Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday April 12 2018, @10:49PM   Printer-friendly
from the first-they-laugh-at-you? dept.

Trump Proposes Rejoining Trans-Pacific Partnership

President Trump, in a surprising reversal, told a gathering of farm state lawmakers and governors on Thursday morning that he was directing his advisers to look into rejoining the multicountry trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deal he pulled out of within days of assuming the presidency.

Rejoining the 11-country pact could be a sharp reversal of fortune for many American industries that stood to benefit from the trade agreement's favorable terms and Republican lawmakers who supported the pact. The deal, which was initiated by the Obama administration, was largely viewed as a tool to prod China into making the type of economic reforms that the United States and others have long wanted.

Both Democrats and Republicans attacked the deal during the president campaign, but many business leaders were disappointed when Mr. Trump withdrew from agreement, arguing that the United States would end up with less favorable terms attempting to broker an array of individual trade pacts and that scrapping the deal would empower China.

Republicans in Congress have also been skeptical of Mr. Trump's tendencies on trade, and 25 Republican senators sent a letter to Mr. Trump urging him to re-engage with the pact "so that the American people can prosper from the tremendous opportunities that these trading partners bring."

Previously: Donald Trump to Withdraw US from Trans-Pacific Partnership
Renamed TPP Signed, Without the IP Rules, Without the USA

Related: "Legal Scrub" of TPP Makes Massive Change to Penalties for Copyright Infringement
US Government's Own Report Shows Toxic TPP "Not Worth Passing"
Australia Leads Charge to Revive TPP While Canada Abstains


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday April 12 2018, @11:02PM (23 children)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday April 12 2018, @11:02PM (#666228) Journal

    He never really left. SNAFU

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Fluffeh on Thursday April 12 2018, @11:27PM (22 children)

    by Fluffeh (954) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @11:27PM (#666241) Journal

    Actually, as soon as the US withdrew from the TPP, the whole Copyright and IP section that they were super snippy about was dropped from the entire agreement.

    The agreement as the other 11 signatories signed it is actually about material goods and markets to support the less inhibited movement of those products. This will work well with the Soybean farmers that Trump was talking to just before this announcement, but there aren't many people that truly think the US will get a "better deal" than they had when it was all being drawn up initially. If they get in, it will be a much less attractive deal as they are the last one entering an already agreed to set of rules - and no-one will want to change that agreement much further.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by arcz on Friday April 13 2018, @12:19AM (17 children)

      by arcz (4501) on Friday April 13 2018, @12:19AM (#666257) Journal
      If they leave out the copyright bits I wouldn't be opposed to rejoining it.
      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by arcz on Friday April 13 2018, @12:24AM (3 children)

        by arcz (4501) on Friday April 13 2018, @12:24AM (#666261) Journal
        Oh, and the "corporate sovereignty" bits. Corporations should not be able to sue governments if the people can't.
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Gaaark on Friday April 13 2018, @02:14AM

          by Gaaark (41) on Friday April 13 2018, @02:14AM (#666301) Journal

          +1

          --
          --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:51AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:51AM (#666404)

          Oh, and the "corporate sovereignty" bits. Corporations should not be able to sue governments if the people can't.

          People can sue governments and they do all the time.

          • (Score: 5, Informative) by jb on Friday April 13 2018, @01:23PM

            by jb (338) on Friday April 13 2018, @01:23PM (#666446)

            Oh, and the "corporate sovereignty" bits. Corporations should not be able to sue governments if the people can't.

                People can sue governments and they do all the time.

            Both of those comments miss the key problem with TPP's ISDS provisions, which are:

            1. They allow foreign investors to sue governments for causes of action explicitly not available to domestic investors....
            ...which turns domestic businesses into second-class citizens in their own countries;

            2. They define "investment" so ridiculously broadly that even many run-of-the-mill operational (as opposed to capital) transactions give rise to "investor" status; and

            3. You end up with democratically elected governments having to pass up sensible domestic public policy reforms if they can't afford to "compensate" all the foreign "investors" who might object.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday April 13 2018, @01:25AM (6 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @01:25AM (#666279) Journal

        Well, I still don't like the TPP very much, but without the IP parts, it does lose most of it's evil.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @07:05AM (5 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @07:05AM (#666348)

          Agreed, but it makes it also a VASTLY less favourable deal for the US, as it basically does nothing to help its biggest export: IP.

          • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday April 13 2018, @04:54PM (4 children)

            by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @04:54PM (#666516) Journal

            Maybe the US should stop focusing on exporting Imaginary Property?

            The absurd lengths of time (even 20 year patents) vastly exceed what seems reasonable. If you can't get your reward within the market advantage time before your competitors can figure out what you did to copy it, then is it really worth protecting?

            Many innovations simply happen because the time is ripe for it. Like 1-click shopping. No reason Amazon should have a patent on that. If Amazon hadn't added that button, someone else would have within six months. It's not an innovation. Simply a "who did it first", and everyone would have done it within a short time. It was fairly obvious. But these days being fairly obvious is the primary thing that makes something patentable.

            I understand there are some who argue that some innovations should be protected. And some good justifications are offered -- even for some software. But it always seems like edge cases. Now if you could get rid of the vast majority of patent-noise so that these edge-cases were the mainstream of patent applications, then you might convince me.

            --
            People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
            • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday April 13 2018, @05:49PM (3 children)

              by maxwell demon (1608) on Friday April 13 2018, @05:49PM (#666544) Journal

              [1-click shopping]

              It's not an innovation.

              It is an innovation. But patents were not introduced to protect innovation, they were introduced to protect inventions. That's an important difference.

              --
              The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
              • (Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Friday April 13 2018, @05:51PM (2 children)

                by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @05:51PM (#666546) Journal

                Okay.

                But if 1-click shopping is an invention, then we're protecting the wrong thing.

                --
                People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
                • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday April 13 2018, @10:08PM (1 child)

                  by maxwell demon (1608) on Friday April 13 2018, @10:08PM (#666643) Journal

                  Read my post again.

                  1-click shopping is an innovation. It is not an invention. Patents were not meant to protect innovations, they were meant to protect inventions.

                  Again, innovations and inventions are not the same thing.

                  --
                  The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
                  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:32PM

                    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:32PM (#666934) Journal

                    Sorry, I misread. I agree.

                    --
                    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Friday April 13 2018, @02:10PM (5 children)

        by meustrus (4961) on Friday April 13 2018, @02:10PM (#666461)

        Side note: "Insightful" probably isn't the right mod for this. Can we get an Agree mod as a counterpart to the Disagree mod?

        --
        If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
        • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday April 13 2018, @02:27PM (2 children)

          by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday April 13 2018, @02:27PM (#666471) Journal
          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
          • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday April 13 2018, @05:01PM (1 child)

            by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @05:01PM (#666520) Journal

            Okay, I done writed this thar comment . . .

            What if Agree and Disgree were "vote counters" instead of mods? Instead of, and independent of mods. This idea has +121,719 Agree and -449 Disagree.

            --
            People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
            • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday April 13 2018, @05:18PM

              by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday April 13 2018, @05:18PM (#666529) Journal

              I like the idea and I think I've brought it up before.

              Essentially, you would be using a Reddit like scheme. We could filter/sort comments by moderation OR like/dislike stats (high number of likes, high like ratio, absolute value of votes, high votes but close to 1:1 likes/dislikes, etc). It would work as a second system on top of moderation, and could be given a larger number of points per day to spend, and convenient up and down arrows.

              Is it too much a departure from the Slashdot formula? Possibly, but people complain about how things work now and we already have the Disagree mod in place, just waiting to be liberated.

              --
              [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @05:24PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @05:24PM (#666532)

          Side note: "Insightful" probably isn't the right mod for this. Can we get an Agree mod as a counterpart to the Disagree mod?

          I got a better idea. First, remove the Disagree mod. Then, when someone disagrees with a comment they can...wait for it...post a cogent reason for why they disagree with the post they are responding to. Yeah, it means that the drag and drool crowd might find themselves left out of the discussion when they have their Smite button taken away from them. Or, they could just man up and articulate reasons for why they disagree with a comment they read on the intertubes. It could work.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Friday April 13 2018, @05:54PM

            by maxwell demon (1608) on Friday April 13 2018, @05:54PM (#666547) Journal

            Yeah, it means that the drag and drool crowd might find themselves left out of the discussion when they have their Smite button taken away from them.

            No, it means they'll abuse the "Troll" or "Flamebait" moderation options to express "Disagree". Guess why the "Disagree" moderation option (with no effect on the score!) was introduced?

            --
            The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @06:58AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @06:58AM (#666347)

      "Actually, as soon as the US withdrew from the TPP, the whole Copyright and IP section that they were super snippy about was dropped from the entire agreement."

      Actually, they weren't dropped. They were just "suspended". Meaning they're still in there, but not being enforced. Many have speculated that they'll be activated once the US joins the TPP. At which point the entire dropping out of the TPP was probably just a ruse to let the entire thing pass and get every other country on board first.

      We'll see what happens, but don't be surprised if that whole copyright/ip section starts biting people in the ass.

      • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday April 13 2018, @05:04PM

        by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @05:04PM (#666522) Journal

        The Copyright and IP cesspool of TPP are a sort of Sword of Damocles hanging in the air.

        --
        People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by jb on Friday April 13 2018, @07:21AM

      by jb (338) on Friday April 13 2018, @07:21AM (#666349)

      Actually, as soon as the US withdrew from the TPP, the whole Copyright and IP section that they were super snippy about was dropped from the entire agreement.

      No it wasn't. The IP Chapter remains in CPTPP. Sure, the provisions on copyright and on ISP enforcement have been "suspended", but almost all the other provisions of the IP Chapter (including most of the ones on patents) still remain.

      Also, "suspended" doesn't mean dropped. It means put in hold "until the parties decide otherwise"...

      CPTPP is a scam, much as the original TPP was. The degree to which it is a scam is, or at least should be, irrelevant.

      Frankly, deceptively marketing a highly restrictive, mostly anti-free-trade treaty like TPP/CPTPP as being "about free trade" (which is exactly what the AU, CA, JP & NZ govs are doing now, as was the US back when they were involved) really should be made a hanging offence. Trouble is, if it were, there'd be almost no politicians left at all in AU, CA, JP, NZ or US (possibly in some of the other TPP parties too, but I don't know enough about them to comment).

      Don't believe me? Read the text [dfat.gov.au] for yourself (it's been available publicly since February this year; the original TPP text for a couple of years longer). Chapter 2 (out of 30 chapters) is the only part of TPP that's pro free trade and even it would achieve very little -- the World Bank modelled its economic impact as so close to zero as to be within margins for error (except for VN, who it seems will actually get a few percentage points of growth).

      Why do we collectively go on rewarding our politicians for lying to us?

      One can only hope (and I admit it's a pretty slim hope) that when Trump talks about free trade, he's talking about actual free trade, not the mountains of restrictions masquerading as free trade that TPP's peddlers have been pushing for so long...

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @02:00PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @02:00PM (#666458)

      As far as I could tell, the TPP was actually a really good idea, but was ruined by the US's insistence on that copyright/IP bullshit, which is what got all us techies up in arms about it.

      We probably *should* be part of the TPP, just without that copyright crap. Freer trade between highly developed nations like Canada, Japan, South Korea, etc. is in our best interests. What's not in our interests (as people not affiliated with RIAA/MPAA/Disney) or the interests of non-US countries that aren't corrupted by Disney lobbyists, is all that ridiculous copyright bullshit. We need shorter copyright terms, not longer.