

It has been public knowledge for months that Obama is fighting with the GOP for this pos. cui bono Nov 2015 #147

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Hortensis Nov 2015 #152

I mean what I said. Obama and the GOP are working together in the fight for TPP. n/t cui bono Nov 2015 #189

Okay. Yes, they definitely are, just not for all the same reasons. Hortensis Nov 2015 #190

The deck has been stacked to slide it through unimpeded. Theoretically it might not be enacted ... GoneFishin Nov 2015 #11

It's a done deal. We're in Kabuki mode now. jeff47 Nov 2015 #87

What happens if there is a massive public protest organized in the coming weeks over this? Baitball Blogger Nov 2015 #94

Nothing. jeff47 Nov 2015 #95

BUT the party is in a battle for the future of America. Hortensis Nov 2015 #108

:rofl: jeff47 Nov 2015 #109

Pffft. What a crock. BO went to bat for TPP, blew his complete wad of political capital on it. GoneFishin Nov 2015 #168

you need a SOPA style or FCC style protest joshcryer Nov 2015 #116

It's his "legacy" hifiguy Nov 2015 #129

So you believe our president betrayed America for 50 pieces of silver. Hortensis Nov 2015 #158

Not believe, know for certain. GoneFishin Nov 2015 #169

You mean like the ones prior to the Iraq war? truebrit71 Nov 2015 #185

I guess what bothers me is why don't they quote the trouble aspects from the agreement, instead of still_one Nov 2015 #102

Perhaps ... We should compile a list of, or at least, ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2015 #174

Krugman was a big cheerleader for NAFTA, bvar22 Nov 2015 #197

Does that mean he cannot be objective in his analysis of TPP? ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2015 #198

You asked, I answered, clearly and unambiguously, with reputable sources. bvar22 Nov 2015 #199

How is your NOT responding to the question ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2015 #200

Here is the Sierra Club's initial analysis. progressoid Nov 2015 #188

I just started reading it ismnotwasm Nov 2015 #2

do you have a link to the actual document please. Sunlei Nov 2015 #12

Here it is. pampango Nov 2015 #16

Thank you. was so much on https://ustr.gov/ , I couldn't find the plain text :P Sunlei Nov 2015 #22

Thanks still_one Nov 2015 #105

Link is in the OP but here it is again Jim Lane Nov 2015 #30

Thank you, yes I found it, & got lost in the letters over some fish callad 'Basa' Vietnam will Sunlei Nov 2015 #43

They agree to us USA food safety regulations? Glorioski, that sounds almost...like a good thing. nt Hekate Nov 2015 #58

yes, & some of the drug 'deals' use Canadas much better than USA consumer RX drug 'laws' Sunlei Nov 2015 #60

OH NOES, CANADA?! No true Murkin would ever buy drugs from Canada...oh, wait. Hekate Nov 2015 #62

Just don't look at the part regarding intellectual property rights on those drugs. (nt) jeff47 Nov 2015 #81

yes, the USA has a lot wrong with 'rights on meds' thats why its better to use Canada's and other Sunlei Nov 2015 #85

It doesn't use Canada's laws. It uses more-or-less US laws. jeff47 Nov 2015 #91

Japan has better food safety regulations Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #80

Dolphins don't think so Sunlei Nov 2015 #88

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #90

It does to Dolphins! Sunlei Nov 2015 #92

OMG that has been an epic 10-year absurd fight Recursion Nov 2015 #154

It's huge still_one Nov 2015 #103

Any thing- ruffburr Nov 2015 #4

Well, how do you spell "60 days to examine"? I'm not reading it myself, Hortensis Nov 2015 #6

Like the Iran nuclear deal? Every treaty is negotiated without your or my involvement. randome Nov 2015 #7

Granted. Now, which will have more of an impact on your life? Scootaloo Nov 2015 #135

Probably the Iran deal. I haven't seen much different from our existing trade agreements yet (nt) Recursion Nov 2015 #153

More Here: WillyT Nov 2015 #5

Thom Hartmann Punx Nov 2015 #10

Yeah I'll be talking to mine this week. Nt F4lconF16 Nov 2015 #17

... AzDar Nov 2015 #13

I like these "firsts" quite a bit. USA already has these rules but some other TPPcountries do not. Sunlei Nov 2015 #14

Gee, acceptable working conditions and no forced labor? I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked... Hekate Nov 2015 #59

OK with me if we call it Obamatrade :P Sunlei Nov 2015 #63

Just don't look too closely on the recent forced labor report on Malaysia. jeff47 Nov 2015 #78

"discourage imports of goods produced by forced labor " Now that's some tough language. rhett o rick Nov 2015 #97

Hillary will tell them to cut it out. n/t Admiral Loinpresser Nov 2015 #101

Just what I was thinking. Corporations are benevolent. They would never do any harm to us. Enthusiast Nov 2015 #121

This is a "first commitment" for some of these countries.Can you find what happens in the TPP text? Sunlei Nov 2015 #106

Much more important is the required changes to Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei's laws Recursion Nov 2015 #162

Better than what existed before. With Obama, it's never good enough. Hoyt Nov 2015 #165

"discourage"? That doesn't sound very toothsome tkmorris Nov 2015 #132

Check out the changes to domestic law Malaysia and Brunei have to make to ratify Recursion Nov 2015 #167

Regulations, rules and laws are nothing w/o enforcement. nm rhett o rick Nov 2015 #181

Yeah, that's what those "secret tribunals" people complain about are for Recursion Nov 2015 #183

We need to start calling this ObamaTrade fbc Nov 2015 #15

That's what Thom Hartmann suggested Populist_Prole Nov 2015 #19

The republican base is way ahead of you on this. pampango Nov 2015 #21

I guess Republicans ciggie Corps, don't want plain pack ciggies like they have in Australia :P Sunlei Nov 2015 #45

'We now have concrete evidence that the Trans-Pacific Partnership threatens our families..... blackspade Nov 2015 #18

And now they caution us Fairgo Nov 2015 #50

Or, contrariwise, you can read it for yourself like the free citizen you are. nt Hekate Nov 2015 #61

Sure! That way you can not know that Malaysia has slave labor jeff47 Nov 2015 #73

I look forward to the citations, as we used to call them in Ye Olde Days. Hekate Nov 2015 #82

Don't ask for what you do not want to see. jeff47 Nov 2015 #84

Errrrrr.. uhhhmmmm frylock Nov 2015 #133

Thats embarrassing Fairgo Nov 2015 #164

Have you seen the legal changes Malaysia has agreed to make? Recursion Nov 2015 #170

Yes, and I expect them to be utterly toothless, since we went ahead and jeff47 Nov 2015 #184

And they're still telling us to just wait until it can be explained to us. /eyes RedCappedBandit Nov 2015 #175

so it can still be voided or voted down? barbtries Nov 2015 #20

Yup... SoapBox Nov 2015 #24

The U.S. won't be included unless Congress approves, but the path is greased. Jim Lane Nov 2015 #34

Not really. jeff47 Nov 2015 #68

Technically it can be voted down, but not likely with the Corps controlling most of Congress. nm rhett o rick Nov 2015 #128

Sickening. SoapBox Nov 2015 #23

Are you kidding? Plucketeer Nov 2015 #32

I'm guessing "sickening" doesn't know, just feels it in the gut? :) Hortensis Nov 2015 #40

Maybe she meant to say 'Mold Standard'? AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #47

Or "Old" standard Plucketeer Nov 2015 #53

LOL, did they write this "article" before it was even released, just had it ready to go! snooper2 Nov 2015 #25

Surely responsible journalists and commentators would have read it all the way through first. Right? Hekate Nov 2015 #64

No aspirant Nov 2015 #148

It doesn't take long to confirm the leaked chapters are in the final agreement. (nt) jeff47 Nov 2015 #79

I'm surprised the corporate DUers haven't jumped to Obama and Hillary's defense on this one. jalan48 Nov 2015 #26

Oh shucks. Generic insults are pass�. Try again. Hekate Nov 2015 #65

It's not genetic. jalan48 Nov 2015 #66

Ge-ner-ic Hekate Nov 2015 #69

My bad on the spell check. jalan48 Nov 2015 #72

But Woody likes it! OnyxCollie Nov 2015 #27

This land ain't your land n/t IDemo Nov 2015 #31

I always found that avatar ironic Fairgo Nov 2015 #55

You should read it, parts of it are facinating to me like this letter (here) about fish trade. Sunlei Nov 2015 #39

Ahhh, catfish. Very tasty... Hekate Nov 2015 #67

It looks to me that the only commitment in the text you have is to talk and come to some agreement in the future. salib Nov 2015 #137

if it is as bad as it appears, restorefreedom Nov 2015 #28

Where does it a"appear" to be bad? Please explain what is so "horrible." Corporate take over??? kelliekat44 Nov 2015 #143

are you sure you are in the right place? restorefreedom Nov 2015 #151

I too feel heart broken olddots Nov 2015 #29

I am truly impressed at how fast you've all read it all the way through. Hekate Nov 2015 #33

If you KNOW it is bad, or if you KNOW it is good, it does not take long for find confirmation. pampango Nov 2015 #36

All foreign trade deals Marty McGraw Nov 2015 #41

Before FDR we did forego all trade deals though we weren't exactly doing just fine as a country. pampango Nov 2015 #107

Really? blackspade Nov 2015 #177

He did stop oil shipments to Japan pscot Nov 2015 #180

Well, be honest zipplewrath Nov 2015 #56

Many bad parts are already out there thanks to Wikileaks riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #52

Well at least Japan has agreed to allow imports of more french fries from the US, under this deal JPZenger Nov 2015 #35

China is not a signer or party to TPP. China would like to continue to exploit Vietnam 'workers' Sunlei Nov 2015 #42

And China will exploit Vietnam's workers. jeff47 Nov 2015 #70

Thats right and China does exploit their workers and probably will continue to off any fishing boats Sunlei Nov 2015 #75

There's a reason China is NOT a signatory. TPP links all the other Pacific nations... Hekate Nov 2015 #86

It doesn't do shit against China. jeff47 Nov 2015 #93

Several of the TPP countries already have such agreements with China: Australia, New Zealand, Chile, pampango Nov 2015 #111

It's not a declaration of war, it's a trade agreement. Hekate Nov 2015 #112

And the trade agreement could require not entering into other trade agreements. jeff47 Nov 2015 #114

It could. But does it? Hekate Nov 2015 #117

You could bother to read the last 2 sentences of that post. (nt) jeff47 Nov 2015 #118

It most assuredly is a delcaration of war--on the 99% by the 1% n/t eridani Nov 2015 #150

The Table of Contents is a dozen pages or so. You've read the whole thing already? George II Nov 2015 #37

Leaks were already analyzed. It doesn't take long to confirm the leaked chapters are in it. (nt) jeff47 Nov 2015 #71

So TPP is a Fascist road map for world takeover? AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #38

So is that what you think? nm rhett o rick Nov 2015 #98

Corporate government = fascism AgingAmerican Nov 2015 #140

I agree. I thought that you were being facetious in the other post. nm rhett o rick Nov 2015 #146

The tea party folks think it is a Socialist road map for world takeover. pampango Nov 2015 #113

It's always heartwarming to see the far right and the far left shake hands. nt Hekate Nov 2015 #115

It is more feudal than fascist. hifiguy Nov 2015 #130

well knock me over with a feather! I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you! marym625 Nov 2015 #46

Blink blink blink Phlem Nov 2015 #48

Feeling vindicated and sick at the same time. lark Nov 2015 #49

New World Order lovuian Nov 2015 #51

Boy I miss cali... riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #54

Second that Fairgo Nov 2015 #57

I have been following this closely Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #83

I'm going to stalk your name then for the next few weeks! riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #89

Here's my OP from last May Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #131

Thank you, Art_from_Ark. Outstanding OP and thread. Octafish Nov 2015 #144

Here's a more recent thread about the TPP Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #179

So let's play "Track the Tactic". Shandris Nov 2015 #74

Don't forget "pretend the language in the agreement trumps reality". jeff47 Nov 2015 #77

One has to be trained to read around the rhetoric. Lots of rhetoric. nm rhett o rick Nov 2015 #99

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2015 #76

He's had to negotiate a treaty that Republicans will support. Octafish Nov 2015 #145

Fuckin' gold standard! polichick Nov 2015 #104

Kicked and recommended! Hear that? It's feckin' horrible! Enthusiast Nov 2015 #119

That's what you go off of? Egnever Nov 2015 #157

It sucks. It's horrible. Enthusiast Nov 2015 #163

Kneel before your corporate overlords, pigs. hifiguy Nov 2015 #123

The FIRE industries furnished most of President Obama's campaign cash. guillaumeb Nov 2015 #127

He's already said he will sign this "sometime after January" Art_from_Ark Nov 2015 #141

The need to reign in corporate power is self-evident and always has been. sulphurdunn Nov 2015 #136

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #138

Paper clip collecting uppityperson Nov 2015 #139

I just wish that when a critical statement is made that it be referenced in the TPP text and be kelliekat44 Nov 2015 #142

Bernie's staff aspirant Nov 2015 #149

Boy are you going to be disapointed Egnever Nov 2015 #156

Disappointed with Hillary aspirant Nov 2015 #173

Well, to start -- he and Warren can no longer yell about it not being released until 4 years after Hoyt Nov 2015 #166

Who cares about that aspirant Nov 2015 #172

Obama Blackmailed? billhicks76 Nov 2015 #159

No, it's a fairly decent deal, and in many ways better than our current bilateral agreements Recursion Nov 2015 #171

K & R davidpdx Nov 2015 #160

I agree with Sierra about the environmental problems Recursion Nov 2015 #161

What shareholders want, shareholders get. raouldukelives Nov 2015 #176

the only "good" thing I have heard about the TPP was a few weeks ago, when I learned that the reason secondwind Nov 2015 #178

China's political influence or the influence of Chinese Money? HereSince1628 Nov 2015 #186

The corporate bootlickers love it! Rex Nov 2015 #182

Beati pauperes spiritu, dammit. BeanMusical Nov 2015 #191

You're right of course. Rex Nov 2015 #192

Yep. BeanMusical Nov 2015 #193

I got bugs from this thread! Rex Nov 2015 #194

Lol! BeanMusical Nov 2015 #195

We are so fucked. BeanMusical Nov 2015 #187