Trans Pacific Partnership (3)

I wrote about the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) on August 1 and October 5 of 2015. These are my TPP3 thoughts and comments: ..................................................................................................... There are economists who said the TPP is a good thing for the joining nation members, while others said no, it is good only to the global investors and corporations, but not to the domestic workers and common people. ....................................................................................................... Since Donald Trump became the U.S. President, he has signed a presidential memorandum to withdraw from the TPP. Without the U.S., can the TPP still go ahead and get rectified by the rest of joining nations? What is the value or usefulness of a TPP without the U.S.? Would it survive or even work ? ........................................................................................................ Looks like China continues to promote global free trade, while the U.S. under the Trump administration now goes backward for protectionism. Trump's withdrawal from the TPP is creating an economic and geopolitical vacuum which would be filled by China, making China's rise even faster and economically more powerful, especially in Asia Pacific. ...................................................................................................... Trump said he is not against free trade. He is against unfair trade. My interpretation is this: as along as America is winning, free trade is fair. If America is losing, then free trade becomes unfair. Winning is fair, losing is unfair. Can we call that the Trump Doctrine?

Obama in Canada

I watched U.S. President Obama give a speech in the Parliament of Canada. I must say that he is a great speaker. In musical terms, the analogy is that he is a great singer. Whether you give him a good song to sing or not, he can still deliver a great performance. That said, how many listeners ever try to analyze the lyrics of a song and see what it says? And whether the singer actually does what he or she sings? 

I agree that the U.S., Canada and Mexico, actually the whole world should reduce the use of fossil fuels for energy, and switch to using clean, green and renewable energy.

I disagree with Obama that he said gender equality is a universal value. I mean it 'should be' a universal value, but it is not. Many countries are still very backwards, ultra-conservative and unfair. They are still very misogynistic and discriminatory against women. Look at Saudi Arabia. If you are a woman, you are not even allowed to drive there.

Regarding the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), I have talked about it before. Of course, Obama was trying to get Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada to come on side and have the TPP signed and rectified. Is the TPP good or bad for the U.S. and Canada? It depends who you are and whom you ask. If you are interested, you can read what I wrote about the TPP on August 1 and October 5, 2015 in my blog Fast Edi Thoughts and Comments.

Regarding global disputes and conflicts, I'm not sure Obama really meant what he said. Certainly every peace-loving person would choose to resolve such serious problems diplomatically and politically, not militarily. But the U.S. military actions everywhere in the world, and the ' let's drop a bomb ' U.S. foreign policy, just don't concur with what Obama said.

I would like to ask this question: when will Washington (and the world) learn that violence is a problem, not a solution? Being a pacifist, my position is that all disputes and conflicts must be negotiated and settled through peaceful means. No violence, No killing, No war. Thank you.

Trans Pacific Partnership (2)

On August 1, 2015, I wrote about the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which failed to reach an agreement then. Now in the news, the U.S., Canada, in total 12 countries, have signed the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) deal.

As I said before, and now again, this is not just about business, trade and economics, but also politics. If not for politics and counter-balancing the growing might of China, it just doesn't make sense that China being the biggest country in Asia Pacific was left out in the TPP deal. However, there may be a TPP2 coming, that China may eventually join later. 

Uncle Sam just doesn't want China to set the rules in international business, trading and economic games, especially with the Asia Pacific countries. The creation of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) was China's win. The TPP deal is the U.S.' win. China's rise is a certainty, but the US decline is not, so the game goes on. 

In any economic policy or trade deal, there will be winners and losers. Instead of arguing too much about whether the TPP is a good deal or not for your country, please focus more on your own situation and see if it is something good or bad for you, and make all the necessary adaptations and adjustments to face the new reality. Take care.

Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)

In the news, the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) deal fails to come to an agreement.

My thoughts and comments:

The TPP is not just about economics. It also has to do with politics. It is Uncle Sam's effort trying to control and counter-balance the rise of China, especially in Asia Pacific. Does it make any sense at all, if not for politics, that the TPP does not include China, the largest country in Asia Pacific?