• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama administration releases text of TPP trade deal

Glen Contrarian said:
Half a loaf is better than none. Not having the best jobs under the sun is better than having no jobs at all.
Click to expand...
What makes you think if we dont move forward with more "free trade policies" like the TPP that we will have "no jobs at all"?

But let me put this in a different light for you. You know that I am (mostly) progressive, that I despise let's-coddle-the-rich trickle-down Reaganomics...but there's something that happened over the years that I don't think most Americans really grasped: globalization, for all the misery it's cost America, its workers and overall economy, has been a great example of "a rising tide floats all boats". I wrote about it in an article six years ago: The Global Upside of Reaganomics. It's not that long - please read it (and bear in mind that it was written during the doldrums of the Great Recession), and pay particular attention to the last three paragraphs. I think they're even more pertinent today.
Click to expand...
See the problem I have with this is the mindset that there is only one way and one way only to cope with globalization and its impact on global trade...
 
Shadowless said:
Let China be the one to extort cheap labor, we are supposed to be better than that.
Click to expand...

Companies have been leaving China for the past number of years due to labor costs.
The TPP represents if i recall 40 % of world trade. It also includes fast growing economies. Economies that will in the next generation grow faster than the US.
3 countries that should/could join later would be Argentina?? but India and Indonesia are not there yet.
 
JANFU said:
Companies have been leaving China for the past number of years due to labor costs.
The TPP represents if i recall 40 % of world trade. It also includes fast growing economies. Economies that will in the next generation grow faster than the US.
3 countries that should/could join later would be Argentina?? but India and Indonesia are not there yet.
Click to expand...

Exactly, we LET big corporations have their headquarters here, and ship jobs overseas because they want to avoid paying living wages. We should NOT let them dp that.
 
tres borrachos said:
Not sure I can stomach reading through all of that legal babble but this is one thing I agreed with Obama on.
Click to expand...

Another key point that has been made and aggreed upon are rights, working conditions, environmental, intellectual rights.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/06/b...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

WASHINGTON — The Communist government in Vietnam has agreed to American terms to grant potentially far-reaching labor rights to the country’s workers, including the freedom to unionize and to strike, in return for expanded trade between the former adversaries, according to the newly released text of a vast Pacific trade agreement.

Those terms were disclosed early Thursday, along with all 30 chapters and side agreements that make up the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a pact reached a month ago by 12 Pacific Rim nations that would be the largest regional trade accord in history. The agreement would end most tariffs and other trade barriers among countries that account for 40 percent of the global economy.
Click to expand...
 
Shadowless said:
Exactly, we LET big corporations have their headquarters here, and ship jobs overseas because they want to avoid paying living wages. We should NOT let them dp that.
Click to expand...

The US is a trading nation, same as Canada is- It comes down to trade or die economically.
 
JANFU said:
The US is a trading nation, same as Canada is- It comes down to trade or die economically.
Click to expand...

Yes, trade with countries we can compete with. Don't sell out our workers so that people can continue working in the service economy.
 
Shadowless said:
Oh stop the BS. European countries and Canada trade with other countries but don't let their wages decline. That is such BS. You are no kind of progressive thinking that way. We can trade with other countries, but we DO NOT have to give up our wages to do so. It has been done, can be done, and should be done.

STOP making FAIR trade seem like isolationism.
Click to expand...

'Scuse me, but aren't you the one saying we don't have to trade with the other nations, that we can make it all at home? And besides, who said anything about "letting our wages decline"? That's an assumption...and the fact that European countries and Canada have higher wages has little to do with choosing to trade only with certain nations, and everything to do with domestic economic policy which includes high taxes that provide the stronger social safety net...which I strongly support, btw.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
'Scuse me, but aren't you the one saying we don't have to trade with the other nations, that we can make it all at home? And besides, who said anything about "letting our wages decline"? That's an assumption...and the fact that European countries and Canada have higher wages has little to do with choosing to trade only with certain nations, and everything to do with domestic economic policy which includes high taxes that provide the stronger social safety net...which I strongly support, btw.
Click to expand...

Listen, if we need bananas, we can trade with Brazil. Look how many products are on the shelves that could EASILY be made in the US. The reason is we let corporations ship labor overseas, but LIVE here. If we stop that, you'll start seeing wages rise again.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
What makes you think if we dont move forward with more "free trade policies" like the TPP that we will have "no jobs at all"?
Click to expand...

The same impulse that you have in thinking that with the TPP we'll be screwing over our own workers. They're both assumptions. But I would prefer to have America in the most influential position when it comes to the world's economic policies instead of China...because at least with America, thanks to our democracy - such as it is - there's a chance we can make it better...but if China decides to screw people over in the name of China, they're screwed. I'd rather have a chance than no chance at all.

See the problem I have with this is the mindset that there is only one way and one way only to cope with globalization and its impact on global trade...
Click to expand...

Did you read the article? My point was, since the advent of globalization, even third-world nations have improved far beyond all expectations. Yes, it cost the American economy dearly in the short run - that 'short run' being three or four decades - but in the long run, as globalization is improving conditions for the great majority (though certainly not all) of the world's population, it leads to less conflict, less tyranny...and more prosperity.

Look at my signature line below - truer words were never said. And then look back through all human history and ask yourself if there's ever been fewer wars/massacres/genocides (relative to population) than in the past quarter-century, even including the Rwandan genocide. I don't think there has been, ever...and I think that the prosperity from globalization has been a big part of that. And this great period of relative peace benefits not only those within third-world nations, but it benefits America, too.
 
Shadowless said:
Listen, if we need bananas, we can trade with Brazil. Look how many products are on the shelves that could EASILY be made in the US. The reason is we let corporations ship labor overseas, but LIVE here. If we stop that, you'll start seeing wages rise again.
Click to expand...

England was the greatest empire in human history for hundreds of years. One could accurately make the argument that the Mongols had a larger contiguous empire, but theirs lasted less than a century. England was therefore the greatest empire in human history.

But England was not just small, but resource-poor. Was it domestic jobs that preserved their empire? Of course not - they were too small and resource-poor. One could try to say it was their navy, but more than that, it was their international trade.

Trade is the thing. Yes, we need to manufacture things here, the more, the better...but England's experience shows that domestic manufacturing is less important than international trade when it comes to a nation's power and influence.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
England was the greatest empire in human history for hundreds of years. One could accurately make the argument that the Mongols had a larger contiguous empire, but theirs lasted less than a century. England was therefore the greatest empire in human history.

But England was not just small, but resource-poor. Was it domestic jobs that preserved their empire? Of course not - they were too small and resource-poor. One could try to say it was their navy, but more than that, it was their international trade.

Trade is the thing. Yes, we need to manufacture things here, the more, the better...but England's experience shows that domestic manufacturing is less important than international trade when it comes to a nation's power and influence.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but that was a bunch of gibberish. We are not England, we have MANY more resources to make our own products.

You ignored the most important point...if we make it illegal for a business to incorporate in the US but use foreign labor, we will bring wages back again. No matter how cheap the labor is in places like Vietnam, no business leaders would actually move there to live. That;s why it's exploitation.
 
Shadowless said:
I'm sorry but that was a bunch of gibberish. We are not England, we have MANY more resources to make our own products.

You ignored the most important point...if we make it illegal for a business to incorporate in the US but use foreign labor, we will bring wages back again. No matter how cheap the labor is in places like Vietnam, no business leaders would actually move there to live. That;s why it's exploitation.
Click to expand...

No, you're not getting it. WHY was England able to have the greatest empire in human history? Because of TRADE. If England, as resource-poor as she has always been, was able to have an empire where the sun never set, how much more could we do since we could have domestic production as well? But make no mistake - international trade is crucial...

...and - to address your particular point - if you refuse to deal with nations because of how they treat their workers, then you have ZERO influence on that nation. But if you do trade with them, then you become economically tied to them, as Nike is to Vietnam...and then, after they are dependent upon those jobs, you expose Nike for using sweatshops, and all of a sudden they have to raise wages and make living conditions better there. It's a glacially slow and frustrating process, but it works. Just ask Nike.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Half a loaf is better than none. Not having the best jobs under the sun is better than having no jobs at all.

But let me put this in a different light for you. You know that I am (mostly) progressive, that I despise let's-coddle-the-rich trickle-down Reaganomics...but there's something that happened over the years that I don't think most Americans really grasped: globalization, for all the misery it's cost America, its workers and overall economy, has been a great example of "a rising tide floats all boats". I wrote about it in an article six years ago: The Global Upside of Reaganomics. It's not that long - please read it (and bear in mind that it was written during the doldrums of the Great Recession), and pay particular attention to the last three paragraphs. I think they're even more pertinent today.
Click to expand...

So in other words, having people work for less than a dollar an hour is better than them having no job at all?

Seriously, your partisan hackery is intense!
 
Glen Contrarian said:
No, you're not getting it. WHY was England able to have the greatest empire in human history? Because of TRADE. If England, as resource-poor as she has always been, was able to have an empire where the sun never set, how much more could we do since we could have domestic production as well? But make no mistake - international trade is crucial...

...and - to address your particular point - if you refuse to deal with nations because of how they treat their workers, then you have ZERO influence on that nation. But if you do trade with them, then you become economically tied to them, as Nike is to Vietnam...and then, after they are dependent upon those jobs, you expose Nike for using sweatshops, and all of a sudden they have to raise wages and make living conditions better there. It's a glacially slow and frustrating process, but it works. Just ask Nike.
Click to expand...

So your bottom line is to sell out workers in the United States for some weird notion of power? You want to build an empire like England did? Do you have any idea how much pain, misery and war that came from England's poor choice to expand its empire? Look what happened there as well, an empire no longer. I don't want influence on Vietnam, I could care less. We should NOT become economically tied to countries that use slave labor.

Nike has NOT STOPPED using slave labor, are you blind? You sound like a Romney/Ryan supporter. Please join the Republican party, we don't need people like you messing up labor in this country. Take your empire talk elsewhere.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Well, we have a choice - we can either go with the TPP, or we can take the very real risk that the nations around the Pacific will agree to join China's "Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership".

So...who do you want to be the leader of the economic bloc of nations around the Pacific - China, or America? 'Cause if they don't join ours, they probably will join China's. Think about the long-term ramifications of that possibility....
Click to expand...

That's a very good point. In the world as it is today, isolationism from global trade isn't a winning situation, especially not in the longer term.

TheDemSocialist said:
How does being the "leader of the economic bloc of nations around the Pacific" going to effect American workers? The same way NAFTA did?
Click to expand...

And that too is a good point. If trade increases, opening up more global markets and reduces barriers to those markets, I figure the result will be proportional to how well each of the nation's economies and producers compete in the global market place, even more so, now that the playing field has been more leveled than not, it would appear.

So how do you think the US economy and producers will fair on this more level global playing field?
 
Shadowless said:
It's because American corporations ship jobs overseas to avoid paying those living wages. Stop that, and we will have our wages rise again.
Click to expand...

I agree. that is why I recommend instituting import duties like all the other countries have. I believe that will stop that.
 
eohrnberger said:
That's a very good point. In the world as it is today, isolationism from global trade isn't a winning situation, especially not in the longer term.



And that too is a good point. If trade increases, opening up more global markets and reduces barriers to those markets, I figure the result will be proportional to how well each of the nation's economies and producers compete in the global market place, even more so, now that the playing field has been more leveled than not, it would appear.

So how do you think the US economy and producers will fair on this more level global playing field?
Click to expand...

Vietnamese workers make let's say, $1 an hour. An American worker makes $15. How is that going to help American labor?
 
fmw said:
I agree. that is why I recommend instituting import duties like all the other countries have. I believe that will stop that.
Click to expand...

Do you disagree that we should make offshoring jobs illegal? Why set up a tariff to tax consumers?
 
Shadowless said:
Vietnamese workers make let's say, $1 an hour. An American worker makes $15. How is that going to help American labor?
Click to expand...

If the two workers were making the same thing to the same quality, yeah that'd be a pretty steep ratio to overcome.

Good thing that they aren't making the same things to the same quality levels.
 
eohrnberger said:
If the two workers were making the same thing to the same quality, yeah that'd be a pretty steep ratio to overcome.

Good thing that they aren't making the same things to the same quality levels.
Click to expand...

So if American made products are better, why would we want to open our consumer markets to more products made in Vietnam? How does this help anyone but the bottom line of the companies who ship labor over there?
 
Mr. Invisible said:
So in other words, having people work for less than a dollar an hour is better than them having no job at all?

Seriously, your partisan hackery is intense!
Click to expand...

In other words, you're making a grand assumption that we'll get rid of the minimum wage.

Seriously, ya gotta watch making assumptions - they come back to bite you sometime.
 
Shadowless said:
So your bottom line is to sell out workers in the United States for some weird notion of power? You want to build an empire like England did? Do you have any idea how much pain, misery and war that came from England's poor choice to expand its empire? Look what happened there as well, an empire no longer. I don't want influence on Vietnam, I could care less. We should NOT become economically tied to countries that use slave labor.

Nike has NOT STOPPED using slave labor, are you blind? You sound like a Romney/Ryan supporter. Please join the Republican party, we don't need people like you messing up labor in this country. Take your empire talk elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Okay, so tell me what you think our economy will be like if China's the one setting the economic policies for the other nations that do business with us.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
England was the greatest empire in human history for hundreds of years. One could accurately make the argument that the Mongols had a larger contiguous empire, but theirs lasted less than a century. England was therefore the greatest empire in human history.

But England was not just small, but resource-poor. Was it domestic jobs that preserved their empire? Of course not - they were too small and resource-poor. One could try to say it was their navy, but more than that, it was their international trade.

Trade is the thing. Yes, we need to manufacture things here, the more, the better...but England's experience shows that domestic manufacturing is less important than international trade when it comes to a nation's power and influence.
Click to expand...

You forgot to include a key component: the slave trade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom