Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Saturday August 01 2015, @08:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the eats-shoots-and-leaves dept.

Deutsche Welle reports on failed round of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) negotiations:

Sticking points were said to have included differences over protecting regional food specialties, the auto trade, and protection for drug makers.

Among other things, New Zealand, the world's largest dairy exporter, has said it will not back a deal that does not significantly open dairy markets.

The question of data protection for drug manufacturers was also a bone of contention, with the US wanting data on biological drug development to remain monopolized for 12 years, as compared with Australia's five years.
The deputy trade minister from Chile, which has no protection at all for drugmakers, said any deal must reconcile public needs with commercial interest. "For us it's vital to have an agreement that balances public policy goals for intellectual property in medicines," Minister Andres Rebolledo said.

The New Zealanders are upset about their distant Canadian cousins protecting their dairy industry, the NZ stuff reports:

The heavily protected Canadian dairy industry has earned the wrath of Federated Farmers president Dr William Rolleston for standing in the way of a good deal for dairy in the Trans- Pacific Partnership (TPP) talks in Hawaii.
Rolleston said the public position of the Canadians was "unacceptable".

A 2014 paper written by Canadian academic and former Liberal MP Martha Hall Findlay says it costs a Canadian family about $300 a year to prop up the dairy industry.
The Canadian government slaps on quotas of 246 percent for cheese, and almost 300 percent for butter.
Outside key dairy electorates, the supply management system that protects farmers is not popular.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 01 2015, @11:12PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 01 2015, @11:12PM (#216884)

    > It's not about trade, but about corporate supremacy.

    No. It is 100% about trade. Corporate supremacy is just a side-effect that the people drafting the TPP don't consider to be a problem worth paying attention to.

    If you care about fighting corporate supremacy, or really any form of authoritarianism, you need to understand how the enemy becomes powerful. If, on the other hand, all you want to do is ineffectively rail against evil in order to make yourself feel good, then you are on the right path.

    "Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories." - Sun Tzu

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Disagree=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Whoever on Sunday August 02 2015, @12:18AM

    by Whoever (4524) on Sunday August 02 2015, @12:18AM (#216895) Journal

    No. It is 100% about trade. Corporate supremacy is just a side-effect that the people drafting the TPP don't consider to be a problem worth paying attention to.

    In your opinion, the TPP is being negotiated by well-meaning people who are naive about the effects of the agreement they are negotiating?

    I have a bridge to sell you.

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:25AM

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:25AM (#216913) Journal

      In your opinion, the TPP is being negotiated by well-meaning people who are naive about the effects of the agreement they are negotiating?

      Two words: Hanlon's razor [wikipedia.org].
      But I admit it's rather a statistical law, can't rule out that some of the negotiators are conscientiously malicious.

      I have a bridge to sell you.

      Thanks, but I'm not a politician [wikipedia.org].

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday August 02 2015, @03:20AM

        by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Sunday August 02 2015, @03:20AM (#216920)

        Two words: Hanlon's razor.

        Stupidity is not a sufficient explanation for the sheer levels of corruption that we are seeing.

        • (Score: 4, Informative) by c0lo on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:01AM

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:01AM (#216925) Journal

          As I said, stupidity only is not sufficient.
          However, a sprinkle of corruption and useful idiots for the rest is enough.

          Don't forget that it is the trade ministers of the countries that will need to sign the treaty and, where applicable, it is the legislative of those countries to ratify the treaty.
          And, as hard as it may be to believe, not all politicians are corrupt or stupid; here's a report of Australian Committee on Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade on Investor-State Dispute Settlement [aph.gov.au] in regards with protecting the public interest - even those that supported the ISDS allowance in treaties pointed out shortcomings (and some suggested safe-guards):

          In recent years the Australian public has become increasingly aware of the shortcomings of ISDS and the risk that it poses to public policy, particularly since the launch of the case against plain packaging by Philip Morris....[A]ccording to UNCTAD, by the end of 2013, 98 states had been respondents in a total of 568 known treaty based cases. Argentina has faced 53 ISDS cases, Canada 22 and the United States 15. The vast majority of ISDS cases—about 75 per cent—are brought by American and European investors.

          The Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network (AFTINET), a network of 60 community organisations, noted that the number of known ISDS cases lodged each year has increased from less than five in 1993 to 57 in 2013. Dr Patricia Ranald outlined the concerns of AFTINET:

          ISDS basically gives additional special rights to foreign investors to sue governments for damages in an international tribunal on the basis of a claim that domestic legislation or policy has harmed their investment. It has developed from a system that originally was about compensating for the actual expropriation of property—real property.But over the years, particularly the last 20 years, it has developed into a system based on principles of indirect expropriation that simply do not exist in most legal systems and that are not available to domestic investors. In that sense it is not about free trade; it is about giving special preferential treatment to foreign investors compared with domestic investors.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Whoever on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:01AM

        by Whoever (4524) on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:01AM (#216924) Journal

        All you have to do is look at the jobs former USTR staffers got after negotiating treaties.

        Occam's Razor is applicable to this situation and it suggests that stupidity is not a likely explanation.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:33AM

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:33AM (#216927) Journal

          All you have to do is look at the jobs former USTR staffers got after negotiating treaties.

          Yes, very likely I could agree with the assertion the US delegation is mostly corrupt if this is what you want to suggest.

          But... US is just 1 of 12 countries, don't discount the interests of others. For instance, in Australia:

          • Howard government did not agree to include ISDS in the 2004 US-Australia free trade agreement
          • In 2011 [wikipedia.org], the Australian government announced that it would discontinue the practice of seeking inclusion of investor state dispute settlement provisions in trade agreements with developing countries.

          Granted, Abbott govt seems oblivious to the lessons of the past [abc.net.au] but, from what I get watching the news about the character, I'd put it on the account of stupidity.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:51AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:51AM (#216915)

      > In your opinion, the TPP is being negotiated by well-meaning people who are naive about the effects of the agreement they are negotiating?

      Self-interested people.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:15AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:15AM (#216910)

    No. It is 100% about trade. Corporate supremacy is just a side-effect that the people drafting the TPP don't consider to be a problem worth paying attention to.

    This is so naive it isn't even funny. They know full well what they're doing and why they're doing it. They just care more about money than they do about democracy or the good of society. Corporate supremacy is the main goal of the plutocrats.

    If, on the other hand, all you want to do is ineffectively rail against evil in order to make yourself feel good, then you are on the right path.

    I want to rail against evil effectively, and the ones writing the TPP are quite evil.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:53AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @02:53AM (#216917)

      > They just care more about money than they do about democracy or the good of society.

      Yes, that is not in dispute.

      > Corporate supremacy is the main goal of the plutocrats.

      No, their personal success is the main goal of plutocrats. Power is a means to an end, not an end itself.

      > I want to rail against evil effectively, and the ones writing the TPP are quite evil.

      Well, you are failing.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @03:15AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @03:15AM (#216918)

        No, their personal success is the main goal of plutocrats. Power is a means to an end, not an end itself.

        Whatever you want to call it. But it's not about trade.

        Well, you are failing.

        In what sense? I could just as easily claim that you are failing, but like you, I have no evidence. Or maybe we are failing, considering the existence of things like the TPP, the NSA's mass surveillance, and countless other nonsense, but in that case, you're failing just as hard.

        And if you're basing this on posts I make here and assuming I do nothing but make Internet comments, then your ability to use logic and reason fails.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:41AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @04:41AM (#216929)

          > > Power is a means to an end, not an end itself.
          >
          > Whatever you want to call it. But it's not about trade.

          Trade is their means to success. Just like they aren't in it for power itself they aren't in it for trade itself. But enabling trade is how they pursue success. TPP is their mechanism for enabling trade as means to achieve success.

          > And if you're basing this on posts I make here and assuming I do nothing but make Internet comments, then your ability to use logic and reason fails.

          Your ability to use logic and reason has failed you. I haven't even hinted that you do nothing but make internet comments. What I have accused you of is being completely ineffective because you fail to understand root causes. Without that understanding whatever actions you take will not succeed except by pure chance.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03 2015, @05:38PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 03 2015, @05:38PM (#217474)

            Trade is their means to success.

            Irrelevant. You said it's 100% about trade, but then when I said it's about power/corporate supremacy, you said power is just a means to an end, and their real goal is personal success. Therefore, it's ultimately not about trade, as I said.

            Your ability to use logic and reason has failed you. I haven't even hinted that you do nothing but make internet comments.

            Your ability to read has failed. Notice the "if".

            What I have accused you of is being completely ineffective because you fail to understand root causes.

            Based on absolutely nothing. I said it's not about trade, and you later agreed with me, even though you said it was 100% about trade. You seemingly just contradicted yourself with your own logic.

            Furthermore, given the state of the world, I'd say your status as an Enlightened One who understands the True Root Causes (really just pedantry and nothing more) is not helping much.

            What needs to be done now is to stop the TPP; regardless of their intentions, that can be done.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @08:27PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 02 2015, @08:27PM (#217097)

        Power is a means to an end, not an end itself.

        No, power is definitely the end. Socipaths seek power and more power because its power.