Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ocschwar 3418 days ago
All true. But it takes a president with an attention span longer than 90 seconds to fix these issues.

If instead we have a guy who just nixes TPP, then we have to take note that we do not have allies in the west Pacific in a war with China.
2 comments
Arizhel 3418 days ago
I don't get it. Trump isn't the only one nixing the TPP. Sanders was going to nix it too, and so was Hillary (unless she was lying). Have you forgotten that Hillary came out against the TPP too?

There was no choice for a candidate who was pro-TPP in this election, except earlier on during the GOP primaries. If you're pro-TPP, the best you could have gotten was Hillary who, considering what she said about it, might have tried to amend it instead of nixing it altogether.

link
ocschwar 3417 days ago
Yes. Sanders also decided to sacrifice TPP, meaning no coalition in East Asia to check China.

However, Sanders has no intention of goading China into war.

link
Arizhel 3417 days ago
You're not going to convince average voters that they need a trade agreement which makes things worse for them just to "check China". This is a big part of why Trump won.
link
tokenizer 3417 days ago
OP Here, my whole point was America's power would get them a better trade deal. My whole point was China would not want war, and neither do we, so a restructuring makes sense.

Yet I get downvoted by idiots who hate opinions they don't have. And I replied to you to agree with you - Trump one because giving lopsided deals makes NO SENSE - Unless you're a billionaire wanting cheaper labour in the 70s...

link
jdmichal 3418 days ago
If a from-scratch refactor is what the TPP needs, then nixing it is the first step...
link
ocschwar 3418 days ago
That's assuming the other parties to the negotiation will be cool with it.

We have a president who doesn't seem to understand we don't get to dictate terms to other countries.

link
jdmichal 3418 days ago
> ... we don't get to dictate terms to other countries.

Of course not; it's a negotiation. And power plays are a very legitimate tactic to use during a negotiation. And the US happens to have a large amount of both economic and militaristic power.

link
ocschwar 3418 days ago
And using it in this particular fashion is poor form if your intent is to secure another nation's commitment to send their soldiers and sailors to die alongside yours.
link
jdmichal 3418 days ago
In what particular fashion is that? Nixing a deal you don't agree with? That's just a failure of negotiation, not a power play.
link