WingMakers Forum
Visit SUMBOLA - The Social Reading Platform
Publishers, Authors, Readers, and Talent wanted.


All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The TPP-Trans-Pacific Partnership
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 8:06 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
TheTrans-Pacific Partnership is 6,000 pages long and/or 2 million words. Few if any have read it in its entirety. It's Made in the USA so guess who has the most say? If not who determines what applies and what doesn't? Guess who would rule the world? Corporate America. It is the opposite of BRICS.However, it is not ratified yet and it doesn't 't look good because of the American election. That's very good. BRICS must be a tremendous threat for how worried the U.S. is in pushing this to be ratified by whatever means it can.


TPP Under Fire in the U.S. As Other Signatories Advance Towards Ratification

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is taking a beating in the ongoing U.S. presidential election cycle, leaving some observers to wonder if it can survive such a political backlash against trade agreements. But as the leading candidates seem to compete for who can bash U.S. trade policies the hardest, other countries have been pressing forward to ratify the TPP since the deal's signature in February.

In the U.S., chances are close to nil that the TPP could get ratified anytime soon. The White House is still seeking congressional support for the massive 12-country deal but the political environment could not be any more unfavorable. Presidential candidates are pointing to trade agreements as the root cause of economic inequality. For the Obama administration, things look grim in Congress as well. More and more lawmakers are coming out against the TPP, while others who had long championed the deal are now holding back their support over their stance that some of the provisions do not go far enough to protect certain industries. The soonest the TPP's ratification vote may happen is during the “Lame Duck” period after November's election.

But even as the United States stalls on the TPP, other countries are moving towards ratification. Below is a summary of how TPP is advancing outside the United States:

New Zealand: The Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs released a consultation document on the implementation of the TPP's intellectual property provisions. EFF has reviewed their proposals and will submit comments. One of the most substantial issues affecting Kiwis' digital rights are the changes the government would be required to make to its DRM rules. Even though the TPP bans the circumvention of DRM, potentially even for non-copyright-infringing purposes, it was a pleasant surprise to see that the government propose very permissive flexibilities that could effectively counteract this toxic obligation. We urge other countries to emulate New Zealand in this regard, and do all they can to support user rights if they are to ratify and implement the TPP.


Australia: Leading proponents of the TPP are seeking parliamentary approval for the TPP before the country heads into a federal election later this year, fearing increased politicization of the issue blocking its chances of getting ratified.

Canada: Trade officials are delivering on their promise that they would consult with the Canadian people about the TPP's impacts. The parliamentary committee on trade is holding public hearings across Canada to hear from people directly and is inviting Canadians to submit written comments by the end of April. A coalition of Canadian civil society organizations have created the Let's Talk TPP platform to make it easy for anyone to send comments to state officials. (To read more about how the TPP will affect the digital rights of Canadians, see Professor Michael Geist's blog series, The Trouble With the TPP.)

Japan: Prime Minister Shinzo Abe introduced some bills earlier this month to approve the agreement during the current Diet session, paving the way for the TPP to be debated by the legislature in April and possibly ratified by the summer. Sadly, one of the bills would enact the TPP's copyright term extension into Japanese law—a provision that we have vehemently opposed. There has long been a major opposition movement against the TPP in Japan, including from those protesting its copyright provisions, but more so due to powerful agricultural and industrial organizations that fear the agreement's impact on their markets. We hope that when these bills come up for debate next month, the Japanese people come out in force to stop the implementation of the TPP's restrictive copyright rules.

Malaysia: The Senate ratified the agreement on January 28 even before the TPP signing in February, making it the first and so far only country to do so. That approval came despite opposition from thousands of Malaysians who protested in the streets. Still, the government must go through the process of implementing the actual terms of the agreement into law. It had already preemptively made some of the necessary changes to its laws in 2012, but one major remaining change is the copyright term extension. A national committee, made up of private industry and NGO representatives, has been created to oversee this process. If they will not reject the deal outright, we encourage this committee to propose copyright rules that maximize the public interest.

Vietnam: The National Assembly has announced plans that it will approve the TPP in July of this year. The Vietnamese government says it strives for an early ratification to prove their role as "active member of the TPP" and has assigned some of its national ministries to conduct reports on the TPP's impact on Vietnam's laws.
Peru: The Prime Minister has expressed his intention to press forward with the TPP's, but there has been vocal public opposition to the deal. Nearly 40 civil society organizations across Peru demanded that a full public debate take place in Congress before the government moves to approve it. Over the following month, there were at least five protests against the deal, one of which had over 2,000 Peruvians marching across the capital city of Lima.

The agreement itself stipulates that the TPP's provisions do not go into force until at least the U.S. and Japan both ratify the agreement. If the U.S. does ratify, it will still claim the ability to withhold benefits from other countries until their implementations are "certified" as compliant to the U.S. interpretation of the deal. We strongly urge countries to forgo TPP's implementation into their laws until at least the TPP impasse is resolved in the United States—or for that matter, to never ratify the deal at all. Many of these TPP signatories are preemptively binding their laws to an agreement that will not only undermine their people's rights to free expression, privacy, and access to knowledge on the Internet, but would also threaten innovation and creativity, potentially all in exchange for nothing.

The TPP was kept entirely secret from the public for seven years of negotiations, while powerful corporate stakeholders had the prerogative to decide its aims and objectives. We're now at the last stage when it's possible to defeat this deal. That's what happened with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), which had already been completed and signed when tens of thousands of Europeans went out and protested the agreement. They couldn't be ignored, and Parliament rejected ACTA. There's hope that we can defeat the TPP too, but it will only happen if the public demands our governments do the right thing and reject its ratification.

~

Are you in the U.S.? If so, call on your Congress members to hold congressional hearings about the contents of the TPP immediately, and demand that they reject the deal when the agreement comes up for an eventual ratification vote:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/03/t ... tification

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Last edited by Shayalana on Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 8:18 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
Quote:
The TPP was kept entirely secret from the public for seven years of negotiations, while powerful corporate stakeholders had the prerogative to decide its aims and objectives. We're now at the last stage when it's possible to defeat this deal. That's what happened with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), which had already been completed and signed when tens of thousands of Europeans went out and protested the agreement. They couldn't be ignored, and Parliament rejected ACTA. There's hope that we can defeat the TPP too, but it will only happen if the public demands our governments do the right thing and reject its ratification.



The TPP demonstrates perfectly such deception if not unbelievable arrogance of corporations so removed from the reality of most people on the planet that they are clearly deluded into thinking they still have the power to rule through ignorance. It used to be the ignorance of the masses they counted on. Now their own ignorance blinds them to how quickly people have become informed about what's really going on even if it isn't a majority it's enough to prevent more enslavement. If anything it looks like things are turned around and there is no stopping it. I love the WWW. It is choice that is being so totally oppressed if the TPP is ratified and it makes every nation who signed on totally beholden to Corporate America to do whatever they want with no accountability or assumed responsibility more so than how they behave now. It's so big (2 million words or 6,000 pages) because they knew when creating it in secret that no-one could read it before it was ratified because there wouldn't be time to read it especially if they rushed it through congress for their approval. Does the US have so much dirt on other countries or that other countries depend so much on the US that fear stops them from obeying the US? The purpose of the TPP is to issue more control over humanity without them having a say in it. Well, we do have a say and we are saying it all over the web, the streets, and the planet. NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol:

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Last edited by Shayalana on Tue Mar 29, 2016 9:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 9:39 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 8:11 pm
Posts: 20378
Location: High Plains of the Front Range of the Rocky Mts in Colorado USA
yes... apparently we (here in the US) have been sufficiently dumb down (genetically via vaccines, education/indoctrination (esp in College) poison food, water and air - and 80% of the population (inc children) are on prescription drugs - not to even mention the FUshima cover up) for the powers that be, to activate their NWO.

no one has read a Bill in congress for the past 20 years - they pass them, based upon who pays them the most for their votes.... even though the US constitution, is only one page long - NO ONE seems to have the attention span to read it - and no one is holding those people breaking it (not just bending, twisting and spinning) and Ignoring the Rights of "we the people" - the very thing that "made America great" ... as long as their TV is working - they don't care.

IMO, Shay, we are NOT "winning" - and we are being steam-rolled at such a rapid pace - there isn't any way to avoid what the LTO predicted, (in their website) would happen when a planet develops Particle Beam technology - and uses it for a Weapon of Mass Destruction ... which we ARE doing at Cern and with our now, global "geo-engineering" (control of Nature) using HAARP--- only we didn't develop it- it was given to TPTB by Anu ... and it will take us Centuries to get back in alignment, to the point were we are now ( on the edge of transformation) ... sure we will get there (it is our Destiny and the purpose of our creation) ... but not anytime soon, because once we are totally dependent upon THEM ( which I would guess is about 60% now) - they will trans-humanize us to the point where we only use 5% of our DNA ... and we will be their Androids.

I am not "peddling doom" I am stating facts (hoping someone will debunk them and show me where I am distorting them) ... and fully aware of what I am (no longer) participating in ... but have no control over. Keep in mind though, that the LTO stated that these materials were for "future generations" and perhaps the 165 other LTO members who are here now "planting seeds / mythmaking"
From my perspective, deep in the Heart of this Nation -the window, of opportunity (for this species) closed when USA became a Korporation ... The Bildaburgers (quazi spokesmen for the elite) have stated openly that there are not enough "survivalist" to even threaten them, and because preppers are not organized ... the few who are "prepared" will simply die off, like the Neanderthal ... when they spray us with some krap that Bill gates finances, to sterilize us all (but the "elite" of course)

it really doesn't matter - because where we are headed is Time-less ... and LIFE in the 3D will become a disk - One of many, in the realms of the Mind ... ta ha ... apparently we have more to learn - or ... this is what it takes to motivate this species, to REALize their full potential ... and active the Remnant Imprinted "hero" within to do the unpredictable.. and save our self (we always have a choice)

_________________
"...to know this information and then remain passive—a pure observer—is a programmed response, and that is not an answer to how do I best serve truth? It is a denial of truth.” 5th Interview


Last edited by starduster on Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:18 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
You are entitled to your opinion and time will tell as it seems to accelerate even more. As stated before, the CHEF(Collective Human Energy Field) has shifted to being more positive than negative and that is rather evident for the many things happening on this planet now and especially those who are saying NO to US CORP control or any government tyranny. Besides, 3 of the biggest countries in the world, 2 of which own the most gold are not a part of this. Russia, China and India, none of which are beholden to your controlling group and also have the largest populations on the planet. They have their own (Unconquering and uncontrolling)alliances with other countries as well and their plans are so opposite the total control the USA wants over the world. The Silk Road is alive, tested and well and the US is not a part of that "trade agreement", nor will they ever control it. :lol: As James has said we don't know the future so much as we create it through our behavior individually which effects the CHEF. Getting informed changes behaviors because it offers more options. The WWW has made all the difference in the world as far as people changing their minds is concerned and becoming informed about whats really going on with various governments which the people you are talking about never counted on. They never wanted the public to be able to access the WWW and lost control when we did over a decade ago. And this is the crux of the TPP is absolute control of the WWW. A regression so that people can be ignorant again and your people can continue to bamboozle them with their power and control over them. The WWW not only put their plans on hold and postponed them it sent them askew. That on top of Anu not returning, your people are panicking and have lost the control they are deluded into thinking they still hold. There is no turning back. Your people are running out of options as more and more people on the planet discover how many more they themselves have and are running with them. The next generation I find to be awesome because they are not taking lies, deception, cruelty, greed and corruption as the given. They absolutely mean to change it. And they are. Their courage speaks volumes. I love them!

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:33 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 8:11 pm
Posts: 20378
Location: High Plains of the Front Range of the Rocky Mts in Colorado USA
very good points Shay, I agree with them all ... and appreciate what you have pointed out ... to give the conversation balance

the Incunebula don't want to loose control ... so they are going to "regulate" WWW, to their benefit ... they will find a way to turn it into a frequency emitting device (if they already haven't) - if they believe that they are loosing controll (predicted by their new super-computer - in real-time/ J.A.D. E. (at the helm) they will just retreat to their rat holes, and EMP the Globe - and blame it on the Sun (like James warned us in the Madi series) when the PTB have full control - of our genes and DNA

_________________
"...to know this information and then remain passive—a pure observer—is a programmed response, and that is not an answer to how do I best serve truth? It is a denial of truth.” 5th Interview


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:44 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 8:11 pm
Posts: 20378
Location: High Plains of the Front Range of the Rocky Mts in Colorado USA
PS, I edited the post above yours to "tone it down a bit" and make it clearer ...

I'm not emotionally triggered by the thought that we blew it ... I like to think that the Remnant Imprint will surface with some Sovereign Integrals ... that's what I dwell on ... but even if we do have to experience "total control" for awhile - I'd like to use these materials to "save my self" from having to experience Death again, and loose the opportunity to enhance my Consciousness, instead of - sitting out life, for perhaps centuries and forgetting what we know now ... I really want to be here when they discover the Soul of this Species - I want to be the female Solomon and live for hundreds of years, building a relationship with Nature

maybe James will finish that Saga of the Dohman ... and we shall see what becomes of the "people of the oracle"

_________________
"...to know this information and then remain passive—a pure observer—is a programmed response, and that is not an answer to how do I best serve truth? It is a denial of truth.” 5th Interview


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 11:08 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
I spent an hour and a half listening to Michael Geist a professor and member of EFF. He has done much in Canada to make people aware of the TPP and its implications for worldwide domination. It is because of his work and many many others concerned about that trade agreement. that various countries are opening it up for public discussion and deciding what they will and will not allow. I am not sure why Trudeau signed the TPP, I'm hoping it's because he's naive being so new as Prime Minister of Canada.Otherwise, shame on him! I hope he doesn't get too caught up in the attention he gets for his looks. :roll: Just another stupid ,meaningless distraction. :roll: The US Corporation rulers have the most to gain with the TPP at the expense of the American people and every other people whose government agrees to it without public discussion. People are demanding to know what it is and because they are seeing more and more about it they are delaying ratifying it. Obama is trying real hard to push it through Congress as fast as he can because there is no way anyone has read it, 6,000 pages!!!! They have been planning for 7 years in secret. Why secret? Because they know if people actually know what it's about they will never consent to it. They will not consent to being even more enslaved then what we are now. In this time of transparency and expansion the transparency has really, really, really expanded. Due to such ready access to the WWW and honest journalists who care, there is nothing the powers that were can get away with. Have you seen pictures of some of those guys like Soros, the Rothchilds, Bush Sr. etc.? They are sooo old. And like James said they are going to die off and the ones coming up are radically different than them...and for the better. The planet is changing and with it the people, and that, coupled with the energetics coming to the planet has changed the game and put the ball in our court and some of the younger ones are running with it. Just think of being brought up with access to the net all your life would you be willing to give that up? They are a different generation than ours and especially different than the controllers and are most appropriate for these times. And a lot of them care about what happens to the planet, not only their own country but the planet as a whole. That is a result of the WWW being global and that is the kind of globalization I want to see is with people who care about humanity. Localization is something to look at as well and bodes ill for big corporations like Monsanto, general Mills, Proctor Silex, Kellogg, etc. because whether in a city or on an acreage people will have access to pure food and will trade with each other locally instead of depending on big box stores and corporations more concerned about profit than the well being and interests of the people. But, that's a whole other topic which you cover on your lovely Garden thread I on my sustainability and Cultural Creative thread. It's about taking action that we can instead of assigning it to a government or god or whatever to take care of what we should ourselves. It has to start somewhere no matter how big it appears to be. It's about being proactive the best we can where we are.

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Last edited by Shayalana on Thu Mar 31, 2016 7:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 11:28 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
Here is the link for those interested to listen to Michael Geist about the TPP in Canada. He brings up very good points and so do some of the panel. Barry Sookman, a lawyer, seems to be an advocate of the TPP and I am guessing its because he may represent some major corporate interests that stand to gain if the TPP goes through. I could be wrong. Assess for yourself. Michael is not politically correct like some of the panel and does not take the TPP as being inevitable like Myra Tawfik although she does bring some good points otherwise that feel safe to her.

Canada and the TPP: A Digital Policy Failure

Published on Nov 16, 2015

The Centre for International Governance Innovation's International Law Research Program (ILRP) hosted a lecture with Michael Geist, Professor of Law at the University of Ottawa and Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce Law.

Professor Geist shared thoughts on his comprehensive work on the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Intellectual Property Rights. After his remarks, there was a discussion, moderated by ILRP Director Oonagh Fitzgerald, with panelists Warren Clarke (Centre for Digital Entrepreneurship and Economic Performance), Barry Sookman (Senior Partner, McCarthy Tétrault) and Myra Tawfik (CIGI Senior Fellow).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTrS1GeADQU

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Tue Mar 29, 2016 11:50 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
Regardless of what some think about people protesting in the streets , this proves how effective it really is. Just because in North America, the US in particular, mainstream media doesn't report such things doesn't mean it ain't happening and doesn't work. This is an excerpt from EDRi (European Digital Rights) concerning when the US was lobbying really hard to get ACTA passed in the European Parliament. ACTA was yet another ( :roll: ) attempt of the Corporate US to restrict and control the internet for its benefit and not for the peoples.
Quote:
“We have to pay huge tribute to the people who protested on the streets of Europe on those cold February days. EDRi and others worked for years on leaks, rumours and never-ending meetings with the Commission and Parliament. Citizens heard our warnings and demanded that the EU defend rights over monopolies, citizens over corporations, democracy over dogma. Thank you to all protesters for your part in an historic success.” added McNamee.


https://edri.org/ACTA_win/

This from the La Quadrature Du Net Wiki sums up ACTA and the TPP: ( Although the TPP wants to control every other aspect of your life as well).

"ACTA is a multi-lateral trade agreement which threatens to change the Internet as we know it and puts fundamental freedoms at risk."

https://wiki.laquadrature.net/How_to_act_against_ACTA



Here's a picture of the EU Parliament's vote on ACTA despite the heavy lobbying of Corporate America. I love it!
Image

Imagine instead of Goodbye ACTA, GOODBYE TPP!

http://www.euinjapan.jp/wp-content/uplo ... 05Acta.jpg

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Last edited by Shayalana on Wed Mar 30, 2016 12:53 am, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 12:33 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
starduster wrote:
PS, I edited the post above yours to "tone it down a bit" and make it clearer ...

I'm not emotionally triggered by the thought that we blew it ... I like to think that the Remnant Imprint will surface with some Sovereign Integrals ... that's what I dwell on ... but even if we do have to experience "total control" for awhile - I'd like to use these materials to "save my self" from having to experience Death again, and loose the opportunity to enhance my Consciousness, instead of - sitting out life, for perhaps centuries and forgetting what we know now ... I really want to be here when they discover the Soul of this Species - I want to be the female Solomon and live for hundreds of years, building a relationship with Nature

maybe James will finish that Saga of the Dohman ... and we shall see what becomes of the "people of the oracle"


I understand what you are saying here but I don't think its a matter of common people in the US "blowing it". So many everywhere are finally waking up. And the most mind controlled people are in the US because they represent the biggest threat to tyranny. You have generations of people believing they are the freest country in the world and have always been that because it is what your country is based on. It can't be taken for granted anymore. People are waking up and some of them having worked some years on making others aware if not care about these issues. There are a lot of small groups in the US of people doing what they can and their groups are growing despite the distractions and impediments. The media in the US is one of the biggest and worst propaganda machines there are. I never go to them if its truth I'm wanting. Like many others I check it out on the web. There are ,many excellent websites with journalists of integrity who care about the truth and humanity.

If the TPP were to go through you would need to have copies of everything on the WM website(s) because of how extensive the censorship would be. We take the web for granted in that we can find out or review whatever we feel we need in the moment on it. The TPP would narrow and restrict what people could access to such a degree you might as well just turn off your computer...forever. The longer it takes to ratify the TPP, if it ever does get ratified, the more people will know about it and what it means and the less likely they will agree to having their lives so controlled; micromanaged, in a word. Even if no-one reads the TPP completely it doesn't matter because there is enough information getting out here on the web about what it means essentially to humanity that, no wonder the American election is such a gong show for all the panic taking place with the control freaks. :lol:

Another possible scenario is even if the TPP is ratified countries are discussing what they will allow of it taking back there right of law in their particular country. The TPP trumps individual countries laws in favor of the rules of the TPP. It's insane. The people who put this together really really really assume that common people are stupid. And I don't judge the American people either because this is a global issue and may be what accelerates globalization but not on the TPP's terms. I am wondering about those countries who have no interest in this because they are not beholden to the Corporations behind the TPP. Russia, China, India, and other smaller South American countries will be using a very different system of trade and one that is open and if I understand correctly not centralized where one country rules so to speak. Why would any country in their right mind choose the TPP when a freer system exists? Look what happens when more information about that hits the web and it will. Maybe that is why the powers that were are so anxious to ratify. I don't know but am open to great possibilities.

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:17 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
This article is from last summer and gives you an idea of what the TPP is about other than digital rights. Just looking at the results of NAFTA and the promises that were made about how great that trade agreement would be is on a smaller scale than the disaster or catastrophe the TPP is. The TPP is utter slavery for everyone concerned that is not a multinational corporation. We cannot allow that to happen.

The TPP: Another Corporate Scam

Image

By Hesh Goldstein

Posted Thursday, August 13, 2015

The more we learn about the TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) trade deal, the less we like it.

Because of a concerted and obvious lack of transparency, the American people know hardly anything about how this agreement will benefit the multi-national corporations at the expense of the American worker.

This massive, corrupt, trade deal, which accounts for 40 percent of global trade, would reduce restrictions on foreign corporations operating within the U.S., limit our ability to protect our environment, and create more incentives for U.S. businesses to outsource investments and jobs overseas to countries with lower labor costs and standards.

Despite the lack of transparency, one can predict the impact of TPP and whose interests this deal will serve, based on who favors the agreement.

More than 500 corporations, including Monsanto, who excels in poisoning the people and buying off politicians, Exxon-Mobil, the best in polluting the ocean with oil spills, and Dow Chemical, another biotech pimp, are key advisers to U.S. negotiators and have access to information that is closed off, blocked, and withheld from the American people.

These profiteers have been providing their input in these negotiations every step of the way to make sure their bottom line is enhanced.
Their influence helped force fast-track Trade Promotion Authority through Congress, taking away the ability of the American people, or the “tricks” as the call them, to weigh in and leaving Congress the only option of a simple uyea or nay vote on the final deal.

Meanwhile, those who represent the working-class, stakeholders, the environment and human rights, remain opposed to the deal.

Although the TPP has been pimped as the most progressive trade deal in history by Obama and other hookers, that’s impossible to verify.
Let’s say it were true and even if it were, what reason could there be to actually believe that the provisions of the deal relating to labor standards, preserving American jobs, or protecting our environment, would be enforceable?

Every trade agreement negotiated in the past claimed to have strong enforceable provisions to protect American jobs. Yet, no such enforcement has ever occurred and agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have always resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of American jobs.

To say that the loss of U.S. jobs under the TPP would not only be unprecedented but catastrophic.

Hawaii, being the gateway to Asia and the Pacific, will be among the first to feel the pain of this corporate corruption.
Skilled workers in Hawaii and across America will not be able to compete against the international minimum wages in many of the countries that are part of the TPP, some of which that are below $3 a day for labor.

Integral to our nation’s democracy is our sovereignty and our ability to set and enforce our own standards and laws. But this atrocious corporate gift to their profits will include an Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) process, which allows a foreign corporation or investor to dispute our U.S. laws related to workers’ rights and environmental protection, among other issues, placing our own domestic enforcement abilities at risk.

And yet our President touts this as beneficial to all. Maybe this should be added to his impeachment list.

A few weeks ago the people of Hawaii protested the TPP negotiations held on Maui. Their message was simple: the American people deserve a voice in the largest trade agreement the world has ever seen. We need open debate and discussion, not negotiations with special interests behind closed doors.

That was received with the feeling of Don’t let the door hit you on your ass on the way out!

The future of the American economy and the working people now rests in the hands of the multi-national corporations and foreign governments that only want to boost their profits at the expense of the American workers.

So, when we see that the final trade agreement contains the health destroying provisions that were in the fast-track authority legislation, don’t you think it’s about time we all stood up for all working Americans by demanding that our elected officials vote against this trade deal when it comes before Congress and make it clear to them that if they do not, this will be their last term in a government of, for and by the Corporation?

Aloha!

http://blogs.naturalnews.com/tpp-anothe ... rate-scam/

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:34 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
About Nafta,(North American Free(?????)Trade Agreement) and how great a trade agreement it is...NOT.

Under Nafta, Mexico Suffered, and the United States Felt Its Pain

Laura Carlsen is the director of the Americas program at the Center for International Policy

Updated November 24, 2013, 5:11 PM

Nafta is limping toward its 20th anniversary with a beat-up image and a bad track record. Recent polls show that the majority of the U.S. people favors “leaving” or “renegotiating” the model trade agreement.

While much has been said about its impact on U.S. job loss and eroding labor conditions, some of the most severe impacts of Nafta have been felt south of the border.

Nafta has cut a path of destruction through Mexico. Since the agreement went into force in 1994, the country’s annual per capita growth flat-lined to an average of just 1.2 percent -- one of the lowest in the hemisphere. Its real wage has declined and unemployment is up.

As heavily subsidized U.S. corn and other staples poured into Mexico, producer prices dropped and small farmers found themselves unable to make a living. Some two million have been forced to leave their farms since Nafta. At the same time, consumer food prices rose, notably the cost of the omnipresent tortilla.

As a result, 20 million Mexicans live in “food poverty”. Twenty-five percent of the population does not have access to basic food and one-fifth of Mexican children suffer from malnutrition. Transnational industrial corridors in rural areas have contaminated rivers and sickened the population and typically, women bear the heaviest impact.

Not all of Mexico’s problems can be laid at Nafta’s doorstep. But many have a direct causal link. The agreement drastically restructured Mexico’s economy and closed off other development paths by prohibiting protective tariffs, support for strategic sectors and financial controls.

Nafta’s failure in Mexico has a direct impact on the United States. Although it has declined recently, jobless Mexicans migrated to the United States at an unprecedented rate of half a million a year after Nafta.

Workers in both countries lose when companies move, when companies threaten to move as leverage in negotiations, and when nations like Mexico lower labor rights and environmental enforcement to attract investment.

Farmers lose when transnational corporations take over the land they supported their families on for generations. Consumers lose with the imposition of a food production model heavy on chemical use, corporate concentration, genetically modified seed and processed foods. Border communities lose when lower environmental standards for investors affect shared ecosystems.

The increase in people living in poverty feeds organized crime recruitment and the breakdown of communities. Increased border activity facilitates smuggling arms and illegal substances.

After promising to renegotiate Nafta for many of these reasons, the Obama administration is now pushing the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The Pacific pact, which is a regional Nafta-style trade agreement, would grant even greater privileges to transnational corporations and would exacerbate problems for Mexico and other developing countries.

That’s not good for them, and it’s not good for the United States.


http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/20 ... t-its-pain




Who can doubt that the multinationals are not going for absolute world domination and that their biggest threat is the American people waking up or at least enough of them to have a collective impact despite the threats and fear programmed into their heads from various propaganda outlets, mainstream media and entertainment channels, and....then there is BRICS?

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Last edited by Shayalana on Wed Mar 30, 2016 5:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:58 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
BRICS is an alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa in cooperating with each other as developing countries to improve their economies through mutually beneficial trade. Here is the Wikipedia definition:

BRICS is the acronym for an association of five major emerging national economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The grouping was originally known as "BRIC" before the inclusion of South Africa in 2010.[4] The BRICS members are all developing or newly industrialised countries, but they are distinguished by their large, fast-growing economies and significant influence on regional and global affairs; all five are G-20 members.[5] Since 2009, the BRICS nations have met annually at formal summits. Russia hosted the group's seventh summit in July 2015. India currently holds the chair of the BRICS group.[6]

As of 2015, the five BRICS countries represent over 3 billion people, or 42% of the world population; all five members are in the top 25 of the world by population, and four are in the top 10. The five nations have a combined nominal GDP of US$16.039 trillion, equivalent to approximately 20% of the gross world product, and an estimated US$4 trillion in combined foreign reserves.[7][8] The BRICS have received both praise and criticism from numerous commentators.[9][10][11] Bilateral relations among BRICS nations have mainly been conducted on the basis of non-interference, equality, and mutual benefit (win-win).


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS


This is what distinguishes BRICS from the TPP, the TPP is so utterly gross.

" Bilateral relations among BRICS nations have mainly been conducted on the basis of non-interference, equality, and mutual benefit (win-win) "

And this is why it is such a threat to the US Corporate Government and its multinational dictators.

"First BRIC summit

The BRIC grouping's first formal summit, also held in Yekaterinburg, commenced on 16 June 2009,[16] with Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Dmitry Medvedev, Manmohan Singh, and Hu Jintao, the respective leaders of Brazil, Russia, India and China, all attending.[17] The summit's focus was on means of improving the global economic situation and reforming financial institutions, and discussed how the four countries could better co-operate in the future.[16][17] There was further discussion of ways that developing countries, such as the BRIC members, could become more involved in global affairs.[17]

In the aftermath of the Yekaterinburg summit, the BRIC nations announced the need for a new global reserve currency, which would have to be "diversified, stable and predictable".[18] Although the statement that was released did not directly criticise the perceived "dominance" of the US dollar – something that Russia had criticised in the past – it did spark a fall in the value of the dollar against other major currencies."[19]


Russia and China have a lot of gold reserves more than the US. Whatever currency they are dealing in is backed by gold through mutual agreement on that as the standard. The US currency is not backed by gold they demolished the gold standard in 1933 I think it was, and by being the global reserve, it is NOT stable and predictable since they can print paper money on a whim and issue control over all countries currencies based on them being the global reserve. That is why the American dollar is beyond deflated in real value, they keep printing more without any real value backing it except for the agreement of those who use it. No wonder there is so much corruption, blackmail and threats concerning American money.That's how they keep countries beholden to them. Ya, I see why the BRICS nations want to create a new global reserve that has equality for all with no-one in particular being able to control all currencies without gold backing. :shock: If I am in error in how this works I would appreciate being corrected. If only for anything I might of missed concerning this since I do realize it is much more complicated than the simplified version I have given here. :?}

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:06 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
This is somewhat unbiased concerning BRICS from an American news service. You discern.

BRICS: CNBC Explains

by Mark Koba

BRICS may sound like something you use to build a house, but they're the initials of some very important countries with economies that affect the world

Image



So what countries make up the BRICS? How did the term come about? What impact do the BRICS have? CNBC explains.

What are the BRICS?

BRIC are the letters that originally stood for these countries: Brazil, Russia, India and China.

South Africa became part of the BRIC nations in 2010, turning BRIC into BRICS.

Actually, the BRICS were first formed on paper rather than as a real group. Here's how it started.

The acronym has been attributed to Goldman Sachs chief economist Jim O'Neill in a 2001 paper he wrote called, "Building Better Global Economic BRICs."

In his paper, O'Neill argued that since the four BRIC countries were developing rapidly, by 2050 their combined economies could eclipse all the economies of the richest countries in the world.

The BRICS acronym has come to be used as a symbol of the shift in global economic power away from the developed G7 economies—like the U.S.—and toward the developing world.

The five nations if combined would be the largest entity on the global stage, according to Goldman Sachs, which has continued to monitor the four countries since 2001. They are considered among the biggest and fastest growing emerging markets, or those markets still developing.

Many analysts consider the BRICS a good place for investment because of their growing populations, infrastructure building, and expansive middle class.

Are the BRICS a true economic bloc?

The Goldman Sachs theory isn't that these countries are a political alliance—like the European Union—but that they have the potential to become a powerful economic bloc.

Currently, there are no reported formal agreements among all the five countries. But there have been agreements between some of the BRICs.

Those agreements include the Shanghai Cooperation Organization between Russia and China, which includes India as an observer. There's also the IBSA Trilateral Forum, in which Brazil, India, and South Africa take part in annual talks.

There are some indications that the BRICS are trying to actually organize themselves as a group. On June 16, 2009, the leaders of the BRIC countries held their first summit in Russia,and issued a declaration calling for the establishment of an "equitable, democratic and multipolar world order."

Since then they have met in Brazil in 2010 and in China in 2011.

What makes the BRIC countries powerful?

The BRICS have a lot going for them. These countries encompass over 25% of the world's land coverage and 40% of the world's population and hold a combined gross domestic product or GDP of 18.5 trillion dollars, according to recent statistics.

Brazil's resources include massive amounts of oil, along with large supplies of agricultural products. Russia, too, has great repositories of oil, along with coal and natural gas. India has iron ore, bauxite, and copper ore and is one of the major producers of iron in the world.

South Africa is the largest energy producer and consumer on the African continent. In addition to diamonds and gold, the country also has reserves of iron ore, platinum, manganese, chromium, copper, uranium, silver, beryllium, and titanium.

China has coal, iron ore, petroleum, natural gas, mercury, rare earth elements, uranium, and the world's largest potential for hydropower.

China is currently the world’s largest exporter. India has 10 of the 30 fastest-growing urban areas in the world and could see 700 million people move to cities by 2050, according to Goldman Sachs—which means greater demand for goods and services by India's population and faster economic growth.

The BRICS theory from Goldman believes that China will become the world's biggest supplier of manufactured goods, India will become the world's dominant supplier of services, while Brazil and Russia will become dominant as suppliers of raw materials.

Of the five BRIC countries, China is said to have the strongest economy, which is actually larger than that of the four other BRIC economies combined.

Will the BRICS expand?

There has been speculationthat South Korea and Mexico will become additions to the BRICS.

They were not included in Jim O'Neill's original paper in 2001, because they looked to be more developed nations and economies than Brazil, Russian India, and China, according to O'Neill. Neither country has officially tried to join.

Indonesia has said it might want to be part of the BRICS at some time in the future.

Are the BRICS a true economic force?

To many observers and investors, the BRIC countries are merely five separate emerging markets with little in common. They are countries developing their economies—with a high pay off, but also with high risks.

The risks include fears that all five could fail to live up to their economic potential. There are political concerns over human right issues in China and Russia that could keep out future investors and slow their economic growth.

Looking at India, its troubled past with Pakistan could limit government finances, increase social unrest, and limit potential domestic economic demand.

Brazil is said to just be getting some economic growth back after years of limited or negative growth, and slowing foreign investing.

And South Africa has a mixed economy with a very high rate of poverty and low GDP per capita.

Nonetheless, whatever the concerns, the BRICS are drawing large amounts of attention and money. A recent reportsaid the BRICS were leading the world in attracting global investments, as of May 2011.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/44006382

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:16 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
A connection of the TPP with BRICS. China.

Beijing’s TPP riddle

February 25, 2016

Image

“Without this agreement, competitors that don’t share our values, like China, will write the rules of the global
economy,” Obama said about the TPP last year [Xinhua]


Though all negotiating members have signed the TPP, it will need to be ratified by each member country, which could take a couple of years because their legislatures will minutely scrutinize it before doing so.

The implementation of the TPP will have major implications for the Asia-Pacific region, many of which are particularly significant for China. All TPP member countries are also members of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, and some other APEC members, such as the Philippines, Thailand, the Republic of Korea and Colombia, have expressed interest in joining the TPP.

If the majority of APEC members decide to sign the agreement, the TPP could isolate the remaining members, particularly China, because most APEC members will come under common trade rules of the TPP and the APEC members will do business according to these rules. And as an APEC member, but not a TPP member, China might have problems in doing business with TPP members, because the US-led trade partnership will have many different rules and standards.

The TPP is moving on to trade standards that are higher than those in the World Trade Organization and most FTAs across the world. Its implementation will also require members to change their domestic policies in a number of fields. These include quality standards, intellectual property rules, government procurement laws, and laws relating to labor, investment and the environment.

While there are challenges, the TPP also gives many countries the opportunity to reform their existing policies. Joining the TPP could give China the opportunity to change many of its domestic rules and move to more market-oriented trade and business systems?similar to the opportunity China had in 2001 while joining the WTO. In this regard, the TPP can help usher in the second phase of domestic reforms in China.

But the TPP has another dimension that might be a greater challenge for China. It comprises the US and several of its political allies and partners. The US played the leading role in the TPP negotiations with the Barack Obama administration making it a top priority. The trade agreement is consistent with the Obama administration’s strategic emphasis on the US becoming a major actor in the Asia-Pacific region. Indeed, the US has made it clear that by pushing the TPP it wants to ensure that it is able to write the rules of trade in Asia-Pacific, which makes joining the TPP an uncomfortable proposition for China.

Apart from being a US-led agreement, the TPP also includes several members with whom China has difficult political relations and territorial disputes in the East China Sea and the South China Sea such as Japan, Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia. This makes the TPP an even greater political challenge for China.

What then are the options for China? One possibility is quick conclusion of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership negotiations that include China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand and member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. But the RCEP might not be as ambitious as the TPP. Many RCEP members, who are members of the TPP, might see more economic gains from the TPP, which could make the RCEP insignificant in the long term.

Perhaps a better option for China would be to press for convergence of the RCEP with the TPP and push for a Free Trade Area for the Asia-Pacific, which it has already proposed. But the FTAAP must be as ambitious as the TPP to make it a credible alternative. Otherwise, more regional economies will choose the US-led TPP leading to strategic complications for China.



This article first appeared in China Daily.

http://thebricspost.com/beijings-tpp-riddle/

As usual discern. This article makes the TPP seem quite benign and understates who benefits the most , like American multinational corporations at the expense of all other people in the countries that accept the TPP! And as if China doesn't have other options! There ARE other options besides the TPP and besides, China is a member of BRICS. And why is it Japan representing the Asian faction?

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Last edited by Shayalana on Sun May 01, 2016 2:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:36 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
Backlash Against TPP Grows as Leaked Text Reveals Increased Corporate Control of Public Health

June 11, 2015

As the Obama administration praises the benefits of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), backlash continues to grow against the deal. WikiLeaks has just published another section of the secret text — this one about public healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry. Newly revealed details of the draft show the TPP would give major pharmaceutical companies more power over public access to medicine and weaken public healthcare programs. The leaked draft also suggests the TPP would prevent Congress from passing reforms to lower drug costs. One of the practices that would be allowed is known as "evergreening." It lets drug companies extend the life of a patent by slightly modifying their product and then getting a new patent. We speak to Peter Maybarduk of Public Citizen and John Sifton of Human Rights Watch about their concerns.

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: House Republicans are set to push for a vote as soon as Friday on approving a measure to give President Obama fast-track authority to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal. The secretive TPP deal involves 12 countries and nearly 40 percent of the global economy. On Wednesday, WikiLeaks released a leaked draft of another chapter of the secret negotiating text, this time the TPP’s so-called Healthcare Annex. Newly revealed details of the draft show the TPP would give major pharmaceutical companies more power over public access to medicine and weaken public healthcare programs. The leaked draft also suggests the TPP would prevent Congress from passing reforms to lower drug costs. One of the practices that would be allowed is known as "evergreening." It lets drug companies extend the life of a patent by slightly modifying their product and then getting a new patent. This is a video explaining the practice, produced by Doctors Without Borders.

NARRATOR: Evergreening. Sounds nice, doesn’t it? But evergreening is what drug companies do when they want to increase their profits. And it leaves people in developing countries without the medicines they need. Here’s how. A drug company develops a new drug and is rewarded with a patent. The patent stops other producers making the medicine for 20 years. So the drug company can charge very high prices without anyone else undercutting them—for 20 years. When the patent ends, other producers can come in and compete with each other, and bingo, the prices come tumbling down. So the medicines become affordable for everyone. But the drug companies want more profits, so they make a tiny little change to their drugs and ask for another 20-year patent.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, for more, we’re joined by two guests in Washington, D.C. Peter Maybarduk is director of Public Citizen’s Global Access to Medicines Program. And John Sifton is advocacy director with Human Rights Watch. Today he’s hosting a briefing at the National Press Club on human rights and humanitarian concerns about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, along with Oxfam America and the Council on Global Equality.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Peter, let’s begin with you on this issue of drugs. Talk about the TPP, and, for those who have never heard of it, explain its significance, and particularly as it relates to global access to drugs.

PETER MAYBARDUK: Sure. It’s great to be with you. The Trans-Pacific Partnership is an ongoing trade negotiation—been going for about five years now—among 12 countries, including developing countries like Vietnam, Peru, Malaysia, as well as the United States. And in this agreement, the U.S. trade representative and the Obama administration put forward a number of proposals that have nothing to do with trade. There are about 30 chapters. Only a few have leaked; the rest is negotiated in secret. And among the many harmful proposals that have been made by big business are demands to transform other countries’ rules with regard to medical patents and many rules affecting people’s access to affordable medicines.

We’re very concerned that the TPP would lead to preventable suffering and death in these countries where people rely on access to generics. There are many provisions in the TPP that would expand the pharmaceutical industry’s monopoly power. We’re also concerned about rules in this latest leak that potentially have implications for Medicare and for U.S. programming, and most particularly constraining our ability to make some of the healthcare reforms that the Obama administration has pledged to reduce healthcare costs for Americans.

AMY GOODMAN: And you’re just learning this now, because WikiLeaks has released the chapter on these issues?

PETER MAYBARDUK: Well, this annex, which is ironically an annex to a chapter called "Transparency," is the latest in a series of leaks that have been published that give us more particular idea of exactly what rules are being negotiated. The details—the details matter. You can’t get into the negotiations. We do our best to follow by talking to contacts that we know, but due to the secrecy, it’s really only through leaks that we’re available to evaluate the particular proposals and assess their impact. These are all rules that would otherwise be debated in our congresses and parliaments out in the open, rules that include many gifts to big business. And so it’s very concerning that we have to rely on someone taking the tremendous risk of leaking a document in order to have a real public debate about the issues.

AMY GOODMAN: What is the possible justification for not revealing what is in the TPP? President Obama repeatedly says, "Trust me." He says, you know, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, they’re getting it wrong. But we are not able to see. The senators can’t even see, unless they go into a room, what is in this deal?

PETER MAYBARDUK: Yeah, well, the U.S. trade representative has come out and as much as said that we can’t tell you what’s in the agreement because it would create political complications for the negotiation, which is effectively the same thing as saying if people saw what’s in it, they wouldn’t like it, and we wouldn’t be able to pass the deal.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Peter, I want to ask you about what you mentioned earlier about the possible impact of the TPP deal, from what has been revealed, on Medicare here in the U.S. The New York Times yesterday, Wednesday, cited officials at the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office saying rules in the TPP would have no impact on the U.S., because Medicare and Medicaid already adhere to them. Could you comment on that? Of course, they didn’t officially comment on the leaked draft, but these were comments that they disclosed to The New York Times.

PETER MAYBARDUK: Well, the administration makes that assertion. But as I say, the details matter. And if you read the leaked text and compare it to Medicare regulations, we’re quite concerned that it gives pharmaceutical companies opportunities to say, "Well, we have broader rights under the TPP than we have under Medicare regulations. We want to be listed in the formularies if we show any therapeutic value, we want to have opportunities to comment at all meaningful points according to our own definitions." And we’re concerned that that could mean potentially that pharmaceutical companies might even be able to bolster a claim in these secret investor-state tribunals, that are much more friendly to investor rules, in order to make their arguments about interpretation of the particular terms. So we’re concerned that there are potential consequences for Medicare A and B today, if pharmaceutical company lawyers and lobbyists exploit what they might now see as their rights if this agreement is signed. But we’re also concerned about what happens to Medicare Part D in the future.

The president’s budget includes a proposal to allow Medicare to negotiate for lower prescription drug costs, something that 75 or 80 percent of Americans support broadly across party lines, could save a tremendous amount of money if it’s implemented with a national formulary. And implementing a national formulary under these rules that have just leaked yesterday would be difficult, would be expensive, subject to a great deal of challenge. We know this, in part, specifically because the Veterans Administration, for example, which is considered a model for procurement practices, has been specifically excluded from the annex, we think, because it’s known that these rules would make it difficult for the VA to operate, similarly would make it difficult for us to negotiate drug prices the way we need to.

AMY GOODMAN: John Sifton, you’re holding a news conference today with other human rights groups. Can you expand on—I mean, health rights are also a human right, but go further and talk about your overall human rights concerns with the TPP.

JOHN SIFTON: Well, there are issues both within the agreement with respect to the health issues, but also labor rights issues. And then there are issues that are larger, on the geopolitical level. The simple fact is, this agreement rewards several countries which have atrocious human rights records. One of them is Vietnam, a one-party, undemocratic state ruled by the Communist Party of Vietnam, no elections, no freedom of speech. This is a country which lacks of dissidence for criticizing the government, voicing their own issues. So, that’s one trading partner.

Another, Brunei. The sultan of Brunei wants to impose Sharia law, which would result in adulterers being stoned to death, thieves having their hands cut off, homosexuals whipped. This is a country which is also nondemocratic, ruled by fiat, by a sultan who inherited his power through birth.

Then you have countries like Malaysia, which although emerging democracies have serious problems with freedom of expression and rights of lesbian, gay, transgender people. Singapore, the city-state next to Malaysia, also has serious problems with labor rights and freedom of expression.

All these countries would be rewarded by the United States. We’d like to see the United States use the agreement as leverage to compel these countries to improve their human rights records. And yet, over the last four or five years, that hasn’t really happened. A couple of the countries have made baby steps. Vietnam has done a few minor things. But by and large, no big agreements. Malaysia, in fact, its human rights record has gotten worse.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, this is President Obama speaking last month about how the TPP would improve worker conditions in Vietnam as well as here in the United States.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: So, when you look at a country like Vietnam, under this agreement, Vietnam would actually for the first time have to raise its labor standards. It would have to set a minimum wage. It would have to pass safe workplace laws to protect its workers. It would even have to protect workers’ freedom to form unions for the very first time. That would make a difference. That helps to level the playing field. And it would be good for the workers in Vietnam, even as it helps make sure that they’re not undercutting competition here in the United States. So that’s progress.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: John Sifton, that was President Obama speaking. Could you comment on what he said about the likelihood of worker conditions improving as a consequence of the TPP?

JOHN SIFTON: Well, look, we give credit to the administration for pushing along a good labor chapter that would have provisions that would do some of the things that President Obama said. Problem is, all that would be on paper. The key issue here is: Would those provisions be enforceable? Would Vietnamese workers be able to actually compel the government of Vietnam to make those supposed paper reforms a reality? And that’s where the Obama administration has been very disingenuous. They suggest the labor chapter is enforceable. What they mean is that if Vietnam fails to meet the standards, a nonexistent Vietnamese union would bring a claim in a nonexistent tribunal to compel Vietnam to improve its rights? No. The only possibility is that an outside group, maybe an international labor federation, could compel another country, like the United States, to bring a complaint against Vietnam about its labor practices in the abstract, and maybe, after many years of tribunal litigation, that would result in some kind of penalty being imposed on Vietnam. That’s not enforceability. That’s merely a process which might potentially impact Vietnam’s reform process on the grand scale. There is nothing like the rights that investors have to compel governments to change their rules. And that, at the end of the day, is what’s wrong with the TPP. It creates rights for companies and investors, but it doesn’t create new rights for workers or civil society. It basically gives corporations more rights than people.

AMY GOODMAN: So, some are saying even if you can’t negotiate these things after the TPP, you can use the TPP to change things as you negotiate it. Some openly gay lawmakers have called for halting TPP negotiations with Malaysia and Brunei because of their laws targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens. But Colorado Congressmember Jared Polis, who’s openly gay, has called on the Obama administration to use the trade agreement to push for reform. He wrote a letter earlier this year saying, quote, "As negotiations over the TPP proceed, I hope you will seize the occasion by expressing to the governments of Brunei and Malaysia in no uncertain terms that their violations of basic human rights must end." John Sifton, if you could respond to that, using the negotiations to change these countries? But also, then, the two of you disagree over what should be done with TPP: John, you’re with the reform TPP crowd, and, Peter, you’re with the stop it, end it. And I’d like to hear your views on this. John?

JOHN SIFTON: Well, first off, let me say, the problem with the idea of compelling the government of Malaysia and Vietnam to improve through the negotiation process is that that’s already been going on. For four or five years, the United States has been pushing these reform agendas, and these countries have not shown any willingness to make meaningful steps. So the real question for the administration is: How is having fast-track authority going to make it any better? At the end of the day, it’s our position that if the United States—if the administration is compelled to reach certain benchmarks on human rights, not just labor rights, but other human rights—political prisoners in Vietnam, LGBT issues in Malaysia—if they’re compelled by law to actually meet those benchmarks as part of the agreement to allow fast-track authority or allow the government to present the TPP back once it’s finalized, then it will be a necessity. These countries will have to reform; otherwise, they can’t be part of the agreement. And that would be an incentive that wouldn’t exist otherwise.

So, essentially, what we’re saying is, yeah, the TPP could be used for leverage, but you have to actually use it for leverage. And if you don’t, it’s going to be a huge disappointment. And when you actually come back with the negotiated agreement, then you’re going to see human rights groups and others saying, "No, don’t vote for this agreement. We’re against it." But for now, our position is, yes, let’s compel the administration to write this agreement in a way that actually protects human rights, that actually promotes human rights, that actually abandons the ridiculous, unconscionable provisions on intellectual property that will lead to higher drug costs. If you make those changes and then go out and negotiate, and it actually compels Vietnam to improve its records, great. If you can’t do it, though, you’re going to be out of luck when you bring this agreement back to Congress when it’s done.

AMY GOODMAN: Peter Maybarduk, you’re with the stop TPP crowd, not reform it, as John is. Why?

PETER MAYBARDUK: Well, there’s no such thing as a good TPP. You know, there have been some very brave negotiators from some of the developing countries in the negotiation who have been standing up to some of the most powerful industries on Earth, in defense of their countries’ various public interests, including health. But at the end of the day, U.S.—well, the multinational corporations involved aren’t going to accept a text that reduces their rights. And so we’re not going to see a TPP that has positive effects for society the way many of us would. The predicted benefits and gains in terms of trade flows are very small. The predicted costs are very large. So I don’t know why Congress would want to cede its constitutional authority to the executive, to the president, giving the president fast-track authority to ram a deal through Congress on an up-or-down vote without possibility for amendment, when the whole thing has been negotiated in secret all this time. As I say, only a few chapters have leaked. That, of course, is unofficial. What’s in the other 25-plus chapters of the agreement that we don’t about? What unfortunate surprises that could have real consequences for human beings? So, we invite your viewers to go to StopFastTrack.com, and your listeners, and to call their member of Congress today, ahead of this very close and very important vote on fast-track trade promotion authority. Say no to fast track.

JOHN SIFTON: And I’d say, look, we don’t disagree at the end of the day about these issues, because the substantive underlying issues are the same. If people want to call their member of Congress and tell them, "I’m uncomfortable with this agreement," they should do that. And, look, we work on Syria, we work on North Korea. We have to be optimistic about the idea, in theory, the Obama administration could do better. If Peter is right and they can’t, and there’s no such thing as a good TPP, then so be it. Then the time will come when it’s time to oppose it. So I don’t think there’s a disagreement here. And, yes, your listeners should go call their congresspeople today. The vote is tomorrow.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Peter, before we conclude, could you just explain specifically what you think the impact of this deal would be on drugs that are used over the long term—for instance, cancer or HIV drugs?

PETER MAYBARDUK: Certainly. Well, there’s a combination of provisions in the intellectual property chapter, enforceable, potentially, through the investment chapter, affected in terms of negotiation powers in this leak that just came out yesterday published by WikiLeaks, that show us that the generic competition, the affordable medicines on which people around the world in many TPP countries depend would be blocked through the expanding monopoly powers of the industry under this agreement. That includes the patent evergreening rules that you mentioned in your run-up. But, you know, for example, if we look at cancer, there’s a rule proposed that was tucked in through a massive lobbying effort by the pharmaceutical industry, tucked into Obamacare, for 12-year automatic monopolies on biologics, which include a great many cancer drugs. Eleven of 12 cancer treatments approved recently by the FDA cost more than $100,000. That’s a leading driver of bankruptcy for American families and leads to devastating consequences—routinely, to death for people in developing countries. So if competition is blocked for a long period of time, governments aren’t going to even be able to offer some of these treatments to their citizens, and people will suffer.

JOHN SIFTON: And it’s madness on the issue of antivirals for HIV/AIDS. It’s amazing that one part of this government, PEPFAR, which is the president’s agenda for combating HIV/AIDS worldwide, they’ll see higher costs to their budget as they try to help countries fight HIV/AIDS, because antivirals, second-stage antivirals, the kind you have to use once the initial ones wear off after a certain number of years of use, are going to be more expensive. Not to mention that all these groups, these humanitarian groups on the ground, are obliged to use subpar generic antivirals, even though there are better drugs that are coming on market, simply because of this expansion in the patent protections. It’s really unconscionable.

AMY GOODMAN: John Sifton, we want to thank you very much for being with us. I know you have to run off to your news conference over at the—you’re holding it at the National Press Club. John Sifton is with Human Rights Watch, and together with Oxfam America, as well as other groups, like the Council on Global Equality, they will be speaking out against TPP. And thank you very much to Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen’s Global Access to Medicines Program.

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/6/11/b ... _as_leaked

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:59 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
Julian Assange on the TPP: Secretive Deal Isn't About Trade, but Corporate Control

Thursday, 28 May 2015 00:00 By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!



As negotiations continue, WikiLeaks has published leaked chapters of the secret Trans-Pacific Partnership - a global trade deal between the United States and 11 other countries. The TPP would cover 40 percent of the global economy, but details have been concealed from the public. A recently disclosed "Investment Chapter" highlights the intent of US-led negotiators to create a tribunal where corporations can sue governments if their laws interfere with a company's claimed future profits. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange warns the plan could chill the adoption of health and environmental regulations.

TRANSCRIPT:



As negotiations continue, WikiLeaks has published leaked chapters of the secret Trans-Pacific Partnership - a global trade deal between the United States and 11 other countries. The TPP would cover 40 percent of the global economy, but details have been concealed from the public. A recently disclosed "Investment Chapter" highlights the intent of US-led negotiators to create a tribunal where corporations can sue governments if their laws interfere with a company's claimed future profits. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange warns the plan could chill the adoption of health and environmental regulations.

TRANSCRIPT:

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: We return to our exclusive interview with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. I spoke to him inside the Ecuadorean Embassy in London on Monday.

AMY GOODMAN: Julian Assange, let's stay with the United States for a moment, with the TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which certainly doesn't only involve the United States, but there's a huge debate within the United States about it right now. And I dare say, some of that debate is as a result of what WikiLeaks revealed. For some people, this treaty, that will determine 40 percent of the global economy, the only thing that we have seen about it comes from WikiLeaks. Explain what the TPP is and the information that you got, that you put out about this top-secret agreement.

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, the TPP is an international treaty that has 29 different chapters. We have released four of them, and we are trying to get the remainder. For the information that has been released, through the chapters that we got hold of and through some congressmen who have seen the contents of some of the others, but they are not allowed to write it down -

AMY GOODMAN: They can go into a room and look at it.

JULIAN ASSANGE: They can go into a room. It has been - it's not formally classified, but it's being treated as if it was classified, in terms of how the information is being managed. They go into a room. If they try and take notes, the notes have to be handed over to the government for safe keeping. And, of course, congressmen under those situations won't take notes. So it is very well guarded from the press and the majority of people and even from congressmen. But 600 US companies are part of the process and have been given access to various parts of the TPP.

OK, so it's a - the largest-ever international economic treaty that has ever been negotiated, very considerably larger than NAFTA. It is mostly not about trade. Only five of the 29 chapters are about traditional trade. The others are about regulating the Internet and what Internet - Internet service providers have to collect information. They have to hand it over to companies under certain circumstances. It's about regulating labor, what labor conditions can be applied, regulating, whether you can favor local industry, regulating the hospital healthcare system, privatization of hospitals. So, essentially, every aspect of the modern economy, even banking services, are in the TPP.

And so, that is erecting and embedding new, ultramodern neoliberal structure in US law and in the laws of the other countries that are participating, and is putting it in a treaty form. And by putting it in a treaty form, that means - with 14 countries involved, means it's very, very hard to overturn. So if there's a desire, democratic desire, in the United States to go down a different path - for example, to introduce more public transport - then you can't easily change the TPP treaty, because you have to go back and get agreement of the other nations involved.

Now, looking at that example, what if the government or a state government decides it wants to build a hospital somewhere, and there's a private hospital, has been erected nearby? Well, the TPP gives the constructor of the private hospital the right to sue the government over the expected - the loss in expected future profits. This is expected future profits. This is not an actual loss that has been sustained, where there's desire to be compensated; this is a claim about the future. And we know from similar instruments where governments can be sued over free trade treaties that that is used to construct a chilling effect on environmental and health regulation law. For example, Togo, Australia, Uruguay are all being sued by tobacco companies, Philip Morris the leading one, to prevent them from introducing health warnings on the cigarette packets.

AMY GOODMAN: That we have in the United States on our own cigarette packages.

JULIAN ASSANGE: Yes. And it's not even an even playing field. Let's say you'll say, OK, well, we're going to make it easier for companies to sue the government. Maybe that's right. Maybe the government is too powerful, and companies should have a right to sue the government under various circumstances. But it's only multinationals that get this right. US companies operating purely in the US, in relation to investments that happen in the US, will not have this right, whereas large companies that are multinationals, that have registrations overseas, can structure things such that they're taking investments from the US, and that then gives them the right to sue the government over it.

Now, it's not so easy to get up these cases and win them. However, the chilling effect, the concern that there might be such a case, is severe. Each one of these cases, on average, governments spend more than $10 million for each case, to defend it, even successfully. So, if you have, you know, a city council or a state considering legislation, and then there's a threat from one of these multinationals about expected future profits, they know that even if they have the law on their side, even if this TPP is on their side, they can expect to suffer.


http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/3103 ... te-control

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 4:07 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
Robert Reich takes on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is the largest--and worst--trade deal you've never heard of and Republicans in Congress want to work with the Obama administration to "fast track" its passage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O_Sbbeqfdw


TPP: The Dirtiest Trade Deal You've Never Heard Of

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) could cost us our internet freedom, labor rights, access to affordable medicine, the safety of our food, and protections that keep our water and air clean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnC1mqyAXmw


Senator Warren on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement

Senator Elizabeth Warren spoke on the Senate floor on February 26, 2015 about the Investor-State Dispute Settlement provision in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement.(She's not a happy camper about the TPP) She's great!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzfxv2XQoPg

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 4:24 am 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
The TPP has a provision many will love to hate: ISDS. What is it, and why does it matter?

By Todd Tucker October 6, 2015

Image

Sen. Elizabeth Warren wrote that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) could erode U.S. financial
safeguards designed to “prevent future financial crises.” (Timothy D. Easley/AP)


With the conclusion of negotiations in Atlanta on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), we will soon have texts to look at, and, eventually, a vote in Congress. It’s the biggest deal in trade politics in several years. It will be widely covered in the media against the backdrop of the presidential election — where many candidates, both Republicans and Democrats, are touting their TPP opposition.

The vote on Fast Track Trade Promotion authority earlier this year showed that opponents of trade deals can get within striking distance of a win in the House of Representatives. In the final vote, it passed by only 219-211. The administration will have to hold on to roughly the number of votes it got then, and opponents will try to get a few to flip.

One sticking point will be the agreement’s chapter on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). My colleagues Henry Farrell and Rachel Wellhausen posted a good explainer on The Monkey Cage earlier this year. Let me recap a few of the main points.

[People are freaking out about the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s investor dispute settlement system. Why should you care?]

ISDS is a legal system that has been included in investment treaties and trade agreements over several decades, including under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Under these rules, foreign investors can legally challenge host state regulations outside that country’s courts. A wide range of policies can be challenged: Argentina has had its macroeconomic policies challenged, Australia its anti-smoking efforts, Costa Rica its environmental preservation laws. While the United States has never lost a case, U.S. corporations have won many of their complaints against foreign governments.

The system is unusual in international law. Most international courts only allow disputes between states. ISDS, in contrast, creates one-way rights: Corporations can sue governments, but not vice versa.

It’s also ad hoc: The legal challenges are decided by arbitrators hired for that case only. The typical set-up is that the foreign investor appoints an arbitrator, the host state appoints a second, and the two parties or arbitrators appoint a third to chair the case. After their decision, they are paid by the parties, and the tribunal is dissolved.

Finally, it’s also unusually powerful for international law. Arbitrators can order governments to pay cash to the investor, who can then enforce arbitrators’ decisions with the full force of domestic courts. As the U.S. Supreme Court determined last year, domestic courts must defer to their decisions and not review their merits.

The White House faced substantial criticism for its decision to include ISDS in TPP. Progressives like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) see the system as lacking checks and balances and as an attack on regulatory sovereignty.

In response, the United States Trade Representative, or USTR (the trade office of the U.S. government), has trotted out an increasingly sophisticated defense of the system, which engages more with critics than in the past. “Not a problem” was the old answer, an easy position to take given that the U.S. has never lost a case.

As TPP moves toward Congress, both sides will attempt to revive the ISDS issue. The White House will attempt to argue that new provisions (like a code of conduct for ISDS arbitrators) make enough of a difference to assuage critics’ concerns. TPP opponents, on the other hand, will have to argue why this deal is singularly problematic when there are already 3,200-plus treaties around the globe that already contain similar investor rights.

[Why losing a trade vote in Congress may strengthen America’s bargaining position]

Indeed, the sheer volume of treaties out there is a problem for both proponents and opponents, as it simultaneously reduces the costs and benefits to one-more-deal. This is what I call creeping multilateralism, which legal scholars like Stephan Schill, Martins Paparinskis and Sergio Puig have written extensively about. Investors have numerous moves at their disposal because of creeping multilateralism.

Under many investment treaties, mere incorporation in a claimed “home” country is all that is needed to be considered an “investor” of that country, and benefit from whatever treaties it signed. For example, Australia and the U.S. have a trade agreement, but not with ISDS. Australia has an ISDS pact with Hong Kong however. Philip Morris was able to use its Hong Kong subsidiary to launch a claim against Australia — something it could not have done directly from its U.S. headquarters.

Most investment treaties have more than one standard of protection for investors. Investors need not limit themselves to alleging one violation, such as rules on expropriation, non-discrimination or fair-and-equitable treatment. Instead, investors engage in what I call “standard stacking.” This means they allege as many bases for protection as they can, to increase the odds that a tribunal will side with them on at least one, which is typically enough to be entitled to some cash damages.

Most-favored nation (MFN) rules in the investment treaties allow investors to claim the best procedural and substantive treatment contemplated in any of a host country’s treaties. This is particularly useful where the treaty that the investor used as its vehicle is more state-friendly (say TPP, arguably) than others in the respondent’s treaty portfolio. Arbitrators have allowed an Argentine investor to challenge Spain with rights from a Chile-Spain treaty, an Australian investor to challenge India with Kuwait-India rights, and a Russian investor to use Denmark-Mongolia rules. As arbitrator Charles Brower writes, arbitrators have been increasingly willing to entertain MFN-based claims.

Investors also have a choice of whether to launch the case at ICSID (a World Bank arbitration center with relatively better transparency), or at a private arbitral center with lower transparency requirements.

Finally, once a tribunal has rendered a ruling, the investor can seek enforcement in any country it estimates likeliest help secure payment (which might be driven by investor-friendly national arbitration laws or courts, or the presence of seizable assets).

Nationality shopping, relief shopping, forum shopping, enforcement shopping: Investors can “shop until they drop,” and nations must pay the bill.

[What do Americans think about free trade? Not much.]

The figure below models the choices of an investor considering going after the Argentine government under an investment treaty. It’s not a merely illustrative choice; Argentina is the most frequent respondent.

Say the Argentine subsidiary of a U.S. company wanted to challenge an Argentine government regulation. The firm could pursue its case in a simple way: use the protection afforded the parent company under the U.S.-Argentina bilateral investment treaty (BIT), have its case heard in the perennially operating ICSID facilities, and later seek enforcement in U.S. courts.
Alternatively, the U.S. company can manipulate its multinational holding company structure so that its Dutch subsidiary is the legal owner of its Argentine operations. If can then bring the case under the Dutch-Argentina treaty, get that treaty’s protections, and seek enforcement in Dutch courts.
Between these options lie many others, such as taking advantage of the treatment standards under third country treaties (e.g., the Argentina-Chile BIT), enforcement opportunities of third-country courts (e.g. Switzerland or Britain), or private non-ICSID arbitral centers. In the figure, the thinner lines represent the simpler options described above. The thicker lines represent more complicated options also available to investors.


And this is the status quo ante, all before the ink dries on the TPP. Anything that is better in TPP can be gotten around through MFN rules. Many bad claims that an investor wanted to make against a TPP government could have probably already been done without TPP.

This does not mean that the TPP changes nothing for investment rules.

While TPP countries already have 35 investment treaties between themselves, the new pact would raise the number effectively to as many as 66. (The number is somewhat uncertain, because it is not clear if Australia was successful in its efforts to be exempted from ISDS in the trans-Pacific deal.) Without a TPP, arbitrators had greater discretion as to whether to allow investors to game the system through nationality planning. Investment arbitration claims can cost millions of dollars to litigate, so the TPP will bring enhanced legal certainty to investors that want to attack government regulations in a more straightforward manner.

The TPP is also an important qualitative shift in investment arbitration. While most treaties that include ISDS are between a single developed and a single developing nation, the TPP is the biggest pact to date that includes many developed nations (Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States). Because developed countries are more likely to have foreign direct investments in the U.S., the U.S. exposure to new claims could be doubled, according to some estimates.

With passage of the TPP, the old argument that ISDS is only necessary because of poor nations’ weak court systems must be officially retired. Indeed, ISDS would have to be seen as a core part of economic governance at the center of the world’s most important trading relationships.

I would be surprised if a TPP vote in Congress really aired all the finer points of this issue. Groups concerned about ISDS will have to fight for air against all the numerous side deals being negotiated. The genius of wrapping up so many issues (from auto tariffs, to dairy quotas, to intellectual property, to regulation) in a single package is that any group or senator can usually find something to like, some goody. This is already on display, with environmental groups that dislike ISDS praising some of the TPP provisions on wildlife protection.

It’s a bizarre flip of what political scientists used to say about protectionist legislation. One of the early studies of the legislative process was E.E. Schattschneider’s book on how protectionist legislation — through log-rolling, deal-making and provision-adding — became a legislative Christmas tree. Now, it is the (nominally) anti-protectionist legislation that brings the yuletide.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/mo ... it-matter/

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 3:08 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
It looks like the multinationals have been sneaking in various clauses of the TPP for decades. So this version calling it the TPP is to consolidate what they have done in secret and couched in legalese for years so most of us couldn't understand it let alone know about it, including politicians in the "no need to know" category. What they don't want us to know is how much we have been tricked, bamboozled, ROBBED, lied too, manipulated and controlled over all these decades if not centuries. But something has shifted and is changing rapidly so that more and more light is being shone on this. They still need our consent. Really contemplate that. And they have always depended on our ignorance to get it. It may be different this time because so many are really fed up and...they have access to information about what is going on like never before. Even though there are 7+ billion people on this planet and approx 5 billion don't have access to the web, there are enough people who do and are making a difference and accelerating the rate of time it takes to shift and make changes. Nothing can be hidden anymore. There is no going back. It does not bode well for the powers that were. I really, really, really, love the WWW. The BRICS nations are building their own. So there will be communication globally but not controlled by the multinationals. There will be a new currency, but not controlled by the multinationals. There will be many new things not controlled by the multinationals and I am certain that any country caught up in the TPP mess if they see an out with BRICS will gladly take it...if BRICS sees that it is in the interest and benefit of ALL concerned. The BRICS countries are not afraid of the multinationals American military might. This war has been going on for some time and became very evident when Putin decided to take a stand. Look what an effect that has had. And he won't interfere here, his country knows the end of this road they have been there and are recovering from it beautifully. They had Kings and Queens, Communism and the Oligarchs and North America has a very corrupt political system and the multinationals. This is my opinion of course feel free to discuss.

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 3:07 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
Here's yet another interesting take on why Obama is pushing so hard for the TPP. It's because he feels threatened by China. China also is part of BRICS.

Why President Obama Really Wants TPP...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DVPkYj3MIN0

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 3:55 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
We know enough about the TPP to know it is detrimental to most people on the planet if not the planet itself and that is with only reading a small fraction of it. They must be really desparate to get this ratified. Why? When they have pretty well been sneaking clauses of it in over the decades through various presidents and their corrupt advisers and enforcers. All multinational corporations like Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook, The Rand Corporation, all Royalty on the planet, the Pope, and many more gain the most from the TPP and the rest of us pay for it like never before, that's the part they especially don't want known. Money is their power and their God and they use it in any way they can to prove their superiority over us. Wonder if...the currency changed and wonder if they were unable to access it without merit nor could any individuals hoard it and use it as a weapon against others? Where would those power mongering control freaks be then? Heaven forbid, wonder if they had to actually earn it according to merit? How well do you think they would do then? That would be most fitting and without them being ableto harm anyone else in the process. That is other then what they do to each other amongst themselves because no other scabgoats are available for their abuse anymore. It's not that I don't have compassion or forgiveness I do. I also am not sentimental and know that forgiving doesn't mean allowing them to continue getting away with abusing others and compassion doesn't mean it's ok not to correct such abuses. I forgive them for their ignorance and feel compassion for them that they are so blind to it and because of it. But it doesn't mean its ok to continue behaving in that same abusive way, they have to be stopped. That's valor.

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 4:03 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
China is growing at such a rapid rate economically and militarily that its scaring the bejesus out of corporate America. Russia, Brasil, Indonesia and South Africa if not other smaller countries don't seem to mind. None of whom are willing to be savaged by multinationals anymore. They are more than aware of the effects of clauses of the pre-TPP used against them and refuse to participate anymore.

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:00 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
I just love Elizabeth Warren she really cares about famlies and common people . She entertains no illusions about how evil the TPP is. "A rigged process produces a rigged outcome."

Sen. Elizabeth Warren - Congress should oppose the TPP trade deal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWXJJ_Tq-U

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject: Re: The TPP
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:08 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18411
Location: QUANTUSUM
The evils of corporate America and their world domination plan. This is a real eye opener!


WikiLeaks - The US strategy to create a new global legal and economic system: TPP, TTIP, TISA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw7P0RGZQxQ

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Copyright © 2005-2012 WingMakers.co.uk