Pacific-Rim Nations Led by US Agree to Historic Trade Accord

[eagle1462010]

Pacific-Rim Nations Led by US Agree to Historic Trade Accord

Twelve Pacific rim countries sealed the deal Monday on creating the world's largest free trade area, delivering President Barack Obama a major policy triumph.

The deal on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, led by the United States and Japan, aims to set the rules for 21st century trade and investment and press China, not one of the 12, to shape its behavior in commerce to the TPP standards.

"After five years of intensive negotiations, we have come to an agreement that will create jobs, drive sustainable growth, foster inclusive development, and promote innovation across the Asia Pacific Region," said US Trade Representative Michael Froman.


The hard-won deal to create the world's largest free-trade area, encompassing 40 percent of the global economy, came after five days of round-the-clock talks in an Atlanta hotel.

President Barack Obama, who made the TPP a priority of his second term, said the accord reached in Georgia "reflects America's values and gives our workers the fair shot at success they deserve."




Another job killer, which will outsource more jobs. Not only that, Companies can SUE COUNTRIES if their laws are deemed to hurt their business............No need to go country to country anymore. Companies can Sue directly.

BOHICA................to America..................

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Pacific-Rim Nations Led by US Agree to Historic Trade Accord

Twelve Pacific rim countries sealed the deal Monday on creating the world's largest free trade area, delivering President Barack Obama a major policy triumph.

The deal on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, led by the United States and Japan, aims to set the rules for 21st century trade and investment and press China, not one of the 12, to shape its behavior in commerce to the TPP standards.

"After five years of intensive negotiations, we have come to an agreement that will create jobs, drive sustainable growth, foster inclusive development, and promote innovation across the Asia Pacific Region," said US Trade Representative Michael Froman.


The hard-won deal to create the world's largest free-trade area, encompassing 40 percent of the global economy, came after five days of round-the-clock talks in an Atlanta hotel.

President Barack Obama, who made the TPP a priority of his second term, said the accord reached in Georgia "reflects America's values and gives our workers the fair shot at success they deserve."




Another job killer, which will outsource more jobs. Not only that, Companies can SUE COUNTRIES if their laws are deemed to hurt their business............No need to go country to country anymore. Companies can Sue directly.

BOHICA................to America..................

If you're going to cut and paste your thread title, at least delete the automatic Newsmax ad that's tacked on to it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

As for the trade deal, I don't know anywhere near enough about it to make a judgement. It's not a simple issue.

 

[eagle1462010]

'Critical Alert': Jeff Sessions Warns America Against Potentially Disastrous Obama Trade Deal

TPA eliminates Congress’ ability to amend or debate trade implementing legislation and guarantees an up-or-down vote on a far-reaching international agreement before that agreement has received any public review,” Sessions writes. “Not only will Congress have given up the 67-vote threshold for a treaty and the 60-vote threshold for important legislation, but will have even given up the opportunity for amendment and the committee review process that both ensure member participation. Crucially, this applies not only to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) but all international trade agreements during the life of the TPA.

“There is no real check on the expiration of fast-track authority: if Congress does not affirmatively refuse to reauthorize TPA at the end of the defined authorization (2018), the authority is automatically renewed for an additional three years so long as the President requests the extension.

“Barclays estimates that during the first quarter of this year, the overall U.S. trade deficit will reduce economic growth by .2 percent,” Sessions writes. “History suggests that trade deals set into motion under the 6-year life of TPA could exacerbate our trade imbalance, acting as an impediment to both GDP and wage growth. Labor economist Clyde Prestowitz attributes 60 percent of the U.S.’ 5.7 million manufacturing jobs lost over the last decade to import-driven trade imbalances.”

Sessions also cites former AT&T CEO Leo Hindery, Jr., who wrote in a recent column for Reuters that since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and South Korea free trade agreements were passed and implemented, “U.S. trade deficits, which drag down economic growth, have soared more than 430 percent with our free-trade partners.”

“In the same period, they’ve declined 11 percent with countries that are not free-trade partners,” Hindery wrote, in the part where Sessions cites him, adding: “Obama’s 2011 trade deal with South Korea, which serves as the template for the new Trans-Pacific Partnership, has resulted in a 50 percent jump in the U.S. trade deficit with South Korea in its first two years. This equates to 50,000 U.S. jobs lost. “

As a result of all that, Sessions questions whether such a trade agreement would actually help—or whether it would hurt—the U.S. economy overall.

 

[Kosh]

Generally if Obama approves of it, it has to be a bad deal for the US..

The far left hates the US as much as ISIS, so they would never make a deal that comes out in favor of the US..

 

[Kosh]

'Critical Alert': Jeff Sessions Warns America Against Potentially Disastrous Obama Trade Deal

TPA eliminates Congress’ ability to amend or debate trade implementing legislation and guarantees an up-or-down vote on a far-reaching international agreement before that agreement has received any public review,” Sessions writes. “Not only will Congress have given up the 67-vote threshold for a treaty and the 60-vote threshold for important legislation, but will have even given up the opportunity for amendment and the committee review process that both ensure member participation. Crucially, this applies not only to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) but all international trade agreements during the life of the TPA.

“There is no real check on the expiration of fast-track authority: if Congress does not affirmatively refuse to reauthorize TPA at the end of the defined authorization (2018), the authority is automatically renewed for an additional three years so long as the President requests the extension.

“Barclays estimates that during the first quarter of this year, the overall U.S. trade deficit will reduce economic growth by .2 percent,” Sessions writes. “History suggests that trade deals set into motion under the 6-year life of TPA could exacerbate our trade imbalance, acting as an impediment to both GDP and wage growth. Labor economist Clyde Prestowitz attributes 60 percent of the U.S.’ 5.7 million manufacturing jobs lost over the last decade to import-driven trade imbalances.”

Sessions also cites former AT&T CEO Leo Hindery, Jr., who wrote in a recent column for Reuters that since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and South Korea free trade agreements were passed and implemented, “U.S. trade deficits, which drag down economic growth, have soared more than 430 percent with our free-trade partners.”

“In the same period, they’ve declined 11 percent with countries that are not free-trade partners,” Hindery wrote, in the part where Sessions cites him, adding: “Obama’s 2011 trade deal with South Korea, which serves as the template for the new Trans-Pacific Partnership, has resulted in a 50 percent jump in the U.S. trade deficit with South Korea in its first two years. This equates to 50,000 U.S. jobs lost. “

As a result of all that, Sessions questions whether such a trade agreement would actually help—or whether it would hurt—the U.S. economy overall.

Even the labor unions here came out against it, that is why Hilary flip flopped on this o gain the unions endless money supply.

So if the unions are against it like they are coming out against Obamacare, it must be bad for the country..

 

[eagle1462010]

'Critical Alert': Jeff Sessions Warns America Against Potentially Disastrous Obama Trade Deal

TPA eliminates Congress’ ability to amend or debate trade implementing legislation and guarantees an up-or-down vote on a far-reaching international agreement before that agreement has received any public review,” Sessions writes. “Not only will Congress have given up the 67-vote threshold for a treaty and the 60-vote threshold for important legislation, but will have even given up the opportunity for amendment and the committee review process that both ensure member participation. Crucially, this applies not only to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) but all international trade agreements during the life of the TPA.

“There is no real check on the expiration of fast-track authority: if Congress does not affirmatively refuse to reauthorize TPA at the end of the defined authorization (2018), the authority is automatically renewed for an additional three years so long as the President requests the extension.

“Barclays estimates that during the first quarter of this year, the overall U.S. trade deficit will reduce economic growth by .2 percent,” Sessions writes. “History suggests that trade deals set into motion under the 6-year life of TPA could exacerbate our trade imbalance, acting as an impediment to both GDP and wage growth. Labor economist Clyde Prestowitz attributes 60 percent of the U.S.’ 5.7 million manufacturing jobs lost over the last decade to import-driven trade imbalances.”

Sessions also cites former AT&T CEO Leo Hindery, Jr., who wrote in a recent column for Reuters that since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and South Korea free trade agreements were passed and implemented, “U.S. trade deficits, which drag down economic growth, have soared more than 430 percent with our free-trade partners.”

“In the same period, they’ve declined 11 percent with countries that are not free-trade partners,” Hindery wrote, in the part where Sessions cites him, adding: “Obama’s 2011 trade deal with South Korea, which serves as the template for the new Trans-Pacific Partnership, has resulted in a 50 percent jump in the U.S. trade deficit with South Korea in its first two years. This equates to 50,000 U.S. jobs lost. “

As a result of all that, Sessions questions whether such a trade agreement would actually help—or whether it would hurt—the U.S. economy overall.

Even the labor unions here came out against it, that is why Hilary flip flopped on this o gain the unions endless money supply.

So if the unions are against it like they are coming out against Obamacare, it must be bad for the country..

Jeff Sessions fought against it. He is a Stand up guy. He openly opposed it and refused to sign it..........He is a consistent Conservative to boot.

It, in my opinion is bad for America. As he has stated................it could allow Corps to SUE COUNTRIES DIRECTLY, and order the country to change it's laws in WTO style court rooms..........

One such example is the COOL STANDARD.........which is a law of the United States..........It is now almost passed to remove this law...............The WTO ruled against the United States and threatened to fine us Billions of dollars if we didn't change it...............

It is not necessarily about whether you agree with the law or not............it is a FOREIGN COURT ORDERING US TO CHANGE OUR LAWS OR ELSE GET FINED............................If they want to do business in our country then they must OBEY OUR LAWS.............Not order us to change our laws to suit their desires.................I expect them to follow our laws or not do business here..................the same as I don't want them to change their laws to suit my wants........................

It's a SELL OUT..............and like NAFTA and the WTO, which are liberal groups to end WORLD POVERTY.................by bringing the third world at the expense of countries like the United States..................which is why they have maintained the TPA..................which is an worker assistance program to help the DISPLACED WORKERS from these deals.......................Like the Trade imbalances in South Korea, and Mexico..............aka their mission statements say they are going to screw us.

WTO | dispute settlement - the disputes - DS384

 

[my2¢]

I've no opinion yet. I'm not a business owner and so I haven't looked much beyond the TPP website and certainly I'll not rely on politicians to judge its success or failure. In the coming months I'll likely find business articles in which those with a deeper stake in the matter will express their views and those I'll take to heart.

 

[DarkFury]

I voted NO. Other then a FEW jobs for dock workers it provides nothing.

 

[eagle1462010]

WikiLeaks releases secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) investment chapter – ‘Finally everyone can see for themselves that the TPP would give multinational corporations extraordinary new powers that undermine our sovereignty’ | Environment

Public Citizen’s analysis of the leaked text is available here. It shows:

• The TPP would grant foreign investors and firms operating here expansive new substantive and procedural rights and privileges not available to U.S. firms under U.S. law, allowing foreign firms to demand compensation for the costs of complying with U.S. policies, court orders and government actions that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms. This includes:

Foreign investors would be empowered to challenge new policies that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms on the basis that they undermine foreign investors’ “expectations” of how they should be treated. This includes a right to claim damages for government actions (such as new environmental, health or financial policies) that reduce the value of a foreign firm’s investment (what the leaked text calls “indirect expropriation”) or that change the level of regulation a foreign investor experienced under a previous government (a violation of what the text calls a “minimum standard of treatment” for foreign investors).

The leaked TPP text largely replicates the “minimum standard of treatment” language found in previous U.S. pacts that tribunals have used to issue some of the most alarming ISDS rulings. Tribunals often have broadly interpreted this vague “right” to fabricate new obligations for governments that do not actually exist in the texts of ISDS-enforced pacts, such as “not to alter the legal and business environment in which the investment has been made.” Due to such expansive interpretations, the “minimum standard of treatment” obligation has been the basis for three of every four ISDS cases “won” by the foreign investor under U.S. pacts.

The text allows foreign investors to demand compensation for claims of “indirect expropriation” that apply to much wider categories of property than those to which similar rights apply in U.S. law.To the limited extent that “indirect expropriation” compensation is permitted in U.S. law, it is generally available only for government actions affecting real property (i.e. land). But the leaked text would allow foreign investors to claim “indirect expropriation” if government regulations implicate their personal property, intellectual property rights, financial instruments, government permits, money, minority shareholdings or other forms of non-real-estate property.

• Foreign corporations could demand compensation for capital controls and other macro-prudential financial regulations that promote financial stability.This obligation restricts the use of capital controls or financial transaction taxes, even as the International Monetary Fund has shifted from opposing capital controls to officially endorsing them as legitimate policy tools for preventing or mitigating financial crises. Proposed provisions touted as “temporary safeguards” for capital controls would fail to protect many standard forms of capital controls, including those successfully used by TPP governments in the past to ward off financial crises.

• The leaked text could newly allow pharmaceutical firms to use TPP ISDS tribunals to demand cash compensation for claimed violations of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) rules regarding the creation, limitation or revocation of intellectual property rights. Currently, WTO rules are not privately enforceable by investors. But the leaked TPP investment text could empower individual foreign investors to directly challenge governments over policies to ensure access to affordable medicines, claiming that they constitute TPP-prohibited “expropriations” of intellectual property rights if ISDS tribunals deem them to violate WTO rules.

• There are no new safeguards that limit ISDS tribunals’ discretion to create ever-expanding interpretations of governments’ obligations to foreign investors and order compensation on that basis.The leaked text reveals the same “safeguard” terms that have been included in U.S. pacts since the 2005 Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). CAFTA tribunals have simply ignored the “safeguard” provisions that the leaked text replicates for the TPP, and have continued to rule against governments based on concocted obligations to which governments never agreed. The leaked text also abandons a safeguard proposed in the 2012 leaked TPP investment text, which excluded public interest regulations from indirect expropriation claims, stating, “non-discriminatory regulatory actions … that are designed and applied to achieve legitimate public welfare objectives, such as the protection of public health, safety and the environment do not constitute indirect expropriation.” Today’s leaked text eviscerates that clause by adding a fatal loophole that has been found in past U.S. pacts.

• Most TPP countries, including the United States, have decided to expose decisions regarding the approval of foreign investments to ISDS challenge. Australia, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand have reserved the right to pre-approve foreign investors. But the United States took no exception for reviews by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States of planned foreign investments to determine whether they pose threats to national security.

• The amount that an ISDS tribunal would order a government to pay to a foreign investor as compensation would be based on the “expected future profits”the tribunal surmises that the investor would have earned in the absence of the public policy it is attacking as violating the substantive investor rights granted by the TPP.

• The text would submit the U.S. government to the jurisdiction of World Bank and United Nations tribunals. All TPP nations have agreed to be so bound with the potential exception of Australia, which has indicated that it might do the same, “subject to certain conditions.”

 

[Kosh]

Trump, Bernie And Big Labor All HATE Obama’s Pacific Trade Deal

Trump, Bernie And Big Labor All HATE Obama’s Pacific Trade Deal

 

[gipper]

WikiLeaks releases secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) investment chapter – ‘Finally everyone can see for themselves that the TPP would give multinational corporations extraordinary new powers that undermine our sovereignty’ | Environment

Public Citizen’s analysis of the leaked text is available here. It shows:

• The TPP would grant foreign investors and firms operating here expansive new substantive and procedural rights and privileges not available to U.S. firms under U.S. law, allowing foreign firms to demand compensation for the costs of complying with U.S. policies, court orders and government actions that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms. This includes:

Foreign investors would be empowered to challenge new policies that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms on the basis that they undermine foreign investors’ “expectations” of how they should be treated. This includes a right to claim damages for government actions (such as new environmental, health or financial policies) that reduce the value of a foreign firm’s investment (what the leaked text calls “indirect expropriation”) or that change the level of regulation a foreign investor experienced under a previous government (a violation of what the text calls a “minimum standard of treatment” for foreign investors).

The leaked TPP text largely replicates the “minimum standard of treatment” language found in previous U.S. pacts that tribunals have used to issue some of the most alarming ISDS rulings. Tribunals often have broadly interpreted this vague “right” to fabricate new obligations for governments that do not actually exist in the texts of ISDS-enforced pacts, such as “not to alter the legal and business environment in which the investment has been made.” Due to such expansive interpretations, the “minimum standard of treatment” obligation has been the basis for three of every four ISDS cases “won” by the foreign investor under U.S. pacts.

The text allows foreign investors to demand compensation for claims of “indirect expropriation” that apply to much wider categories of property than those to which similar rights apply in U.S. law.To the limited extent that “indirect expropriation” compensation is permitted in U.S. law, it is generally available only for government actions affecting real property (i.e. land). But the leaked text would allow foreign investors to claim “indirect expropriation” if government regulations implicate their personal property, intellectual property rights, financial instruments, government permits, money, minority shareholdings or other forms of non-real-estate property.

• Foreign corporations could demand compensation for capital controls and other macro-prudential financial regulations that promote financial stability.This obligation restricts the use of capital controls or financial transaction taxes, even as the International Monetary Fund has shifted from opposing capital controls to officially endorsing them as legitimate policy tools for preventing or mitigating financial crises. Proposed provisions touted as “temporary safeguards” for capital controls would fail to protect many standard forms of capital controls, including those successfully used by TPP governments in the past to ward off financial crises.

• The leaked text could newly allow pharmaceutical firms to use TPP ISDS tribunals to demand cash compensation for claimed violations of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) rules regarding the creation, limitation or revocation of intellectual property rights. Currently, WTO rules are not privately enforceable by investors. But the leaked TPP investment text could empower individual foreign investors to directly challenge governments over policies to ensure access to affordable medicines, claiming that they constitute TPP-prohibited “expropriations” of intellectual property rights if ISDS tribunals deem them to violate WTO rules.

• There are no new safeguards that limit ISDS tribunals’ discretion to create ever-expanding interpretations of governments’ obligations to foreign investors and order compensation on that basis.The leaked text reveals the same “safeguard” terms that have been included in U.S. pacts since the 2005 Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). CAFTA tribunals have simply ignored the “safeguard” provisions that the leaked text replicates for the TPP, and have continued to rule against governments based on concocted obligations to which governments never agreed. The leaked text also abandons a safeguard proposed in the 2012 leaked TPP investment text, which excluded public interest regulations from indirect expropriation claims, stating, “non-discriminatory regulatory actions … that are designed and applied to achieve legitimate public welfare objectives, such as the protection of public health, safety and the environment do not constitute indirect expropriation.” Today’s leaked text eviscerates that clause by adding a fatal loophole that has been found in past U.S. pacts.

• Most TPP countries, including the United States, have decided to expose decisions regarding the approval of foreign investments to ISDS challenge. Australia, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand have reserved the right to pre-approve foreign investors. But the United States took no exception for reviews by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States of planned foreign investments to determine whether they pose threats to national security.

• The amount that an ISDS tribunal would order a government to pay to a foreign investor as compensation would be based on the “expected future profits”the tribunal surmises that the investor would have earned in the absence of the public policy it is attacking as violating the substantive investor rights granted by the TPP.

• The text would submit the U.S. government to the jurisdiction of World Bank and United Nations tribunals. All TPP nations have agreed to be so bound with the potential exception of Australia, which has indicated that it might do the same, “subject to certain conditions.”

Another trade deal that off shores American jobs, but greatly enriches the big corps. Nothing new here...proves much of the political class is owned by Wall Street.

The Rs who support it include Jebby, Rubio, and Kasich...clearly they are owned by Wall Street. Mrs. BJ is flip flopping...Trump and Bernie are against it.

 

[Kosh]

WikiLeaks releases secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) investment chapter – ‘Finally everyone can see for themselves that the TPP would give multinational corporations extraordinary new powers that undermine our sovereignty’ | Environment

Public Citizen’s analysis of the leaked text is available here. It shows:

• The TPP would grant foreign investors and firms operating here expansive new substantive and procedural rights and privileges not available to U.S. firms under U.S. law, allowing foreign firms to demand compensation for the costs of complying with U.S. policies, court orders and government actions that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms. This includes:

Foreign investors would be empowered to challenge new policies that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms on the basis that they undermine foreign investors’ “expectations” of how they should be treated. This includes a right to claim damages for government actions (such as new environmental, health or financial policies) that reduce the value of a foreign firm’s investment (what the leaked text calls “indirect expropriation”) or that change the level of regulation a foreign investor experienced under a previous government (a violation of what the text calls a “minimum standard of treatment” for foreign investors).

The leaked TPP text largely replicates the “minimum standard of treatment” language found in previous U.S. pacts that tribunals have used to issue some of the most alarming ISDS rulings. Tribunals often have broadly interpreted this vague “right” to fabricate new obligations for governments that do not actually exist in the texts of ISDS-enforced pacts, such as “not to alter the legal and business environment in which the investment has been made.” Due to such expansive interpretations, the “minimum standard of treatment” obligation has been the basis for three of every four ISDS cases “won” by the foreign investor under U.S. pacts.

The text allows foreign investors to demand compensation for claims of “indirect expropriation” that apply to much wider categories of property than those to which similar rights apply in U.S. law.To the limited extent that “indirect expropriation” compensation is permitted in U.S. law, it is generally available only for government actions affecting real property (i.e. land). But the leaked text would allow foreign investors to claim “indirect expropriation” if government regulations implicate their personal property, intellectual property rights, financial instruments, government permits, money, minority shareholdings or other forms of non-real-estate property.

• Foreign corporations could demand compensation for capital controls and other macro-prudential financial regulations that promote financial stability.This obligation restricts the use of capital controls or financial transaction taxes, even as the International Monetary Fund has shifted from opposing capital controls to officially endorsing them as legitimate policy tools for preventing or mitigating financial crises. Proposed provisions touted as “temporary safeguards” for capital controls would fail to protect many standard forms of capital controls, including those successfully used by TPP governments in the past to ward off financial crises.

• The leaked text could newly allow pharmaceutical firms to use TPP ISDS tribunals to demand cash compensation for claimed violations of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) rules regarding the creation, limitation or revocation of intellectual property rights. Currently, WTO rules are not privately enforceable by investors. But the leaked TPP investment text could empower individual foreign investors to directly challenge governments over policies to ensure access to affordable medicines, claiming that they constitute TPP-prohibited “expropriations” of intellectual property rights if ISDS tribunals deem them to violate WTO rules.

• There are no new safeguards that limit ISDS tribunals’ discretion to create ever-expanding interpretations of governments’ obligations to foreign investors and order compensation on that basis.The leaked text reveals the same “safeguard” terms that have been included in U.S. pacts since the 2005 Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). CAFTA tribunals have simply ignored the “safeguard” provisions that the leaked text replicates for the TPP, and have continued to rule against governments based on concocted obligations to which governments never agreed. The leaked text also abandons a safeguard proposed in the 2012 leaked TPP investment text, which excluded public interest regulations from indirect expropriation claims, stating, “non-discriminatory regulatory actions … that are designed and applied to achieve legitimate public welfare objectives, such as the protection of public health, safety and the environment do not constitute indirect expropriation.” Today’s leaked text eviscerates that clause by adding a fatal loophole that has been found in past U.S. pacts.

• Most TPP countries, including the United States, have decided to expose decisions regarding the approval of foreign investments to ISDS challenge. Australia, Canada, Mexico and New Zealand have reserved the right to pre-approve foreign investors. But the United States took no exception for reviews by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States of planned foreign investments to determine whether they pose threats to national security.

• The amount that an ISDS tribunal would order a government to pay to a foreign investor as compensation would be based on the “expected future profits”the tribunal surmises that the investor would have earned in the absence of the public policy it is attacking as violating the substantive investor rights granted by the TPP.

• The text would submit the U.S. government to the jurisdiction of World Bank and United Nations tribunals. All TPP nations have agreed to be so bound with the potential exception of Australia, which has indicated that it might do the same, “subject to certain conditions.”

Another trade deal that off shores American jobs, but greatly enriches the big corps. Nothing new here...proves much of the political class is owned by Wall Street.

The Rs who support it include Jebby, Rubio, and Kasich...clearly they are owned by Wall Street. Mrs. BJ is flip flopping...Trump and Bernie are against it.

Hilary changed her mid so she could tap the endless union money and for no other reason..

But then again maybe she could her 32 million of her money to pay for things..

 

[eagle1462010]

TPP is a bad deal. Companies will now sue countries directly to change the laws to their suiting...................

It's already happening.............If they want to do business in a country, then obey the laws there............If not TAKE A HIKE.............

It's BS.

 

[Kosh]

TPP is a bad deal. Companies will now sue countries directly to change the laws to their suiting...................

It's already happening.............If they want to do business in a country, then obey the laws there............If not TAKE A HIKE.............

It's BS.

It is great news for Apple who can still over charge for their Chinese products that use Chinese slave labor and their children.

Many on the far left use Apple as a status symbol but remain silent on the horror of the Apple products..