Bernie's a politican and probably the most visible Dem in America right now. I'm just a dude on a forum about vidya games.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bernie Sanders praises Trump for nixing Trans-Pacific trade deal
- Thread starter Aruarian Reflection
- Start date
- Status
I don't want to derail this into a Hilary debate, but that's not true. There are plenty examples of her flipflopping on issues to appease whoever was in front of her at the time. Google it. This is one of the reasons why she was usually described as untrustworthy in polls. She even said in the Goldman Sachs speeches that she refused to share, that you must have a private and public face (meaning speaking privately to Goldman Sachs, etc versus the public).
It is impossible to separate economic and social issues. Creating a more inclusive society would have economic benefits, besides the whole, y'know, not ignoring people's problems because we (White men) have our own.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusive_growth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusive_growth
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Fuck that. People voted for Trump because they were stupid enough to think anything he was kicking was real. This idea that there was a valid choice to be made there is ridiculous.
legacyzero
Banned
I said Minorities. Not just the black community. What's was the percentage of women?
legacyzero
Banned
Stupid? Maybe. Desperate? Probably. Keep telling potential dem voters shit like that. I'm sure they'll be happy to tell you to fuck off and stay red. Win them over, instead of treating them like the neo-con you know they aren't.
Arguments like this go nowhere. China might not be as imperialistic as the US, but its abhorrent human rights record precludes them from being any "good guy".
Rather than picking sides in nationalistic disputes, we need to side with the average people who stand to lose from both liberal economics and chauvinistic protectionism.
dave is ok
aztek is ok
Good. We need less hypocrites in politics.
Seeing the left do a complete u-turn on the TPP was hilarious though
Seeing the left do a complete u-turn on the TPP was hilarious though
The right side of history is more and more interconnectivity in trade that raises the quality of life for people worldwide.
Populist, protectionist economics go directly against this.
What happens when it turns out they're fully aware of what they were voting for and are actually pleased with the decisions Trump is making? What could anyone who voted left possibly do to combat that?
activatethesmile
Member
KO Traveling Hobo
Member
Bernie has also been one of the most vocal and visible politicians to oppose Trump.
Taking umbrage with his use of the word "delighted" is ignoring the context of the statement, just as it is ignoring the context to measure Bedroom Eyes Carlton against a 75 year-old politician who was almost in the running to become president of the united states.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
How are you supposed to win over stupid people who ignore facts? The kind of people who can watch Trump speak and think anything but "what the fuck is wrong with this dude"?
As many people have already said, minorities are suffering too but they didn't turn out in big numbers for Trump. Those who did obviously don't see the big picture.
Seems like you don't understand what trade agreements actually do to. They are only good for huge multinationals companies.
Tell that to the factory workers and farmers of the midwestern states who get to sell their good to a larger audience thanks to our trade agreements.
I'm not saying that trade agreements have never been abused. They have been, and that needs to be fixed. But global trade is a net benefit for workers and consumers. Google it.
Clinton won every cohort of women other than white women without a college degree.
Chaos2Frozen
Member
They would rather start a war over Taiwan than TPP.
Start the war, probably not fight it.
legacyzero
Banned
Reality stings. That part probably has to happen first.
Hari Seldon
Member
From an American perspective, we can cut individual trade deals with whoever we want, because every country wants access to the American consumer. That is why we have a giant ass state department. We don't need giant TPP deals filled with a wall street christmas list of horseshit.
TestOfTide
Banned
This is coming from the guy who supports the Assad Regime.
"Worldwide" is a funny way to say developed economies. Poor countries whose primary resources are labor or mineral wealth, and whose economies are largely managed by foreign corporations, cannot expect their quality of life to be increased by any substantial means. While free trade can help developing countries if paired with heavy intervention, more often than not it opens the door to more exploitation and destroys local industry.
TestOfTide
Banned
How about we not paint ALL Trump voters as the crazy deplorables.
I'm confident that MOST of them are, but I have a hard time believing that Obama/Trump voters are the same as Rush Limbaugh's audience.
Schattenjäger
Gabriel Knight
63,000,000 voters...they can't all be stupid people, can they?
...because those individual deals wouldn't be?
KO Traveling Hobo
Member
By overhauling our K-12 education, and making college more accessible.
tell that to the other millions whose jobs got destroyed thanks to the same trade agreements. The pros are very low compared to the cons/bad things it causes.
This ideal future (and theory) you speak of also does not have countries taking advantage of trade interconnectivity by engaging in export-oriented protectionism and other forms of protectionism via non-trade barriers. Shinzo Abe and Xi Jinping also engage in populism and protectionist economics that happens to be export-oriented and takes advantage of trade interconnectivity to promote its national champions. Same with South Korea. To advance further trade interconnectivity without addressing such issues would just go against some of the important things that free trade is supposed to provide.
Similarly, the ideal future would have correct income redistribution policies to ensure that the most concentrated benefits of free trade (to the wealthy and to the multinational companies) and most concentrated damage of free trade (to those that become competitively disadvantaged--this would include white collar workers in the future) are balanced out.
To further advance free trade, when these large systemic errors have appeared on the system and have already been creating distortions from what is anticipated, is a huge folly.
If the Republicans implement massive tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy (which would exacerbate how these groups obtain the majority of the benefits of free trade), and a Democratic president takes office (with a Republican Congress), it would be a huge mistake to pursue a second TPP just because it would be easy to get through a Republican Congress.
The reason we might have large, group, trade deals with "a wall street christmas list of horseshit" is because tariff's are actually relatively low in many places, and in any case, tariff's are far from the only, or even biggest, thing that might be a roadblock to trade.
Really, these deals are much more about stuff like countries unifying regulations (maybe having 1 set of automotive regulations to comply with instead of a whole bunch, for example), strengthening intellectual property in countries where it is weak, and (ideally) setting minimum standards across a large, and thus influential, block of countries to curb a race to the bottom (and the TPP would have raised environmental and labour standards in a number of countries).
These sorts of things have been attacked as not actually having anything to do with trade, but they really do. IP stuff specifically gets attacked a lot, but creative industries are a big part of the American economy, and they employ a lot of people. You'd think people wouldn't be so aghast at the idea that IP rights would be considered an important part of trade between countries.
This does leave us negotiating a lot of policy between countries, usually in secret, which is very unpopular. But agreements that merely reduce tariff's wouldn't really achieve much. And I get that maybe some of the provisions might be flawed. But my argument isn't just that free trade is good, but that there are good reasons the TPP would touch on so many topics that many wouldn't think would be part of a trade deal. (The full text of the deal is publicly available, so people can be specific with their concerns if they'd like)
And when people talk about the TPP holding China to higher standard this is what they're talking about. If enough people signed on to the TPP the other countries in the region will be pressured to then also sign on, accepting the unified regulations and minimum standards that might become the rules driving trade in the region.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
The factory workers that get their job outsourced?
Even if you like the ideas of free trade and those behind the TPP, surely you think that anti-consumer BS in that deal was enough to not consider it? While free trade does bring in more wealth, that wealth is not evenly distributed and the TPP is not at all helping in evenly distributing it.
Considering how a better deal was inevitable anyways, I think even as a person who supports TPP you should enjoy its death because those IP laws are a threat to any liberal democracy.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
Late replying here but you're going to have to bring up some refs because besides Trump trying to handwave the birther issue away by pointing to her '08 bid and Hillary not immediately conceding to Obama, the Hillary/Bernie saga seemed vastly more volatile.
Still, my point was most of those voters still statistically voted for Hillary, and those that didn't went third party or abstained. The arguments about Bernie sabotaging Hillary's campaign simply by running against her just feel like scapegoating the more obvious issue that Hillary was a scandal ridden candidate, and the DNC's initial but blatant hostility to Bernie was incredibly easy for Trump/Wikileaks/Stein/ etc.
TestOfTide
Banned
Are we still pushing this myth that manufacturing jobs went away due to outsourcing?
Their job wasn't outsourced. It was replaced by robots.
The poor benefit the most from cheaper goods. And I understand this is small consolation for the disadvantaged, but we can, and should, do a much better job of helping people adjust. Protectionism wouldn't have actually helped either, automation would have taken that job eventually anyway, perhaps even faster because of the lack of the larger market trade deals might offer.
GhostWriter24
Member
Misinformed much?
The jobs were outsourced, like it or not. Robots are starting to get going now, not 10 years ago.
That's the kind of bullshit you would hear from a GOP spokesman.
And the poor benefiting from cheaper goods is absolutely true. Accepting that doesn't preclude us from redistributing wealth. Indeed, there might be more wealth to tax and redistribute, and the welfare would go further for people if goods were cheaper.
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
Depends on how he loves them.
I'm sorry, but having a job is a lot more important than having a cheaper television.
boiled goose
good with gravy
"Cheaper goods" is not necessarily a net benefit. It depends who actually reaps rewards of gained efficiencies. Basically a goplike trickle down argument.
Cheaper goods are better is just as reductionist as lower taxes are better! Or maybe simple phrases that sound good are only wrong when coming from gop?
Walmart providing cheaper goods a net benefit? I think the answer is clearly a strong HELL NO. They kill of locas business, only provide starvation government subsidized below poverty line wages with no advancement and extract wealth from communities only to fill the pockets of multimillinaires executives.
"Wealth redistribution" is also clear gop framing.
probably the most embarrassing political post I've seen this week
Then you should support free trade since they are a net job gainer AND it results in cheaper TVs.
fart town usa
Member
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
It can be both? Robots and cheap foreign labor are both things that have hurt domestic manufacturing workers.
but what if the workers owned the robots
It's a few people having a job vs everyone having cheaper TV's. And those people who do lose their jobs shouldn't be out of work for long, they should be moving on and producing the next thing that society wants to improve their lives. It's how we got to be as wealthy as we are.
Of course we have been failing to help people move on to the next job, or to ever really have much of a chance to have a good job in the first place, as is the case in a lot of poor minority communities. This is what has left a lot of people in a bad spot while wasting a huge amount of economic potential. (And is not at all "fiscally conservative" in anything but the shortest term).
Barajas_201
Member
Who is also working with America... But none of that matters because the TPP is bad, especially for me since I live in Mexico and we always get the short end of the stick, this is a victory no matter how you spin it buddy.
FYI I don't support Assad but I know you'll keep saying I do because you lack other arguments.
SilentRacoon
Member
Actually that thread title is complete BS, he never directly praised trump for one good deed, he praised that a deal he fully opposed right from the beginning has been scrapped, and that he is open to work along with him on issues they might converge, why is people so mad at the possibility of him working towards policies that actually benefit the working class. (not that I think there is much to be talked with the orange turd) But a man in Bernie's position should never burn bridges or cut off the nose just to spite his face.
- Status