Sounds like a line Elizabeth Warren might have used at a United Steel Workers rally. Personally I kind of like the idea of fast tracking a tax cut that holds back gov't control of private spending.
Posted on 04/25/2015 10:00:17 AM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
As America inches towards a big trade deal with Asia, PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA is itching to sign one of the biggest trade deals in American history. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would link 11 economies of the Pacific rim—including Japan and Singapore—with America.
These 12 countries together account for 40% of world GDP and one-third of trade (see chart 1). As well as dismantling tariff barriers, the TPP is meant to tackle tough issues such as intellectual property, labour and environmental standards. American trade negotiators predict that by 2025 the TPP will make the world $220 billion a year richer. In this section
Fighting the secret plot to make the world richer A field guide to 2016 Wanted: cops with people skills Dark days A fuel and your money Hobbling businesses The California raisin grab The regulated West
Reprints Related topics
Exchange-rate regimes Republican Party (United States) U.S. Democratic Party Politics Political parties World politics
Many Democrats, however, fiercely oppose it. Sandy Levin, a Democratic congressman, growls that he is “out to defeat” Mr Obama’s plans. Hillary Clinton has conspicuously withheld her endorsement. Labour unions hate the TPP. If it passes, it will be because Republicans in Congress, for once, back Mr Obama.
The geopolitical aspects of the deal are hardly controversial. Friendly ties with Asian allies are obviously important. China has been flexing its military muscles over disputed islands and is trying to build up regional influence with projects such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, of which America is not a part. The TPP could help America retain its sway in Asia, boosters argue. If the 12 TPP countries plump for common trade standards (for instance, mutual recognition of regulatory approval processes in medical services), then those rules—not China’s—could function in effect as global ones, given the fat chunk of world GDP they would govern.
Congressional Republicans and Mr Obama argue that by boosting exports, the deal would make America richer. Jason Furman, the chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, says that by 2025 the TPP would raise American incomes by 0.4% per year. Public support for foreign trade is high. Gallup finds that 58% of Americans see it mostly as an opportunity—a figure that has risen 17 percentage points since the recession—and only 33% see it as a threat.
Republicans’ views have not changed much, but the proportion of Democratic voters who see trade positively has shot up from 36% to 61% since 2008 (see chart 2). This may be because Democrats are more likely to be in jobs that benefit from globalisation, or it may simply be because there is now a Democrat in the White House pushing trade deals instead of a Republican.
Nonetheless, opposition to the deal is strong.
Democratic politicians are much less trade-friendly than Democratic voters or the country as a whole. Many fret that imports from low-cost countries such as Vietnam will hurt American workers in industries such as carmaking and textiles.
This is not a foolish worry. Globalisation has filled people’s shopping trolleys with cheaper, better goods: the US Chamber of Commerce estimates that imports boost the average American family’s purchasing power by $10,000 a year. However, trade has probably also held down blue-collar workers’ wages in rich countries.
A new paper, from Ann Harrison of the University of Pennsylvania and colleagues finds that if there had been no imports, median real wages in America in 2008 would have been 3% higher than they actually were. For workers in menial tasks, they would have been 15% higher. Another paper found that a quarter of the employment decline in American manufacturing from 1990 to 2007 was caused by competition from Chinese imports.
Yet it is difficult to blame trade deals for this. America has no free-trade agreement with India, yet imports of goods from there have more than doubled over the past decade. Though many Democrats see NAFTA, a deal with Canada and Mexico that Bill Clinton signed in 1993, as a disaster for America’s workers, the consensus among economists is that it did not have much effect on the labour market.
The effects of the latest deal are unlikely to be very different. What is more, thanks to pressure from Democrats, any trade deal would also include extra “trade-adjustment assistance”: ie, help for those whose jobs may be threatened by it.
Barack Obama, corporate shill?
This will not reassure everyone.
The TPP is BIG—there are nearly 30 chapters—and since large chunks of the negotiations are KEPT SECRET, many worry that American workers, human rights and the environment will soon be at the MERCY of the “GLOBAL CORPORATE AGENDA” that Mr Obama somehow represents. In TPP negotiations America is pursuing provisions similar to the “May 10th Agreement”, a deal which included workers’ rights and has appeared in other American trade pacts.
Other parts of the TPP will irk greens. In recent months America seems to have softened its language on the environment, possibly to win over poorer trading partners. Mr Levin complains that the TPP “does not address whether or how climate-change issues should be handled”.
The TPP might not be so controversial if talks were conducted openly. Jeffrey Schott of the Peterson Institute, a think-tank, argues that although negotiators need input from those who will be affected—including businesses and trade unions—making the negotiations public might make it difficult to balance the demands of competing interest groups.
However, SECRECY now MAY be so STRICT that it ends up irritating everyone. In an attempt to make the plan stick, senior Democrats say that a final trade agreement must be subject to public consultation before Congress votes.
Many Democrats also grumble that the TPP says little about “CURRENCY MANIPULATION”, by which countries deliberately hold down their currencies to boost exports.
According to a paper from the Peterson Institute, currency manipulation may be responsible for half of America’s “excess unemployment” (joblessness above what economists call “full employment”). Among the countries the paper designates as “currency manipulators” are Japan and Singapore. Some simple, even lax, rules on currency manipulation would appease many of the sceptics, though such manipulation is fiendishly hard to define.
Economists worry that cluttering up trade pacts with rules about labour, greenery and currencies dilutes the benefits of free trade and gives its opponents extra tools to block the deals entirely. However, there is scant chance of getting any deal through Congress without such sweeteners.
On April 16th congressional leaders settled on a bill to give Mr Obama “Trade Promotion Authority” (TPA), also known as “FAST TRACT”. This is very important: if the bill passes, it would allow the president to negotiate a deal and then submit it to Congress for a yes-or-no vote, with NO AMENDMENTS. Without this power, it is hard for Mr Obama to make credible promises, since Congress could shred them later.
Mr Obama’s ability to conclude TPP and an even bigger proposed pact with Europe, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, hinges on him getting fast-track authority. Most Republicans in Congress, where they hold a majority in both chambers, are likely to support him—they believe in free trade and are keen to show that they can govern.
But both TPA and TPP will need a few Democratic votes to pass. And with so many Democrats in Congress, not to mention darlings of the left such as Elizabeth Warren, either anti-trade or seeking to build a post-Obama identity, that is far from assured.
The President wants to evangelize as quickly as possible?
The GOPe Establishment Republicans have not quite yet destroyed the American middle class, although they HAVE managed to fund Obamacare & amnesty, and put a leftist, racist traitor to the United States in power as the new attorney general.
It will be hilarious to watch communists like Elizabeth Warren AND and her ilk attack this.
While it means an overall net economic benefit, that doesn’t necessarily mean it will lower unemployment and see jobs sent overseas.
The Post-industrial age requires new skills from the workforce, however what that exactly entails is vague to me.
A favor a trade deal to make these countries pull their weight for defense of their own countries, but GOP (closet libs) shouldn’t give Obama complete control over this agreement because of his miss-use of his authority and lies.
It should be tied to securing the border and eliminating the executive actions that are unconstitutional.
Obama would have been impeached in his first term if he were a Republican.
“The Post-industrial age requires new skills from the workforce, however what that exactly entails is vague to me.”
Agree, quite vague. Seems to me the Post in “Post-Industrial” references an artificial activity that took place at the hands of leftist manipulators. Curious how the demise of America’s industrial superiority occurred that today we are negotiating with such focus as we are.
We’re encountering the same kind of problems that happened when the Industrial Revolution began. Mechanization of industry has displaced thousands of workers just like it did with agriculture.
Even with more protectionist policies, we’d still see job losses in the Industrial sector, robots have supplanted the need of human labor. In fact, Industrial output has never dropped despite such job losses.
Figuring out what’s wrong is a lot easier than coming up with a solution, and I don’t have one.
Which begs the question: Does the world have a contingency plan for our nukes?
“Fast Track” always struck me as “QUICK! Before the public finds out!”
Whatever the solution, foreign labor cannot be considered a part of it as you likely already know.
” Combine this with the illegal invasion, EPA and the deficit, the country will be lucky to survive another 20 years. “
It is evident that a large number of powerful entities don’t want us to survive.
“The U.S. cannot be allowed to enter a treaty that would abrogate our Constitution.”
The presidents use of the IRS to subvert and suppress the
vote of his political opponents abrogates our Constitution
also yet the criminal tard is still in office. For some
reason some people think the Constitution is still an issue
with our elected officials. I assure it’s not. It’s not
even a road bump to them any more.
Free flow of labor is in there. That is Amnesty writ large- unlimited immigration.
Sounds like a line Elizabeth Warren might have used at a United Steel Workers rally. Personally I kind of like the idea of fast tracking a tax cut that holds back gov't control of private spending.
What if we were to try to free market. This isn’t the America it was just 30 years ago. It’s harder than ever.
Do you realize that OSHA and the EPA regulate local construction projects? I mean local rehabilitations of existing buildings.
On top of all the local regulations: permitting, licensing, zoning, and etc. (keep in mind that a Chicago alderman can put an indefinite hold on any project in their ward) you’ve got the FEDGOV monster to contend with. The fines are enormous and will put you out of business.
Competition thins your margins. Government comes in and inverts them.
I’m with you on that. Having free trade while not allowing free enterprise is a losing proposition. The country is collapsing under the weight of its own bureaucracy.
That's the good news. The worrisome thing is: how do we get the bureaucracy to fall without taking us with it?
Keep in mind that the problems we’re facing are directly caused by government intervention. Education has driven many people into careers or training that is totally unsuited. Get government out of the way and in 12 months the economy will be all sorted out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.