Corporate-Managed Trade Deals Screw America

The New Hampshire primary is now just one day away, and differences between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton couldn’t be clearer, especially when it comes to so-called free trade.

While Secretary Clinton’s views on corporate-managed trade have changed a lot over the years, Bernie’s haven’t.

He opposes and has opposed every single one of the so-called free trade deals we’ve entered into since the 1980s.

He also now says that he would reject the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, if elected president.

This is a big deal, and yet another sign that a Bernie Sanders presidency would do wonders for working Americans.

Even so, the corporate media will probably still paint it as a dangerously radical move; an example of how Bernie Sanders is just too far out of the mainstream to be a viable candidate.

But here’s the thing: the idea that we can undo or reject bad so-called free trade agreements isn’t that radical.

It’s actually pretty mainstream, or at least used to be.

In fact, back in 2008 even Hillary Clinton said she would consider opting out of NAFTA if, as president, she couldn’t renegotiate better terms for American workers and the environment.

Hillary Clinton was right then, and if she came out and said that today she’d still be right.

The fact is that so-called free trade has been a complete and utter disaster, both for Americans workers and the American economy.

NAFTA alone has led to the loss of at least 1 million jobs, a 12.2 percent decline in wages for working Americans, and an almost $200 billion and growing trade deficit with Mexico and Canada.

The onset of Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China, meanwhile, has led to another massive trade deficit and, according to the Economic Policy Institute, killed off 3.2 million jobs.

Newer so-called free trade deals have been just as disastrous. According to another study by the Economic Policy Institute, the U.S. Korean Free Trade Deal that President Obama signed us onto back in 2012 has led to a loss of at least 75,000 jobs and created a trade deficit that’s hovered in the tens of billions of dollars.

None of this is an accident. Free trade” has always been a scam.

It’s not the "inevitable transition to a more globalized world" that its supporters say it is; it’s a blatant attempt by giant corporations to change the rules of the game so that they always come out on top.

If the media were really honest, it’d start calling it “corporate-managed trade.”

And that’s a really important point, because for over 200 years in this country we had a trade policy that actually reflected the needs of the people as a whole and not just a handful of multinational corporations.

It wasn’t corporate-managed trade; it was “We the People-managed trade.”

First laid out in Alexander Hamilton’s famous 1791 Report on Manufactures, the idea behind this trade policy was simple: the ultimate source of wealth for all nations is for them to protect domestic industries through strong tariffs - and that those tariffs make goods produced by factories here at home cheaper than those made abroad.

That’s what we did from the founding of the Republic until the Reagan, Clinton, and Bush years, and it’s what we need to do now if we want to rebuild the middle class.

Through so-called free trade, that’s really corporate-managed trade, we’re letting big business decide what’s important for our economy, and it’s destroying the lives of millions of hardworking Americans.

It’s time to put this failed experiment with free trade to rest once and for all.

The next president needs to end permanent trade relations with China, pull out of NAFTA and the WTO, and just say no to the TPP.

Then we need to once again do the same thing that Alexander Hamilton and George Washington did way back in 1791: come up with a trade policy that works for "We the People" instead of "they the corporations."

Comments

cccccttttt 6 years 33 weeks ago
#1

Do we live in a corporate enterprise zone, or a traditional nation state?

Watch how TTP plays out to get your answer.

ct

Hephaestus's picture
Hephaestus 6 years 33 weeks ago
#2

Absolutely!

This is a corporate virus that in reality is fascism

We have fought against this stuff in two world wars, it rears its Medusa like ugly head again and I now can't get that people don't see it for what it is

This is true manifestation of greed and evil against the greater good

“Excess of liberty, whether it lies in state or individuals, seems only to pass into excess of slavery.” Plato

Government allows corporate excess by the means of corruption

And, we the people allow them to do so

delster's picture
delster 6 years 33 weeks ago
#3

I've believed for a long time the cleaverest way to take over a democracy and limit the constitution and rule of law for that matter is by a corporate take over. That is part of what free trade agreements are about. I like Bernie Sanders and I like his message , but going up against corporate rule is a tall order to fulfill. One thing the free world has really got to keep an eye on is technology. www.businessinsider.com/technology-is-destroying-jobs-..

Aliceinwonderland's picture
Aliceinwonderland 6 years 33 weeks ago
#4

Delster, a corporate take-over translates to CORPORATE FASCISM, which is indeed what these so-called "trade agreements" are about. Bernie's agenda is the only acceptable agenda for anyone concerned about corporations taking over matters of the state, who does not want to live under fascism.

Governments are not corporations and vice versa, and we need to keep it that way. Bernie is the ONLY candidate who takes this issue seriously at all.

Craig Bush's picture
Craig Bush 6 years 33 weeks ago
#5

How do we trust Hillary or any politician that will change their minds by the way the political winds blow? Hillary stated the TPP was the gold standard for free trade. She was an attorney for Monsanto. Voted to protect them from litigation. Pushed fracking in Eastern Europe instead of green energy. When asked in a recent debate what was the most important issue facing Americans? Her reply was Iran. Bernie's was global warming. This marks the most significant difference. Who out there believes some Persian or Arab living in a cave, on the other side of the planet with an AK and a laptop is more dangerous to their future then global warming? I am more concerned about the wing nut down the block with a Bushmaster and a 100 round clip. If we do not address global warming it is all over for the future for every living thing. Why don't the corporate democrats understand a thermus maximus event and mass extinction?

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 6 years 33 weeks ago
#6

I would add that we must not forget how Senate Republicans killed the 2012 anti-outsourcing bill.....which would have eliminated tax breaks for employers shipping jobs overseas. Thanks to our anti-democracy, pro-fascist media, hardly any citizens are aware of this bald faced disrespect for those of us who work for a living. Seems to me this is an excellent example of how the Teapublican Party could care less about the 99%. It would be a great issue to bring up in front of all America during the Presidential debates...I'd love to hear how the scoundrels would answer to this in front of a national audience.....!!!!!!!!

Rubio was a Senate Teapublican at the time!

Johnnie Dorman's picture
Johnnie Dorman 6 years 33 weeks ago
#7

"Free to slave trade," is what it should be called. Just like the, "Citizens United," shoud be called, "Corporations United."

These corporate pigs don't care if the people of this country die in poverty. Just as long as they can sell us a McDonald's burger and keep us powerless to do anything about it.

The worst shame is that so many people are blaming all the wrong people for how we were all sold out. They really don't have a clue after forty years of phony patriotism and all the corporate paid for propaganda.

If Trump or any of the other Rethugs make it to the presidency, I'm out of here, Amsterdam, here I come, because this country will be finished.

John_mulkins123's picture
John_mulkins123 6 years 33 weeks ago
#8

GREAT SHOW THOM! SO TRUE! And, the fact that our economy is not based on caring for each other is where this discussion should go! Socialism is a "We" word. Capitalism a "Me" word. I think we are all done with the "Me" thing. It's no fun.

That said, we act like we are addicted to our "representational Democracy".
We have forgotten about direct democracy.

When a Nation relies solely on it's "representatives" to do the right thing, shit happens, it always will.

That is why AMERICA NEEDS a DIRECT DEMOCRACY MOVEMENT for a National Referendum. We the People must create that FOR OURSELVES Because we can and we must.

Bernie could never do that, even though it is the perfect expression for a REAL POLITICAL REVOLUTION. It's something we need as much as we need compassion and justice, if we are to heal this planet of all it's ills. And we must because we can.

http://www.thenationalreferendum.org/

ginico55's picture
ginico55 6 years 33 weeks ago
#9

Tom, I have read Bernie's healthcare plan. I have listened to him on your show for years talking about EVERYTHING that he currently wants to do as President. I look at the number of gerrymandered seats held by Republicans in the House of Representatives that probably will NOT change until after the next census, and the fact that EVERYTHING that Bernie is running on has to come up in the House and be funded. I don't see that happening and Bernie would become as impotent by the Republicans as they have tried to do to President Obama. Also, I don't think that Bernie can win nationally. I don't think that the revolution is going to change a thing as long as the Republicans are in control of the House. Also, his own State has retreated on single payer, stating that they cannot afford it. Taking all of this into consideration, I have decided that I will not support Bernie, that Hillary's expertise has a better chance of getting anything done. I would appreciate any rebuttal on how he will work these miracles, I am willing to listen.

ginico55's picture
ginico55 6 years 33 weeks ago
#10

He takes a lot seriously, talking is one thing but doing is the hard part. As long as the House is controlled by Republicans, I think Bernie is a pipe dream that cannot happen. I don't see Republicans rolling over for anything that Bernie is calling for in his revolution.

Hephaestus's picture
Hephaestus 6 years 33 weeks ago
#11

The racist Repugs did nothing but screw, from begining to end, our first president who was not white

Old_Curmudgeon 6 years 33 weeks ago
#12

Several decades ago my students thought it deliciously ironic that ’twas Multinational Corporations {and not Marxism’s successes} which were causing “the withering away of the state”. … Sure ‘nuff: Many years later, scholars have been continuing this theme, - f’rinstance in this Foreign Affairs essay’s title, “Will the Nation-State Survive Globalization?” {by Martin Wolf, Jan/Feb 2001}. - https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2001-01-01/will-nation-state-survive-globalization

Willie W's picture
Willie W 6 years 33 weeks ago
#13

ginico55...Sad to say, I think you're right.

RLTOWNSLEY's picture
RLTOWNSLEY 6 years 33 weeks ago
#14

ginico55; Needless to say It's going to be tough for Bernie to force the Neoliberal leadership of the Democrat Party to back any progressive policies after twenty five years of snuggling up to the Capitalist Right ! This relationship was formed back in the mid to late eighties and initially manifested itself as the DLC (Democrat Leadership Council). An entity that no longer exists but when it did, it's website had a list of charter members that included Bill and Hillary Clinton. There were various rumors floating around at the time that credited Billionaire George Soros with being the father of this movement. It quickly became evident that beyond his list of secret love interests, Bill Clinton, and by association Hillary Clinton, was literally sleeping with the enemy that launched them onto the national political stage ! The Clinton's wasted no time rewarding their supporters with legislation like NAFTA, a major reduction in Depression Era government aid policies that helped the poor, and the obliteration of the Glass-Steagall Act that corrected one of the major problems that led to the Great Depression, no mystery that just eight years after the demise of Glass-Steagall in 1999, we experienced yet another major economic breakdown !

Neoliberalism is an economic/ governing philosophy that has been around for some time, and like many philosophies it has changed with the times. I looked up the current definition of Neoliberalism on Wikipedia last week and was shocked to find that it's current guiding principles were not that far removed from the policies of the late Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, strange times when the preferred platform of the Democrat Leadership closely mirrors that of the Republican Party and has for the past quarter century. If most Democrats are not familiar with this established fact, their going to go into total shock when they realize that their party's leadership has been sleeping with the enemy for twenty five years !

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 6 years 33 weeks ago
#15

Ginico 55: Bernie can and will accomplish things the same way the Civil Rights Movement gained traction and fomented change. As President Bernie will have the pulpit/attention of the vast majority, and thus be able to speak truth to power, something we haven't had from a President in a long long time. Armed with the fire of his economic and social justice truth,"We the People," will then need to take to the streets in a non - violent manner and force our elected officials either to follow us or seek further employment...yes, it's that simple.

longbid's picture
longbid 6 years 33 weeks ago
#16

Glass Steagall re-newal would not do anything.The SEC and its cohorts were asleep at the switch.They had all of the tools to regulate and did not.

Bernie has great ideas but Hillary is the only one that can get things done.

Instant-RunOff-... 6 years 33 weeks ago
#17

Hillary Clinton is a liar and a Bankster stooge who will say anything to get elected, and then do what her corporate masters tell her.

Even the moderate economist Robert Reich admits Glass Steagall would have prevented the criminal Bankster led financial meltdown:

http://robertreich.org/post/124114229225

"...because the repeal of Glass-Steagall led directly to the 2008 Wall Street crash, and without it we’re in danger of another one..."

"...“The idea is pretty simple behind this one,” Senator Elizabeth Warren said a few days ago, explaining her bill to resurrect Glass-Steagall. “If banks want to engage in high-risk trading — they can go for it, but they can’t get access to ensured deposits and put the taxpayers on the hook for that reason...."

"...the big Wall Street banks weren’t content. They wanted bigger profits. They thought they could make far more money by gambling with commercial deposits. So they set out to whittle down Glass-Steagall.

Finally, in 1999, President Bill Clinton struck a deal with Republican Senator Phil Gramm to do exactly what Wall Street wanted, and repeal Glass-Steagall altogether.

What happened next? An almost exact replay of the Roaring Twenties. Once again, banks originated fraudulent loans and sold them to their customers in the form of securities. Once again, there was a huge conflict of interest that finally resulted in a banking crisis. ..."

"...to this day some Wall Street apologists argue Glass-Steagall wouldn’t have prevented the 2008 crisis because the real culprits were nonbanks like Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns.

Baloney. These nonbanks got their funding from the big banks in the form of lines of credit, mortgages, and repurchase agreements. If the big banks hadn’t provided them the money, the nonbanks wouldn’t have got into trouble.

And why were the banks able to give them easy credit on bad collateral? Because Glass-Steagall was gone.

Other apologists for the Street blame the crisis on unscrupulous mortgage brokers.

Surely mortgage brokers do share some of the responsibility. But here again, the big banks were accessories and enablers.

The mortgage brokers couldn’t have funded the mortgage loans if the banks hadn’t bought them. And the big banks couldn’t have bought them if Glass-Steagall were still in place.

I’ve also heard bank executives claim there’s no reason to resurrect Glass-Steagall because none of the big banks actually failed.

This is like arguing lifeguards are no longer necessary at beaches where no one has drowned. It ignores the fact that the big banks were bailed out. If the government hadn’t thrown them lifelines, many would have gone under.

Remember? Their balance sheets were full of junky paper, non-performing loans, and worthless derivatives. They were bailed out because they were too big to fail. And the reason for resurrecting Glass-Steagall is we don’t want to go through that ever again..."

You would think these criminal Banksters would be content with the fact that we let them create our money supply out of thin air, the biggest case of welfare in the history of human civilization, and they don't even pay any taxes on the 10's of $trillions they have created in the past decade. Our privately owned, privately controlled debt-money system. But no, they want more, their greed is insatiable. And all this to a bunch ultra-rich parasites who produce nothing. The thing about parasites is once they attach themselves to a host, namely us lowly serfs, they use every vile deception they can invent to keep us from shaking them off. Hillary Clinton is one of those.

An excellent documentary on the subject is 97% owned - Economic Truth Documentary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcGh1Dex4Yo

Watch the Money As Debt Youtube videos by monetary theorist PAUL GRIGNON:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pBIEvKctSs

Mystic's picture
Mystic 6 years 33 weeks ago
#18

That is why we have to help Bernie create a movement, and elect a Congress that will support the change. Bernie admits that alone he can do nothing, but the kids are getting it, we have to provide him the support team.

douglas marr's picture
douglas marr 6 years 32 weeks ago
#19

you said that you think berbie is doing jesus work even though bernie is a jew...Jesus was also a total jew! he went to temple,christianty and church's did not exist.please remind listeners that bernie and jesus,both jews.

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Today, we are closing Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann seeks out interesting subjects from such disparate outposts of curiosity that you have to wonder whether or not he uncovered them or they selected him."
Leonardo DiCaprio, actor, producer, and environmental activist
From Screwed:
"If we are going to live in a Democracy, we need to have a healthy middle class. Thom Hartmann shows us how the ‘cons’ have wronged this country, and tells us what needs to be done to reclaim what it is to be American."
Eric Utne, Founder, Utne magazine
From Cracking the Code:
"No one communicates more thoughtfully or effectively on the radio airwaves than Thom Hartmann. He gets inside the arguments and helps people to think them through—to understand how to respond when they’re talking about public issues with coworkers, neighbors, and friends. This book explores some of the key perspectives behind his approach, teaching us not just how to find the facts, but to talk about what they mean in a way that people will hear."
to understand how to respond when they’re talking about public issues with coworkers, neighbors, and friends. This book explores some of the key perspectives behind his approach, teaching us not just how to find the facts, but to talk about what they mean in a way that people will hear."