http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38059623?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_breaking&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

The trans pacific partnership is a contreversial trade agreement, part of a series of 4 seperate nefociations to open up a large us-centric zone of relatively free trade. 

Following public outcry over its content, both candidates denied support for it early on in the campaign. It has the approval of many current world leaders, including president Obama.

Contreversy arouse around the secrecy of the negociations (now broken: the full content is available online), and a clause that would permit corporations to open legal files against countries.

The main objective of the TPP was to prevent Chinese economic domination of East Asia. In fact, China has a a similarly encompassing agreement ready to be signed, which would impose its more interventionist values upon the area, which will likely come into action following the breakdown of the TPP.

(note: this is more personnel, the above is objective) I find the cnaceling of the TPP to be a shame, as a liberal (in the classical sense, not the american one). People seem to be fairly misinformed about what the TPP will actually do and not do. Yes, there is some valid critique to be given; most notably, the extremely extensive american copyright laws will be applied in all participating countries,mwhich can be harmfull, let's say, in the pharma industry. However, it is untrue that a corporation could sue a country for environnemental/security laws purely on the basis that it impedes profit. Only if favoritism is shown can the trade court be called upon (ex: foreign corporations need to keep higher environnemental standards than local ones.) I'm equally of the opinion that it was fully necessary to closen economic ties with smaller asian nations. China has recently been very agressive in its attempts to favor its own corporations (example : the extremely questionnable ban on the sales of the newer iphone models over apparent copyright infringement on a chinese product, while the chinese court completely ignores many very blatant immitations produced by its own companies. Or the massive subsidies it gives certain of its indistries to take marketshare.) It would be a mistake to allow China to make these values applicable in its neighbouring nations, which the RCEP would permit. Also, Trump has good talk about "being tough on China", if RCEP passes, the US will lose much of its negociation power. I barely think that Charisma alone will bring you a good deal at this point.

So, what's your opinion on all of this?

Discuss!

Here's the full transcript of the deal, by the way: https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text

Well considering the TPP was so good that they can't state what it is to the general public then I say good riddance. You can't just say hey we have this awesome trade agreement and refuse to share details of what that trade agreement is with its citizens. Have a blind trust that these backdoor dealings are in your favor.

The biggest crock of shit was Nike stating they would bring back jobs to USA if the TPP was passed. That is the biggest bullshit I ever heard in my life. To my knowledge the only major shoe manufacture (besides smaller shoe companies) that build any shoes in USA is New Balance and they only produce their big sizes in USA while smaller sizes are made outside USA. I don't believe the bring back 10,000 jobs one bit from Nike.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/08/news/nike-jobs-obama-trade/

Thank god

Perfect. The transparency was close to 0 on this one. Thank god it tanked.

https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-full-text

Trade agreements are never open to the public until almost everything has been established. This is to prevent non-implied interest groups from jeapordizing completion(in this case: China, Russia, who both are being isolated by the deal, for example). This can be done by giving counter offers to specific members, or opening legal cases over specific clauses (which aren't meant to be successfull, and don't need to be to delay the agreement.) I don't believe Nike either. Manufacturing won't return to the US, ever, regardless of what you do.

So we can now view what the trade agreement was going to be?  The whole secrecy is what killed it in the first place for most USA citizens.  I'd have to get a layman's term report of the trade deal because I'm sure they use language in it to describe shit that would make the average person wonder what the fuck they are talking about or trying to agree on.

Well, considering how adamant most censorship activists were that the TPP was a bad thing for us citizens, I'm willing to be happy about this. They really needed to be more transparent about it. Perhaps Trump did something right? At the same time we know he will be terrible for foreign affairs, so maybe this was his first FA gaff

Unless those 10,000 jobs are really to 10,000 robots then I'd maybe believe them.  Trump rose at the right time I suppose.  Same can be said about Bernie.  We haven't had much growth since about the 90s and haven't had really any wage growth in the past 30 years or so.  Free trade is almost a sin word in USA now.  Easy to see the resentment when a lot of manufacturing has gone to China, Mexico or any other low cost labor country.  Hell, even Cisco is pulling out of USA for the most part and going heavy into Mexico.  Luckily, the plant I work at is taking in other products from other plant closure in the USA so the Cisco pulling out isn't going to result in huge layoffs at my plant besides the routine layoffs they have every couple of months.

For the clauses, what I, personnaly, consider to be the worst (note: I suuport it, so it might be different for others), is that US pharmaceutic companies could prevent generics being put on the market for quite some time after its creation (30 years, I think, for drugs? I'm don't remember the exact numbers, but medication stays under copyright laws for quite some time in the US.)

I don't really see any major negative impacts for the US, though, seeing as the deal imposes laws already in application in the US worldwide.

I have this feeling that we wont see the last of the TPP. Like SOPA/PIPA, it will probably return under a different name, with Trump's defense being that he "turned a bad deal into a tremendous deal!"