African American

Number23

(24,544 posts)

36. This thread has me like this

Mon May 23, 2016, 05:08 PM

May 2016

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=948996

But at least the OP isn't going out of his/her way to be an obnoxious, rude, pain in the ass the way so many others have been that have "popped in" lately.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Please dont attack me- I want to give you a heads up - This is important stuff I don't fully underst [View all] Baobab May 2016 OP

Why would let the government outsource procurement? Silver_Witch May 2016 #1

Thats it exactly. Also, this huge huge deal was done over the last 20 years with carrots and sticks Baobab May 2016 #2

I agree wholeheartedly! Silver_Witch May 2016 #3

It makes no effing sense. Especially if it would include military items. MH1 May 2016 #5

There is an exemption for security clearance jobs. Will they be the only secure service jobs? I dont Baobab May 2016 #8

Its also part of a deal, sort of the global services equivalent of "its her turn" logic. Baobab May 2016 #23

Sorry, are you asking if 8a contracting rules are being overturned by nebulous "trade deals"? Recursion May 2016 #4

Preempted, they would be preempted Baobab May 2016 #6

And when are you saying this is going to start? Recursion May 2016 #7

1995 - some of it, but our entry into the WTO GPA was just recently and its gradual Baobab May 2016 #9

OK, but that's 21 years in the past, and 8a contracts are still a thing Recursion May 2016 #10

Thats on the national level, that might still apply for procurements below some threshold Baobab May 2016 #13

So, you're saying this *might* be a threat, some day, and you don't know when? Recursion May 2016 #14

It will definitely be a threat, what I am saying is small contracts below maybe $100,000 (just guess Baobab May 2016 #15

they also claimed that HRC hated CHIP, and only "supported" it because trade agreements would bettyellen May 2016 #17

Please read the following- I didnt say she hated it-Between 1995 and 1998 is a grey area Baobab May 2016 #21

India also put in a request to WTO to evaluate US's use of visa quotas Baobab May 2016 #11

Right, but the US never loses WTO cases. Like, ever. That's India's huge complaint Recursion May 2016 #12

Americans are not aware of these particular international laws, because in 1995 they were never told Baobab May 2016 #16

Sorry you feel that this kind of info would warrant an attack. dixiegrrrrl May 2016 #18

Also read the info at Baobab May 2016 #19

Since Bernie is likely not to get the nomination, what should we ask President Clinton to do? Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #20

Good question - There are examples of carve outs in several papers - also a European group is trying Baobab May 2016 #22

"Please don't attack me" Number23 May 2016 #24

I suspect you are not seeing some of my posts Baobab May 2016 #25

this is what I mean Baobab May 2016 #26

because not all of us live in paranoia all of the time. nt La Lioness Priyanka May 2016 #27

The FTAs are getting rid of compassion's ability to have any legal effect. With "competition policy" Baobab May 2016 #28

I'm going to ask OP to redirect this to tangible impacts on black Americans today JustAnotherGen May 2016 #29

Cliffs Notes - Response Please JustAnotherGen May 2016 #30

Impacts today+impacts in the near future Baobab May 2016 #31

This isn't true JustAnotherGen May 2016 #32

Yaw ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2016 #33

That is what I was saying, the ACA has only quite marginally reduced those racial disparities. Baobab May 2016 #34

That has nothing to do with what I wrote JustAnotherGen May 2016 #35

This thread has me like this Number23 May 2016 #36

They posted this op JustAnotherGen May 2016 #37

thank you Baobab May 2016 #39

GATS was arguably one of the main causes of the 2008 financial crash which devastated a lot of Baobab May 2016 #38