Support NeoGAF

[Clockwork5]

Can't let pesky facts get in the way of your conspiratorial narrative!

What? I said there was a very good reason, nothing of any conspiracies... I was unaware the doc had been released. Settle down.

 

[Torokil]

democrats have been pro free trade since the late 80s. Hillary is not anti TPP. hope this helps.

 

[nelsonroyale]

I would be interetested in some the opinions which underpin their positions.

For instance, Free Trade has benefited US big business pretty massively on the international stage...

 

[numble]

I would be interetested in some the opinions which underpin their positions.

For instance, Free Trade has benefited US big business pretty massively on the international stage...

The questions are mainly focused on jobs and wages of American workers.

 

[darkace]

I would be interetested in some the opinions which underpin their positions.

For instance, Free Trade has benefited US big business pretty massively on the international stage...

Free trade hurts US big business by exposing them to international competition. The main beneficiary of free trade is the consumer.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Generally the bits of the TPP that people are opposed to (ISDS is the most common) are in practically every FTA.

Copyright being extended to lifetime + 75 years isn't in every FTA.

Neither is expanded patent protections for pharmaceutical companies.

 

[KDR_11k]

So, what this means is that Republicans have changed the economic philosophy they have believed for the last 35 years in a SINGLE PRIMARY.

Shows you this isn't about political direction but pure winning or losing. Perfectly engenders Trump's message, doesn't matter if what you do makes sense, just that you WIN.

Copyright being extended to lifetime + 75 years isn't in every FTA.

Neither is expanded patent protections for pharmaceutical companies.

Doesn't the US have 90 years + life by now? Most of this is the US pushing its own lobby-written laws onto others.

 

[darkace]

Copyright being extended to lifetime + 75 years isn't in every FTA.

These don't change in most countries. Also it's life+70.

Neither is expanded patent protections for pharmaceutical companies.

Again don't change in most countries. Including the US. Low wage countries receive pharmaceutical through TRIPS anyway, so the TPP will have little impact here.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Doesn't the US have 90 years + life by now? Most of this is the US pushing its own lobby-written laws onto others.

This is correct. This is the US forcing their own copyright laws down the throats of the Asia-Pacific Rim nations. It benefits American Big Media and no one else.

In the US, the bill that led to lifetime + 75 years copyright duration is nicknamed the 'Mickey Mouse Law' because it's origin is basically Disney trying to prevent Mickey Mouse from ever entering the public domain.

 

[Jacob]

Y'know, maybe this is a generalization but GOP voters don't strike me as all that ideologically consistent.

The major American parties have always been a hodgepodge of different and sometimes contradictory ideas since they're more alliances of convenience than ideological blocs. They're actually a lot more cohesive nowadays than they used to be, though Trump has thrown a lot of things about the GOP into (possibly temporary) doubt.

 

[numble]

Free trade hurts US big business by exposing them to international competition. The main beneficiary of free trade is the consumer.

Nah, these are multinational companies. They set up a Vietnam subsidiary and that means the exports from the Vietnam subsidiary qualify for TPP benefits on exports to the US.

And there are elements in the TPP that are clearly anti-consumer. The TPP authorizes rights-holders to prohibit parallel imports. Basically if the corporation wants to sell drugs or textbooks cheaply in Vietnam or Canada, a US consumer can be prohibited from buying the textbook or drugs from Vietnam/Canada.

 

[darkace]

Nah, these are multinational companies. They set up a Vietnam subsidiary and that means the exports from the Vietnam subsidiary qualify for TPP benefits on exports to the US.

You realise most companies are in competition with other ones, right? This happened before, but now there's more competition.

And there are elements in the TPP that are clearly anti-consumer. The TPP authorizes rights-holders to prohibit parallel imports. Basically if the corporation wants to sell drugs or textbooks cheaply in Vietnam or Canada, a US consumer can be prohibited from buying the textbook or drugs from Vietnam/Canada.

The IP provisions in the TPP explicitly allows countries to set their own parallel import laws.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

I think that, for any given voter, there's maybe two issues that they care about, and all the other stuff is just baggage they are okay with.

this is 90% of voters.

 

[Abounder]

Good. Just about everyone should be against these bullshit deals especially the TPP - it shuffles in legislation like it was SOPA on steroids.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

I seem to specifically remember about 15 years ago the UAW (US auto manufacturers union) was staunchly against aspects of free trade and many middle class jobs that kept the American midwest chugging along went to Mexico thanks to some of those deals.

I also specifically remember red states and their non-unionized voters not giving a fuck because Kia was moving into Tennessee, GA and other southern states to make cars. Very much a "fuck you, I got mine".

Interesting to now see southern state voters adopting this position. I wonder if they would have if not for The Donald saying so and them following like lemmings.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

partisan elite cues and motivated reasoning; party ID is stickier than virtually any policy position.

I'm only ever partially convinced by this argument; I don't think I've read a paper with a satisfying enough methodology to make me fully believe the causal link. Did Trump persuade the Republican right that globalisation hurt them? Or did he win because they'd already made that decision? Which came first?

 

[numble]

You realise most companies are in competition with other ones, right? This happened before, but now there's more competition.

I don't see that contradicting what I said. Are you seriously alleging that US big business is against the TPP? Please list the US big businesses that are against the TPP because it will hurt US big business.

The IP provisions in the TPP explicitly allows countries to set their own parallel import laws.

The IP provisions allow countries to determine when IP rights are exhausted, yes, but they also explicitly allow rights holders to prohibit importation of their works:

Each Party shall provide to authors, performers and producers of phonograms the exclusive right to authorise or prohibit the making available to the public of the original and copies of their works, performances and phonograms through sale or other transfer of ownership.

They also provide rights holders the right to prohibit accessing streams of their works by VPN:

each Party shall provide to authors the exclusive right to authorise or prohibit the communication to the public of their works, by wire or wireless means, including the making available to the public of their works in such a way that members of the public may access these works from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.

 

[Maztorre]

Free trade hurts US big business by exposing them to international competition. The main beneficiary of free trade is the consumer.

Multinationals are major beneficiaries of free trade, seeing as they are able to go out into the developing world and lower prices as soon as a FTA is established, and destroy any small/medium sized businesses that were competing with them in their domestic markets. The consumer benefits of free trade in the West did exist, but have been eroded by the impact of multinationals interfering with the political and economic policies of Western countries. What we have now is crony capitalism, where state welfare is used to allow multinationals to suppress wages by "topping up" salaries to something approaching living standards, while openly refusing to pay tax through abuse of their multinational status.

There are a range of massive unintended impacts caused by free trade that current law is completely unequipped to deal with, and there is no appetite to fix these problems due to the financial leverage multinationals have over politicians due to decades of hands-off economic policy. The model is propped up by the constant presence of developing nations as a source of cheap and unregulated labour, and pretensions that they can have unlimited growth forever while never accounting for environmental impacts of their actions. The recent reactions from UK/US citizens are proof that the economics of the 80s-00s are no longer tenable.

To return to the topic - the average citizen has no idea how economic policy works, can't comprehend the scale of any particular policy relative to the national budget, and many of them have token causes that they are emotionally invested in to the exclusion of anything else. They will follow the party line on economic policy if it is sold to them in a beneficial and simplistic way, even if it is contradictory to their own politics. This is why fiscal conservatism has been so successful, it's built on emotional platitudes about people abusing handouts (with no thought given to the relatively low cost of food stamps relative to something like the military) or the treatment of national budget like a household budget, which is immediately relatable to a citizenry that has built its lifestyle on debt.

 

[darkace]

I don't see that contradicting what I said. Are you seriously alleging that US big business is against the TPP? Please list the US big businesses that are against the TPP because it will hurt US big business.

Business suggestions to the TPP wont be available for a few years, but I distinctly remember leaked e-mails by pharma criticising it heavily.

The IP provisions allow countries to determine when IP rights are exhausted, yes, but they also explicitly allow rights holders to prohibit importation of their works:

This is how law currently exists in the US. It's fairly standard IP protection.

They also provide rights holders the right to prohibit accessing streams of their works by VPN:

Yes they allow rights holders to choose how people access their work. If they want to allow it they can. I don't understand how this isn't a positive.

Multinationals are major beneficiaries of free trade, seeing as they are able to go out into the developing world and lower prices as soon as a FTA is established, and destroy any small/medium sized businesses that were competing with them in their domestic markets. The consumer benefits of free trade in the West did exist, but have been eroded by the impact of multinationals interfering with the political and economic policies of Western countries. What we have now is crony capitalism, where state welfare is used to allow multinationals to suppress wages by "topping up" salaries to something approaching living standards, while openly refusing to pay tax through abuse of their multinational status.

Small/medium businesses are extraordinarily inefficient. Large businesses allow lower prices for the inhabitants of those countries, increasing real incomes.

There are a range of massive unintended impacts caused by free trade that current law is completely unequipped to deal with, and there is no appetite to fix these problems due to the financial leverage multinationals have over politicians due to decades of hands-off economic policy. The model is propped up by the constant presence of developing nations as a source of cheap and unregulated labour, and pretensions that they can have unlimited growth forever while never accounting for environmental impacts of their actions. The recent reactions from UK/US citizens are proof that the economics of the 80s-00s are no longer tenable.

None of these issues are free trade related. Also the international community recognises the presence of corruption in domestic policy, it's part of why these trade agreements are written. The main way crony capitalism is engaged in is with subsidies and regulation.

To return to the topic - the average citizen has no idea how economic policy works, can't comprehend the scale of any particular policy relative to the national budget, and many of them have token causes that they are emotionally invested in to the exclusion of anything else. They will follow the party line on economic policy if it is sold to them in a beneficial and simplistic way, even if it is contradictory to their own politics. This is why fiscal conservatism has been so successful, it's built on emotional platitudes about people abusing handouts (with no thought given to the relatively low cost of food stamps relative to something like the military) or the treatment of national budget like a household budget, which is immediately relatable to a citizenry that has built its lifestyle on debt.

There are legitimate arguments for both reducing the debt and for reducing welfare spending. It's a problem of rhetoric more than anything else.

I don't really understand what that has to do with free trade though.