Obama: 'clear the way' for new trade agreements

[Bluebear]

U.S. President Barack Obama said on Thursday it is time to "clear the way" for trade agreements with Panama, Colombia and South Korea.

"Now it's time to clear the way for a series of trade agreements that would make it easier for American companies to sell their products in Panama, Colombia and South Korea -- while also helping the workers whose jobs have been affected by global competition," Obama said in a speech to Congress on jobs and the U.S. economy.

"If Americans can buy Kias and Hyundais, I want to see folks in South Korea driving Fords and Chevys and Chryslers. I want to see more products sold around the world stamped with three proud words: 'Made in America,'" Obama said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/08/obama-jobs-trade-idUSWNA818920110908

[FiveGoodMen]

1. I bet these agreements will be every bit as good as NAFTA.

[Selatius]

3. NAFTA = continental labor arbitrage. Just playing workers against even poorer workers. nt

[izquierdista]

6. NAFTA

Normal Americans Fucked Through Arbitrage

[FiveGoodMen]

12. Yup!

[blue_onyx]

2. No more "free" trade!

[Raine]

4. Repubs stood up and applauded for that. nt

[pipoman]

39. THAT is exactly the problem...

I will never forget the gut cramp when I saw repugs and dems sucking each others asses over their agreement on the necessity of NAFTA and GATT...even as 80% of the voting public opposed these agreements.

Obama is no better...The labor party is dead...both parties have turned their leadership over to those who take orders from those who profit from exportation of US jobs.

..fuckers..

[Raine]

44. Yes, exactly. They sit on their hands for anything that might

be worthwhile but applaude ANYTHING that hurts working Americans, they ALL make me sick. :puke:

[Marrah_G]

5. Will these trade agreements benefit American workers... or just big corporations

Frankly I see the words "Trade Agreement" and I want to start punching people in the face.

[Bluebear]

7. They will create many jobs, never fear.

[Bjorn Against]

11. It is true they will

Free Trade creates all kinds of jobs, just move to South Korea and you will be able to get a job no problem.

[rpannier]

16. The agreement is not particularly popular among labor here in Korea either

[Bjorn Against]

21. Oh I am sure it is not...

This may create more jobs in South Korea, but it also will almost certainly result in lower wages and crappier working conditions. "Free Trade" has enormously high costs for labor on both sides of the deal.

[Art_from_Ark]

22. I'm curious as to why workers in S. Korea would be against this

It's always interesting to hear your take on things on the other side of the Sea of Japan.

[rpannier]

51. On the other side of the East Sea

1. there are subsidies and protections for farmers (most farm use manual labor and are not corporate owned - they are probably one of the few things left that aren't partnered with one of the big 6 Chaebol)- that would be lost

-It has been confirmed that the legal status of the agreement is different in the implementation legislation currently under review by the U.S. Congress. Whereas South Korea has given the agreement precedence over all current domestic laws, the U.S. plans to assign it status below not only federal law but also state law. (on edit: This would apply to labor and environmental laws)

- A South Korean investor might be subject to restrictions according to U.S. federal or state law, it would be a violation of the agreement to punish a U.S. investor according to South Korean law.

- More than thirty domestic laws conflict with the agreement and those laws would be null under the free trade agreement without any discussion.

*These are four that have come up often in discussion

[Art_from_Ark]

55. Very interesting

Thank you for your insight :)

[Bluebear]

56. Invaluable insight, thanks!

[JDPriestly]

58. This is precisely what I dislike about the trade agreements.

Not only do they cost us jobs, but they override our law. I will believe that these agreements will leave to Americans the right to enforce our own employment, environmental and other laws, when I see it.

NAFTA set up a court that requires member countries to comply with the decisions of the NAFTA court on certain environmental issues, for example. It is easy to see an environmental regulation as a veiled trade restriction or protection.

[saras]

54. No, you won't. You can't speak the language, you're probably way too undisciplined, etc...

[JDPriestly]

57. But not in the US.

[Bluebear]

62. +

[ProSense]

8. Here's why I'm not worried:

Obama became the first president to enforce U.S. trade law

[LaValle]

10. HAFTA? Yeah right

I can send a clock to Canada, and they pay a huge duty on it Like 50% of it's value. but if someone in Canada sends me one I pay 4%

Now to make Free trade? Extremely simple.

Whatever laws they have goods from the USA going into their country, we place exactly the same laws on their goods coming into the USA.

soo extremely simple. If they don't like 50% duty on their product coming into the USA then don't charge 50% on ours going into your country.soo simple and fair no one can complain at all.

[ThomCat]

15. Oh yeah, we can see that all the damage from NAFTA has clearly

been repealed. He's doing just so much to enforce so many rules to help the working people in the US. :eyes:

You can always be reliably counted upon to find something with a minor effect, and imply that it's somehow huge and incredibly world-changing instead.

He's proposing 3 more NAFTAs. Only you could find reasons to cheer this as a good thing.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[joshcryer]

27. The Democrats won't pass it without the Trade Assistance Act which helps mitigate jobs losses.

[brentspeak]

29. NYTimes: Trade assistance practically useless, displaced workers not helped

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/us/06retrain.html

[joshcryer]

30. The title of that article is not the subject of your post, and the text does not support...

...your subject, either. Drop the dishonesty. The Republicans fought the Trade Assistance Act.

[brentspeak]

33. Wait, stop, rewind: How does "the text not support the subject"?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/us/06retrain.html

Nonetheless, a http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Workforce%20Investment%20Act%20Non-Experimental%20Net%20Impact%20Evaluation%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf">little-noticed study the Labor Department released several months ago found that the benefits of the biggest federal job training program were “small or nonexistent” for laid-off workers. It showed little difference in earnings and the chances of being rehired between laid-off people who had been retrained and those who had not.]

"joshcryer": "Drop the dishonesty."

Are you from the Karl Rove school of accusing the other person of doing exactly what you yourself are guilty of?

[joshcryer]

34. TAA is not the same as NWLB.

Simple. You said "Trade assistance is practically useless," but that would apply to "No Worker Left Behind." I'm sorry, but in my book, this is called dishonest. Framing one thing as something else.

[brentspeak]

38. Maybe in Karl Rove's book of Making Up Bull$hit, that would be mislabeled "dishonest"

And pushed as such. But as it turns out, the study quoted by the New York Times discusses the federal trade assistance programs in general, not merely "No Worker Left Behind", as if that makes a bit of difference anyway.

You're not related to Mr. Burns' spokesweasel Smithers, are you?

http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Workforce%20Investment%20Act%20Non-Experimental%20Net%20Impact%20Evaluation%20-%20Final%20Report.pdf

This study reports results of a nonexperimental net impact evaluation of the Adult and Dislocated
Worker programs under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA).

[joshcryer]

42. And yet, that paper doesn't mention it once. WIA doesn't give a worker 2 years of benefits, etc.

They're completely different issues.

The problem with TAA is that it doesn't do enough but the extended funding for TAA would close the gap, which is why the Heritage Foundation, among others, are vehemently against expanding it.

[Raine]

28. Good to know because politicians keeping their jobs

is of great concern.

[pampango]

20. Another reason: Our trade is almost balanced with FTA countries, big deficit with others.

In 2010 our total trade with the 17 countries we have FTA's with was $1.115 trillion. We had a deficit of $71.1 billion (6.5% of the total).

In 2010 our total trade with all non-FTA countries was $2.108 trillion. We had a deficit of $574.8 billion (27.3% of the total).

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/index.html

[joshcryer]

26. Wow, that's an incredible link, thank you for that. Completely unbelievable.

Wow.

[JDPriestly]

61. But if we had tariffs, our trade deficit would not make any difference

because the more we imported the more tax revenue we could raise -- and we could use that revenue to invest in infrastructure and tax relief that would boost our industry and create jobs.

So the free trade agreements are a huge blow to our economy when compared to tariffs. And Thom Hartmann has frequently pointed out, tariffs were the original plan for our country's economy. Tariffs made us strong.

(Hamilton helped found the United States Mint; the first national bank; and an elaborate system of duties, tariffs, and excises. In five years, the complete Hamiltonian program replaced the chaotic financial system of the confederation era with a modern apparatus that gave the new government financial stability, and gave investors sufficient confidence to invest in government bonds.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hamilton

Doing away with tariffs has caused our current problems. We should help underdeveloped countries in ways that do not hurt poor and poorly paid Americans.

[Cowpunk]

66. Can you explain how you came up with these numbers?

I clicked on your link. There's just more links there. Are we to assume you went through the numbers for every country and added them up, or did you do it some other way?

[Romulox]

67. She got them directly from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. nt

[pampango]

70. Sure. We have FTA's with 17 countries. I added our imports and exports from each of them

to get a total of imports, exports and the deficit for the group.

One of the links has the figures for total of our imports from and exports to all countries. I took the global import/export figures and subtracted the import/export amounts from the group of 17 FTA countries to get the figures for non-FTA countries, then figured the percentages from there.

[Union Scribe]

53. You should be worried.

I don't see why they can't outsource what you do. Or maybe they already have.

[JDPriestly]

60. But this trade agreement will way outlast Obama's presidency.

By the way, Obama's jobs plan is very much like the plan of the Chamber of Commerce.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1905093

But Obama used his jobs plan as an excuse to cut the funds flowing into the Social Security Trust Fund. My congressman says that Obama's plan is to replenish the Social Security funds that his proposal will cost with funds from the general fund.

That is a joke. Congress will agree with the cuts in payroll taxes and the ensuing depletion of the Social Security Trust Fund -- and then will claim it can't repay the Social Security Trust Fund because there is no money.

So much for your Nonsense. It lacks Common Sense. In case that is too complicated for this late hour: Your Two Cents just don't make Sense.

Face it. Obama is a Republican. He could care less about the poor, the disabled and the elderly. They are just bargaining chips for him.

[Romulox]

68. What about Obama's lies regarding NAFTA?

:hi:

[TeamsterDem]

9. Clear the way for further reduced wages/employment. Great, great idea. Let's do more of that. nt

:sarcasm:

[Marrah_G]

13. Maybe I can get a third part time job!!!!!

ANd thank the goddess for the Teamsters. My Ex can not only support his kids but the health and dental are great. We need more Unions!

[TeamsterDem]

18. We truly are becoming a part-time nation. It saddens me more than you know

The America in which I was raised had part-time jobs but it wasn't nearly as common that so many people were holding so many of them. Then again the America in which I was raised would have never thought cutting taxes after cutting taxes after cutting taxes would somehow have a different effect.

I can barely believe where we are as a nation, sister. And where we are is another thing which pains me.

[Marrah_G]

19. Yup

I work for a small progressive owned life ins brokerage part time during the day. The office is down to just me and the owner and me just part time. Then off I go to ring a register at a pharmacy just so I can bring home enough to pay the bills. Fortunately I live in MA and have been able to buy into state heath care, but I am 41 with no saving, no retirement, no 401... no future really.

[TeamsterDem]

24. Sickening. Just sickening that people now have to do that after

decades of stagnating wages, job exportation by the millions, and an ever-widening wealth gap. I suppose that's partially why I get a kick out of anti-union comments: We may not be perfect but we do fight for/against the things which ultimately mean the most to everyone at the end of the day. I only wish we could help more people. But the Republicans (singularly) have made it so difficult to organize that we can barely accomplish it in units where the internal polls show like 85% and over pre-election support.

And that leaves people working 2, 3, and even more jobs just to survive. But hey, what does the government care? They've got theirs. Everyone else can eff off. Everyone, that is, who isn't a large campaign donor. So we'll continue cutting taxes, signing costly unfair trade deals, and basically pushing the knife in further ... the end of that cycle being anyone's guess.

I can only hope people finally awaken en masse to what's being done to them and vote these unamerican corporate proxies out of office before we literally go right off the cliff.

[Marrah_G]

31. What we need is a real labor party.

We need people in DC to fight for more unions, not less. More regulation on big business, not less. More enviromental protections, not less.


People are finally starting to get angry. Some are very misguided by propaganda and head towards the tea party. But a lot more people are just furious and don't know where to turn.

[TeamsterDem]

37. Totally agreed on all counts. Totally

We're in this weird economic argument which goes something like this: If we (government) spend less and employers pay less (by way of eroding union rights), we'll all be better off. Even if I were rich I could only "agree" (cynically for my own benefit, in that case) with the latter. The reality is that government spending does actually benefit all people, including the rich. And of course we as Democrats disagree with the latter part because we know that when the American people earn decent paychecks (which anyone deserves for hard work) they also tend to spend that money in the economy. (I apologize if it seems as though I think I'm "teaching" this to anyone. I don't. Just venting aloud)

To be honest with you, sister, I don't understand what the collective stupidity is which hangs over our country now and has been building for 25+ years. I've tried and tried but for the life of me I just don't understand it.

[Bluebear]

40. .+

[ClarkUSA]

14. This is how it works: "WTO Upholds Obama’s Tire Industry Relief Decision"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=762403&mesg_id=765428

[ThomCat]

41. You can keep posting that repeatedly

but what does that one decisions, started by WORKERS, really mean when compared to

• the millions of jobs lost for workers
  
• the overall loss of benefits at existing jobs for workers
  
• the overall loss of job security at existing jobs for workers
  
• the overall loss of income, wage levels, and the stagnation of raises for workers
  
• the vast loss of small family farms to bankruptcy and the loss of farming diversity, leading to consolidation of big-agribusiness mega-farms, and mono-culture farming
  
• the millions of people displaced by poverty who become undocumented workers and illegal immigrants
  
• etc.
  

These are the effects of free trade agreements. These are what Obama is giving us. One decision to support tire workers is hardly meaningful compared to all of that.

That would be like someone who spreads typhoid, but they stop and put a bandage on a kid's scraped knee. So you keep pointing to the bandage over and over again to prove he cares about people. The typhoid is a bit more relevant. In this case, the vast, overriding effects of free trade are far more relevant than one trade case in the other direction.

[Warren DeMontague]

23. ***

[Odin2005]

25. Another Obama FAIL.

[blkmusclmachine]

32. Always found it amusing that "nafta" is Spanish for "gasoline."

n/t

[WinkyDink]

35. Um, hello? Why would a Korean NOT buy a Kia, if even an AMERICAN does? "Buy local" is

universal.

[B Calm]

36. This and cutting medicare were the two things that made me mad listening to his speech

[LadyInAZ]

43. I LIKE THIS..

SMILES

[Bluebear]

46. WHY

[Marrah_G]

47. Why do you like it

[Bluebear]

48. SMILES

:eyes:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

69. She's a lady!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqnA5A6VZeE&feature=related

[dflprincess]

45. " I want to see more products sold around the world stamped with three proud words: 'Made in America

I want to see more products sold in the U.S. stamped with three proud words: 'Made in America'.

[sad sally]

49. Most products with a label identifying them as such say "Made in USA"

Made in "America" can usually include Mexico, Canada, or other Central American countries. Only by scanning the bar code can you tell from which of the Americas a product is made.

[dflprincess]

50. Excellent point!

I'm ashamed I didn't catch that.

[sad sally]

52. Don't be. It's the old shell game.

Bought one of those little six packages of diced Dole peaches the other day - didn't have my good glasses on, but saw "USA" so thought okay, they're US peaches. Got home and discovered they're Chinese peaches, packaged in Taiwain, distributed by Dole of California. Did I ever feel dumb!

[Bluebear]

59. !

[woo me with science]

63. +1

[Jack Rabbit]

64. It will say "Made in America"

. . . because the corporate headquarters has an address in Texas or South Carolina. The product will actually be made in Asia while corporations continue to starve American workers into submission.

[Bluebear]

71. +

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.