<p><a href="http://economixcomix.com/home/tpp/" rel="nofollow">http://economixcomix.com/home/tpp/</a></p>

<p>Discussion of the cartoon spawned a <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3az0fa/eli5_what_does_the_tpp_transpacific_partnership/csh9neu" rel="nofollow">very argumentative thread</a> on reddit, with as far as I can tell no hint of a consensus.</p>

<p>I'm specifically interested in whether the cartoon has any specific factual errors or economic misconceptions, and if so whether those mistakes are serious or not.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-25T14:07:54.147Z
As written, this seems primarily opinion based. Would you alter this to instead address what is accurate and inaccurate about the comic?
BKay
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-25T14:10:26.060Z
OK, I just edited the title to focus more on the issue of whether there are errors.
user1205901 - Слава Україні
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-25T14:26:53.960Z
Maybe make it more specific regarding which part of the cartoon is wrong too. The first page doesn't seem very serious anyhow.
VicAche
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-25T14:42:06.737Z
(After reading brielfy, it seems that it's correct, from an economics point of view)
VicAche
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-25T15:18:25.297Z
I am not a fan of the stock exchange but on pg 14 they pretty much just claim that buying stocks has no effect on investment, not even an indirect one. The author probably knows that it is more nuanced (there is again a reference to "good economists") but leaves it at that.
Giskard
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-25T16:52:53.907Z
It would be helpful if, like @VivAche said, you could specify what part you want commented on. Eg. "Is (statement) economically valid?" Or, "What is the evidence for or against (this)?"
philE
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-25T18:16:58.110Z
I think the arguments the cartoon is making about free trade agreements could apply equally well to the cartoon itself.
Lumi
<free-trade>
Does this cartoon about the transpacific partnership contain errors?
user1205901 - Слава Україні
# Does this cartoon about the transpacific partnership contain errors?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-06-25)

<http://economixcomix.com/home/tpp/>

Discussion of the cartoon spawned a [very argumentative thread](http://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/3az0fa/eli5_what_does_the_tpp_transpacific_partnership/csh9neu) on reddit, with as far as I can tell no hint of a consensus.

I'm specifically interested in whether the cartoon has any specific factual errors or economic misconceptions, and if so whether those mistakes are serious or not.

**Tags:** free-trade

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: As written, this seems primarily opinion based. Would you alter this to instead address what is accurate and inaccurate about the comic?  
> **username_0**: OK, I just edited the title to focus more on the issue of whether there are errors.  
> **username_2**: Maybe make it more specific regarding which part of the cartoon is wrong too. The first page doesn't seem very serious anyhow.  
> **username_2**: (After reading brielfy, it seems that it's correct, from an economics point of view)  
> **username_3**: I am not a fan of the stock exchange but on pg 14 they pretty much just claim that buying stocks has no effect on investment, not even an indirect one. The author probably knows that it is more nuanced (there is again a reference to "good economists") but leaves it at that.  
> **username_4**: It would be helpful if, like @VivAche said, you could specify what part you want commented on. Eg. "Is (statement) economically valid?" Or, "What is the evidence for or against (this)?"  
> **username_5**: I think the arguments the cartoon is making about free trade agreements could apply equally well to the cartoon itself.  

---

## 0 answers

