The Trans-Paacific Partnership trade deal


Off-Topic Discussions


So now that the deal's full text has been released, what do people think about this? Is it a powerful new way to unite and benefit a huge number of national economies? Or a piece of corporate skulduggery designed to undermine national and regional safeguards to maximize profits at the people's expense? I'm curious to hear your responses.

Sovereign Court

It has ?
That is somewhat big news


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Both, probably


I am somewhat concerned that the safeguards on organized labor aren't sanctionable for 5 years. Vietnam has a storied past with organized labor and I doubt they are just going to start allowing unions without some muscle forcing their hand. In 5 years when we get the chance to flex that muscle there very likely could be an administration in office that isn't labor friendly and will choose not to enforce that option.


Calex wrote:
Is it a powerful new way to unite and benefit a huge number of national economies? Or a piece of corporate skulduggery designed to undermine national and regional safeguards to maximize profits at the people's expense? I'm curious to hear your responses.

Both.

It's a reality, which means it's a compromise.

One of the increasingly worrisome trends in US politics is the fact that no one seems to understand that you can't "compromise" your way to everything you want. If we both want the same watermelon, "I get the watermelon and you get nothing" isn't a compromise, as you have no incentive to agree to it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

From what I've heard, I'm... concerned... about the parts where individual companies apparently have more power than entire nations, and can basically get paid by nations (i.e. take people's tax money) simply because of "expected future profits" that the nation has laws against. Or something along those lines.

o_O

That does kind of sound like the sort of clause you'd get in a document designed to maximize corporate profits regardless of the cost to anyone else.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The TPP, if ratified by the various national governments, will spell the end of any perceived governance by an elected government body on behalf of the majority of the people in these nations. The ISDS clauses alone will place all useful power in the hands of private tribunals whose decisions will bind national governments, whose composition will be defined by corporate interests and whose power will only by accessible to those same corporate interests. The TPP will mark a shift from hidden control of our governments by corporations to overt corporate governance of the countries that become a party to the TPP. The TPP will mark the last vestiges of democracy being swept away in favor of a corporate oligarchy.


Pink Dragon wrote:
The TPP, if ratified by the various national governments, will spell the end of any perceived governance by an elected government body on behalf of the majority of the people in these nations. The ISDS clauses alone will place all useful power in the hands of private tribunals whose decisions will bind national governments, whose composition will be defined by corporate interests and whose power will only by accessible to those same corporate interests. The TPP will mark a shift from hidden control of our governments by corporations to overt corporate governance of the countries that become a party to the TPP. The TPP will mark the last vestiges of democracy being swept away in favor of a corporate oligarchy.

NWO fears?


GreyWolfLord wrote:


NWO fears?

No. Simple observation and historical context. Democracy (or at least a more democratic form of governance) has not been the norm in recorded history.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Calex wrote:
So now that the deal's full text has been released, what do people think about this? Is it a powerful new way to unite and benefit a huge number of national economies? Or a piece of corporate skulduggery designed to undermine national and regional safeguards to maximize profits at the people's expense? I'm curious to hear your responses.

It'll be the same boon to the people of the signatory nations that NAFTA has been to North America. Which is to say, none at all.


The ISDS is a way for companies to circumvent the law of a given nation. If a law of a nation runs counter to something in the trade agreement, basically a company can take the government to an ISDS, or neutral arbitration. This arbitration then results in a legally binding result that the nation is required to follow, or face penalties under the trade agreement.

To date, nearly all disputes that have gone to an ISDS-format for NAFTA have resulted in decisions that invalidate the laws of the interested nation.

Basically it's an international version of the Supreme Court, except it isn't elected by anyone, it isn't appointed by an elected official, nor is it in any way accountable to a voting body of citizens.

It takes power out of the hands of government and puts it in the hands of corporations.


Sounds like insane paranoid ramblings, Irontruth. Seriously, do you really believe in conspiracy theories?


Sissyl wrote:
Sounds like insane paranoid ramblings, Irontruth. Seriously, do you really believe in conspiracy theories?

I'm not necessarily worried about a NWO-style takeover, rather just the sovereignty of people being violated for corporate profits.

Here's an article if you'are actually interested.

If you're not actually interested and just want to snipe at me, please post another attacking post so I know I can ignore you.


Certainly not. I have respect for people who feel that negotiations in secret about important facets of democracy and society are likely handled that way to impose things they don't want to tell anyone about, i.e. a conspiracy. And so, I am quite willing to respect your view that the TIPP treaty is a conspiracy. Just as I see the IPCC climate meetings and reports as parts of another.

Liberty's Edge

The same claims of corporate governance were made about NAFTA, and while we have certainly seen plenty of movement towards corporate governance... almost all of that movement has been from the Supreme Court ('corporations are people') and the rest of the Republican party.

Overall, I'd call the TPP a mixed bag and many of the criticisms vastly overblown. For example, the complaints that Vietnam has five years before organized labor safeguards go into effect... that's worse then Vietnam never being pushed to implement organized labor safeguards, how exactly?

It doesn't go far enough to force labor and environmental reforms and that will allow countries which do little in these areas to undercut the US on price? Have you looked at how much of the stuff you buy is "Made in China"? The scenario you describe is the status quo. The TPP pushes several countries to improve conditions and will direct some US trade to them (and away from China) in exchange... that's a win/win.

So, there is a grain of truth to all the criticisms, but the reality is that the supposed problems exist without the TPP and it may actually help to reduce some of them... and slow down Chinese economic imperialism in the process.


CBDunkerson wrote:
The same claims of corporate governance were made about NAFTA, and while we have certainly seen plenty of movement towards corporate governance... almost all of that movement has been from the Supreme Court ('corporations are people') and the rest of the Republican party.

NAFTA is costing the Canadian government millions, potentially billions over the next couple years, as corporations keep taking it to ISD settlements in attempts to circumvent Canadian environmental laws. Not all the cases results in corporate wins, but the litigation still costs them serious money.

ISDS was originally intended to prevent corrupt Mexican judges from ruling against corporations in other countries, but since then the primary target has been Canadian environmental laws.

Is it widespread or massive? No, but it is happening.

Bilcon seeking $300 million in damages. The tribunal already ruled in their favor that their rights under NAFTA were violated, the hearing on damages won't take place for at least another few months though. The effect though is that it's harder for local and federal authorities to make determinations about what kinds of projects can move forward. If it costs them serious money to reject projects, you can expect that they'll get sued for every rejection of a foreign company, which means either big budget hits, or they can't reject any project.

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / The Trans-Paacific Partnership trade deal All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.