I actually don’t think that a deal with South Korea would be that bad. The problem with NAFTA is Mexico and dealing with other countries that essentially have slave labor and then asking the American workforce to compete with that. I mean, like most industrialized countries,South Korea has a higher standard of living than we do. It would probably be a step down for them. I hope South Korea protects its healthcare system like Canada did or they’ll be looking at a shadowy WTO challenge…A really bad deal would be with North Korea…I’m surprised that Black Republican in Drag Barry hasn’t pursued that yet….It would be par.

U.S., South Korea fail to reach free-trade deal

Yeah, South Korea has its standards apparently…

Well, Obama’s goal with this FT deal is to double US exports in the next five years. If he can do that while demonstrably not shipping jobs overseas or losing them here then I’m not sure I would be opposed to it. What other negatives are there?

And what’s to stop S.Korean firms from outsourcing the work the Bangladesh or Vietnam?

Ooops – should have been a reply to Steelydan3

Wait … wait … wait …

We have to “offer sops” to South Korea to keep troops there? My brain just froze over.

Here’s an idea, end our involvement in the Korean War and bring the troops home.

Oh, and if HRC supports it, it is probably a bad idea.

Spot on.

According to pollsters, opposing NAFTA-style trade agreements and defending Social Security were the two strongest issues Democrats had in 2010. There were 220 television ads run by Democrats in competitive races in 2010 opposing the outsourcing of jobs and “free trade” agreements, including the hard-won swing districts of Nick Rahall, Scott Owens, Larry Kissell, Leonard Boswell, John Yarmuth, Joe Donnelly and Raul Raul Grijalva.

Additionally, Barbara Boxer’s attacks on Carly Fiorina as a job outsourcer was critical to her victory. Likewise Patty Murray, Harry Reid and Joe Manchin.

That’s why I don’t vote for DemPublicans – Elected Republicans and Democrats both do the same things, just Democrats lie to their constituents more about their stances. It should come as no surprise that Democrats used Social Security and free trade as their electoral rallying cry to then go and stab their constituents in the back on those issues once they get elected. We’ve already seen Obama and the other Democrats backstab constituents, so trying the same thing again and expecting different results just aint gonna happen…and if you disagree with their treachery and deceit, you’ll be called an unserious extremist who should be drug tested.

Yet another poisoned fruit from Citizens United.

They know that if they want to have as much as a tenth of the money that the corporate interests are already shoveling into the maws of conservative interest groups such as Rove’s, they have to give Corporate America what it wants.

Once again: http://www.publicampaign.org

Perennially, Obamanibly DEMPATHETIC!

I’m bitterly amused that the deal to allow South Korean industrialists like Sun Myung Moon to aim a knockout blow to what’s left of our industrial base has hit a snag. If Obama can’t sell the rape/murder of America’s industrial base to South Korea, then he really can’t sell cocaine to Charlie Sheen.

Question: Would a South Korea FTA be subject to old “fast track” rules about no amendments, etc.?

My guess is that in the larger scheme of things an agreement with South Korea is pretty small potatoes; we already have something close to it, and why should the Koreans want to poison themselves with our meat? The more important point has to do with the troops. I am beginning to think that our disastrous domestic policies (and that includes trade agreements) are driven by the Washington Elite’s unquestioned assumption that the United States should maintain its unchallenged primacy. It was put in a more vulgar way by the previous administration, but it is there just the same. We can’t afford to rule the world and have Social Security and Medicare. We just can’t. And since the elites think ruling the world dominates anything that might be good for the underclass, those benefits have to go. The fact that alot of wealth is being redistributed upwards is just a nice freeby.

The conventional wisdom is killing us. It is going to take a real unchallengeable defeat in Afghanistan to begin to make a dent in it, and maybe not even then. One thing, when we go out with our tails between our leg, they won’t be able to blame the Left, like they did in Vietnam. The Left has been silent. We get to lose this one the old fashioned way. But I don’t see any other way out. It just takes time and a lot of lives.

I live it when they say we hve to do it so the So. Koreans will let us stay. What the hell are the gonna do? kick us out? like they want us to leave? they’ll be talkin’ North Korean in 10 minutes. We ain’t goin’ anywhere. Since when did we ever care if a country wanted us there? I mean it’s getting / gotten so a progressive really has no place in the Democratic Party. And the party leaders know it, don’t give a shit, and take our votes for granted. Well fuck them. Maybe the party was that way before and I was too ignorant to recogize it.

I was typing my #15 rant and hadn’t read you #7. Not stealing your stuff. Same thing just acme right to my head. Absurd.

As I’ve spent some time in Korea, I can say it’s the absolute last industrialized country we should want to have a free trade agreement with. I’m not in favor of ‘free trade’ in general, because I’ve seen whats it done to manufacturing jobs (high paying and low paying alike) over the last 15 years. Still, even if you’re a free trade supporter, there’s good reason to not do it with South Korea:

The country is highly nationalistic, and as a general rule simply doesn’t have a desire to consume anything produced abroad. While foodstuffs might be an exception, you’ll never sell things like appliances and automobiles in that country in any volume. Koreans pride themselves buying products made in their country – like Americans did at one time on a much smaller scale. After 40 years of building up their industrial base, Korea can also produce anything its population needs – from refrigerators to cell phones – and these are products whose quality equals anyone else in the world.

If the USA ever wants to create a lot of good paying jobs, it’s going to have to do what Japan and Korea did – use tariffs and other protectionist tools.

South Korea can’t have failed to notice what NAFTA did to Mexico and Central America. South Koreans aren’t about to cross the border into the north to look for jobs to replace the ones they lost due to a flood of US imports.

Obama’s cocaine has been stepped on by elephants. Not a sparkle of flake to be found.

* like . Not “live it.” And that’s just the first sentence. Any other typos, fuck ‘em. i’m not re-reading that whole thing.

Exactly. That’s one thing the much-maligned Hubert Humphrey understood better than any Third Wayer or Blue Dogger or DLCer does today — or else the prospect of corporate donations blinds them to the plight of what used to be America’s middle classes.

The Filipinos didn’t have a problem booting us out of the Philippines, why not South Korea? Would put a lot of hookers out of work, though.

Good point on the unwillingness of Koreans to buy US-made goods. If the UAW and GM think they are EVER going to sell a lot of cars in Korea, they are just dreaming.

No problemo, you can’t have too many rants. The Internet is made up of equal parts of porn, lolcats, and rants. Without one of its legs, it cannot stand.

For some crazy reason, leaders of foreign countries have the quaint and rustic notion protecting the jobs of their citizens instead of the profits of multi-nationals. But Global President Obama is not constrained by such provincial thoughts.

Because the Philippines does not have a 38th parallel, the line separating S. Korea from N. Korea that has guns pointing at each other.

My sis did most of her USN career in Subic, did some interesting photo essays on bar girls in her spare time. Anyway, Mt. Pinatubo had the final say on that US base, also Clark I believe.

We just need a Ma Nature event in Korea, I suppose.

The area around Subic is unrecognizable on Google Earth. In 62-63 I was at Sangley Point, across the bay from Manila. At least there I can see where the runways and buildings were.

As usual, you’re absolutely correct, we’ve de-industrialized our nation. Most of the good jobs have been outsourced, offshored, I wouldn’t even think of getting a project at Microsoft, closed down my us co a coupla months ago.

There is no longer a left-right paradigm, some might even argue, other than your valiant attempts Signora Hamsher, our ‘left’ went away with communism…funny how here in parts of Italy, communism works well, like in Bologna and other areas, it’s not a dirty word. Italy, unlike the other major exporting countries, owe nothing to the global banks, which is pretty interesting….and it also knows how to play well with Brazil and others….we, US, can no longer dictate, especially as many parts of the world are quietly dismissing out power, that’s why we don’t notice it, but it’s happending….

All those troops couldn’t stop the North Koreans from shelling Seoul. By the time the military responded Seoul would be a pile of rubble. We may have a lot of troops there but garrison troops can be problematic.

Yup, and our nations history is full of such measures. Over 100 years of high tariffs and rising living standards. It’s sad how today’s conservatives get away with calling “free trade” part of the nations heritage when the exact opposite is the truth.

“Troops?” or “targets?”

O sure is intent on pissing off everyone to the max degree possible. Has a real talent for it. NOW I know what he’s meant all along by postpartisanship.

I don’t believe the UAW will have much to say about GM, Ford or Chrysler selling cars to foreign entities, they have no representation on the board of directors.
Pretty much everyone in the automobile industry knows that the Koreans will not buy anything that is not made in Korea, that is why 99% of all cars in Korea are Korean. Only the US will allow their industries to be decimated by foreign competition, hell, we even helped the Korean auto industry set up the dealer network and logistics, thus saving them at least 15 years.
The Koreans do not buy Japanese cars or products, the Japanes do not buy Chines products, that is why Walmart can’t make a go of it in Japan and the Chinese will only buy the GM Buicks until they have their own models in the pipeline.

I will not do business with car dealerships that sell domestic and foreign cars, I will not do business with people that drive foreign trucks or cars and I try very much to buy American.

“Additionally, Barbara Boxer’s attacks on Carly Fiorina as a job outsourcer was critical to her victory. Likewise Patty Murray, Harry Reid and Joe Manchin.”

So voters haven’t learned a thing. I am sure, come re-election, these stalwarts of the American citizen will once more play lip service to this topic.

The UAW may not have formal representation on the boards of the GM and others, but I have read a number of statements from the AFL-CIO (apparently on behalf of UAW) that labor’s principal objection to the South Korea FTA is that the South Korea will not relax restrictions on imports of US-made automobiles.

The point I was trying to make is similar to one that you made: South Korean consumers will not buy American cars in any quantity, and that any notion by labor or management that the FTA will change that is a pipe dream.

Perhaps Lori Wallach or another expert could address the issue of how the proposed FTA would affect US investment in the Korean auto sector.

In other words, is the goal of the current FTA to allow GM and other US entities to own and operate Korean auto plants, or is to promote the sale of US-made products in that country?

Doubling exports is a good thing, but not when you don’t take into account imports. It’s like thinking that more exercise without changes in your habit of eating double cheeseburgers and fries every day will help you lose weight.

The Economic Policy Institute estimates that 159,000 U.S. jobs would be lost within the first 7 years of the agreement going into effect. See report “Free Trade Agreement Will Cost U.S. Jobs”: http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/free_trade_agreement_with_korea_will_cost_u.s._jobs/

Also, the problems with this agreement go beyond market access for U.S. products. The agreement includes the same NAFTA and CAFTA provisions that allow foreign companies to challenge laws in other countries that might get in the way of them making a buck. Environmental protections, food and product safety standards, financial services regulations and much more would be available for challenge in foreign tribunals at taxpayer expense. Read my article today in MinnPost for more info: http://www.minnpost.com/community_voices/2010/11/11/23281/us-s_korea_fta_threatens_jobs_and_state_sovereignty

Fact Check Please: I don’t think it is true that Philippines government “booted” the US out. I think it is more accurate to say that the US decided to close the bases unilaterally, and the the Philippines government was indisced to go along.

The U.S.-Korea FTA is actually the biggest trade agreement since NAFTA – not exactly small potatoes. Food sovereignty is an important point, thanks for bringing it into the discussion. It’s also important to note that the agreement includes provisions which would allow Korean companies or Chinese, European, etc companies with subsidiaries in Korea to challenge our laws – like food safety – in international tribunals at taxpayer expense. See my piece in today’s MinnPost for more info: http://www.minnpost.com/community_voices/2010/11/11/23281/us-s_korea_fta_threatens_jobs_and_state_sovereignty

?Hillary has been trying to do what Obama wants on trade.

Interesting that the throw away comment was made – still trying to say “just as bad as Obama” are we?

In an article that I agree with 99% of the thought – I did not see the need for the comment. Could an SOS ever be reported as “fighting the Obama trade agenda tooth and nail”? – and still be SOS the next morning?

A big reason that South Koreans won’t buy our cars is the variety of techniques they use to keep our cars out of the market or out of reach of everyday Koreans. For example, they slap exorbitantly high luxury taxes on our cars and change the required size of license plates every so often (without advance notice) which costs our manufacturers an arm and a leg to keep up with compliance.

Another labor related issue important to organized labor and other rights groups is the fact that the labor provisions in the proposed FTA are based on the International Labor Organization’s (ILO’s) two-page Declaration on labor rights, rather than on the longer, more-concrete ILO Conventions supported by President Obama. This lack of specificity leaves the question of labor rights open to interpretation, something already proving a problem in implementation of the earlier Peru FTA. The proposed Korea FTA’s labor provisions should be strengthened to be based on the ILO Conventions.

Actually, though the bases in the Philippines are closed. The U.S. military is still in the Philippines under the Visiting Forces Agreement and the Joint Military operations between the Philippine and U.S. military forces. Also, there is a presence of U.S. military on the island of Sulu because that is where the U.S. navy may be planning to build a port to continue its planned encirclement of China.

Regarding the FTA with South Korea, this trade agreement may lead to the acceleration in offshoring of engineering design and R&D jobs overseas as the average monthly income of Korean engineers is close to roughly half that of U.S. engineers.

NAFTA and the trading agreements with China led to the offshoring of manufacturing jobs. The FTA with South Korea will lead to the offshoring of more higher paying engineering and R&D jobs.

The deindustrialization of the U.S. continues unabated.

Bye! Bye, American Middle Class & American Economy!

in other news:
SEOUL, South Korea — Aides to President Barack Obama and President Lee Myung-bak of South Korea were scrambling early today to reach agreement on a revised free-trade pact that they hoped would show their commitment to expand commerce ahead of the G-20 conference of leading nations.

Ford and Chrysler are against it.

Ford Motor Co. has told President Barack Obama’s administration it’s “critical” that automobiles are included in the free-trade agreement he’s negotiating with South Korea, said Bill Ford, the company’s executive chairman.

“You can’t leave autos out of a free-trade agreement and call it free trade,” Ford said in a Bloomberg Television interview with Willow Bay from the Ernst & Young conference in Palm Desert, California. “The Koreans have unlimited access to our market here. We have virtually no access to their market.”

Ford has run a full-page newspaper ad which shows a sea of red cars and one lone blue car, along with this text: For every 52 cars Korea ships here, the U.S. can only export one there.

Meanwhile, Uncle Sugar has thirty thousand troops in South Korea defending the Hiunday and Kia auto plants although the Republic of Korea is fully capable of defending itself. The US is also building a new military city at Camp Humphreys to accommodate military families (a Gates decision), including high-rise apartment buildings, schools and rec centers, but that’s another story.

The US still opposes ending the Korean War and hasn’t promoted the re-unification of Korea, but that’s another story too.

Hmmm….are you suggesting that US-based manufacturers of automobiles will sell large numbers of cars in South Korea if the FTA is tweaked to satisfy the lobbyists for GM and the UAW?

Let’s be clear what is going on with the “free trade” agreements. The rulings of the World Trade Organization have essentially opened the US market to other countries’ trade by frequently ruling against the US on trade disputes. That is going to be the situation whether or not we negotiate “free trade” agreements until the G-20 agrees to global labor, accounting, labor, regulatory, legal, and accounting standards that do not promote a race to the bottom.

A “free trade” agreement is necessary because it is the markets of other countries that are still closed to US goods (and not just the “race to the bottom” labor costs alone), and that artificially depresses US exports.

It is the content of the “free trade” agreement and not just its existence that needs to be watched. What is exactly are the terms of the agreement with South Korea? The US being able to sell US manufactured and exported cars in South Korea on equal terms to the sale of Hyundais and Kias in the US would be helpful for two things: providing a level competitive playing field for US labor and forcing US automakers to build cars that South Koreans will buy — which means higher engineering and maintenance standards. The beef deal is important only if it drives greater health regulation of the cattle raising and meatpacking industries, which have been hit with an number of e. coli recalls.

But the indications are that neither of these will appear in the treaty. And the other provisions seem to demand more “race to the bottom” regulations, exactly the wrong thing to do.

It still must be ratified by a two-thirds majority. How long can Bernie Sanders filibuster?

Your reference to the ILO documents is obscure.

Can you explain the meaning to the unitiated, including me?

From Wiki:

Many months before the expiration of the Military Bases Agreement of 1947 intense negotiations between the governments of the United States and the Philippines began. These negotiations resulted in the Treaty of Friendship, Peace and Cooperation between the United States and the Republic of the Philippines. This would have extended the lease of the American bases in the Philippines.

On September 13, 1991, the Philippine Senate rejected the ratification of this treaty, citing a number of reasons for the rejection. This was a devastating blow to the Aquino administration, who were strongly pro-treaty and even called for a referendum by the Filipino people; a move that was declared unconstitutional.
The American Flag is lowered and Philippine flag is raised during turnover of Naval Station Subic Bay.

In December 1991, the two governments were again in talks to extend the withdrawal of American forces for three years but this broke down as the United States refused to detail their withdrawal plans or to answer if nuclear weapons were kept on base. Finally on December 27, President Corazon Aquino, who had previously fought to delay the U.S. pullout to cushion the country’s battered economy, issued a formal notice for the U.S. to leave by the end of 1992. Naval Station Subic Bay was the U.S.’s largest overseas defense facility after Clark Air Base was closed.

We can argue over the word “booted” but to what end.

Wiki link

“So once again, more middle class jobs would be sacrificed for the sake of militarism and interventionism.”

Militarism throws trump. In thinking about the relative importance of jobs and the rest of the economy, the Department of Defense’s budget has about doubled in the past ten years and continues to grow. It will expand in the next year by another 1%. And this does not include nuclear weapons, debts on past war, hidden defense spending and other “security” expenditures. What other budgets have doubled in a decade? Is the US spending twice as much on infrastructure or education than it was at the turn of the century?

http://comptroller.defense.gov/budget.html

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_chart_30.html

Historically, the costs of war have broken many empires after they moved from a production to a financed based economy. The death wish is more pervasive than just the Democratic party. Unless we suppose that corporations and the ruling class now find the notion of the nation state irrelevant.

Jeez, I wish we could be clear about what is going on with the South Korea FTA.

Is it about bi-lateral trade policy?

Or is it about regional military policy?

Or is at about global competition for strategic control?

Or is at about the next election?

I agree with Atrios re “The Democratic Party Self-Destruction Act.”. This will be “The Democratic Party Obsolescence Act”.

FAIR TRADE, NOT “FREE TRADE”. START NOW.

I suspect it’s more about our misguided military and trade policies. Strategic control of what? The next election depends on actual accomplishments between now and then. Good questions, Bruce H.

Like most things the President does:

Yes.

These FTAs suck for us. All that happens is that multinationals set up shop in the countries with the cheapest labor and the least regulation. They then close down the factories here and export to the US without any fear of retaliation. Where do we benefit in this? We were told only manfacturing jobs would be affected. How’d that work out?

Last week in India Obama said outsourcing was a bogeyman. Westinghouse is now employing 11,000 engineers in India. He said it was because the engineers are better in India. Translate that into much cheaper. IT, engineering, etc. are moving to India and Obama thinks it’s just peachy. That a*hole Tom Freidman keeps spouting that the world in flat. He thinks engineers in the US have to compete with the ones in India. So, you should go into debt for about $200,000 and then work for minimum wage. Freidman thinks this should be done out of patriotism. What’s he been smoking? Is it any wonder that are best minds are finding there way to Wall Street. Instead of doing real engineering that boosts the economy and creates real jobs, they are doing financial engineering to help hedge fund managers make bigger bets. This doesn’t benefit the country.

Obama needs to get a clue. Let’s renege on these FTA’s that dosen’t benefit us. Why is it always the middle class and the poor that have to sacrifice. Why doesn’t business do a little sacrificing?

Here’s something for everyone to ponder. Exxon pays no taxes in the US. This year they signed a huge contract to develop the oil fields in IRAQ. Our treasury gets ransacked. Thousands of our soldiers get killed or wounded. Exxon gets a big fat contract, pays no taxes, and actually gets corporate welfare in the form of cash for the oil depletion allowance. YUP, sounds about right to me.

Want to end these wars? Start a draft that puts the members of Congress children and grandchildren first in line. Then start drafting based on income with the richest going first for a change. Watch how fast these wars end.

Well said comment –

on “The rulings of the World Trade Organization have essentially opened the US market to other countries’ trade ” what can we do other than withdraw from the WTO if the WTO will not change their definition of free trade?

On cars/meat exports from the US we are talking about non-tariff barriers be reduced not eliminated with tariffs still unfair. Are we unable to type out a fair agreement, even if we must define fair under the unfair WTO rules?

We are well past the point where we need arbitrary trade barriers. We seem to enjoy slapping WTO disproved barriers on trade with Canada on lumber – settling the problem at a much later date. Why do we have “no balls” with the rest of the world? I know Obama has no backbone and does not worry about the common man except in speeches (see bend over on tax cut for the rich and the tossed public option), but are there not 41 Democrats in the Senate that can stop this thing?

Yup, Friedman is the cheerleader for national suicide.

I don’t know how many more U.S. cars would be sold in Korea with tweaks, but I’m betting it’d be more if we could export more than 1 car for every 52 Korean cars imported here. It’s hard for our manufacturers to compete against so many non-tariff trade barriers the Koreans have thrown up.

The following is from http://www.citizen.org/documents/g20-korea-obama-comparison-memo.pdf and might help with the obscurity in my reference to the ILO:
“The Bush administration inserted language into the Korea FTA explicitly forbidding reference to the International Labor Organization conventions, which set forth the core international labor standards. Bush’s Korea FTA text requires countries to ensure workers the rights of collective bargaining, freedom of association and freedom from employment discrimination, but includes a footnote that says the obligations “refer only to the ILO Declaration” rather than the ILO Conventions.3 The ILO Declaration is a two-page general statement of the ILO’s principles; it has little meaning unless read in the context of the actual Conventions and their jurisprudence. This footnote must be eliminated to meet Obama’s commitments on the necessary labor components of trade agreements.
Labor rights violations are widespread in Korea, so eliminating the footnote is not an academic exercise. For example, the Korean government has used its “obstruction of business” law to imprison labor leaders, and employers often use police to break up labor union activity.4″

Citations:
3. See Article 9.2 of the Labor Chapter of the Korea FTA, Available at:
http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/agreements/fta/korus/asset_upload_file934_12718.pdf

4. ILO Committee on Freedom of Association Report No. 353, Case 1865 ¶ 729 (2009), and Young-Joon Ahn, “Ssangyong Motor union agrees to end strike,” Associated Press, August 8, 2009, Available at:
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Ssangyong+Motor+union+agrees+to+end+strike-a01611957511

Throwing Free Trade Overboard
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/13/opinion/13lighthizer.html