Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Public House › trade
- This topic has 5 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 5 months ago by Billy_T.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 3, 2016 at 8:48 pm #47759znModerator
Global Trade: What’s A Good Progressive To Do?
It must have given the earnest wonks at the Economic Policy Institute a bit of a start when Donald Trump touted their research in a speech courting white, working-class voters by criticizing NAFTA and U.S. trade policy with China.
EPI president Lawrence Mishel was moved to respond in a blog post tilted “Trump’s Trade Scam.”
“If he is so keen to help working people, why does he then steer the discussion back toward the traditional corporate agenda of tax cuts for corporations and the rich?” Mishel wrote, hastening to distance himself from Trump.
Progressives who have long criticized trade deals that favor multinational corporations, suppress wages, accelerate outsourcing, and replace local democracy with unelected tribunals, shrink from keeping company with the racist, isolationist right.
This is equally true in Trump’s America and in Britain, newly divorced from the rest of Europe. Guardian columnist Gary Younge concurs with Michel on the fraudulence of rightwing anti-globalism, and particularly the immigrant-bashing Brexit campaign:
“The very people who are slashing resources—the Tory right— and diverting what’s left to the wealthy are the ones rallying the poor by blaming migrants for the lack of resources,” Younge wrote.
“Not content with urinating on our leg and telling us it’s raining, they have found someone to blame for the weather.”
Rightwing populists are making a lot of noise about the weather lately—that is, the lousy economic climate brought on by trade deals that favor corporations at the expense of labor. As a result they are making inroads with an anxious working class.
“Progressives can’t afford to cede economic populism to the man who could prove to be the most effective white nationalist campaigner of our generation,” Tarso Luís Ramos, executive director of the rightwing watchdog group Political Research Associates put it to me recently, when I interviewed him about Donald Trump.
To get a progressive view on globalization, I spoke with Melinda St. Louis, International Campaigns Director for Public Citizens’ Global Trade Watch. St. Louis has spent her career working on fair trade.
She is optimistic about a global movement for economic justice.
“I don’t think we’re ceding talking points on this,” she says, pointing to the campaign to defeat the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which she calls “kind of exciting.”
For years, both major parties pushed multinational corporations’ agenda in big trade deals. But not this year. Growing public ire over NAFTA, especially in the Rust Belt, which has seen more than 57,000 factories offshored, has changed the political debate. St. Louis points out:
“Now the candidates are fighting over who hates the TPP more. That is a prudent response since all of the trade unions, environmental groups, LGBT organizations, women, retirees—the entire progressive base is opposing TPP.
It’s not about trade or not trade, it’s about who writes the rules and who benefits.”
Human rights advocates see no reason for the TPP to make it easier for Malaysia, which has a problem with human trafficking, to access U.S. markets. LGBT activists don’t want to roll out the red carpet for Brunei, which is bad on LGBT rights.
Overall, the trouble with the TPP is that it “doesn’t learn the lessons of NAFTA,” St. Louis says. “It expands incentives for offshoring and creates more opportunities to challenge environmental and health and safety laws through secret tribunals.”
The public is increasingly unhappy with such deals.
St. Louis notes the TransCanada corporation’s recent Keystone claim against the United States under NAFTA’s rules. “Obama listened to activists, who pointed to the environmental and economic damage, and now we the taxpayers could be on the hook for $15 billion because of an unaccountable trade deal. Why on earth would we want to expand that through the TPP?”
Perhaps the biggest difference between left and rightwing views of global trade is that while rightwing populists blame immigrants and foreign workers, progressives see workers across borders making common cause.
“I worked in Central America during the Central America Free Trade Agreement negotiations, and the people in Central America said at the time, ‘This is going to decimate us,’” says St. Louis. “Sure enough, we’ve seen an increase in inequality and instability in the region since CAFTA passed.”
St. Louis speaks with feeling about “the brightest, most entrepreneurial people” leaving Southern Mexico and Central America to make the dangerous trek North, not because they think the streets in the United States are paved with gold, but because there are no other opportunities for them:
“To see these families in a place where family is so important being broken up for years—parents sending money to their children, but not seeing them for fifteen years—it’s devastating.”
Scapegoating these immigrants is particularly outrageous, she says, since economic and trade policies have been a major contributor to their plight.
Take the two million Mexican farmers who lost their livelihoods under NAFTA when U.S.-subsidized corn flooded the market at prices that were lower than the cost of production.
Despite the bad economic news, and the ominous rightwing backlash, St. Louis is optimistic about the global movement for economic justice:
“When there is this level of overreach of corporate greed people do mobilize and beat it back. A couple of years ago it was unthinkable that the TPP would be a major issue in the presidential campaign.”
There have been other victories. Massive opposition to the Free Trade Area of the Americas—a proposed NAFTA expansion—killed that plan. Likewise, citizen organizing helped kill the Multilateral Agreement on Investments.
Liberal economists, including Paul Krugman, Larry Summers, and Robert Reich, have moved away from their pro-NAFTA positions and begun to support the call for fair trade. St. Louis sums it up:
“There is a populist response from the left and the right. Elites should pay attention.”
July 4, 2016 at 12:48 am #47797znModeratorNote: I posted this article in another thread and then decided to copy it here too. So it’s in two places.
==
The Trump trade scam
Posted June 29, 2016 at 5:14 pm by Lawrence Mishel
Yesterday, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump gave a speech on trade, extensively citing EPI’s research which shows that trade deficits as a result of NAFTA and other trade deals, as well as trade with China, have cost U.S. jobs and driven down U.S. wages. It’s true that the way we have undertaken globalization has hurt the vast majority of working people in this country—a view that EPI has been articulating for years, and that we will continue to articulate well after November. However, Trump’s speech makes it seem as if globalization is solely responsible for wage suppression, and that elite Democrats are solely responsible for globalization. Missing from his tale is the role of corporations and their allies have played in pushing this agenda, and the role the party he leads has played in implementing it. After all, NAFTA never would have passed without GOP votes, as two-thirds of the House Democrats opposed it.
Furthermore, Trump has heretofore ignored the many other intentional policies that businesses and the top 1 percent have pushed to suppress wages over the last four decades. Start with excessive unemployment due to Federal Reserve Board policies which were antagonistic to wage growth and friendly to the finance sector and bondholders. Excessive unemployment leads to less wage growth, especially for low- and middle-wage workers. Add in government austerity at the federal and state levels—which has mostly been pushed by GOP governors and legislatures—that has impeded the recovery and stunted wage growth. There’s also the decimation of collective bargaining, which is the single largest reason that middle class wages have faltered. Meanwhile, the minimum wage is now more than 25 percent below its 1968 level, even though productivity since then has more than doubled. Phasing in a $15 minimum wage would lift wages for at least a third of the workforce. The most recent example is the effort to overturn the recent raising of the overtime threshold that would help more than 12 million middle-wage salaried workers obtain overtime protections.
Trump is absent or wrong on all these issues. He has said in the past that wages are too high. And he argues, without basis, that businesses are overregulated and overtaxed—further ingratiating himself to corporate elites and the party he now leads. Deregulation and tax cuts are have been tried and failed for the last four decades, simply enriching the rich without stimulating any growth.
Trump’s latest take on trade is a scam. He claims to be offering a path for workers, but is actually just offering mostly empty boxes on trade. What exactly is he trying to accomplish with renegotiated trade deals? And if is he so keen to help working people, why does he then steer the discussion back toward the traditional corporate agenda of tax cuts for corporations and the rich? Some pro-worker, anti-elite populist Trump is.
July 4, 2016 at 12:59 am #47798znModeratorRobert Reich:
The Trans Pacific Partnership is a travesty. It would make it more difficult to improve health, safety, environmental, investors, and labor protections in the U.S. and in every nation that signs it, and make it easier to outsource labor abroad. Yet the TPP is still moving forward. Congress will vote on it after the November elections.
And here’s the really infuriating thing: Even though Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are both against it, the committee that’s drafting the Democratic platform voted against a provision rejecting it.
Please join me in adding your name to my petition asking the full Democratic Platform Committee to do the right thing, and reject the TPP.
====
SIGN ROBERT REICH’S PETITION: Tell the Democratic Platform Committee to take a stand against the Trans-Pacific Partnership
To the DNC Platform Committee:
The Democratic Party needs to show solidarity with working families by taking a stand against the Trans-Pacific Partnership in the party platform. Please adopt an anti-TPP amendment on July 8 in Orlando. Read more…
Time is running out to show your support for one of the most important battles that our movement is fighting over the Democratic Party platform before the DNC convention.
Opposition to the job-killing Trans-Pacific Partnership should not be controversial within the Democratic Party: Both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton campaigned against the TPP during this year’s presidential primary.
Will you join Robert Reich, Bernie Sanders, Keith Ellison, and DFA to demand that the Democratic Party take a stand against the TPP in the party platform? Please add your name now.
DEADLINE: 2pm ET on Wednesday, July 7.
http://act.democracyforamerica.com/sign/stopTPPinDNCplatform/?source=160703tppdncrr
July 4, 2016 at 9:24 am #47815bnwBlockedHildabeast doesn’t care what the platform says about the TPP. Billy went against 2/3 of the democrats in congress to pass NAFTA. Clinton’s smell money to be made by peddling influence via the TPP and that will always win out over all else, as if there is anything else!
The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.
Sprinkles are for winners.
July 4, 2016 at 10:19 am #47833znModerator
Donald Trump’s anti-trade rhetoric is textbook hypocrisyRichard L Trumka
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jul/04/richard-trumka-donald-trump-anti-trade-hypocrisy
“Outsourcing Creates Jobs in the Long Run”.
That was the title of a blog written by Donald Trump for his students at the now defunct Trump University. You see, long before Trump made speeches this week in Pennsylvania and Ohio decrying the consequences of unfair trade deals, he was the head cheerleader and a major beneficiary of the policies that have battered America’s manufacturing base for decades. If you want to know Trump’s true position on the current corporate trade model, all you have to do is follow the money.
Trump has consistently sent American jobs overseas to line his own pockets. He personally profited from the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta). Most of his suits, ties and cufflinks are made in China. His dress shirts are made in Bangladesh. His furniture is made in Turkey. Trump talks a good game on trade, but his first and only loyalty is to himself. He embodies everything that is wrong with our current trade policies, from which CEOs thrive and everyday families suffer.
And how about the occasions when he kept his business in America? Time and again, working people got stiffed. Trump has literally failed to pay hundreds of people and companies who have faithfully done work for him. And it’s not just now and then, or long ago. In April, he didn’t pay servers at a Passover event who worked 20 hours straight.
You’ll have to forgive our skepticism that Donald Trump is actually a friend of working people. He said our wages are too high. Really, he did. Trump wants to destroy labor unions. His position on wage-suppressing right-to-work laws is “100%”, and he has routinely moved union jobs to right-to-work states. Trump actually rooted for the collapse of the housing and real estate market. He bet on himself and against America. People lost their homes, their jobs and their life savings. And Donald Trump was cheering all the way to the bank.
Hard-working families in Pennsylvania, Ohio and across America are hungry for a new direction on trade. They are sick and tired of policies that destroy jobs and hold down wages. At the AFL-CIO, we are focused on rewriting the trade rules, the structures that for too long have left our communities poorer and weaker.
This isn’t a matter of whether or not to trade. It’s about what the rules are and who benefits from them. Of course, we should open up new markets for our products and do business all over the world. The real challenge is to advance trade policy that creates shared prosperity. The pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), like Nafta before it, fails that test miserably.
Donald Trump’s anti-trade rhetoric amounts to little more than bandwagon bluster and textbook hypocrisy. He knows the TPP is unpopular in the states he needs to win so he pretends to care about lost jobs and shuttered factories. But Trump has always seen working people as nothing more than a means to an end: labor to be exploited, customers to be bilked and human capital to be used and then discarded. We refuse to sit back and be co-opted as a talking point for a profiteer who has traded away our future for his own personal gain. It’s our job to explain that Donald Trump is not the answer to our trade problems – he is the problem.
Richard L Trumka is president of the AFL-CIO, America’s largest union federation
July 4, 2016 at 10:35 am #47834Billy_TParticipantZN,
Thanks. Good article and spot on. But I fear the facts will fall on deaf ears. Trump’s supporters will either ignore the above, or just see it all as a part of the conspiracy against them.
The really sad thing is that Clinton will likely ignore Trumka’s message as well. As did Obama. The Dems were once the party of unions and working people, but started to abandon them after the 1960s. Little by little, they embraced the Reagan/Thatcher revolution, with this becoming party orthodoxy under Clinton. Obama has “naturalized” that position.
The GOP didn’t have to abandon working people, because they never supported them in the first place, though, largely due to their support of “White Identity politics,” they’ve captured them from the Dems.
In short, neither wing of the duopoly gives a damn about working people or the poor. I’d say Trump and the GOP are worse on this issue. But there is no viable “champion” in the race.
It’s beyond tragic.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.