Obama defends free trade push to supporters: This isn’t NAFTA
Source: Washington Post
President Obama rallied his staunchest allies Thursday to support his free trade push in the face of stout Democratic opposition, arguing that his critics are wrong to say the deal will harm the middle class.
Appearing before 200 members of Organizing for Action, the progressive advocacy group born from his campaign apparatus, Obama said the 12-nation Pacific Rim trade pact his administration is pushing for is far superior to past trade deals that labor unions have blamed for job losses. Specifically, he cited the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed by President Bill Clinton in 1993.
"I've got some good friends opposed to this trade agreement and when I ask them specifically, 'What do you oppose?' they start talking about NAFTA," Obama said at the Ritz Carlton. "Im thinking, 'I just came out of law school when NAFTA was passed.' Thats not the trade agreement Im passing. You need to tell me what's wrong with this trade agreement, not one that was passed 25 years ago."
Two days after talking about trade in a roundtable in Northern Virginia moderated by MSNBC host Chris Matthews, Obama laid out his most forceful case yet that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would boost the U.S. economy. Congress is considering "fast-track" legislation that would give him authority to present the pact to lawmakers for a vote without them being allowed to amend it.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/04/23/obama-defends-free-trade-push-to-supporters-this-isnt-nafta/
ybbor
(1,558 posts)How the hell would they know? You won't let them see it until your FT deal goes through and then it's too late.
No to the TPP!
haikugal
(6,476 posts)Disgusting.
tridim
(45,358 posts)Be specific. What do you oppose?
haikugal
(6,476 posts)Basically he's doing a PR tour and holding hands, patting heads and telling us "there, there" or "don't worry I've got this" rather than give us anything real.
I'm and adult and I don't appreciate it...he's blowing smoke.
tridim
(45,358 posts)And despite your opposition, you still didn't say what you oppose. But you KNOW you oppose it. Weird logic there.
rpannier
(24,350 posts)It hasn't been
A report published by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a left-leaning Washington think tank, puts the first-year US job-loss figure at up to 40,000.
Why should I trust him on this when I haven't seen anything that says this trade agreement has done what he claims
It hasn't helped Koreans much either. Unless, you are part of the Chaebol. They've made big money using many of teh same tactics as U.S. companies have.
They use an astonishingly high number of irregular workers: About 8 million
There are about 2 million working for subcontractors. These workers make barely enough to live on (In some cases they do not)
They continue to mistreat workers and prevent unions from forming by using subcontractors and irregular workers
Tell me, why I should believe this is a good thing when the trade agreement he points to has not worked out for the workers in either country
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)which is a big issue here in Korea. There has been a lot of press about how poorly they are treated and how the laws need to be changed to better protect them. Many come from poorer SE Asian countries to work because they can make more than they can at home.
My question is have any jobs been created out of the KFTA? Is the loss of 40,000 an actual loss number or the net loss? The real issue is that the US has to start importing products and services to Korea that are needed but not available (see below for some examples).
I will say that I have seen many more American products in stores here in Korea, especially food and beverages. I bought a bottle of Oregon wine last week (the first time I've been able to find one in 11 years) to celebrate finishing my doctorate. Granted I paid through the nose for it, but it was nice to support my home state. Cheese has become much easier to find as well and that comes from three or four states that I know of (California, Oregon, and Wisconsin).
With all that said, I am very skeptical about the TPP. Korea has said they won't join it at first, but may later. My main opposition is the intellectual rights crackdown (with movies and TV programs) and the lack of distribution making them available here.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)Oh wait...
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Votes it down.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)LOTS of corporate-owned Democrats in the mix.
It's not smart.
pampango
(24,692 posts)turn it into a conservative Christmas tree with the ability to add and delete whatever they want.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)I wouldn't think we would get a good deal either way.
It's a big reason why I'm against Fast Track and the TPP/TTIP/TISA/...
Just about all of the Republican Senators are for this, and I just can't ignore that fact. They have been properly informed by their bosses that this is a go. So, I say it's a no go.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)Oh, wait...
Response to ybbor (Reply #1)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
IDemo
(16,926 posts)"I wish I could let you see the vehicle, but no."
"Now, if you'll just sign here, we can all go to lunch."
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)you buy it? What is wrong with you? "
"Now shut up and sign here."
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)bloomington-lib
(946 posts)I hate it when people I generally respect do shit like this.
GeorgeGist
(25,327 posts)Again
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)referring to the TPP as a "trade agreement" just like all of the ones that have come before it when they have been educated on the scope of the TPP and know very well that opposition is heavily against the TPP for many, many reasons (and trade might not even be the biggest reason for many that oppose).
In reality, the TPP is probably much, much bigger than previous deals that have come before it, and from leaks we have learned that only 5 of the 29 chapters deal with trade issues. Not too mention that with so many countries being involved, it apparently will be incredibly binding if all countries will be needed to end the agreement or modify it.
The TPP is not a trade agreement. It is a "trade agreement".
tularetom
(23,664 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Especially since it's being kept secret.
How about "You need to tell us what is good about it!!"
haikugal
(6,476 posts)grntuscarora
(1,249 posts)The environmental groups I follow are deeply suspicious.
example:
http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/trans-pacific-partnership
And I trust these groups a hell of a lot more than I trust the corporate lawyers that drafted this thing.
turbinetree
(24,745 posts)lets have information on this matter----that's all we ask for, I trust Warren, tell me why I should trust this Mr. President
antigop
(12,778 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Korean Free Trade Agreement
project_bluebook
(411 posts)Ed's head almost exploded and Sen Sanders, who was being interviewed at the time of Obamas speech, got quite a kick out of it. Big Ed is the only TV show going after SHAFTA. Obama is now paying back the wall street banksters for their campaign support.
Geronimoe
(1,539 posts)It is NAFTA on crack.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)I feel like TPP whether we lose jobs or not is not going to do ANYTHING to help the working class.
So I think just on principle that the working class and dems should KILL it until conditions improve for US workers.
How about fast track on increasing the min wage? Mandatory sick leave and vacation?? Making overtime pay double time not just time and a half?? How about fast tracking removing the cap on Social Security.
Why must we rush anything to help the rich or business but anything to help ordinary people well it could drag on forever.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Or else just shut the fuck up and get on with fulfilling your obligations to the rulers.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Larry Engels
(387 posts)6 or 8 years from now we will be whining about the President, whoever he or she is, including our own candidate. Yes, even Bernie.
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)He knows full well how Americans will be screwed by this TPP garbage...apparently he has huge debts to the billionaires.
msongs
(67,502 posts)Geronimoe
(1,539 posts)The truth is so simple isn't it. The Emperor has no clothes. It is a Faustian bargain O has made with Wall Street and the own-everything class.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)myrna minx
(22,772 posts)to ridicule the President isn't appropriate.
candelista
(1,986 posts)I know you can do it!
myrna minx
(22,772 posts)I didn't alert. Do you consider "red state" legitimate source material here?
candelista
(1,986 posts)As far as the source goes, it's a photograph. Are there right wing photographs and left wing photographs? Please explain.
myrna minx
(22,772 posts)candelista
(1,986 posts)Fine, great!
candelista
(1,986 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)candelista
(1,986 posts)Attack me for something I actually said. Besides, it's a photograph. Are you saying it was photoshopped? Are people only supposed to post complimentary photogenic poses of President Obama? Is that a rule around here?
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1075689
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
linking to a photo mocking Obama from freaking redstate.com (THE rightwing blog on the internet, home of such luminaries as Erick, son of Erick)
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Apr 24, 2015, 11:01 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh, for the love of Hilary!
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry Juror #5, we'll agree to disagree.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Posting the picture is insensitive. Having the redstate site link and words against it with a warning would have just been acceptable, but no with this picture.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I clicked on the pic for more info from Google - the result was "Best guess for this image: pathological liar" While occasionally other DUers have posted the same opinion in words, using a rw site to make your point is not appropriate.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
candelista
(1,986 posts)Is that your purpose?