Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement

Some critics and even supporters of the TPP wanted the agreement to contain measures against nations involved in alleged currency manipulation, particularly against China. [194] Daniel Drezner, a professor of international politics at Tufts University, argued, however, that the trade agreement would never involve restrictions on monetary manipulation because it would have limited U.S. monetary policy. [195] Harvard economist Jeffrey Frankel argued that the inclusion of the language of monetary manipulation in the TPP would be a mistake. [196] Frankel noted that monetary manipulation would be difficult to implement (in part because it cannot be said whether a currency is overvalued or undervalued); “monetary manipulation” can often be legitimate; China, often referred to as a major monetary manipulator, is not involved in the TPP; Accusations of monetary manipulation are often worthless; and because it would limit U.S. monetary policy. [196] Many pro-TPP economists have recognized that extended trade, while a net positive for growth, has drawbacks. Former Finance Minister Lawrence H. Summers points to evidence that the Ss has reinforced inequality by allowing “more opportunities to make money for those in charge and by exposing ordinary workers to more competition.” However, they argue that the loss of manufacturing jobs is more related to new technologies than to trade, and that trade agreements can help U.S. workers by opening up foreign markets to the goods and services they produce.

The Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (PPCC) agreement is a free trade agreement between Canada and 10 other countries in the Asia-Pacific region: Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. Once fully implemented, the 11 countries will form a trading bloc representing 495 million consumers and 13.5% of global GDP and allowing Canada preferential access to the most important markets in Asia and Latin America. Donald Trump criticized the TPP agreement as too long and complicated and said, “[i]t makes 5,600 pages, so complex that no one has read it.” [197] Senator Bernie Sanders accused the TPP of being much more than a free trade agreement. [198] Robert Z. Lawrence, a Harvard economist, argues that the model used by Tufts researchers “is simply not appropriate for credibly predicting the effects of the TPP” and asserts that the model used by Petri and Plummer is superior. [19] Lawrence argues that the model used by Tufts researchers “does not have the granularity that allows it to assess variables such as exports, imports, foreign direct investment and changes in the industrial structure.