Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

[Josh H]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

I honestly think it is what is going on is so unimaginable to the average person that they would rather read about fairy tales.

Gotta agree with you on that one-it's much easier to live in fantasy land.

[Woodsman]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

Windfall at Bernie's: Sanders raises $1.5 million in 24 hours

Bernie Sanders' nascent presidential campaign announced Friday that it raised more than $1.5 million in its first 24 hours, a number that far outpaces what Republican presidential hopefuls posted in their first day.

Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont who caucuses with Democrats, kicked off his dark horse campaign for the Democratic nomination on Thursday with an email to supporters and a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol. Since then, more than 100,000 people signed up for the campaign and 35,000 people donated money, according to a campaign press release.

The average donation was $43.54.

[charliebrown]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

Hey love the Choctaw Bingo song. Great vocals, drips with midwest americana themes, Uncle Slayton could be my neighbor. Rhythm and guitar sound is catchy. The other video bundled with this is good too We can't make it here anymore.

Link to "inside job audio"
https://vimeo.com/37721651

[dcarrigg]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

Obama’s Republican Collaborators


by Patrick J. Buchanan

April 21, 2015

Well, well, well, what have we here?

Democrats hand Obama a stinging defeat on trade deal


Could this be the populist moment?

A seemingly unstoppable coalition of the powerful assembled to advance the Trans Pacific Partnership trade bill: A Democratic president aligned with the Republican majority in both chambers of Congress and the full lobbying might of Corporate America.

But on Tuesday afternoon, the Senate Democratic minority delivered a surprise defeat to President Obama and a severe setback to one of the last few items on his presidential agenda. They blocked consideration of “fast track” trade authority – a crucial vehicle to get the Pacific trade pact through Congress.


The victors: the ascendant populist wing of the Democratic Party, and its spiritual leader, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. “Over and over, America’s workers have taken the brunt of bad trade deals,” the former Harvard professor and scourge of big business told a gathering of the Roosevelt Institute, a liberal think tank, hours before Tuesday’s vote.

“We can’t keep pushing through trade deals that benefit multinational companies at the expense of workers,” she added, with theatrical urgency. “Government cannot continue to be the captive of the rich and powerful. Working people cannot be forced to give up more and more as they get squeezed harder and harder.”


Warren masterfully undermined the trade bill, by highlighting the administration’s obsessive secrecy (the details of the proposed agreement are classified) and the role of corporate interests in drafting the deal (500 non-government advisors participated, she said, 85 percent of them industry executives or lobbyists).
“And now this trade deal is getting the full court lobbying press from those same giant multinational corporations,” she said. “The middle class is on the ropes and now is the time to fight back.”

Under intense pressure from the Warren wing, 44 of the 45 Democrats present Tuesday afternoon defied Obama. Even Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the chief Democratic advocate for the fast-track bill, buckled. Proponents fell eight votes short of the 60 they needed to take up the fast-track bill.

....

At the White House, press secretary Josh Earnest called Tuesday’s vote a“procedural snafu.” But Obama was undone by more than procedure. His would-be successor, Hillary Clinton, was not courageous enough to take a position on the trade legislation, but her silence gave Democrats more freedom to oppose it. And Democrats in Congress bristled at Obama’s disparagement of opponents of the trade bill as emotional, illogical and dishonest.

...

Tuesday’s 44-to-1 vote against Obama’s position confirms that Warren’s populists now dominate the Democratic Party – and if Obama wants to retain a semblance of relevance, he’ll join them.

The rest here.

[jk]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

i heard an interview with eliz warren over the weekend, in which she focused on the enforced arbitrations that would be run by corporate lawyers, with no appeal. she also discussed how that process could [and likely would] be used to undermine what financial regulation we have. so i was cheered up when i read that the senate democrats had torpedoed the tpp.

i guess it's true that obama is really a republican, deep down. fdr was called a traitor to his class, but otoh there are those who say he saved capitalism. so perhaps that will be the story when historians look back on obamacare [saving the insurers from any single payer threat] and afghanistan [the "right" war, wasn't it?]

supposedly obama wanted to rise above the political divisions of the baby boomer dominated political parties. but then again, w was "a uniter, not a divider," and richard nixon was going to "bring us together." and clinton came out of the democratic leadership council and was an exponent of "triangulation," which turned out to mean deregulating the financial industry and repealing glass-steagall.

maybe obama's thinking about how much he'll be able to charge for speeches after he leaves office. bill's $500k has got to be a big target for him.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

It's curious to me.

I assume there has to be a not-completely-insignificant population of Republicans who would not be happy with some corporate international arbitration court deciding US law in secret.

I don't understand how Republicans in Congress seem to feel so little pressure from their base on these types of things.

Maybe too much of the base simply bought the "free markets/trade = good" meme to ever question exactly what these things are doing? I mean, it's called a free trade deal, but it has nearly nothing to do with tariffs, and everything to do with give-aways to Finance and Hollywood and a stripping of national sovereignty - not exactly favorite industries / actions for much of the Right in America.

That said, even if all of the Republican Senators were going to go ahead with this, there were 22 Republicans in the House who were not.

But this is still just playing defense. The tide would turn by getting labor, environmental, and currency manipulation standards into the WTO. Even then, that only buys level playing field...

[jk]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

It's curious to me.

I assume there has to be a not-completely-insignificant population of Republicans who would not be happy with some corporate international arbitration court deciding US law in secret.

I don't understand how Republicans in Congress seem to feel so little pressure from their base on these types of things.

Maybe too much of the base simply bought the "free markets/trade = good" meme to ever question exactly what these things are doing? I mean, it's called a free trade deal, but it has nearly nothing to do with tariffs, and everything to do with give-aways to Finance and Hollywood and a stripping of national sovereignty - not exactly favorite industries / actions for much of the Right in America.
..

i think there are 2 republican "bases" - the moneybags base, and the voters base. the latter, i think, are not paying much attention to the tpp. "free trade" has "free" in it, and besides, the supreme court is about to rule on gay marriage.

[jk]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

gee, how could i forget to bring in shell oil getting to drill in the arctic sea. keystone got all the attention, and it's not even economic anymore, so obama can shore up his environmental cred at no cost by vetoing it, then give shell the go ahead up north. everyone's a winner! he didn't get that nobel peace prize for nothing.

[photon555]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

Meet your new boss, same as your old boss. Now get back to work, serf. Relax everyone, we're just reverting to the mean. The American experiment was a statistical outlier in enlightened self government that has been forced back into the historical norm of depraved tyranny. But there are still a few formalities that need to be rationalized so that the few sheeple that care about such things will understand their place in the social structure. Uppity sheeple can be entertaining to the elites, but even sheeple can bite the hand that rules them.

[lektrode]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

i think there are 2 republican "bases" - the moneybags base, and the voters base. the latter, i think, are not paying much attention to the tpp. "free trade" has "free" in it,

oh there's a 3rd too - its called the self-employed

...and besides, the supreme court is about to rule on gay marriage.

and what could possibly be more important (to the lamerstream media - as a distraction) than that...
(obviously NOT the biggest organized crime heist in history, but now it'll be 'police brutality')

[vt]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

Is this trade deal really that bad? It doesn't include China, India, or Russia. In fact it offsets China's teaming with russia on a new "silk road" to Europe.

Yes it hurts generic drug makers, which is anti consumer. This needs to be corrected, but so do a lot of other things with pharmeceuticals and pricing.

Free trade has rarely been a bad idea.

As for the American worker, why are we letting in millions more illegal, low skill workers that compete with African Americans sufering from high unemployment? The same people against this bill are letting low wage immigrants take jobs form low and middle income Americans. Which includes latinos that are already U.S. citizens. The Democrats are the hypocrits here.


"Trans-Pacific Partnership: The Best Trade Deal You've Never Heard Of

Sean Brodrick, Resource Strategist, The Oxford Club

"Gentlemen, I was wrong."

That line is famously attributed to atheist Clarence Darrow. He was asked what he would say if, after he died, he found himself in heaven, confronted by the 12 apostles.

Today I face having to say those same words. The subject is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the new multilayered trade deal that the U.S. is quietly working on with trading partners around the Pacific Rim.

When I first heard about this proposed deal early last year, it set off all sorts of alarm bells. When you string the words "government," "bureaucrats" and "deal" together, I normally assume that regular Americans are getting shafted.

However, based on new evidence, I may have been wrong.

In fact, there may be a lot to like about this deal. Let's examine the facts.

What We Know About the TPP

Fact is, we don't know for sure what is in the TPP. A) It is still being negotiated, B) all we know, we learned from leaks and C) the governments involved are keeping the details secret as long as possible.

But here's what we do know...

• It's a treaty that enhances trade and investment among 12 countries throughout the Pacific Rim: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam.

• Together, these countries account for 40% of the global economy and one-third of world trade. China is NOT included in the TPP, and that's by design. The TPP is America's answer to a trading web that China is attempting to weave through its "New Silk Road." (This is something I touched on in my column about why investors should be concerned about Putin.)

• The goal of the TPP is to boost U.S. exports to some of the world's fastest-growing economies. It also promises to help resolve labor disputes. Small business could benefit from the new trade deal. And it sounds like companies may even be able to challenge government regulations that they believe are punitive or restrictive.

Speaking of the government, the TPP is that rarest of birds spotted in D.C. nowadays - bipartisan. Congressional Republicans and President Obama have finally found something they can agree on.

In the business world, companies ranging from Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) to Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) back the deal. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and the National Association of Manufacturers also support it.

Going on the Fast Track

To move things along, President Obama is asking Congress to grant him fast-track authority on the TPP.

Fast track was created by President Richard Nixon to get around public debate and congressional gridlock. It set up a system of more than 500 official corporate U.S. trade advisors who have access to the secret trade agreement. They set the "U.S." trade agenda no matter who the president is.

Now Obama is asking for it.

The opposition comes from Congressional Democrats who worry that he's giving away the store to international corporations.

I think they're wrong.

The U.S. Pivots to Asia

President Obama and Congressional Republicans are pushing TPP because they can see what China is doing with its New Silk Road. They don't want American manufacturers and workers left out in the cold.

Its backers say the TPP deal is the United States' chance to enhance economic power in Asia and to require participating countries to play by its rules.

What's the "New Silk Road"? We introduced this concept to Investment U readers back in 2010. Click here for our straightforward explanation.

The alternative is that those countries will fall increasingly into China's orbit.

It's true that the TPP will bring a lot of changes. It could change everything from where your shoes and shirts are made to where U.S. car companies, drugmakers and the energy industry sell their products.

Swoosh! Here Come Jobs

It could also bring jobs to the U.S. Just recently, Nike (NYSE: NKE) said that the TPP would help it create at least 10,000 manufacturing and engineering jobs in the United States over 10 years.

In fact, in a recent interview, Nike CEO Mark Parker said: "We expect [the TPP] will actually create more like 40,000 jobs when you look at suppliers, other manufacturers who will be involved, and partners, engineers, construction jobs."

Now, detractors will point out that Nike employs 990,000 workers around the world in garden spots like Vietnam, most of them laboring in the most miserable sweat-shop conditions you can imagine.

My response: We can't save anybody. People would still labor in miserable conditions in Vietnam without this deal. On the other hand, 10,000 new, good American jobs is nothing to shake a stick at.

Sure, Nike is only one company. Some companies will close production in the U.S. and shift production overseas.

But what President Obama and Congressional Republicans are hoping is that more jobs will be created here than destroyed.

To be sure, there will be both winners and losers from the TPP. The Peterson Institute for International Economics provided the chart below detailing how much it thinks different economies will gain from the TPP.

Japan gets the biggest potential dollar gain from the deal - $119 billion. Vietnam gets the biggest percentage gain, with an economic bump of 13.6%.

But the U.S. could add $78 billion per year to its GDP. The boost for America could be as much as $267 billion annually if free trade expands to the rest of the Asia-Pacific region.

Many people think the 21st century is China's century, much as the 20th belonged to the U.S. Let me tell you, it doesn't have to be that way."

[jk]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

re: isds- washington post interview with elizabeth warren:



WARREN: Once a group of independent arbiters, whose decisions cannot be appealed, can issue a money judgment of any size, then the ISDS problem arises….Here’s what you could do. If corporations had to go through the same procedures that anyone else has to go through to get the trade deal enforced, then the problem wouldn’t exist.
Now, if a labor union says, ‘Vietnam promised not to work people for a couple of dollars a day, and to raise working conditions, and then failed to do it,” they have to get the U.S. government, through the trade rules, to go to Vietnam and prosecute the case. If corporations had to do the same thing, then it would be a level playing field…ISDS gives a special break to giant corporations, a break that nobody else gets.


PLUM LINE: What you’re arguing is that six years of fast track,plus ISDS, could ultimately result in the weakening of financial regulations? You’re not saying ISDS itself would do that?
WARREN: Absolutely right…six years means that whatever the Obama administration has committed to won’t bind the next president. If that president wants to negotiate a trade deal that undercuts Dodd Frank, it will be very hard to stop it.

PLUM LINE: Couldn’t a Republican president simply go straight at Dodd Frank? Would this be any easier than that?
WARREN: Absolutely. Because trade will be fast tracked for six years….A direct run at Dodd Frank potentially takes 60 votes in the U.S. Senate. But doing it through trade authority needs to be done with 51 votes.

PLUM LINE: But wouldn’t that require a direct change to U.S. legislation?
WARREN: It’s possible to punch holes in Dodd Frank without directly repealing it. For example, harmonization of the capital standards and leverage ratios could be adjusted to help the big banks without ever directly contradicting Dodd Frank. But the effects of Dodd Frank would be severely undercut.


somebody please tell me that they believe that if tpp happens, the financial industry won't use the tactics warren describes. and explain why you believe that.

[jk]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

fewer generic drugs under tpp?

joseph stiglitz: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/31/op...ur-health.html

[dcarrigg]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

"Trans-Pacific Partnership: The Best Trade Deal You've Never Heard Of

VT, even the advocates say they expect a gain of 0.4% of GDP over 10 years in the US. That's 0.04% GDP gain per year. It's a rounding error. And that's assuming if all the FIRE deregulation within the TPP doesn't cause another financial meltdown before then and evaporate all those anticipated gains and then some.

We were going to give away the house to FIRE in this one. All for what? A vague expectation from NIKE to make 10,000 jobs in 10 years? 1,000 jobs per year? 833 jobs per month? Another rounding error in the 100,000-250,000 jobs added per month range we're dealing with now.

And that's not counting all of the manufacturers that will close their factories and offshore to Vietnam. Not that many (Levis etc) haven't already done so.

I don't see how on Earth it's a good deal for the American people to give up our sovereign right to police the banks over to an international corporate arbitration board for a vague expectation of 0.04% annual GDP growth. Odds are the American consumer will end up paying that 0.04% GDP back and then some to increased royalty and patent fees and name-brand drugs once they take our generics away in this deal.

And like I said, that's not even counting the speculative craziness that will go on once the banks weasel their way out from under Dodd-Frank through the back-door TPP kicks open for them.

And even if you don't believe any of that, believe your eyes. Believe history. Let me re-quote Buchanan for you:

When we look back to NAFTA, GATT, the WTO, MFN and PNTR for China, the Korean-U.S. free trade deal, CAFTA with Central America—almost all have led to soaring trade deficits and jobs lost to the nations with whom we signed the agreements.

As for the bureaucrats and politicians who promised us big new markets for exports, rising trade surpluses, better jobs—were they simply ignorant, or were they knowingly lying to us?

No one can be that wrong for that long. The law of averages is against it.

[vt]

Re: Another "Giant Sucking Sound" ?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/13/trade-bill-revived-bipartisan-deal-sets-new-votes/

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/13/exclusive-sen-rand-paul-visits-secret-room-to-read-obamatrade-calls-for-public-release-of-deal-text/