Well the article certainly had me at the phrase “… stifle market experimentation …” NOT! An agreement that stifles market experimentation gets and immediate up vote from anyone who has a memory that goes back to 2008. And I do expect someone with a slightly different slant on politics in general may (and I emphasize ‘may’ here) characterize the TPP as proper regulation vs throwing the doors open for another Wild-Wild-West situation.
" at the expense of US and Canadian growth,"
“the US government has hung weights around the necks of new entrepreneurs and businesses”
From my reading of politics and economics articles here on BB, it would not be hard to draw the conclusion that both of these are Good Things.
As in, North American investors could sue China / Chinese interests?
If so - ha ha ha! Legal system! Courts! Good luck suing China!
In Economic game terms, China is quietly upping the ante everywhere. There is so much localised stuff going on that they’re creating a swell towards a tipping point.
My takeaway from reading the article as an actual economist is…well, very little. It didn’t offer enough detail about what the specifics in those provisions were, nor how they would affect outcomes, to convince me of much of anything. That’s not to say the author is right or wrong.
The main argument seemed to be that TPP will make it harder to steal trade secrets and make it easier to punish those that do. So, for this to benefit China and hurt the US and Canada, one would have to believe that the US and Canada are presently profiting by reverse-engineering Chinese products and putting their secrets to use in our own products. If anything, that sounds like the opposite of the current reality.
Don’t quote moronic ideologues just because they happen to agree with you this one time, Cory. Especially when their reasons are dumb as hell.
I’m confused. Am I supposed to hate TPP for being unfair for American business or to American business? Or am I supposed to hate TPP because Cory does?
Indeed. The only Countries that the TPP is good for are the countries not in it…
Because of the ISDS part in particular, unless you feel it’s a good idea to elevate the power of the largest corporations above that of national governments, it’s a hilariously bad deal full stop.
We are already seeing the effects of the economic power of large corporations like Wal-Mart on municipalities; they can afford enough lawyers to bankrupt small municipalities with lawsuits, so in practice can do what they like. Governments seem incapable of learning the lesson that democracy is being eroded by unaccountable economic power and it will be their turn next.
Any agreement that is shrouded in secrecy in its writing, reduces transparency and contributes to hollowing out of the middle class is unfair and unethical.
Big Money gets what it pays for, including PR/astroturf/reputation management that provides immediate social media response designed to safeguard their existing and new business models.
So who benefits from the TTIP? Or is that China as well?
He speaks the language of a true believer.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.