Hillary disagrees with President Obama on the details of the TPP, not the concept of it

[YoungDemCA]

This is an important distinction to make. Clinton's view is that any trade agreement must be as fair as possible for all parties and stakeholders involved, and that there should be strong protections for American workers and other stakeholders. Her stance is one of nuance and pragmatism, not knee-jerk, unthinking reaction to ANY agreement.

DU'ers and other progressives would do well to recognize that distinction.

[BootinUp]

1. She says it must raise wages and help the middle class

to meet her standard for being a good deal.

[BlueCaliDem]

2. President Obama disagrees on some of the details of the TPP, too, but it's still the best we've been

able to negotiate so far.

And yes, we need to recognize the distinction. Totally agree!

[realmirage]

3. Knee jerk refusals to everything is not a good economic model

We need to trade with other countries or we will die economically. That is a proven fact of economics. But that trade needs to be beneficial for the regular people on both sides, not just weasely CEOs of corporations. Hillary's perspective on this seems the most reasonable of all the candidates. You need a balanced approach to governing. Make a deal that helps everyone, or else don't make the deal, but don't just automatically reject everything.

[Lucinda]

4. Yep. Many don't get nuance and see things in very all or nothing terms.

If something comes along that addresses her concerns I wouldn't be surprised to see a pivot, but otherwise she has been quite clear, as it stands now, she doesn't support it.

[ismnotwasm]

5. It's a complex Trade agreement

That has been hammered out for over a decade. We need trade agreements, and we need them with multiple counties, each with their own government and laws. I see the term 'TPP' tossed out there as the embodiment of everything evil and bad, without offering a viable alternative. I mean what? NO trade agreements? Stop negotiating until every country agrees to everything the US wants? Start over--conduct business without trade agreements? Stick with NAFTA? Let China run the negotiations? What?


Hillary opposing parts of it she finds--I will use the word inadequate-- is the proper and most sensible thing to do.

What President Obama has said, is that he want the US to have a significant say in what goes into trade agreement, to protect our workers, to protect workers in other countries. Hillary has identified areas where these protections could be improved.

[puffy socks]

6. Right!

I keep reading that she is against it now, and that's clearly not what she's said.

I think most people really haven't read it but have read articles like Warren's attacking the ISDS and continue the silly arguments that it was done in "secret", who cares, and why? We see the results an can debate those.

Also I keep reading that the US government is trying to hide the agreement from the public it by not posting it. Yet it's been online for a long, long time.

ISDS info
https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2015/march/investor-state-dispute-settlement-isds
TPP full text
https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text


The truth is that TPP is a complicated agreement, it is impossible to know whether costs will exceed benefits until we have data after implementation. Undoubtedly,some jobs will be lost, but some will be created as well. In general, trade agreements have increased wealth particularly in poorer nations. In fact, trade agreements show no correlation with living standard declines. NAFTA preceded substantial gains in US median income, though the TPP is not expected to deliver a huge amount to the US' economic growth, there is no reason to believe the TPP will be any different than previous agreements...and there are strategic considerations as well. For instance, it is in the our best interest to get China on board where trade practices are concerned. They are in the midst of an economic decline and have expressed interest in the agreement which would definitely help labor internationally by creating a minimum wage floor, better working conditions, and addressing child labor abuses.
We don't know if the TPP can accomplish this goal, but imo it is better than doing nothing and giving power only to International corporations to create and dictate terms.