Η εταιρική σχέση Trans-Pacific είναι μια εμπορική συμφωνία που θα καταστήσει ευκολότερο για τις αμερικανικές εταιρείες να π&omega…
Διαβάστε περισσότερα@2Q6VKQZ3 χρονών3Y
Yes, with the provision that companies may not move their base. This is to incentivize trade and create jobs and a stronger economy- we should have provisions and guidelines in place for participants to ensure the continued growth of the american workforce.
@2Q6L3VV3 χρονών3Y
No, free trade must be allowed and not subject to treaties guaranteeing reciprocity. We should not engage in trade wars; the market will provide the incentive for other countries to stop protectionism; even if they are deaf to the market, using force is counterproductive.
@2Q6CQC73 χρονών3Y
No, this will weaken environmental regulations and threaten labor rights.
@2Q5W52Y3 χρονών3Y
No, HELL NO. I live and work in China now. I'm here because I can't find a job in the US. Do something to make jobs at home so I can come home!
@44gangster3 χρονών3Y
It's like the Affordable Care Act; too complicated for the average citizen to understand and suspected of having hidden clauses. Build our economy and trade one on one with other countries
@2Q3SN7J3 χρονών3Y
Yes, but only if it were guaranteed that the companies would employ American workers, thus not taking away from American job opportunities.
@songture3 χρονών3Y
from leaked documents, this is a very biased agreement in favor of multinational corporations and their interests that will override other issues such as the environment and civil liberties.
@2MBZ2433 χρονών3Y
No, it is secret and will affect us all. Restrictions on intellectual property, outrageous extranational courts negating sovereignty and infuriating Internet rights infringements.
@2MBSN9B3 χρονών3Y
Without knowing what has been negotiated, I can't say. There are geopolitical reasons to have trade agreement with the countries engaged in these discussions. It could be an effective way to counterbalance China's influence.
@2MBRWXQ3 χρονών3Y
Yes, only if Malaysia is taken out of the deal.
@2MBJY6C3 χρονών3Y
No, tariffs are an important source of revenue. Instead of pursuing a free trade strategy, the United States should pursue an equal trade strategy, where signers of the partnership agree upon a universal tariff rate.
@29G823TΦιλελεύθερος/η3 χρονών3Y
Favor free trade in principle as beneficial, but dislike increasing intellectual property law guarantees.
@2MBGD2T3 χρονών3Y
Some of the member countries routinely commit human rights abuses. This makes me uncomfortable.
@2MBBYF83 χρονών3Y
No, corporations will abuse the Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions.
@2MB8H683 χρονών3Y
No it reduces a country's sovereignty and makes it easier for corporations to exploit countries for economic gain. Some countries will see a reduction in their food safety standards and some will miss out on jobs. Countries will loose some of their authority and will be able to be sued by corporations.
@2M9YRTZ3 χρονών3Y
support it, but only with the caveat that they limit the size of the operations allowable overseas and a majority % of jobs must remain stateside.
@2M9YJ453 χρονών3Y
No, I am suspicious of secret deals that the American public cannot see.
@2M9XS6Z3 χρονών3Y
Yes, but limit companies ability to move operations/manufacturing jobs overseas.
@2M9VQDS3 χρονών3Y
No... While I believe in free trade, I don't believe in all the hidden riders that the government will hide within the bill.
@2M96XRD3 χρονών3Y
Yes, but the deal has to be more transparent and publicly influenced
@2M8Q3PK3 χρονών3Y
No, I do not support any kind of agreement that may, by circumstance or design, force Americans to do business with any country or persons who commit criminal acts against humanity, as several of the intended "partners" are known to do.
