President Donald Trump's first executive action on Monday will be to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, reports CNN.
Just like NAFTA, TPP is a crony trade deal, but it is better than no trade. (SEE: Free Trade, No Trade, Crony Trade and Trump Trade).
There certainly can be a lot of improvement over TPP but that improvement would come by moving towards greater free trade. But there is no indication that Trump wants to move in the direction of free trade.
-RW
The question should be how the TPP compares to the present situation not to no trade. Does this new form of managed trade offer the american people anything above and beyond what the present situation does? What are the good parts of the TPP and how do they weigh against the bad parts?
ReplyDeleteBut since the TPP is largely secret and would be completely secret without leaks, we don't know. Why should we trust those at the table to look out for the best interests of the american people? Who has motivation to do so?
Will this be another Kyoto or Obama CO2 type deal* where americans are thrown under the bus with greater regulatory competitive disadvantages? Most likely. Our dear leaders and NGOs have propensity to require the greatest beyond the point of diminishing returns environmental and safety regulations on the US while China and others have little to no obligations. Not even to implement cheap and effective 1970s and 80s technology.
*Obama made a CO2 deal with China where the USA will reduce output and China will continue to increase output until 2030 something when they'll then consider reductions. This of course adds another competitive burden to US manufacturing.
Re: Jimmy Joe Meeker,
Delete─ The question should be how the TPP compares to the present situation not to no trade. ─
Trade is always better than no trade.
─ Does this new form of managed trade offer the american people anything above and beyond what the present situation does? ─
Yes, it does. It does not offer perfection, that is being able to trade without being harassed by arrogant busybodies who think they know better than the rest of us. But at least offers less barriers to those who want to trade.
─ Why should we trust those at the table to look out for the best interests of the american people? ─
What do you mean with "the best interests of the American people"? There is NO such thing as collective interests and certainly the mythical "American Worker(TM)" does not represent the American people. We're all individual humans of will stepping on this good Earth. Having more open trade benefits everyone *who wants to trade* with foreign manufacturers. If YOU don't happen to benefit from this trade, then tough cookies; that gets filed under "This is not a Commune and nobody is obligated to share your pain."
─ Will this be another Kyoto or Obama CO2 type deal ─
Kyoto has NOTHING to do with trade.
─ [...] where americans are thrown under the bus with greater regulatory competitive disadvantages? ─
You're conflating two completely different issues. It is a fact that these trades tend to impose more regulatory burdens on foreign exporters than on American exporters. This is one of the reasons why they're far from perfect but at least it presents a less-restrictive environment for traders compared to the status quo.
You haven't offered any reason why the TPP is better, more open or anything else than the existing status-quo. There is trade now and nobody is proposing no trade. The no trade or TPP binary is not the condition. Why is TPP better than the present instead of merely different management of trade? Some areas may be freer but others less free.
DeleteYes, there's no such thing as collective interests, but these managed trade treaties do not recognize such libertarian details. The very notion of managed trade rejects the idea that people are individuals and subjects them to collective management. So let us stay within the scope of managed trade and the notions it employs shall we?
These managed trade treaties are about interests represented in the negotiations. Since they are handled by representatives they are by definition collective one size fits all. If those at the table for the USA are only considering corporate interests (collectively) then labor, consumers, and such(collectively) have no voice.
Accepting, defending, and arguing for crony managed trade deals with false alternatives becomes another example of half-assed libertarianism, which is just a different mix of statist interventions.
Conflating? Have you ever read any of these crony managed trade deals Torres? Environmental regulation is very much a part of them. And leaked TPP draft shows it to contain such.
How do you know the TPP is less-restrictive? Have you read it? If so, share with the world. So far all I've seen is a very old incomplete draft that cannot be relied on for detail.
There is clearly protectionism, cronyism, implicit subsidies, labor and environmental regulations in TPP. RW sounds like one of those ass-backward libertarians in his apology of TPP.
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty clear that Trump's issue with the TPP is that it would make it harder for him to implement all his stupid tariffs.
DeleteWhy do you keep comparing crony trade deals to "no trade."
ReplyDeleteIs there no trade going on between the US and Asian nations right now, without TPP?