Politics Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

[CountryRace]

why would i be conflicted? i partake in many illegal practices. hell, i'm high right now.

im not sure how to articulate it currently - ill get back to you on the specifics

the vibe, really

 

[Long Live HFC]

your problem is you make too many erroneous assumptions about my ideological framework, simply because i oppose your extremist conspiracy nonsense. wanting to learn more about the TPP i did what any normal person would do, and read some of it. radical i know.

 

[CountryRace]

your problem is you make too many erroneous assumptions about my ideological framework, simply because i oppose your extremist conspiracy nonsense. wanting to learn more about the TPP i did what any normal person would do, and read some of it. radical i know.

incorrect, you misunderstand

not in regards to you choosing to to break the law and smoke

more in regards to the source of your information - a secret partnership being leaked in a non legal way , where even pollies can only view one of two copies, and not make notes... that the rest of the world might find out four years later. If jullian had not gone to the trouble of rooting his life up - so people like you and me can learn more. it seem like an uncomfortable position

better a extremist conspiracy nonsense, than neo-con shill IMHO. even if one does not get paid for the trolling

 

[Long Live HFC]

more in regards to the source of your information - a secret partnership being secretly leaked, where even pollies can only view one of two copies, and not make notes... that the rest of the world might find out four years later. If jullian had not gone to the trouble of rooting his life up - so people like you and me can learn more. it seem like an uncomfortable position

shrug, don't give a s**t. if i didn't read it a few months ago, i'd read it a few months from now when the final document is released. no difference to me (other than having a bit more to mock people like you with).

better a extremist conspiracy nonsense, than neo-con shill IMHO. even if one does not get paid for the trolling

wow, don't you guys just love to throw around simplistic, (inaccurate) isms at your detractors? neocon?! hahahaha. it just illustrates what a pathetically shallow understanding you have of ideas (and the world). but i must thank you for the giggle

 

[CountryRace]

shrug, don't give a s**t. if i didn't read it a few months ago, i'd read it a few months from now when the final document is released. no difference to me (other than having a bit more to mock people like you with).



wow, don't you guys just love to throw around simplistic, (inaccurate) isms at your detractors? neocon?! hahahaha. it just illustrates what a pathetically shallow understanding you have of ideas (and the world). but i must thank you for the giggle

You may not give a s**t - but other might see it as a 'funny' position to take in the light of day

'jah bless - shill

 

[Long Live HFC]

yeah, stupid people.

 

[CountryRace]

http://maplight.org/us-congress/bil...s-nonpacs&campaign=congressional&politicians=

 

[Demonic Ascent]

why do i need to ask those questions given i already know their answers? i mean honestly, kids today!

negotiations are kept secret to foster dialogue, discussion and negotiation, without having progress de-railed by ignorant partisan bullshit from any given member nation. the wanton ignorance and petulant nonsense in this thread alone illustrates why they try to bang out a deal without having everything dragged through the press beforehand- i mean s**t, it's taken them 10 ******* years to get this far. it'd take 100 otherwise. trade negotiations shouldn't become political footballs for domestic political terrorism.

Haha, domestic political terrorism, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

None of that answers why the negotiations need to be kept secret for four years AFTER implementation.

And yeah, not a kid, probably older than you with a family and a well paying job - just someone who is aware of and concerned about the manipulation and subversion of the democratic process a lot of people seem to take for granted. I'm not ignorant or naive enough to believe that governments and corporations are acting in our best interests especially when done under the veil of secrecy.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

have you bothered to release the agreements as yet?

Huh? Unfortunately that's not in my control - if I could, yeah I'd release the agreement for public debate and transparency.

 

[Long Live HFC]

Haha, domestic political terrorism, you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

shrugs, that's just how I view idiot politicians who put themselves and petty partisanship ahead of effective policymaking.

None of that answers why the negotiations need to be kept secret for four years AFTER implementation.

well I would agree that 4 years sounds a bit much, but I can't say I give a s**t. and it still doesn't explain your and others' obsession with an outdated document? I'm sure if you really cared you could contact DFAT and ask.

And yeah, not a kid, probably older than you with a family and a well paying job - just someone who is aware of and concerned about the manipulation and subversion of the democratic process a lot of people seem to take for granted. I'm not ignorant or naive enough to believe that governments and corporations are acting in our best interests especially when done under the veil of secrecy.

sorry, I always assume that 911 conspiracy theorists and the like are adolescents (I guess it makes me feel less depressed about humanity?). how is the democratic process being subverted? you know what representative democracy is about, right?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

well I would agree that 4 years sounds a bit much, but I can't say I give a s**t. and it still doesn't explain your and others' obsession with an outdated document? I'm sure if you really cared you could contact DFAT and ask.

The point is that negotiations are being carried out in secret and we won't know what those negotiations entailed until 4 years after they've been implemented meaning we won't know what points our elected representatives tried to argue, which ones they rolled over on and which ones they didn't bother with in the first place. I'd say that's extremely important to ensure some context around the agreement and it's negotiations and any potential impacts on our country. It's also important in trying to ensure a modicum of accountability and transparency in our domestic politics.

Four years is a good number for them because it will ensure by the time it's released 1) it is likely there will be a new government in power (especially in the US) and 2) the agreement will already have been in place for a period of time so any concerns people may have had with the process will be irrelevant.

sorry, I always assume that 911 conspiracy theorists and the like are adolescents (I guess it makes me feel less depressed about humanity?). how is the democratic process being subverted? you know what representative democracy is about, right?

Because national sovereignty is being eroded to ensure greater power is diverted to an unrepresentative supra-national government structure and unelected and unaccountable private corporations. This treaty/agreement is just one step in a long march that's been ongoing for decades. The aim is to chip away at these things bit by bit to take away the power from nations and their citizens. This view is held by such well-known conspiracy extremist nutjobs as Joseph Stiglitz.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/co...porate-takeover-by-joseph-e--stiglitz-2015-05

When I chaired President Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers, anti-environmentalists tried to enact a similar provision, called “regulatory takings.” They knew that once enacted, regulations would be brought to a halt, simply because government could not afford to pay the compensation. Fortunately, we succeeded in beating back the initiative, both in the courts and in the US Congress.

This is the aim, to ensure that the threat to governments of being sued for loss of potential future earnings is so great that they just don't bother enacting regulations in the first place.

 

[Long Live HFC]

The point is that negotiations are being carried out in secret

like every trade deal ever?

and we won't know what those negotiations entailed until 4 years after they've been implemented meaning we won't know what points our elected representatives tried to argue, which ones they rolled over on and which ones they didn't bother with in the first place. I'd say that's extremely important to ensure some context around the agreement and it's negotiations and any potential impacts on our country. It's also important in trying to ensure a modicum of accountability and transparency in our domestic politics.

to be fair, I doubt we'd know any of this anyway, unless they'd release a dozens of documents of versions A-Z etc, which I'm not sure would happen regardless of the timeline.

Four years is a good number for them because it will ensure by the time it's released 1) it is likely there will be a new government in power (especially in the US) and 2) the agreement will already have been in place for a period of time so any concerns people may have had with the process will be irrelevant.

I agree with both your points, but especially the bolded. which is a positive in my opinion. I've never been a huge fan of "theorycrafting" and having 4 years of evidence to judge the actual outcomes, is better (to me at least).

Because national sovereignty is being eroded to ensure greater power is diverted to an unrepresentative supra-national government structure and unelected and unaccountable private corporations.

oh ok, you're referring to the ISDS. in this we agree. I can see their benefit in some ways (as Power Raid and I already discussed), but I am not sure they're a good thing for AU per se. indeed if you read what's being said in the media, it's been a major sticking point for our negotiators. which is a plus I think.

 

[CountryRace]

Does every like, trade deal ever allow

"Foreign corporations would be empowered to bypass domestic courts and directly "sue" the U.S. government before a tribunal of private lawyers that sits outside of any domestic legal system. These lawyers would be authorized to order the U.S. government to hand millions of our tax dollars to the corporations for laws that they find inconvenient." ?

http://www.citizen.org/tppinvestment

 

[CountryRace]

 

[Long Live HFC]

it's kind of hard to take your interest in this topic seriously, when you go posting stuff that's already been posted. in this thread. in the previous 2 weeks even

 

[Power Raid]

Does every like, trade deal ever allow

"Foreign corporations would be empowered to bypass domestic courts and directly "sue" the U.S. government before a tribunal of private lawyers that sits outside of any domestic legal system. These lawyers would be authorized to order the U.S. government to hand millions of our tax dollars to the corporations for laws that they find inconvenient." ?

http://www.citizen.org/tppinvestment

do you understand the basic concept behind this? the whole reason for an external body is simply because the executive and judicial arms have failed in the country at question.

why would you run a legal process in a failed judicial system?

 

[Power Raid]

Huh? Unfortunately that's not in my control - if I could, yeah I'd release the agreement for public debate and transparency.

rubbish

you are simply too lazy as it is available

unbelievable.......and yet you want to have a say. lol

let me know when you care to be informed

 

[Long Live HFC]

rubbish

you are simply too lazy as it is available

unbelievable.......and yet you want to have a say. lol

let me know when you care to be informed

in his defence, your post had an error. you wrote 'release' instead of 'read'.

 

[Long Live HFC]

do you understand the basic concept behind this? the whole reason for an external body is simply because the executive and judicial arms have failed in the country at question.

why would you run a legal process in a failed judicial system?

while i agree with you, we both know these tribunals will enforce decisions even in countries with a well-established executive and judiciary (which really just means an extra avenue of appeal, which isn't an inherently good thing imo). i'd also like to know about the make-up/structures of these independent courts. do you have any links?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

rubbish

you are simply too lazy as it is available

unbelievable.......and yet you want to have a say. lol

let me know when you care to be informed

You asked me whether I had released the information yet? I don't have any information to release.

I've read the documents released on Wikileaks (and thank god for whistleblowers like them, Manning, Snowden etc) but that's only a fraction of the story.

 

[not a warmonger]

do you understand the basic concept behind this? the whole reason for an external body is simply because the executive and judicial arms have failed in the country at question.

why would you run a legal process in a failed judicial system?

Which countries have failed judicial arms?

 

[not a warmonger]

try and concentrate now. yes, I am for deregulation (uber vs taxis is a good example of deregulation I favour) but I am not in favour of deregulating banks but I am in favour of deregulating finance.

yes I am against big business for much of the same reason I am against big government. but that doesn't mean I am anti-govt, I just believe we should have proper demarcation between our layers of government. I prefer local governance, local business, a better spread of power and the ability to leave if I don't like it.

So there are some of my principles..........so care to answer if you are for or against Mabo?

Right-"libertarians" like your good self are not interested in eliminating capitalist private property and thus the authority, oppression and exploitation which goes with it. They make an idol of private property and claim to defend "absolute" and "unrestricted" property rights. In particular, taxation and theft are among the greatest evils possible as they involve coercion against "justly held" property. It is true that they call for an end to the state, but this is not because they are concerned about the restrictions of liberty experienced by wage slaves and tenants but because they wish capitalists and landlords not to be bothered by legal restrictions on what they can and cannot do on their property. Anarchists stress that the right-"libertarians" are not opposed to workers being exploited or oppressed (in fact, they deny that is possible under capitalism) but because they do not want the state to impede capitalist "freedom" to exploit and oppress workers even more than is the case now! Thus they "are against the State simply because they are capitalists first and foremost." [Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p. 564]

 

[not a warmonger]

you couldn't be more wrong......... I guess its like one plus one; you either get it or you don't.

I believe in government intervention. How could anyone not? are you being stupid or mischievous in your comment?



I believe in selective deregulation as disclosed. Have you ever flown a budget airline, used uber, bought something online from overseas, gambled using an overseas betting agency etc? I trust you have benefited from deregulation recieving better services or lower prices! You do realise deregulation was lead by the Hawke/ Keating government (so it can't be all bad if it was delivered by the left)? So were you being mischievous or stupid with your comment?

I believe in privatisation as a general rule but that doesn't mean I don't believe in regulation of monopolies. In fact given I prefer smaller governments and smaller business, I prefer these to be broken up to create competition which leads to innovation and lower costs. There are some clear examples where scale outweighs the benefits of competition meaning there is a role for large corporations.

I dare say you aren't stupid but you are mischievous. That's probably driven by fear and uncertainty but only you can answer that. Perhaps you should have been born in the 40s and enjoyed the protestionist era of the 1950s and 60s. Perhaps you and Abbott have more in common than you would first think.

Have we finished Altas Shrugged yet?

 

[Power Raid]

You asked me whether I had released the information yet? I don't have any information to release.

I've read the documents released on Wikileaks (and thank god for whistleblowers like them, Manning, Snowden etc) but that's only a fraction of the story.

oops, my mistake

edit: have you bothered to read the agreements as yet?


and questioned answered thanks

 

[Power Raid]

Which countries have failed judicial arms?

at a guess........most

too many judges can be bought and many governments can be bought or simply don't have the funds to run their executives

Indo is a perfect example of $ = decisions
Guinea is a perfect example of not having the $s to run the executive
Philippines is a perfect example of a country that doesn't operate under its own laws
Peru is a classic example of a government who may eventually deliver under its own laws

There are also plenty of cases in Oz, Canada and the US where governments and the courts have simply got it wrong.