A Trade Agreement With Japan

Charles Lane is upset that anyone should disagree with the administration about the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement:

In Greek mythology, Sisyphus paid for his sins by being compelled to push a boulder up a steep hill, only to have it roll back down, over and over again.

If the gods had really wanted to frustrate him, though, they would have assigned Sisyphus to fact-check the misinformation opponents of the Trans-Pacific Partnership are spreading in their desperate effort to block that manifestly beneficial free-trade agreement between the United States and 11 other countries.

I, on the other hand, think that we should be wary about a trade agreement with countries that have a policy of currency manipulation. I also think that any partnership with countries whose economies are closely tied with that of China probably aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on (or the disk storage they’re recorded on).

However, let’s get down to the nitty gritty. This isn’t a free trade agreement but a managed trade agreement. We already have managed trade agreements with Canada, Mexico, Australia, and Singapore, generally referred to as “free trade agreements”, which with the exception of Japan constitute the largest economies among the countries with which we’re negotiating. That raises a question that I think needs answering: what will we secure in a trade agreement with Japan that we don’t already have? Be specific. The essence of this agreement is an agreement with Japan.