Contributor Post Created with Sketch. The Case for the TPP

 

It’s a measure of the lunacy of this election that neither candidate is robustly defending the TPP, and the task of making the case for it has been offshored, so to speak, to Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong:

His comments about Japan are noteworthy. If the agreement fails, he argues, US credibility will be severely undermined:

I think in terms of America’s engagement of the region, you have put a reputation on the line. It is the big thing which America is doing in the Asia Pacific with the Obama administration, consistently over many, many years of hard work and pushing. And your partners, your friends who have come to the table, who have negotiated, each one of them has overcome some domestic political objection, some sensitivity, some political cost to come to the table and make this deal.

And if, at the end, waiting at the altar, the bride doesn’t arrive, I think there are people who are going to be very hurt, not just emotionally but really damaged for a long time to come. Mr. Abe, for example, several of his predecessors thought seriously about and decided not to participate in the TPP. They came very close. They prepared the ground, they walked away. But Mr. Abe came through and decided to commit. Why? Because he wants to help. He wants his country to benefit and to open up its markets, and this is one way to do it.

It hurts your relationship with Japan, your security agreements with Japan. And the Japanese living in an uncertain world, depending on an American nuclear umbrella, will have to say: on trade, the Americans could not follow through; if it’s life and death, whom do I have to depend upon? It’s an absolutely serious calculation, which will not be said openly, but I have no doubt will be thought.

This is the one thing Obama really got right — but now we have not one, but two candidates running against free trade.

Have I mentioned recently how dispiriting I find this election?

 

Tags:

There are 166 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Profile Photo Member

    What US credibility?

    • #1
    • August 15, 2016, at 3:16 AM PDT
    • Like
  2. aardo vozz Member

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.:

    Have I mentioned recently how dispiriting I find this election

    Yep. But it’s only you and tens of millions of other voting age Americans. Probably another couple billion people around the world also, but they can’t vote.(Of course,there’s always Cook County, but I digress).

    <sarcasm off>

    <cynicism always on>

    • #2
    • August 15, 2016, at 3:24 AM PDT
    • Like
  3. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    So we are all in 100% agreement that the TPP is a 100% “good thing”.

    To be honest, I have mostly heard smoke one way or the other on this thing.

    Where can I find objective details?

    • #3
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:08 AM PDT
    • Like
  4. James Madison Member

    TPP will benefit many voters a little. It may hurt some a lot. Trade deals always do.

    Yet Americans who vote or lean Republican are so mistrustful of Obama and their own party leaders, they oppose it and see it as the bogey man. This is the result of the radio Kommentariat creating the false notion of the GOP’s betrayal and the idea trade deals are one sided and against America’s interests.

    Most people have no idea how trade benefits them or their neighbors. American farmers, hi-tech machine makers, coal miners, software engineers, entertainment workers, aircraft, chemicals, and even auto producers have been benefiting from increased foreign sales over the past 15 years. The middle class cannot save the $2,000 a year that Walmart’s expansion made possible without trade. Yes, trade killed some industries like furniture, steel, old auto plants, and textiles. But these jobs were in decline and about to be eliminated or automated further, trade advanced the schedule. People do not understand, chose not to understand or conflate this.

    Perhaps more importantly, TPP will block out China’s and Russia’s effort to build economic hegemony in the Pacific and displace the US. This is actually the most important aspect of the deal.

    Trump thought, as many still do, that China was a part of TPP and will win with its passage. The opposite is the case.

    Trade has become a witch hunt. Light up the torches and grab the pitch forks.

    • #4
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:13 AM PDT
    • Like
  5. I Walton Member

    It would be nice if we knew what was in this agreement. I suspect, but of course can’t know, that it contains extension of our regulatory state into our competitors’ economies as much as it pushes freer trade. After all it came from an Administration that doesn’t believe in free markets but seems to have faith in the regulatory administrative state. Singapore is already the freest economy in the world so only gains access. Singapore labor standards are high, because, as a free economy with very strict immigration standards, they enjoy an excess demand for labor and capital which drives up productivity, wages and standards through competition. As a tiny island they have established environmental requirements that everyone supports as if they were Swiss. They use market forces rather than direct controls for most regulations. What they want, and must have is the US military presence in the region, and they are right. This thing must be opened for serious scrutiny by a new Administration. Unfortunately perhaps neither will want to do so. If I’m right that it extends the administrative regulatory state, both may actually embrace it.

    • #5
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:16 AM PDT
    • Like
  6. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I Walton:It would be nice if we knew what was in this agreement. I suspect, but of course can’t know, that it contains extension of our regulatory state into our competitors’ economies as much as it pushes freer trade. After all it came from an Administration that doesn’t believe in free markets but seems to have faith in the regulatory administrative state. Singapore is already the freest economy in the world so only gains access. Singapore labor standards are high, because, as a free economy with very strict immigration standards, they enjoy an excess demand for labor and capital which drives up productivity, wages and standards through competition. As a tiny island they have established environmental requirements that everyone supports as if they were Swiss. They use market forces rather than direct controls for most regulations. What they want, and must have is the US military presence in the region, and they are right. This thing must be opened for serious scrutiny by a new Administration. Unfortunately perhaps neither will want to do so. If I’m right that it extends the administrative regulatory state, both may actually embrace it.

    Why do you say that we cannot know what is in this agreement?

    • #6
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:26 AM PDT
    • Like
  7. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    It is almost impossible for the average citizen to know whether any legislation or international agreement will harm or benefit his country. TPP runs 30 chapters long and was written in multiple languages. New Zealand published the whole thing so one is free to read all 90 PDFs files to make sure everything is copacetic.

    Otherwise, one is left to assume that the President and his representatives have conducted in good faith bargaining for the American people. And by the people, I just don’t mean those who contributed the most to Organizing For America, the DNC, or some other political slush fund.

    No one has made that comprehensive argument yet. It’s just been “trust us.”

    Now, after this administration has repeatedly lied about its major domestic program, consistently lied to our European partners about upholding defense agreements, laid down mythical red lines, set 5 al Qaeda terrorists free for one American traitor, traded $400 million to Iran to free hostages and secure a nuclear deal that was no deal at all (and publicly laughed at how they bought, paid for and hoodwinked the press over it), the absolute best argument is American credibility?

    How many times does one have to be hit between the eyes with a two by four before one yells “Stop!”?

    • #7
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:28 AM PDT
    • Like
  8. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    EJHill:It is almost impossible for the average citizen to know whether any legislation or international agreement will harm or benefit his country. TTP runs 30 chapters long and was written in multiple languages. New Zealand published the whole thing so one is free to read all 90 PDFs files to make sure everything is copacetic.

    Otherwise, one is left to assume that the President and his representatives have conducted in good faith bargaining for the American people. And by the people, I just don’t mean those who contributed the most to Organizing For America, the DNC, or some other political slush fund.

    No one has made that comprehensive argument yet. It’s just been “trust us.”

    Now, after this administration has repeatedly lied about its major domestic program, consistently lied to our European partners about upholding defense agreements, laid down mythical red lines, set 5 al Qaeda terrorists free for one American traitor, traded $400 million to Iran to free hostages and secure a nuclear deal that was no deal at all (and publicly laughed at how the bought, paid for and hoodwinked the press over it), the absolute best argument is American credibility?

    How many times does one have to be hit between the eyes with a two by four before one yells “Stop!”?

    See, this is my problem. No one has sold me on TPP, because no one can even tell me what is in it. Any trade document that is 30 Chapters, cannot be, on the face of it “Free Trade” because there has to be all sorts of carve outs and exceptions.

    What I have heard, is that the TPP is used to impose foreign rules on Americans. Other Treaties have been used in this way before.

    Clair, can you say what, specifically, is great about TPP?

    • #8
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:33 AM PDT
    • Like
  9. James Madison Member

    Bryan G. Stephens: No one has sold me on TPP, because no one can even tell me what is in it. Any trade document that is 30 Chapters, cannot be, on the face of it “Free Trade” because there has to be all sorts of carve outs and exceptions.

    Like NAFTA, there are many definitions, rules, and procedures. There are carve outs. Some aspects are delayed for many countries. They will become effective in 3, 5, 9 years. Some aspects will require compensation for transition. Some aspects will keeps small fees (tariffs) or compliance requirements.

    Think if you will, that you are exporting peanuts into Indonesia – or peanut products – grown in Georgia. You have to define a peanut, inspection rules, certify who and how to inspect, determine what fungi and disease must be excluded, insure not insects or rat feces are in the peanuts, etc. etc. etc. Now do this for two, then three, then 7 countries and multiply by it 3 and you get TPP.

    Yes it is complex and long, there are winners and losers – for a while. But, it is more free trade than not and where it is not, it will set the course to become more free trade. After all when you owe the bank a little money, it is your problem. When you owe a lot, it is their problem. Countries will become dependent upon it so fast that there will be a TPP #2, etc. as nation’s work to clarify and define.

    • #9
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:45 AM PDT
    • Like
  10. mezzrow Member
    mezzrow Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Have I mentioned recently how dispiriting I find this election?

    I’m considering getting this tattooed on my forehead.

    Can we agree that the name for what the electorate lacks here is trust?

    What we are discussing is why there is none of it for anyone in this cycle. Not the press, not the candidates, not the parties, nobody.

    All that’s left is fear and cynicism.

    • #10
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:46 AM PDT
    • Like
  11. I Walton Member

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    I Walton

    Why do you say that we cannot know what is in this agreement?

    It was not made public. If you want to read it you must get permission, you can’t take notes, photos etc. Most people who say they support it have not read it. That former USTRs support it almost convinces me, but it came from this bunch. Maybe the reason it is held closely is because it targets China, but the Chinese probably found a way to go over all countries copies including ours and know what’s in it better than anyone. Past agreements were not held so closely. I don’t want to sound Wilsonian, but these things should be open.

    • #11
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:49 AM PDT
    • Like
  12. James Madison Member

    TPP, like all trade agreements, must be constructed by government, regulators and the elite. These are three things conservatives mistrust. And we mistrust them for good reason. But that does not mean that because I mistrust doctors, I should not see one.

    Conservatives believe in freedom and free markets. We are trapped by the political process or benefit by it. If we avoid or shirk from it, then the “winners and losers” the liberals like win. We must get in the fight, stand for freedom and accept that many people will face competition and perhaps a loss of jobs for a time. We have to accept that politics and power will play a role.

    But, free trade is competition and specialization – and it is the source from which all productivity arises – and to evade it is to be selfish. It is like saying, we don’t want to compete and take risk because the deal is not good to us in all aspects. No deal is. To do otherwise is to hurt our children and their children by denying them the opportunity to compete and win.

    If the rules are unfair, we will make them fairer by being in the game. And since when do American’s ever believe the world is “fair.” Fairness is a liberal progressive concept that connotes redistribution from the winners – the risk takers, the talented, the brave – to the losers, the whiners, and the indolent.

    • #12
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:54 AM PDT
    • Like
  13. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James Madison:

    Bryan G. Stephens: No one has sold me on TPP, because no one can even tell me what is in it. Any trade document that is 30 Chapters, cannot be, on the face of it “Free Trade” because there has to be all sorts of carve outs and exceptions.

    Like NAFTA, there are many definitions, rules, and procedures. There are carve outs. Some aspects are delayed for many countries. They will become effective in 3, 5, 9 years. Some aspects will require compensation for transition. Some aspects will keeps small fees (tariffs) or compliance requirements.

    Think if you will, that you are exporting peanuts into Indonesia – or peanut products – grown in Georgia. You have to define a peanut, inspection rules, certify who and how to inspect, determine what fungi and disease must be excluded, insure not insects or rat feces are in the peanuts, etc. etc. etc. Now do this for two, then three, then 7 countries and multiply by it 3 and you get TPP.

    Yes it is complex and long, there are winners and losers – for a while. But, it is more free trade than not and where it is not, it will set the course to become more free trade. After all when you owe the bank a little money, it is your problem. When you owe a lot, it is their problem. Countries will become dependent upon it so fast that there will be a TPP #2, etc. as nation’s work to clarify and define.

    OK, so what does it do? Can you point me to a summary?

    This sounds much like the TSPLOST here in Atlanta that everyone said was going to be great, but no one could quite tell me how I, personally, was going to benefit.

    How does TPP help me, Bryan G. Stephens or my family, live a better life? What is in it for me? I keep hearing how great this thing is. It should be child’s play, if it is so great, to rattle off a list of things it will do for me.

    Just point me to a summary of the good and bad points, so I can make up my mind.

    • #13
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:55 AM PDT
    • Like
  14. BrentB67 Inactive

    If it takes 5,000 + pages, has to be hidden in secret before the TPA vote and has no chance (or so I am told) of garnering the 2/3 Senate majority required for a treaty I am glad it does not have support.

    This is exactly the kind of thing the Constitutional requirement for 2/3 majority was designe to prevent. Put the whole thing out in the open, debate it and if it doesn’t get 2/3 we go back to our negotiating partners and say we want more and make them give us what we want until it achieves the 2/3 hurdle.

    • #14
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:57 AM PDT
    • Like
  15. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James Madison:TPP, like all trade agreements, must be constructed by government, regulators and the elite. These are three things conservatives mistrust. And we mistrust them for good reason. But that does not mean that because I mistrust doctors, I should not see one.

    Conservatives believe in freedom and free markets. We are trapped by the political process or benefit by it. If we avoid or shirk from it, then the “winners and losers” the liberals like win. We must get in the fight, stand for freedom and accept that many people will face competition and perhaps a loss of jobs for a time. We have to accept that politics and power will play a role.

    But, free trade is competition and specialization – and it is the source from which all productivity arises – and to evade it is to be selfish. It is like saying, we don’t want to compete and take risk because the deal is not good to us in all aspects. No deal is. To do otherwise is to hurt our children and their children by denying them the opportunity to compete and win.

    If the rules are unfair, we will make them fairer by being in the game. And since when do American’s ever believe the world is “fair.” Fairness is a liberal progressive concept that connotes redistribution from the winners – the risk takers, the talented, the brave – to the losers, the whiners, and the indolent.

    If it was true Free Trade, it would not take all these pages. The government, regulators and the elite have a long and rich tradition of cooking the books to give themselves perks at the expense of ordinary people. If it was true Free Trade, we could write it thusly:

    There Shall be Free Trade between the following Nations:

    <Nation List Follows>

    Easy.

    • #15
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:58 AM PDT
    • Like
  16. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    BrentB67:If it takes 5,000 + pages. Has to be hidden in secret before the TPA vote and has no chance (or so I am told) of garnering the 2/3 Senate majority required for a treaty I am glad it does not have support.

    This is exactly the kind of thing the Constitutional requirement for 2/3 majority was designe to prevent. Put the whole thing out in the open, debate it and if it doesn’t get 2/3 we go back to our negotiating partners and say we want more and make them give us what we want until it achieves the 2/3 hurdle.

    Yep. Though, EJ says it is posted and in a bunch of languages, so I guess it is not exactly secret.

    But, it should be debated. Let them go to the American people and explain the damn thing. Are we so stupid that we cannot understand it?

    Again, someone tell me why it is so great.

    • #16
    • August 15, 2016, at 4:59 AM PDT
    • Like
  17. James Madison Member

    I Walton: It was not made public. If you want to read it you must get permission, you can’t take notes, photos etc. Most people who say they support it have not read it. That former USTRs support it almost convinces me, but it came from this bunch. Maybe the reason it is held closely is because it targets China, but the Chinese probably found a way to go over all countries copies including ours and know what’s in it better than anyone. Past agreements were not held so closely. I don’t want to sound Wilsonian, but these things should be open.

    Certain parts – special side agreements – are not public. They may hurt some Americans in some industries. But the reason for these agreements is to cut deals to get the big deal done. These side agreements go away or they don’t get renegotiated. The cover local politicians in Thailand, Vietnam, etc. They may also protect Boeing, Cargill, GM, etc. And they also hurt China and Russia hopefully.

    If you want to read the TPP, it is all over the Internet – except for some of the “protocols” or side agreements. And if you want to understand it, read the Wall Street Journal or any reasonably objective source. The WSJ is not a representative of “Wall Street,” in this case since Wall Street bankers and traders are already in a global, near tariff free market. Also, avoid Drudge. They are selling clicks. They want controversy.

    • #17
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:02 AM PDT
    • Like
  18. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    mezzrow:

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.: Have I mentioned recently how dispiriting I find this election?

    I’m considering getting this tattooed on my forehead.

    Can we agree that the name for what the electorate lacks here is trust?

    What we are discussing is why there is none of it for anyone in this cycle. Not the press, not the candidates, not the parties, nobody.

    All that’s left is fear and cynicism.

    Right on! And it is totally the fault of the elites.

    John Podhoretz, on a GLOP podcast, said “OH they always lie” and acted as if that was not a reason to be upset. The elites have turned on the American people, and they are tired of it.

    • #18
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:02 AM PDT
    • Like
  19. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James Madison:

    I Walton: It was not made public. If you want to read it you must get permission, you can’t take notes, photos etc. Most people who say they support it have not read it. That former USTRs support it almost convinces me, but it came from this bunch. Maybe the reason it is held closely is because it targets China, but the Chinese probably found a way to go over all countries copies including ours and know what’s in it better than anyone. Past agreements were not held so closely. I don’t want to sound Wilsonian, but these things should be open.

    Certain parts – special side agreements – are not public. They may hurt some Americans in some industries. But the reason for these agreements is to cut deals to get the big deal done. These side agreements go away or they don’t get renegotiated. The cover local politicians in Thailand, Vietnam, etc. They may also protect Boeing, Cargill, GM, etc. And they also hurt China and Russia hopefully.

    If you want to read the TPP, it is all over the Internet – except for some of the “protocols” or side agreements. And if you want to understand it, read the Wall Street Journal or any reasonably objective source. The WSJ is not a representative of “Wall Street,” in this case since Wall Street bankers and traders are already in a global, near tariff free market. Also, avoid Drudge. They are selling clicks. They want controversy.

    You are for it. Can you not make the case about what it will do for me?

    I am unwilling to sign any contract I am not allowed to fully read. Do you honestly want me, as a voter, to support a trade agreement that is kept hidden? Seriously?

    • #19
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:05 AM PDT
    • Like
  20. BrentB67 Inactive

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    BrentB67:If it takes 5,000 + pages. Has to be hidden in secret before the TPA vote and has no chance (or so I am told) of garnering the 2/3 Senate majority required for a treaty I am glad it does not have support.

    This is exactly the kind of thing the Constitutional requirement for 2/3 majority was designe to prevent. Put the whole thing out in the open, debate it and if it doesn’t get 2/3 we go back to our negotiating partners and say we want more and make them give us what we want until it achieves the 2/3 hurdle.

    Yep. Though, EJ says it is posted and in a bunch of languages, so I guess it is not exactly secret.

    But, it should be debated. Let them go to the American people and explain the damn thing. Are we so stupid that we cannot understand it?

    Again, someone tell me why it is so great.

    Yes, it is posted now. However, when the Trade Promotion Authority vote that lowers the threshold from 2/3 to simple majority was takig place it was under lock and key.

    The only Senator I am aware of on record having read some of it is Rand Paul.

    One of the reasons I stopped donating to Cruz, though I voted for him in the primary, was that he voted yes and admitted to not having read it. He later voted against TPA.

    • #20
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:08 AM PDT
    • Like
  21. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    BrentB67:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    BrentB67:If it takes 5,000 + pages. Has to be hidden in secret before the TPA vote and has no chance (or so I am told) of garnering the 2/3 Senate majority required for a treaty I am glad it does not have support.

    This is exactly the kind of thing the Constitutional requirement for 2/3 majority was designe to prevent. Put the whole thing out in the open, debate it and if it doesn’t get 2/3 we go back to our negotiating partners and say we want more and make them give us what we want until it achieves the 2/3 hurdle.

    Yep. Though, EJ says it is posted and in a bunch of languages, so I guess it is not exactly secret.

    But, it should be debated. Let them go to the American people and explain the damn thing. Are we so stupid that we cannot understand it?

    Again, someone tell me why it is so great.

    Yes, it is posted now. However, when the Trade Promotion Authority vote that lowers the threshold from 2/3 to simple majority was takig place it was under lock and key.

    The only Senator I am aware of on record having read some of it is Rand Paul.

    One of the reasons I stopped donating to Cruz, though I voted for him in the primary, was that he voted yes and admitted to not having read it. He later voted against TPA.

    How can that even be allowed? You cannot pass a Treaty that then allows modification outside of the 2/3rd limit.

    The Elites want to rule us like they are Kings.

    Trump is just the beginning on this.

    • #21
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:10 AM PDT
    • Like
  22. James Madison Member

    Bryan G. Stephens:If it was true Free Trade, it would not take all these pages. The government, regulators and the elite have a long and rich tradition of cooking the books to give themselves perks at the expense of ordinary people. If it was true Free Trade, we could write it thusly:

    There Shall be Free Trade between the following Nations:

    <Nation List Follows>

    Easy

    Free trade is part of a politcal process and a diplomatic process. You have to define what is free, what is not.

    Some things may escape the agreement for good reason, and some may escape the agreement for political reasons. Some may have special terms for geopolitical reasons – get back at China, get Russia. If you are Vietnamese or the Phillipino, you do not want the world to know how you are kicking China or getting special treatment for the cotton ball and Q-tip business in your home country for a few years. Thus, parts are secret. This helps the process. It is not a conspiracy. And the secret parts mostly will subside with time. They are transitional to get the deal done and help the sugar cane producers in Mindinao, or give an exemption to the timber clear cutters in Java from US environmental regulations on rare hardwoods or the protection of the Javese parrot.

    If you have not participated in a negotiation or bought a new car or home recently, you may not understand how the paper work can mount quickly.

    • #22
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:12 AM PDT
    • Like
  23. genferei Member
    genferei Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James Madison: Perhaps more importantly, TPP will block out China’s and Russia’s effort to build economic hegemony in the Pacific and displace the US. This is actually the most important aspect of the deal.

    Can you explain how this happens? Or even how China is attempting to build economic hegemony in the Pacific?

    • #23
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:21 AM PDT
    • Like
  24. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James Madison:

    Bryan G. Stephens:If it was true Free Trade, it would not take all these pages. The government, regulators and the elite have a long and rich tradition of cooking the books to give themselves perks at the expense of ordinary people. If it was true Free Trade, we could write it thusly:

    There Shall be Free Trade between the following Nations:

    <Nation List Follows>

    Easy

    Free trade is part of a politcal process and a diplomatic process. You have to define what is free, what is not.

    Some things may escape the agreement for good reason, and some may escape the agreement for political reasons. Some may have special terms for geopolitical reasons – get back at China, get Russia. If you are Vietnamese or the Phillipino, you do not want the world to know how you are kicking China or getting special treatment for the cotton ball and Q-tip business in your home country for a few years. Thus, parts are secret. This helps the process. It is not a conspiracy. And the secret parts mostly will subside with time. They are transitional to get the deal done and help the sugar cane producers in Mindinao, or give an exemption to the timber clear cutters in Java from US environmental regulations on rare hardwoods or the protection of the Javese parrot.

    If you have not participated in a negotiation or bought a new car or home recently, you may not understand how the paper work can mount quickly.

    Wow, way to be condescending, as if, as CEO, I don’t look at massive contracts on a regular basis. One might assume, as Reagan member, I am a person of some means. Bought a new car last year, and refinanced the house.

    Anymore statements to imply I am too stupid to understand what the big boys are doing?

    I am for Free Trade. That is, Trade that is Free. It does not have to be defined. Any application of any limitation on Trade means it is not “free”. Only diplomats and political elites can muck something that simple up.

    I do not trust any of these players. They have not earned my trust. They do not get a pass.

    Again, what are the benefits for me on TPP. You are clearly for it. Give me what I am going to get out of TPP. It is great! It is wonderful! Sell me on it, instead of telling me I am too stupid to “get it”.

    • #24
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:21 AM PDT
    • Like
  25. BrentB67 Inactive

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    BrentB67:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    BrentB67:…

    Yep. Though, EJ says it is posted and in a bunch of languages, so I guess it is not exactly secret.

    But, it should be debated. Let them go to the American people and explain the damn thing. Are we so stupid that we cannot understand it?

    Again, someone tell me why it is so great.

    Yes, it is posted now. However, when the Trade Promotion Authority vote that lowers the threshold from 2/3 to simple majority was takig place it was under lock and key.

    The only Senator I am aware of on record having read some of it is Rand Paul.

    One of the reasons I stopped donating to Cruz, though I voted for him in the primary, was that he voted yes and admitted to not having read it. He later voted against TPA.

    How can that even be allowed? You cannot pass a Treaty that then allows modification outside of the 2/3rd limit.

    The Elites want to rule us like they are Kings.

    Trump is just the beginning on this.

    When it goes to a simple majority it doesn’t hold the same power as a treaty. I will the more detailed nuances to the distinguished gentleman @jamesmadison.

    • #25
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:21 AM PDT
    • Like
  26. James Madison Member

    By the way, TPP under lock and key means it was available for reading and analysis, but not for general publication – especially the parts that were in the side deals. Ted Cruz and every member of Congress knew what was in it or could easy know. They have staffs that make it their business to read and decipher it. And there was only a limit from copying it or replicating it…for obvious reasons.

    Republican government’s involve electing representatives to represent us in republican governments. Some don’t trust anyone. Some punish everyone one. But to have a republican government you have to trust some one. Trump may be the person you trust, but what will he do? Tweet, withdraw, change, sarcasm? Will he cut a better deal? Yes, and no. He will will claim “yes”. But, …he will still negotiate and that negotiation will mean many will win a little and a few will lose a lot – for a time.

    The fact is this, political processes are never fair to everyone in their eyes. And they may not be fair to the 14 million who voted for Trump in the GOP primaries or the 55-60 million who might vote for him in the general election when he loses to Hillary as she wins 66-70 million votes. Better get comfortable with that.

    Running away from free trade or pretending it can be done in a vacuum or in 10 words is unrealistic. It is know-nothing-ism.

    • #26
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:22 AM PDT
    • Like
  27. BrentB67 Inactive

    genferei:

    James Madison: Perhaps more importantly, TPP will block out China’s and Russia’s effort to build economic hegemony in the Pacific and displace the US. This is actually the most important aspect of the deal.

    Can you explain how this happens? Or even how China is attempting to build economic hegemony in the Pacific?

    It doesn’t. This provides a great opportunity for some of the members of TPP to play both sides of the fence.

    • #27
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:22 AM PDT
    • Like
  28. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    BrentB67:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    BrentB67:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    BrentB67:…

    Yep. Though, EJ says it is posted and in a bunch of languages, so I guess it is not exactly secret.

    But, it should be debated. Let them go to the American people and explain the damn thing. Are we so stupid that we cannot understand it?

    Again, someone tell me why it is so great.

    Yes, it is posted now. However, when the Trade Promotion Authority vote that lowers the threshold from 2/3 to simple majority was takig place it was under lock and key.

    The only Senator I am aware of on record having read some of it is Rand Paul.

    One of the reasons I stopped donating to Cruz, though I voted for him in the primary, was that he voted yes and admitted to not having read it. He later voted against TPA.

    How can that even be allowed? You cannot pass a Treaty that then allows modification outside of the 2/3rd limit.

    The Elites want to rule us like they are Kings.

    Trump is just the beginning on this.

    When it goes to a simple majority it doesn’t hold the same power as a treaty. I will the more detailed nuances to the distinguished gentleman @jamesmadison.

    ok

    • #28
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:23 AM PDT
    • Like
  29. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    James Madison:By the way, TPP under lock and key means it was available for reading and analysis, but not for general publication – especially the parts that were in the side deals. Ted Cruz and every member of Congress knew what was in it or could easy know. They have staffs that make it their business to read and decipher it. And there was only a limit from copying it or replicating it…for obvious reasons.

    Republican government’s involve electing representatives to represent us in republican governments. Some don’t trust anyone. Some punish everyone one. But to have a republican government you have to trust some one. Trump may be the person you trust, but what will he do? Tweet, withdraw, change, sarcasm? Will he cut a better deal? Yes, and no. He will will claim “yes”. But, …he will still negotiate and that negotiation will mean many will win a little and a few will lose a lot – for a time.

    The fact is this, political processes are never fair to everyone in their eyes. And they may not be fair to the 14 million who voted for Trump in the GOP primaries or the 55-60 million who might vote for him in the general election when he loses to Hillary as she wins 66-70 million votes. Better get comfortable with that.

    Running away from free trade or pretending it can be done in a vacuum or in 10 words is unrealistic. It is know-nothing-ism.

    What is in it for me? You keep not giving an answer, but you continue to insult.

    For the record, I don’t Trust Trump either. There is no reason to trust any of the elected people because their past behavior does not warrant it. For that, you call us know-nothings.

    Again: Stop insulting us, and tell us why TPP is a good thing.

    Any legislation or Treaty should be trusted to the American people. If the elites don’t trust the American people, then they should not ask us to trust them.

    • #29
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:25 AM PDT
    • Like
  30. James Madison Member

    Bryan G. Stephens: Again, what are the benefits for me on TPP. You are clearly for it. Give me what I am going to get out of TPP. It is great! It is wonderful! Sell me on it, instead of telling me I am too stupid to “get it”.

    Before you go all “thin skinned,” you said a free trade agreement should be reduced to one line. Who is condescending? That is clearly out of the question and anyone would know that. It is an easy way out and cannot be serious. The preamble is longer than that. Read it – you can find it online.

    What does free trade do for you? See two centuries of incredible specialization and rising living standards. Read Adam Smith.

    Does it hurt many people? Does it make many more better off? Is it ever free? Yes, Yes, Not always.

    NAFTA was secret too – or at least the side agreements were. And the side agreements favoring glass, chemicals, etc. are now gone. NAFTA created a boom in farm exports – so there is that. It also placed new auto plants in Mexico which displaced some imports from Asia, Canada, and production in the US. But it was not all a displacement from the US.

    Again, you are going to have read. Search the WSJ opinion pages and you find both sides of the argument. It cannot be conveyed in 250 words. The TPP is more about containing China and Russia in Asia….there is that too.

    • #30
    • August 15, 2016, at 5:33 AM PDT
    • Like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.