REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Meanwhile, the TPP was signed

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Monday, May 23, 2016 18:21
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1975
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, February 4, 2016 10:29 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


While we were all distracted by the Presidential campaigns, who won, who was a close second, and what this all "means", the TPP was signed in New Zealand yesterday by its twelve member nations.

Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal signed in Auckland
Quote:

The Trans Pacific Partnership, one of the biggest multinational trade deals ever, has been signed by ministers from its 12 member nations in New Zealand. The ceremony in Auckland brings the huge trade pact, which has been five years in the making, another step towards to becoming a reality.

But the TPP continues to face opposition.

The 12 nations account for some 40% of the world's economy - they now have two years to ratify or reject the pact.

Australia's minister for trade Andrew Robb was the first to sign the pact. Those attending the ceremony cheered as his counterpart, New Zealand trade minister Todd McClay, added the last signature.



http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35480600



Wow, look at those self-satisfied dicks, rubbing noses and patting each other on the back! It's a marriage of money!

Most people in most of the developed and emerging nations are against it. Nonetheless, TPTB will do their best to ram it up our asses, like they've done before.

But all is not lost. The TPP must be ratified by its member nations - it must pass the relevant legislative bodies - before it becomes law. Not only that, it must pass within two years, so a delay is as good as a denial.

Fight this. Fight it like your life depends on it. Call your Congressperson or MP and KEEP ON calling your Congressperson or MP, and let them know this is an issue for you for the next election (November, for us) and beyond.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 4, 2016 2:18 PM

BYTEMITE


Free Trade Agreements have worked so well in other places. /s

Mexico is currently the way it is and overrun by the drug cartels because of an economic crash caused by an agreement like this.

There's no good way to protect poorer nations from exploitation, the TPP might set prices but it's not going to be able to enforce any labor standards. TPP also creates a stranglehold on research and intellectual property.

The nitty gritty details of setting prices for food and livestock and imports is well and good, but it's the broader perspective that's a problem. I'm not really sure this helps anyone's economy, not America, and surely not the other nations. That's my off the cuff perspective without dragging up references for me to check numbers on.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 4, 2016 11:44 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


G, what are you, some sort of corporate shill? The whole idea of looking at "winners" and "losers" in this pact is misdirection.

No matter what the specific provisions of the TPP, the real problem is that corporations are allowed to sue nations if they believe their profits have been infringed on by labor, environmental, GMOs/ food safety, or other regulatory laws. And the case doesn't go to an international judiciary, it goes to an arbitration panel of... corporations. So say goodbye to your national sovereignty, or any control that your nation may want to place on corporate or industrial practices. Just bend over.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 7, 2016 6:41 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


At least we have the EFF in common.

At this point, I'm not about to scour the internet for something that is critically important to you that you can easily look up yourself. Especially if you've got your fingers in your ears and you're busy repeating Nyah nyah nyah... I can't hear you. Which has been your whole internet relationship with me so far. Along with the name-calling.

I do my best to bring the most thoughtful information to the board, culled from many websites and from people who spend a lot of time thinking about things, a helluva a lot more time than I have. I'm trying to pass along what I think is REALLY HAPPENING about stuff that is REALLY IMPORTANT, not just media crap.

If you don't like what I post, don't argue about it, just don't read it.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 12, 2016 10:08 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Here we go again... Signym telling us what she's doing. It's right there:

When I say something to her she... "puts her fingers in her ears and gets busy repeating Nyah nyah nyah... I can't hear you"

I asked you for specifics to bolster your argument - discuss - and you ran



G, I don't like to whinge online about my personal life, but aside from supervising a technical group with a span-of-control twice average, managing a household consisting of a disabled daughter and chronically sick husband, and being significantly sick for the past few months, I've been working hard with my doctor to get well enough for two excisional biopsies and am now, even as I type, recovering at home and waiting for the pathology reports.

I know you like to think the worst possible things about me. The feeling is mutual: I know that you just pumped your fist a little bit at my misfortune. The information is readily searchable and easily readable, and if that isn't good enough, just think about the implementation of NAFTA and decide how that went for your nation.

INVESTOR STATE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT (ISDS)

To me, the most worrisome aspect of the TTIP and the TPP aren't their specific provisions ... yanno, how many tons and what prices ... but the ability of a transnational corporation to bring suit against a nation for expropriation of profits and the arbitration of that dispute by international trade lawyers.

If you read the State Department (Hillary, the Wall Street candidate) blurb on ISDSs it's full of word-smithed reassurances. Once you get past the "benefits [to the corporations] of trade agreements" part, you'll find ...

Quote:

Much of the concern about ISDS is the risk of companies using the mechanism to challenge legitimate regulations. Philip Morris International, for example, has challenged Australia’s plain packaging regulation under a 1993 Hong Kong-Australia Bilateral Investment Treaty. Though that case has not yet been fully adjudicated and Australia has made no changes to their regulation, we nonetheless are working to ensure that TPP includes important safeguards that protect against ISDS being used to challenge legitimate regulation.
What is a "legitimate regulation"? Isn't that any regulation which has been properly passed by a legislative body of a nation, or its subdivisions? If an Australian city wanted to pass a law banning fast-food restaurants, to preserve it's tourist appeal which makes up a large part of its revenues, are they then open to a lawsuit by McDonald's?

Quote:

That is why the United States has put in place several layers of defenses to minimize the risk that U.S. agreements could be exploited in the manner to which other agreements among other countries are susceptible.
Such as?

Quote:

In an effort to safeguard against potential abuses of ISDS, TPP will have state-of-the-art protections. It will recognize the inherent right to regulate and to preserve the flexibility of the TPP Parties to protect legitimate public welfare objectives, such as public health, safety, the environment, and the conservation of living or non-living exhaustible natural resources.
What about the preservation of agricultural or manufacturing base, or the preservation of natural resources as a public commons, or the development of a natural drug industry? Those would run counter to the purpose of the trade agreements, and yet are legitimate government objectives.

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2015
/march/investor-state-dispute-settlement-isds
#

Public Citizen has a less reassuring view of TPP, TTIP, and ISDSs in general. These are the problems they've identified that I think are the most important:

Quote:


1) ISDS gives foreign corporations greater procedural and substantive rights than domestic firms by providing only foreign firms access to extrajudicial tribunals and by enabling them to obtain compensation for government policies and actions that apply equally to domestic firms and that would not be deemed to violate domestic property rights protections.

2. ISDS undermines the rule of law by empowering extrajudicial panels of private sector attorneys to contradict domestic court rulings, including those in which countries’ supreme courts interpret domestic Constitutions and laws, in decisions not subject to any substantive appeal.

3. ISDS cases have led to the watering down of environmental, health and other public interest policies, and chilled the establishment of new ones, as the mere threat of an ISDS case against an existing or proposed policy raises the prospect that a government will need to spend millions in tribunal and legal costs to defend the policy, even if the government might ultimately prevail.

4.Investor-state tribunals often order governments to pay foreign corporations large sums of taxpayer funds as compensation for future profits that the tribunals surmise the firms would have earned if not for the challenged government actions or policies.
...

7 Purported safeguards and explanatory annexes added to agreements in recent years have failed to prevent ISDS tribunals from exercising enormous discretion to impose on governments obligations that they never undertook when signing agreements.

8 Transparency rules and amicus briefs are insufficient to hold accountable tribunals that remain unrestrained by precedent, States’ opinions or substantive appeals.

9.State and local governments have no standing to defend the state and local policies that are often challenged in ISDS cases.



http://www.citizen.org/documents/ustr-isds-response.pdf

This is all very dry, so how about a few examples? Aside from the PLAIN PACKAGING case, in which Phillip Morris has sued Australia, here are cases lost by government


Quote:

S.D. Myers v. Canada
Between 1995 and 1997 the Canadian government banned the export of toxic PCB waste, in order to comply with its obligations under the Basel Convention, of which the United States is not a party. Waste treatment company S.D. Myers then sued the Canadian government under NAFTA Chapter 11 for $20 millions in damages. The claim was upheld by a NAFTA Tribunal in 2000.

Occidental v. Ecuador
In October 2012, an ICSID tribunal awarded a judgment of $1.8 billion for Occidental Petroleum against the government of Ecuador. Additionally, Ecuador had to pay $589 million in backdated compound interest and half of the costs of the tribunal, making its total penalty around $2.4 billion.The South American country annulled a contract with the oil firm on the grounds that it violated a clause that the company would not sell its rights to another firm without permission. The tribunal agreed the violation took place but judged that the annulment was not fair and equitable treatment to the company.

Ethyl Corporation v. Canada
In April 1997 the Canadian parliament banned the import and transport of MMT, a gasoline additive, over concerns that it poses a significant public health risk. Ethyl Corporation, the additive's manufacturer, sued the Canadian Government under NAFTA Chapter 11 for $251 million, to cover losses resulting from the "expropriation" of both its MMT production plant and its "good reputation". A similar challenge was launched by three Canadian provinces, under the Agreement on Internal Trade, and was upheld by a Canadian dispute settlement panel.Consequently, the Canadian government repealed the ban and paid Ethyl Corporation $15 million as compensation.

Dow AgroSciences v. Canada
On August 25, 2008, Dow AgroSciences LLC, a U.S. corporation, served a Notice of Intent to Submit a Claim to Arbitration under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, for losses allegedly caused by a Quebec ban on the sale and certain uses of lawn pesticides containing the active ingredient 2,4-D. The tribunal issued a consent award as the parties to the dispute reached a settlement.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor-state_dispute_settlement

----------

Perhaps the best way to evaluate the TPP and TTIP is to look at how "free trade" agreements have worked for us in the past. Looking at the history of NAFTA and CAFTA (Clinton), and the inclusion of China into the WTO (Bush), the only consistent "free trade" winners have been the transnationals. Average people on both sides of the agreements, including the average Mexican farmer and the underpaid Chinese factory-worker, tend to come out with the short end of the stick.




--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 12, 2016 11:01 AM

REAVERFAN


[img][/img]

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 12, 2016 11:44 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Good to know that you think the worst possible things about me, though!
Yep, because you assumed I "ran away" as opposed to being really busy, or sick, or maybe even both.

Now, can we (by "we" I mean you) perhaps re-focus on the TPP and TTIP?

Each time the USA has signed a free trade agreement, the employment situation in the USA has gotten worse. And curiously, it's not like the employment situation on the OTHER end of the agreement has gotten any better either. NAFTA, for example, drove many small farmers out of business in Mexico and Central America, CAFTA did the same for Haiti. Now we have unemployed farmers flooding the cities, the border-factories, and over the border in search of work, while Mexicans are food-dependent on Cargill and Haitians are dependent on McDonald's and on aid.

What drives me absolutely bonkers is hearing Obama thump the TPP and TTIP as some sort of equalizing agreement which will "open markets" to American products and "create good jobs" in the USA. That has been the talking point ever since Clinton, and it has NEVER worked out that way. Ross Perot, the anti-NAFTA candidate, was absolutely correct when he described the effect of NAFTA as a "giant sucking sound" of jobs being sucked out of the USA to low-wage countries elsewhere.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 23, 2016 2:07 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


So I see in response to my comment about how the employment situation has shaken out for the USA after these "free trade" agreements are signed, the usual suspects have cogent and well-researched opinions.

Not.

Meanwhile ...

Obama confident Pacific trade deal will be approved

Quote:

U.S. President Barack Obama said on Monday he was confident a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal he has championed will be approved by U.S. legislators, to the benefit of the world.

Obama, on a Visit to Vietnam, told a news conference the TPP was a good deal for U.S. business and it would give the United States the ability to engage on issues of concern.

He said he had not seen a credible argument that the deal, which will group 12 economies, would hurt U.S. business.


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-vietnam-obama-ttp-idUSKCN0YE0NI

But -

The Final Leaked TPP Text Is All That We Feared


Quote:

Today's release by Wikileaks of what is believed to be the current and essentially final version of the intellectual property (IP) chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) confirms our worst fears about the agreement, and dashes the few hopes that we held out that its most onerous provisions wouldn't survive to the end of the negotiations...

If you skim the chapter without knowing what you're looking for, it may come across as being quite balanced, including references to the need for IP rules to further the “mutual advantage of producers and users” (QQ.A.X), to “facilitate the diffusion of information” (QQ.A.Z), and recognizing the “importance of a rich and accessible public domain” (QQ.B.x). But that's how it's meant to look, and taking this at face value would be a big mistake.

If you dig deeper, you'll notice that all of the provisions that recognize the rights of the public are non-binding, whereas almost everything that benefits rightsholders is binding. That paragraph on the public domain, for example, used to be much stronger in the first leaked draft, with specific obligations to identify, preserve and promote access to public domain material. All of that has now been lost in favor of a feeble, feel-good platitude that imposes no concrete obligations on the TPP parties whatsoever.


https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/final-leaked-tpp-text-all-we-fea
red


http://www.citizen.org/leaked-trade-negotiation-documents-and-analysis

Now, OFFICIALLY, Congress can't read the actual document except in a locked room to which they can't even bring paper and pencil. How are they supposed to vote on something that's a secret?

In reality, the TPP promotes the profits of banks, international corporations, pharma, tobacco, Hollywood, GMO producers like Monsanto, etc. No national, state/province, county/riding, or local regulation shall stand in the way.

Thank you, Obama, for bending over, and thank you, Hillary in advance.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 23, 2016 6:10 PM

THGRRI


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
G, what are you, some sort of corporate shill? The whole idea of looking at "winners" and "losers" in this pact is misdirection.

No matter what the specific provisions of the TPP, the real problem is that corporations are allowed to sue nations if they believe their profits have been infringed on by labor, environmental, GMOs/ food safety, or other regulatory laws. And the case doesn't go to an international judiciary, it goes to an arbitration panel of... corporations. So say goodbye to your national sovereignty, or any control that your nation may want to place on corporate or industrial practices. Just bend over.



The problem you have is not about sovereignty or you would be against Russian troops in Georgia and Ukraine. Nope, your displeasure is about the world doing business with each other to the exclusion of Russia. You should be use to it by now, but prepare yourself, it is only going to get worse.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 23, 2016 6:21 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So I see in response to my comment about how the employment situation has shaken out for the USA after these "free trade" agreements are signed, the usual suspects have cogent and well-researched opinions.

Not.

Meanwhile ...

Obama confident Pacific trade deal will be approved
Quote:

U.S. President Barack Obama said on Monday he was confident a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal he has championed will be approved by U.S. legislators, to the benefit of the world.

Obama, on a Visit to Vietnam, told a news conference the TPP was a good deal for U.S. business and it would give the United States the ability to engage on issues of concern.

He said he had not seen a credible argument that the deal, which will group 12 economies, would hurt U.S. business.


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-vietnam-obama-ttp-idUSKCN0YE0NI

But -

The Final Leaked TPP Text Is All That We Feared
Quote:

Today's release by Wikileaks of what is believed to be the current and essentially final version of the intellectual property (IP) chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) confirms our worst fears about the agreement, and dashes the few hopes that we held out that its most onerous provisions wouldn't survive to the end of the negotiations...

If you skim the chapter without knowing what you're looking for, it may come across as being quite balanced, including references to the need for IP rules to further the “mutual advantage of producers and users” (QQ.A.X), to “facilitate the diffusion of information” (QQ.A.Z), and recognizing the “importance of a rich and accessible public domain” (QQ.B.x). But that's how it's meant to look, and taking this at face value would be a big mistake.

If you dig deeper, you'll notice that all of the provisions that recognize the rights of the public are non-binding, whereas almost everything that benefits rightsholders is binding. That paragraph on the public domain, for example, used to be much stronger in the first leaked draft, with specific obligations to identify, preserve and promote access to public domain material. All of that has now been lost in favor of a feeble, feel-good platitude that imposes no concrete obligations on the TPP parties whatsoever.


https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/final-leaked-tpp-text-all-we-fea
red


http://www.citizen.org/leaked-trade-negotiation-documents-and-analysis

Now, OFFICIALLY, Congress can't read the actual document except in a locked room to which they can't even bring paper and pencil. How are they supposed to vote on something that's a secret?

In reality, the TPP promotes the profits of banks, international corporations, pharma, tobacco, Hollywood, GMO producers like Monsanto, etc. No national, state/province, county/riding, or local regulation shall stand in the way.

Thank you, Obama, for bending over, and thank you, Hillary in advance.


I have not looked up Speaker Ryan's position on this. Hopefully he will get it rejected.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russian losses in Ukraine
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:45 - 982 posts
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Mon, March 18, 2024 23:44 - 496 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:27 - 3338 posts
I'm surprised there's not an inflation thread yet
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:09 - 709 posts
Elections; 2024
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:08 - 1982 posts
Grifter Donald Trump Has Been Indicted And Yes Arrested; Four Times Now And Counting. Hey Jack, I Was Right
Mon, March 18, 2024 19:06 - 753 posts
MO AG Suing Large Nationwide Child Sex-slave Trafficker
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:24 - 2 posts
New Peer-Reviewed Research Finds Evidence of 2020 Voter Fraud
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:21 - 7 posts
RCP's No Toss-Up State Map (3-15-2024)
Mon, March 18, 2024 15:19 - 2 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, March 18, 2024 08:03 - 6091 posts
Israeli War
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:27 - 31 posts
CNN: Is the US on the brink of another civil war?
Mon, March 18, 2024 01:22 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL