Trans Pacific Partnership - continuing the conservative assault on working people

Dont know about the particular case of the smaller nations, like Vietnam but on the more developed ones the "weakening" is barely noticeable because these nations already possess strong patent protections when relative to what the US was asking.
Look, if you're going to answer that these countries already have this and that so TPP doesn't make a difference then why argue for or against TPP at all; all of these countries essentially already have free trade...? Obviously this agreement is building on previous agreements, yeah?

With regards to drug patents, TPP weakens everything. It weakens the standards of earning a patent in the first place and it goes on and on.
It makes it easier for companies to get patents, protect patents, and extend patents.

TPP is a trade deal, countries wouldnt surrender their local sovereignty over it.

The international courts are still composed of members countries and at worst a country can simply pull off the TPP or ignore it altogether.

So its okay that corruption exists because the international courts will solve everything? C'mon man. Just punt if you don't have a real answer.

Because your point wasnt that clear, in some places you claim that US corporations are dictating local politics for the rest of the countries and in other places you accuse me of misrepresenting it.
Well, its obviously unclear to you because I never even suggested that US corporations were dictating local politics. So I guess just keep on keeping making accusations and misrepresenting my posts, even after I've cleared them up, and hide behind "but you're confusing me".

Because that was what the US wanted, the rest of the countries without much in terms of pharma industry didnt cared much about.
.
Exactly. The US wanted it. The other countries didn't. TPP included it anyhow. Dictated to.

A drug for a rare disease.
yeah, I already answered this for you.

And that only applies to the specific treatment and form of the molecule, not the old one, and thus is not really as profitable.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

I cant think of an example, can you bring one up?
Crestor received 1 or 2 patent extensions due to a new indication. No change in the formulation.
Humira has had at least 1 extensions for multiple new indications. No change in the formulation.
Thats off the top of the head, I know of others but not sure how/why they got extended. Sometimes its just lawyering up.

Yes, but that wouldnt apply to the old one wouldnt it?
Not sure what you're trying to say. I pretty much explained this.

Also it depends on the national governing body on whether the patent gets extended or not.
I'm not sure about that. I think if a drug gets patented in the US, then part of the IP standards written into the TPP means that product is protected amongst all TPP signatories.
Chile has a 20 years patent protection so Januvia will be protected until the next decade in Chile.
It was a hypothetical. I'm not arguing the individual laws of every TPP country. C'mon man.
Whether Merck would be able to extend the patent of Januvia after those 20 years, thats another matter entirely.
Which was exactly the matter the hypothetical was based on....
Because the TPP doesnt enforces a monopoly on drugs that are off-patent, thats entirely 1,000% US domestic policy.
No. That doesn't address the point at all. Let go of your off patent bullshit. nobody is making that argument but you.
As i said, what mechanism in the TPP allows or prevents off-patent orphan drugs from being jacked up?
As I said, who the fuck suggested the TPP protects off-patent drugs? You are the only person who thinks that. Are you debating with another poster on another site and getting your conversations mixed up?
And in the end local law supercedes the above, its not like the countries involved will pass sanctions or invade a country in breach.
who the fuck suggested that countries would be invading other countries over this? What happens is corporations sue member countries for failing to adhere to the treaty. See Eli Lilly vs. Canada. Lets see Vietnam risk incurring those legal fees to defend a case against Big Pharma, even in a winning effort.


Do me a favor and don't respond.
Its just going to be more bullshit about you accusing me of suggesting the US is going to invade other countries to dictate local politics because some Latin American country won't honor an infinite patent extension on an off patent drug even though Peru has a law dating back to 1951 that already enforces this.
 
IGIT,
hi again AUR!

sorry for the lag in response time. i had a murderous weekend and had gigs to shoot.



yes.

this is the problem, not the TPP.
Why not both?
Not everything wrong about a trade deal can be corrected with a tax bill.

and that is what has to change, Anuung. wonks (of one political persuasion or another) and the elite (on both sides of the political spectrum) are always going to write the legislation.

the people still have to vote on it.
The people don't get to vote on trade bills.

where will the gains in the TPP go? that is your concern. or at least, that should be your concern.

tax policy.

fiscal policy.

not the TPP.
Not necessarily. And tax policy can't heal all wounds. A new tax policy isn't going to correct a job lost to trade, automation, or currency manipulation.



but you cannot stop globalism. or progress. if the US textile industry hadn't of gone to Asia, one of two things would have happened;

a) US textile mills stay in the US and retain US workers....and become tremendously handicapped, globally. c'est la vie, US textile mill.

b) the US textile mill becomes almost completely automated, since its decided to stay in the US and wishes to remain in business.
And maybe currency manipulation is a thing of the past, but it wasn't when this agreement was being negotiated. That also cost millions of jobs.
A tax bill wasn't going to correct that. And that trade deficit didn't allow companies to adapt in an organic fashion.


its a tangential fight to what? lol. a trade deal is unrelated to wealth distribution.
Which was the point I was trying to make. You can't fix a trade deal with a tax plan.

the huge fight has actually been fought, as you noted. and its been lost.

its a drag, really.

- IGIT

We seem to be losing an awful lot these days.

-AUR
 
hi AUR!

IGIT,

Why not both?
Not everything wrong about a trade deal can be corrected with a tax bill.

i never said it could. i said that the principle problems in the TPP have to do with wealth distribution.


The people don't get to vote on trade bills.

sure they do. particularly when the TPP gained such profile in 2016. i can guarantee you that rust belt workers were voting on NAFTA and the TPP when they back Mr. Trump.


Not necessarily. And tax policy can't heal all wounds. A new tax policy isn't going to correct a job lost to trade, automation, or currency manipulation.

currency manipulation shouldn't really be such a worry for you, Anuung. if you want to hold tight to that notion, there isn't much i can do about it though.

as to job losses?
sure, free trade causes some job losses. Amazon causes job losses. Walmart causes job losses. Netflix causes theater chains to bleed money. yes, yes, yes.
people are going to try and get the things they want at the lowest price. what do you propose?

what does the TPP have to do with automation, exactly?

And maybe currency manipulation is a thing of the past, but it wasn't when this agreement was being negotiated. That also cost millions of jobs.
A tax bill wasn't going to correct that. And that trade deficit didn't allow companies to adapt in an organic fashion.

currency manipulation is not the bogeyman you're making it out to be - i actually didn't know this point stuck in your craw so severely.

let me ask you, does the US manipulate its currency? i think they do, lol. does it bother you?

maybe the US doesn't want explicit language regarding currency manipulation for a reason.

what do you think?

Which was the point I was trying to make. You can't fix a trade deal with a tax plan.

the trade deal doesn't need fixing, Anuung...the only thing that has to be addressed is how the money is divided.

tax policy.

fiscal policy.

We seem to be losing an awful lot these days.

-AUR

well, chin up my friend! i just read in NYmag that Mr. Trump is prepping around 30 billion in tariffs at China for IP skullduggery. its about time.

- IGIT
 
hi AUR!



i never said it could. i said that the principle problems in the TPP have to do with wealth distribution.




sure they do. particularly when the TPP gained such profile in 2016. i can guarantee you that rust belt workers were voting on NAFTA and the TPP when they back Mr. Trump.
So its a vote for TPP or Tax Cuts for the rich?
Where is the choice?

currency manipulation shouldn't really be such a worry for you, Anuung. if you want to hold tight to that notion, there isn't much i can do about it though.

as to job losses?
sure, free trade causes some job losses. Amazon causes job losses. Walmart causes job losses. Netflix causes theater chains to bleed money. yes, yes, yes.
people are going to try and get the things they want at the lowest price. what do you propose?

what does the TPP have to do with automation, exactly?

Automation, free trade, currency manipulation, outsourcing are all free trade related perils that have cost millions of American jobs.
You mentioned automation and outsourcing related to textiles. I thought I would complement that argument by adding other contributing factors that have affected that, and other, industries.

What would TPP have added to those other examples of progress?



currency manipulation is not the bogeyman you're making it out to be - i actually didn't know this point stuck in your craw so severely.

let me ask you, does the US manipulate its currency? i think they do, lol. does it bother you?

maybe the US doesn't want explicit language regarding currency manipulation for a reason.

what do you think?
Like I said, maybe its a thing of the past, but it wasn't while the TPP was being negotiated and it was a very significant factor in job loss in the USA.
the trade deal doesn't need fixing, Anuung...the only thing that has to be addressed is how the money is divided.

tax policy.

fiscal policy.
What are the odds that a trade bill include a clause that a percentage of all profits secondary to said trade bill will be set aside for checks to the American people or funding of unemployment benefits etc?



well, chin up my friend! i just read in NYmag that Mr. Trump is prepping around 30 billion in tariffs at China for IP skullduggery. its about time.

- IGIT

Congrats!
Rama
 
Look, if you're going to answer that these countries already have this and that so TPP doesn't make a difference then why argue for or against TPP at all; all of these countries essentially already have free trade...? Obviously this agreement is building on previous agreements, yeah?

With regards to drug patents, TPP weakens everything. It weakens the standards of earning a patent in the first place and it goes on and on.
It makes it easier for companies to get patents, protect patents, and extend patents.

Again... HOW?

You brought me an article that says weakens, but none explains the how. As i said before its not only about free trade, it also has a lot to do with standarization of processes in order to make transnational business easier.

So its okay that corruption exists because the international courts will solve everything? C'mon man. Just punt if you don't have a real answer.

A real answer needs a real question. Throwing buzzwords like corruption without specifics is not going to produce an specific answer.

Well, its obviously unclear to you because I never even suggested that US corporations were dictating local politics. So I guess just keep on keeping making accusations and misrepresenting my posts, even after I've cleared them up, and hide behind "but you're confusing me".

You are saying that the TPP will override local patent laws, this is of course a complete lie.

Exactly. The US wanted it. The other countries didn't. TPP included it anyhow. Dictated to.

See this is the double speak im talking about, "I never said that the US was dictating local politics but the TPP is overruling local law and the US is dictating the TPP".

The US had an input in negotiations, and that input had a bigger say because its a large nation, thats quite a stretch to claim US corporations dictating anything.

yeah, I already answered this for you.

Cool, and how is that relevant to the TPP discussion?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

Patents dont get extended on BS grounds or just because of a minor molecule change.

For example Levocetirizine doesnt extends the patent of Cetirizine, so sure, you can patent a drug with minor modifications, but such patenting is meaningless when the original drug is off-patent.

Crestor received 1 or 2 patent extensions due to a new indication. No change in the formulation.
Humira has had at least 1 extensions for multiple new indications. No change in the formulation.
Thats off the top of the head, I know of others but not sure how/why they got extended. Sometimes its just lawyering up.

1.- Crestor didnt had a patent extension, some companies tried to null the patent of Crestor based on BS ground and got shot down.

2.- There are already biosimilars to Humira on the market and as i said before it all depends on the national regulatory body to determine whether a patent for a product is valid or not.

I'm not sure about that. I think if a drug gets patented in the US, then part of the IP standards written into the TPP means that product is protected amongst all TPP signatories.

No, its not. Where did you get this idea?

It was a hypothetical. I'm not arguing the individual laws of every TPP country. C'mon man.

But you are talking as if the TPP was something beyond an agreement and that it was some sort of supernational governing body when its not, every individual country has its own laws and its own patent systems.

The TPP establishes guidelines and establishes a way where private companies can appeal. But that doesnt means that a patent in America is valid everywhere.

No. That doesn't address the point at all. Let go of your off patent bullshit. nobody is making that argument but you.

So why bring these examples to the discussion?

As I said, who the fuck suggested the TPP protects off-patent drugs? You are the only person who thinks that. Are you debating with another poster on another site and getting your conversations mixed up?

You are the one who brought Valeant and Skreli into the conversation, not me, why the fuck are you talking about these orphan drugs as an example of anything when the reason they have little to none competition is 100% local law.

who the fuck suggested that countries would be invading other countries over this? What happens is corporations sue member countries for failing to adhere to the treaty. See Eli Lilly vs. Canada. Lets see Vietnam risk incurring those legal fees to defend a case against Big Pharma, even in a winning effort.


Do me a favor and don't respond..

So you dont want me to respond the fact that Eli Lily lost that lawsuit and had to pay for litigation costs and thus rendering your point moot?

Its just going to be more bullshit about you accusing me of suggesting the US is going to invade other countries to dictate local politics because some Latin American country won't honor an infinite patent extension on an off patent drug even though Peru has a law dating back to 1951 that already enforces this.

You are suggesting that the TPP was crafted by corporations in order to gain undue influence in foreign countries.
 
ahoy Anuung Un Rama!

So its a vote for TPP or Tax Cuts for the rich?
Where is the choice?

a vote for the TPP is a vote for a trade deal that will facilitate trade. it is unrelated to wealth inequality or income inequality. its also an effort to assert a bit geopolitical pressure on China.

you can vote for the TPP and vote for a tax plan that would resemble something that Hillary or Bernie would have put forward. i don't see any compromise going on here, you know?

everybody's happy (except the super wealthy).

Automation, free trade, currency manipulation, outsourcing are all free trade related perils that have cost millions of American jobs.

if you want to stop globalization and automation, wind at yer back, Anuung.

good luck de-inventing large ocean shipping vessels, the jet engine and the internet.

You mentioned automation and outsourcing related to textiles. I thought I would complement that argument by adding other contributing factors that have affected that, and other, industries.

What would TPP have added to those other examples of progress?

how does the TPP hurt US textile mills, exactly?

Like I said, maybe its a thing of the past, but it wasn't while the TPP was being negotiated and it was a very significant factor in job loss in the USA.

Anuung, does the US manipulate its currency also? yes or no?

What are the odds that a trade bill include a clause that a percentage of all profits secondary to said trade bill will be set aside for checks to the American people or funding of unemployment benefits etc?

though nothing would please me more, i think there is zero chance of that kind of language being presented.

i never suggested that such wording was possible in the TPP, and you know this.

Tax policy

Fiscal policy

Yarrrrr!

- IGIT
 
ahoy Anuung Un Rama!



a vote for the TPP is a vote for a trade deal that will facilitate trade. it is unrelated to wealth inequality or income inequality. its also an effort to assert a bit geopolitical pressure on China.
We already have free trade. TPP is not about facilitating trade.
And how is it not related to wealth inequality?
062816carney-Elephant.png


What exactly would it have done to pressure China?

you can vote for the TPP and vote for a tax plan that would resemble something that Hillary or Bernie would have put forward. i don't see any compromise going on here, you know?
Well, we've established that we don't get a vote for TPP. We get to vote for a candidate and oftentimes the options cancel each other out.

everybody's happy (except the super wealthy).
No, they're happy.

if you want to stop globalization and automation, wind at yer back, Anuung.

good luck de-inventing large ocean shipping vessels, the jet engine and the internet.
Wasn't making that argument, just pointing out the ramifications of globalization for the US worker.

how does the TPP hurt US textile mills, exactly?
At this point I think the damage to textiles is done. Not much left to bleed from the US textile industry that I can see. Maybe getting rid of a 0.5% tariff on teal fabric dye will revitalize it?
How TPP would affect other industries is unknown. Did we know currency manipulation, trade deficits, and outsourcing were going to be so damaging ahead of time?

Anuung, does the US manipulate its currency also? yes or no?
IG-meister, I was told currency manipulation doesn't exist anymore.

though nothing would please me more, i think there is zero chance of that kind of language being presented.
Exactly.

i never suggested that such wording was possible in the TPP, and you know this.
I never said you did, and you know this. You suggested that we affect how the money gets redistributed.
You're saying tax policy. That ship has passed for the time being. Why not put it in right in a trade agreement?

Tax policy

Fiscal policy

Yarrrrr!
Its a beautiful dream.

AUR
 
hiya mon,

i tried to read your article, though much (almost all of it) was unrelated to IP



no need to apologize, mon. i wasn't vexed over how your post looked, i just felt it didn't address IP in any meaningful way.



because my query to you related to IP only. your response to me seemed to wander far and wide (and that's fine) but didn't really seem related to my IP concerns.

i'm concerned about IP because i am an commercial artist.

i'm concerned about IP because i own stock in pharma.

i'm concerned about IP because one of America's biggest investments is in R&D, and i am American.



this issue relates to wealth distribution - not free trade, not the TPP.



as i've said, Australia (and the US, for that matter) have fared really well in the WTO. that's because when the Australia (and the US) strike trade agreements, they usually abide by them pretty faithfully.

if history is any indicator of the future, your anxiety on this point is much ado about nothing.

nice to meet you matey!

- IGIT

This is what I replied to

Regarding TPP specifically, it bends my imagination to understand how so many intelligent persons would have wished to have overlooked its insidious ADR provision, rights to private action against governments, inflexible patent protections, lost-profits clauses, and other despicable aspects, just to corner the international marketplace in a race to the bottom.

You than replied to my response bringing up IP. I steered the conversation back to my concerns and we're back to IP.

You brought up sinister and have ignored my rebuttal. If you dont wish to address the things I raised which concern me as much as IP does you and was why I responded to the above quote, at least address how a document which will directly or indirectly effect every person within the proposed countries cant be considered sinister when we have no access to it before its passed?
 
IG-meister, I was told currency manipulation doesn't exist anymore.

Depends on what you consider currency manipulation, everytime i change pesos to dollars im weakening the peso, does that means im intentionally devaluing the peso?
 
Depends on what you consider currency manipulation, everytime i change pesos to dollars im weakening the peso, does that means im intentionally devaluing the peso?
Currency manipulation doesn't exist. Read the thread.
 
Currency manipulation doesn't exist. Read the thread.

As i said before, you dont seem to grasp simple facts and resort instead to using broad words without going into specifics.

Currency manipulation is a buzzword, simple as that.
 
As i said before, you dont seem to grasp simple facts and resort instead to using broad words without going into specifics.

Currency manipulation is a buzzword, simple as that.
Sure. Whatever.
 
You brought up sinister and have ignored my rebuttal. If you dont wish to address the things I raised which concern me as much as IP does you and was why I responded to the above quote, at least address how a document which will directly or indirectly effect every person within the proposed countries cant be considered sinister when we have no access to it before its passed?

hello mon,

of course IP protection affects many people and its understandable that folks would want patented and copyrighted material for free, but that's not how the world works, and that outcome would be very undesirable to innovators and inventors. it also would be a terrible outcome for any nation that spends a huge proportion of its fortune on IP.

creating IP worth stealing and then protecting it is alot like protecting an investment.

i mean, think about it. do you want US officials reaching into your investment portfolio and helping themselves to whatever strikes their fancy?

- IGIT
 
Sure. Whatever.

You didnt even knew the differences between floating and fixed rate which is fine i guess, but kind of becomes obnoxious when you keep repeating said buzzword without specifying what exactly do you want in the TPP addressing "currency manipulation".
 
You didnt even knew the differences between floating and fixed rate which is fine i guess, but kind of becomes obnoxious when you keep repeating said buzzword without specifying what exactly do you want in the TPP addressing "currency manipulation".

Lol, first of all dude you attacked me for multiple positions I didn’t even take and continued to do so even after I clarified them over and over. I at least had the humility to ask you to clarify your comments before being a cunt and attacking you for things you didn’t say. You stopped being a credible partner in this conversation several posts ago, but I was a good sport and humored your repetitive ignorance.

Now you want to talk about currency manipulation when you’ve assured me that it didn’t exist while completely ignoring the context in which I most recently mentioned it. I don’t have the time or interest in dragging out a conversation with somebody so dishonest.
 
hio Anuung (last post for now, gotta go pick up my ounce....its time!),

We already have free trade. TPP is not about facilitating trade

yes, we do have free trade. are you saying that because free trade exists between the US and various countries, any further free trade agreements are superfluous?

is this the argument you're trying to frame?

And how is it not related to wealth inequality?
062816carney-Elephant.png

what is this chart really supposed to prove, Anuung? that wealth distribution mechanisms in the US and globally favor the rich?

wealth distribution is unrelated to free trade. also, are you asking me to lose sleep about wealth distribution in Canada and Japan?

in the US, income and wealth disparities can be addressed by tax policy and fiscal policy. NOT by kneecapping US based corporate interests.

What exactly would it have done to pressure China?

i am not going to get into a side discussion on this. i like you Anuung. i think you're a solid poster and i share many of your perspectives; but i don't think you care about geopolitical pressure on China one way or another.

i'll answer your question, and you'll move on.

if you don't think an economic alliance formed in the Asia Pacific Region, spearheaded by the US, that specifically doesn't include China will have no effect on China, i don't want to argue this point with you.

Well, we've established that we don't get a vote for TPP. We get to vote for a candidate and oftentimes the options cancel each other out.

come on, man.

here in the US, we don't vote on ANY legislation. you vote for a candidate who has (hopefully) taken a stand on whatever legislation that concerns you, and you vote accordingly.

this should come as news to no one, and its not a conspiracy.

No, they're happy

you're responding too quickly and not reading what i'm writing.

Wasn't making that argument, just pointing out the ramifications of globalization for the US worker

the US worker will no longer be protected from competing with the rest of the planet in 2018. that's life, Anuung.

At this point I think the damage to textiles is done. Not much left to bleed from the US textile industry that I can see. Maybe getting rid of a 0.5% tariff on teal fabric dye will revitalize it?
How TPP would affect other industries is unknown. Did we know currency manipulation, trade deficits, and outsourcing were going to be so damaging ahead of time?

US textiles are kaput, i think you're right on that.

textileindustry_laborcost2014_bars-437br.GIF


you're a major textile producer, and you need labor. you have to compete with companies around the globe, and its a cut throat business.

where do you go to have your products made, Anuung? if you say "the USA" and you're competing with me, you're gonna have a fixture sale before Easter.

IG-meister, I was told currency manipulation doesn't exist anymore.

i've read Rod1's stuff. i'm at the shallow end of the pool, i don't have his acumen on these matters.

objectively, Anuung; do you feel the US manipulates its currency?

yes or no?

I never said you did, and you know this.

then why ask me a rhetorical question whose answer is self evident? i'd love that kind of language to be included, but outside of a fantasy movie penned by Aaron Sorkin, its not happening.

You suggested that we affect how the money gets redistributed.
You're saying tax policy. That ship has passed for the time being. Why not put it in right in a trade agreement

because the killing the TPP does nothing to address the issues that really concern you and i. all it does it hurt US based interests internationally. how in the world will that help?

Its a beautiful dream

Bernie would never have signed that tax "reform" into reality. neither would have Clinton.

gotta go, Anuung - i've been slogging away at photoshop for so long i think all the THC has left my system.

this is unacceptable.

talk more later Anuung Un Rama!!!

- IGIT
 
hello mon,

of course IP protection affects many people and its understandable that folks would want patented and copyrighted material for free, but that's not how the world works, and that outcome would be very undesirable to innovators and inventors. it also would be a terrible outcome for any nation that spends a huge proportion of its fortune on IP.

creating IP worth stealing and then protecting it is alot like protecting an investment.

i mean, think about it. do you want US officials reaching into your investment portfolio and helping themselves to whatever strikes their fancy?

- IGIT

Hi mate

I got it, IP protection and all that. You dont want to address any of my probs and I understand IP is very important to you.

Ongoing diversion aside (IP)lets discuss something you raised ie nothing sinister here.

There is something very sinister involved when no public citizen has access to this document, afterall the devils always in the detail. You stated theres nothing sinister here, please expand on this?

Also out of curiousity what is your job and/or sector do who work in? I ask as I also make money from different equities which have/does include pharma and other high r&d sectors and I'm not losing my shorts over the stealing of ideas. Maybe I should as the worlds most notorious IP thief China also got a free trade agreement through to screw us.

Youre pushing the tpp up hill with a pointy stick.... Whats in it for you? Were you involved in this rogering of individual identity amongst cultural variations?
 
IGGY,

Moving forward lets do away with this broken posting. Its a bitch on mobile and I've lost several replies during this thread.
It also makes it difficult to interpret whats being discussed in context.
hio Anuung (last post for now, gotta go pick up my ounce....its time!),



yes, we do have free trade. are you saying that because free trade exists between the US and various countries, any further free trade agreements are superfluous?

is this the argument you're trying to frame?
Not really, no. We have free trade. Sure there is a way to grind out some freer trade, but I think we're kidding ourselves to present TPP as a simply a vehicle to facilitate more free trade, especially in light of the protectionism conversation we've been having over the last few pages.

what is this chart really supposed to prove, Anuung? that wealth distribution mechanisms in the US and globally favor the rich?

wealth distribution is unrelated to free trade. also, are you asking me to lose sleep about wealth distribution in Canada and Japan?
It depicts the change in global wealth distribution related to globalization and free trade. It shows the developing countries doing better, the rich getting much richer, and the middle class getting fucked. There is a correlation between globalization and wealth inequality.

in the US, income and wealth disparities can be addressed by tax policy and fiscal policy.
It can be addressed by winning the lottery, too. Not to be a nihilist, but this isn't going to be changed under our current political climate. And by current I mean the last 20 years and the foreseeable future.
NOT by kneecapping US based corporate interests.
I think this is a crazy exaggeration at this point. TPP wasn't saving these corporations from getting knee capped and dropping out of it wasn't doing the knee capping either.

i am not going to get into a side discussion on this. i like you Anuung. i think you're a solid poster and i share many of your perspectives; but i don't think you care about geopolitical pressure on China one way or another.

i'll answer your question, and you'll move on.

if you don't think an economic alliance formed in the Asia Pacific Region, spearheaded by the US, that specifically doesn't include China will have no effect on China, i don't want to argue this point with you.
Cheers on the compliment, you are one of my favorite WR posters for your style and well rounded knowledge.
Now, I don't bring up China to be a side argument. I think its the elephant in the room. You've brought them up several times. I've addressed how TPP was marketed to be essential to keep China in check. I've yet to see anybody, on sherdog or otherwise, elaborate on how that would work.

come on, man.

here in the US, we don't vote on ANY legislation. you vote for a candidate who has (hopefully) taken a stand on whatever legislation that concerns you, and you vote accordingly.

this should come as news to no one, and its not a conspiracy.

you're responding too quickly and not reading what i'm writing.
Agreed, I did read it too fast. Apologies. This broken posting makes it difficult to stay on track.
My point was voting for positive change is akin to a hail mary pass these days.


the US worker will no longer be protected from competing with the rest of the planet in 2018. that's life, Anuung.
The US worker is a US citizen. These trade deals not only don't protect them, they have been systematically removing their protections for decades.



US textiles are kaput, i think you're right on that.



you're a major textile producer, and you need labor. you have to compete with companies around the globe, and its a cut throat business.

where do you go to have your products made, Anuung? if you say "the USA" and you're competing with me, you're gonna have a fixture sale before Easter.
We need laws to restructure the obligations to share holders similar to Germany.

GO DEEP!
original



i've read Rod1's stuff. i'm at the shallow end of the pool, i don't have his acumen on these matters.

objectively, Anuung; do you feel the US manipulates its currency?

yes or no?
I'm with you. My understanding of currency manipulation is related to what I've read about China and Japan as it relates to our trade deficit. Based on what I've been told in this thread, I don't see how its possible that the US manipulates its currency. Seeing as we've had the world's largest trade deficit since the 1970s, if we're doing it, then we're doing it wrong.

then why ask me a rhetorical question whose answer is self evident? i'd love that kind of language to be included, but outside of a fantasy movie penned by Aaron Sorkin, its not happening.
It was sarcasm. Our tax and fiscal policies haven't addressed any of negatives of free trade. Relying on a politician to do so at this point (Bernie will be too old) is pure fantasy; why not suggest building it into the agreement. Again, its not about trade, or American citizens, its about giant corps.
because the killing the TPP does nothing to address the issues that really concern you and i. all it does it hurt US based interests internationally. how in the world will that help?
If the TPP, under optimal conditions, barely helps, then killing it should barely hurt, if at all.

Bernie would never have signed that tax "reform" into reality. neither would have Clinton.
I agree. But only Bernie would have gone further to address issues that would reverse or mitigate the damage free trade and other policies have done to the poor and middle class.

gotta go, Anuung - i've been slogging away at photoshop for so long i think all the THC has left my system.

this is unacceptable.

talk more later Anuung Un Rama!!!

- IGIT

Get high hombre, you've earned it!
Best,
AUR
 
Back
Top