"This trade deal is not about trade."

We've known for some time that the “investor-state dispute settlement” process is a threat to our national sovereignty. But, now we know that those international trade courts are also a huge benefit to billionaires and massive corporations.

According to a new study published by York University in Toronto, “the beneficiaries of [the] ISDS... have overwhelmingly been companies with more than $1 billion per year in annual revenue – especially extra-large companies with more than $10 billion – and individuals with more than $100 million in net wealth.”

In other words, massive trade agreements like the TPP aren't about expanding trade or opening markets – they're about making rich people and corporations even richer. And, that's exactly why we must keep push Congress to say no to the Trans Pacific Partnership.

That study addresses how these ISDS courts have been given the appearance of “legitimacy” by allowing people to believe that these systems would also benefit individuals and small businesses, but that's not how they work in practice.

The authors explained that challenges are not brought to these courts through normal, public processes that could be utilized by the little guy. Instead, cases are only heard by these private panels of arbitrators, who often represent the same massive corporations likely involved in the case in question.

Is it any wonder that nearly all of the money – as in 95% - that was awarded through ISDS challenges went straight to the super wealthy and giant corporations?

As a trade campaigner for Greenpeace explained, “This trade deal is not about trade. It's about the transfer of power from people to big business.” As if they need another way to cheat us or rig the system.

The reasons to reject the TPP keep adding up, and it's time to let Congress know that they will vote down this trade deal, or we will vote them out of office.

Comments

KDAKC's picture
KDAKC 6 years 30 weeks ago
#1

I think that it's fitting to call Trump "Trumenstein" because he's the creation of the Republican party.

KDAKC's picture
KDAKC 6 years 30 weeks ago
#2

Correction: "Trumpenstein".

Kend's picture
Kend 6 years 30 weeks ago
#3

I am not sure why the left hates big companies so much. If it wasn't for them where would you put all your pension funds. If they don't turn big profits there is no pension plans. Big companies, with the exception of government, are the only places left that have those great union jobs. This is one of those reasons the Democrats are know for their anti business. Guys like Thom are always bashing corporations.

adfecteau's picture
adfecteau 6 years 30 weeks ago
#4

Thom,

You need to put this on your show regarding the reason for the low Democratic primary turnout:

It is simply because of the media blackout on Bernie. People who watch TV only know of one candidate, in which case, why bother to vote in the primary.

Hordes are coming out for Trump and the fascist wing because he's all over every form of media. They aren't that much more energized, its just that more of them are aware of the race.

In 2008, Obama and Hillary were both all over the media in the horse race. Now, as far as the media is concerned there is still only one Dem candidate, with only minor change since the start of voting,

If they start covering Bernie like Trump, there will be crushing crowds.

Alexis

RJ Schundler's picture
RJ Schundler 6 years 30 weeks ago
#5

I think what we have here are the ANTI-People people .... If the Republcians were to pass tariffs, we would hear the they are just trying to protect the WEALTHY, if they lower the TARIFFS we would hear that they are trying to hurt the working class. What we should be trying to do, is to promote full employment it in the USA. Best way to do that would be to repeal all Labor based taxes .... The FICA taxes on the employees and those on the employers, that would increase the take home pay of the worker while reducing the cost to the employers, then we should repeal the FUI and all income taxes on wages. Replace the lost revenue by passing the FAIR TAX on Goods only, both foreign and domestic goods .... That way we could have both FAIR TRADE and FREE TRADE, Good for everyone.

cccccttttt 6 years 30 weeks ago
#6

Writing your congressman is an act of futility.

Buying your congressmen will get their vote.

ct

RJ Schundler's picture
RJ Schundler 6 years 30 weeks ago
#7

The Dems are not anti-Big Business, they are just anti-small business.... The Democratic Party is pro BIG BUSINESS, BIG LABOR, BIG BANKS, Lawyers (big and small firms), and the super WEALTHY (like George Soros) .... And Big Government, and they tend to like Fasist type of Presidents like FDR and Obama (for Congress and take action) .... And under the Democrats the super Wealthy get wealthier, and the Poor get Poorer, as they did under FDR and Obama.

The Glenn Beck Review's picture
The Glenn Beck ... 6 years 30 weeks ago
#8

I got on Fox Business News yesterday and called the "free-trade agreements" "international, corporate rule" and called Clinton fascistic for supporting them.

Gary Reber's picture
Gary Reber 6 years 30 weeks ago
#9

No, it is about monopolizing the OWNERSHIP of all FUTURE productive capital wealth among the already wealthy capital OWNERSHIP class, who wield political power throughout the world.

The Trans Pacific Partnership agreement will promote the interests of giant, multinational corporations over the interests of labor, environmental, consumer, human rights, or other stakeholders in democracy, AND FURTHER CONCENTRATE OWNERSHIP OF THE NON-HUMAN PRODUCTIVE CAPITAL MEANS OF PRODUCTION!

The REAL STORY is a story about the collusion among a globally wealthy ownership class to further concentrate private sector ownership in ALL FUTURE wealth-creating, income-generating productive capital asset creation on a global scale. A sorta FREE TRADE ON STEROIDS!

This is a battle between two property system choices: economies such as China in which the productive capital assets are primarily state-owned or state-sponsored communism or socialism and economies such as the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Japan, etc in which the productive capital assets are primarily privately owned, although also largely concentrated among less than 10 percent of the population so as to require massive earnings redistribution, and thus welfare support open and disguised.

But there is another alternative, a balanced Just Third Way (http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/thirdway-intro.htm), based on an understanding of binary economics, by which over time the economy's productive capital assets will become almost entirely individually owned by 100 percent of the citizens. Such an economy would produce efficiencies of production fully using ever-advancing technologies of production that will fuel a greater growth of the world economies by eliminating the problematic condition of the exponential disassociation of production and consumption through ordinary citizens gaining access to FUTURE productive capital ownership to improve their economic well-being, without taking anything away from those who already own.

It is critical that private property ownership in productive capital be extended to ALL people because of the increasing power of productive capital to produce more and more of the wealth or products and services needed and wanted by society. Because productive capital––the non-human factor of production––is an independent productive power separate from human labor power, and represents an increasing role in creating wealth, the question to be addressed is: Who has the right to acquire ownership of productive capital?

While people have private property rights in their own labor, due to tectonic shifts in the technologies of production it is not enough for individual survival if people cannot get jobs, or if jobs, in reality are no longer doing a substantial part of the wealth creation. As exponential technology shifts destroy jobs and devalue the worth of labor, people need not only private property rights in their own labor, but also private property rights in the productive capital assets that are doing ever more of the work.

We as a nation, and other nations, can no longer limit people to personal rights while restricting ownership acquisition rights in wealth-creating, income-producing productive capital assets to those already well-capitalized. To be a just society, all individuals MUST have effective property rights not only in their labor and personal use possessions but also in FUTURE productive capital asset creation. Because of this imbalance, the result has been that the consumer populous is not able to get the money to buy the products and services produced increasingly by the non-human factor––physical productive capital––as a result of substituting machines for people. And yet you can’t have mass production without mass human consumption.

Broadened, private sector individual ownership of FUTURE productive capital assets as a societal objective is the ONLY individual private property-rights approach that will provide solutions to income inequality, unemployment, underemployment and anemic GDP growth––all of which is rooted in the tectonic shift in the technologies of production and its concentrated ownership. This reality, as a practical matter, is destroying jobs and devaluing the worth of labor, widening the income gap between the rich and poor and struggling (each resentful and suspicious of the other), and resulting in our inability to achieve double-digit GDP growth in the United States and other countries.

To solve this challenge, several policies must be implemented in the United States:

1. Tax reform is needed to incentivize broadened individual ownership of corporations by their employees. As an incentive, provide a tax deduction to corporations for dividend payouts, which would tighten-up the right of each owner to his or her full share of profits, a basic and historic right of private property. It would eliminate double and triple taxes on corporate profits, shifting the burden of taxation to personal incomes after exempting initial incomes that would allow low and middle class citizens not to pay taxes on incomes needed to cover basic living expenses. It will also encourage corporations to finance their growth through the issuance of new full voting, full dividend payout shares for financing their productive capital growth needs through Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) and Capital Homestead Accounts (CHAs). Politically we need to insist that politicians lift barriers to the democratization of future ownership opportunity based on sound principle, rather than redistributive taxation.

2. As increasingly more workers acquire ownership stakes in FUTURE corporate productive capital assets using ESOP financing mechanisms, workers will build second incomes to support their living expenses, which in turn means they will be better "customers with money" to support demand for the products and services that the economy is capable of producing. By reason of the higher marginal spending rate on the part of workers second incomes, more of the additional income earned by the new capitalists (who have many unsatisfied consumer needs and wants) will be spent on consumption than if the income had been earned by those capitalists who now have concentrated the ownership of productive capital exclusively, and who have few, if any, consumer needs and wants. Such broadened incremental consumption will fuel a demand for more consumer products and services, which in turn will provide incentive for greater productive capital investment.

3. For all Americans, the Federal Reverse needs to create an asset-backed currency that can enable every man, woman and child to establish a Capital Homestead Account or "CHA" (a super-IRA or asset tax-shelter for citizens) at their local bank to acquire a growing dividend-bearing stock portfolio to supplement their incomes from work and all other sources of income. The CHA would process an equal allocation of productive credit to every citizen exclusively for purchasing full-dividend payout shares in companies needing funds for growing the economy and private sector jobs for local, national and global markets. The shares would be purchased using essentially interest-free credit wholly backed by projected "future savings" in the form of new productive capital assets as well as the future marketable products and services produced by the newly added technology, renewable energy systems, plant, rentable space and infrastructure added to the economy. Risk of default on each stock acquisition loan would be covered by private sector capital credit risk insurance and, if necessary, government reinsurance, but would not require citizens to reduce their funds for consumption to purchase shares.

4. Reform the tax code such that the tax rate would be a single rate for all incomes from all sources above an established personal exemption level (for example, an exemption of $100,000 for a family of four to meet their ordinary living needs) so that the budget could be balanced automatically and even allow the government to pay off the growing unsustainable long-term debt. The poor would pay the first dollar over their exemption levels as would the stock fund operator and others now earning billions of dollars from capital gains, dividends, rents and other property incomes.

5. As a substitute for inheritance and gift taxes, a transfer tax should be imposed on the recipients whose holdings exceeded $1 million, thus encouraging the super-rich to spread out their monopoly-sized estates to all members of their family, friends, servants and workers who helped create their fortunes, teachers, health workers, police, other public servants, military veterans, artists, the poor and the disabled.

6. Eliminate all tax loopholes and subsidies.

These polices would result in rapid and substantial economic growth with the GDP rate in double digits. As a result of the stimulus effect, more REAL, decent paying job opportunities and further technological advancement would be created while simultaneously broadening private, individual ownership of FUTURE wealth-creating, income-generating productive capital assets, which would support second and primary incomes for ALL Americans.

In this new FUTURE economy, a citizen would start to benefit financially at the time he or she enters the economic world as a labor worker, to become increasingly a capital owner, whose productive capital assets contribute as a non-human worker earning a second income, and at some point to retire as a labor worker and continue to participate in production and to earn income as a capital owner until the day you die.

As we ALL contribute to the building of a FUTURE economy that can support general affluence for EVERY man, woman and child, at some point as the technologies of production further advance there will be far less need for human workers and productive capital asset ownership will become the primary income source for most people. As general affluence becomes more widespread people will be free and economically secure to pursue their creative desires and pleasures, further contributing to the cultural and societal development of the country.

Support the Agenda of The Just Third Way Movement at http://foreconomicjustice.org/?p=5797

Support Monetary Justice at http://capitalhomestead.org/page/monetary-justice

Support the Capital Homestead Act at http://www.cesj.org/homestead/index.htm and http://www.cesj.org/homestead/summary-cha.htm. See the full Act at http://cesj.org/homestead/strategies/national/cha-full.pdf

See "Financing Economic Growth With 'FUTURE SAVINGS': Solutions To Protect America From Economic Decline" at NationOfChange.org http://www.nationofchange.org/financing-future-economic-growth-future-savings-solutions-protect-america-economic-decline-137450624 and "The Income Solution To Slow Private Sector Job Growth" at http://www.nationofchange.org/income-solution-slow-private-sector-job-growth-1378041490.

Old_Curmudgeon 6 years 30 weeks ago
#10

A Future Rhymer’s Rhyme

{… a pair of limericks …}

In Elections Twenty-Sixteen’s,

politicians vented their spleens.

Vicious words rumbled,

Candidates bumbled.

Sanity in smithereens.

… … …

Yet like agile acrobats,

the tricky plutocrats

applied their wile

in WallStreeter style

to continue as the fattest of cats.

==========================

SteveS's picture
SteveS 6 years 30 weeks ago
#11

The following video from CREDO says it all:

http://blog.credomobile.com/2016/03/video-nobel-prize-winner-fact-checks...

If the link above doesn't work, manually type the URL in. the video's well worth seeing.

Not long ago, I wrote to President Obama and asked him if he wanted his daughters to grow up in a country where international corporations could sue the government because clean air and clean water laws and regulations were judged by a trade tribunal to be standing in the way of those corporations making expected profits. I never received an answer.

RFord's picture
RFord 6 years 30 weeks ago
#12

Who are these people wispering in the president's ear telling him the TPP is about creating good paying American jobs? Is he that gullable? Or is thare something in it for him personally? There's been enough leaked out about the TPP agreement that we all know that's not true. There's a good reason the TPP agreement hasn't been published publicly. The reason is the writers don't want the American people to know all that it contains because we would reject it with outrage and ask our senators and congressmen to reject it. Give the president fast track athority? I don't think so. Trade agreements should be written only by our elected representitives and be equally benificial to the working people of all countries involved. We certainly don't need any agreements that that break down the laws that protect us.

Mark J. Saulys's picture
Mark J. Saulys 6 years 30 weeks ago
#13

I don't know if I said this before here but we're supposed to get exited about TPP because it's gonna send our jobs to Viet Nam instead of to China. That, of course, is a benefit to big business owners, not to us average working people.

Qoheleth 6 years 30 weeks ago
#14

Every time I write to the Congresscritters from this state, I tell them to oppose Obamatrade, which is what I call the TPP. That should appeal to them since they're all Republicans.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 6 years 30 weeks ago
#15

Free trade is just like the republican party, both are hated once you hear the related truth/facts. How many citizens would be supportive of free trade if provided with information...one percent maybe???? How many would support republican conservative right wing economic policy if presented with the facts....one tenth of a percent maybe???? Great job our corp media is doing....we have a totally misinformed general public.

Here's what a billionaire controlled media feeds us... Bernie wins state after state, but it's quickly pointed out that he can't possibly win. A republican theocrat wins a couple, and hey now, he can beat Trump!

Free trade is a republican/fascist driven economic policy, which is why the media keeps the public confused about it....Oh that's right, It's all Obama's big idea!!!! Not quite!

Obama is simply doing what the Fascists have asked him to do on free trade....god only knows why???? ....country club/golf pals???

chuckle8's picture
chuckle8 6 years 30 weeks ago
#16

Most of the chapters in the TPP are not about trade. I would guess that is why Thom says the TPP is not about trade. However, when I looked at the TPP, link by link, it seemed most of the pages were about trade. The TPP seemed to consist of a bunch of tables that drive tariffs to zero. These tables take up the bulk of TPP. As Thom, Adam Smith, and Alexander Hamilton have pointed out no economy can survive without protecting its workers with tariffs. We need tariffs not a handout as Hillary wants to do. Her objection to the TPP was the handout was not big enough, not that handouts were not a good replacement for tariffs.

Mark J. Saulys's picture
Mark J. Saulys 6 years 30 weeks ago
#17

Chuckle 8, it's ostensibly about trade but really about power for the business elites and investor class.
It actually represents, I think, the effecting of a neo feudalism with the very wealthy supplanting government and making it the personal property of a few rich assholes.

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 is a national treasure. Read him, embrace him, learn from him, and follow him as we all work for social change."
Robert Greenwald, political activist and founder and president of Brave New Films
From Screwed:
"I think many of us recognize that for all but the wealthiest, life in America is getting increasingly hard. Screwed explores why, showing how this is no accidental process, but rather the product of conscious political choices, choices we can change with enough courage and commitment. Like all of Thom’s great work, it helps show us the way forward."
Paul Loeb, author of Soul of a Citizen and The Impossible Will Take a Little While
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."
Paul Loeb, author of Soul of a Citizen