Posted on 06/08/2015 4:48:07 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
Trump said the Republicans are pushing the deal because “they don’t understand” the topic and “they’re making a mistake.”
“It’s because you have lobbyists lobbying for this thing, and you have lobbyists representing areas of industry, you have lobbyists representing countries,” Trump said.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/08/exclusive-donald-trump-disaster-trade-deal-empowers-americas-enemies-another-sign-country-is-going-to-hell/
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Facts About Manufacturing
•In the most recent data, manufacturers contributed $2.09 trillion to the economy. This figure has steadily risen since 2009 when manufacturers contributed $1.73 trillion. The sector accounts for 12.0 percent of GDP.1 For every $1.00 spent in manufacturing, another $1.37 is added to the economy, the highest multiplier effect of any economic sector.2
•Manufacturing supports an estimated 17.6 million jobs in the United States—about one in six private-sector jobs. More than 12 million Americans (or 9 percent of the workforce) are employed directly in manufacturing.3
•In 2013, the average manufacturing worker in the United States earned $77,506 annually, including pay and benefits. The average worker in all industries earned $62,546.4
•Manufacturers in the United States are the most productive in the world, far surpassing the worker productivity of any other major manufacturing economy, leading to higher wages and living standards.5
•Manufacturers in the United States perform more than three-quarters of all private-sector R&D in the nation, driving more innovation than any other sector.6
•Taken alone, manufacturing in the United States would be the ninth-largest economy in the world.7
- See more at: http://www.nam.org/Newsroom/Facts-About-Manufacturing/#sthash.Ep9Kz3y9.dpuf
U.S. Manufacturing: Output vs. Jobs Since 1975
This week, Veronique de Rugy examines changes in employment and productivity in the American manufacturing sector. Since 1975, manufacturing output has more than doubled, while employment in the sector has decreased by 31%. While these American job losses are indeed sobering, they are not an indication of declining U.S. competitiveness. In fact, these statistics reveal that the average American manufacturer is over three times more productive today than they were in 1975 – a sure sign of economic progress.
http://mercatus.org/publication/us-manufacturing-output-vs-jobs-1975
But you believe a chiseler who’s declared bankruptcy umpteen times and runs casinos, real estate schemes and reality shows? You don’t see the irony there?
Triple Bingo!
This is not a Trade Agreement, it just gives the President authority to negotiate one that has to then be approved by Congress.
He absolutely nailed this one. This trade deal is horrific. How can any Conservative support it?
Garbage.
Yes productivity has improved and that’s contributed to unemployment. But so has imports as a percent of GNP. And anybody and everybody can walk into Walmart and see the percent of goods made in China and how it’s changed.
Those goods that could be made by Americans if our market wasn’t wide open to countries like China. China doesn’t use their foreign currency to buy trade goods in return. Instead they but debt and equities. And we shouldn’t be trading with them under those conditions.
We have the largest consumer market. We should be using it to make sure Americans are employed. Not helping the Chinese to take us over.
The smartest man who many of the professors at Harvard Law have ever seen but he doesn’t “understand” what he’s reading? A man who has won a dozen Supreme Court cases but he’s too dumb to figure out a trade bill? Seriously?!
The President doesn't need Congressional authority to negotiate a trade agreement. That power is assigned to the President by the constitution. So what is Congress really up to?
I've heard this bill relaxes the congressional approval that the Constitution requires. If so, the bill itself is unconstitutional, but you'd need a court to say so. And if it does relax the Constitutional requirements, it's an end run around the Constitution that no conservative should agree with.
Of course I see irony here.
I want to win the next election, and I want our next president to work to re-industrialize this great nation.
Trump is the ONLY candidate (or potential candidate), at the moment, who is saying a single word about this. And he is going to town about it.
He’ll do very well, as a candidate, if this race continues to play out the way it has been so far.
The guy has ... well he has a pair.
He stands for what he believe in, and so far he’s pretty much spot-on.
Just saying.
I have one concern about him, in that he might be tempted to look at the value of the US dollar as something to manipulate - he is realestate rich, so that wouldn’t hurt him so much, and I want to go on record now as (strongly) opposing any such plan.
BIG TIME.
But the guy nails it, in every other regard.
He nails it.
Wow! Thanks for the info on manufacturing. That’s encouraging. I can see why Cruz supported this since most of the 6 years it will be in effect will be under a different President, hopefully him. Right now he is representing the 3 million jobs supported by exports in his state, which is what he should be doing as Senator.
The President doesn't need Congressional authority to negotiate a trade agreement. That power is assigned to the President by the constitution. So what is Congress really up to?
I've heard this bill relaxes the congressional approval that the Constitution requires. If so, the bill itself is unconstitutional, but you'd need a court to say so. And if it does relax the Constitutional requirements, it's an end run around the Constitution that no conservative should agree with.
Cruz has one of the most brilliant legal minds in this country. I trust his interpretation of this bill. When it is passed in the House it will hopefully contain some of the Cruz language on immigration before it goes back to the Senate for reconciliation.
I wish I could afford top shelf whiskey.
A great legal mind is not necessarily a great economic mind.
And the statement “this is a standard bill just like in the past” indicates a lack of strategic thought.
““The voters understand the country is going to hell.” - Trump card
The Constitution does not give the President Fast Track Authority. That is what this bill is for.
I worked on the Steve Forbes (and Al Haig’s years earlier) campaign in Iowa. Trump is going nowhere.
When you are right you are right . This trade bill is terrible on multiple levels. The republicans are selling out middle America.
Why does he need fast track authority? The constitution lays out a process. Why isn’t that good enough? It sounds like an end run around the Constitution to me.
I saw Steve Scalise talking about it yesterday and he was pointing out that it would have passed in the senate with or without Cruz. He also points out that its not getting through the house without major amendments including things like requiring a vote in congress before any major deals are made. In fact he says they would like to exclude China from it to deal with other pacific rim nations.
People need to lean on congress to make it better.
Why does he need fast track authority? The constitution lays out a process. Why isn’t that good enough? It sounds like an end run around the Constitution to me.
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.