Bernie Sanders: Absolutely No to the TPP! (Mix) #Bernie2016

[Donkees]

[NewImproved Deal]

1. Bernie gets it.

The Clinton Machine has been hurting Americans with Globalist Trade Deals for decades...

[Kittycat]

2. Clinton foundation and their donors always benefit

From those shitty deals. Of course she loves bad trade policies that hurt American and foreign workers. She's not thinking about us, just herself and her donors/friends. But that's supposed to change now, she told us so.

[Triana]

3. "Worse Than We Thought": TPP A Total Corporate Power Grab Nightmare

As expert analysis of the long-shrouded, newly publicized TransPacific Partnership (TPP) final text continued to roll out on Thursday, consensus formed around one fundamental assessment of the 12-nation pact: It's worse than we thought.

"From leaks, we knew quite a bit about the agreement, but in chapter after chapter the final text is worse than we expected."
—Lori Wallach, Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch

In fact, Public Citizen charged, the TPP rolls back past public interest reforms to the U.S. trade model while expanding problematic provisions demanded by the hundreds of official U.S. corporate trade advisers who had a hand in the negotiations while citizens were left in the dark.

On issues ranging from climate change to food safety, from open Internet to access to medicines, the TPP "is a disaster," declared Nick Dearden of Global Justice Now.

"Now that we’ve seen the full text, it turns out the job-killing TPP is worse than anything we could’ve imagined," added Charles Chamberlain, executive director of Democracy for America. "This agreement would push down wages, flood our nation with unsafe imported food, raise the price of life-saving medicine, all the while trading with countries where gays and single mothers can be stoned to death."

THE REST: http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/11/05/worse-we-thought-tpp-total-corporate-power-grab-nightmare

[appalachiablue]

4. K & R. Outstanding video report, watch and circulate it! No TPP, TTIP, TISA!!

[Enthusiast]

5. K&R! This post deserves hundreds of recommendations.

Against our wishes, Mr. President! Shame on you, Barack Obama!

[yallerdawg]

6. Americans Remain Upbeat About Foreign Trade

Is it all just a very vocal local, regional minority? Maybe:



Et tu, Democrats and independents?



http://www.gallup.com/poll/189620/americans-remain-upbeat-foreign-trade.aspx?g_source=trade&g_medium=search&g_campaign=tiles

[fasttense]

7. That whole analysis is about foreign trade NOT Free Trade Deals

There is nothing wrong with foreign trade in of itself. This country has participated in foreign trade since its beginnings.

With good policy and regulations, foreign trade is a boom to a country. It's these corporate developed free trade deals that are ruining America. They turnover control and power to corporations that are only interested in profits uber all. Corporate manipulation is what is ruining foreign trade. Foreign trade is fine "free" trade deals are destroying it.

[yallerdawg]

9. So, trade is good. Free trade is bad. I don't think that works, either.

The latest results, from a Feb. 3-7 Gallup poll, follow the signing earlier this month of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the largest regional trade agreement in U.S. history. Americans' views on foreign trade have not changed since last year.

During the initial debate last year, some of the biggest opponents of the TPP were Democratic U.S. senators, who did not support President Barack Obama's efforts to secure the agreement with 11 other countries. But the senators' opposition to the TPP isn't consistent with the views of rank-and-file Democrats. Identical majorities of Democrats and independents have viewed foreign trade as an economic opportunity over the last two years: 61% in 2015 and 63% in the latest poll.

[fasttense]

10. It is Still an analysis of foreing trade

And NOT free trade deals.

The info is about foreign trade and then the writer switches to "free" trade deals as if they were synonymous. They are NOT the same thing. But it is a common ploy to convince people that giving corporations control over our laws is a good thing. They ask what do you think of foreign trade and then say see everyone likes the TPP and NAFTA.

[yallerdawg]

12. I have never seen where a trade deal negotiated by the US...

gave "corporations control over our laws"?

I think the point is several candidates have been railing against trade deals, and American opinion has not changed.

We favor increasing American exports to create jobs and see no threat to US economy from imports.

I think the people have spoken.

The much vilified demonized Hillary leads both of the isolationist/protectionist candidates.

Maybe the people are smarter than you give them credit for?

[fasttense]

16. Well it seems you are very uninformed.

About what is in those trae deals all the corporations are paying off politicians for.

Only Corps can bring suits against entire nations if they think their profits are less because of any laws. Already our tax dollars went to pay off Mexican and Candadian meat producers. Then our congress repealed the popular country of origin labels on our meat so our tax dollars wouldn't go to paying off fines.

If you don't think they control our laws, you are not aware.

Again you equate foreign trade with "free" trade deals.

[JDPriestly]

11. No. Trade is good, but these trade agreements that are written by the corporations and for the

corporations and that will have such horrible effects on the American middle class that we are not even allowed to read them, ARE EVIL.

EVIL incarnate.

These trade agreements are not about trade, not even about "free" trade. They are about dismantling the health, economic and environmental protections that Americans need and want for their personal safety. They are about allowing irresponsible, malevolent corporations to punish us for laws that we enact democratically -- punish us with fines. They are about INSURING profits for very wealthy, international corporations rather than allowing the market to decide what profits those companies make.

We want trade, but not these corporate-written trade agreements.

I wonder how many people are paid to post pro-TTP, etc. arguments on the internet. Must be quite a few.

[yallerdawg]

13. Do you actually believe your over-the-top outlandish propaganda?

Or do you get time-and-a-half on Sundays? (gotcha back! )

[JDPriestly]

14. I am retired and not paid for posting on the internet.

I have actually read the US Codes that implement the NAFTA dispute resolution agreements. I know how they work. That is why I oppose these trade agreements.

Look at the list of cases brought to the NAFTA dispute resolution authorities. Many of them challenge legitimate and positive environmental laws. We do not need these agreements in order to have free trade. The agreements are just an excuse for undermining democratically enacted environmental, safety and labor laws.

No to these trade agreements.

[yallerdawg]

15. "EVIL. EVIL INCARNATE."

Not just a little over-the-top?

Disputes are inevitable. One nation's interests are not always the other nation's. Dispute resolution provides a negotiated and agreed-upon methodology for remedy.

The world has a history of settling international disputes in a completely different manner.

Partnerships, alliances, economic ties - EVIL?

[JDPriestly]

19. Corporations are entitled to arbitrate their disputes in private courts. No problem.

But corporations should not be able to arbitrate disputes with democratic nations about laws that may limit or bar corporate profits but were decided according to the democratic institutions of the nations.

If you look at the list of disputes brought to the NAFTA court, you will see that quite a few of them concern laws passed by democratically elected legislatures to protect the environment or in the alternative court decisions by courts in democratic countries that the corporations bringing the cases don't like.

We do not need courts that through money damages overrule democratically enacted laws. Obama has said that these courts cannot undo the laws, but they can impose financial costs on countries that will cause the countries to either avoid passing environmental, health and other laws or cause the countries to amend or otherwise change the laws just to please the corporations.

That is unacceptable. We are either promoting democracy or we are promoting corporatocracy. Can't have both. They are incompatible.

We should not agree to any more of these trade courts.

I want to know the country of origin of the meat I eat. I want to know when my lamb comes from New Zealand. Nothing wrong with lamb from New Zealand, but I want to know where it comes from. I want to know if a wine is really from France or from maybe Italy. I want to know whether my tomatoes are from Mexico or the US. Doesn't affect whether I buy them. I just want to know. What is wrong with that? Why does the WTO court disapprove of our labelling meat according to the country of origin?

[JDPriestly]

20. Plus. We are not just talking about disputes between nations.

We are talking about disputes in many cases between corporations and nations. As if sovereign, democratic nations can be sued in arbitration courts outside the sovereign jurisdiction of the nation. I do not understand that concept.

I think someone needs to reread the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. We are a sovereign nation, and while we can join international bodies and relinquish some of our sovereignty to them in the interest of peace and harmony in the world, I do not believe that we can relinquish any of our sovereignty to allow corporations to sue us outside of our judicial system. That's my opinion.

[fasttense]

17. Well said. n/t

[AzDar]

8. Will NEVER vote for a Candidate who supports this abomination...( or pretends not to).

[Rebkeh]

18. K and r nt

[MrMickeysMom]

21. K&R!