Donald Trump says he will issue an executive action on his first day in office to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
In a video updating Americans on the White House transition, the President-elect described TPP as a "potential disaster for our country".
[...] Mr Trump said his administration instead intends to generate "fair, bilateral trade deals that bring jobs and industry back onto American shores".
Sky Correspondent Greg Milam said: "Donald Trump has been very critical of what trade deals have done for American workers and the damage that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) did in the 1990s - particularly to low-income workers in the Midwest, who it turns out voted for Mr Trump in huge numbers."
Source: Sky News
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 22 2016, @09:35PM
Thumbs up on this one, Trump. I guess I need to start keeping score, see how many things you bungle, and how many things you get right. But, thumbs up on this one item.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by arslan on Tuesday November 22 2016, @09:59PM
What's the score on Obama?
Also, his renegade on persecuting HRC, is that a thumbs up or down? Obviously, purely from a campaign promise its a thumbs down, but I personally dislike lynch mobs and witch hunts...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 22 2016, @10:25PM
The game already ended with the $25 million Trump U settlement. Trump effectively admitted fraud defrauding thousands of struggling middle class folks out of thousands USD each, with no plan going in to do otherwise.
Then the next day, he starts talking about the 'Hamilton' cast, and so the press dutifully turns their attention to that. I have to admit, Trump is at what he does, which is being a con man. Hillary should've asked for help early on in competing against this kind of operator. Michael Moore was one of the few who had a clue.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 22 2016, @11:07PM
HRC persecution, or prosecution? I hope we all persecute HRC forever. She has no business in the adult world, and I hope all the kids throw rocks at her everytime she ventures out from under the porch.
Now, prosecution? That's a different matter. I want to see it happen, but it never will.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:07AM
Have I ever mentioned, Runaway, that one of the things I like most about you is your ironclad dedication to keeping the tenor of discourse classy and high-minded at all times? And how you're never, ever a complete dumpster fire of a human being, even in jest?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Funny) by mhajicek on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:32AM
You two are such a cute couple!
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 1, Troll) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:32PM
Eh, the fights get nasty sometimes. He's really annoyed I have a bigger dick than he does, especially since it's a clitoris. I keep trying to tell him that technically his is too, but he just gets all sulky about it and pouts all day...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by q.kontinuum on Wednesday November 23 2016, @07:02AM
keeping the tenor of discourse classy and high-minded at all times?
Shall we dig up some of your replies to jmorris or the uzzard? Notwithstanding my agreement or disagreement with your opinion in those posts, I'm not sure they meet the common classification of "classy" and "high-minded"...
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday November 23 2016, @04:36PM
SN is turning into a meatgrinder of namecalling these days. Really wish that would stop.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:15PM
I find it sometimes entertaining, although not enough to join in :-) My impression is that most people are mainly rude to those already known to be rude as well. Sure, some hotheads will attack anyone, but ... you know... stick and stones...
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday November 23 2016, @05:30PM
They most definitely do not...and neither do their intended targets :D
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 22 2016, @10:07PM
We will need trade agreements. I'm holding back my thumbs until I see what his administration wants to put in the next trade agreement.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 22 2016, @11:09PM
HOw did the world survive before trade agreements? Have we had trade agreements favorable to American entertainment industries since the stone ages?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by black6host on Wednesday November 23 2016, @01:14AM
I have to agree with this. Copyright extension has long been a contentious issue with me. One of my main complaints with HRC was that she was in bed with entertainment producers to the detriment of the common man. Fuck Sonny Bono and the horse he rode in on and all those that followed in his footsteps. The "New Democrats" will pay a price and well they should.
I won't comment on all the other potentially divisive issues regarding Trump, at this time. He's in. Let's see what he does. I didn't vote for him but I will give him a chance. Pretty fair thinking as far as I'm concerned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @03:34AM
To me, that seemed to be a matter of upholding capitalism and fairness. When people don't respect copyright, then the cost of music, books, and movies goes into free fall, as we've seen. But the world has changed, you say. Well, it's quite a different matter if everyone decided they didn't want to listen to records made by the old guard anymore, but in fact they are listening to them, and are collecting their music - they were (and to some extent still are) doing it illegally.
And yet Apple, Samsung, Verizon, Comcast, and ESPN and their executives always get paid, because there's no way to "infringe" on them in the same way that people have pirated the works of musicians, authors and publishers, actors and film studios, some software developers. Does that seem justified?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @04:25AM
What are you getting at?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @07:55PM
So because people are disregarding copyright law and swapping illegal copies around, we should... extend copyrights even longer, preventing some old works from falling into the public domain where they could be legally copied, while doing nothing to affect the illegal copying you're ostensibly concerned about? Try again.
Setting aside all moral issues of how copyright should work, or even whether it should exist at all. Just look at the system we have, and how people react, given that they know there's meant to be a balance between an initial period of monopoly, followed by perpetuity in the public domain.
If you're looking to reduce piracy (or better yet, to maximize total cultural value created) you should be near the top of that list; we're at the bottom today, and you're defending term extensions by whining about rampant piracy?!
*Of course, this perception is also affected by the manner in which extensions are performed: if they let existing works fall into the public domain at the appointed time, while extending the term for new works, it looks more like good faith; if they retroactively extend copyright on works about to enter the public domain (as with most, if not all, US copyright term extensions}, it looks like a sell-out; and if they put previously uncopyrighted works under copyright (as the Copyright Act of 1976 did for certain works), it leaves no room for doubt.
(Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:54AM
The question is not so much if it is favourable to Americans or Europeans; most of the population in Europe also opposes the trade agreement. It's long past the time where the conflict was mainly US against Russia, EU, China or whatever.
The main conflict is rich/big enterprises vs. users and average working class. As Warren Buffet put it: It's class warfare. My class is winning, but they shouldn't be. [wikiquote.org], full interview for context [cnn.com].
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @01:37PM
That would have been, might makes right. And The Golden Rule, He who has the gold makes the rules.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @01:43PM
Really? The world has ALWAYS had trade agreements. Going back thousands of years! The world was explored because of, or to get around, trade agreements. This is why the position of diplomat or emissary is thousands of years old. In fact, trade agreements, or lack thereof, is the cause of many wars through history.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday November 22 2016, @11:14PM
We might need decent trade agreements, but what we don't need are trade agreements negotiated in secret that are just thinly-veiled corporate supremacy treaties which force even more draconian copyright and patent rules down everyone's throats. Stop that sort of garbage and there won't be so much resistance.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:38PM
'Trade' agreements, maybe. But corporate money making machines? No.
Corporations run on risk: enter a new niche? There is a risk attached. Invent (or even 'invent') a new product for making profit on? Risk. Try to make money in a new market? Risk. But the reward could be great!
With things like the TPP, they are trying to remove risk: they create a chemical that THEY discover kills bees, but they can make a magnificent profit on and they go for it, covering up their own data. Other scientists start saying 'Hey, their chemical kills bees!" What to do as a corporation? Help create a 'trade' bill that allows you to sue governments that stop the sale of your bee killing chemicals.
eg. Make a magnificent profit off sale of bee killing chemicals in Canada. Canada decides your chemical is killing bees (partially after discovering that YOUR OWN DATA says it kills bees) and they stop the sale of your chemical.
Should you be, then, able to sue Canada for lost profits???? UNBELIEVABLE!!! NO. YOU. SHOULD. NOT!
This is NOT a trade agreement: this is a corporate profit agreement. Screw the people, make money.
I for one am not willing to sit around and just agree to take it up the arse so that a corporation can make another dollar...and another....and another.
'Thank you, sir, can i have another arse raping?'
No. Thank. You.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Mykl on Tuesday November 22 2016, @10:19PM
If anyone needed any reason to wonder why so many people voted for Trump, they could probably just start and finish at things like the TPP. A multinational trade deal, cooked up and pushed by special interest groups, negotiated in secret (because they KNEW that the content would be unpopular with 99% of the population) and almost snuck in under the cover of darkness. What was that part about "of the people, by the people, for the people" again?
I'm personally glad for this too, as the TPP was going to be very bad for Australians. With the US out, it's very likely to die off entirely. Our Government has been toeing the establishment line and supporting it, so there was little chance of us escaping its clutches any other way.
Don't chalk me up as a Trump fan just yet, but like OP, I'll take my wins when I can.
(Now hoping he doesn't get too many people in his ear between now and January. Do you remember how Obama was definitely going to close Gitmo?)
(Score: 4, Informative) by LoRdTAW on Tuesday November 22 2016, @11:26PM
Go do a little search on why Obama hasn't closed gitmo yet. It's not for lack of trying. There are plenty of people in the pentagon and congress who didn't like the idea and sandbagged where ever possible.
(Score: 3, Funny) by krishnoid on Wednesday November 23 2016, @12:26AM
Thank goodness Trump was elected -- he'll just get things done. He'll ignore everyone's input, then sign an executive order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention site, and order the prisoners returned to their respective countries of origin. As a result, he'll win the Nobel Peace Prize.
Why, yes I would like another glass of wine, thank you. Best Thanksgiving ever!
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:54PM
Yeah, Obama wins the peace prize just by showing up a different color than the rugs: Trump should win just because... his HAIR! I mean..... his HAIR!!! IT IS NICER THAN HILLARY'S! :)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 24 2016, @01:10AM
LOL XD
(Score: 3, Interesting) by hemocyanin on Wednesday November 23 2016, @03:03AM
It depends on what you mean by "close". Politicians have this knack of using words that imply something, like "ending the practice of due process free detention" to make people feel warm and fuzzy, while meaning something totally different, like "closing down Gitmo and moving the PRACTICE of due process free detention to Illinois." The latter is what Obama wanted to do. Slimy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @04:56PM
It depends on what you mean by "close". Politicians have this knack of using words that imply something, like "ending the practice of due process free detention" to make people feel warm and fuzzy, while meaning something totally different, like "closing down Gitmo and moving the PRACTICE of due process free detention to Illinois." The latter is what Obama wanted to do. Slimy.
In other words, "close Gitmo" meant... closing Gitmo? Color me shocked.
He didn't say he wanted to end the practice, just close the practice of using Guantanamo Bay that way.
I'd also argue that if it were to move to the continental US, that would be a substantial step in the right direction. One of the arguments the Bush administration used frequently was that Gitmo was not subject to constitutional provisions due to it not being on US territory (or something like that... it was weird double-talk). If it were on 100% uncontested US soil, that argument would not longer apply.
Also, in terms of soft-power, it would be a major step forward. There would be much more visibility in the practices going on there (even if it were done illegally by news organizations and vigilantes), and there would also much more attention (as the local neighbors would have opinions and potentially raise a ruckus with news and politicians, if nothing else).
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Wednesday November 23 2016, @03:06AM
My concern exactly. How many people will slither out in the next 2 months and tell Trump that it's just too hard to pull out of the TPP because reasons? Fortunately, it will be hard for the special interest groups to get their way by sandbagging, as it's them that need things to keep moving.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:52AM
Pentagon? He should have had a stern talk with the Commander in Chief about that problem.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday November 28 2016, @11:16PM
They may not *like* the idea, but he doesn't actually need their approval:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-president-doesnt-need-congresss-permission-to-close-guantanamo/2015/11/06/4cc9d2ac-83f5-11e5-a7ca-6ab6ec20f839_story.html [washingtonpost.com]
Of course, it's possible if he tried he'd end up in court. So did the ACA, but that didn't stop him there. When the White House counsel (the author of the above article) is saying he's fully authorized to do it alone, and he chooses not to, it's hard to say he had any real determination to the idea. At best you could say he was considering shutting it down but only if nobody raised any objections. And as soon as they did, he backed off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 23 2016, @12:53AM
> If anyone needed any reason to wonder why so many people voted for Trump, they could probably just start and finish at things like the TPP.
Economic anxiety is a popular narrative for explaining Trump. But the single greatest predictor of support for Trump in both the primaries and pre-election polling was cultural anxiety [washingtonpost.com] that Trump brought out among constituents.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday November 23 2016, @01:24AM
Wait one. Trump didn't bring out any cultural anxiety. The alt-left in this country has been bringing that out for the past few years. BLM, for instance. They have made it quite clear that ONLY black lives matter. To say that "all lives matter" is considered a challenge by BLM, and repeatedly, we are told that white lives, blue lives, brown lives are all secondary to black lives.
With the alt-left SJW's backing this kind of crap, they can claim credit for bringing out any cultural anxiety.
If Trump capitalized on that anxiety, well, that's what politicians do, right?
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday November 23 2016, @06:20AM
That's because the All Lives Matter thing was started specifically as a challenge of BLM. BLM has some major problems in terms of PR, strategy and aim, but you're grossly mischaracterizing it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday November 23 2016, @08:34AM
No, I'm not mischaracterizing. With BLM, they aren't rioting over the obviously innocent. There are a number of young black males who were very obviously MURDERED, on camera. BLM has little if anything to say about those. BLM instead protests the deaths of those who are less obviously innocent, as well as those who are obviously GUILTY. Furgeson? Come on, WTF?
BLM is a racist movement, with few if any redeeming qualities. You can use several adjectives to describe them, including unruly, lawless, violent, racist, and combative. If none of that were true, they would have latched onto that "all lives matter" thing, and made it their own.
Are white europeans the only people who can take demeaning insults like "yankee doodle", and make those insults something to be proud of? Obviously, BLM is incapable of doing so.
But, that's because BLM doesn't really want to find a solution. When George Soros funds anything, he intends to be more disruptive, than anything.
https://www.google.com/search?q=who+funds+BLM&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 [google.com]
That's the face I'd love to see stuck to a 24" truck tire . . . .
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday November 23 2016, @01:40AM
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday November 23 2016, @03:06AM
Sorry, but I have the WAPO blocked in my /etc/hosts.
Remember the Maine! https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Foriginal.antiwar.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F11%2Frememberthemaine.jpg&f=1 [duckduckgo.com]
You want to talk fake news? The WAPO is the place to start.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Wednesday November 23 2016, @09:17PM
Agree with this: this REALLY needed to die (and so does CETA here in Canada), and i'm glad it finally will.
Hillary said she'd kill it, but i think that was one of those public things: i think privately she would have kept it if it killed her (not saying this to start a flame war: i just believe she would have flipped on this and passed it through).
Working on killing CETA next... trying to let the liberals know that the only reason they achieved power was because Canadians didn't want Harper and his TPP/CETA crap (and privacy invasion, etc etc). If the liberals pass this crap through, they will be the next to lose power.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---