agreement as mr. clinton said in ta debate back in iowa. and lori, is think any evidence that the trade-off to get cheaper tchotchkes for people like you and me is in some way a net benefit for all the lost jobs and everything else? you can actually now do the numbers, and theoretically trade helps us on the import side by providing less expensive goods, but the loss we suffer because these kinds of trade agreements offshore, huge numbers, of different kinds of jobs now nets out negative. even when you save on some, that is to say, on some goods, the loss in u.s. income means on average the median $7,000 per person a year. i want to talk about two of these agreements that i learned these in the podcast i did with you, lori, that stunned me. this first on panama. this is from the wikileaks drop, a state department secret memo
person a year. i want to talk about two of these agreements that i learned these in the podcast i did with you, lori, that stunned me. this first on panama. this is from the wikileaks drop, a state department secret memo to panama in 2006. this is from our state department to panama in 2006. it guess as follows it says, this american government, the pan manic incorporation regime ensures secrecy, avoids taxes and shields eight from the enforcement of legal judgments. oh, isn t that fun ji can t believe it. along with its sophisticated banking services panama remains an environment conducive to launder the proceeds from criminal activity and creates a vulnerability to terrorist financing. why would we want to do a free trade agreement with these people? because the big u.s. banks want us to do it. why do we want this agreement