• 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!

For or against the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement?

For or against the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement/.


  • Total voters
    55
This is going to get ugly for the Dems.

In YER wildest dreams.

McConnell did not allow votes today on
1. unfair labor practices,
2. child labor,
3. currency manipulation;
4. help for workers losing their jobs


The TEA party in the House will block TPP .
 
In YER wildest dreams.

McConnell did not allow votes today on
1. unfair labor practices,
2. child labor,
3. currency manipulation;
4. help for workers losing their jobs


The TEA party in the House will block TPP .

Well, the TEA parties good for something.
 
The US enjoyed an artificially lush economic environment in the post-WW2 world 1945-75. Thereafter stronger competition was to be expected and has been a sign of improved well being elsewhere. RWR's policies made us more competitive and enabled growth to continue in the tougher environment.

No, FDR depression era policies created the strong post war period. Reagan's war on Americans through his anti union policies and deregulation of banking and manufacturing has dashed the hopes of average Americans. Restrictions and regulations aren't the enemy, Reagan was, he's gone, but his policies are still hurting Americans, that is the 99%ers of course.
 
In YER wildest dreams.

McConnell did not allow votes today on
1. unfair labor practices,
2. child labor,
3. currency manipulation;
4. help for workers losing their jobs


The TEA party in the House will block TPP .

Sorry, but it's on the Dems. From my WaPo link in #99:

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday that Republicans were willing to attach “trade adjustment assistance” — which would provide funding authority for worker assistance programs — to the fast-track bill. But he made no pledge to include a trade enforcement bill — which would, among other things, take aim at alleged Chinese currency ma*nipu*la*tion and is opposed by the administration — or a fourth bill concerning trade with Africa.
McConnell said those provisions could be attached by amendment to the bills under consideration.
“We want to pass this and get this to the president’s desk,” he said. “It’s the Democrats who are standing in the way of what is one of the president’s prime domestic policy plans for the economy of this country.”
 
No, FDR depression era policies created the strong post war period. Reagan's war on Americans through his anti union policies and deregulation of banking and manufacturing has dashed the hopes of average Americans. Restrictions and regulations aren't the enemy, Reagan was, he's gone, but his policies are still hurting Americans, that is the 99%ers of course.

Sometimes I fear I'm the only one here who reads history. WW2 not only generated massive development of US industry, it also destroyed or severely crippled most of our economic competitors. The U.S. economy stood as an unchallenged giant.
 
Free trade ? Love it.

Protectionism ? Its short sighted and a predictable left wing " solution "...Hate it.

Reading Progressive rants against TPP while they keep their mouths shut on Obama's decision to flood this Country with Millions of illegals ?

Love it.
 
Sometimes I fear I'm the only one here who reads history. WW2 not only generated massive development of US industry, it also destroyed or severely crippled most of our economic competitors. The U.S. economy stood as an unchallenged giant.

Jack, your not the only one that reads history. There's lots of history books on this subject. You are probably the only one that reads history books with a pro conservative slant though, that's obvious.
 
Free trade ? Love it.

Protectionism ? Its short sighted and a predictable left wing " solution "...Hate it.

Reading Progressive rants against TPP while they keep their mouths shut on Obama's decision to flood this Country with Millions of illegals ?

Love it.

Both parties are guilty of "flooding this country with illegals". And our borders have been porous only forever.
 
Jack, your not the only one that reads history. There's lots of history books on this subject. You are probably the only one that reads history books with a pro conservative slant though, that's obvious.


I am not among those who belittle FDR's accomplishment, but WW2 (growth here, destruction there) was the more important factor.
 
I am not among those who belittle FDR's accomplishment, but WW2 (growth here, destruction there) was the more important factor.

I heard you the first time, and already responded to that.
 
:doh
"I dont think thats the root of the problem, I think its clear that the root of the problem is our trade policies especially when it comes to immigration. Its also to point out the part your quoted isnt even about immigration in the first place."

That is correct - I drew a connection because the effect of lowering low-skill blue collar wages is a commonality between mass immigration and what you are accusing the TPP of.

Its not the root cause of the problem.

In fact it is a key driver. Supply of low-skill labor goes up, cost of low-skill labor goes down. Illegal workers also come with all sorts of built in cost advantages - not just pay, but (chiefly) tax and regulatory. Everyone else benefits (upper middle class and upper income earners, for example, get cheaper nannies and lawn service), but not the 25-50% of our inner city unemployed.

If I may allow Gallup to put it:

we know that wages for lower- and middle-income workers have been held down even as inflation has increased. There's been relatively little, if any, increase in the real earnings of lower- and middle-income workers in recent years. We know that part of the reason for this is that a number of companies have moved large parts of their operations to labor markets where they can get cheap labor to substitute for U.S. labor that's more expensive. And we also know that another part of the reason for the current wage stagnation is because we have allowed the influx of a huge number of illegal immigrants who violate U.S. immigration restrictions and therefore drive down lower- and middle-income wages. If illegal aliens are willing to work for wages that are much lower than those paid to legal workers, companies will either hire illegal immigrants and pay them much less, or companies will go out of business because they can't compete with those that hire cheap illegal immigrant labor. So illegal immigrants tend to determine the wage and benefit costs in those business sectors where they tend to be a large part of the labor market...


As I pointed out - both of these policies have the effect you claim you oppose, yet you favor one and are against the other. Why?
 
Never been a better time to outsource.
 
cpwill​;1064615714 said:
:) let me know when you have something other than a Just So argument.
(And everything you said after that.)

Let me know when you have something relevant to say.

Like maybe when it passes and has been in effect for some time. :lamo
 
Obviously whether one approves of a trade treaty or not has to depend on the final content. But on the whole I favour the promotion of greater free trade.

The notion of "free" trade bothers no one. The opponents of various trade agreements have issues with trade deals real beneficiaries. In the case of TPP, its unlikely that corporate executives and industry lobbyists comprising the committees negotiating this deal have their sleeves rolled up, hard at work to ensure that it is a win win for the American worker.
 
Obviously corporate execs and industry lobbyists aren't working for the interests of American workers, no more than labor unions or labor advocacy groups would be working for corporate interests. This is why the imbalance of negotiators is problematic.

Organized Labor and Advocacy Groups call on Congress to Stop Fast Track Legislation | United Steelworkers

Something else about TPP that's of interest is that it started out as a trade deal between 4-5 PRC's (Singapore, Chile, New Zealand and Brunei) but in 2009 the US jumped in to take the lead, with the chief motivating factor being containment of China. Which of course further tidies up US/China relations. One more piece of USFP that's driving China and Russia closer together.
 
Last edited:
Why all the fuss over these trade deals?


Wouldn't it just be so much simpler to just say....hey, here's what I have for sale, what have you got? Why do we need a deal, a law, to say something as simple as, "OK, let's buy and sell stuff to these people."
 
(And everything you said after that.)

Let me know when you have something relevant to say.

What, you mean like how it is also a pretty good-sized foreign policy victory, reducing the ability of China to turn SEAsia into the new East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere? Or how the patent protections benefit the US? Or how the source you cited is a conspiracist nutter site currently tying their panties in a wad about Jade Helm?

I think I did, in fact, mention all that.
 
googles attorneys have issues with the patent protection clauses, but what's really problematic is that advocacy groups for American workers and labor unions don't have near enough input. It would be nice to see that addressed.
 
Free trade enriches all participants, and any job lost after NAFTA was enacted likely was doomed anyway.
Yea just ask these people:
2lv06zo.jpg

xlgwb8.jpg

25koodj.jpg

25jzgv9.jpg

kf4npj.jpg


Look at the enrichment!
 
Back
Top Bottom