Chaos2Frozen
Member
So erm Anti-TPP people, what are you guys going to do about all those farmers mentioned in the article? Tough luck?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Trumps Trade Pullout (TPP) Roils Rural America (Politico)
- Thread starter Piecake
- Start date
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Right, and to avoid this unnecessary appearance of insult, the interests of your corporations would necessarily have to be weighed very carefully against the importance of your relationship with other states and their peoples - and that is a good thing, rather than effectively conceding sovereignty to a legal entity charged solely with profit-maximization and nary a concern for welfare.
Phrozenflame500
Member
Welp, at least we'll have an example the next time the econ-deniers rear their heads.
LizardKing
Member
Good. Agriculture is a terrible industry to build a backbone of a country anyway. So very few get so very rich by exploiting vast swathes of land.
Maiden Voyage
Gold™ Member
Crazy. I've got family in Eagle Grove. Population 3k. Small world.
makingmusic476
Member
I was inclined to oppose the TPP when it was being written (I think because of the social circles i run in), but I always felt like the arguments against the deal by its opponents were mostly conjecture.
I'm a fan of globalization on the whole, but I fear the possible "race to the bottom" consequences of trade liberalization. I was never able to really figure out whether the pact mitigated that while also strengthening trade between member states.
I'm not a fan of products being hard to come by because of unnecessary trade restrictions, and I like the strengthening of ties between nations in general, for many, many reasons.
I'm a fan of globalization on the whole, but I fear the possible "race to the bottom" consequences of trade liberalization. I was never able to really figure out whether the pact mitigated that while also strengthening trade between member states.
I'm not a fan of products being hard to come by because of unnecessary trade restrictions, and I like the strengthening of ties between nations in general, for many, many reasons.
TPP set higher labor and environmental standards than several of the member countries had, so it would've raised that bottom. Now that's gone because the Chinese alternative deal definitely won't care about labor laws.
Every nation already conceded sovereignty when they agreed to the terms of the treaty. So long as the rulings by the arbiter adhere to the treaty I honestly don't see the problem.
Plus, why should a nation be able to get away with violating the treaty if the other nation is too afraid of retaliation or harming the relationship with the other?
To me, that seems like it would favor the influential and powerful nations in the treaty at the expense of the weaker ones. They can violate the treaty and get an advantage while they can punish the weaker ones for violating it. I'd hardly call that a fair and effective mechanism of enforcement, or a good mechanism to ensure that all of that nations end up happy and stay in the treaty.
Before jumping on the anti-Bernie bandwagon, many in U.S did not agree with the TPP, including Clinton backers which is might be part of the reason she shifted her opinion on it. It got too much bad publicity from all sides of the aisle.
Zeus Molecules
illegal immigrants are stealing our air
Because historically that has ended so well......
makingmusic476
Member
I was aware of that, but those are only pieces of the puzzle. What about things like corporate tax rates?
(That may have been covered, too. I never really outright opposed the deal. I was more inclined to throw my hands up and say "I don't know".)
jack_package_200
Banned
¯\_(ツ
_/¯
Perhaps abandoning the TPP was a bad idea...
Sucks for those farmers.
_/¯Perhaps abandoning the TPP was a bad idea...
Sucks for those farmers.
Banderdash
Member
As someone who doesn't live in the US... the TPP was a shithouse deal for the other signatories.
No one outside the states should lament its passing.
No one outside the states should lament its passing.
There are currently around 3 million people working directly on farms in the United States. It's kinda a big deal.
Also
LizardKing said:
sans_pants
avec_pénis
isn't this shit fairly complicated and outside the knowledge base of like 90% of people?
americans have always been real good at understanding complex arguments
We need you to buy stuff. We probably don't need you making anything other than spiderman movies.
Suggesting that it was is kind of like sideways acknowledging Hillary's biggest flaw. She is prone to saying things she doesn't mean.
Edit: it really lost, imo because of the way it was put together more than anything. People didn't trust it because it was put together in secret by lobbyists and then dumped on the public with no chance to change it.
There are many constituencies, labor in particular that voiced specific problems they had with the TPP.
Edit2: I should say Hillary's SUPPOSEDLY biggest flaw
I still mourn the TPP, deeply. We could have locked Asia into a preferential trade deal with the U.S. setting the terms. Later China would have joined after the U.S. set the terms. It was a brilliant strategic move by Obama, but you had anti free trade forces like Bernie's wing and Trump's wing sink it.
Historically US influence almost never ends well considering the US has been responsible for dragging multiple countries backwards.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Correct.
No one knows now what the TPP started as. Maybe it was originally a trade agreement. By the end of the secret negotiations it was a dramatic overreaching attempt to expand and establish a hegemonic American corporate power across the Pacific Rim.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
I'm sure things will be better with China.
Chmpocalypse
Blizzard
You're talking to a leaver who erroneously thinks the UK is still an influential and powerful nation. So, take the words with a lot of salt.
jack_package_200
Banned
And it would have helped many people including farmers in the US.
I also want someone to answer this question.
teruterubozu
Member
Didn't Clinton flip-flop on the TPP too? If there's anyone to blame it's Obama with his half-assed messaging regarding the TPP agreement. Americans had no idea what the fuck it was.
Nope, so I am ambivalent either ways.
I for one am glad the TPP is dead. The worst part would be the idea of corporations suing governments through tribunals, though that is already a thing in past trade agreements (chapter 11 I think in NAFTA?). Whatever perceived benefits it may have had, the threat to local industries, jobs, privacy, medications and the general idea of giving corporations even more power and rewarding their ability to operate this agreement in secrecy doesn't sit well with me.
Then again, I am not American. Either way I think the threats government and enabling corporations would make anyone double-take regardless if your nation was set to benefit from it. I actually agree with countering China's influence too, but all the other bullshit was enough to dismiss it entirely, because wether its Trump or someone else, we would've gotten another deal eventually- and hopefully, a better one.
Then again, I am not American. Either way I think the threats government and enabling corporations would make anyone double-take regardless if your nation was set to benefit from it. I actually agree with countering China's influence too, but all the other bullshit was enough to dismiss it entirely, because wether its Trump or someone else, we would've gotten another deal eventually- and hopefully, a better one.
Free trade in general is very difficult for the public to hear anything good about, as the benefits are just too diffuse and the drawbacks too concentrated. You have detractors like Bernie and Trump using it as their rallying point while advocates find it very disadvantageous to speak good of it. Barely anyone stuck their neck out for the TPP and when they did they did so with heavy qualifiers.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
1.) Clinton could have tried to create a message for it, and risk pissing off the already irate Sanders supporters even more. We heard no end to the demands the Sanders party with their paltry delegates made, and not giving them that, ugh. The best bet was to give in to the whiny kids who have no idea how trade works, and 'reluctantly' finish ratifying it later.
Of course, at the end of the election, it did not matter.
2.) Sanders could have ignored trade, or reluctantly supported it. Or, for fucks sake, focus on the real issue: Automation. Instead he was vehemently against it, with supporters not knowing what the fuck they were against: see "NO TPP! NO TPP!" chants during the DNC. You thought the disrespectful babies at the convention made things ugly, try supporting one of their arch enemies.
The simple fact of the manner, we don't need help from the left to make the messaging harder. The message "TPP is Bad!" will win out in most cases over any case to be made for TPP considering the complexity of it. Complexity means people have to trust experts on the manner, and Sanders demonized most of those.
The fact is: Globalization is inevitable and you have two choices, you can slow it down and isolate yourself with tariffs, or try to put your country in a better position and leverage what advantages your country has.
Nevermind it's going to do nothing to combat automation. Other than banning technology, one of the few things you can do is incrementally tax profits from that automation. India is comically going the ban technology route, it will be interesting to see if they follow through.
Anti-trade is the biggest area of damage Sanders did to the Dem party, and it's going to be difficult to come back from it and take many years.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
so tired of winning!
Isn't Canada out of this as well? The map shows the talks are on hold.
hydragonwarrior
Member
Hopefully they eventually realize Trump was a bad choice. From what I read, they're still coming up with reasons to avoid saying he's an idiot.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Well I mean it's obscurity was part of the scheme to push it through Congress without much notice. If Americans found out that for example it expanded American style copyright of lifetime + 75 years across the Pacific Rim the result might not have been what Obama expected.
fredrancour
Member
Clinton gave in and reversed stances when a large portion of her party turned against it. Sanders actively fought against it.
Unknown Soldier
Member
NAFTA was the first trade agreement to introduce the corporate tribunals. All previous trade agreements throughout history never had them and yet somehow trade was still possible.
The introduction of the corporate tribunals was intended so American corporations could obtain supernational power over countries they did business in. Subsequent trade agreements negotiated with American involvement have all included them since.
I expect if there ends up being a "TPP11 + China" agreement there will be no provisions for American style copyright, American style patent protections for drugs, corporate tribunals, etc. Quite frankly the Pacific Rim will be more free and more prosperous without the United States in complete and total corporate domination.
Sure but what doesn't make sense is all the Americans opposed to TPP because they think it's a bad deal for the other signatories
jack_package_200
Banned
I'm still curious on what some of ya'll wanna do to help these farmers.
Conflict NZ
Member
I'm from New Zealand and the TPP was going to be hellish for us. We have a great social healthcare system and our drugs are massively if not completely subsidised by the government. The TPP was going to force us to pay US prices on drugs, which are completely crazy. It would've bankrupted PHARMAC and sent our Health System in a downward spiral to the shitshow that is the US.
Last edited:
There are perfectly valid reasons to be against these huge trade agreements as they were. People aren't being isolationist alarmists when they critique them. These new trade agreements give unprecedented power to big corporations and take power away from the people & their chosen representatives.
Also worth pointing out that the NAFTA tribunals have never ruled against the US.
If there's one thing people don't need to live, it's food.
Delighted the TPP went down in flames from an Australian perspective.
Can't believe they were even thinking about the ISDS after all the shit that went down with Phillip Morris and the Hong Kong trade agreement.
Can just imagine the US pharmaceutical lobby trying to drag down the health care system in Australia and New Zealand through nuisance litigation.
Can't believe they were even thinking about the ISDS after all the shit that went down with Phillip Morris and the Hong Kong trade agreement.
Can just imagine the US pharmaceutical lobby trying to drag down the health care system in Australia and New Zealand through nuisance litigation.
And what specific powers were those?
