Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

[Kepler]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Liz on TPP and her disagreement with the President. Interesting

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...tid=HP_opinion

Good read; thanks.

So, what's the deal with Obama wanting fast track? It's obvious why the corporations want it, but Obama's never running for anything ever again. What's his incentive for giving them a huge payout?

[joecct]

Good read; thanks.

So, what's the deal with Obama wanting fast track? It's obvious why the corporations want it, but Obama's never running for anything ever again. What's his incentive for giving them a huge payout?

$750,000 speaking fees as of 1/21/17. He wants to outpoint Bill.

WaPo is ganging up. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...e81_story.html

[Kepler]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

$750,000 speaking fees as of 1/21/17. He wants to outpoint Bill.

WaPo is ganging up. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...e81_story.html

Obama's criticisms of Warren are interesting in that in reading the two of them I come to the opposite conclusion: he is not offering anything of substance, while she has both made her case and also given him the opportunity of making his by declassifying the deal's terms and laying it out in the light of day.

[joecct]

Obama's criticisms of Warren are interesting in that in reading the two of them I come to the opposite conclusion: he is not offering anything of substance, while she has both made her case and also given him the opportunity of making his by declassifying the deal's terms and laying it out in the light of day.

Now it's Liz and Rose. This is getting to be fun.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2...d0K/story.html

[Rover]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I think this will be the last trade deal pushed by a Democrat. While I don't know all the intricacies of this particular deal, it seems by going to Nike Obama is making the case that this deal will get American consumers cheaper products. That is no longer a valid tradeoff for losing American jobs. Crappy Mao-Mart products are already cheap enough. Saving another 10 cents on them by making it easier to use Vietnamese slave laborers instead of Chinese ones is a dead argument.

With all of these trade deals, I'd really like to see an analysis of how many jobs and which jobs are supposedly being created. Until that comes I'm behind Warren in opposing this deal. You just can't take on faith that this will all work out, especially when dealing with countries with no wage standards (as opposed to say and EU trade pace which I could live with more easily).

[joecct]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Yard sale pickup

@nytimes: Breaking News: Verizon to Buy AOL for $4.4 Billion
http://nyti.ms/1cMUNXt

[5mn_Major]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Good read; thanks.

So, what's the deal with Obama wanting fast track? It's obvious why the corporations want it, but Obama's never running for anything ever again. What's his incentive for giving them a huge payout?

Not really getting the hate on this. Just because somethings good for the 1% (or more accurately 20%) doesn't automatically mean its bad for the US. The agreement covers competition, co-operation and capacity building, cross-border services, customs, e-commerce, environment, financial services, government procurement, intellectual property, investment, labour, legal issues, market access for goods, rules of origin, sanitary and phytosanitary standards, technical barriers to trade, telecommunications, temporary entry, textiles and apparel, trade remedies. Doesn't sound horrible.

US is not manufacturing hand towels. It is producing intellectual property, web businesses, etc. Our competitive advantage is at the top of the food chain and that's where we should be adding jobs. Not cheap manufacturing. And our world beating creative industries desperately need property rights and arbitration as internet businesses, services, content and tech have been getting stolen or forged for decades. This agreement helps police that. Helping encourage business growth aimed at our 21st century advantages does seem like a win for the US.

And helping smaller Asian countries while isolating China is not all bad either. I'm not at all for tax cuts for the rich, but reality is not always a zero sum game.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Yard sale pickup

@nytimes: Breaking News: Verizon to Buy AOL for $4.4 Billion
http://nyti.ms/1cMUNXt

Slowly but surely, we're putting Ma Bell back together for the 21st century.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Slowly but surely, we're putting Ma Bell back together for the 21st century.

I don't want investment banks and commercial banks operating under the same umbrella and I don't want telecoms and content creators operating under the same umbrella. Neither are good for the consumer or the country.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I don't want investment banks and commercial banks operating under the same umbrella and I don't want telecoms and content creators operating under the same umbrella. Neither are good for the consumer or the country.

It's really really really awesome for the 1% though. And really isn't that all that matters?

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

It's really really really awesome for the 1% though. And really isn't that all that matters?

Today? Pretty much. Which is why I'd like to see Glass–Steagall reenacted in full and similar legislation on media creation, content, delivery, and that entire process. No one should own the actors, studios, broadcast rights, content distribution, and everything else in between.

It scares me* when someone owns everything between the camera lens and the glass on my television.

* and it may be completely unfounded and paranoid, but it seems wrong on the face of it...

[Kepler]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Not really getting the hate on this. Just because somethings good for the 1% (or more accurately 20%) doesn't automatically mean its bad for the US. The agreement covers competition, co-operation and capacity building, cross-border services, customs, e-commerce, environment, financial services, government procurement, intellectual property, investment, labour, legal issues, market access for goods, rules of origin, sanitary and phytosanitary standards, technical barriers to trade, telecommunications, temporary entry, textiles and apparel, trade remedies. Doesn't sound horrible.

US is not manufacturing hand towels. It is producing intellectual property, web businesses, etc. Our competitive advantage is at the top of the food chain and that's where we should be adding jobs. Not cheap manufacturing. And our world beating creative industries desperately need property rights and arbitration as internet businesses, services, content and tech have been getting stolen or forged for decades. This agreement helps police that. Helping encourage business growth aimed at our 21st century advantages does seem like a win for the US.

And helping smaller Asian countries while isolating China is not all bad either. I'm not at all for tax cuts for the rich, but reality is not always a zero sum game.

These are all good points and all the more reason to conduct the negotiations with greater transparency. If as you are suggesting it's a win-win, then by all means let us all see how we're going to win. Insisting on fast track prior to declassification is playing Monty Hall with the economy. I'm not taking what's behind the curtain.

It's not as if transnational corporations and Big Finance have given us a reason to be suspicious of them or anything...

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I don't want investment banks and commercial banks operating under the same umbrella and I don't want telecoms and content creators operating under the same umbrella. Neither are good for the consumer or the country.

This is why I've always said: Verizon: Terrific if you're an investor, horrible if you're a customer. Given the rural portfolio and who would still use AOHell, the merger does make sense.

[Kepler]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

It's really really really awesome for the 1% though. And really isn't that all that matters?

According to this study, it literally is all that matters.

Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics—which can be characterized as theories of Majoritarian
Electoral Democracy, Economic-Elite Domination, and two types of interest-group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased
Pluralism—offers different predictions about which sets of actors have how much influence over public policy: average citizens;
economic elites; and organized interest groups, mass-based or business-oriented.
A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors, but until recently it has not been
possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against each other within a single statistical model. We report on an effort
to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues.
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial
independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no
independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of
Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.

We are no longer a democracy. That's not a rhetorical statement, it's an actual fact. All that stuff we learned growing up about being a country where the people rule is no longer true. We have been made into a feudal society.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Today? Pretty much. Which is why I'd like to see Glass–Steagall reenacted in full and similar legislation on media creation, content, delivery, and that entire process. No one should own the actors, studios, broadcast rights, content distribution, and everything else in between.

It scares me* when someone owns everything between the camera lens and the glass on my television.

* and it may be completely unfounded and paranoid, but it seems wrong on the face of it...

Then flip the station. Either that or cut the cord. Is it any wonder why people are doing that in droves?