Politicians stances on the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) have come up over and over again. I have seen multiple times where conservatives had argued against it and used another candidates support of the TPP as a mark against them. Some candidates supported the TPP as it was proposed but not as it was amended or vice versa.

Conservatives seem to be mostly against free trade agreements like the TPP and NAFTA. Common arguments I have heard was that they hurt American jobs. In contrast is that conservatives trumpet the free market, capitalism, as the best system. Steps towards free trade across nations could hurt American jobs but at this point we seem to be contradicting ourselves. Do we want free trade or do we want government regulated trade to protect jobs (a more liberal trait.) Is it specific provisions which are opposed or the idea of the program itself?

Discuss!

Disclaimer: I have not read the TPP in depth so I am not speaking for or against at this point. I am not going to parrot opposition or support just because a political party tells me it's good or bad. Rhetorical question: How many people who consider it an issue to vote based on understand it in any depth?

Since free trade will threaten american jobs, can conservatives ever really succeed in free trade positions?

Conservatives seem to be mostly against free trade agreements like the TPP and NAFTA.

If there is a piece of shit on the ground, and I call it a chocolate muffin, does it turn into a chocolate muffin?

If someone refuses to eat it, will the news say that this person refuses to eat a chocolate muffin?

The TPP is not a free trade agreement. It is a trade document that ties many countries together to the U.S. Economy allowing them favorable trade with us while we get unfavorable trade agreements with them. NAFTA is now been around long enough that the claims of exporting jobs out of our country have proven true. The TPP is similar to NAFTA. it is just another way of selling favors to other countries while the U.S. Citizens pay for it in fewer good paying manufacturing jobs and corrupt politicians.

I certainly see where the TPP or NAFTA is not a true free trade system, but isn't it closer than what we had before, loads of tariffs and regulations?


The bigger issue though I am pondering is if we did have truly free trade wouldn't we still be getting the short end of the stick and jobs here would be put at risk? Lets say we could trade freely with Mexico, no taxes, or rules. Mexico has a lower standard of living and lower living costs than the USA. Because of this they will always be able to make products and sell them cheaper than people in America could. America with it's higher wages could not produce an item at a cost that would be competitive to what Mexico could do (generally speaking). So Mexico would not import much from America and we would import a lot from Mexico. This would put American jobs at risk, at least until the two economies became more level to each other if I recall my college economics course correctly.

It seems that a true free market would be a very hard sell in America since we have such a high standard of living, there is not much we could compete in.

There are numerous resources on YouTube and the Web regarding what is so bad about these trade agreements, particularly TPP.

You have to do the homework if you want to know why they are so bad.

If you just want a quick summary, the quick summary is that they are crap agreements.

If there is a piece of shit on the ground, and I call it a chocolate muffin, does it turn into a chocolate muffin?

If someone refuses to eat it, will the news say that this person refuses to eat a chocolate muffin?

Under Obama and probably Clinton, yes, a turd on the ground is a chocolate delicacy to be enjoyed by the peons while they dine at Vintage Cave etc.  The news media will definitely blame the ingrate for not stuffing his mouth with the brown goody.   They praise the pos in office as the greatest POTUS which to me is proof.
Sorry, back on topic.

There are numerous resources on YouTube and the Web regarding what is so bad about these trade agreements, particularly TPP.

You have to do the homework if you want to know why they are so bad.

If you just want a quick summary, the quick summary is that they are crap agreements.

I didn't mean this as some homework assignment. I was interested in a discussion on it as well as the greater topic of how truly free commerce would actually hurt American jobs and how that plays into conservative politics.

Yes but how can you discuss it if you do not know about it?

How can someone discuss quantum mechanics without understanding what it is?

We gave you the nutshell already: It sounds like a good idea, but it is not.

If you want to know why, then you have to do the homework.

Yes but how can you discuss it if you do not know about it?

How can someone discuss quantum mechanics without understanding what it is?

We gave you the nutshell already: It sounds like a good idea, but it is not.

If you want to know why, then you have to do the homework.

My search yields loads of pro and con TPP sources with a lot of bias in the mix.  I see a lot of fear mongering and conspiracy type statements in sources against the TPP. I also don't see a lot of specifics.

It would be nice to find a source that would cut through the politics, otherwise I am left to read the thousands of pages of the agreement.  How many people who are for or against the TPP have actually read the agreement themselves?

One of the criticisms by democrats is that it will hurt American jobs. This side the of argument leads to the bigger question of whether free market (in terms of international trade) is really good or not. Politicians are always concerned with American jobs so going along free market ideals is still going to be hazardous for them in terms of their voter base. The TPP eliminates some trade tariffs but not all apparently and it leaves out certain countries, like China, so I understand criticisms that it is not a truly free market deal. How many free market believers will stick to their beliefs about a free market if/when it causes them to lose their job?

One of the big criticisms is the ability of corporations to sue governments which I would think is something to be favored by conservatives. In contrast, the secrecy in planning the TPP is cause for concern for democracy.
This article seemed to be a bit more neutral but I am unfamiliar with the source.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-pros-and-cons-of-the-Trans-Pacific-Partnership-for-the-various-countries-involved

Why keep things secret unless you think people will disagree with it.



Published on Aug 14, 2016
Good morning, I’m still reporting on TPP.
 According an interview with Julian Assange done by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now, less than 14% of the text of the TPP has been released to the public. Twenty-five of its 29 chapters are still secret.
According to Assange:
“Once we’re in, we’re stuck forever.”
Goodman interviewed Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London on Monday and published the interview yesterday over the Pacifica network on their daily news show, Democracy Now at Democracynow.org.
[insert]
This is simply outrageous! I just don’t know how to describe this in non-conspiratorial terms. We stand on the verge of becoming a world of slave states required to do exactly as the multi-national corporations want us to do. Humanity’s 2500-year-long quest for freedom will be eclipsed – forever.
This is not an exaggeration. If TPP passes, we will still have democratic-looking arms of government. We will still have elections, but they will be decided by corporate money alone. We have all seen this cloud of corruption that now dominates the halls of Congress. TPP will cast that method of operation in stone in perpetuity. Only Donald Trump gives us – the U.S – any chance of breaking this evil oligarchy. This is our last chance to turn this around.
And, if Hillary Clinton wins the U.S. Presidential election, TPP will surely pass in her first 100 days in office.
I’m still reporting from Washington. Good day.

Not sure why things would be kept secret. The TPP is a strategic move against China so it could be to keep China from exerting it's influence. I agree that the secrecy is an issue for concern but it might actually make sense given a certain context.

I think Assange's claims might be a little exaggerated. Although I think it is worthy of note when a liberal (I believe he is IIRC) sides with conservatives on the issue.

Our government is supposed to be transparent except in the case of national defense. Transparency promotes accountability. It seems to me this secrecy is due to no one wanting to be accountable to the wholesale selling of the U.S. Government to foreign governments. Which is what I suspect this trade agreement is. Just like the rest of them.

Why keep things secret unless you think people will disagree with it.
...
 According an interview with Julian Assange done by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now, less than 14% of the text of the TPP has been released to the public. Twenty-five of its 29 chapters are still secret.
...

Hmmm...  and yet it all appears to be right here: https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text