In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Trump splattered Obama

hobo9650hobo9650 Member Posts: 2,759 ✭✭✭
edited November 2016 in General Discussion
while Obama was making his overseas visit , Trump dropped a bombshell. On DAY ONE he will withdraw the US from TPP.

Japan PM says without the US, TPP is no good.. China is having a fit. Mexico screaming FOUL. Obama is critical of Trump to world leaders, but he can do nothing.[:)]

Comments

  • mag00mag00 Member Posts: 4,719 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32498715

    There is a link to the 30 chapter agreement a short way into the article.
  • spasmcreekspasmcreek Member Posts: 37,717 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    well TOUGH S--T oblamer....your AMERICA sellout doesn't carry any weight with the new guy
  • 1911a1-fan1911a1-fan Member Posts: 51,193 ✭✭
    edited November -1
  • woodshed87woodshed87 Member Posts: 23,478 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Does this Mean I won't Have to Compete with The US Companies Making their Overseas So Called CNC'd Turkey Calls
    Sold in Mall Mart And Other Box Stores.
    I May have to Go Pubic ....Sell Stock[;)]
    WOOHOO[^]
  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 17,019 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Barry "LEGACY" is about as much as a flea on an eleplant. There is NOTHING there but racial divide and BARRY screwing up the USA.. YES SIR, that's the ticket/[|)]
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    What, specifically, is in the TPP that you folks find objectionable?

    https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership

    A phasing out of tariffs on the import of US Made goods?

    A path to elimination of non-tariff barriers to the import of US Made goods?

    I will be the first to admit to not reading each and every word (there are quite a few, after all) but after a bit of reading, I don't see anything that jumps out at me as a step backward. As a manufacturer and exporter, I welcome the removal of barriers.

    Being of an open mind, however, I would welcome a specific listing of all of the downsides to this agreement to better educate myself.

    Thanks in advance.

    Don
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • o b juano b juan Member Posts: 1,941 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Specifcally ! OK

    The U S has never IN THElast 50 years made a trade deal that was good for the U S.

    We alawas drew the shot matchstick
  • Horse Plains DrifterHorse Plains Drifter Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 40,170 ***** Forums Admin
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus

    I will be the first to admit to not reading each and every word (there are quite a few, after all) but after a bit of reading, I don't see anything that jumps out at me as a step backward.
    Yep, I read a little of it too. Not as much as Don I'm sure, but I didn't see any "bad"? I DID see the picture at the top of the page in the link mag00 provided. Seems like Bernie supporters have something in common with Donald.
  • woodhogwoodhog Member Posts: 13,115 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Don!! What the heck is the matter with you? Don't you know the first GunBroker rule is no logigical or factual information is allowed in political discussions?
  • IAMAHUSKERIAMAHUSKER Member Posts: 2,479 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Its enough for me to know that Obama wants it so I oppose it!!
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by woodhog
    Don!! What the heck is the matter with you? Don't you know the first GunBroker rule is no logigical or factual information is allowed in political discussions?


    My apologies, woodhog.

    It still a little early on the left coast, and I am not yet up to speed.

    I looked at a number of the country specific tariff clauses, and all involved eliminating immediately or phasing out over 5 years tariffs against US made products and services.

    Obviously it would be better if the tariffs would all end upon signing, but a realist will understand that countries need to transition their industries. An immediate end to all existing tariffs makes for a good sound bite, but is not practicable nor possible.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • wpageabcwpageabc Member Posts: 8,760 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Some of Trumps shooting from the hip will be waterd down as his advisers inform him of repercussions of certain actions.

    There is so much to do to turn the big ship around in the US economy that some modifications will take lower priority.
    "What is truth?'
  • jerrywh818jerrywh818 Member Posts: 2,573 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think he is just positioning himself for a better deal. There will be a trade deal but more in our favor. I HOPE. We will have a lot smarter people than in the past. Obama has never had the interest of the USA first. He thinks he is the president of the world. The fine against the Denver Sheriff dept. is a prime example.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by jerrywh818
    I think he is just positioning himself for a better deal. There will be a trade deal but more in our favor. I HOPE. We will have a lot smarter people than in the past. Obama has never had the interest of the USA first. He thinks he is the president of the world. The fine against the Denver Sheriff dept. is a prime example.


    I could be convinced that this was the case if Trump would state specifically what he would or could make better.

    Absent this, it is difficult to understand why he is taking the position he is taking.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 66,404 ******
    edited November -1
    I tried to get to it to read it from the link provided but the link to the actual text is broken??
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • Dads3040Dads3040 Member Posts: 13,552 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    What, specifically, is in the TPP that you folks find objectionable?

    https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership

    A phasing out of tariffs on the import of US Made goods?

    A path to elimination of non-tariff barriers to the import of US Made goods?

    I will be the first to admit to not reading each and every word (there are quite a few, after all) but after a bit of reading, I don't see anything that jumps out at me as a step backward. As a manufacturer and exporter, I welcome the removal of barriers.

    Being of an open mind, however, I would welcome a specific listing of all of the downsides to this agreement to better educate myself.

    Thanks in advance.

    Don


    Overall, the first reservation I have is simply that I cannot bring myself to logically believe that Obama has negotiated a deal that is of significant benefit to the US. As so little he has done has been, it seems reasonable to be at the very least suspicious of what he has agreed to.

    More specifically, the language in the section on the environment seems problematic. For all the vague verbiage about how nothing is to be construed as requiring compliance by member parties, it raises the question of what purpose the language then serves. I also see mention of leftist buzzwords like 'social responsibility' and 'food security concerns'. Call me a cynic, but I am not thinking those phrases are flowing from, nor necessarily applicable to, places like Vietnam, Mexico, and Brunei. All of this is part and parcel of the problem with trying to even a playing field when the players have such disparate levels of development.

    Other subsections of the environmental portion of the TPP appear to require that parties to the agreement commit to implementing what are termed 'Multilateral Environmental Agreements' that they are a signatory to. Does this mean the Paris Accord and other 'Climate Change' pacts? The section also suggests that member nations 'assist' the less economically developed in their efforts toward a more environmentally 'sustainable' existence.

    Likewise the 'Labour' chapter contains some likely problematic language. In the interest of protecting countries from unfair labor practices, the TPP says that no signatory can refuse to enforce its own labor laws. The problem is that the TPP neglects to require that a country have much in the way of labor laws to enforce. An oversight, I am sure.

    Additionally, there is a provision about forced or compulsory labor. Useless doesn't begin to describe it. "...each Party shall also discourage, through initiatives it considers appropriate, the importation of goods from other sources produced in whole or in part by forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory child labour." Crap fire and save matches! We are going to require that they "discourage" such behavior! Maybe a public rebuke...or dare I say it...strongly worded letter?!?

    The sections of the TPP I have read are a perfect example of an agreement that a 1st World functional country will abide by, while the 3rd World Crapholes laugh as they ignore its restrictions and go about their merry way.

    While I haven't read the entire 5500+ pages of the TPP contained in its 30 chapters, that figure alone ought to cause anyone with common sense to ask some very pesky questions. The idea that 'Free Trade' is being promoted by the use of a 5500+ page document full of guidelines, restrictions, suggestions, protocols, and 'cooperative frameworks' is so oxymoronic as to make my head hurt.

    The Ideal Free Trade Agreement ought to read 'There shall be Free Trade between The Grand Duchy of Fenwick and The Shire'. Obviously that is at one extreme end of a spectrum. I would submit that 5500+ pages is banging pretty hard on the door of the other end.

    The reactions by nations such as Japan to Trump's comment are also illuminating, and troubling. Japan says that if the US is not a party, the TPP isn't worth doing. The total adult consumer population of the TPP signatory nations is 800 million. The US is 250 million of that. It ought to say something about the focus of this agreement, and the intent of the other signatories, that if 31% of the consumers go away, the agreement isn't worth having. Sounds a bit like we are considered the main flock of sheep, and absent the opportunity to shear us, everyone else doesn't want to play.

    As conservatives, we should support free trade, but not worship at its altar. Nor should we agree to unilaterally disarm, and give the other signatories a clear shot at us.
  • discusdaddiscusdad Member Posts: 11,427 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    that assessment would make Paul Harvey smile Dads3040. well done
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    What, specifically, is in the TPP that you folks find objectionable?

    https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership

    A phasing out of tariffs on the import of US Made goods?

    A path to elimination of non-tariff barriers to the import of US Made goods?

    I will be the first to admit to not reading each and every word (there are quite a few, after all) but after a bit of reading, I don't see anything that jumps out at me as a step backward. As a manufacturer and exporter, I welcome the removal of barriers.

    Being of an open mind, however, I would welcome a specific listing of all of the downsides to this agreement to better educate myself.

    Thanks in advance.

    Don


    Overall, the first reservation I have is simply that I cannot bring myself to logically believe that Obama has negotiated a deal that is of significant benefit to the US. As so little he has done has been, it seems reasonable to be at the very least suspicious of what he has agreed to.

    More specifically, the language in the section on the environment seems problematic. For all the vague verbiage about how nothing is to be construed as requiring compliance by member parties, it raises the question of what purpose the language then serves. I also see mention of leftist buzzwords like 'social responsibility' and 'food security concerns'. Call me a cynic, but I am not thinking those phrases are flowing from, nor necessarily applicable to, places like Vietnam, Mexico, and Brunei. All of this is part and parcel of the problem with trying to even a playing field when the players have such disparate levels of development.

    Other subsections of the environmental portion of the TPP appear to require that parties to the agreement commit to implementing what are termed 'Multilateral Environmental Agreements' that they are a signatory to. Does this mean the Paris Accord and other 'Climate Change' pacts? The section also suggests that member nations 'assist' the less economically developed in their efforts toward a more environmentally 'sustainable' existence.

    Likewise the 'Labour' chapter contains some likely problematic language. In the interest of protecting countries from unfair labor practices, the TPP says that no signatory can refuse to enforce its own labor laws. The problem is that the TPP neglects to require that a country have much in the way of labor laws to enforce. An oversight, I am sure.

    Additionally, there is a provision about forced or compulsory labor. Useless doesn't begin to describe it. "...each Party shall also discourage, through initiatives it considers appropriate, the importation of goods from other sources produced in whole or in part by forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory child labour." Crap fire and save matches! We are going to require that they "discourage" such behavior! Maybe a public rebuke...or dare I say it...strongly worded letter?!?

    The sections of the TPP I have read are a perfect example of an agreement that a 1st World functional country will abide by, while the 3rd World Crapholes laugh as they ignore its restrictions and go about their merry way.

    While I haven't read the entire 5500+ pages of the TPP contained in its 30 chapters, that figure alone ought to cause anyone with common sense to ask some very pesky questions. The idea that 'Free Trade' is being promoted by the use of a 5500+ page document full of guidelines, restrictions, suggestions, protocols, and 'cooperative frameworks' is so oxymoronic as to make my head hurt.

    The Ideal Free Trade Agreement ought to read 'There shall be Free Trade between The Grand Duchy of Fenwick and The Shire'. Obviously that is at one extreme end of a spectrum. I would submit that 5500+ pages is banging pretty hard on the door of the other end.

    The reactions by nations such as Japan to Trump's comment are also illuminating, and troubling. Japan says that if the US is not a party, the TPP isn't worth doing. The total adult consumer population of the TPP signatory nations is 800 million. The US is 250 million of that. It ought to say something about the focus of this agreement, and the intent of the other signatories, that if 31% of the consumers go away, the agreement isn't worth having. Sounds a bit like we are considered the main flock of sheep, and absent the opportunity to shear us, everyone else doesn't want to play.

    As conservatives, we should support free trade, but not worship at its altar. Nor should we agree to unilaterally disarm, and give the other signatories a clear shot at us.


    I did not read the environmental portion, Dads3040, but I would agree that an Obama negotiated environmental treaty is most likely a problem, and you point out a couple.

    I read the forced labor issue differently, however. I read it that the US can, within the agreement, refuse the import of goods we believed were produced using forced labor. A positive, though I would imagine we have that power at some level already.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • hobo9650hobo9650 Member Posts: 2,759 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I like it that Trump cut the legs out from under Obama
    while Obama was telling the World leaders what he was gonna do to Trump.

    The other leaders say they need the US as a door for their products.
  • Marc1301Marc1301 Member Posts: 31,895 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Dads3040
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    What, specifically, is in the TPP that you folks find objectionable?

    https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership

    A phasing out of tariffs on the import of US Made goods?

    A path to elimination of non-tariff barriers to the import of US Made goods?

    I will be the first to admit to not reading each and every word (there are quite a few, after all) but after a bit of reading, I don't see anything that jumps out at me as a step backward. As a manufacturer and exporter, I welcome the removal of barriers.

    Being of an open mind, however, I would welcome a specific listing of all of the downsides to this agreement to better educate myself.

    Thanks in advance.

    Don


    Overall, the first reservation I have is simply that I cannot bring myself to logically believe that Obama has negotiated a deal that is of significant benefit to the US. As so little he has done has been, it seems reasonable to be at the very least suspicious of what he has agreed to.


    I'll go with this.^^^
    "Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here." - William Shatner
  • mag00mag00 Member Posts: 4,719 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    I tried to get to it to read it from the link provided but the link to the actual text is broken??


    Sorry about that, I never checked the link. I read some more on the BBC site and that sure is a liberal spin. This link seems to be a good link with table of contents etc,

    https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text

    I search of this, I found some conservative sites which take a fully different view of the TPP
    http://www.citizen.org/TPP

    ACA was a whopper to read, Tucson budget was unbelievable. The first big spending bill of Obama, was bloated with so much pork.

    These guys don't read anything. I imagine each side gets something for a trade off. The thing is what they are trading is not theirs, and we end up paying.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by mag00
    quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
    I tried to get to it to read it from the link provided but the link to the actual text is broken??


    Sorry about that, I never checked the link. I read some more on the BBC site and that sure is a liberal spin. This link seems to be a good link with table of contents etc,

    https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text

    I search of this, I found some conservative sites which take a fully different view of the TPP
    http://www.citizen.org/TPP

    ACA was a whopper to read, Tucson budget was unbelievable. The first big spending bill of Obama, was bloated with so much pork.

    These guys don't read anything. I imagine each side gets something for a trade off. The thing is what they are trading is not theirs, and we end up paying.


    Damn, Mag00.

    Obama supports it, so it most likely has problems, but when the Public Citizen opposes, I have think it must have merit.

    Confusing this is.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 66,404 ******
    edited November -1
    Well, I didn't have to read very far to understand why Trump would be against it:

    "1.
    Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, no
    Party shall increase any
    existing customs duty, or adopt any new customs dut
    y, on an originating good. "

    He's said all along that one of the things he would do as president would be to increase Tariffs on incoming goods. Under this agreement, he would be unable to do that. I'm not sure how good or bad that restriction would be on our economy. Seems like a fixing the playing field in a position which is a bit out of kilter is a bad idea though.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • mogley98mogley98 Member Posts: 18,291 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    My understanding (I also have not read all of it) is that without addressing currency manipulation several of those 11 countries have already been identified as guilty of, they can make their products artificially cheaper.

    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    What, specifically, is in the TPP that you folks find objectionable?

    https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership

    A phasing out of tariffs on the import of US Made goods?

    A path to elimination of non-tariff barriers to the import of US Made goods?

    I will be the first to admit to not reading each and every word (there are quite a few, after all) but after a bit of reading, I don't see anything that jumps out at me as a step backward. As a manufacturer and exporter, I welcome the removal of barriers.

    Being of an open mind, however, I would welcome a specific listing of all of the downsides to this agreement to better educate myself.

    Thanks in advance.

    Don
    Why don't we go to school and work on the weekends and take the week off!
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,681 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by mogley98
    My understanding (I also have not read all of it) is that without addressing currency manipulation several of those 11 countries have already been identified as guilty of, they can make their products artificially cheaper.

    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    What, specifically, is in the TPP that you folks find objectionable?

    https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership

    A phasing out of tariffs on the import of US Made goods?

    A path to elimination of non-tariff barriers to the import of US Made goods?

    I will be the first to admit to not reading each and every word (there are quite a few, after all) but after a bit of reading, I don't see anything that jumps out at me as a step backward. As a manufacturer and exporter, I welcome the removal of barriers.

    Being of an open mind, however, I would welcome a specific listing of all of the downsides to this agreement to better educate myself.

    Thanks in advance.

    Don




    One could surmise that this could be addressed under the elimination of non-tariff barriers to the import of US Made Goods. Obviously the devil is in the details, and one would assume that to make good on a claim, that claim would have to go through a review and judgment process before the import of objectionable goods could be stopped. Currency manipulation is one of those things that may be easy to recognize, but tough to prove in some kangaroo (or panda, as the case may be) court.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
Sign In or Register to comment.