HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The Trans Pacific Partner...

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:17 PM

 

The Trans Pacific Partnership. TPP Do you support it or not.

President Obama has been pushing this as well as Hillary Clinton

Do you think this is a good idea or not?

I, for the record, think it will be a disaster for the middle class in the US

88 replies, 6241 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 88 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Trans Pacific Partnership. TPP Do you support it or not. (Original post)
frwrfpos Feb 2014 OP
2naSalit Feb 2014 #1
LongTomH Feb 2014 #2
vlakitti Feb 2014 #34
daleanime Feb 2014 #47
GoneOffShore Feb 2014 #67
JohnyCanuck Feb 2014 #3
jwirr Feb 2014 #4
RC Feb 2014 #5
djean111 Feb 2014 #8
jazzimov Feb 2014 #16
djean111 Feb 2014 #17
rhett o rick Feb 2014 #55
Scootaloo Feb 2014 #27
Art_from_Ark Feb 2014 #79
Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #41
LanternWaste Feb 2014 #66
Ed Suspicious Feb 2014 #81
Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #35
NCTraveler Feb 2014 #65
840high Feb 2014 #6
Recursion Feb 2014 #7
djean111 Feb 2014 #9
Recursion Feb 2014 #11
Lasher Feb 2014 #71
sabbat hunter Feb 2014 #10
X_Digger Feb 2014 #12
jazzimov Feb 2014 #13
Fumesucker Feb 2014 #18
Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #36
merrily Feb 2014 #49
merrily Feb 2014 #50
Armstead Feb 2014 #26
rhett o rick Feb 2014 #40
treestar Feb 2014 #59
Marr Feb 2014 #14
neverforget Feb 2014 #15
CaliforniaPeggy Feb 2014 #19
truebluegreen Feb 2014 #22
blkmusclmachine Feb 2014 #48
frwrfpos Feb 2014 #20
truebluegreen Feb 2014 #21
frwrfpos Feb 2014 #23
Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #52
GReedDiamond Feb 2014 #24
Armstead Feb 2014 #25
Phlem Feb 2014 #78
MindMover Feb 2014 #28
jsr Feb 2014 #29
SamKnause Feb 2014 #30
eridani Feb 2014 #31
liberal_at_heart Feb 2014 #32
Warpy Feb 2014 #33
cherokeeprogressive Feb 2014 #37
JDPriestly Feb 2014 #38
roody Feb 2014 #39
Vashta Nerada Feb 2014 #42
WillyT Feb 2014 #43
rhett o rick Feb 2014 #44
zeemike Feb 2014 #45
blkmusclmachine Feb 2014 #46
merrily Feb 2014 #51
cui bono Feb 2014 #53
newfie11 Feb 2014 #54
PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #56
KoKo Feb 2014 #57
City Lights Feb 2014 #58
raouldukelives Feb 2014 #60
FiveGoodMen Feb 2014 #61
highmindedhavi Feb 2014 #62
frwrfpos Feb 2014 #63
NCTraveler Feb 2014 #64
LanternWaste Feb 2014 #68
LiberalEsto Feb 2014 #69
Starry Messenger Feb 2014 #70
DefenseLawyer Feb 2014 #72
woo me with science Feb 2014 #75
Jetboy Feb 2014 #73
Aerows Feb 2014 #74
peacebird Feb 2014 #76
Phlem Feb 2014 #77
Ed Suspicious Feb 2014 #80
kelliekat44 Feb 2014 #82
frwrfpos Feb 2014 #83
sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #84
frwrfpos Feb 2014 #85
ananda Feb 2014 #86
woo me with science Feb 2014 #87
bullwinkle428 Feb 2014 #88

Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:29 PM

1. NOT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:29 PM

2. Abso-fuckin-lutely not!!!!!

It's a disaster for American democracy as well as our economy. It gives big corporations veto power over environmental and labor protection laws, to start with. It will be another giant step for corporatocracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #2)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:42 AM

34. Perfect answer.

It's the corporate democrat's ultimate betrayal of their working class and middle class base, for one thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #2)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:12 AM

47. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #2)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:43 PM

67. ^This^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:29 PM

3. No effing way

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:34 PM

4. No, my mommy taught me to mistrust secret deals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:34 PM

5. I wonder what the Obama and Hillary supporters think of this?

 

I think this is another step in the loss of our freedom an the loss of control of our country.
Where are the pitch forks and fire brands?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #5)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:45 PM

8. Lessee -

 

We have no idea what is in it, we have to wait and see

Don't you want to help poor people in other countries?

We can't trust what Wikileaks has released because we hatesssss Wikileaks and Assange

Even with lovely links, we don't think Hillary has mentioned her feelings on the TPP

You never loved Obama

Haha - Obama did not actually use the exact words "fast track" in the SOTU speech, so he isn't asking for fast track

Anyway, if, by some miracle, the TPP is sunk, it will turn out Obama was just messin' with us and wanted it to fail all along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #8)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:04 AM

16. Lessee -

"We have no idea what is in it, we have to wait and see"

To me, that's a show-stopper right there. NOBODY knows what's in it, because it's still being negotiated. To claim that you do is disingenuous.

How can you say you are for or against something if nobody knows anything about it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #16)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:06 AM

17. Some of it has been leaked already. So some of us, including some in Congress,

 

don't like what we see so far.
I don't know how anyone can be "for" it, except the people who have access to it. pretty secretive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #17)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 11:26 AM

55. Both of my DEMOCRATIC Senators said that trade agreements are important

 

for the industries and businesses in our state. That's code for the businesses will make out but the workers will be screwed. In fact, one of the Senators included the reassurance that she supports assuring that those put out of work (kinda admitting workers will in fact be put out of work), will be retrained for other jobs. She didnt include that the taxpayers will foot the bill (not the businesses that will benefit from the TPP) for the retraining for jobs that dont exist.

TPP will bring cheaper (and less expensive) products to the USofA, but who will buy if they are out of work?

Globalization means leveling the standards of living around the world as well as providing the 1% tools to rape the lower classes.

"The wealthy dont wish us to die, they just dont give a crap if we do."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #16)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:57 AM

27. We know WHAT it is, though

 

And we know that never has a "free trade agrement" of any sort , cause anything BUT harm, for the working people of those countries involved, for the massive gain of the top half-percent.

Ask Mexicans how well NAFTA worked out for them - Bonus points of the Mexicna you asked is available for you to ask because they're hauling ass away from the smoldering ruin of an economy that nation has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #16)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 10:16 PM

79. It was debated in the Japanese Parliament back in November

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #8)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:03 AM

41. "Don't you want to help poor people in other countries?"

 

We need to help the poor people in this country first before helping poor people abroad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #41)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:42 PM

66. Those imaginary lines on the maps are really important to a lot of people.

Those imaginary lines on the maps are really important to a lot of people. Guess religion's not the only imaginary thing we let dictate our ethics and treatment of others.

(this is where a juicy yet fallacious distinction without a difference is inserted... or instead, my favorite bit: "my imaginary crap is more important than other imaginary crap...!!!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #66)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 10:21 PM

81. We only have a say in what goes on within the confines of those lines. Citizenry matters. It's

not simply nationalism for nationalism's sake. We are Americans. I always try to fix the problems in my own house before I go out and cure the ills of my neighbors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #5)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:43 AM

35. No you don't. LOL!

 

The first of the minions to come is already here1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RC (Reply #5)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:30 PM

65. Love Hillary overall.

 

Hate the fact she supports this. It is no surprise to me though. On almost all economic issues she and Obama are conservative. As much as I love Hillary, I will not vote for her in a primary. Just because I love her doesn't mean I want her running the country. I like Grayson too, but I hope the guy never makes it to the White House. Politically, I am extremely impressed by Clinton and Obama. Politics are shady and so are both of them. Nature of the beast. They have both found extreme power. That power has been financed by the 1%.

Obama and Hillary/Bill play the game better than anyone since maybe Regan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:38 PM

6. Not - not - not

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:42 PM

7. Meh

An attempt to create a Pacific trade block that excludes China is interesting, but our trade with TPP members (other than Canada) will still be absolutely dwarfed by our trade with China.

To the extent that it has much of an effect, it's just going to reinforce the trends trade is already responsible for:
* American heavy manufacturing will increase, as we keep building the machines and factories other countries use to do light manufacturing
* American light manufacturing will decrease, as we keep buying the light manufactured goods that those other countries produce more cheaply
* American ag will continue to consolidate and export a lot, even at the expense of domestic consumption (see the thread about alfalfa from the other day)
* China will continue to buy dollar-denominated debt to keep the renminbi down

We'll sell slightly more soybeans, cattle hides, and heavy plant, and buy slightly more cheap plastic crap, but still not enough to remotely eclipse China or Canada as trade partners (and Canada is probably going to sign on to the TPP anyways, for largely the same reasons we will).

I'm with Krugman that it's not really going to have the positive effects the pro-TPP people claim or the negative effects the anti-TPP people claim, particularly since we already have similar bilateral agreements with AFAIK every potential member.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #7)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:50 PM

9. It is not the "trade" stuff that is frightening - it is the elevation of invetors to a position

 

where they can sue other countries if those countries have any regulations that will adversely affect profit. And the court will be populated by the investors' lawyers. So then either sovereign laws/regulations must be overturned or taxpayers must pay the investors the amount of profit they decided they would have made.

In addition, I understand that the TPP will block the sale of cheaper generic drugs, which means that health care costs will continue to spiral until they approach MIC proportions. IMO.

Things like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #9)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:57 PM

11. Then you're 20 years too late

I don't know why people noticed the arbitration policies in the TPP, but not in... oh... every trade treaty since Bismark's time.

So then either sovereign laws/regulations must be overturned or taxpayers must pay the investors the amount of profit they decided they would have made.

Yup. That's what a treaty is: countries agree to give up some of their sovereignty in return for other countries' doing the same thing. A country that passes a law in contravention of the TPP can be penalized through a tort.

So, for instance, the similar investor-state arbitration policy we already have with Australia allowed Phillip Morris to sue Australia over its packaging laws. But the deciding court is... the Australian supreme court. Phillip Morris didn't do very well at that trial, obviously.

In addition, I understand that the TPP will block the sale of cheaper generic drugs

Importation of generics is already blocked, and the TPP doesn't deal with intranational issues like a country producing its own generics. What it would allow, which would be awesome, is for foreign companies to sue against bad US drug patents to allow importation of the drugs they make.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #11)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 09:10 PM

71. But isn't all this pretty much the point against the TPP and TTIP?

We already have trade agreements and low conventional trade barriers. So what is to be gained from doubling down on new mega-trade agreements like these? The focus of these deals will be on non-conventional barriers, meaning various regulatory practices.
These trade agreements are not about promoting prosperity for all, but for powerful industry lobbies to dodge regulation.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/15/us-trade-deal-with-europe-hype

Contemporary so-called free trade agreements are not the same as every treaty since Bismark's time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:51 PM

10. I support

free trade when the countries pay scales, regulations, etc are fairly equal. For example the EU (and prior to it the common market) works well because all of the countries involved are on a fairly level playing field. I think it has benefited most of the countries involved.
So when you have countries like New Zealand, Canada, Australia, the United States, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea involved, you have countries that have fairly similar pay scales, regulations, etc. So having tariffs drop among them would be beneficial to all, as none has any glaring major competitive advantage over another. As a result by a place like South Korea dropping tariffs on foreign cars, would benefit companies like GM, Chrysler, Ford in bringing in their cars to South Korea and competing with Hyundai.

The situation gets a lot more tricky when you involve countries that have large advantages due to government owned corporations (like Vietnam has),where the Vietnamese government is not afraid to try and sell its goods at a loss abroad, in an effort to put competitors out of business. In cases like that a tariff barrier levels the playing field, by bringing up the costs of goods from Vietnam close to goods made in the US.

In many cases of countries involved in the TPP, there are already bilateral trade agreements in place (like with the US and Chile), so a lot of the issues I described above are already being dealt with.

So for that part I do not think it would be a disaster for the middle class.

The bigger issue with the TPP is the intellectual property issues, like drug companies trying to get provisions put in place so that brand name drugs have to be in place for longer times before generics are allowed (this would affect countries like Chile, Vietnam more than the US). It would also make it harder to self publish in some places, would forbid or restrict the importation of things like DVDs in to a country where there is already a licensed distribution partner (like buying movies from japan and shipping them here. instead you would be forced to buy from a local distributor, which could raise prices)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership_Intellectual_Property_Provisions

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership would be far more beneficial to the US, as it would give the US more access to the EU market for our goods.


In both cases I oppose fast track approval and instead would want it to go thru full approval and vetting by the Senate and a greater public transparency of TPP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:59 PM

12. Fuck.the.TPP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Wed Feb 19, 2014, 11:59 PM

13. Support what?

It's still being negotiated. I would prefer to see what's in it before I say I do or do not support it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #13)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:14 AM

18. "We'll have to pass it to see what's in it" -Pelosi

The time between "too soon to say anything" and "too late to matter" is about negative three months at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #18)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:45 AM

36. It burns so badly!

 

They actually believe (and not without justification) that this will work again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #18)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:21 AM

49. IMO, it's already too late to matter.

By the time the term "TPP" came into our consciousness, it was already too late for us to matter.

When do our opinions change minds in DC anyway? For example, I give you the public option, Keystone, troops in Afghanistan, etc.

I think the Vietnam War --and the draft-- ended because conservatives, many of them neocons, wanted it to end, not because liberals had been demonstrating for ten or more years. And I don't think a few phone calls from us stopped Obama re: Syria, either. Again, that was a movement begun by conservatives and joined by many Democrats in Congress, some of whom had already sued Obama over Libya, plus Boehner,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #49)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:22 AM

50. Deleted by merrily.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #13)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:52 AM

26. By then it will be too late

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #13)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:03 AM

40. Oh plez. Who do you think you are fooling? nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jazzimov (Reply #13)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:18 PM

59. going to make up my own mind too

there is attempt here to create a bandwagon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:00 AM

14. No.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:02 AM

15. Nope!

F the TPP!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:18 AM

19. I do NOT support it.

And the fact that Hillary does makes me not want her to be President of anything.

Obama's support is just one of the reasons I am so disappointed in him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CaliforniaPeggy (Reply #19)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:34 AM

22. Brave Defenders of the Powers That Be.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #22)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:13 AM

48. Fierce Advocacy! For "Change"!

 

Mr. Moneybags, buyer of the DEMS ~>

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:19 AM

20. google this tpp

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:32 AM

21. NO.

 

p.s. I live in Mexico and can tell you that NAFTA was an effin' disaster for this country too. The only "people" who benefited were the corporate variety.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #21)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:34 AM

23. yep

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #21)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:27 AM

52. As was its only intent, ever. The betrayal by Clinton has been grievously understated as a result

 

of the overt over-the-top showmanship produced by the republican troop of the DC Circus .

He fucked us and fucked us good. The kind of fucking that we won't get over for generations, if ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:35 AM

24. No, never...nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:51 AM

25. Hell no. These scams have been an obvious disaster

 

They are a power grab by those who want the only laws to govern the world to be the laws of the most ruthless forms of capitalism. No checks and balances from civil society. No competing social or ethical values.

We've seen the results. Who in their right mind can think the decimation of the middle/working classes is a good thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #25)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 10:11 PM

78. But you can't rattle the minds of the faithful, they'll have a "look see" first.



Not only my brain but my whole body hurts.

-p

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:00 AM

28. Just keep shifting the jobs and wages to every other country ...

I WANT FAIR TRADE, NOT FAKE TRADE DEALS ...

Where are our negotiators and why does our President have so much power in these negotiations ... ???

No one man should have the power to make these trade decisions for an entire countries business community ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:01 AM

29. Kill It Now. Kill It Dead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:06 AM

30. Just say NO to the TPP !!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:34 AM

31. AbsoFUCKINGlutely NOT!!

And supporters should just spare us the "we don't know what's in it" bullshit. Thanks to leaks, we do know some of it, and so far there is absolutely not a single good feature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:35 AM

32. I do not support it, and will not vote for democrats who do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:38 AM

33. It's hard to support something written by multinational corporations

and kept in such extreme secrecy that members of Congress don't know all of what is in it.

I guess that means I'm vehemently against it. So much for Obama's promise of transparency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:45 AM

37. I do not.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:48 AM

38. I do not support it. It will suck even more jobs out of the US and turn our country into one huge

disaster zone. I would like to see us return to a position in which we have freedom as a sovereign nation and are not subjugated to international trade courts. The TPP will be yet another blow to our democratic government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:01 AM

39. Hell no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:04 AM

42. Absolutely not.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:05 AM

43. No.

 

No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:05 AM

44. Oh Hell No! nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:09 AM

45. Not only no but hell no.

But they will try to ram it down our thought and make us like it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:09 AM

46. NO I DO NOT SUPPORT TPP (little good that will do--DEMS have SOLD OUT to the highest bidder!)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 02:24 AM

51. NO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 06:28 AM

53. HELL NO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 06:28 AM

54. Hell NO

And yes it would be a disaster for this country! This is total insanity!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 11:28 AM

56. No.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:16 PM

57. No!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:17 PM

58. I do not support it.

I also think it will be a disaster the for US middle class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 12:54 PM

60. Not a Wall St investor, so, no. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:32 PM

61. NOT AT ALL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 01:57 PM

62. no.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton are not "pushing" the TPP, they are merely puppets of the Banks, Wall St, and corporations. When are we going to wake up and stop voting candidates who take bribes during their campaigns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:21 PM

63. kick

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:23 PM

64. I am in no way against all trade agreements.

 

Just ones like NAFTA and the TPP.

Many things could be done with a trade agreement that would benefit so many. unfortunately, the last three Presidents seem to be interested in the few.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:44 PM

68. "The avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote..."

"The avalanche has already started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:49 PM

69. NO nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 04:49 PM

70. No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 09:25 PM

72. Only a corporatist tool could support it.

 

We should actually be doing the exact opposite of just about everything in the TPP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DefenseLawyer (Reply #72)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 09:53 PM

75. +1000000


Yep, that's pretty much exactly what we see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 09:28 PM

73. No

No way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 09:32 PM

74. Hell no

 

and attempting to convince people to support it after the disaster that was NAFTA is a fool's errand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 10:01 PM

76. No Freaking Way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 10:09 PM

77. If it's so good for us, why keep things secret and fast track it?

No, no, and NO!

past history shows how god awful free trade agreements affects the middle class, why would one think doing it again is going make things better?

-p

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 10:17 PM

80. Not a chance in hell. I don't support a race to the bottom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Thu Feb 20, 2014, 11:39 PM

82. I really want to see and understand what the final outcome will be. BO is a cagey one. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Fri Feb 21, 2014, 02:33 AM

83. thank you for all the responses

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Fri Feb 21, 2014, 03:08 AM

84. Not!

I would say more, but just the thought of what they are up to almost makes me speechless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Fri Feb 21, 2014, 04:38 AM

85. kick

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Fri Feb 21, 2014, 06:27 AM

86. NOT

..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Fri Feb 21, 2014, 10:47 AM

87. Hell no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frwrfpos (Original post)

Fri Feb 21, 2014, 10:49 AM

88. NAFTA on steroids? Absolutely not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread