Home | About | Donate

Betrayed Again, This Time By Unconvincing Arguments For The TPP


#1

Betrayed Again, This Time By Unconvincing Arguments For The TPP

Thomas Palley

Voters of all stripes have recognized the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as another betrayal of working people, and they have resoundingly rejected it. Despite that, President Obama continues to push it, to the extent of possibly seeking passage in a “lame duck” session of Congress.


#2

Mr. Palley, instead of being a "single issues" writer, you listed and connected all of the salient dots.

I must say I find this metaphor particularly intriguing:

"It is a colossal and terrifying surrender of sovereignty that promises to castrate democratic governance as we know it."

Castrating "Mars' Rules" war by commerce component. Interesting...

And a resounding "Yes!" to this:

"TPP masquerades as a “trade agreement” when it is in fact a “global governance agreement” that empowers and enriches corporations at the expense of voters and workers.

"Corporations and establishment economists call it a trade agreement since that is favorable verbal terrain for business dealing with a public steeped in the loaded language of “free trade.” If the TPP were described as a “global governance agreement,” that would immediately surface the enormity of the issues and the irresponsible undemocratic process pushing it."

Obama OWES big time. That's why he's doing his shuck and jive routine to sell this BOMB!


#5

You shouldn't even be calling it an "agreement" when in fact it is patently a "treaty" and as such should require a 2/3 majority in Congress (and NO "fast track"). Shameless liars all!


#7

It is not Dangerous To Democracy. It is either TPP or Democracy - you can't have both.


#8

Welcome to the Global Plantation!


#9

One of thew few articles I have read which truly and clearly describes the grave risk to democracy itself from the TPP, as well as the TTIP, its forthcoming trans-Atlantic equivalent. Well done. It scared the shit out of me.

Today, every law that is passed -- federal, state, or local -- must pass a crucial test: is it constitutional?
With TPP and TTIP, any law that is passed -- federal, state, or local -- will be required to pass a second test: will it (or might it) have a negative impact on the anticipated future profits of the oligarchs and their corporations?

Want to raise the minimum wage to a living wage? See above.
Want to ban fracking, or glyphosate, or GMO foods, or anything else for that matter? See above.
Want to have single-payer health care? See above.
Want to reduce carbon emissions? See above.
Any nation, state, or city which wants to manage its own affairs will be able to do so only to the extent it doesn't interfere with the multi-national corporations and their drive for ultimate profits. This is rule by oligarchy.

I submit, however, that TPP and TTIP are unconstitutional for that very reason. The U. S. Constitution does not give the President the power to cede some of our government's authority -- and some of our nation's sovereignty -- to any outside entity. Nor does the Constitution give the Senate the power to ratify such a treaty.

Neoliberals don't care abut any of that. That includes Obama and Clinton. It also includes most Republicans in Congress and at least half the democrats. This is the main reason the 2016 election will decide our future. Clinton will gladly implement TPP, then give us TTIP. Trump will stop TTIP and will, I believe, challenge TPP as unconstitutional if Obama gets it ratified by the Senate.