Your sovereign rights being flushed down the toilet by our politicians

[bogan]

Well I 'spose in about 5 years time when the truth is revealed & fiction becomes fact, then it will probably be too late to do anything about it eh.

Only if they get it wrong. You guys do like your circular logic don't you.

[Brian d marge]

It seems we are all missing the point here.

It isn't countries who are/have written the bulk of the agreement provisions and it ain't one country over another that will profit from it.

It's the corporations who have written most of it and they are the ones who stand to profit most from it. Particularly the law suits (damages claims against sovereign laws that prejudice the corporate ability to extract profits, and who we the tax payers will pay the price for) that will come by the hundreds once everyone is locked in.

You have to stop thinking in terms of national benefits, that ain't what it's about. The touted benefits are the glitter that covers the turd that is the TPPA. You are idiots if you think any of us tax slaves will benefit from this for more than the settling period. This is about trade and those who profit most directly from it. At best we will get the scraps needed to keep us living the illusion of parity.

Trade agreements like this are what has stripped the US of 90% of it's manufacturing industries in the last 20 or so years. Most big corporations have relocated the manufacturing to other countries, while retaining full access to the US market. The smaller manufacturers who remained loyal to their employees and the US economy have subsequently become non competitive and driven out of business. Millions of jobs lost for what? Corporate profits. Corporations care not for national boundaries or national pride. This is how corporations thrive.

thanks for that . i was going to reply but you summed it up nicely

im still waiting for the cheap electricity they promised us the last time the idiots tried to sell us a good idea, ,

[puddytat]

Only if they get it wrong. You guys do like your circular logic don't you.

What comes 'round goes 'round....

[flyingcrocodile46]

Well some of us are.

It's really pretty simple. Free trade = everyone NOT included in the sale/purchase activity gets to NOT punch the ticket on the way past. All manufacturers and all consumers of their product with half a brain see this as a fucking excellent idea.

This particular free trade agreement like every one of its predecessors likely contains individual provisions that favour one nation over another. And yes, the signatories are countries. Not corporations.

There may even be clauses in there that have fuck all to do with trade regulation, but in the end your government will sign it or not based on their assessment of its overall favourable terms to this nation.

Entities not in favour of free trade are invariably those that stand to lose their cut of the legal backhanders that are currently in place. That's unlikely to be the reason they publicly use, but stripped of the bullshit them's the facts. Fuckem.

They have to be in order to circumvent the soveriegn laws (which help protect the little people from big predators) that interfere with corporate objectives (they only have one). Anyway, corporations are also some of the signatories,

If the TPPA was really good for the people of any of the participating countries (as opposed to good for the corporations and bad for the people) why aren’t the conditions of the agreement open to public scrutiny in any of the participating countries?...... That’s largely a rhetorical question by the way, as the answer is already well documented. (google is not your friend, but can enlighten you if you are interested). Aw! what the fuck. People who learned of some of the conditions during earlier 'open' negotiations, let their politicians know that they weren't happy with the proposed loss of protection afforded by sovereign laws that would be nullified under the agreements. The negotiations stalled then restarted (underground and in secret).

Just how much more obvious does it need to be?

The insinuation that our interests are safely in hand through proportional representation by politicians (may as well be car dealers) has to be a fucking joke right! Politicians are the fuckers who send young sheep to war (often based on lies). The pricks specialise in telling lies about themselves and each other to themselves, each other and us just to take attention away from the broken promises they told to get elected.

Our politicians have infinitely more in common with their shareholding buddies than any of the tax herd. Yeah! Sure you can trust them not to shaft us. History is full of tales about politicians who threw themselves on the sword for the good of the people.

The TPPA is ... An illicit plan formulated in secret by a group of highly placed persons involving duplicity and deceit to mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights in order to achieve personal advantage.

Coincidentally, that is a typical definition of a conspiracy theory. But ewe knew that, right!

[Brian d marge]

Then why is it called a trade agreement?

And you're description of how really simple trade agreements are doesn't actually describe any historical trade agreements with any accuracy at all now, does it? In fact it's fair to say that in keeping with the massive number of interested parties involved they're probably the single most complicated negotiations ever undertaken, isn't it?

Oh have I got a bargain for you
one possibly 2 owners from new
prime Auckland waterfront real estate
current owner seeks to monerize assets due to current economic conditions
steady revenue streams from cameras on both lanes

bargain trust me

[Ocean1]

They have to be in order to circumvent the soveriegn laws (which help protect the little people from big predators) that interfere with corporate objectives (they only have one). Anyway, corporations are also some of the signatories,

You don’t like politicians changing laws? How do you think current law was established? If you’re so uptight about inappropriate interference in politics you’d have to outlaw the Labour party’s institutional reliance on union votes on policy issues wouldn’t you?

If the TPPA was really good for the people of any of the participating countries (as opposed to good for the corporations and bad for the people) why aren’t the conditions of the agreement open to public scrutiny in any of the participating countries?...... That’s largely a rhetorical question by the way, as the answer is already well documented. (google is not your friend, but can enlighten you if you are interested). Aw! what the fuck. People who learned of some of the conditions during earlier 'open' negotiations, let their politicians know that they weren't happy with the proposed loss of protection afforded by sovereign laws that would be nullified under the agreements. The negotiations stalled then restarted (underground and in secret).


Just how much more obvious does it need to be? [/I]

Who else stands to benefit from access to sensitive trading negotiations? Those big corporations would just love to get some advanced notice of how their markets plan to deal with them in future wouldn’t they? Isn’t that reason at least as obvious?

And those “sovereign laws”, we’re talking duty and import tax rules here aren’t we? The same rules that protected the NZ public from all of those crap Japanese vehicle manufacturers and insisted that we buy one of the outstanding products from NZMC, or Ford NZ, perhaps a nice HQ holden?

The rules that protected a few laughably incompetent local corporations and their equally laughable employees from the real world? Those that, when removed saw half of the third world suddenly change from subsistence farmers to successful, productive manufacturers?

The insinuation that our interests are safely in hand through proportional representation by politicians (may as well be car dealers) has to be a fucking joke right! Politicians are the fuckers who send young sheep to war (often based on lies). The pricks specialise in telling lies about themselves and each other to themselves, each other and us just to take attention away from the broken promises they told to get elected.

Our politicians have infinitely more in common with their shareholding buddies than any of the tax herd. Yeah! Sure you can trust them not to shaft us. History is full of tales about politicians who threw themselves on the sword for the good of the people.

Again, the politicians that draughted the current set of rules were a bunch of clever, insightful and upright members if the community but the current ones aren’t? Please stop, it’s embarrassing.

Oh, and if you’d rather be “led” by academics and socialists intent on “protecting” us then I can only suggest that it might be a good thing that your influence on such things is limited to that tiny single vote you disparage.

See, of all of the multitude of flavours humankind has tasted over the years democratic capitalism has finally proved to work best , not just for that mill boss caricature you love to hate but for the world in general. It seems likely that even an adherent to such might find a bunch of shit in this trade agreement that he don’t like. Be silly for me to expect it all my way too, wouldn’t it? But let’s not try to paint this as some sort of tool of corporate slavery, in spite of all of the socialist noise to the contrary it’s nothing of the sort.

The TPPA is ... An illicit plan formulated in secret by a group of highly placed persons involving duplicity and deceit to mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights in order to achieve personal advantage.

In which case you’ll have no problem ignoring or altering it later, should it transpire that you don’t approve of those advantaged, will you? But I’m picking it’ll be more of the same improvements to fair trade we’ve seen over the last half century or so.

[flyingcrocodile46]

You don’t like politicians changing laws? How do you think current law was established? If you’re so uptight about inappropriate interference in politics you’d have to outlaw the Labour party’s institutional reliance on union votes on policy issues wouldn’t you?

Was that really a question? As it seems you have assumed that it is how i think and have attempted to obfuscate my rather simple points by burying them using strawman arguments that have nothing to do with the core statements that I made. Some intellect you turned out to be. If you can't debate this simple issue honestly I am not interested in debating with you as it will go on and on and on and on as you keep building diversions in an attempt to somehow bolster you self delusion. That sort of shit only works on sheep.

Who else stands to benefit from access to sensitive trading negotiations? Those big corporations would just love to get some advanced notice of how their markets plan to deal with them in future wouldn’t they? Isn’t that reason at least as obvious?

BWUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Idiot. They are changing the rules to suit themselves rather than learning to live with them and that is the crux of the problem with the TPPA.

And those “sovereign laws”, we’re talking duty and import tax rules here aren’t we? The same rules that protected the NZ public from all of those crap Japanese vehicle manufacturers and insisted that we buy one of the outstanding products from NZMC, or Ford NZ, perhaps a nice HQ holden?

Sure. Lets quote laws that were changed decades ago to bolster our delusion. Pathetic.

The rules that protected a few laughably incompetent local corporations and their equally laughable employees from the real world? Those that, when removed saw half of the third world suddenly change from subsistence farmers to successful, productive manufacturers?

Sure. Worked real well in India (and dozens of other countries (where big corporates have moved in) Shoot yourself in the feet. See if I care. FFS http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21077458 Try reading the article and do some fucking research as you are clearly ignorant on this issue. Big profits for the big corporations and death for the peasant farmers.

Again, the politicians that draughted the current set of rules were a bunch of clever, insightful and upright members if the community but the current ones aren’t? Please stop, it’s embarrassing.
Oh, and if you’d rather be “led” by academics and socialists intent on “protecting” us then I can only suggest that it might be a good thing that your influence on such things is limited to that tiny single vote you disparage.

Did I say that our old politicians were any better or that I wanted academics (who are no better) to rule in their place? No. So take your dishonest strawman obfuscation and shove it.

See, of all of the multitude of flavours humankind has tasted over the years democratic capitalism has finally proved to work best , not just for that mill boss caricature you love to hate but for the world in general. It seems likely that even an adherent to such might find a bunch of shit in this trade agreement that he don’t like. Be silly for me to expect it all my way too, wouldn’t it? But let’s not try to paint this as some sort of tool of corporate slavery, in spite of all of the socialist noise to the contrary it’s nothing of the sort.

Once again putting your words in my mouth to add substance to your delusion where it has none. That's as dishonest as a debate can get. You should be a poliweasel.

In which case you’ll have no problem ignoring or altering it later, should it transpire that you don’t approve of those advantaged, will you? But I’m picking it’ll be more of the same improvements to fair trade we’ve seen over the last half century or so.

No son. What you're 'picking' is your nose.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I'll say it again, as it is the most telling indicator that can be extracted from the secrecy surrounding the TPPA negotiations. Only a fool would not recognise its significance. (waves to bogan and ocean)

If the TPPA was really good for the people of any of the participating countries (as opposed to good for the corporations and bad for the people) why aren’t the conditions of the agreement open to public scrutiny in any of the participating countries?

Don't know the answer? Let me help.

People who learned of some of the conditions during earlier 'open' negotiations, let their politicians know that they weren't happy with the proposed loss of protection afforded by sovereign laws that would be nullified under the agreements. The negotiations stalled then restarted (underground and in secret).

Just how much more obvious does it need to be?

[blue rider]

I'll say it again, as it is the most telling indicator that can be extracted from the secrecy surrounding the TPPA negotiations. Only a fool would not recognise its significance. (waves to bogan and ocean)

If the TPPA was really good for the people of any of the participating countries (as opposed to good for the corporations and bad for the people) why aren’t the conditions of the agreement open to public scrutiny in any of the participating countries?

Don't know the answer? Let me help.

People who learned of some of the conditions during earlier 'open' negotiations, let their politicians know that they weren't happy with the proposed loss of protection afforded by sovereign laws that would be nullified under the agreements. The negotiations stalled then restarted (underground and in secret).

Just how much more obvious does it need to be?

but but

cheap computers!!

[Oscar]

Do you vote?

?...................................

[mashman]

?...................................

Such a fuckin stupid question that I'm surprised you still expect an answer to it.

[Oscar]

Such a fuckin stupid question that I'm surprised you still expect an answer to it.

I just wanted to know if you're the only idjut here that complains about the democratic process but doesn't vote.

[mashman]

I just wanted to know if you're the only idjut here that complains about the democratic process but doesn't vote.

That you need an answer is not unexpected, but I thought you'd have growd up enough by now to realise just how irrelevant whether a person votes is or not when it comes to forming an opinion. I guess not, or you're incapable of conjuring such a separation. I hold out hope for ya though, always will.

What democratic process have I been complaining about again? Oh look, I haven't.

[mashman]

Nuns Urge Pope to Rescind Doctrine of Discovery

[SPman]

but in the end your government will sign it or not based on their assessment of its overall favourable terms to this nation.

(and Labour would be no better!)