WhiteHouse.gov states that US will withdraw from TPP. - Polidicks

[quote]With tough and fair agreements, international trade can be used to grow our economy, return millions of jobs to America’s shores, and revitalize our nation’s suffering communities. This strategy starts by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and making certain that any new trade deals are in the interests of American workers. President Trump is committed to renegotiating NAFTA. If our partners refuse a renegotiation that gives American workers a fair deal, then the President will give notice of the United States’ intent to withdraw from NAFTA.[/quote] [url]https://www.whitehouse.gov/trade-deals-working-all-americans[/url] [quote]WASHINGTON -- Soon after President Donald Trump was sworn in, his administration announced the U.S. withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade pact championed by former President Barack Obama and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. The White House on Friday also wasted no time in declaring a renegotiation of the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA. Trump is expected to take a more isolationist, protectionist stance, and the international community is concerned that the U.S. will continue to draw inward.[/quote] [url]http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/Policy-Politics/US-announces-withdrawal-from-TPP[/url] a day old, kinda surprised nobody was talking about it here. this also happened to be one of trump's day-one promises. it's official.

not really a surprise, this was one of his biggest campaign promises and one of the few that people generally supported him doing

lmao go ahead and pull out of NAFTA, Donnie, see what happens.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;51707543]lmao go ahead and pull out of NAFTA, Donnie, see what happens.[/QUOTE] what do you think would happen? I genuinley dont know enough about NAFTA to have an informed opinion

Wasn't that already confirmed a while back, as far back as November, days after Trump won? It's one of the few positives under a Trump presidency, IMO.

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51707546]Wasn't that already confirmed a while back, as far back as November, days after Trump won? It's one of the few positives under a Trump presidency, IMO.[/QUOTE] this confirms he is actually doing it as opposed to just saying he is

[QUOTE=Judas;51707545]what do you think would happen? I genuinley dont know enough about NAFTA to have an informed opinion[/QUOTE] The NAFTA has been quite a success story for the united states with the exception of a small amount of unskilled workers who lost out. There's a couple things normal countries do in situations of inequality like these but uh Protectionism is our god now :v:

[QUOTE=Judas;51707545]what do you think would happen? I genuinley dont know enough about NAFTA to have an informed opinion[/QUOTE] [URL="https://photos.state.gov/libraries/canada/303578/pdfs/us-canada-economic-relations-factsheet.pdf"]America's biggest trading partner is Canada and a ridiculous amount of economic traffic flows through the border in both directions every day.[/URL] Thirty-five states export primarily to Canada. What's going to happen to the economies on both sides of the border (plus Mexico on the other side) when the free trade agreement gets ripped up and Donald insists on a "more fair" deal? I expect this "fair" deal of his to be a poster example of American exceptionalism and not "fair" at all, given The Don's tough-negotiator facade.

I despise Trump, and that's unlikely to change until he grows a pair and starts acting like a mature adult, but I will praise his withdrawing from the TPP. This pretty much kills the agreement, and keeps things good for Canadians. We would have had the costs on drugs and medicines that many Canadians depend on rise dramatically if it had gone through. Now we won't. [editline]22nd January 2017[/editline] 'Course, this is Trump we're talking about. He's broken almost every promise he's made so far. He's a compulsive liar. We shall see.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51707563]The NAFTA has been quite a success story for the united states with the exception of a small amount of unskilled workers who lost out. There's a couple things normal countries do in situations of inequality like these but uh Protectionism is our god now :v:[/QUOTE] If anything, NAFTA killed off high paying factory worker jobs and replaced them with unskilled retail jobs.

[QUOTE=Ridge;51711687]If anything, NAFTA killed off high paying factory worker jobs and replaced them with unskilled retail jobs.[/QUOTE] We would still have those retail jobs, and we'd have significantly better job markets and domestic production, which would reduce the necessities of welfare and help slow the devaluing of the dollar. OPEC is what runs our economy, We print money, people give us cheap shit for dollars, then use those dollars to buy oil (OPEC primarily prices oil in USD) , oil producers then buy US Bonds, weapons, or otherwise invest that money, allowing us to respend some of that money. Our economy is basically international theft, the downside being that it'll eventually crash when either the dollar is no longer pegged to oil, or if we default and people stop buying bonds when faith in the dollar fades. But hey at least we'll cause a shock in the world economy in the process! Our regulation laws, through sheer burden and liability (often with anti-competitive tendencies), coupled with high minimum costs of labor allow other countries to undercut our labor force wherever having a person in that spot isn't directly necessary. It also tends to necessitate overworking people who do manage to find employment because the cost of hiring another employee is often prohibitive, the ACA is (was?) partially responsible for the increase in jobs being reduced to part time work instead of full time to avoid benefits that are required for full time employees. Anecdotally, I know a specific employer who after an employee left janitorial position couldn't afford to rehire another full time person for the position due to recent more recent legislation, and now have two part time employees for that position, because hiring two people part time is cheaper than hiring one person full time. It actually annoys the fuck out of me that such a vast portion of our country's "economy" is dedicated to literally just shuffling money around, most of which isn't even physically present.

[QUOTE=Ridge;51711687]If anything, NAFTA killed off high paying factory worker jobs and replaced them with unskilled retail jobs.[/QUOTE] Automation/technology killed those, try again. The US manufactures more than it ever has lol [URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS[/URL] Real output is about double that of when NAFTA was signed Those high paying factory jobs that were cut were unsustainable in the face of automation and efficiency, it's like complaining about how few of us work in agriculture nowadays.

Good.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51712075]Automation/technology killed those, try again. The US manufactures more than it ever has lol [URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OUTMS[/URL] Real output is about double that of when NAFTA was signed Those high paying factory jobs that were cut were unsustainable in the face of automation and efficiency, it's like complaining about how few of us work in agriculture nowadays.[/QUOTE] Automation wasn't a thing in 95+% of manufacturing in the early 90s.

[QUOTE=Ridge;51711687]If anything, NAFTA killed off high paying factory worker jobs and replaced them with unskilled retail jobs.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Ridge;51712663]Automation wasn't a thing in 95+% of manufacturing in the early 90s.[/QUOTE] sources?

[QUOTE=Ridge;51712663]Automation wasn't a thing in 95+% of manufacturing in the early 90s.[/QUOTE] Not necessarily relevant, there's a reason I edited in "/technology." Mechanization is the term here I guess (iunno, it's technology making human manual labor less strenuous/relevant.) Again with agriculture tractors for example increased productivity by a lot which led to people having to leave and work elsewhere. Automation, with computers and hydraulics and all that shit as we think of it started spreading in the 70s btw. "Automation" isn't like a static state where we've suddenly kicked out all of the workers, for factories it's been pretty gradual. By the 90's factories were less of this: [thumb]http://ophelia.sdsu.edu:8080/ford/12-04-2011/images/content/heritage_1928_rouge_model_a_575x426.jpg[/thumb] and were much more like this: [IMG]http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-manufacturing-boom-mexico/static/image/car.gif[/IMG] Which by the way, is mexico in the picture. they aren't really safe from this either. I'd try to compare the amount of people working in manufacturing in America to Mexico, but we measure it differently from them so I probably shouldn't since I don't really know where it differs. But they are basically dominated by services already (64% of gdp atm) which is only expanding as their agriculture becomes less shit and manufacturing does as well. [sp]although the history isn't really related to my original post. The point is that feasible US manufacturing is heavily automated nowadays, and that retreating to protectionism is fuggen dum and won't even bring back those jobs en masse for people[/sp]

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51713659]Which by the way, is mexico in the picture. [/QUOTE] That's exactly the point, though. Automation reduced the number of jobs available, but NAFTA allowed them to disappear entirely to Mexico. You can't look at companies hopping the border to take advantage of cheaper labor and market regulations and say it's all just due to automation.

[QUOTE=catbarf;51713794]That's exactly the point, though. Automation reduced the number of jobs available, but NAFTA allowed them to disappear entirely to Mexico. You can't look at companies hopping the border to take advantage of cheaper labor and market regulations and say it's all just due to automation.[/QUOTE] "disappear entirely" need I link the thing again that says that we're making more than we ever have, and in fact, have been expanding our industrial manufacturing at a pretty good rate? The factories in both countries aren't 100% the same either, the factories in Mexico aren't automated to the extent that ours are, which is another reason companies will build factories there. Highly automated factories require a lot more capital investment and skilled labor, without free trade many of those factories in Mexico just wouldn't exist rather than coming back. Those same factories with less automation aren't worth the cost in America, even without free trade. There's other relevant factors at play too, such as supply chains and how Mexican manufacturing is often closer to being a part of our manufacturing chain rather than being a separate competing agent, which would mean we'd LOSE some jobs cutting NAFTA, but shit gets pretty complicated at that point. And there's also how freeing up those jobs lets some Americans move on to better jobs, benefiting America as a whole. Comparative advantage bullshit. I brought that up to point out that it's not an American problem to have low skill factory labor losing its relevance, to show that it's how countries trend as they develop and that we need to move on rather than pretending we can employ people in that fashion again. edit: [URL]http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.15.1.125[/URL] Here's a thing that talks about what impact it has had. And again, while some workers lose out (most policies don't help [I]everyone[/I],) overall it leaves us better off and with more ~stuff~. If distribution of resources like education (to get new jobs) is the problem or we need welfare (to take care of unemployable/poor)... just do that.

Ah, Good! Trans pacific partnership never benefited us to begin with, I'll never understand why we signed it.

Shame, so many countries would had benefited from this

Time for china to take over global trade.