[0] https://www.usitc.gov/press_room/news_release/2016/er0518ll5...

It's a free trade agreement like any other.

The benefits of free trade are well understood.

Consumers get access to a larger variety of goods, at better prices.

Companies get easier access to parts/services in their supply chain.

Etc. etc..

When the government has been lying to you for years about domestic spying, among other things, how do you expect them to follow you blindly on another deal made in the dark?

This country is going to go into chaos in the next ~10-25 years as more and more jobs are automated, unemployment skyrockets, and people refuse to give free money to all the "entitled white heroin users in the Rust Belt." Notwithstanding the effects of global warming ramping up.

Except because of the elitism we get to start this period with Donald Trump at the helm instead of someone at least half sane.

You are being distracted by irrelevancies if you think this was the main issue. And probably quite foolish if you think democracy means 100% of people give their input to 100% of decisions.

The only thing that could improve this situation is that deals should be formed in complete secrecy, with no input from Congress or the Senate and should be ratified solely by the President via a treaty process.

You really want to ensure the Great Unwashed and those incompetents they elect indirectly don't get any where near trade deals, otherwise they might possible make "improvements" such as forcing through openness, accountability, fairness and equality! All of which are totally the anathema of good backroom deals.

It's a pretty seminal work, I'd encourage reading it.

(8000+ citations, https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?view_op=view_citatio... )

http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/tpp/official-documents/D...

You don't want to show your cards in a negotiation, right? So how could the President and Congress say to the American people "this is what we're going to offer and accept from China" and pretend that the Chinese aren't going to hear it too?

Secrecy is often a horrible idea but this is a really complicated issue.

"Black crack smokers in Detroit would rather help themselves with welfare instead of getting a job and helping the rest of the country."

Wow, doesn't that really make you think? Maybe we shouldn't target people by their race, and associate them with negative stereotypes? Maybe we shouldn't dismiss their response to struggle as selfish and stupid? Really gets the noggin goin'.

As for stupid, large complex and overarching new legislation taking away tons of rights relating to everything from food to medical treatment from individuals ... and everybody (including the vast majority of Hacker News I might point out) seems to have a problem with this.

This is not a stupid attitude. Why not ?

Start here: https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp

Actually paying higher taxes is so rare and unknown that it baffles anyone you tell that it's actually allowed and that a few people did it.

But in case you don't know, here's how you're supposed to do it: http://www.fms.treas.gov/faq/moretopics_gifts.html

So, did you pay higher taxes, say, last year, or not ? Or does it "matter to you that others wouldn't be contributing equally" or something along those lines ?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/11/eg...

And most of the information I have suggested otherwise.

The problem was that all of the things pertaining to the duties of corporations were optional while things falling on individuals were enforced with the full weight of law.

The people putting together the TPP knew EXACTLY what they were doing and tried to tie together a bunch of unpopular stuff with a bunch of important stuff and ram it all through together.

Given how much effort some of this took to hammer out, they can split the TPP provisions apart and try passing them individually.