S. Korea Trade Deal - Obama versus Trump

[howaboutme]

I disagree strongly with Pres Obama on this and I can't understand why he pushes this deal with S Korea instead of revising all of our trade deals from free to "FAIR Trade" as he promised. These deals have been the downfall of America.

How many free trade deals will it take for the USA leadership to understand that the only common denominator in all of these deals has been that the USA loses, and international bankers on Wall St and international corporations win?? At its core they are about commoditizing and making labor fungible at the expense of USA self sufficiency and our overall economy.

Fifty percent of Americans now don't pay taxes because they don't earn enough or have access to jobs that will keep them much above poverty. Because of "Free Trade" we don't have the tax revenue from what was once a broad and strong middle class to pay for government services. Also we don't have the tax revenue from the rich that used to pay 70-90% marginal rates. Instead we cut taxes from the ultra rich, complex alliances that create terrorism, fight perpetual wars that have nothing to do with defending the USA and encourage the outsourcing of our economy.


You need to go to about 3:40 on the video on this site and listen to what Trump has to say on trade.

http://stopuskoreanafta.org/2011/01/video-donald-trump-opposes-nafta-style-korea-trade-pact/


Here is Obama's announcement of this farcical deal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gs25DKlp_ts&feature=related

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[howaboutme]

3. What happened to common sense?

This shouldn't be about Ds or Rs, it should be about our leaders doing what they are being paid to do, and doing what is best for Americans and America.

These deals have been bad, bad, bad. Should we like it just because a Democrat proposes this, and does that mean it is good for Americans? Obama needs to hear from his constituents. BTW I have not forgiven Clinton on MFN for China and NAFTA either.

[ProSense]

2. Screw Donald Trump he's an opportunistic asshole. The

trade deal has to be ratified by Congress, and there are enough unions, Senators and others who will scrutinize the deal.

Statement by Sander Levin (who voted against NAFTA, CAFTA and most trade agreements and has been a strong advocate for tighter regulations.)

Chairman Levin Statement on U.S. – South Korea Free Trade Agreement

<...>

“The changes announced to the U.S. – Korea Free Trade Agreement (FTA) today are a dramatic step toward changing from a one-way street to a two-way street for trade between the U.S. and South Korea. These changes represent an important opportunity to break open the Korean market for U.S. businesses and workers and boost American manufacturing jobs, particularly in the automotive sector.

“For decades South Korea has employed a unique and ever changing regulatory regime to discriminate against auto imports while the U.S. market has been totally open to their goods. As a result, U.S. automakers exported less than 6,000 cars to South Korea in 2009 while South Korea has used its historically closed market to finance an aggressive push into the U.S. market, exporting 476,000 cars to the U.S. in 2009. The imbalance is so severe that automotive trade accounts for a full three-quarters of the $10.6 billion U.S. trade deficit with South Korea.

“Today’s agreement delays the elimination of the U.S. tariff on South Korean auto exports for five years, unlike the 2007 FTA, which would have eliminated duties on Korean car exports immediately. This development provides leverage to assure that Korea opens its market and provides time for our industry to root itself in the Korean marketplace. Today’s changes will also tear down South Korea’s wall of non-tariff barriers (NTBs), including their improper use of tax rules and discriminatory safety and emissions standards that have shut U.S. automakers out of their market. The changes also include, for the first time ever, an auto-specific safeguard that will protect U.S. manufacturers from a harmful surge of South Korean imports in the future. Most importantly, today’s changes are fully enforceable.

“The FTA also includes robust labor and environmental commitments that are fully enforceable that were agreed to in May 2007. Going forward, the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations provide an opportunity to continue working on other provisions within the framework of trade agreements.

“The changes announced today resulted from the Administration, domestic automotive industry, the United Auto Workers and a key, bipartisan Congressional group standing up for American manufacturing. This was the only way to reverse the historic, lopsided pattern of one-way trade with South Korea. I support today’s agreement. It is important for American manufacturing and American jobs. It is also an important step toward a global rules-based trade system.”

<...>

Statements on U.S. - Korea Trade Deal from Senators Brown and Kerry

[howaboutme]

4. If it is has been that harmful for Americans

then WTF is Obama pushing it? Sometimes primaries have a way of redirecting the energy of politicians who have strayed from the values that got them elected.

[ProSense]

5. The goal is

to ensure that workers rights are protected and safety concerns are adequately addressed. Still, why Trump? Why not the AFL-CIO statement?

"Sometimes primaries have a way of redirecting the energy of politicians who have strayed from the values that got them elected. "

You're advocating that Trump primary Obama?

WTF?

[howaboutme]

6. The goal is also to protect our own economy

Without a strong USA working and middle class there is no political power for the average person, and there will be no one looking to help international labor.

I would support a primary run against Obama by a host of Democrats, if only to redirect his values and energies. BTW so do many other DUers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=610542&mesg_id=610542

Why do Democrats in leadership oddly find themselves conflicted at times between the moneyed interests of Wall St, and the needs of average Americans. The issue at the heart of these trade deals is they make money for the PTB and elite, while screwing the sheeple.

We need something to redirect the energy of our politicians back to common sense and to Americans, and even Trump could have such influence.

[ProSense]

7. Are you implying that the President isn't trying "to protect our own economy"?

I would support a primary run against Obama by a host of Democrats, if only to redirect his values and energies. BTW so do many other DUers.

<....>

We need something to redirect the energy of our politicians back to common sense and to Americans, and even Trump could have such influence.

Since you base your opinions on what other DUers think, "Donald Trump is a stupid fucking pig." (I'm in full agreement with that.)

I'm not interested in a primary challenge, and I strongly believe the President has the country's economic interests at heart.

The trade deals need to address the issues raised by the AFL-CIO and some members of Congress.

[howaboutme]

8. A vote for free trade is a vote against the USA

That's the way I see it. There is no nuance about it, such as ...well maybe there is some good in it.

We've had politicians that have worked to sell out the USA working class for 30 years. Most have been Rs but some have oddly been Ds which confirms the fact that having "D" after one's name does not guarantee a vote for the working class. Make no mistake money and constituent betrayal can cross Party lines.

We’ve witnessed this many times – where big movements produce leaders that go to DC to clean up that town, and are instead seduced by DC’s power structure, and end up on the other side. The Egyptians were faced with this rift between people and their puppeteers, and that led to what’s happening in Egypt.

[davidpdx]

10. Free trade brings down prices for everyone

Though it has to be pretty even on both sides. As I explained above, my complaint is about agricultural products being protected by Korea.

[davidpdx]

9. As someone who lives in South Korea and is American

I have mixed feelings on it. American cars here are VERY expensive because of the extra tariffs added to the cars. I feel that American companies would sell more cars if those were eliminated.

My two big beefs (pun intended) with the FTA is that they don't go far enough to allow more rice and beef imports. The farmers here have pushed protectionism of agricultural industries, which is not in total sync with free trade. The price of beef has continued to go up and the outbreak of foot and mouth disease makes Koreans look very hypocritical about screaming about mad cow.

The price of food here has climbed quite a bit in the last few years and while I understand that farmers want to save their businesses, they are blocking any competitiveness of some industries which drive up prices.

It will be interesting to see if both countries ratify the treaty. I have my doubts it will happen.