Who knows, but I think he has to. The US has individual agreements with Pacific nations, it makes sense to have a regional agreement, which he indicated he is in favor of but under different terms. There would be so much pressure for him to do so, it would be absurd not to. Then again, he got elected so who the hell knows. Even congressional Republicans know how their bread is buttered and won't dive into protectionism. Given his ego, they could probably just change the name to the Trump Pacific Partnership and not change a thing and he would pass it.
I'm not going to say he definitely won't do it, because it's impossible to predict what flatters Trump's ego at any given point in time, but he did just run a campaign that was anti-NAFTA, pro-tariff, and anti-globalization.
Free trade is great, only if you have local labor standards to protect people. We don't. We are unique in the developed world in that our average citizen has no insulation from the labor practices of the 3rd world: no unions, no subsidized healthcare or education and no labor protection. Instead of increasing local protection, that would directly benefit the American worker, we put our head in the sand and let China take the reins? I'm all for things like TPP that increase the onus on countries like Malaysia to raise their standards...but the question is in enforcement. Who is policing the Malaysia branch of Levi's or Nike? Likely no one, certainly no one that was at the negotiating table. Also, who is telling Nike's US branch that they have to allow for unions, fair labor practices and living wages no matter where they operate? No one. And the presence of corporations at the table, much less the notion that they are guiding the discussions tells me it's not going to run counter towards their interest in minimizing labor costs and maximizing production. That, in layman's terms, means fucking over their labor force as hard as legally permissible. This is what scares me about Trump and his appointments: none of these people know what $35,000 a year feels like. They don't know what $35,000 a month feels like. So, how are any of us supposed to believe they will act against their elite "class/status/tax bracket" and help the people whose jobs are literally at risk of being made redundant? In the recession, we lost a ton of jobs that are never coming back. Ask any middle-aged, white, middle-manager with no degree (or no master's) used to making $70K+ that got laid off once since 2009 how easy getting hired back has been. The reality is for the next few years less of our working age population will work, and they certainly won't work enough to sustain themselves (for those that get meager part-time or minimum wage jobs). That begs the question: who's covering the gap between what these people need and what they earn? This is a big issue with the healthcare cost, because they can't be denied care but can't afford it either. So those of us who have insurance subsidize them. When there's too many of them, our costs increase. Our choice is either skyrocketing costs, because the number and severity of the subsidized is growing, or deny coverage and only insure (and provide care) to the employed and healthy? No offense, but I'll pay a bit more so that my sister gets prenatal care and my uncle gets cancer treatment, fuck you very much. I don't want to face bankruptcy due to medical bills, but that's statistically the most likely scenario. It's the same issue with the cost and availability of housing: I can exist on my earnings and pay rent, but I damn sure can't save up a down payment for a house on US service economy wages. When the number of renters rises, compared to owners...rents increase, and new homes stagnate. Our most desperate need is for labor protection to bolster the middle class, add some semblance of security and establish some counterbalance to the power of corporate America. Neither party addressed it, and the one who gave it lip service won.
How do you bolster people who won't adapt their skill set? Or refuse to acknowledge that their skill set is outdated? The middle manager you mentioned whose job is forever gone HAS to adapt somehow, or they have to start from the bottom and work their way back to where they were. Scrounging just like they did the first time. Ramen tastes like ass after you've had real food for a few years. There are manufacturing jobs that are gone. Forever. And the people who held those jobs want them back, and aren't taking steps to enter new industries, and I don't understand this line of thinking.
The skill set is only part of the issue. Another part of the issue is the jobs were in small, suburban towns and the costs to transition are massive, and the transition itself doesn't offer much in the way of additional security. I can imagine the idea of my dad getting fired and having to move for his job: the costs and prospects of selling his house is a nightmare, as well as the fear of being in the exact same position in a year or two, with even fewer options. Few companies could justify manufacturing in a major urban center, most of this kind of thing got farmed out to the burbs. Another part of the issue is ego: imagine being taught by someone with half your experience, in a room filled with 20-somethings. It's uncomfortable at best, demoralizing at worst. Also, why would a hiring manager select the 55-year old with the same degree as the 22 year old? The 55-year old is going to be a bigger pain in the ass, with less upside and more cost. The final part of this is anger: they are looking for a scapegoat and there really isn't one, unless they look up the food chain at the folks who decided to automate or outsource their job. I work in tech, and there is software that makes service sector jobs redundant: what once took 5 accountants, now takes 2, and will soon take 1. There isn't much of a defense against technology, except a constant state of change. However, somehow companies (and governments) in places like Canada or Australia seem to embrace this with the notion of taking better care of one's employees. That logic doesn't exist in the US.
I think a very understated part of the problem is that we never really addressed the mass delusion that housing always appreciates and that sinking >100% of your equity into your home is a sound financial decision. We have millions of Americans that are stuck where they are because they'd be ruined if they ever admitted their house is worth a fraction of the life savings they bought it for. There's always going to be costs to relocating, but our current fetish for home ownership makes those costs absolutely crippling for the majority of Americans.
I'm sure there will be, but it might take awhile. Whether tariffs go up against China will largely depend on how those negotiations go, and if China actually abides by agreements. Flagrant currency manipulation, constantly shrugging at piracy, destroying US competition within China through a kangaroo court system will all be big topics of discussion. It's not really free trade when one side plays by the rules and the other just does whatever the fuck. Finally a way democrats can still get legislation through the senate. Trumpcare. Trumpucation. Trumpnet. Trumpfare. Trumpnesty. Just gotta feed that greatness.
White House has announced its response to Russia: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/us/politics/russia-election-hacking-sanctions.html My first gut reaction is that the response is pretty weak, and mostly designed to make Trump look bad when he reverses it. edit: I suppose we'll find out in thirty years or so if we actually pushed their shit in, or ended up not doing much at all.
Syrian ceasefire with ISIS and the YPG left out. Who knows if and how long it will hold. Maybe they've just decided they should combine their efforts specifically on killing these people, and then they can go back to killing each other.
Did any of you notice the 300K acres here in Nevada that Obama made a national monument against our governor's wishes? Want to take a wild guess who's ranch is close by the newly designated land?
Probably the same reason he tweeted this: The dems are chucking rocks at the orangutan and he's slinging his feces back. What is the delay he is referring to in that first tweet? Is it the cease fire? And if so, did he tweet it just because Obama got left out of the negotiations? And what the fuck has been up with Obama during the transition? First he runs around rambling about how great the TPP is(it is not well liked on both sides), and how it being unpopular is just because people 'don't get it'. Then he permits a UN resolution against Israel that seems to accomplish nothing, and just creates a cluster fuck he can drop on the next president for the LOLs. There was an utterly toothless set of sanctions against Russia, which also made little sense. Did they get hacked by multiple agencies, don't know who got the documents to wikileaks, but just want to run with their scorched earth narrative? Or if they are 100% convinced Russia was behind wikileaks why bother with something so meaningless? Then he blocked drilling in a way that attempts to lock the next administration out, except he did it at the last minute, presumably as a fuck you to the incoming president. Oh, and most recently bypassed bipartisan work when the republicans already agreed large sections of the land should be protected, but just swooped in to shut down an agreement. I don't even really care about that one, but the way he did it was like 'wow, look what a dick I can be.' Trump, without having the real power yet has been bitching incessantly about all of it on twitter, and I guess trying to one up the dickishness? On the first part of that last one, no you're not. I'm so sick of both sides projectile vomiting at each other, and then trying to claim they're the 'reasonable' side. Ugh.
So Trump is mocking the stupidity of the DNC for losing their e-mails to phishing. I'm torn on this because I want the dems to do well in 2 years because I don't think a republican majority in both the house and senate is a good thing, and they are poised to take an ass raping if they can't get their shit together. On the other hand, they've spent the last two months trying to delegitmize an election they lost by 70 electoral votes. After they pulled all manner of shenanigans to force Hillary through the primaries. If they're too stupid to start moving forward instead of this scorched earth never ending whiny bullshit they deserve it. When they confirmed the election results a few of the house democrats wouldn't stop shouting about their objections while Biden slammed the gavel and told them to shut up. I'm sure to the democratic base that looked heroic or some shit. To everybody else it looked fucking embarrassing.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...gligence-led-to-its-hacking-trump-tweets.html They can either work with Trump to bolster cyber security and outline an appropriate response to Russia, or they can cry about this for 4 years straight. You can feel however you want about how you think this impacted the results. For anyone so determined, have fun with that. This cracks me up. https://stream.org/astroturf-outrag...unteract-negative-news-about-hillary-clinton/ I suppose Russian and Hillary operatives had quite the flame war as trolls on the internet.
No idea if it's true or not, waiting for things to shake out more. Either way it's fucking hilarious, because either: a) It's true and this is the most fucked up election of all time, and Trump has a piss fetish b) It's not true, and /pol/ or someone similar pulled a huge con on the CIA, and Republicans have to deal with super fake news for once.