2 ms·

Pushing back on China trade is the one and probably only thing I agree with Trump on, and I've wondered if getting rid of Clinton and the TPP wasn't actually wo

by api 7y ago

Pushing back on China trade is the one and probably only thing I agree with Trump on, and I've wondered if getting rid of Clinton and the TPP wasn't actually worth tolerating Trump being an ass for four years. All I know is that I'm glad the TPP is dead and I'll be happy if nobody with the last names Clinton or Bush ever sits in the White House again. I say this as someone who leans more toward the 'woke' side of the present culture wars.

learc83 7y ago
The TPP was designed to contain China. China wasn't a part of it.
- api 7y ago
  If that's true then I'm wrong, but I'll need a reference on that. My understanding has been that the TPP was about opening China to further outsourcing of white collar work by regularizing IP law on paper (which the Chinese would just ignore of course). This would have allowed more paralegal, contract writing, engineering, and even things like radiology (X-ray and scan interpretation) to be outsourced, further gutting the US middle class and transferring more expertise to China. In other words it would have started the outsourcing of non-physical forms of service work and more lower-level intellectual labor. What would even be left of the US middle class after that?
  - yourbandsucks 7y ago
    China wasn't a signatory. You're right that it was corporate captured but the original goal was geopolitical. Edit, cite: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - learc83 7y ago
    https://cjil.uchicago.edu/publication/how-united-states-uses-trans-pacific-partnership-contain-china-international-trade https://cjil.uchicago.edu/publication/how-united-states-uses...
JonathanFly 7y ago
>Pushing back on China trade >I'm glad the TPP is dead https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-10-16/best-best-way-trump-can-squeeze-china-on-trade-is-with-new-tpp https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-10-16/best-b... https://www.piie.com/publications/wp/wp16-2.pdf https://www.piie.com/publications/wp/wp16-2.pdf

by api 7y ago

learc83 7y ago

The TPP was designed to contain China. China wasn't a part of it.

api 7y ago
If that's true then I'm wrong, but I'll need a reference on that. My understanding has been that the TPP was about opening China to further outsourcing of white collar work by regularizing IP law on paper (which the Chinese would just ignore of course). This would have allowed more paralegal, contract writing, engineering, and even things like radiology (X-ray and scan interpretation) to be outsourced, further gutting the US middle class and transferring more expertise to China. In other words it would have started the outsourcing of non-physical forms of service work and more lower-level intellectual labor. What would even be left of the US middle class after that?
- yourbandsucks 7y ago
  China wasn't a signatory. You're right that it was corporate captured but the original goal was geopolitical. Edit, cite: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- learc83 7y ago
  https://cjil.uchicago.edu/publication/how-united-states-uses-trans-pacific-partnership-contain-china-international-trade https://cjil.uchicago.edu/publication/how-united-states-uses...

JonathanFly 7y ago

>Pushing back on China trade >I'm glad the TPP is dead https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-10-16/best-best-way-trump-can-squeeze-china-on-trade-is-with-new-tpp https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-10-16/best-b... https://www.piie.com/publications/wp/wp16-2.pdf https://www.piie.com/publications/wp/wp16-2.pdf