http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/upshot/trade-deals-setback-left-wall-street-unmoved-why.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article
Wall Street’s apparent indifference to this latest development tells us something, although it’s not quite clear what. One possibility is that perhaps this trade deal just isn’t such a big deal for the bottom lines of these firms — it adds only millions to the bottom lines of companies that are worth billions.
― curmudgeon, Saturday, 13 June 2015 11:59 (nine years ago) link
2 NYT articles
― curmudgeon, Saturday, 13 June 2015 12:00 (nine years ago) link
or Wall Street knows it's going to pass anyway.
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 13 June 2015 12:02 (nine years ago) link
On endemic corruption and our New Nixon
"As for the Democrats, Hillary Clinton may not be the worst person to fly the reform flag, but then again, she might be. Her first problem is her past. If the Clintons didn’t invent pay-to-play politics, with such minions as Rahm Emanuel and Terry McAuliffe in tow, they came close to perfecting it. Her second problem is her present: her special way of handling her email; the alleged conflicts of interest over at the Clinton Foundation; the pricey speeches she gave and Bill still insists on giving. Her third problem is how she handles questions about it all: her defensive tone; her far-too-clever syntactical evasions; her insistence on being praised even as she stumbles; and, yes, her seeming sense of entitlement.
In a June 2 Gallup poll, 57 percent of respondents said Hillary is not “honest or trustworthy.” In a Public Policy Polling survey of Ohio voters this week, she led Ted Cruz by a point and was tied with Marco Rubio. The first poll explains the others. This week, Bill Clinton said he’ll stop giving $500,000 speeches if she becomes president. Yesterday, Hillary went to New York City to deliver a populist-themed speech. Neither Clinton has a clue about the depth of public anger over watching big-money interests treat government as their personal toy. If Clinton loses the nomination or the general election, this will be the reason why.
Bernie Sanders does a far better job on the issue, but even he doesn’t quite nail it. Like Clinton, he says his Supreme Court appointees must commit to overturn Citizens United. He said it first, but every Democrat says it now and it feels like a dodge. Overturning Citizens United, whether by judicial review or constitutional amendment, is a highly conjectural remedy. A president could serve two terms and not get to replace a single Republican Supreme Court justice, and hell will freeze over before a 38th state ratifies a constitutional amendment.
Democrats speak of Citizens United as if overturning it would restore a golden age of ethics; as if its mere existence excuses all the bad bargains they strike with the rich and powerful; as if it proved that where corruption is concerned, they are only victims, never culprits. Government was corrupt before Citizens United was filed and will have to be cleaned up before it’s overturned. Voters want to hear some practical ideas about how to do it up–but so far Democrats don’t have any.
The sight of any Democrat raising billions while offering vague assurances of future reform won’t satisfy anyone and comes at a high opportunity cost. Jeb Bush has possibly been breaking at least two major campaign finance laws all year. Democrats can’t call him to account because they do the same thing. How much money must they raise to recoup the expense of ceding the high moral ground?
One reason Democrats can’t talk about corruption is that it’s as much in their nature to defend government as it is in the Republicans’ nature to attack it. The idea that government may be rotten at its core is alien to them. Two of Clinton’s declared Democratic opponents, Martin O’Malley and Lincoln Chafee, attack her ethics, but the only reform either proposes is to pick him over her. Neither seems able to frame the issue properly. Democrats just aren’t very good at it."
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/14/heres_how_bernie_sanders_could_win_the_one_issue_where_hillarys_vulnerable_and_where_the_tea_party_might_be_right/
― the increasing costive borborygmi (Dr Morbius), Monday, 15 June 2015 07:31 (nine years ago) link
Hillary Clinton may not be the worst person to fly the reform flag, but then again, she might be[
the always artful salon
― Mordy, Monday, 15 June 2015 12:46 (nine years ago) link
Not saying that's the worse way to begin a story, but then again, it might be.
― pplains, Monday, 15 June 2015 13:26 (nine years ago) link
it is what it is - until it isn't
― legendary wireless executive (Karl Malone), Monday, 15 June 2015 13:43 (nine years ago) link
The game is the game.
http://i.imgur.com/nFFxh1Y.jpg
― pplains, Monday, 15 June 2015 13:46 (nine years ago) link
Not saying that's the worse way to begin a story
It's not the beginning.
― the increasing costive borborygmi (Dr Morbius), Monday, 15 June 2015 13:54 (nine years ago) link
i see it's just a game except FOR THE SECRET STUFF HILMART ACTUALLY BELIEVES, do you see
Open my eyes. Let the salon.com story run through my veins.
― pplains, Monday, 15 June 2015 13:58 (nine years ago) link
ha, just got a new email from opm re: the "cyber intrusion".
OPM has recently discovered that additional systems were compromised. These systems included those that contain information related to the background investigations of current, former, and prospective federal government employees, as well as other individuals for whom a federal background investigation was conducted.
lol
jesus
― legendary wireless executive (Karl Malone), Monday, 15 June 2015 14:02 (nine years ago) link
this is all tombot's fault
― legendary wireless executive (Karl Malone), Monday, 15 June 2015 14:03 (nine years ago) link
nah, he had a vacation day when this happened
just seize this as an opp'ty to get the dirt on yr coworkers, KM.
― the increasing costive borborygmi (Dr Morbius), Monday, 15 June 2015 14:20 (nine years ago) link
gov't should just give you all new identities
― Οὖτις, Monday, 15 June 2015 15:32 (nine years ago) link
you can be John Smallberries
― Οὖτις, Monday, 15 June 2015 15:43 (nine years ago) link
my new name is mick jagger
― legendary wireless executive (Karl Malone), Monday, 15 June 2015 15:44 (nine years ago) link
FBI should be taking from this that any backdoor the good guys have can and will be used by the bad guys, but they won't.
― jennifer islam (silby), Monday, 15 June 2015 16:09 (nine years ago) link
they need even better backdoors to catch these bad guys do u see
― panettone for the painfully alone (mayor jingleberries), Monday, 15 June 2015 17:05 (nine years ago) link
this fuckin guy
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) was escorted out of Tuesday’s Benghazi deposition by panel chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) about a minute after he snuck into the private hearing, The Hill reported.The former House Oversight Chairman reportedly attempted to observe Sidney Blumenthal’s deposition before the House Select Committee. Blumenthal was an adviser to 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.Issa and Gowdy spoke outside the hearing before Issa sulked off, according to The Hill.“Sorry about that,” Gowdy reportedly said as he reentered the closed-door session.According to The Hill, Issa had gone to the briefing room where Blumenthal was to be interviewed but the room was empty as a lunch recess had been called.
The former House Oversight Chairman reportedly attempted to observe Sidney Blumenthal’s deposition before the House Select Committee. Blumenthal was an adviser to 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
Issa and Gowdy spoke outside the hearing before Issa sulked off, according to The Hill.
“Sorry about that,” Gowdy reportedly said as he reentered the closed-door session.
According to The Hill, Issa had gone to the briefing room where Blumenthal was to be interviewed but the room was empty as a lunch recess had been called.
― panettone for the painfully alone (mayor jingleberries), Tuesday, 16 June 2015 23:41 (nine years ago) link
When Trey fucking Gowdy is the mature one you know you're dealing with some beyond-obsessive psychos.
― a silly gif of awkward larping (Sparkle Motion), Wednesday, 17 June 2015 00:02 (nine years ago) link
Time for Hoos to get back to work and stop that work-around Boehner has come up with to push TPP. I guess I can contact my pro-TPP Dem rep and beg him again to change his mind, when this comes up for a vote again
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 15:35 (nine years ago) link
that fucking guy
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 16:56 (nine years ago) link
so it looks like their plan is to:
1. tuck TAA into something noncontroversial/essential (the highway bill, probably!), pass *that* in the house (if GOP goes for it?)2. pass TPA (if Dems/Tea Party go for it?) solo in the house3. shoot TAA-less TPA over to the senate and pass it (if Dems go for it without TAA in it?)
there are a lot of question marks in there and it wouldn't be an easy win for them but there *is* a path, so we've got to get back to it.
negotiators in other countries are saying now that if it's not passed by August recess then they're ready to basically suspend negotiations until the second year of the next presidency--so this really is the finish line.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 17:04 (nine years ago) link
tbf there's absolutely no reason to have any faith that Boehner can get anything past his caucus
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 17:07 (nine years ago) link
is this the kind of thing where the bulk of the GOP really hates it or feels compelled to hate it by their constituency (aside from the crazies)
― goole, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 17:58 (nine years ago) link
by the crazies i mean the bachmann/king/gohmert end
I'd guess constituency. If some Dems cave in to White House, that might also give Boehner the numbers he needs
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 18:06 (nine years ago) link
Boehner won't do it if it requires majority Dem + minority GOP tho
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 18:07 (nine years ago) link
what worries me shakey is that the vote last week suggests that the numbers *are* there to pass standalone fast track/TPA--McConnell is now saying he has assurances from some of last week's No vote dems that if he & Boehner "promise" to tuck TAA into something else to ensure it passes, then they'll vote for fast track. fuckin horse trading sycophants.
is this the kind of thing where the bulk of the GOP really hates it or feels compelled to hate it by their constituency (aside from the crazies)― goole, Wednesday, June 17, 2015 5:58 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― goole, Wednesday, June 17, 2015 5:58 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
the breitbart crew have been pushing really hard on the "obamatrade" angle ("house GOP kowtows to their corporate masters & empowers obama with fast track") trying to swing more crazies the right way, but the bulk of the house is part of the corporate GOP & is thus "pro-trade."
we're trying to hit the people who voted wrong pretty hard too.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 21:26 (nine years ago) link
huh yeah that's bad news
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 21:34 (nine years ago) link
To change subjects for a sec: Benghazi Committee chair Drago Malefoy has officially turned himself into Ken Starr, hoovering any evidence that will impugn a Clinton during an election year.
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 17 June 2015 21:39 (nine years ago) link
I am shocked
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 June 2015 21:41 (nine years ago) link
lol malefoy
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 18 June 2015 06:00 (nine years ago) link
goddammithttp://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/19/business/house-sends-trade-bill-back-to-senate-in-bid-to-outflank-foes.html?_r=0
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 18 June 2015 16:51 (nine years ago) link
Senate Democrats will also have to gamble that House Democrats will not again vote against the measure when it comes across the Rotunda.
ugh there's no way this happens, if they vote yes on TAA in the africa bill in the senate the house dems are never gonna shoot their feet and vote against it at that point, that'd be entirely pointless
we have to kill it in the senate, which is a much scarier and less plausible prospect.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 18 June 2015 18:29 (nine years ago) link
fuck
h00s, i have a question about ISDS -- who gives the organization any authority to fine countries? is it just that the countries involved in the trade bill are voluntarily placing themselves under ISDS authority? putting aside why the US would be okay with that when we're already so reticent to sign onto any UN obligations lest we risk our sovereignty, why would any of the other countries want this?
― Mordy, Thursday, 18 June 2015 18:35 (nine years ago) link
yeah I have much less faith in my senators. well one of them anyway.
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 18 June 2015 18:51 (nine years ago) link
They also want to make sure that Mr. Boehner will bring up that measure once the Senate is done with it — most likely at the end of next week. Mr. Obama and Democrats aligned with him on trade have to support Mr. McConnell and Mr. Boehner, basically saying, “Trust us that we trust them.”
lol riiiight
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 18 June 2015 19:04 (nine years ago) link
who gives the organization any authority to fine countries? is it just that the countries involved in the trade bill are voluntarily placing themselves under ISDS authority? putting aside why the US would be okay with that when we're already so reticent to sign onto any UN obligations lest we risk our sovereignty, why would any of the other countries want this?― Mordy, Thursday, June 18, 2015 6:35 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― Mordy, Thursday, June 18, 2015 6:35 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
Yeah by signing onto the agreement the countries are giving the arbitration tribunals the right to fine based on any violation of rules contained in the agreement.
Generally speaking, negotiators in other countries begrudgingly agree to it as 'the cost of doing business' with the multinational (American) companies pushing for the deal. In a lot of my protest actions around tourist traps here in DC I've been approached by people from lots of other TPP countries who are excited to see American opposition because "everyone in our country is against this, and the secret courts."
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 18 June 2015 19:50 (nine years ago) link
my favorite detail about the ISDS process is that the tribunals who make the decisions literally come from the same pool of corporate lawyers arguing on behalf of the multinationals--so they could come in to work monday, argue a case for philip morris, clock out, then come in the next day and be 1/3rd of the tribunal on a different philip morris case.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 18 June 2015 19:52 (nine years ago) link
I just can't understand why the US govt would be willing to hand over some of its sovereignty to an arbitration tribunal. Are the corporations bullying Obama into this? Or is the idea that without the tribunal there won't be any way of enforcing the trade agreements? (In which case isn't the better way to ensure compliance to tie the applicability of the treaty itself to its adherence?) Also, who gets the fine money?
― Mordy, Thursday, 18 June 2015 19:53 (nine years ago) link
Oh, I see. So the individual corporation would get it. Seems like a terrible idea to have corporations enforcing the details of a multinational treaty. They aren't even parties to it!
― Mordy, Thursday, 18 June 2015 19:54 (nine years ago) link
Are the corporations bullying Obama into this? Or is the idea that without the tribunal there won't be any way of enforcing the trade agreements? (In which case isn't the better way to ensure compliance to tie the applicability of the treaty itself to its adherence?)
yeah its sold as an enforcement mechanism. it's theoretically possible for (say) Barclays to take the US to court over Dodd-Frank, and no one really explains *why* that won't happen when Obama mocks that idea as ridiculous, except for this kind of unspoken notion that the international capital that plays nice together helps everybody win.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 18 June 2015 20:05 (nine years ago) link
why, how could anybody honestly mistrust the interests of international capital, that's just silly
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 18 June 2015 20:07 (nine years ago) link
It just seems like we manage to have enforcement mechanisms on every other treaty we sign without giving open season to every corporation's legal team to start draining the capital of every signatory to TPP.
― Mordy, Thursday, 18 June 2015 20:09 (nine years ago) link
well i'd kinda argue that draining the capital of pacific rim signatories to make room for american capital is what the agreement (and 'free trade' generally) is *for*
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 18 June 2015 20:23 (nine years ago) link
though tbf realistically ISDS isn't really a big part of that plan in terms of dollars--example of outrageous settlements abound, but the money is really used as leverage to change laws in the corps' favor rather than, say, an explicit bleedout of welfare programs overlapping with corporate interests. ISDS is just a particularly egregious part of it.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 18 June 2015 20:26 (nine years ago) link
what are the enforcement mechanisms in NATO?
― Mordy, Thursday, 18 June 2015 20:30 (nine years ago) link