The following is an excerpt from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). 

According to the Department of Labor’s Aug. 2 jobs report, 12 million U.S. workers remain unemployed. In manufacturing and construction alone, 1.8 million people were out of work. Given that past trade agreements have had a deep and lasting impact on U.S. jobs, the officials negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) must focus on policies that create jobs, rather than destroy them.

On Aug. 22, the government of Brunei will kick off the 19th round of negotiations of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), a massive trade and investment pact among 12 Asia-Pacific countries, including all of North America, Australia, Malaysia and Vietnam. The latest country to accede is Japan.

The Economic Policy Institute’s (EPI) Robert Scott has issued a report on the early results of the U.S.-Korea trade agreement (often called KORUS).  It’s not good for U.S. workers, who have already lost about 40,000 jobs because of the increasing trade deficit with Korea. 

We need to think differently about trade.

First, let me say that I am 100% in favor of trade. Trade is when we do what we do best, they do what they do best and we trade. Trade, done right, will raise living standards.

The U.S. government is currently working with 10 other countries to negotiate the biggest trade and investment agreement (also known as a “free trade agreement” or FTA) in history. It is called the TPP, or Trans-Pacific Partnership. Not only will it be bigger than NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement)­—it’s actually NAFTA plus eight other countries.

“Free trade agreements.” Many union members and other workers might tell you that so-called FTAs (of which NAFTA—the North American Free Trade Agreement—­is the most well-known) haven’t been effective at creating jobs or raising standards of living—and they’d be right. But what are these FTAs, really? 

Well, first of all, “free trade agreements” are only somewhat about trade and have very little to do with making it “free.” At least if we are talking about U.S.-style trade agreements since 1993, when NAFTA went into effect. 

The United States and 10 other countries are negotiating our next big trade agreement, called Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP. It's time to re-examine what works and what doesn't work.

Imagine a thought experiment, where we put environmentalists in each country in charge of negotiating the next trade agreement. Preposterous! I know. Stick with me. This is a thought experiment.

In his 2013 State of the Union Address (SOTU), President Obama announced that the U.S. would soon begin talks on a “Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership”—in other words, the U.S. will begin negotiating a “free trade agreement” (FTA) with the European Union (EU).

When you hear anyone from the big multinationals or Wall Street using the word “reform,” watch out! The way they use the word, it means give them more and We, the People, get less. They want to “reform” Social Security, “reform” Medicare and “reform” the income tax code. And now they want to “reform” the taxes corporations pay on money made outside the United States. It’s like “reforming” an oak tree with an ax.

"Wear Jeans? Why Made in America Matters to You" is a cross-post from the Youth Monument blog, by Celeste Drake, trade and globalization policy specialist at the AFL-CIO. 

“Buy American.” “Made in America.” In today’s interconnected world, those ideas might seem more like leftovers from the Cold War—not important maxims for America’s future. After all, young Americans are drinking Colombian coffee in the morning, skyping with friends in the U.K. at lunch, buying a made-in-China iPhone in the afternoon and drinking Italian wine in the evening. The idea of “Buying American,” or economic patriotism, might seem quaint, if not outright ridiculous.

Fact is, making things in America isn’t an obsolete idea. It’s how we built this country into the largest economy the world has ever seen. And it’s imperative for America’s future.