Obama trade is bad for Jobs. Obamatrade allows his communist regime to negociate TPP. Anyone for obamatrade should be ashamed and will be politically damaged. Why are we allowing obama trade? it is RINO madness.
You do understand this is about TPA (the bill about procedures FOR the trade deal) and not TPP (the trade deal)?
Mostly false. There is little doubt that FTAs benefit some U.S. corporations and workers, while harming others—that’s kinda free-market competition’s thing.
SHOCK: FTA predicted to reflect/amplify USA's comparative advantages & disadvantages: http://t.co/PUgLrpL3O8 pic.twitter.com/INypfluXSk
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) March 16, 2015
In general, however, the corporate winners (who tend to be in growing, innovative industries) from U.S. FTAs outnumber the losers (who tend to be in archaic, uncompetitive ones). And every legitimate economic analysis of the TPP confirms this general rule. FTAs also contain rules and exceptions for well-connected stakeholders. As I’ve repeatedly discussed, this is a big reason why FTAs are “third best” option for U.S. trade policy.
Nevertheless, there is also little doubt that (i) FTAs are pretty much the only trade liberalization game in town these days; (ii) while unpalatable, the cronyist exceptions in U.S. FTAs, are relatively minor compared to the overall liberalization; and (iii) the biggest winners from such liberalization aren’t corporations or the mega-rich, but consumers, particularly poor ones.
Hey, average American [especially low-income ones], here’s how you benefit from free trade http://t.co/0T2XnveplW pic.twitter.com/sLf8p6p62c
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) May 20, 2015
(More here.) These gains wouldn’t be possible without FTAs (as much as we free traders wish they would be).
Good oped from NRF's Matt Shay on how US FTAs, made possible by #TPA, benefit US consumers: http://t.co/PLck4zo6dI pic.twitter.com/0IYlQwwV0L
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) May 11, 2015
Thus, the idea that FTAs like the TPP, or any other reduction in global trade barriers, benefit the 1 percent at the expense of working class is just not true. Indeed, as we at the Cato Institute are constantly pointing out, the real cronyism in trade policy takes place on the anti-trade side of the ledger: corporations and unions lobbying government to shield them from free-market forces, always at consumers’ expense. It’s precisely for this reason that many of the U.S. lobbying dollars spent on TPP aren’t from pro-export mercantilists (although there are plenty of those, too) but from those anti-competitive industries (autos, steel, textiles, sugar, etc.) and unions that are seeking to scuttle the deal or secure their own special exemptions.