TPP Fast track

[master_shake_]

Trade deals aren't 100% about tariffs and traditional "trade", as your layman worldview would have you believe. They're also about complex financial laws, IP, etc. Welcome to 50 years ago. This surprises no one well informed. The fact that it scares you is your problem.

you should be too

From 1990 through the present, over 100 different countries have been sued over 550 times. Most of these are developing countries. The U.S. and Canada have been sued under NAFTA, but Western European countries have been sued only a handful of times (and Japan never). Sometimes these cases are brought at the World Bank’s International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Sometimes they are brought under special U.N. rules (UNCITRAL). Because these cases can sometimes be private, we don’t know the full number of cases.
For my research, I have compiled a database of 360 cases in which we know what happened as of 2012. Of these, the state won 34 percent of the time. The MNC won 31 percent of the time. The case settled before reaching a final judgment 34 percent of the time (which lawyers think of as a win for the MNC). In all but a handful of cases, governments appear to have been compliant with the awards rendered.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ispute-settlement-system-why-should-you-care/

 

[First]

And complex financial laws are what we already knew that they were going to be about in the FTA.

Huh? Why do complex financial laws scare you, because they're complex? OK, so let experts work out the language, don't fucking pretend you could decipher that dense shit. I will reserve judgment until the actual language is released and well informed people intepret it. Until then, I won't rage like a fucking fool.

 

[norseamd]

Btw, don't wimp out of addressing the overwhelming failure of ISDS to undermine state/federal gov't sovereignty. Oh TPP is going to make this happen? Link and quote the exact language then, turd. Don't pussy out.

Even if it does not lead to lots of lawsuits against America that does not mean that it will allow companies to control what other countries can do or enact especially when it comes to the poor countries.

 

[norseamd]

Huh? Why do complex financial laws scare you, because they're complex? OK, so let experts work out the language, don't fucking pretend you could decipher that dense shit. I will reserve judgment until the actual language is released and well informed people intepret it. Until then, I won't rage like a fucking fool.

No because it is obviously known that banksters like to hide their schemes and operations in complexity.

 

[First]

you should be too



http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ispute-settlement-system-why-should-you-care/

Read that, and the way that's written it's pretty clear that's both 1) not a full accounting of the cases, 2) we don't have any way to judge whether the litigation was perfectly legitimate (vs the world you live in where corporate litigation must have been to pollute the environment) and 3) Farrell is vague about the accuracy of his compilation.

 

[First]

Even if it does not lead to lots of lawsuits against America that does not mean that it will allow companies to control what other countries can do or enact especially when it comes to the poor countries.

The whole point of creating legal statues is so they can be enforced in the courts. If they can't be successfully adjudicated, they're worthless. So frankly, I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[First]

No because it is obviously known that banksters like to hide their schemes and operations in complexity.

I'll reserve judgement like I said. You should try it.

 

[First]

Anyway, I'll let you two jerk off through the weekend. Cheers bros. ;-)

 

[blastingcap]

Did I claim to? Nope.

You realize that negotiations are never transparent, right? That's literally the exact opposite purpose of a negotiation; it's supposed to be secret! Come on. The whole thing, by law, will be aired out in public for 2 months, it's really not controversial in that sense at all.

They have shown various congresspersons, in classified private briefings, the exact contents of the on-going TPP deal. This is well known. They're not voting to pass TPP language right now, they're voting for fast track. Get it?

You are very opinionated in favor of the TPP for someone who has not read the entire TPP. Or if you aren't for it, you're basically just trolling.

Pro-TPPers have the burden of proving it's better than the status quo.

I'm not against the TPP per se but for it to lack so much transparency I simply can't be for it at this time. TPP appears to be an attempt to get a very long, complex agreement passed without a commensurately long period of time for review. I've done legislative analysis. It takes a while to consider all the implications, and that's if you can focus. It's not like everyone can drop everything else. Further, there are those who HAVE had access to it who have said negative things about it, adding to further belief that it's a bad agreement.

 

[sportage]

If anyone really believes American corporations would have never moved off to Mexico without NAFTA, think again.
And eventually TPP is going to be the way it is, never mind if America goes along or not.
This is silly.
What matters and all that matters is the price of goods on that Walmart shelf.
Patriotism be dammed.
For American shoppers, patriotism ends at the checkout counter.
Who is fooling who here?
Sam Walton knew how Americans are, what is important, their buying habits.

The lip service from Bernie Saunders and Elizabeth Warren sounds great, stirs up a lot of people, but all that chest pounding patriotism ends for Americans once they enter the doors of that big box retail store.
Or need the best deal buying car tires.
Or buying that big screen TV.
Who is kidding who.

If ground beef from China or Japan is on the shelf for 29 cents a pound vs American ground at 79 cents, which package would the typical American shopper chose?
And when Walmart builds a new store, will they chose American steel at three times the cost, or steel from China a one third the cost?

I don't know who Bernie Saunders, Elizabeth Warren or Rand Paul thinks they are fooling here, but when it comes to the American shopper, sticker price rules the day.
And that is where the patriotism ends.

 

[alcoholbob]

If ground beef from China or Japan is on the shelf for 29 cents a pound vs American ground at 79 cents, which package would the typical American shopper chose?
And when Walmart builds a new store, will they chose American steel at three times the cost, or steel from China a one third the cost?

In the long run China's steel will cost more than American steel does today, but we'll still pay the price since the cost of American regulations (we add 500,000 pages to the Federal register a year...) and lack of infrastructure means the future cost of U.S. steel will be in comparison prohibitively expensive compared to today. So in the long run it's just a lose-lose for the consumer *and* American businesses.

 

[FelixDeCat]

The TPP would cement SOPA like provisions

 

[boomerang]

Here's a vid from my Rep. He's new so I haven't figured out to what degree if any I should trust what he says. I will give him points for at least taking the time to give an explanation. Whether there is any truth within that explanation, I don't know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3OVHpwgT3U&feature=youtu.be&list=PLAENrifqF3xjhZd2dcFSlRIELiwvBBqyR

 

[Jaskalas]

Why America Hates the GOP-Obamatrade Deal
by Michelle Malkin

Sessions, Hunter: Fast-Track Would Gut Congressional Powers, Authorize Obama To Form New International Bureaucracy

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Here's a vid from my Rep. He's new so I haven't figured out to what degree if any I should trust what he says. I will give him points for at least taking the time to give an explanation. Whether there is any truth within that explanation, I don't know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3OVHpwgT3U&feature=youtu.be&list=PLAENrifqF3xjhZd2dcFSlRIELiwvBBqyR

I'll give him credit he does not try too hard to conceal where he stands and he did explain it in a simple fashion.
I'm still not a fan . While I think the filibuster has been used far too much recently however something this big should not require a simple majority to pass. I also go back to the Ross Perot theory of 8 other countries in the TPP have very low wages how many cars and crap do we expect to sell to them as consumers and what impact will that have on US wages when we have to compete against someone making $58.85 per week?

 

[boomerang]

I'll give him credit he does not try too hard to conceal where he stands and he did explain it in a simple fashion.
I'm still not a fan . While I think the filibuster has been used far too much recently something this big should not require a simple majority to pass. I also go back to the Ross Perot theory of 8 other countries in the TPP have very low wages how many cars and crap do we expect to sell to them as consumers and what impact will that have on US wages?

What concerns me is the extreme differences in interpretation within just the Republican party alone. Look at what my Rep says and what Jaskalas has linked. These guys are all over the map on this. I think their support comes down to how much they personally stand to profit from it and I am not being facetious. How else can there be such a disparity in the interpretation of what boils down to just words?

We need to wipe the slate clean and start over and I'm not being facetious when I say that either.

Edit: I didn't respond to your points because frankly, I don't know who or what to believe. Our government lies to us. Obama wants this and a Republican majority wants it and Democrats are against it? Something doesn't smell right. Just based on those facts alone, I'm against it. But there is no way to educate myself on it, because I can't read it. America, fuck yeah.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm with you Boomer

 

[norseamd]

Fuck it all.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...huge-win-on-trade/+&cd=11&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Wow, working across the aisle. Yeah team!!!!

 

[blastingcap]

See if your Congressperson was on the list of traitors who voted for TPA (which got tacked onto an unrelated bill, HR 2146, in order to get another attempt to pass TPA):

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/114-2015/h374

https://medium.com/govtrack-insider/the-house-passes-the-tpa-again-7bdef576c708

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The ones who changed their votes are complete assholes. Against it to prove they are against everything the President does but in reality when their vote is needed they come charging in with just enough people to pass it.
Disgusting

Blastingcap thank you for posting the votes.

Proud day for Massachusetts none of our representatives voted to support it.

 

[First]

lol

 

[Linux23]

big business said this bill is going through, and guess what, it's becoming a reality, america be damned.

 

[hal2kilo]

big business said this bill is going through, and guess what, it's becoming a reality, america be damned.

Was there ever any dought?

The Dems did there little dance to look like they're not bought and sold by the oligarky, voting it down the first pass.

 

[TheSlamma]

Was there ever any dought?

The Dems did there little dance to look like they're not bought and sold by the oligarky, voting it down the first pass.

It's nice to know a handful of other people see the "little dance"

It's "the lesser of two evils" though right? running on fear is powerful for both parties.