Americans should be aware of a very important difference between the US Presidential candidates

Trade agreements (treaties) allege to block a great deal of what many candidates are promising, and have since the mid 1990s, and the body of changes they have made make it highly unlikely most of them could happen without an potentially costly international fight. We should prepare for that and understand, we're being fed a bill of goods by virtually all of them. The only one who seems a cut above the rest is still leaving this super important fact out. As his platform's proposals basically violate so many restrictive treaty rules, it seems highly unlikely his party would nominate him because that would result in exposure of this huge body of really shameless lying. So he will have to win by a really huge margin in a way that cannot be hidden by cheating. Which is inevitable-Both parties are clearly cooperating to hide their decades long deception. (Its important to them for this theft of democracy to remain hidden because its something the entire country would agree is totally evil. Also, a great many poor Americans have died unnecessarily of treatable diseases in the more than 25 years our healthcare system has been rigged in a way that is impossible to fix without this knowledge they have all been hiding from us, that's murder.)

Generally, issues that involve economic rights now allegedly given to foreign investors and businesses to veto policy are paralyzed.

This is discussed extensively on this site and in a great many of the links in our external links area.

Non-economic issues, like holidays, etc, as well as totally nonprofit areas that have been that way since before agreements were signed, are not covered by these treaties. (Based on GATS Article I:3 (b) and (c) - which is also called called the governmental authority exclusion)

This definition which defines the scope of these agreements, is very narrow and almost never applies.

Politicians (and not just here in the US) have been misleading us for a long time as to what governments can and will do.

However, at least one (WTO) Member country, Canada, has managed to keep its public healthcare relatively intact, thanks to the work of the CCPA in their extremely well written publications, informing Canadians about these FTAS.

This has made all the difference for them. For example, if we lived in Canada, (not the UK) we could largely set our own policy for health care, because there, its noncommercial, evading the GATS' "tier trap". (if you have any tiers at all, your public healthcare must conform to GATS and soon TISA rules designed to protect international mega corporations profits at the expense of human life, without fail.) This danger also applies to all other financial services like Social Security and Medicare, putting them on the one way street to privatization. (For example, we're only allowed to bend the healthcare rules a little with Medicare, but only as long as it remains just for retired people, part of our "system of statutory social security")

If we were Canada, we would not be forbidden to continue to have fully subsidized public health care, as long as we kept it totally free of commercial activity, or had carved it out in advance, with great specificity, because the Canadian Medicare system existed before the creation of the WTO, and Canada does not allow the sales of for profit health insurance.

Had they allowed it, like the UK has, then their system would also be gradually being dismantled like the UK's is being. "On principle" !

Because of WTO rules that limit subsidies. See our "subsidies" keyword.

The US could, if it wanted to,  using GATS Article XXI, withdraw sectors from these treaties (which generally require international trade to be resorted to whenever government subsidies are involved) but it will carry a price based on how much profit is potentially lost by them (how much business their firms might conceivably lose, under the most optimistic possible set of conditions for them)

If other countries sue us (we are already being sued by India over a GATS jobs related issue (DS503) that could result in the outsourcing/insourcing of a very great many US jobs-as many as 41% in one replication study (looking at a previous study by Princeton professor Alan Blinder which found we could lose 26%)

its potentially VERY expensive, to buy our freedom, especially the longer we wait. It was crazy to join this agreement, and now they want to sign more of them, like TISA each one makes virtually all changes in policy that benefit people more and more unlikely. Just as people need them.

Basically, since services (80% of the economy) became tradable, in GATS and other WTO 'agreements' a very great many things have become bargaining chips in world trade. This has become a mother load of dishonesty and bad government, arguably turning politics into a sham, and politicians into bad actors.

Unless GATS Article XXI is pursued, sector by sector, at a potentially tremendous cost, these 'agreements' nobody would ever have agreed with, take more and more, in an irreversible ratchet.

Its a one way street, that makes it impossibly costly to ever reverse privatizations.

These deals are a trick, a con game by these organizations of rich people to take away our peoples planet and transfer it to their ownership.

They will destroy the middle class, as more and more small businesses are lost to mega corporations and progressive policy and public service jobs will be irreversibly traded away. They shred all kinds of workplace accomplishments like anti-discrimination and environmental laws and force laws in countries to comply with the lowest common denominators awarding vanishing jobs to companies that bid the lowest and invariably pay the lowest wages.

Now, Politicians tell us what they think we want to hear, but only a candidate who has the courage to make these changes can save us from a real disaster.  And so far, none have really come out and told us the truth.

We shouldn't be asking ourselves what we will lose, because its basically everything that makes people's lives fairly tolerable.

This is being done to implement a cult-like ideology which is based on "efficiency". Its junk trickle down economics and everybody knows it except us.

The leaderships of both US parties clearly subscribe to it because we are so gullible we let them get away with it..

Trade policy is the real policy, while what we're being fed is a simulacrum.

Maybe its not true that the media is 100% captured in the US. However, it is more like 95%, as is social media.

We all deserve better.