TPP withdrawal Trump's first executive action Monday, sources say

[joshcryer]

Source: CNN

President Donald Trump's first executive action on Monday will be to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, two sources familiar with matter told CNN.
That withdrawal is consistent with campaign promises Trump made. The real estate mogul ran on a platform of anti-globalization policies and vowing to create fairer trade deals for American workers.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/23/politics/trans-pacific-partnership-trade-deal-withdrawal-trumps-first-executive-action-monday-sources-say/

[Recursion]

1. Japan and China have already started regional trade talks

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20161229_06/

This is literally exactly what US trade policy has tried to avoid for 20 years.

[joshcryer]

2. Trump doesn't grasp geopolitics.

When the US economy collapses because of his shenanigans I wonder how much blame will be on Obama.

[Recursion]

3. So here's one advantage of the short attention spans in Dumbfuckistan

The US public is pretty consistent about holding whoever is left with the potato responsible.

[joshcryer]

18. After thinking about it for awhile...

...I could actually see Trump repackaging TPP and passing it again anyway in a year or so. Remember, he wants to make "the best deals," and TPP was pretty fucking great for the US in regards to expanding US copyright, IP, environmental, and labor influence in the world.

Oh, and ISDS covers the USs ass, we'd never lose one of those disputes, because of how it's set up to be in the US jurisdiction.

[Recursion]

19. It's too labor friendly though

Trump doesn't want a minimum wage in Brunei, or unions in Vietnam. He'll quietly remove those provisions

[nikto]

23. Please give a link explaining how ISDS would "cover US's Ass"

I need to read that.

Must have missed it.

[nikto]

25. How dare OTHER countries talk trade, without the US calling the shots?

Kinda' arrogant, IMO.

[Recursion]

28. They're free to, but we'd much rather have a hand in the agreement to protect our interests

For instance, the TPP would have required a minimum wage and independent unions in Vietnam, Malaysia, etc. A Chinese-led trade deal will not.

[nikto]

34. That's what Mickey Kantor would say

I realize the likes of Liz Warren are seen as kinda' radical leftist by some here,
but if you retain any trust in her at all, now hear this:

IMO, on this issue,
Liz Warren>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Mickey Kantor



But I must admit, I'm a radical leftist like Liz, so I guess I'm biased.

[Recursion]

37. What is it about unions and minimum wages that bothers you?

I just don't get that

[nikto]

47. I would ask you the same question

Give me a list of these Unions that participated in TPP negotiations.


If you can't, then you need to just slink away quietly from adult conversations that employ EVIDENCE.

You exhibit zero knowledge of the actual pact, and how it was negotiated.


I'm challenging you on this issue.

Are you up to a real grown-up dialogue on this topic, or just short little, tweet-like emotional outbursts?


I respect people who have reality-based opinions, and can back them up with evidence.

That's what I am asking for here.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[nycbos]

4. I think I am starting to revise my thoughts on the TPP.

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2017, 10:38 AM - Edit history (1)

I AM capable of changing my mind when shown new evidence.

[nikto]

26. Don't bother, there is no new evidence

Last edited Wed Jan 25, 2017, 03:49 AM - Edit history (1)

Anybody changing their minds now about TPP is doing so as a result of some kind of "Trump-effect", where anything that seems like it goes against Trump is seen as unquestionably good.

Please don't follow the hysteria in that sad direction.

As a Progressive, I hate and fear Trump's as much as anybody, but I am seeing minds change on "our" side
on certain issues, for no other reason than just
reacting emotionally to his incredible awfulness, and it is not always rational.

Trump has always spoken against TPP, so does that mean TPP is good?

I hope Trump doesn't announce he's opposed to cannibalism, or I swear, some Democrats will be
heating up a pot and scanning the streets for tasty-looking people.

There are actually 9 areas where Trump could do some decent things, although most of them are unlikely.
But scrapping TPP was one of them. So there's 1 out of 9.

Check this out:

http://thesuspicionist.blogspot.com/2016/12/how-can-progressives-evaluate-trumps.html

[nycbos]

30. China will now right the rules to trade in the pacific.

Last edited Wed Jan 25, 2017, 10:21 AM - Edit history (1)

That's what I think I am bothered by.


Maybe some alterations are a good idea. But a return to smoot-hawley is not an answer either.

[nikto]

32. Yeah, if China insists on LOW wages, poor environmental conditions, and NO regulations, that's bad

But that would be just like TPP.

BTW,
The groups below were NEVER part of TPP's secret drafting process (the whole thing was drafted
by international corporate lawyers):

Environmental groups
Indigenous People's representatives
Labor Unions
Objective Scientists, or experts on social impacts of Trade policies
Immigrant groups


I do not approve of a pact with such international impact being written, in secret,
by insiders only and none of the groups named above.

But that's just me.

[Recursion]

38. Err.. environmental and labor groups were part of the negotiation team

Don't believe everything you read on the Internet

[nikto]

46. I challenge you to back that up with a solid evidential link

Odd that you align yourself against various Liberal groups like the Sierra Club,
Friends Of The Earth, and many Labor Unions.

How is your sense of alignment different from garden-variety GOPers?
Pretty strange for a Democrat, IMO.

All over the pacific rim, citizen's groups, environmental groups, Indigenous Peoples, Labor Unions
and other groups have roundly OPPOSED TPP.

http://www.citizenstrade.org/ctc/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/TransPacificEnvironment.pdf

Excerpt:
"For years, the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations
have taken place behind closed doors. Since
negotiations began in 2008, none of the negotiating
documents have been officially released for public review
(although some have been leaked).
In the United States, approximately 600 corporate
lobbyists have been named as official advisors, granting
them steady access to the negotiating texts, as well as
the negotiators."


"Most environmental groups, journalists
and those whose lives will be affected by the negotiators’
decisions have no right to see the texts until the
negotiations have concluded — at which point, it is more or less
impossible to change them. "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/10/06/industry-labor-and-environmental-groups-gear-up-to-oppose-tpp-trade-deal/?utm_term=.e2d982e73df5

http://www.sierraclub.org/compass/2015/10/more-dozen-environmental-organizations-warn-trans-pacific-partnership-risks

Dear Recursion:

Please supply a link or links listing the environmental, Labor and citizen groups who were part of TPP negotiations.

YOU made that claim.

The onus is on YOU to back it up.


I'm waiting.

[nikto]

48. Didn't think so.

[nikto]

49. Incapable of a factual response?

Just as I figured.

[Recursion]

50. You offered no evidence for your ridiculous claim

To give you a hint on how to research this, start with the USTR's statement on Round 16, just as an example.

https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/round-16-singapore

The trade rep team had members whose briefs were labor rights and the environment. Furthermore, labor and environmental representatives met with the team every. single. round.

The amount of lies I've seen swirling around the far right and far left about this are staggering.

[nikto]

51. Thank you for some apparent substance, but ofcourse bias is unavoidable

Last edited Sat Jan 28, 2017, 03:56 AM - Edit history (1)

Being a Government site, it will tend to have a solid pro-TPP bias, as the Obama administration
was strongly for it.

Down through the years, I have seen many government sites and ads that
put its particular administration's spin on an issue (I've seen it at least since Reagan in the 80s, if not earlier).

I understand that no site or source will be un-biased, one way or another.

I assume you do as well.

The site is only as useful as the essential information it can yield or guide me to.


I will search the site for names of labor leaders, environmental authorities,
and other individual people I can personally read specific info about and get a handle on.

Names are important.

For example:
I assume labor leaders/reps include well-known, verifiable advocates of labor, and not corporate surrogates.

I know of no major American Labor figures or representatives who were any part of the TPP negotiations,
so I am very curious to find out who I may have missed.

The same criteria hold true for environmental reps and others in their respective areas of concern.

If the site does not facilitate locating these people, then its lack of usefulness as anything but a glossy governmental front
for the deal must be acknowledged.

But I can't pass judgement yet.

Got to see what it yields.


Thanks!

OK, admittedly I'm just a left-Dem, but proud of it.
I make no apologies and ask for none.


You have far-exceeded most of your centrist-Dem brethren with this response.

[nikto]

52. 1st impression is that ...

It seems pretty much a promo-site, cheerleading the deal.

No names of negotiators are available so far.

I am trying to figure out just who these labor, academic people and others were.

I understand it was negotiated in secret, so the names may not be available.
But if so, that still isn't reassuring.

1 more perspective, as I reasearch:
The source below may be kinda' leftist for you, but it comments on exactly the kind of info
you gave me, and that I will certainly continue to check out.

No source will be without bias, ofcourse.

Anyway, the source below is a solid Democratic Party constituency, and was a supporter of
Hillary's 2016 campaign. It's the AFL-CIO:

Proof of their loyalty ...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/16/politics/hillary-clinton-afl-cio-union-endorsement/index.html

And here's what they say about Labor's participation in TPP negotiations, right around the time of those
Singapore meetings you linked to on the Gov't site:
http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Fast-Track-Legislation/Labor-s-So-Called-Seat-at-the-Table-at-TPP-Negotiations


I personally respect the AFL-CIO's opinion's on labor issues. But that's just me.

[nikto]

53. AFL-CIO's final weigh-In (after full-text was released and analyzed)

http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Free-Trade-Agreement-TPP

(from 2016)
"... The grim conditions facing workers in TPP partner countries were not effectively addressed in the TPP text or the side agreements called "consistency plans." Too many commitments to improve labor rights and environmental practices are vague, and the proposed enforcement scheme relies wholly on the discretion of the next administration. The failure of the TPP to incorporate needed improvements to labor commitments that already have proved inadequate in existing trade deals belies the agreement’s stated commitment to workers. Instead, the TPP contains strict, clear and strong protections for foreign investors and pharmaceutical monopolies. It is clear that, as currently drafted, the TPP would increase corporate profits and skew benefits to economic elites, while leaving workers to bear the brunt of the TPP’s shortcomings, including lost jobs, lower wages and continued repression of worker rights."

Seems as though these US Labor folks don't think the glossy claims made on the Government's cheery website
were enough for them to be happy about.


1 more impression, just of my own:

I am a retired Teacher, who left a school that was in the torturous throws of privatization via
billionaire-backed charter school pressures in our big city district.

I recall everybody was expected to refer to everyone else in the school as "stakeholders"---Not as teacher, student, counselor, etc.
(They since dropped that practice)

But that had such an icky "corporate" feel to it, that I will never be able to forget hoiw that word was used.

Seeing the word, "stakeholder" on the Gov't site referring to TPP made me just slightly
(corporately) nauseous for a moment.

I gotta' admit.
Very biased, that.

[SidDithers]

54. ...

Sid

[oberliner]

5. The US never ratified the agreement

Can the US withdraw from an agreement they hadn't ratified?

[watoos]

10. Exactly

Shouldn't he have said, if Congress ratifies the TPP, I will veto it?

[tom_kelly]

6. What time does his his day start? Maybe he'll take today off, too.

Hell, make it a long weekend.

[BlueCaliDem]

7. Oh goodie! Now China gets to set the rules for the Asian market, and Americans can look forward to

paying the price! Real smart there.

This is why the anger against TPP was totally unfounded - but well propagandized by pro-corporate M$M - from an American worker's p.o.v. The stronger rules in the TPP would've protected foreign workers from being exploited, would've held countries accountable should workers try to join a union (and are currently being murdered for it - with impunity and no recourse), and a whole host of other laws that would have protected our environment and such.

But supporters of President Obama, who trusted him to always stand on the side of workers, knew this. Those who couldn't bring themselves to trust him but rather swooned for the louder Senators from Vermont and Massachusetts, were against the TPP while not bothering to read it. GOP smiled. Billionaire corporate heads smiled. Propagandists propadized against the TPP.

Great goin' there, America. Slave labor across the globe will continue, and corporations will continue to send jobs overseas cuz they'll work for a few dollars a day, fattening their bottom line. And NAFTA is still alive and well and UNchanged, while those who railed against the TPP are not strangely silent...until shit hits the fan, and it will.

[Sunlei]

13. China will take the USAs billions in trade but the other countries still have their TPP trade agreem

agreements. Countries like Canada, Mexico, Australia will continue without the USA.

China was never a signer of the TPP agreements, neither was Russia. They never wanted those small Asian-pacific, their neighbor countries to have any worker rights at all.

[BlueCaliDem]

40. Yup. We've been screwed by ideologues and isolationists, and China is the dog that walks

away with the prized bone since the TPP was D.O.A. last year (not when Dear Leader signed U.S. withdrawal).

[TheBlackAdder]

15. China was not going to be in TPP, so they could undercut TPP partner nations.

.


Like with Central and South America and Africa, the US and EU have trade agreements to elevate the UN MDG standards, and China comes in and says, "Hey, deal with us and we don't care about the ecology, financial records, labor, etc... You do what you want and we'll look the other way, saving you millions of dollars each year. Then, instead of businesses giving you sporadic contracts, we'll contract with you for 25-30 years, guaranteed, with price adjustments, etc."

Developing nations are burdened with the paperwork to maintain Millennial Development Goals, that developed countries push onto them. China is running away with almost half of the Western Hemisphere's nations, as the US and EU pushes for unrealistic goals that barely elevate the extreme poor just pennies out of that category and increase the wealth of the upper classes. It looks good on paper though. People go from making extreme poverty of $1.20 a day to $1.30 a day and that lifts them out of extreme poverty category, while their life conditions barely change.

China acts as a collective merchantile state, where they contract for the good of the nation. They've locked down over 1.5 Million square miles of South American and African croplands, for at least 25 years.

The TPP would hamstring partner nations, while China stays out of it and acts as a free agent, dealing directly with and undercutting the TPP-bound countries.

.

[nikto]

27. Also, one BIG purpose of TPP was to ...

Transfer production leased by western corporations from China to Vietnam,
where wages are even lower, and environmental standards very very LOW.

Another ruined country (Vietnam) in-the-making.


Fits right in with your statement, which is accurate, IMO:

"the US and EU pushes for unrealistic goals that barely elevate the extreme poor just pennies out
of that category and increase the wealth of the upper classes."

Sadly, I am not sure as many Democrats care about those details as much as they perhaps used to care.

The ones that do end up at odds with those who don't.

Our party still has a lot to work out, I think.

[joshcryer]

17. Trade from this market was going to happen regardless of TPP.

TPP was to stem the issues that are soon to arise with automation. And Trump is going to make the problem 100x worse.

[harun]

35. If TPP was a good plan for the public it would have been made public

Not all done in secret.

[BlueCaliDem]

39. ALL trade deals are negotiated in secret for a reason! We were only ONE country in 12

doing negotiations that other countries should not be following in order to influence. And when it was done, when all negotiations were done, it was made FULLY public and would not be ratified until Congress saw each and every deal made.

It's like saying, "If the intelligence agencies work in the public interest, they would do their work in public". See how stupid that sounds?

[harun]

42. Compassionate Conservatives

See, we used to use the term Compassionate Conservative. We don't anymore. We don't need to sugar coat it. You know what we also used to do? Promise job training to help the worker who was about to lose their job from a trade deai, making it cheaper to pay someone else to do it somewhere else. The NAFTA debate talked a lot about the re-training.

This time they didn't even bother bringing up the need for job training. They new the American worker wouldn't buy it this time around.

The American worker has been too screwed by NAFTA to ever let another "trade deal" get through.

Just the idea of a TPP was enough to push Trump over the top. Even if it gave everyone in America free unicorns and rainbows.

[BlueCaliDem]

43. What pushed Trumputin over the top was the ignorance of the American people. Period.

There's no sugar-coating that, either.

Simply put, if you hate NAFTA so much, you should've supported TPP which would have made NAFTA all but null and void in those areas where it should be null and void, like stronger worker's rights, the right to organize, and the opportunity for saner countries to go after union-busters who murder union organizers - which is not the case in NAFTA.

Instead, people listened to charismatic candidates who don't know shit about the global economy, and believed those charismatic candidates' doomsday hype over President Obama, and they effectively helped keep NAFTA intact.

Distrust of President Obama was KEY to hating on TPP and making shit up about it - the president who has done more for American workers than his critics combined.

Here's a video to help explain the TPP and what we've lost:

[Blue_Tires]

8. Remember the good old days when I continually asked

about Julian Assange's motivation for directly poisoning the TPP, especially since he never gave a shit about trade deals before, and he didn't even live in any of the countries involved?? And remember when I got shouted down here mercilessly for asking so? Fun times...

And you will note that Assange and none of the self-styled "anti-globalism" crowd are putting any of these other deals under the microscope. If nothing else comes of it, I do hope that more folks on the left learn to faster recognize when they're being played for useful idiots...

[Sunlei]

14. The russian hackings & blackmail worked really well.

[brooklynite]

9. China isn't in a trade agreement with us, and will still export cheap stuff...

[watoos]

11. It's not about trade for me

Most of the TPP isn't about trade, it's about keeping higher drug prices for Mr.P, it's about losing our sovereignty by agreeing to corporate tribunals to settle disputes.
The parts of the TPP that talk about trade don't scare me like the rest of the TPP does.

[PSPS]

12. This is just "reality show" theatrics. There never was a ratified TPP.

[mopinko]

16. yeah, i was gonna mention that.

rescinding things that dont even exist, while the country burns.
such a smart guy that cheeto. not.

[Rex]

20. Yep.

[nikto]

24. Wrong.

TPP was voted onto "fast-tracK'---A sort of "standby" position, from which it could be voted thru by both senate and house
as an item at any time in the next 5 and 1/2 years.

Now, it's off "fast-track".

[milestogo]

21. Withdrawal from Trans-Pacific Partnership shifts U.S. role in world economy

By Ylan Q. Mui January 23 at 8:02 PM

President Trump’s cancellation Monday of an agreement for a sweeping trade deal with Asia began recasting America’s role in the global economy, leaving an opening for other countries to flex their muscles.

Trump’s executive order formally ending the United States’ participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership was a largely symbolic move intended to signal that his tough talk on trade during the campaign will carry over to his new administration. The action came as China and other emerging economies are seeking to increase their leverage in global affairs, seizing on America’s turn inward.

Mexico’s President Enrique Peña Nieto declared Monday that his country hopes to bolster trade with other nations and limit its reliance on the United States. Chinese state media derided Western democracy as having “reached its limits”; President Xi Jinping had touted Beijing’s commitment to globalization during his first appearance at the annual gathering of the world’s economic elite last week in Davos, Switzerland.

“This abrupt action so early in the Trump administration puts the world on notice that all of America’s traditional economic and political alliances are now open to reassessment and renegotiation,” said Eswar Prasad, a professor of trade policy at Cornell University. “This could have an adverse long-run impact on the ability of the U.S. to maintain its influence and leadership in world economic and political affairs.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/withdrawal-from-trans-pacific-partnership-shifts-us-role-in-world-economy/2017/01/23/05720df6-e1a6-11e6-a453-19ec4b3d09ba_story.html

[nikto]

22. Good!

At least Trump's done 1 good thing.


TPP sucks for American workers and all non-wealthy.

I'm a Bernie-style Democratic Socialist and TPP is crap in my book.

The ISDS section alone is a deal-killer for me, far more than the loss of jobs.

I am not posting trying to disagree or get into arguments, so I will not engage anybody who gets nasty
or wants a big knockdown-drag-out.

I have felt this way all along, and have not found any new knowledge to
make me want to change my mind on these issues.

All you Liberal-Centrists reading this, get used to actually disagreeing with other (more left) Democrats.
We are not enemies. But we are also not dittoheads, either, right?

Another related thought:
if Trump blocks the AT&T merger with Time-Warner, are you folks going to oppose that (and thus become pro-monopoly),
just because Trump wants it?

There's plenty of areas where Trump is doing great harm to average Americans, so there's plenty we can agree on.

But would I EVER support TPP OR the AT&T-TW merger?

No way.
(And I would not have 10 years ago, either).

Peace.

[Recursion]

29. Why don't you want Vietnamese workers to have a minimum wage or independent labor unions?

The TPP would have required that. Now Vietnam doesn't have to institute a minimum wage (China sure as hell isn't going to make them do it), and the government can keep appointing their union officers. Why are you for that?

[nikto]

33. Vietnamese workers would have been kept poor, and their nation's environment, ruined

NAFTA did nothing to make average workers in the US or Mexico better off.

TPP was structured similarly (i.e. with low wages), as have been ALL these corporate-negotiated trade deals.

Also, environmental laws in the US would have become unenforceable against international companies.
If you never heard about that aspect, then I can suggest some good sources to learn more about it.

TPP was odious----A closed document negotiated in secret by and for wealthy corporate and investment insiders.

I realize Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders are kind of radical-Left for some of the folks on this board,
but if you still have any respect for Liz Warren, then let HER tell you:

[Recursion]

36. And you want to keep that happening.

Slow clap.

Congratulations. You are a tool of the corporate elite, and they have convinced you that's a left thing for you to do. Great job.

[nikto]

45. Keep what happening? That is a truncated, blurry answer.

Please be clearer in your answer.

You call ME a tool?

I bet you don't even know much about TPP, yet you are defending it.

I was specifying the conditions that TPP would MAINTAIN.

In TPP's absence, a better deal could be negotiated, PUBLICALLY, with more parties involved
than just a closed group of international corporate lawyers.

Honestly, you do not seem equipped to dialogue on this topic at that level.
And yet your feelings are so strong.

If you decide to respond, please do so as an educated, articulate person would do,
so your answer is clear. Resist name-calling, if you can.

If you're going to come at me with negativity, please do so in a clear, intelligent manner.

Use knowledge of the subject matter, and be analytical, and not merely hysterical and hostile.

Make your point like an adult.


If you are able.

If not, please don't waste my time.

[Blue_Tires]

31. It gets better:

US trading partners Australia and Chile swiftly woo China after Trump pulls out of Trans-Pacific Partnership

http://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/2064867/us-trading-partners-australia-and-chile-swiftly-woo



I mean, if there was only someone who tried to point this out this consequence before...

[BlueCaliDem]

41. This is exactly what President Obama warned us about, but ideologues on both sides played their

supporters, and now China gets all the goods. This is what TPP was negotiated to counter.

I never thought, not in my wildest dreams, that the Left were such isolationists. I learn something every day.

[Rex]

44. Obama wasn't going to sign it, HRC said she was not for it.

Donny Tinyhands is just doing what a good boy would do when their parents leave behind a TO-DO list. Nobody should pretend Trump withdrew because he understood the trade deal.