Trans-Pacific Partnership

Trans-Pacific Partnership (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

defiantbadgirl -> Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/12/2014 4:46:03 PM)
I can't believe President Obama is supporting this after everything he said against free-trade deals! It appears the American people will once again be on the losing end: "offshore millions of American jobs, roll back Wall Street reforms, sneak in SOPA-like threats to Internet freedom, ban Buy American policies needed to create green jobs, jack up the cost of medicines, expose the U.S. to unsafe food and products, and empower corporations to attack our environmental and health safeguards." What, if anything are Americans supposed to gain? http://www.citizen.org/tpp

servantforuse -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/12/2014 6:00:58 PM)
Clinton signed NAFTA and your guy Obama will sign this.

Lucylastic -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/12/2014 6:24:22 PM)
every day merrycans? nothing... Same as everyday canucks, and aussies.... along with the every day joes in all them furriner countries. Nothing is designed to make anybody (poor or middle class at least) ANY money or a priority. The people behind the curtain dont give a shit how bad things get for anyone but them

Phydeaux -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/12/2014 8:12:12 PM)
And the left think the right bury their heads in the sands. Why do you think caterpillar can sell equipment overseas. Or the car companies Or financial services companies.. Its called 'trade'. And trade generates a helluva lot of jobs for us... despite rumors to the contrary..

defiantbadgirl -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/12/2014 9:39:57 PM)
I have no problem with fair trade, I hate free trade.

Phydeaux -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/12/2014 9:48:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl I have no problem with fair trade, I hate free trade. There is no such thing as "fair" trade. Fair is a subjective word. It means different things to different people. Free, on the other hand, is more objective. While there are loopholes, it means free of tarriffs, and in conformance with GATT/WTO.

mnottertail -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 9:56:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl I have no problem with fair trade, I hate free trade. There is no such thing as "fair" trade. Fair is a subjective word. It means different things to different people. Free, on the other hand, is more objective. While there are loopholes, it means free of tarriffs, and in conformance with GATT/WTO. No, that is now the stupidest thing ever uttered on the internet. That is not the definition of free trade. and GATT/WTO and fair or free should not be uttered in the same country at the same time. Free trade is: international trade left to its natural course without tariffs, quotas, or other restrictions and that doesn't now, nor has it ever happened in the history of the world. LOL, in conformance with GATT...i.e. General Agreement on TARRIFFS and trade.

EdBowie -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 11:56:12 AM)
Is this the Sooper Seekrit NWO treaty that Obama is going to pass and sign without any action from Congress, etc.?

mnottertail -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 12:08:47 PM)
Eh, I guess its one of them. There are probably kenyan sized bales more of them he is doing, cuz the entire nutsacker house is being stymied by the law, since they couldnt even get him to admit his birth certificate was faked.

popeye1250 -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 2:40:17 PM)
Ok, who wants to be the first one to open a Ford- Lincoln dealership in Porto Prince Haiti? President Pantload already signed a "free trade" deal with Colombia, Chile and S. Korea.

mnottertail -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 2:51:51 PM)
Oh, you mean the ones that were voted on and passed in the nutsacker house, by an unvetoable margin? Maybe you want to open up that dealership.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 4:53:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl I can't believe President Obama is supporting this after everything he said against free-trade deals! It appears the American people will once again be on the losing end: "offshore millions of American jobs, roll back Wall Street reforms, sneak in SOPA-like threats to Internet freedom, ban Buy American policies needed to create green jobs, jack up the cost of medicines, expose the U.S. to unsafe food and products, and empower corporations to attack our environmental and health safeguards." What, if anything are Americans supposed to gain? http://www.citizen.org/tpp With Obama... Nothing.

Owner59 -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 4:57:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Ok, who wants to be the first one to open a Ford- Lincoln dealership in Porto Prince Haiti? President Pantload already signed a "free trade" deal with Colombia, Chile and S. Korea. We got rid of president pant-load in 08,after he tricked thousands of your fellow service men and women into their deaths.

subrob1967 -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 10:45:42 PM)
I can't believe it took you 5 years to realize that Obama's a lying fucktard of a President...Nevermind, I can and do believe it took you this long.

EdBowie -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/13/2014 11:37:58 PM)
And yet no one can explain how this treaty takes effect on the President's signature alone.

mnottertail -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/14/2014 6:00:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 I can't believe it took you 5 years to realize that Obama's a lying fucktard of a President...Nevermind, I can and do believe it took you this long. All of our presidents have been lying TOS violations some, far less greasy and repugnant than others, on the scale of repugnancy, this president scores far lower than the last 4 out of 5 republican presidents, but of course one of those was just fuckin stupid, and probably brain damaged from his ineptitude on the warren commission and his pardoning of a treasonous (e pluribus unum) republican president.

popeye1250 -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/14/2014 9:47:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Oh, you mean the ones that were voted on and passed in the nutsacker house, by an unvetoable margin? Maybe you want to open up that dealership. Let me guess, you've never heard of "K Street" have you?

mnottertail -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/14/2014 10:16:56 AM)
Let me guess, you have never heard of waste of oxygen have you? K street is not K street anymore, lobbyists can afford better digs. ON the other hand we might take the tack that these trans pacific partnership agreements were negotiated by Ws administration and passed by nutsackers way back in 2008 and this is simply a renegotiation and expansion of an existing treaty.

FellowSlave -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/14/2014 2:13:09 PM)
quote: And yet no one can explain how this treaty takes effect on the President's signature alone. It does not. The Congress needs to approve it, but it will be a simple majority vote. How it will go down: 1. a few days ago the congress introduced the (bipartisan) legislation that will give the president fast track authority (it is likely to pass), 2. the bill lets the administration put trade deals before the Congress for an up or down vote without amendments. It means there will be no meaningful debate, it will be rushed through. It is not a major problem to get majority vote for this, most congressmen do not take time to read bills.

mnottertail -> RE: Trans-Pacific Partnership (1/14/2014 2:27:36 PM)
And a simple majority defeats it.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875