trade policy

Trump is falsely claiming that tariffs on imports from China will pay for a new $15 billion dollar subsidy for struggling U.S. farmers.
This anti-trade rhetoric is alarming in the 21st century.
In my view, that would be a mistake. The fate of the United States and the fate of the world are really in our hands. If you are an independent, please do not sit out this election. It is much too important.
The major candidates in this year’s presidential race both believe that trade policies of foreign countries are unfair and
We have Trump offering quite specific policies, and taking extreme heat for them. Hillary Clinton's strategy is, apparently, not to be pinned down. In other words, she has adopted a political strategy, not a substantive one.
Larry Summers(!) and Hillary Clinton called for a "rethink" on trade. Amen. The sooner the better. Years after CAFTA, Guatemala
However objectionable one might find Trump on other grounds, it is folly to dismiss out of hand his critique of global trade imbalances with their growth-subtracting U.S. trade deficits.  Throwing wage-insurance crumbs to disaffected non-college workers will not increase economic growth, foster competitive industrial/technological capabilities, and pay down the national  debt.
Pacts like the recently-signed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), currently sidelined without sufficient congressional support for passage, contain thousands of pages of enforceable rules that would fuel climate chaos and empower corporate polluters to challenge environmental laws across the globe.
In 2014 the US imported about $500 billion more than we exported. That means US businesses lost $500 billion more in sales
Image Credit: U.S. Government Printing Office "The Republican leaders of the U.S. Congress, with the help of President Obama
Congress is responsible for managing major government policies year-by-year, as our experience and goals evolve. How does that work in the case of huge trade deals like the Trans-Pacific partnership (TPP)?
The proponents of the Trans-Pacific Partnership are hoping that the rest of us will be happy that we got seats at the children's table. We will be hearing much about this table as they push to have the deal approved. But it's long past time that the rest of us be treated like adults.
Any number of roasters may pay a decent price for coffee, visit a farm, or offer a good cup. But no matter how much direct trade coffee you buy, or fair trade coffee for that matter, we won't transform the current system that puts corporate profits first and marginalizes small-scale farmers until we become politically engaged and start supporting the democratic organizations that advocate and agitate for change from the grassroots up.
On August 10, 2015, the Editorial Board of the Washington Post published a "Post View" that illustrated how comfortable the paper is with secrecy, high drug prices, and industry lobbying in general, and how much disdain the Editorial Board has for critics who challenge any of this.
Bernie has been there with us every time, fighting for fairness, for environmental justice, for voting rights and getting big money out of politics. Bernie is there for criminal justice reform and a path to citizenship for 20 million immigrants. Bernie realizes that workers' rights in the U.S. remain under attack and near the bottom of the world's democracies.
Let me be clear: I oppose "fast-track" legislation! Congress is empowered by the U.S. Constitution to review trade deals. I do not support ceding our authority to anyone.
It's quite remarkable that the national security-advocating Republican Party has not challenged the President on his fanciful China TPP claims. Apparently, they are so wedded to free trade theory that they think it is a cure-all for national security ills as well.
Of course, the critics are right, they are looking straight at the facts, the critics know exactly what a good trade policy would look like, and it's nothing like NAFTA or TPP.