Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The text for Trans Pacific Partnership released: it's bad.

  • 08-11-2015 12:21am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 81,489 ✭✭✭✭


    http://www.truthdig.com/report/page2/the_most_brazen_corporate_power_grab_in_american_history_20151106

    The TPP text, drafted in secret for 6 years, has now been released.

    5,700+ pages long and among many other things (it's a long document - thrice the King James Bible) it would legally restrict people from establishing "Buy local" campaigns, and corporations would have the power to sue governments for TPP violations. This includes such highlights as invalidating existing environmental protection laws that may be in place in countries, if they violate the TPP.

    This will severely impact the internet, as well, and by extension the freedom of information and speech, it more or less contains the worst aspects of the nixed Stop Online Piracy Act:

    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/the_tpp_a_time_bomb_that_could_blow_up_a_free_internet_20151107
    "To fully grasp the impending trainwreck here, it’s important to understand that copyright laws have a profound effect on what internet users can see and do online. The US regime of copyright enforcement has been repeatedly co-opted by special interests to censor legitimate content from the web. Copyright laws have been used to attack LGBTQ websites, censor investigative journalism and scrub homemade videos from the net just because of the music in the background.

    Many of the scariest scenes in the TPP script take place in the intellectual property chapter. This section exports the most draconian aspects of the United States’ broken copyright system and forces them onto the rest of the world, without requiring “fair use” provisions that are necessary to protect free speech.

    One provision demands that TPP member countries enforce copyright terms 70 years after the death of the creator. This will keep an immeasurable amount of information, art and creativity locked away from the public domain for decades longer than necessary, and allow for governments and corporations to abuse copyright laws and censor content at will, since so much of what’s online will be subject to copyright for decades.

    TPP even prescribes a mechanism for that censorship to occur. A section that can best be described as “Zombie-Sopa”, due to its similarity to the failed Stop Online Piracy Act, would require internet service providers (ISPs) to play “copyright cops” and create systems for hastily taking down internet content upon a copyright holder’s request, even without a court order."

    American workers will have to more directly compete with countries where the working wage is pennies an hour.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/tpp-ignores-global-warming-and-allows-murder-of-labor-union-organizers/5487148

    Oh and brutalizing and killing labor organizers? Totally not a labor rights violation under TPP.
    Thea Lee, the AFL-CIO deputy chief of staff, told HuffPost that USTR officials said in at least two meetings where she was present that killing and brutalizing [labor] organizers would not be considered interfering with labor rights under the terms of the trade measures.

    And if you thought the legal system was bad - it can always get worse... forget the court of appeals, forget the SCOTUS, there will be a three-person tribunal made up of technocrats when a company sues your government, saying their Clean Energy laws violate the TPP for instance.
    The most important chapter in the TPP treaty is “Dispute Settlement,” which sets forth the means by which corporations will sue countries for alleged violations of their stockholders ‘rights’ to extract profits from operations of those corporations in the signatory countries. The underlying assuption here is that the rights of international stockholders take precedence over the rights (even over the sovereignty rights) of the citizens of any participating country.

    Instead of these suits being judged according to any nation’s laws, they are allowed to be addressed only by means of private arbitration “Panels.” The Dispute Settlement chapter contains “Article 28.9: Composition of Panels.” Section #1 there is simply: “The panel shall comprise three members.” Each of the two Parties will appoint a member; one for the suing corporation, and the other for the sued nation; and both of those members will then jointly select a third member “from the roster established pursuant to Article 28.10.3”; and this third member will automatically “serve as chair.”

    Article 28.10.3 says that anyone who possesses “expertise or experience in law, international trade, other matters covered by this Agreement, or the resolution of disputes arising under international trade agreements” may be selected for the roster, so long as the individual meets vague criteria such as that they “be independent of, and not be affiliated with or take instructions from, any Party.” No penalty is laid out for anyone on the roster who lies about any of that. Basically, anyone may become a person on the roster, even non-lawyers may, and even corrupt individuals may, especially because there are no penalties for anyone on the roster, none at all is stated.

    Then, “Article 28.19,” section 8: “If a monetary assessment is to be paid to the complaining Party, then it shall be paid in U.S. currency, or in an equivalent amount of the currency of the responding Party or in another currency agreed to by the disputing Parties.”

    There is no appeals-process. If a nation gets fined and yet believes that something was wrong with the panel’s decision, there is no recourse. No matter how much a particular decision might happen to have been arrived at in contradiction of that nation’s laws and courts and legal precedents, the panels’ decisions aren’t appealable in any national legal system. Whatever precedents might become established from these panels’ subsequent record of decisions will constitute no part of any nation’s legal system, but instead create an entirely new forming body of case-law in an evolving international government which consists of international corporations and their panelists, and of whatever other panelists are acceptable to those corporate panelists. Voters have no representation, they’re merely sued. Stockholders have representation, they do the suing, of the various nations’ taxpayers, for ‘violating’ the ‘rights’ of stockholders.

    The roster of authorized panelists available to be chosen by any corporation’s panelists in conjunction with by any nation’s panelists, is customarily composed of individuals who move back and forth between government and private-sector roles, through a “revolving door,” so that on both ends of that, the ultimate control is with the owners of the controlling blocs of stock in various international corporations. This is the newly evolving world government. It will not block any nation from legislating protections of workers, or of consumers, or of the environment; it will simply hold a power to extract from any participating nation’s taxpayers fines for ‘violating’ the ‘rights’ of stockholders in international corporations. Citizens will increasingly be held under the axe, and the top stockholders in international corporations will be holding it. This isn’t the type of world government that was anticipated by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Albert Einstein, the founders of the U.N., and by the other early (pre-1954) proponents of world government. But, since 1954, the plans for this anti-democratic form of emerging world government were laid; and, now, those plans are the ones that are being placed into effect.
    Obama (and Hillary) who have campaigned on 'ending crony trade agreements?' well,
    In other words: This is, and will be, the low level of the playing-field that U.S. workers will be competing against in TPP etc., just as it is already, in the far-smaller existing NAFTA (which Hillary Clinton had helped to pass in Congress during the early 1990s). (Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, all campaigned for the Presidency by attacking Republicans for pushing such ‘trade’ deals. Their actions when they gain power, contradict their words. America and virtually the entire world has become rule of a suckered public, by perhaps as many as a thousand psychopathic aristocrats who own the international corporations and ‘news’ media, and who regularly do business with each other though they wall themselves off from the public.

    A mass protest effort is being planned to protest the TPP in Washington DC from November 14-18. http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Action.php/2015/11/07/mass-mobilization-to-stop-the-tpp-announ

    Ben Carson supports the TPP and you know how much of a ****ing lunatic that guy is http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/11/06/ben-carson-backs-white-houses-tpp-trade-deal/

    This is quite a lot like that New World Order stuff that the conspiracy theorists have warned about for decades, honestly.

    Strongly considering going to Washington next weekend. If this belongs in US Politics please move but it has global repercussions. If passed the EU economy will be severely impacted.


Comments

  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,659 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    The TPP does have the potential to restrict innovation within the IT realm.

    This would be done by locking into place restrictive practices that would favour stakeholders who could afford to traverse the laws. So while this would be of benefit to the status quo, this would be at the expense of progress and ulimately the consumer. Historically, from the book "Copyright Masquerade", a similar type of freezing was attempted at the turn of 20th century to protect sheet music providers against the new-fangled gramophones. Thus with the TPP, it seems the former's equivalents will prevail.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,359 ✭✭✭micosoft


    Overheal wrote: »
    http://www.truthdig.com/report/page2/the_most_brazen_corporate_power_grab_in_american_history_20151106

    The TPP text, drafted in secret for 6 years, has now been released.

    All international treaties are drafted in secret. How on earth can you negotiate in public?
    Overheal wrote: »
    5,700+ pages long and among many other things (it's a long document - thrice the King James Bible)

    How long should a trade agreement between the two largest economic blocs in the world be? A mass missal?
    Overheal wrote: »
    it would legally restrict people from establishing "Buy local" campaigns, and corporations would have the power to sue governments for TPP violations. This includes such highlights as invalidating existing environmental protection laws that may be in place in countries, if they violate the TPP.
    You seem to be missing the purpose of a free trade agreement. How would you feel if French butter companies campaigned for French people not to buy Irish Butter? If you don't like free trade be honest about it but I find it strange you object to a free trade treaty having rules about buy local campaigns.
    Overheal wrote: »
    This will severely impact the internet, as well, and by extension the freedom of information and speech, it more or less contains the worst aspects of the nixed Stop Online Piracy Act:

    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/the_tpp_a_time_bomb_that_could_blow_up_a_free_internet_20151107

    Umm. Enforcement of intellectual property rights is a core part of any trade agreement. Given the future for Ireland and most western countries is trade based on intellectual capital rather than money or property captital one would have thought you might support this. But rather you'd like to take other peoples intellectual property and not pay them right?
    Overheal wrote: »
    American workers will have to more directly compete with countries where the working wage is pennies an hour.

    This treaty is between the EU and the US. Don't think there are many Euro workers on pennies an hour.
    Overheal wrote: »
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/tpp-ignores-global-warming-and-allows-murder-of-labor-union-organizers/5487148


    Oh and brutalizing and killing labor organizers? Totally not a labor rights violation under TPP.

    Ahhh. The classic, because it's not in it, it's for it eh.
    Overheal wrote: »
    And if you thought the legal system was bad - it can always get worse... forget the court of appeals, forget the SCOTUS, there will be a three-person tribunal made up of technocrats when a company sues your government, saying their Clean Energy laws violate the TPP for instance.
    It's a trade agreement. It could never be overseen by the courts of one of the participating nations.
    Overheal wrote: »
    Obama (and Hillary) who have campaigned on 'ending crony trade agreements?' well,


    A mass protest effort is being planned to protest the TPP in Washington DC from November 14-18. http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Action.php/2015/11/07/mass-mobilization-to-stop-the-tpp-announ

    Ben Carson supports the TPP and you know how much of a ****ing lunatic that guy is http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/11/06/ben-carson-backs-white-houses-tpp-trade-deal/

    This is quite a lot like that New World Order stuff that the conspiracy theorists have warned about for decades, honestly.

    Strongly considering going to Washington next weekend. If this belongs in US Politics please move but it has global repercussions. If passed the EU economy will be severely impacted.

    You do realise that you are posting on an Irish website based in the EU? Are you randomly pasting this junk on as many websites as you can to spread your badly thought out ideas? Who are you trying to influence here?

    My advice is to take the tinfoil hat off and take some of your research from sites other than crackpot US conspiracy sites. Be less of a sheep and spend more time thinking through why things work the way they do.

    It's unlikely that TTIP will be perfect but so far it's reasonable and not confirmed by many of the engaged entities. Overall it will increase trade and jobs between the EU and US which can't be a bad thing.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Seems to be some confusion here between the Atlantic and the Pacific deals.


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,489 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    First off, we're talking about the TPP - Trans Pacific Partnership. Not the TTIP. Secondly, if you thought we were talking about the TTIP, why imply that it was not a relevant topic to Irish people? Thirdly, yes I'm fully aware of what website I've been on, only been here 9 years...

    If you think my sources or conclusions are crack-potted, or foil-wrapped, then you probably have the ability to post contrary sources of information, yes? Let's be perfectly honest, this isn't exactly the PATRIOT act, it would take quite a long time to digest it all (probably earn you a thesis if you're a Poli-Sci major) so let's acknowledge that cherry-picking is an inevitability for the layperson, so if you think the information is inaccurate, provide better information.
    Umm. Enforcement of intellectual property rights is a core part of any trade agreement. Given the future for Ireland and most western countries is trade based on intellectual capital rather than money or property captital one would have thought you might support this. But rather you'd like to take other peoples intellectual property and not pay them right?
    For decades longer than made sense, a copyright claim existed (but only due to technicality on the creator's part, was this year overturned) that protected "Happy Birthday To You" and required that particularly movies that wished to use the song, had to pay a royalty to the long-dead creator's foundation.

    But that's not even the part that I was discussing dismay over (Thanks for reading!) it's the fact that a provision in the Trans Pacific Partnership would require Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to execute take-down notices of material without requiring a court order, they would have to actively police the internet in a sense. Similarly, youtube takes down videos all the time for completely inane reasons (case study, video taken down in spite of 'fair use' in 2007; not settled until 2015: http://www.examiner.com/article/dancing-baby-lawsuit-youtube-video-of-baby-dancing-to-prince-song-is-fair-use) If this sounds completely foreign to you or you have no idea what the Stop Online Piracy Act is - well, google it. Anything you find online should give you a profound idea of how bad that is.
    Don't think there are many Euro workers on pennies an hour.
    Reportedly the average wage in Vietnam though is 35 cents/hour, a member of the TPP.
    Ahhh. The classic, because it's not in it, it's for it eh.
    Would you accept an Irish trade agreement that flooded the market with cheap foreign goods that were tantamount to slave labor? Would you be OK with buying conflict diamonds? More or less the same philosophy.
    How would you feel if French butter companies campaigned for French people not to buy Irish Butter?
    Well let's be clear, Kerrygold is delish and I will pick it up from my local grocer once in a while. That said, if my neighbor at the farmer's market wanted me to buy his real home-made irish-like butter locally instead of encouraging the expensive and wasteful proposition of having a homogeneous product shipped overseas (like, a bottle of water - a type of product countries ship all over the world for no ****ing reasons other than they can make a quick dollar), I'd be all for it.
    How long should a trade agreement between the two largest economic blocs in the world be? A mass missal?
    Well understandably a trade agreement is a bit like an OS Kernel, it's the framework for the 2+ economic/legal systems to interface. The reason the text length is such a problem though is as I have said, whether this was something Ireland was agreeing to or the US, the scope of that text leaves it out of the hands of the majority of most citizens who in most cases just are not able to divest the time to read and understand it.

    Previous trade agreements, like NAFTA, have given us charming anecdotes like this:
    In 1996, the gasoline additive MMT was brought into Canada by Ethyl Corporation, an American company. At the time, the Canadian federal government banned the importation of the additive. The American company brought a claim under NAFTA Chapter 11 seeking US$201 million,[34] from the Canadian government and the Canadian provinces under the Agreement on Internal Trade ("AIT"). The American company argued that their additive had not been conclusively linked to any health dangers, and that the prohibition was damaging to their company. Following a finding that the ban was a violation of the AIT,[35] the Canadian federal government repealed the ban and settled with the American company for US$13 million.[36] Studies by Health and Welfare Canada (now Health Canada) on the health effects of MMT in fuel found no significant health effects associated with exposure to these exhaust emissions. Other Canadian researchers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency disagree with Health Canada, and cite studies that include possible nerve damage.[37]

    Canada had filed numerous motions to have the duty eliminated and the collected duties returned to Canada.[38] After the United States lost an appeal from a NAFTA panel, it responded by saying "We are, of course, disappointed with the [NAFTA panel's] decision, but it will have no impact on the anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders." (Nick Lifton, spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman)[39] On July 21, 2006, the United States Court of International Trade found that imposition of the duties was contrary to U.S. law.[40][41]

    To relate that concept to the TTIP: the United States could sue the EU for hefty sums of money if member states did not allow genetically modified agricultural goods to flood your supermarkets, or could just as equally sue Ireland if it reacted by saying "**** all these sciencey foods, buy local", or otherwise continued to criticize/libel GM-foods since they have not been linked substantially to any health concerns. Under law in the United States, you cannot publicly discuss/criticize some common sources of greenhouse gasses (moo) without threat of a lawsuit...


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,833 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    And then there's the whole thing with ISDS hanging over governments that dare make a teeny-weeny dent in massive corporate profits by trying to introduce regulations. El Salvador knows all too well about them.

    The world of "Elysium" looks like it's coming closer to fruition by the day.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 81,489 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Even Trump understands its a bad deal (yikes)

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/09/exclusive-donald-trump-obamas-trans-pacific-free-trade-deal-insanity/

    During last nights debate he was slammed by Rand Paul for "thinking China was part of the partnership" http://www.vox.com/2015/11/10/9710284/rand-paul-donald-trump-republican-debate

    That might have everything to do with China being slated as a future member, but as in the video they do bring up a couple points against the Trump :p


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    micosoft wrote: »
    All international treaties are drafted in secret. How on earth can you negotiate in public?

    ...Why couldn't you?
    You seem to be missing the purpose of a free trade agreement. How would you feel if French butter companies campaigned for French people not to buy Irish Butter? If you don't like free trade be honest about it but I find it strange you object to a free trade treaty having rules about buy local campaigns.

    I wouldn't like it, but their free speech is more important than my beliefs.
    Umm. Enforcement of intellectual property rights is a core part of any trade agreement. Given the future for Ireland and most western countries is trade based on intellectual capital rather than money or property captital one would have thought you might support this. But rather you'd like to take other peoples intellectual property and not pay them right?

    I'm musician and a songwriter. I'll be completely frank and say that if the only alternative to losing revenue to piracy is having ISPs cherry picking the internet and restricting free speech, I'd rather not make as much from it.

    It's about the lesser of two evils. Policing the internet will inevitable lead to political repression - just look at what GCHQ are doing with their powers to manipulate and hack political polls and discussions online.
    It's a trade agreement. It could never be overseen by the courts of one of the participating nations.

    Why not?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,949 ✭✭✭A Primal Nut


    Yeah, anything that makes it easier for Corporations to sue Governments over regulations is dangerous territory. Switzerland and Uruguay signed a bilateral agreement which allowed Corporations to sue, and now Philip Morris are suing Uruguay over anti-Tobacco regulations. Crazy stuff.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,685 ✭✭✭walshyn93


    What will the implications of TTIP be for our discriminatory taxes on tobacco?


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,489 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    walshyn93 wrote: »
    What will the implications of TTIP be for our discriminatory taxes on tobacco?

    Depends. Australia got into trouble a few years ago with tobacco companies for its health warning labels. iirc they sued the govt through one of its trade agreements:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/23/business/international/tobacco-plain-packaging-philip-morris-british-american-cigarettes.html

    http://aftinet.org.au/cms/node/519


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Strikes me as a storm in a teacup

    Corporations can and do sue governments, doesn't mean they win

    Copyright and intellectual property laws make sense, what's the fuss? smacks of bit of internet entitlement, screw Vietnam getting a potential 11% GDP increase from this, we might not be able to "share" future films so easily

    Every large treaty has it's pros and cons, this is certainly no different, but the backlash seems overly alarmist and partisan over a trade deal that will positively affects millions in the long run


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,685 ✭✭✭walshyn93


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Strikes me as a storm in a teacup

    Corporations can and do sue governments, doesn't mean they win

    Copyright and intellectual property laws make sense, what's the fuss? smacks of bit of internet entitlement, screw Vietnam getting a potential 11% GDP increase from this, we might not be able to "share" future films so easily

    Every large treaty has it's pros and cons, this is certainly no different, but the backlash seems overly alarmist and partisan over a trade deal that will positively affects millions in the long run

    If it affects our food it gets a big fat no from me. I lived in America and the quality of food is atrocious. Even the hugely expensive stuff is worse than our bottom of the range stuff. I fear that in an uncontrolled market place an undiscerning Irish consumer will accept low quality food and as a result decent produce will be hard to come by.

    That's the single most important issue for me.

    And who exactly enforces the judgements of these courts?


Advertisement