An article in The Japan Times (January 25, 2016) titled “TPP will raise U.S. annual income by $131 billion, study shows” (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/01/25/asia-pacific/tpp-will-raise-u-s-annual-income-131-billion-study-shows/#.VqY1r4UrJQI) describes a study from The Peterson Institute for International Economics, which states that the TPP will raise US incomes by 131 billion annually after 2030. The analysis highlights that one-year delay in the TPP implementation would cost $77 billion in lost income. Moreover, the agreement would boost the US exports by $357 billion annually, and by $1.025 trillion annually for all TPP countries together. Other studies suggest that there would be 53,700 US jobs that would churn annually during the first 15 years of the TPP implementation period, but it is estimated that by 2030 about 796,000 jobs will have been added in US export activities thanks to the commercial agreement. Will the US Congress approve the TPP considering this analysis and its suggestion that the benefits of the TPP outweigh its costs?
An article in The Denver Post Opinion (January 15, 2016) titled “Guest Commentary: TPP will harm Colorado’s workers, environment” (http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_29390004/guest-commentary-tpp-will-harm-colorados-workers-environment) describes impact that the TPP has had on employment, especially in Colorado. The TPP is not just about imports and exports; it deals with important topics such as public health, environment and consumer protections. Once a country imports more that it exports it costs good jobs. According to the Economic Policy Institute, Colorado has lost more than 70,700 jobs from the North American Free Trade Agreement and the China trade deals. The risk now is that the TPP will only hasten such job losses. Will the TPP be changed in a way that doesn’t jeopardize as many jobs as previous trade deals have?
An article in Bloomberg (January 15, 2016) titled “Unions Tell Federal Panel TPP Deal Will Shed U.S. Jobs” (http://www.bna.com/unions-tell-federal-n57982066302/) describes the main claims that Unions have made against the TPP. The AFL-CIO, United Auto Workers, United Steelworkers and International Association of Machinists testified as part of the ITC’s mandated investigation about the economic impacts of the TPP deal. They claim that increased trade globalization has created trade deficient, which corresponds to a loss of about 5 million jobs and 60,000 factories since 2000. In this way, Unions assure that the TPP will lead to losses in employment and increases in inequality. How many jobs will be in risk if the TPP is approved? Will the economic benefits of the deal be passed to the population in social politics?
An article in Voice of America (October 30, 2015) titled “Will the TPP Agreement Cost US Jobs?” (http://www.voanews.com/content/will-the-tpp-agreement-cost-us-jobs/3029372.html) describes the risk that TPP represents for the unemployment rate in US. The AFL-CIO Labor Unions blames the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with the loss of approximately 700,000 U.S. jobs since the deal took effect in 1994. Barak Obama has promised that the TPP will be different from NAFTA, since it will improve workers’ standards by having enforceable mechanisms in countries like Vietnam and Malaysia. Some people discuss that the TPP is a betrayal to the American worker, while others highlight the advantages of this commercial deal for economic sectors such as agriculture. How will the TPP impact the unemployment rate in the U.S? If the deal is approved what actions will be performed by the Central Bank to control such unemployment rate and its impact on the economy?
The case study at the following link (http://tradebenefitsamerica.org/sites/default/files/studies/BRT_TPP_TX.pdf) talks about the impact of TPP and the potential benefits for Texas with the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Texas has important trade and investment ties with TPP countries. In 2011, trade-exports and imports of goods and services with TPP countries supported an estimated 1,160,100 jobs in the state. The TPP will help build on these trade and investment relationships and support the Texas jobs that depend on them.
Texas’s goods exports in 2013 totaled $279.7 billion. Texas exported $141 billion annually in goods to all TPP markets. Texas’s goods exports to all TPP markets increased by 15 percent from 2011 to 2013. During this period, 53 percent of Texas’s total goods exports went to the TPP region. The top three product categories exported to TPP-member economies in 2013 were computer and electronic products, petroleum and coal products, and chemical manufactures.
A total of 40,737 companies exported goods from Texas locations in 2012. Of those, 37,921 (93.1 percent) were small- and medium-sized enterprises with fewer than 500 employees.
Small- and medium-sized firms generated nearly one-third or 30.6 percent of Texas’s total exports of merchandise in 2012. Small- and medium-sized firms benefit from the tariff-elimination provisions of free trade agreements, as well as many of the other commitments in the agreement. Trade facilitation, for example, is vital to small- and medium-sized firms, as is enforcement of their intellectual property rights, streamlining of regulatory issues, and other commitments.
Jobs supported by Texas’s goods exports were about 786,000 in 2011 according to the U.S. Department of Commerce data. In 2011, over one-quarter (26.1 percent) of all manufacturing workers in Texas depended on exports for their jobs.
The TPP will also help Texas companies buy the inputs they need to produce competitive products. The TPP will help strengthen investment ties between Texas and all 11 TPP countries. By removing barriers and strengthening partnerships, the TPP will encourage companies based in TPP countries to increase their business investment in Texas, supporting economic growth and jobs throughout the state.