Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal Is Reached 278
An anonymous reader writes: The NY Times reports that negotiators have finally reached agreement over the Trans-Pacific Partnership from the U.S. and 11 other nations. The TPP has been in development for eight years, and has the potential to dramatically strengthen U.S. economic ties to east Asia. Though the negotiations have been done in secret, the full text of the agreement should be published within a month. Congress (and the legislative houses of the other participating countries) will have 90 days to review it and decide whether to ratify it. The TPP has been criticized in tech circles for how it regards intellectual property and facilitates website blocking, among other issues.
Proponents will also have to answer broader questions about whether it stifles competition, how it treats individuals versus large corporations, as if it creates environmental problems. To give you an idea of how complex it is: "The Office of the United States Trade Representative said the partnership eventually would end more than 18,000 tariffs that the participating countries have placed on United States exports, including autos, machinery, information technology and consumer goods, chemicals and agricultural products ranging from avocados in California to wheat, pork and beef from the Plains states."
Proponents will also have to answer broader questions about whether it stifles competition, how it treats individuals versus large corporations, as if it creates environmental problems. To give you an idea of how complex it is: "The Office of the United States Trade Representative said the partnership eventually would end more than 18,000 tariffs that the participating countries have placed on United States exports, including autos, machinery, information technology and consumer goods, chemicals and agricultural products ranging from avocados in California to wheat, pork and beef from the Plains states."
Finally (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Finally (Score:5, Informative)
The agreement also would overhaul special tribunals that handle trade disputes between businesses and participating nations.
Probably something like ISDS. That should hardly be a surprise. It is the new colonialism: it gives companies the possibility to plunder foreign nations, but with an army of lawyers instead of an army of thugs.
Re:Finally (Score:4, Informative)
The agreement also would overhaul special tribunals that handle trade disputes between businesses and participating nations.
Probably something like ISDS. That should hardly be a surprise. It is the new colonialism: it gives companies the possibility to plunder foreign nations, but with an army of lawyers instead of an army of thugs.
Actually, they have plenty of thugs, too. They just prefer to use the lawyers so everything looks "clean".
Great. now we can vote the damn thing down (Score:4, Interesting)
and, might I add, vote the damn thing down without amendments. otherwise, all job types will meet an H1B type competition.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe that would get more attention on the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
I'll narrow it down. You're going to get raped. So, you have 'surprise sex' coming but who knows when? I've not yet seen one good thing reported about this. Not one...
Re: (Score:3)
Failure to buy Brand X (lead included) Lubricant will result in your beings sued because the company failed to make a profit by your choosing to not buy it. Surprise sex for everyone!!! I'm hoping they whip me and call me names first. I'll pay extra for that.
Re: (Score:3)
Umm... No? Can you show me anything good that has been published about this? I've not seen one good thing published about this. Not one.
Fast Track (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course those morons passed fast track for this TREATY, which it is.
So no matter what nasty surprises are found in it, if anyone actually gets to see it, changing them will next to impossible.
Someone should sue and charge that this is, in fact, a Treaty and subject to the provisions of the Constitution regarding treaties.
Re: (Score:3)
One of the wonderful things about a treaty is that it bypasses piddling issues like whether it's Constitutional. If a treaty is signed that violates the Constitution (free speech? What is free speech?) then it's still enforceable. On Americans.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Are you a large multinational?
No? Bend over.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... who elected the politicians who let this happen.
Not the American people.. if you go by election results for the last 15 or so years...
We Are Fucked (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:We Are Fucked (we'll, depends.) (Score:2)
This is the first thing that came to mind. That, and we are really, really fucked .
We are fucked... where "we" represent those that still want to do "business" (operate/work/get paid) as usual. This is the time when all of us need to aggressively find ways to adapt, and prosper at best (and not getting squashed at worst.)
Think of all the folks who are still crying for their jobs to come back from China, even though that has been happening for 3 decades (I mean, how many decades do people from a 1st word industrial nation need to adapt)?
Though I feel sympathy for them, I know I do not
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:We Are Fucked (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The TPP has more to do with strengthening the Japanese economy (in the crapper for 2 decades) and many Southeast asian nations to balance out China's growth and aggressiveness than anything to do with American companies. Sure, American companies are part of the deal, but they're bargaining chips among the US' geopolitics. It strengthens Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, New Zealand, Australia, and Singapore and opens up several South- and North- American markets for those counties to trade, places that China has
Re:We Are Fucked (Score:5, Insightful)
This is all about letting Big Biz (esp Big Pharma) in the USA fuck all the smaller biz into bankruptcy AND letting the US Feds get unfettered access to anything they want.
The other countries get what out of this exactly?
The sagebrush is blowing in the wind.
Soon ann these other counties will look just like identikit USA with a Big Mac whorehouse on every corner etc etc
Re: (Score:2)
Wait... are you trying to suggest that a government would put the interests of big businesses and millionaires before that of the people?
Actually.. upon half a second of reflection I have now come to the conclusion that you're right.
please say you didn't just type that with a straight face?
Congratulations (Score:5, Insightful)
You are now ever so much more than a mere consumer you are now officially a commodity.
And we STILL can't read it (Score:5, Insightful)
Its full 30-chapter text will not be available for perhaps a month
Doubtlessly to be released to public 24 hours before the Congressional vote...
If the reason for keeping it secret is that the negotiators didn't want to be swayed by day-to-day changing public opinion, what reason not to release the text immediately? It's not as if they have to print it all out; I'm sure there's many a web-designer who could whip up a site with the content of the treaty in less than a day.
Hell, stick it in a TXT file and dump it on an FTP site somewhere. Nominally this agreement is for the betterment of all involved countries; there is no reason not to make the information available immediately.
Unless... say, you don't think the negotiators weren't working in the best interests of the citizens they are supposed to represent, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
They don't HAVE to, but they opted to. It's not their fault you didn't find the one unlinked web page on some random government server to request your hard copy with 30-day lead time requirement. But it was available to be requested.
Re: (Score:2)
Beware of the leopard.
Re:And we STILL can't read it (Score:5, Informative)
It's because Canada is in the middle of an election, and if the details get out before then, the ruling Conservatives will be completely wiped off the face of the earth.
It will gut most of Canada's government-run businesses, including our health care system.
Re:And we STILL can't read it (Score:5, Funny)
With apologies to the late Douglas Adams:
Congressman: "But the treaty was on display to the public!"
Disgruntled Voter: “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find it.”
Congressman: “That’s the display department.”
Disgruntled Voter: “With a flashlight.”
Congressman: “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
Disgruntled Voter: “So had the stairs.”
Congressman: “But look, you found the treaty, didn’t you?”
Disgruntled Voter: “Yes, yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
Re: (Score:2)
"Doubtlessly to be released to public 24 hours before the Congressional vote"
That would actually an improvement. Last I heard it was going to remain secret after ratification.
Re:And we STILL can't read it (Score:5, Interesting)
It gives the players involved time to setup any sort of spin, distraction, press release, leak, or other propaganda to snub the expected protests.
If you pay attention you can see it in action. Shortly before the Iran deal was announced there were a bunch of stories about amazing bunker buster bombs, which were nothing new, but magically were on the second pages of assorted news sites. Once the deal was announced it was clear to me that it was all nicely orchestrated to either pressure Iran into accepting or else, or to snub those that would argue we would be toothless on the enforcement side (likely both).
So watch the news cycle carefully for the next 30 days. Friendly "journalists" will be getting special access and you can expect a lot of stories based on that access that will paint things in a positive light. You will see a lot of selling and spinning in the affected countries. By time the full text comes out and the analysis comes out it will be fighting an uphill battle to re-ignite outrage that has already been tamped down.
Re:And we STILL can't read it (Score:5, Insightful)
At least Nixon knew when the jig was up and still had enough sense of shame to step down when he was busted. When modern presidents wantonly ignore the law AND get caught they claim is some !$MYPARTY conspiracy to discredit them and carry on.
We would lucky to have a president with half the integrity or Richard Nixon again.
Re: (Score:3)
We would lucky to have a president with half the integrity or Richard Nixon again.
if that isn't a sad commentary I don't know what is.
Canada (Score:5, Interesting)
There's an election going on here. Whether or not Canada signs is depends greatly upon which party wins. Right now, it's pretty much a (nationwide) three-way tie. But that doesn't mean an even sharing of the seats in parliament, as the NDP are expected to "waste" a lot of votes in Quebec, so it's actually a much closer race between the Liberals and incumbent Conservatives.
Re:Canada (Score:4, Interesting)
According to Wikileaks, the State Owned Enterprises section of this agreement was to basically green light the selling of the CBC and Canada Post and allow for suits against crown corporations for interfering in the market. Do we have the final text of this section?
Re: (Score:2)
It also outsources auto manufacturing and means Canadians won't be allowed to know the Country of Origin of their meat, chicken, milk, eggs, butter, or chalk substitute pretending to be milk.
Or Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
How is that possible? We need to know that in the cases of contaminated food.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but the other country and their countries, under TPP, can sue you for anything that restrains their trade, like environmental, health, or safety.
Those get in the way of their profits.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether or not Canada signs is depends greatly upon which party wins.
No matter which party wins, it will be signed. Libs, NDP or Conservatives will all bow down to banks and big money.
Re: (Score:3)
The Conservatives support the TPP, that's obvious. The NDP does NOT [theglobeandmail.com] - not sure where you get the idea they're bought by corporations. In the recent provincial election in Alberta, the top 70 corporate donations went to one of the two right wing parties (PC, Wildrose). NDP was the only party to claim they'd raise corporate taxes. Granted, that's at the provincial level but the party ideology
Re: (Score:3)
I'd be surprised if the Liberals don't support it in the end, but it may depend what happens in other countries.
If the alternatives are to sign on and have a 12 partner TPP, or not sign on and be excluded from an 11 partner TPP, I think Canada will sign on. Now that the agreement is final, rather than still in negotiations, it is a take it or leave it situation. The argument of not wanting to be left out will likely be enough to sway the vote.
If it faces trouble in other nations, then the Liberals might be
Re: (Score:2)
ITT (Score:5, Interesting)
any one for reclaiming their government from the corporations and plutocrats that have corrupted it to their purposes?
or are we all just going to sit around whining about government, full stop, no further thought on the topic
Re:ITT (Score:5, Interesting)
How would you suggest going about doing that?
It sounds nice, but it isn't as simple as you make it sound.
Re:ITT (Score:5, Insightful)
there is a mistaken notion that you have to devise a perfect solution to the problem before improving the problem
for example: we have laws against rape and murder. that doesn't stop all rape and murder, but no one is arguing that, just because we can't stop all rape and murder, we shouldn't have any laws against them. but we do have morons arguing that because we can't magically stop all corruption, we shouldn't try to minimize it
the point is to simply minimize the problem. the simple fact is that many nations do better than the usa in regards to controlling corruption and plutocrat interest. with very simple changes (simple in construct, i didn't say simple to achieve). for example: we pass laws that cut down on the election cycle funding by corporations and plutocrats. i'd argue the most destructive event against the usa, in it's entire history, worse than 9/11, worse than pearl harbor, even worse than the civil war, is the 2010 citizens' united decision. let's start by reversing that
a lot of whining at this point about how that's hard. because the right thing is hard to do is an argument against doing it? anything worth doing in this world is hard by definition. if it were easy, it would already be done. this is just lazy whiners
elect people that would promise to reverse citizen's united. i'm not saying it's going to happen in 2016. but every day people grow angrier and more aware of the problem. look at the interest in trump and sanders. these "protest votes" would usually fade by now in previous cycles. but people are really getting mad. at some point, a tipping point will be reached. this problem isn't going away, and is getting worse. not enough people are paying attention right now. but more and more are every day
really our biggest enemy is acceptance and cynicism. there's always people with bad intent in this world. they always need to be defeated. but instead of rolling up our sleeves and doing that, the perplexing and maddening thing is people who roll over and accept being robbed, and then rationalize their victimhood with cynicism. this is our real enemy: willing slaves
you will see this mentality in many comments in this thread and other threads on the topic of corruption and government. those people are the real reason we have our problems
Re: (Score:2)
I have a solution that will really DO SOMETHING about this nonsense:
Next election, I'm going to vote for Democrats or Republicans. If everyone else has the courage to join me in this, I think it should solve all our problems.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils still doesn't change the fact that there are still 2 evils.
2. First Past the Goal Post [youtube.com] is the bigger problem.
Vote for Sanders? (Score:4, Informative)
Sanders opposes and has opposed [berniesanders.com] Citzens United, Corporate Financing of Election, the TPP, and the Iraq war since the beginning. He has never accepted corporate money in his entire career [opensecrets.org] and isn't now that he's running for president.
AFAIK he is the only candidate with a long political record who's speeches are in line with his actions. You could vote for him or, you know, talk about the cynacism of the two party system and how political change is impossible.
I do know one thing. Cynacism is obedience to the plutocracy. Sure, it talks differently, but it functions exactly the same way.
Well I didn't vote for it (Score:2)
Wake up in your own bed, but not in the U.S. (Score:2)
That's right, one day you'll wake up and not be in your own country any more because now we'll be in the TPP.
Answer? (Score:5, Interesting)
Proponents will also have to answer
You can give China MFN status one day in the name of "human rights" theater and then lecture Americans about the importance of environmental protection the next, and no one anywhere blinks an eye. Exactly when are proponents going to have to answer to anyone, about anything? Elites have been trading US prosperity for various and sundry bad overseas agendas since forever and none of them have ever paid the least price.
I'm all for trade deals (Score:2)
However how can a deal between rich countries such as Japan, Australia and the USA be reciprocal with countries like Vietnam were wages are low?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well Plato said democracy only works with educated and informed voters. The problem is most voters are shit-brained morons who should have never been given the right to vote, because this is what happens. If you voted Democrat or Republican, you made this happen, SO FUCK YOU!
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. But not consumer costs. So the aforementioned will be not just reduced to Vietnam conditions, but the people will be wiped out. You can't live on a wage of 10 cents an hour if a cup of coffee costs you $5.
Re: (Score:2)
Corporations everywhere need a place to get cheap labor so they can keep profits up. Watch over the next decade as China starts building factories in Africa.
Re: (Score:3)
They are building them now.
Re: (Score:2)
Corporations everywhere need a place to get cheap labor so they can keep profits up. Watch over the next decade as China starts building factories in Africa.
Why next decade? They are already doing it (Ethiopia is booming with work right now.)
hmmm (Score:2)
The US government can rarely agree on any one subject and this secret treaty has everything including the proverbial kitchen sink (made in Taiwan) in it.
I'm curious (Score:5, Interesting)
Has anyone here ever met anyone who is in favor of the Trans Pacific Partnership?
I mean, I've met people who don't know what it is, but I have yet to meet someone who's all, "Yes! We need this Trans Pacific Partnership to make my life better."
Stronger IP protections (Score:2)
Stronger IP protections are generally being welcomed by the creative types I know. I haven't heard much about the rest of the treaty and neither has anyone else so I'm a little puzzled as to what all the chicken littling is about.
Re:Stronger IP protections (Score:4, Insightful)
"Stronger IP protections" are not for the "creative types you know". They're for the ownership types you know. And for the government types you know. Whistleblower protections would disappear and so would anything like fair use. It's the DMCA on a global scale. You comfortable with global enforcement?
The countries signing the TPP are not ones that generally violate IP protections, anyway.
https://www.eff.org/issues/tpp [eff.org]
Re: (Score:2)
"Stronger IP protections" are not for the "creative types you know". They're for the ownership types you know.
I've no idea why you think the two are mutually exclusive. Indie authors and musicians for example are sharply on the rise, in terms of cinema while the blockbusters will forever remain in the hands of corporations there's a lot of decent quality amateur stuff coming out. Everything you write, you have immediate copyright protections on, that's how easy it is to take advantage of stronger copyright law.
I'll put it to you like this - with stronger and longer recent IP protections recently, have you noticed a
Re: (Score:3)
"Creative output"? No change whatsoever.
Indie authors and musicians are not "sharply on the rise". There's just a new word, "indie", invented to make it seem like it was something that didn't happen until millennials invented "being creative while making hardly any money". And to think that stronger and longer IP protections is the reason behind the rise of
Re: (Score:2)
If someone covers your eyes, puts a pen in your hand, guides it to the contract and says sign here, there is every reason to believe it's a bad idea.
In favor (Score:3)
The populist arguments against NAFTA have generally been that it "enriches corporations, at the expense of American jobs". While it eased Canadian-US trade somewhat, the most visible effect of NAFTA was that US-Mexican trade was eased to the point that hundreds of maquiladoras (manufacturing
Re: (Score:3)
I'm in favor of TPP, and of trade agreements generally.
Great to hear your in favor of a deal you haven't read.
On the other hand, a kind of knee-jerk hatred to trade agreements in general appears to drive much of the opposition, and I think of those anti-trade arguments as having no moral standing, just like the ones put forth by the sugar lobby.
Knee-jerk hatred, knee-jerk acceptance whats the difference?
While I appreciate patriotism,
Patriotism is stupid.
I personally feel that we should be trying to make life better for humanity in general, rather than greedily holding onto wealth in the USA.
Globalization like capitalism only works when coupled with serious efforts to manage losers. In the absence of a serious will to do so blanket statements about moral imperatives favoring any and all trade deals simply because more trade = more good fall flat.
NAFTA is a disaster (Score:5, Informative)
Canada has been completely screwed over by NAFTA. If we try to enact any kind of environmental protection, a US company sues Canada for millions. It creates a situation where if Canada wants to reduce the amount of water, lumber or other natural resources exported, or more tightly control the extraction of those resources, US companies can succesfully sue Canada for increased costs or lost profit.
NAFTA's Chapter 11 Makes Canada Most-Sued Country Under Free Trade Tribunals [huffingtonpost.ca]
It's great that poor countries can see increased growth from this, but the reality is large trade agreements often make a few people companies/people richer while reducing a country's sovreignty and the quality of life of the average joe.
Re: (Score:2)
Some Chinese I met think the TPP will be the opportunity of poking the China bubble, forcing the economy to crash, hence removing the last similitude of legitimacy of Chinese Communist Party's one-party authoritarian rule. They're all for it.
But one can easily see the countless logical holes in this line of pipedre^H^H^H^H^H^H^H reasoning. In slashdotspeak, it's like
1) TPP ...?
2)
3) Liberty!
More like
1) TPP, crash of Chinese economy, billions of Chinese with nothing to lose
2) ???
3) 3rd world war
Re: (Score:3)
Corporations are your government. The TPP makes their power stronger, while doing nothing at all to lessen "regulation"..
Supersedes NAFTA (Score:5, Interesting)
Since Canada, USA and Mexico are all involved in this deal, this will replace NAFTA. To get a better idea of how this will affect you, just look at what NAFTA did.
8 Years to negotiate? (Score:2)
Individual tax payers get the shaft again (Score:5, Insightful)
Until 1913, customs duties (tariffs) and excise taxes were the primary sources of federal revenue. [wikipedia.org] This was by design of the Constitutional framers. In 1913 the income tax was introduced and coincidentally or not the federal reserve corporation was also established. Provided that globalists corporations shift their tax liability to the most corrupt or more politely business friendly tax haven the funding of the US government falls almost exclusively on the shoulders of the middle class who can afford to pay taxes.
Do not like any provision in this agreement? Tough luck, your elective representatives have no power to enact any change.
This agreement is yet another boon for multinational corporations who own politicians and another step towards global totalitarian government.
Now begins the useless review period. (Score:3)
Now we get to see the perfunctory "review period" in action - complete with prebuilt talking points.
The TPP explained... (Score:2)
Although a little lengthy, I found this to be an interesting assessment of the TPP:
http://economixcomix.com/home/... [economixcomix.com]
The TPP isn't a free trade agreement .. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why you should care about the TPP [slashdot.org]
Re:What Could Possibly Go Wrong? (Score:5, Insightful)
I honestly don't know. No. Really. I don't know.
The same thing that has gone wrong with every single trade pact that the US government has ever negotiated: a few get enriched, the rest of us get fewer jobs. Do try to keep up.
Re:What Could Possibly Go Wrong? (Score:5, Insightful)
vote trump he will kill this (Score:5, Funny)
vote trump he will kill this
Re: (Score:2)
Donald Trump as US President.
Or...
Feudal vassalage under the TPP.
That's going to require some thought.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a 'death' option? I suppose 'cake' is RIGHT OUT D:
Re:vote trump he will kill this (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I agree. I have family who have voted Republican all their lives. I tell them how bad TPP is sometimes I think they imagine that it couldn't possibly be that bad. I tell them that if the Republican candidate is some establishment crony like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio, Sanders' opposition to TPP alone makes it worthwhile to vote for him, even if you disagree with him on other issues. The response is always: "but, but, SOCIALISM!"
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it's more expensive. Unlike the US and Europe, we do not directly subsidize our dairy producers.
Also Canadian milk tastes much better.
Re: (Score:2)
By the way, it's the trans-pacific deal. Not the Canada-EU deal. EU is not part of the deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Just cow's milk?
I found goat cheese in Canada was very cheap compared to Australia, during my travels in 2013. Send it my way!
Re:Tech circles vs slashdot (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, I don't oppose TTP because of Obama. I oppose it because it is a secret deal, pre approved by the powers that be, and enough (D) and (R) supported it to make it bi-partisan. If you support it, not knowing anything other than it was "Obama says it will be good" then you are the real fool. I bet you'd oppose it if GWB supported it (all other things considered).
The fact is, the whole (D) good (R) bad (Or visa versa) is really getting old. And do not pretend the (D) don't do the very same thing. Blindly following your party is for Sheeple.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-... [thehill.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The fact is, the whole (D) good (R) bad (Or visa versa) is really getting old. And do not pretend the (D) don't do the very same thing. Blindly following your party is for Sheeple.
I never claimed that the democrats are better in any meaningful way. In fact, if you look at my comment and JE history here you'll find I criticize Obama quite regularly.
Rather, my point is that slashdot is overwhelmingly conservative. Anyone who does not adhere to the conservative agenda is labelled a "socialist" (generally by people who have no clue what socialism actually entails). I haven't decided yet if I like the TPP or not - particularly as we haven't know the full details of the deal yet - bu
Re: (Score:3)
slashdot is overwhelmingly conservative.
If anything Slashdot is Libertarian. Pro Liberal social policies, pro conservative fiscal policies, with a fair amount of independent thought.
But I could understand liberals thinking /. is conservative, and conservatives seeing it more liberal.
But case in point, there are both liberals and conservatives that both support or reject it. Bernie Sanders isn't really conservative, but opposes TPP vehemently. As does Trump. Strange bed fellows indeed.
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/... [senate.gov]
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g [breitbart.com]
Re: (Score:2)
If anything Slashdot is Libertarian.
Only in that a large number of slashdot members are paullowers, who like to call themselves "libertarian".
Pro Liberal social policies
You're joking, right? We routinely see front page articles telling us that we should all own more guns. We routinely see discussions dominated by people shouting fact-free nonsense about abortion. We often see front page articles about how evil public schools are.
pro conservative fiscal policies
That part I agree with.
with a fair amount of independent thought.
10-15 years ago there was plenty of independent thought here. Now thought itself has become rare.
Re: (Score:2)
You're joking, right? We routinely see front page articles telling us that we should all own more guns. We routinely see discussions dominated by people shouting fact-free nonsense about abortion. We often see front page articles about how evil public schools are.
oddly enough the libertarian party supports gun ownership and gun rights [lp.org].
Re: (Score:2)
More to the point though, the poster claimed that slashdot users have "liberal social values", which they simply do not.
Re: (Score:2)
Guns are an exception. And Liberals don't really oppose guns, they just oppose commoners having them. They are all for guns when it suits them (police, military, elites with body guards etc.
Here's the deal, I'll give up my guns just as soon as the government gives up theirs. Not a moment before.
Re: (Score:3)
I haven't decided yet if I like the TPP or not - particularly as we haven't know the full details
That is people problem though. FASTTRACK essential means our elected representatives HAVE decided they like, and they largely haven't seen the full details either! More than that the smaller group of officials actually negotiating the thing did not let larger group look at it except under insane conditions where they could not even take notes.
It does not matter if its a good law or not, they way its being enacted amounts to a total subversion of how our system of representative democracy was supposed to w
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking we need to send a petition to the other signatories stating that consent has been withdrawn and so no American signatory is authorized. That is, that the treaty cannot be properly signed.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh please, enough rhetoric already.
Why don't you actually educate yourself [youtube.com]
US has negotiated in secret with 600 private corporations. Only 5 chapters are about trade, the rest aren't. Public companies suing counties over public health measures? Gee, what could go wrong!?
This country was founded upon no taxation without representation -- meaning an _open_ government.
Governments and business who negotiate in secret are cowards. Chances are they have self-interests that don't serve the public good.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that participating in a government, and running a corporation, are both activities that are highly attractive to avil, amoral psychopaths. The fact that they are seen as engaging in cowardly practices is secondary to the fact that they are psychopaths.
Re:Tech circles vs slashdot (Score:4, Insightful)
No, people in Slashdot think this treaty is evil because what is in it has been deliberately concealed by people with a history of being untrustworthy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Good buy jobs and cheap drugs.
Did you mean 'bye'?
Re: (Score:2)
/Oblg. /sarcasm America has the best government money can buy!
Re: (Score:2)