from contempt to mistrust to cautious accolade… The conclusion of a TPP agreement in early October sparked a heated debate in Beijing, with the weight of the elite appearing to be collapsing in the direction of possible membership; For example, the head of the China-sponsored Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), Jin Liqun, announced his support shortly after the announcement of the TPP agreement in Washington.  Economists Peter A. Petri and Michael G. Plummer of the Peterson Institute for International Economics predict that the TPP would increase U.S. revenues by $131 billion per year, or 0.5% of GDP. Exports from the United States would increase by $357 billion per year, or 9.1%, as a result of the agreement.  However, two tufts University economists argue that Petri`s research is based on unrealistic assumptions such as full employment: lost jobs are immediately replaced in other industrial sectors.  According to Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, «Petri and Plummer believe that labour markets are flexible enough to compensate for job losses in sectors of the economy affected by job losses elsewhere. Unemployment is excluded from the outset – an integrated result of the model that TPP supporters often distort.  Rodrik notes that «the Petri Plummer model is directly based on decades of academic business modelling, which distinguishes a clear distinction between microeconomic effects (the design of resource allocation by sector) and macroeconomic effects (compared to the general level of demand and employment).
In this tradition, trade liberalization is a microeconomic «shock» that affects the composition of employment, but not its overall level.  Ken Akamatsu, creator of the Japanese manga series Love Hina and Mahou Sensei Negima!, expressed concern that the agreement could decimate the Djinshi (self-published) works that predated Japan. Akamatsu argued that the TPP would «destroy D-Jinshi. And it would also reduce the power of the entire manga industry.  U.S. environmental, labour and intellectual property negotiators emphasized that the Pacific Agreement was designed to create competitive conditions by imposing strict labour and environmental standards on trading partners and monitoring intellectual property rights. The content of the TPP goes far beyond the standards developed by the World Trade Organization. The TPP contains a negative list of all sectors covered for trade liberalization, with the exception of the clearly mentioned sectors. The TPP provides for a new regime for e-commerce, the treatment of foreign investors, broader protection of intellectual property, labour laws and a neutrality agreement with state-owned enterprises.  Donald Trump criticized the TPP agreement as too long and complicated and said, «[i]t makes 5,600 pages, so complex that no one has read it.»  Senator Bernie Sanders accused the TPP of being much more than a free trade agreement.  Brunei, Chile, Singapore and New Zealand are parties to the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement (TPSEP), signed in 2005 and entered into force in 2006. The original TPSEP agreement contains a membership clause and reaffirms «the obligation for members to promote the accession of other economies to this agreement.»   This is a comprehensive agreement that affects trade in goods, rules of origin, trade policy remedies, health and plant health measures, technical barriers to trade, trade in services, intellectual property, public procurement and competition policy. In particular, it called for a 90% reduction in all tariffs between Member States by 1 January 2006 and a reduction of all trade duties to zero by 2015.
 These were also traditional trade issues.