Posts Tagged ‘trade agreements’

Why millions of ordinary Americans back Trump

March 11, 2016

Donald Trump is a con man, a racist and a bully.  The record is clear.  But the world is full of confidence men, racists and bullies.  What sets him apart?

Thomas Frank, author of What’s the Matter With Kansas? and other great political books, took the trouble to listen for himself to several hours of Trump speeches (which I confess I have never done).

I saw the man ramble and boast and threaten and even seem to gloat when protesters were ejected from the arenas in which he spoke.  I was disgusted by these things, as I have been disgusted by Trump for 20 years.

thomasfrank4718But I also noticed something surprising. In each of the speeches I watched, Trump spent a good part of his time talking about an entirely legitimate issue, one that could even be called left-wing. 

Yes, Donald Trump talked about trade.  In fact, to judge by how much time he spent talking about it, trade may be his single biggest concern – not white supremacy.   Not even his plan to build a wall along the Mexican border, the issue that first won him political fame.  He did it again during the debate on 3 March: asked about his political excommunication by Mitt Romney, he chose to pivot and talk about … trade.

It seems to obsess him: the destructive free-trade deals our leaders have made, the many companies that have moved their production facilities to other lands, the phone calls he will make to those companies’ CEOs in order to threaten them with steep tariffs unless they move back to the US.

Trump embellished this vision with another favorite left-wing idea: under his leadership, the government would “start competitive bidding in the drug industry”.  (“We don’t competitively bid!” he marveled – another true fact, a legendary boondoggle brought to you by the George W Bush administration.) 

Many liberals think that Trump supporters are simply out of touch with reality.  But they themselves are out of touch with how trade and immigration are changing American life.

(more…)

Free trade, fair trade and economic nationalism

March 9, 2016

The theory of free trade is that everybody benefits when individuals and corporations based in different nations are allowed to buy and sell goods and services without restriction.

India and trade DilemaUnfortunately most of the world operates on a different theory—that the exchange of goods and services should be to the benefit of the nation, not the corporation or the individual.

Subcontracting of manufacturing by, for example, Apple Computer to the Chinese company Foxconn is of mutual benefit to Apple and Foxconn, but it is not of mutual benefit to the USA and China as nations.  It is China’s gain and America’s loss.

Governments of China, Japan, Germany and other countries regard regard the unit of international economic competition as the nation rather than to the individual or the corporation.  They don’t care about the economic benefit to the trading partners.  They’re concerned about the economic benefit to the nation as a whole.

If an American corporation wants to do business in China or Japan, its executives have to provide something that benefits the Chinese or Japanese economy—a transfer of technology, or the creation of manufacturing jobs.

You have the strange situation of American business corporations dictating policy to Washington while kowtowing to Beijing.

(more…)

Fact-checking President Obama on the TPP

March 4, 2016

Hat tip to my expatriate pen pal Jack

What trade agreements have done to us

June 12, 2015

freetrade20010709

It is true that democracy and national sovereignty are threatened by proposed international agreements such as the Trans Pacific Partnership, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and Trade in Services Agreement.

What I’m coming to realize is how much democracy and national sovereignty have already been compromised by the North American Free Trade Agreement and other existing so-called trade agreements.

They all have investor-state dispute settlement provisions that allow corporate-friendly special tribunals to override national laws and regulations.  And they all go far beyond setting terms and conditions for imports and exports.

Since almost anything can affect international trade, almost anything can go into an international trade agreement.  As David Dayen documents in a coming issue of the American Prospect, lobbyists have learned to bypass Congress and persuade the U.S. International Trade Representative—typically a former or future lobbyist himself—to enact their wish lists through trade agreements.

Rejecting the TPP, TTIP and TISA will not be enough.  The next step will be to renegotiate or cancel the existing toxic trade agreements.

(more…)

‘Fast track’ involves more than just the TPP

April 21, 2015

The significance of “fast track” goes far beyond clearing the way for quick approval of the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement.

There are other TPP-like trade agreements now under negotiation, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Trade In Services Agreement.

The Trade Promotion Authority bill, otherwise known as “fast track,” would govern how such agreements are negotiated and voted on in the future.

In theory this could work well.  Negotiators would pursue objectives set by Congress, the leaders of Congress would be kept informed as negotiations progress and ratification of the agreement would be only a formality.   But there is no mechanism in the current fast track bill by which Congress can call the negotiators to account or demand information.

Fast track assumes good faith on the part of all concerned, and, based on the historic record, including the way the TPP has been negotiated, I think this would be a naive assumption.

LINK

Hatch Bill Would Revive Controversial 2002 Fast Track Mechanism That Faces Broad Congressional, Public Opposition by the staff of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch division.

What’s Wrong With Wyden-Hatch-Ryan’s Fast Track Bill – The Specifics by Gaius Publius for Down With Tyranny (via naked capitalism).  [Added 4/22/2015]