Explain how China, who was not part of the TPP would have used it to further put us at a disadvantage?
In the area I live in, there are textile mills closed by the hundreds. They employed 10s of thousands. These people have lived in this area and performed these duties for generations. The mills even built inexpensive homes…rows and rows so that their workers had affordable housing because the pay was minimal. Tell me in your opinion how they needed to adapt after these textiles were shipped out of the country? What should they have done?
Move to where the work is?
Is that your answer? Kind of like…let them eat cake?
Same thing your generation tells us. Deal with it and adapt.
by using TPP countries as conduits to get around agreements. TPP was too big, it involved too many parts. The EU is one thing. Them we can deal with because they are essentially one economic unit even using the same currency. TPP; Different countries, different currencies, each with its own “outside” deals with others… too much potential for being used.
When you’re young, you are in a circle with spokes going out in almost all directions, giving you many choices in life to choose from. After you’ve been down one for a couple of decades, you’ve established your roots and it isn’t that easy. The older you are, the longer you’ve been in a location, the harder “adaptation” becomes. I am one who can adapt and I’m thankful for that but not everyone is as blessed.
Retraining.
Textile jobs are now largely in automated plants. So the people who know how to program the computers and fix the machines make good money.
Oh yes…just…retrain. Thanks. I should have thought of that.
Yes you should have because people who do that even older people tend to do better than those who sit and complain.
So what they do is count on the government to fix things with tariffs.
Think about this all they are being asked to do is either go back to school or move. Now there are people that either pick up and move to entire new countries pay lots of money to get citizenship. Others agree to go to other countries and risk being mistreated by employers like my sister in law did in Kuwait.
I am pointing a finger at econimic policy/ideology.
Both Dems and Pubs are responsible.
This is not a tribal thing. This is bad policy, that keeps being supported by people (not pols), that believe in untruths.
You, continue to believe tax cuts, are good, and will stimulate the economy…to the point of not creating a deficit. That is utterly false. Yet, you, and others, who vote…continue to support an ideology that does not work.
That’s the damn problem.
It’s what I did.
You know. Bootstraps and all that.
Tax cuts in the right places are good but they also should have been combined with spending cuts and the military is a target rich environment.
That seems like a pretty hand waving explanation to me.
We disagree on the efficacy of multilateral trade deals. Whether or not you choose to agree with one rationale for not favoring them or another is fairly irrelevant. The way I see it, every podunk little berg of a country that is currently irrelevant to us becomes a back door through which others will find ways to get around our intent. Especially China, finding ways to gain unfair trade advantages is what they do.
The failure of your argument is that you are making an assumption that something will happen.
So it is a rejection of a policy based on nothing but a belief of might happen sometime in the future.
The problem is that there were plenty of problems with the TPP to take issue with… saying China could use it to their advantage is far and way not one of them.
Damm. Bout choked on my lunch.
Tax cuts for the middle class are good.
Tax cuts for those that have more money than they will ever spend, is not good.
And yet again, you support a policy, that the party your support, does not. In fact, they do the exact opposite.
So much BS. It is far and away one major reason. Saying China might use it to cheat is like saying water is wet. It’s what they do. Neither denial nor willful ignorance will change that.
