Trans-Pacific Partnership: 11 Things Harper Doesn't Want To Reveal

[Michael Hardner]

If being chained up to a sewing machine all day being paid 2 cents an hour and have the place burn down with no fire exits in Bangladesh means free to you then by all means.

I'm sure the people in Tianjin are enjoying their freedom right now.

Tianjin Port Free Trade Zone is the largest free trade zone in northern China.

It's true that people in these areas do not have the safety regulations that we have, but they are getting better.

I'm not sure why you can't have a level playing field, in terms of environmental and safety regulations, before you have trade but it certainly seems to be the case. Our economies evolved the same way, in that safety regulations came slowly and only followed commerce, so maybe it's not surprising.

[waldo]

The government doesn't own these companies, sorry.

it's the Harper Conservative government negotiating treaties for 'these companies'... imagine negotiations and agreements that only occur if proper safety and environmental standards are a part of the agreements - what a concept!

[Michael Hardner]

imagine negotiations and agreements that only occur if proper safety and environmental standards are a part of the agreements - what a concept!

Indeed, that's the elephant in the room. The left constantly demands this, standing on the point that we shouldn't loosen trade with countries without these types of changes ... but they never seem to make it into the agreements. Is it the complexity of adding such standards to a deal ? Or is it concern that the west would use these types of clauses to their own trade advantage ?

We're in need of an expert opinion on this one, I think.

[waldo]

TPP secret negotiations behind closed doors... with more than 500 corporations at the table! Within business-speak those pesky things like safety, environmental and labor regulations... those are NBTs (nontariff barriers to trade). They get in the way of the altruistic nature of corporations opening up developing countries to "free trade"..... you know... integrating developing countries into international trade... delivering them inclusive sustainable growth and bettering their competitiveness, improving their means to connect to global value chains!!!

[overthere]

You see it how it is. "Free Trade" is just Orwellian news speak for getting away with murder.

Do you think Mulroney should be executed for forcing NAFTA on an innocent Canadian population? Chretien jailed for failing to repeal it despite having promised just that, followed by 13 years of opportunity?

[G Huxley]

A. I don't believe in the death penalty.

B. I believe in the rule of law provided that it is in accord with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (Rules out 'Free Trade')

[WIP]

I think I read somewhere it's the way Ottawa keeps selling out Canadians to the Dairy Board that's caused our potential Pacific trading partners to tell us to piss up a rope.

The freer the trade the freer the people. I truly do believe that but if we don't practice what we preach we'll just be a joke.

Complete bullshit! The freer the trade, the freer the controllers of vast amounts of capital to use their money as a means of dictatorial control of people. If you want to be even more of a serf to big money, just keep supporting the new rounds of trade negotiations.

Farming should have remained local (just like Europe has resisted ending their protectionist policies until lately) and so called "protectionist" organizations like the dairy and wheat boards protected smaller farmers from being driven out of business by Big Ag....like the Americans did around the time Willie was doing his Farm Aid concerts. Too bad nobody at Farm Aid understood why all the small local farmers were being driven under, and could only whine about the problem....just like the benefit concerts for climate change and starvation.

[Michael Hardner]

Complete bullshit! The freer the trade, the freer the controllers of vast amounts of capital to use their money as a means of dictatorial control of people.

There are a lot of advantages to freer trade that you're not acknowledging though.

[bush_cheney2004]

....We're in need of an expert opinion on this one, I think.

Not really...if one nation insists on regulations for tree hugging and "human rights", then it will be left out of the poker game.

You wanna do business or not ?

[eyeball]

Complete bullshit! The freer the trade, the freer the controllers of vast amounts of capital to use their money as a means of dictatorial control of people.

Yes well, you have to take what I said in the context of knowing what I prescribe as a means to control the politicians, regulators and government - outlawing in-camera lobbying, and implementing souveillance measures that would make Orwell blush.

If you want to be even more of a serf to big money, just keep supporting the new rounds of trade negotiations.

I certainly don't support them, because of the absence of souveillance. In the meantime I'm mostly amused that our so-called free trade government got burned due to its own lack of commitment to free trade.

Maybe one day, in the far far distant future people will say the freer the people the freer the trade.

[waldo]

Not really...if one nation insists on regulations for tree hugging and "human rights", then it will be left out of the poker game.

You wanna do business or not ?

no - Michael Hardner suggested the need for an expert opinion as to why such things as worker/workplace safety, worker health regulations, environmental standards, etc., aren't (typically) a part of negotiated agreements. Your flippant trivialization of that to "tree hugging/human rights" offers nothing to move the discussion forward. There would be no "nation insisting" in a genuine negotiation.

now, if one accepts the somewhat politicized glossy overtones in the U.S. Whitehouse blog... it might appear Obama is working seriously towards this... recognizing the actual full agreement is still under negotiation... and the proof is always in the details, per that Whitehouse website:

TPP gives America the greatest opportunity to change these rules and level the playing field for American workers. How? By putting in place tough new standards on labor, the environment, and in other areas that will make the Trans-Pacific Partnership the most progressive trade deal the world has ever seen.

Here's what that would look like:

Stronger protections for workers:

Stronger protections for the environment:

[Michael Hardner]

Interesting detail there Waldo, thank you.

[waldo]

Interesting detail there Waldo, thank you.

I have to admit I had no realization that Obama had these designs taken to this level... of course, the 'devil is in the details... as negotiations progress. I trust the U.S. Congress wouldn't, "pull a Kyoto"... and refuse to ratify the U.S. TPP agreement. Or would Obama's executive order ability apply/over-rule regardless? But then again, how could the U.S. Congress ever be against something that would presume to (ultimately) favour the U.S. worker - right? (/snarc).

[bush_cheney2004]

Interesting detail there Waldo, thank you.

Indeed...always interesting but not surprising to see American content to explain things in the Federal Politics part of the forum. President Obama is not "fighting" for any of these things, and certainly not for Canada.

[Michael Hardner]

President Obama is not "fighting" for any of these things, and certainly not for Canada.

But he's talking about it ? So there's obviously some value in it.

[bush_cheney2004]

But he's talking about it ? So there's obviously some value in it.

There's always political value in "talking about it"....but there is a reason that the actual meat of any negotiations are shielded from public view.

Access to the huge Chinese market back in the 90's meant that such soft nonsense be left behind and/or systematically ignored. We called it "technology transfer", a term completely devoid of any political trappings.

[Michael Hardner]

Access to the huge Chinese market back in the 90's meant that such soft nonsense be left behind and/or systematically ignored. We called it "technology transfer", a term completely devoid of any political trappings.

Right, but things do change... at least on the surface. This may be the way of the future, or a temporary salve against protectionism - who knows ?

[bush_cheney2004]

Right, but things do change... at least on the surface. This may be the way of the future, or a temporary salve against protectionism - who knows ?

Maybe...but only if it sweetens the deal. Protectionism is part of the same strategy. Imported Obama slide shows won't do or mean anything about Canada's locked up dairy industry, which actually costs "regular folks" more money...lots more.

[waldo]

Imported Obama slide shows won't do or mean anything about Canada's locked up dairy industry, which actually costs "regular folks" more money...lots more.

imported Obama slide shows!!! First of all, I declared those when I came across the border ... actually, of course, they're simply images... there was no slideshow! Notwithstanding that trivial dramatization of yours, the discussion centered upon NTBs (safety, environmental, labour standards)... apparently the extent of your talking to this is to bring out your "tree-hugging" labeling. Perhaps you should try a serious run at that discussion instead of distracting to "cows", hey!

Edited August 19, 2015 by waldo

[Michael Hardner]

I don't understand why the emergence of a public consciousness around field-leveling issues (or alternately NTBs) wouldn't be lauded, as these are good for competitiveness, good for business, good for workers, good for the environment.

Would people buy a can of tuna that said on it "We DON'T care about dolphins !" ?

[waldo]

I don't understand why the emergence of a public consciousness around field-leveling issues (or alternately NTBs) wouldn't be lauded, as these are good for competitiveness, good for business, good for workers, good for the environment.

Would people buy a can of tuna that said on it "We DON'T care about dolphins !" ?

they're not lauded by those who would choose to put corporate profit ahead of morality and ethics

[WIP]

There are a lot of advantages to freer trade that you're not acknowledging though.

There are so many negatives that never get factored in, such as increased carbon footprint because of the necessary expanded supply lines and transportation needed for finished products....think of all of the giant freighters crossing the Pacific in recent decades. Free trade forces workers to compete globally and reduces their bargaining power in free trade arrangements that are written up to allow manufacturers to abandon North American plants for cheaper locations with little or no penalties. If their imported products made with sweatshop labour had to face stiff tariffs and other punitive measures, they would be more inclined to stick around.

Then again, a better solution would have been to give worker-owned coops a fighting chance against the powers of the big corporate way of doing business. Coops exist on the fringes and aside from Spain, have had difficulty enduring because they are targeted by owners of capital, and receive no help even from the local governments where they are trying to keep industries operating.

Free trade has been a ruse to re-establish colonialism informally and even bring back slave labour, as one of the recent scandals facing the Obama Administration has been their efforts to give Malaysia back their favoured nation status in spite of allowing the use of immigrant slave labour. Globalization moves obvious crimes such as slave labour, child labour, environmental calamities, out of sight and out of mind for the western consumer. That's why two years ago, when Bangladeshi fires and factory collapses were briefly a big story, some alternative media were reminding us of the 100th anniversary of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire in New York in 1913. When more than 100 mostly immigrant women died while unable to get out of that decrepit building in New York's old textile district, the public outrage went national and there were demands for labour reforms and health and safety regulations. But when they move the offending crap half way around the world it becomes a minor story and is overshadowed by the promise of $10.00 shirts!

[WIP]

Yes well, you have to take what I said in the context of knowing what I prescribe as a means to control the politicians, regulators and government - outlawing in-camera lobbying, and implementing souveillance measures that would make Orwell blush.

I certainly don't support them, because of the absence of souveillance. In the meantime I'm mostly amused that our so-called free trade government got burned due to its own lack of commitment to free trade.

Maybe one day, in the far far distant future people will say the freer the people the freer the trade.

In libertarian paradise, the people with the most money have the most freedom. It's like one political theorist who's name I've forgotten said a couple of centuries ago: 'the public vagrancy laws apply equally to the beggar as to the rich man.'

[Michael Hardner]

they're not lauded by those who would choose to put corporate profit ahead of morality and ethics

It's not even that. There are situations where morality and ethical behavior enforce and enhance the public image of a brand, or an endeavor thereby leveraging a public morality for "good" and also increasing the possibilities for commerce. As cynical as people want to be about it, these things are important.

To dismiss them seems to me more of a desire to immerse oneself in cynicism, and stoke ones ego over the correctness of such a world view. My world view is optimistic, but when reality slaps it down (regularly) I don't deny that reality, I adjust.

[bush_cheney2004]

...To dismiss them seems to me more of a desire to immerse oneself in cynicism, and stoke ones ego over the correctness of such a world view. My world view is optimistic, but when reality slaps it down (regularly) I don't deny that reality, I adjust.

Global competition is not about "morality and ethics". Check such baggage at the airport.