Obama trade dilemma: Scant support from Democrats

Associated Press ^ | Jun 15, 2013 12:16 PM EDT | Tom Raum

[Olog-hai]

As President Barack Obama pushes an ambitious agenda to liberalize global trading, political trade wars already are forming, and they’re with fellow Democrats rather than with Republicans, his usual antagonists.

Obama is promoting free-trade proposals with Europe and Asia that could affect up to two-thirds of all global trade. …

Both deals generally have the support of U.S. businesses. But labor unions and human rights and environmental groups—core Democratic constituencies—have so far viewed them cynically.

These organizations, and Democrats in general, say that free-trade deals can cost American jobs and lead to environmental and workplace abuses that would not be tolerated in the U.S. …

[expat_panama]

"You didn't build that."  /protectionist

lol --exactly!

Incidentally the day after the protectionist-in-chief made that 'you didn't build that' speech, he indignantly retorted how the "that" was referring to "roads and bridges".   Right.  You didn't build that roads and bridges even though you may have build those factory.

[Mase]

he 16th amendment compensated for the loss of income due to the lifting of import tariffs.

Right. And the Fordney-McCumber tariff compensated for the loss of what? Like all tariffs, it massively increased the cost of goods to all consumers, started a trade war, and, eventually, contributed to the depression. Good job, protectionists! Don't you guys live it when your unintended consequences some together?

[expat_panama]

So would you be in favor of Smith and Wesson, Colt and Ruger moving all of the manufacturing to China? 

I don't waste time fantasizing and bragging about what I would do about things I that don't, haven't, and won't do. 

You and I have got no ability to say where Colt should be moved because we don't own it.  Smith and Wesson does.  We don't own Ruger because it's privately held.  Right now one of the companies I own is  B/E Aerospace Inc. (BEAV) and it sells this to the military--

--not this

I've already moved my company all over the world and if you don't like how I run my company then either learn to live with it or you can go get a company of your own so you can stick it wherever you want.  The only other choice is to fantasize and brag about what you would do when you can't, haven't, and won't.

[expat_panama]

don't own Ruger because it's privately held

I take it back --RGR is public.  Confusing it with Marlin, Browning, Beretta, Glock, Mossberg, H & K, Savage, Bushmaster, Remington, Winchester...

[1rudeboy]

I think that, lost in all the static (and the bs hypotheticals), no one expects Obama to negotiate a FTA the benefits the U.S. I'm not even sure Obama expects it. By the time all of his special-interest constituencies (environuts, labor goons, and sundry campaign contributers, etc.) finish sticking their fingers in it, it won't resemble anything that Friedman (or Reagan) would imagine.

[dennisw]

The Democrats propagandize about being for Americans workers and poorer Americans while they sabotage blue collar wages via immigration amnesties and mindless free trade. Disgusting liars but blame stupid Americans for buying their lies, being too lazy to look further

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, the US Treasury will never get all the auto TARP money back.

But at least the unions were saved. LOL!

[central_va]

Protecting US manufacturing has nothing to do with labor or unions. My position would be the same regardless if robots were the sole source of labor.

[ex-snook]

Send a message - End job exporting unbalanced trade deals - better to vote Third and lose than vote for the two perpetrators and lose.

[central_va]

If you look at the economic libertarians around here no wonder there is little hope for the USA. These so called Free Trade lovers justify their arguments because they look at economics in 2 dimensions supply and demand. There is a third inseparable dimension, politics. You cannot discuss economics without politics.

[central_va]

I don't waste time fantasizing and bragging

You are nothing but an un American cowardly windbag proved by not answering my simple question.

[central_va]

These Free Traitors hate regulations but somehow love free trade, no tariffs and income taxes, the ultimate regulation.

[central_va]

I would still want to change the tax code and regulations before going for the protectionism. It would be just as quick.

I want to crap gold bricks but it happening. We have to stop the offshore bleeding while working on a better tax or no income tax.

[1rudeboy]

Politics? On my FR?

Seriously, do you ever go back and reread some of the bs you write?

[central_va]

Both parties are in favor of amnesty, open borders, no tariffs, free trade, H1-b visas. When both parties are on the same side of an issue as important as this one is, something is wrong. You are are on the same side as the gloBULList America haters - like Obama. You are a hater of the worst kind.

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Dems are in favor of free trade? LOL!

Sorry, you're on their side, I'm not.

[1rudeboy]

I'm not a hater. I just hate you.
/Band of Brothers ripoff

[ex-snook]

"These Free Traitors hate regulations but somehow love free trade"

Their idea of 'free' trade is government to government trade deals with regulations.

[central_va]

With much consideration and emotional discussion, the House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, 234-200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. NAFTA passed the Senate 61-38. Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; it went into effect on January 1, 1994.[3][4] Clinton, while signing the NAFTA bill, stated that "NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement."[5]

Stick it buckwheat.

[central_va]

I'm not a hater. I just hate you.

Back at ya.