SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
It's looking like, possibly (hopefully), the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) talks between the U.S. and Europe may be falling apart. According to a BBC article, the French Minister of trade is saying that the trade talks "are likely to grind to a halt".
The French minister, who threatened to leave talks last year, said Europe was offering a lot with little in return. It comes a day after Greenpeace leaked documents from the talks. The environmental group released 248 pages of classified documents, which it said showed how EU standards on public health risked being undermined by the major free-trade agreement.
So, in my opinion, the French (and Greenpeace) deserve a toast (and not with a California red). Now all we have to do is do the same with the TPP!
This is what the trade 'deals' mean for our future if not defeated.
takyon: Also at Foreign Policy, The New York Times .
Previously: TTIP Documents Leaked
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday May 03 2016, @11:51PM
Except that, slowly (as in boiling the frog), the shareholders of public traded corporations are less and less made of the lower people.
With the middle class melting down [ft.com] and all that
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday May 04 2016, @12:39AM
Shareholders are not people. Shareholders vote with majority rule, when has the majority of investors ever voted for anything other than maximizing profit? The usual majority of shareholders are represented by fund managers, and funds only exist to maximize profit (and occasionally reduce risk.)
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Wednesday May 04 2016, @01:19AM
There are people which are direct shareholders. Did you want to say that their "peopleship" attribute is of no relevance when discussing the "shareholder" attribute?
But... even if so, does it make my statement invalid?
Let me make my point a bit clearer: the participation of the middle and lower class to the capital/investment market diminishes as the time passes
(where by participation does include both "direct" - as in owner of shares - or "indirect" - as member of an investment fund or something).
And this is the very trap so few realize (being blinded by the network of indirections/proxies which acts inside the economy/capital markets): we reached a point in which if someone wins, other have to lose.
And, of course, at this "poker table" whoever has more chips has better chances to stay in the game (yes, I know it's not poker, but it's an almost a "zero-sum game").
As such, the capability of real people to self-determination is eroded (fast, lately) and thus, in the context of "not sure which is the lesser of evils", I'd be more afraid of the corporations than the govt.
The govts can be physically removed/replaced if they become too disconnected from the interest of the governed citizens, big enough (supra-national) corporations cannot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday May 04 2016, @03:47AM
I meant to say that shareholders do not act like people. For most corporations, the majority of shares are not owned directly by people, but by collections of people - other corporations, mostly funds. Even when people own shares directly, the only thing they typically agree on (as shareholders) is to maximize profit.
Yes, the less wealthy have less say in corporations because they (a) own less shares, and (b) tend to own those shares by proxy via collectives, funds, and other mechanisms that only "protect their interests" by maximizing profits.
Its actually a really good argument for "government interference in business" - for the government to protect peoples' interest by passing laws to control the corporations. Now, when government is unduly influenced by "corporate interests", where does that leave the people?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday May 04 2016, @04:06AM
Ummm... it leaves them in the USA?
(grin)
---
(PS. Kidding aside... come to think of it, it may be the only place were real corporate interest is influencing the governance - and not only the people in government.
Yes, corruption of governments by private interest happens all over the world, but it is rather opportunistic in its nature - the favour goes to the highest payer of the moment. Change the govt, the old favourites go out of favour.
In US? Change the govt and it is very likely the previous gained influence remains as the law.
It's only in USA that I see a relentless push to make corporate interest the supreme law of the land... am I blind to other places in which this happens in a non-opportunistic way?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford