Sanders or Clinton folk regarding TPP, what do you think?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,519
6,952
136
Here's someone who I think is worth listening to on this issue. He's done yoeman's work analyzing the TPP. Here's his blog:

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/

Interesting. From what I've gathered from that article as well as some others, it looks like for the most part Big Corporations are going to benefit from TPP while the working class from the USA and Japan are going to suffer from it.

So then the question is: From what member nations will the working class benefit and why?
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136

shady28

Platinum Member
Apr 11, 2004
2,520
397
126
Interesting. From what I've gathered from that article as well as some others, it looks like for the most part Big Corporations are going to benefit from TPP while the working class from the USA and Japan are going to suffer from it.

So then the question is: From what member nations will the working class benefit and why?

I think you're asking the wrong question, as it implies those pushing TPP give a crap about the working class somewhere. They do not.

This is what EPI (Economic Policy Institute) said :

Expanded trade, particularly with trading partners that are poorer and more labor-abundant than the United States, is likely to lower the wages of most American workers. While expanded trade is generally “win-win” at the country level, expanded trade redistributes so much income within countries that it’s possible to make the majority of residents worse off—and this is indeed the likeliest scenario for the United States.
...
Some TPP supporters claim the agreement will be “all gain, no pain” for American workers because U.S. tariffs are already low while trading partners’ tariffs are higher. These arguments are economically incoherent. In fact, studies that show the TPP will increase overall American national income also show that it will cause substantial reshuffling of domestic production away from labor-intensive import-competing sectors. This will clearly inflict damage on large groups (probably the majority) of American workers.\
...
Finally, it’s worth noting that lots of the export “opportunities” highlighted by proponents of the TPP—including in the passage above—are not necessarily opportunities for U.S. firms to export more, they are instead opportunities to use the TPP to ensure that foreign consumers pay more for U.S. exports. Treaties like the TPP routinely harmonize other nations’ intellectual property laws to meet U.S. standards, which are very kind to U.S. pharmaceutical and software companies. This essentially means other countries must now spend resources to ensure higher prices are paid by their own consumers to protect the monopoly profits of firms like Pfizer and Microsoft. It is hard indeed to see how this is a win for the wages of the vast majority of American workers.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,405
6,079
126

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,596
474
126
People who ignore the damage the TPP can do to the economy of this country because "Oh we're about to elect the first female president" are fucking idiots.

I'm not voting for a fake progressive.


__________
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,113
925
126
LYING FROM A RACIST BIGOT just like his god Fuhrer Trump.

Why doesn't that surprise me?

Maybe you won't care, but if you ever want to be treated with some modicum of respect, by me, I would suggest you don't talk to me like that. First of all, you are completely off base. Second, you don't know anything about the diversity of my family. Third, Trump is not my "god Furhrer" and I am not voting for him. Truthfully, earlier, I was in favor of some of his ideas, but have since realized this guy is not someone we should elect as president...Hillary either. It's just inappropriate for you to go labeling people you know nothing about in real life.

That's all.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,979
47,897
136
I'm fairly ambivalent about it as it is more of an IP agreement than a trade agreement. I think it's weird that it has become some sort of totem among both the far left and the far right though, as in the scheme of things it won't change much.

I'm very very supportive of free trade, but trade in the world is already pretty good in that regard so the best we can do is make marginal improvements in further reducing barriers.

I think when people complain about free trade what they should really be complaining about is governmental failure. Free trade makes the country richer, but often unequally. We can easily correct for that, but we often don't.
 

Painman

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2000
3,805
29
86
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...7705a2-bd1e-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html

ISDS would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws — and potentially to pick up huge payouts from taxpayers — without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court. Here’s how it would work. Imagine that the United States bans a toxic chemical that is often added to gasoline because of its health and environmental consequences. If a foreign company that makes the toxic chemical opposes the law, it would normally have to challenge it in a U.S. court. But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages.
But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages.

What part of this does anyone not get?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,979
47,897
136
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...7705a2-bd1e-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html

But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages.

What part of this does anyone not get?

So it's a lot like the WTO? That dispute resolution framework has been extremely useful for the US.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,405
6,079
126
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...7705a2-bd1e-11e4-b274-e5209a3bc9a9_story.html

But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages.

What part of this does anyone not get?

There is much that I don't get. What I don't get is whether this concern is of any rational concern. From what little I understand treaties take president over national laws and we are signatory to many treaties. I don't know if we are not already bound by lots of such conditions and or whether they present actual difficulties. I also know that there is an aspect of American thinking that is paranoid about some insane notions of a one world government that will strip us of our American identity, but the identity of America I see today is nothing like the America I was born in, so I see such fears as childish, fearing what has and will always happen. You can't step into the same river twice.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,405
6,079
126
So it's a lot like the WTO? That dispute resolution framework has been extremely useful for the US.

Thank you for this and your prior post. I am trying to determine what is the issue that divides Clinton from Sander teams regarding this topic and so that I could develop some concept of what is at stake. I am beginning to see the issue is pretty arcane and of relatively narrow focus, and that in fact the real issue may be one of bias, whether you think international trade has been a good thing for the US worker. Thanks to you and LR I am beginning to think the issue is not so much trade which may be OK, but with how you insure wealth distribution.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,195
126
Is party platform the right place to negotiate trade deals?
I think you lay out principles there, but specific trade deals, it's kind of silly.
 

Painman

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2000
3,805
29
86
There is much that I don't get. What I don't get is whether this concern is of any rational concern. From what little I understand treaties take preCEdent [my edit] over national laws and we are signatory to many treaties. I don't know if we are not already bound by lots of such conditions and or whether they present actual difficulties. I also know that there is an aspect of American thinking that is paranoid about some insane notions of a one world government that will strip us of our American identity, but the identity of America I see today is nothing like the America I was born in, so I see such fears as childish, fearing what has and will always happen. You can't step into the same river twice.

You don't give a fuck about sovereignty? Or national identity?

You know, people talk about American "identity" and they suppose it's all about white people. It's not. This is a horizontally oriented culture. It has always been, and it always will be. We're an amalgam of people from all over the planet, who largely agree upon the overall idea of America, and then try to find their place within it.

And with regards to TPP... You're OK with it just because we're OK with a bunch of other treaties?

Ehh...
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,405
6,079
126
You don't give a fuck about sovereignty? Or national identity?

You know, people talk about American "identity" and they suppose it's all about white people. It's not. This is a horizontally oriented culture. It has always been, and it always will be. We're an amalgam of people from all over the planet, who largely agree upon the overall idea of America, and then try to find their place within it.

And with regards to TPP... You're OK with it just because we're OK with a bunch of other treaties?

Ehh...

What I said does not mean I'm OK with anything. It means I am not persuaded by your projected doom and gloom just because you proffer it as a valid scenario. I also said nothing about white people.

I believe in the sanctity of life, the value of the individual, justice and fairness, etc, in short what would be good for the whole human race, not just my own country of origin. There is one human race and we have one planet to live on. I would like to live in a world that can sustain itself peacefully and in which people's lives have meaning. I believe the world is moving toward integration and it's a good thing. The more we see our own welfare tied to the welfare of others I think the better off we will be. I think that one of the manifestations of self hate is the desire that others not win.
 

Painman

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2000
3,805
29
86
What I said does not mean I'm OK with anything. It means I am not persuaded by your projected doom and gloom just because you proffer it as a valid scenario. I also said nothing about white people.

I believe in the sanctity of life, the value of the individual, justice and fairness, etc, in short what would be good for the whole human race, not just my own country of origin. There is one human race and we have one planet to live on. I would like to live in a world that can sustain itself peacefully and in which people's lives have meaning. I believe the world is moving toward integration and it's a good thing. The more we see our own welfare tied to the welfare of others I think the better off we will be. I think that one of the manifestations of self hate is the desire that others not win.

Sorry, Moony. We're just not ready for mass multiculturalism yet. Europe's clusterfuck ought to be showing you that.

Perhaps California is... If so, then by all means, fucking secede and have at it... leave the other 49 to our own sensibilities.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,218
14,904
136
Sorry, Moony. We're just not ready for mass multiculturalism yet. Europe's clusterfuck ought to be showing you that.

Perhaps California is... If so, then by all means, fucking secede and have at it... leave the other 49 to our own sensibilities.

Sensibility? Ha!
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,405
6,079
126
Sorry, Moony. We're just not ready for mass multiculturalism yet. Europe's clusterfuck ought to be showing you that.

Perhaps California is... If so, then by all means, fucking secede and have at it... leave the other 49 to our own sensibilities.

Perhaps you don't remember when we all used to be British and then we had a war with our closest ally today. I'm thinking a Chevy Impala or a Honda Civic. Which do you think I should pick.
 

Painman

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2000
3,805
29
86
Perhaps you don't remember when we all used to be British and then we had a war with our closest ally today. I'm thinking a Chevy Impala or a Honda Civic. Which do you think I should pick.

Whichever one is manufactured in Tennessee.