Trans-Pacific Partnership

[JohnnyB]

Those who are blithely supporting the TPP because "free trade is good" are displaying shocking intellectual negligence.

It's a 6,000 page document that applies to 40% of the world's economy. It's full of detailed policies, wherein lie the devils. To suggest that it's good just because it's branded "free trade" is idiotic.

[CampbellsTransgressions]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. At the end of the day, we will ratify due to the fear of being left out of the agreement. I hope this isn't the case and we take our sweet time and thoroughly vet the document.

Dairy tariffs still exist, they're just opening up a portion of our market to free trade.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Those who are blithely supporting the TPP because "free trade is good" are displaying shocking intellectual negligence.

It's a 6,000 page document that applies to 40% of the world's economy. It's full of detailed policies, wherein lie the devils. To suggest that it's good just because it's branded "free trade" is idiotic.

Oh well - the jig is up. No more Alberta beef - we now have to eat meat from Vietnam. And ExxonMobil now owns your children. So sorry.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Oh well - the jig is up. No more Alberta beef - we now have to eat meat from Vietnam. And ExxonMobil now owns your children. So sorry.

Ignoring the "free trade" label, answer two questions. What percentage of the details of the TPP agreement would you say you understand? Is that percentage enough to actually support any agreement?

My point is that saying something is "free trade" and accepting it without actually understanding it is an utterly irresponsible and ignorant thing to do.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Oh well - the jig is up. No more Alberta beef - we now have to eat meat from Vietnam. And ExxonMobil now owns your children. So sorry.

Well the thing is Viet Nam may not have the same regulations for growing and handling meat and we could be forced to align our regulations with Viet Nam's. For me it could be a loss of sovereignty that we ran into with NAFTA only worse and when there becomes a disagreement we lose because we don't have the financial or political power to win.

Here's an example of how they can threaten our sovereignty.

Canada is the most-sued country under the North American Free Trade Agreement and a majority of the disputes involve investors challenging the country’s environmental laws, according to a new study.
The study from the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) found that more than 70 per cent of claims since 2005 have been brought against Canada, and the number of challenges under a controversial settlement clause is rising sharply.
The investor-state dispute settlement mechanism contained in NAFTA’s chapter 11 grants investors the right to sue foreign governments without first pursuing legal action in the country’s court systems, in order to protect foreign investors from discrimination. Drafters of the 1994 treaty included the provision to protect U.S. and Canadian investors against corruption in Mexican courts.
Critics argue that the mechanism limits governments from enacting policies on legitimate public concerns such as the environment and labour or human rights, and that negotiations are often carried out in secret.

Canada has lost or settled six claims paying a total of $170 million in damages, while Mexico has lost five cases and paid out $204 million. The U.S.,meanwhile, has won 11 cases and has never lost a NAFTA investor-state case.
“Thanks to NAFTA chapter 11, Canada has now been sued more times through investor-state dispute settlement than any other developed country in the world,” said Scott Sinclair, who authored the study.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/01...n_6471460.html

[flamesfan6]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Side effect of the fast-track of the TPP agreement during an election. Who agreed to this mess again?

sadly people will blame Trudeau when it was all harper

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Ignoring the "free trade" label, answer two questions. What percentage of the details of the TPP agreement would you say you understand? Is that percentage enough to actually support any agreement?

My point is that saying something is "free trade" and accepting it without actually understanding it is an utterly irresponsible and ignorant thing to do.

Well, I understand enough to know it will not affect me in any way, except that some stuff I buy may get cheaper. I also understand enough to know this is at least as much political as it is economic, as the US is essentially drawing together a bunch of countries that exclude China...
What exactly are you worried about? You already eat shrimp from Vietnam and Wagu beef (if you want to and can afford it). The cost of the shrimp might fall by 10 cents. Well, that's awful. Are you concerned that this document will make us Cambodian slaves? Or that it will be even easier to hire a Philippino nanny? I remember all the Lefty unionists and conspiracy nuts warning that Americans would take us over if we signed a free trade deal with them back in the Mulroney days. Well, the world didn't end.

[GGG]

not sure if it got in there but there was rumours that we would have to cave on our generic prescription drug laws. Until someone has read the whole as released document and summarized it reasonably we don't really know.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

HA! We are supposed to have free trade with the US. Try ordering something online and when the duties come in, tell me how "free" the trade is. Consumers will get screwed, as they always do.

As for this specifically, look into the patent and copy-write issues if you want to see where Canadians are going to get screwed hard on the TPP. You can start with anything Micheal Geist writes. Get informed.

Harper committed to buying off dairy farmers for several billion dollars. That should tell you enough about it that our tax dollars have to placate our industry, at least temporarily, how good it will be for us. And what happens when that money is gone and our industry is suffering?

Well you don't really understand "NAFTA" considering most of the #### you order online is purchased from the U.S. but manufactured overseas. If you bought something that was "made in the USA" you wouldn't pay any duty. You pay GST.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by flamesfan6

sadly people will blame Trudeau when it was all harper

It's up to Trudeau to decide if the deal goes ahead so save your blame game for him.

[chubeyr1]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Well you don't really understand "NAFTA" considering most of the #### you order online is purchased from the U.S. but manufactured overseas. If you bought something that was "made in the USA" you wouldn't pay any duty. You pay GST.

Thanks for taking the words out of my mouth! We do have free trade with the states, on products manufactured there.Couple of years back I was buying cylinder heads for my toy, Lot of choices. I chose Edelbrock which are not cheap, but the cheap knock offs were more expensive once tarrifs etc were applied. For the record Edelbrock are made in the USA. To get these heads though I ended up paying massive duty and then fighting to get my money returned to me. Customs in Canada is a joke. Its like they know the rules, will charge everyone these fees regardless, but if you complain reimburse you!I loved when our exchange rate was dollar for dollar. Lot of happy internet shopping back then. Of course I would love to buy Canadian, But when a can of spray paint is three times the price of getting 3 cans shipped to me out of country its hard to support our economy.

[stampsx2]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Those who are blithely supporting the TPP because "free trade is good" are displaying shocking intellectual negligence.

It's a 6,000 page document that applies to 40% of the world's economy. It's full of detailed policies, wherein lie the devils. To suggest that it's good just because it's branded "free trade" is idiotic.

Shocking intellectual negligence, idiotic, and you haven't said a single word about what's in the document that's so bad. What is it in the agreement that you so strongly oppose? Just calling something idiotic so I see it your way is well, idiotic.

[comrade]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Shocking intellectual negligence, idiotic, and you haven't said a single word about what's in the document that's so bad. What is it in the agreement that you so strongly oppose? Just calling something idiotic so I see it your way is well, idiotic.

Nice straw man.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by stampsx2

Shocking intellectual negligence, idiotic, and you haven't said a single word about what's in the document that's so bad. What is it in the agreement that you so strongly oppose? Just calling something idiotic so I see it your way is well, idiotic.

You cannot have an earnest discussion about the merits of a deal without everyone in the discussion at least acknowledging that the details of the deal are important.

I don't think any of the posters in this thread are idiots. It is the choice to cheer on a deal without understanding the details of that deal that I am critical of. Perhaps you would describe the act of assenting to a contract regulating your economic practices before actually understanding the terms of the contract as something other than idiotic. I'll stand by my strong language on that point.

To add to the discussion on details, which I have not taken any side on yet other than to say they are very important, here is a short portion of an interview with Joe Stiglitz, a nobel laureate economist, in which he explains some of his reasons for thinking that this is not a free trade deal at all.

Under TPP Polluters Could Sue U.S. for Setting Carbon Emissions Limits

[Buster]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Those who are blithely supporting the TPP because "free trade is good" are displaying shocking intellectual negligence.

It's a 6,000 page document that applies to 40% of the world's economy. It's full of detailed policies, wherein lie the devils. To suggest that it's good just because it's branded "free trade" is idiotic.

But supporting it after some analysis is not necessarily idiotic.

[Zarley]

My main criticisms of the agreement are that the supply management system for dairy and poultry in Canada will remain largely in tact and that the government is dolling out a massive $4.3 billion subsidy to the small, inefficient farms affected by the limited (3.25%) opening of the market to foreign competition.

Why are governments so afraid to end a system that results in this type of waste?

[flamesfan6]

Originally Posted by Zarley

My main criticisms of the agreement are that the supply management system for dairy and poultry in Canada will remain largely in tact and that the government is dolling out a massive $4.3 billion subsidy to the small, inefficient farms affected by the limited (3.25%) opening of the market to foreign competition.

Why are governments so afraid to end a system that results in this type of waste?

and don't forget about the impact to the canadian auto industry (and to both auto makers and dairy it is worse than Harper was saying)

among the other stuff in the deal that really benefits big american corporations. kill free internet, undermine canada post, and much much more

Everyone negotiating the deal knew Harper was desperate to get it done, so I can't imagine all the other stuff we had to concede on (ie have to remove tariffs for japanese cars in 5 years, vs the states who have 30 years to do it)

[flamesfan6]

Balsillie believes the structure could prevent Canadian firms from growing as it would also limit how much money they can make from their own products and services.

"It's such brilliantly systemic encirclement. I'm just in awe at its powerful purity by the Americans...

"I'm not a partisan actor, but I actually think this is the worst thing that the Harper government has done for Canada," the former co-chief executive of RIM said in an interview after studying large sections of the 6,000-page document, released to the public last week. "I think in 10 years from now, we'll call that the signature worst thing in policy that Canada's ever done...

http://www.therecord.com/news-story/...tfoxed-by-tpp/

hurray a deal that actually hurts canadian companies - how does that help canada?

Nevermind the copyright provisions as well, under the TPP uploading this would get you sued or worse


Know how the CRTC recently said that the carrier must unlock the phones after 30 days, and we are all happy about that? Well the TPP would make that illegal and Apple can sue the canadian government.

We are already the most sued country under "free trade" agreements that allow private companies to sue governments, TPP just adds to this.

[corporatejay]

"It is the Blackberry of trade deals" - Jim Balsillie

[Titan]

Originally Posted by MaDMaN_26

5 questions and answers about the TPP leaked chapter

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...aked-tpp-text/

I think a lot of posters here may have not clicked through to this article.

This is a very short article but it highlights to me some very serious concerns about patent law changes in the TPP that merit, at least, some very serious concerns. It appears to be drafted by the pharma/entertainment industry. It does not appear good for anyone except shareholders of those companies.