[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]

/polpol/ - Politically Incorrect Discussion

Politics, news, culture, society - no shills allowed

Catalog

The development of the fully open source software behind 8ch.net that anyone can use ("infinity") is a massive undertaking. Please consider supporting the Infinity Development Group on Flattr by clicking here. Your donations also contribute patches back to vichan, infinity's upstream and engine on which more than one hundred imageboards rely worldwide.
8chan Bitcoin address: 1NpQaXqmCBji6gfX8UgaQEmEstvVY7U32C | Buy Bitcoin easily in the US | Buy Bitcoin anonymously all over the world | Bitcoin FAQ
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 1 per post.


File: 1429334890692.jpg (72.58 KB, 675x430, 135:86, 1429241009083.jpg)

3d5251 No.13224

Copypasted from /pol/ because of sliding:
>Pierce the shit together, it's the end
Time to /k/ the fuck up

>WASHINGTON — Key congressional leaders agreed on Thursday on legislation to give President Obama special authority to finish negotiating one of the world’s largest trade accords, opening a rare battle that aligns the president with Republicans against a broad coalition of Democrats.


>In what is sure to be one of the toughest fights of Mr. Obama’s last 19 months in office, the “fast track” bill allowing the White House to pursue its planned Pacific trade deal also heralds a divisive fight within the Democratic Party, one that could spill into the 2016 presidential campaign.


>With committee votes planned next week, liberal senators such as Sherrod Brown of Ohio are demanding to know Hillary Rodham Clinton’s position on the bill to give the president so-called trade promotion authority, or T.P.A.


>Trade unions, environmentalists and Latino organizations — potent Democratic constituencies — quickly lined up in opposition, arguing that past trade pacts failed to deliver on their promise and that the latest effort would harm American workers.


>The deal was struck by Senators Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, the Finance Committee chairman; Ron Wyden of Oregon, the committee’s ranking Democrat; and Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. It would give Congress the power to vote on the more encompassing 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership once it is completed, but would deny lawmakers the chance to amend what would be the largest trade deal since the North American Free Trade Agreement of 1994, which President Bill Clinton pushed through Congress despite opposition from labor and other Democratic constituencies.


>President Obama embraced the legislation immediately, proclaiming “it would level the playing field, give our workers a fair shot, and for the first time, include strong fully enforceable protections for workers’ rights, the environment and a free and open Internet.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/17/business/obama-trade-legislation-fast-track-authority-trans-pacific-partnership.html?_r=0

38afdc No.13225

Any propaganda-free sources?

619916 No.13235

>>13224
we don't need your shitty burger culture over here
NO to TPP

b7a0d4 No.13530

File: 1429764312833.png (18.67 KB, 183x232, 183:232, 6millionWoes.png)

>>13224

We have to rush the TPP through quickly, before the goyim wake!


7323c4 No.13538

>>13224

So what does this mean in laymans? I'm retarded.


46b20d No.13539

>>13538

In economics, the principle of free trade between states is that as you increase the size, and thus diversity, of the market, you increase the chance and amount of competition available to firms. This forces them to either become more competitive, or go bankrupt. That is the basic theory behind it, and it is supported by governments all over the globe.

For example, here down under, the government signed free trade deals and removed protectionism that would otherwise allow local automotive manufacturing firms to stay afloat in the face of cheap-as-chips labour in Asian countries and a high AUD – this forced them to either become competitive or kick the bucket. They did the latter. We now have cheaper cars, at the expense of losing our entire car manufacturing base and the towns that revolved around such industries (e.g.: Geelong) will die economically once the full force of the changes comes through.

See, what the theory doesn't say is that unless you are a large firm with a great market share, economy of scale, major assets and connections both economically and politically, the means to capitalise and undercut foreign industries, the ability to retreat from any high tax countries into safe tax havens so as to save profits, and so on and so forth, you will feel the force of Monsanto, International Finance, and generally the heavyweights of international business kicking your ass from here to Timbuktu.

Naturally, free trade agreements open up the world to a global economy, but in order to maintain some semblance of order and regulation in a global economy you need – you guessed it – global government! Here comes the NWO and "international" trade pacts signed by a select few, invisible to the commoner, but visible to those who benefit the most from it, and most importantly of all: it is designed for the big business.

That's all freer trade ever accomplished, in today's world at least.


22d210 No.13543

File: 1429782496756.png (166.38 KB, 986x1098, 493:549, ttipppp.png)




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]