Skip to main content

View Diary: Failing To Respect The Third Rail (290 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I doubt the Japanese and Chinese would (0+ / 0-)

    agree to anything that everyone else hasn't already (nor will the WTO view anything favorably that bends its own rules too much, and it's the WTO that has the real power). So I see no reason why TPPA would have any different terms than CAFTA did, or FTAA, or all the bilateral one-on-one agreements. Certainly nothing in what you cited indicates anything different from all the others. It's the same ole anti-democratic thing as always--made in secret, enforced in secret, unappealable, veto power over any country's democratic laws, no elected representatives . . . . same ole same ole.  Even fast-tracked like most of them are. It may be new to YOU, but I don't see anything about it that isn't already in every other free trade agreement the US has signed. (shrug)

    PS-- I'm assuming you have no access either--which makes me wonder how, if there is anything different in it, you would know.

    •  I've read commentary by those that have had... (5+ / 0-)

      ...or, claimed they had, access to the latest drafts.

      That being said, it's my understanding that: a.) China's nowhere near signed-off on this, and they may never even be a party to it; and, b.) whether or not Japan was going to be a party to this agreement was actually one of the greatest (and one of the most controversial) issues of the recent Japanese national election.

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Wed Apr 10, 2013 at 08:17:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  to be blunt, it doesn't matter (0+ / 0-)

        Both China and Japan are already part of the WTO, so they already live under virtually all those rules anyway. TPPA might set different numbers for particular products or industries, but the rules of the game are the same as WTO, and they are already under those rules.

        TPPA is itself part of a mostly failed attempt by the neocons to replace the multinational WTO with bilateral agreements which the US can dominate. It's entirely possible that TPPA will fall flat on its face, like FTAA already has. But the WTO remains, and everyone already bows to it.

      •  there is a reason that (0+ / 0-)

        China and Japan would balk,  now they have rules that no foreign corporation can operate independently by just selling inside their countries at will.  The US gave that ball away years ago.   That big stink about Jeep creating factories in China, that is so they can sell in China, otherwise they are very limited on what they can import.   Clearly the US does not demand part ownership in local factories or even that their be local factories.   I doubt the Chinese want to be subject to the same kind of foreign product invasion the US has been subject to most of my life.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site