Home | About | Donate

“Free Trade”: The Elites Are Selling It But The Public Is Longer Buying


#1

“Free Trade”: The Elites Are Selling It But The Public Is Longer Buying

Dave Johnson

“Free trade”: The elites are selling it but the public is longer buying it. Look at the support for Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Donald Trump, especially in light of Sanders’ surprise 20-point comeback in this week’s Michigan primary. With primaries coming soon in Ohio, Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina, will Sanders’ trade appeal resonate again?

Voters See Free Trade Killing Their Jobs And Wages


#2

We need to think about discussing issues with our neighbors as well as candidates. Knowledge is power.


#3

ATTENTION C.D. Editors:

Also, it was repeated in the opening sentence:

“Free trade”: The elites are selling it but the public is longer buying it."

Please fix the heading: It should read: "But the public is NO longer buying it." (I don't think the public ever did "buy it." What was determined in secret and treated like some kind of national security apparatus hardly called for any public input.)

Essentially, these treaties are being shoved down our throats. Fortunately, opposition to corporations as odious as Monsanto (along with those as environmentally unsound as Exxon) is escalating in many of the nations theoretically onboard to sign off on the public's right to safety... added to the last vestiges of free choice.

Human beings by and large do no want these oppressive trade treaties that trade away the rights of people to sue corporations for malfeasance and harm so that a few already very rich persons can continue their rape, pillage, and plunder of this precious planet's most irreplaceable natural resources.

And this, when earth mother is already exhibiting major expressions of climatic overload.

I heard an interview on Public Radio where a Democratic union guy was speaking up about his opposition to these felonious (would-be, in a functioning Democracy) trade deals; but he said he couldn't give his name. He said that as a union member, he was not allowed to speak out about this!

If unions that lean Democratic go for Hillary Clinton, they are signing their own death warrants... no different from obeying Jim Jones' "electric Kool-Aid acid test."


#4

NY Times sez: "Mr. Sanders pulled off a startling upset in Michigan on Tuesday by ... hammering Mrs. Clinton on ... her past support for trade deals that workers here believe robbed them of manufacturing jobs."

"Past" support? "Believe" robbed them of jobs? Ah, the genteel backhanded compliment of the Grey Lady.


#5

It's apparent that the writer is writing - consciously or unconsciously - about trade with China at a superficial level. Few people know that China's biggest trading partner is not the US, but the EU. Further, China's combined exports to its tiny special administrative area of Hong Kong and ASEAN are bigger than to the US. And India's imports from China are more than twice that from the US. Chinese workers are paid considerably more than their counterparts in many ASEAN countries, which is why China is facing problems of illegal workers from Vietnam and other countries from Southeast Asia and even Africa (many Eastern China provinces are also having problems with labor scarcity). About currency manipulation - can it be that the yuan is undervalued? That would mean that the yuan is strong, which is not the case. Most countries think that the so-called "quantitative easing" is currency manipulation, and is one reason why many are buying gold. I would agree, however, that "free trade" isn't good for the US, or China, or anyone but the superrich corporations. "Globalization" has seen Americans lost too many jobs AND the exploitation of workers from China to Bangladesh. Time to replace neoliberalism which is a failed ideology and return to the socialism of FDR and most northern European states.


#6

glad someone else noticed that, but this was the language, I think, of the quoted report, which was generated by a pro-"free trade" consultancy.

But yeah, "stupid peasants just don't understand these things. sheesh."


#7

Obama will sell his soul to get TPP through or kick the can down the road so as not to sully his legacy.

Watch what happens when Congress finally votes on it. There will be breaking of the rules on votes, delays with time for arm twisting, multiple votes - anything to satisfy the corporatists.

Clinton would gleefully support TPP with a couple of meaningless tweeks.


#8

Not to argue, but the quote I snipped was pure NYT (from the original). If it was taken verbatim from the Edison Research report, why, that would constitute plagiarism on the part of the Times. :wink:


#9

Bernie is doing another great job on CNN, the sheep who say it is too late, see you later, it isn't over until it is over. Go Bernie. Go away Mr. and Mrs. Milquetoast, those who say Bernie is on a quixotic quest, just go away.

Edit, Hillary is on now, I can't bring myself to listen.


#10

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#11

Thanks for the update, I couldn't bring myself to watch Hillary.


#12

Don't worry. You didn't miss anything.


#13

He already did. Obama wants the TPP to include countries that use human slavery, because if we don't include them, they may trade with China instead of the US. Our 1st black president supports trade over slavery:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/07/president-obama-accepts-slavery-in-order-to-win-tpp-trade-deal.html


#14

The "human trafficking" provisions are unenforceable in the TPP; all they have to do is put up a poster warning about it in a staff lounge, and it fulfills the requirement. And minimum wage requirement could be 1 cent per hour, and fulfill the requirement. TPP puts more power over governments in the hands of corporations. We can do better - read the AFL-CIO list of fair trade requirements. (They should have added "that corporations do not have the same legal status as governments" as well.)


#15

damn good thing I put the "I think" in there, eh? :slight_smile:


#16

It's unfortunate and misguided to "blame China", or blame anyone other than US politicians, for the flight of jobs. What about the tax rules that actually encourage lifting US factories and relocating them to foreign jurisdictions? It would be reasonably easy to change depreciation regulations to discourage or eliminate this sort of thing. Moving expenses should not be allowed as a tax deduction. That would fix it.