Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

[Paulo]

Seriously uncompetitive; frozen out of markets we need to sell our products to; we'd have to get around that be employing a broker, say Australia, who could buy low from us and sell high and they'd pocket the difference. On the plus side, the Treaty, Union, Corporate and other Troughers could also suffer reduced income levels, although probably not - the rest of us would be taxed more as individuals to keep filling the Treaty and Union Troughs. GST to 20% amongst other stupidities. A John Minto / Sue Bradford economy.

Here's a good report countering the highly dubious figures being bandied about by MFAT (obviously not the sort of critical analysis you'll find in the Herald)

http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/w...zurietaTPP.pdf

[Paulo]

Here's a good report countering the highly dubious figures being bandied about by MFAT (obviously not the sort of critical analysis you'll find in the Herald)

http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/w...zurietaTPP.pdf

and here's the summary if you dont want to read all 24 pages.

In the main existing assessments, the TPP is projected to generate small gains in GDP in most
participating economies. However, these projections are based on an economic model that
assumes full employment and invariant income distribution, thereby excluding, from the outset,
some of the most serious risks of trade liberalization.
Projecting the effects of the TPP with a different economic model, based on more realistic
assumptions about economic adjustment and income distribution, leads to different results. We
project that the TPP will lead to a contraction of GDP in the United States and in Japan, and
negligible income gains in other countries. We also project job losses and higher inequality in all
participating economies. In the face of negligible or negative income gains, the costs of the TPP
are projected to fall asymmetrically on labor.
Furthermore, when analyzed with a model that recognizes the risks of trade liberalization, the
TPP appears to only marginally change competitiveness among participating countries. Most
gains are therefore obtained at the expense of non-TPP countries.
Globally, the TPP favors competition on labor costs and remuneration of capital. Depending on
the policy choices in non-TPP countries, this may accelerate the global race to the bottom,
increasing downward pressure on labor incomes in a quest for ever more elusive trade gains.

[Woodman]

I wonder if Sue Bradford if, god help us she was in a position of power, would make the decision to not join the TPPA if everyone else did? Surely even she can't be that stupid/short sighted/have no understanding of where her bludging supporters "wages" come from?

At the end of the day NZ has no option but to follow the crowd as we are way way way too small to go it alone or threaten the other members. Its a harsh reality.

[mashman]

I wonder if Sue Bradford if, god help us she was in a position of power, would make the decision to not join the TPPA if everyone else did? Surely even she can't be that stupid/short sighted/have no understanding of where her bludging supporters "wages" come from?

At the end of the day NZ has no option but to follow the crowd as we are way way way too small to go it alone or threaten the other members. Its a harsh reality.

"My" economic model can make the TTP agreements moot. By ya'll know the price of that eh @follow.

[Woodman]

"My" economic model can make the TTP agreements moot. By ya'll know the price of that eh @follow.

All good in theory, but would you have the balls to lead the country into it? and live with the consequences either way.

[mashman]

All good in theory, but would you have the balls to lead the country into it? and live with the consequences either way.

That's exactly what I intend to do. However there's more than just me, and I am not a candidate for leading your country. You won't let me.

[Woodman]

That's exactly what I intend to do. However there's more than just me, and I am not a candidate for leading your country. You won't let me.

Goodonya, but the fact is the people want "safe", so rightly or wrongly, you lose

[Crasherfromwayback]

At the end of the day NZ has no option but to follow the crowd as we are way way way too small to go it alone or threaten the other members. Its a harsh reality.

We did our own thing regarding nuclear warships/power and we seem to be going ok.

[mashman]

Goodonya, but the fact is the people want "safe", so rightly or wrongly, you lose

We'll see in regards to what people want...

[Akzle]

At the end of the day NZ has no option but to follow the crowd as we are way way way too small to go it alone or threaten the other members. Its a harsh reality.

conversely, we're small enough not to need everyone else.

Nz could be a self sufficient nation. And fuck the rest of the world.

But, y'know, imf and shit.

All good in theory, but would you have the balls to lead the country into it? and live with the consequences either way.

vote akzle

[Woodman]

That's exactly what I intend to do. However there's more than just me, and I am not a candidate for leading your country. You won't let me.

Oh, I am sure we will, but just because something is popular, doesn't mean its right.

[Brian d marge]

and here's the summary if you dont want to read all 24 pages.

In the main existing assessments, the TPP is projected to generate small gains in GDP in most
participating economies. However, these projections are based on an economic model that
assumes full employment and invariant income distribution, thereby excluding, from the outset,
some of the most serious risks of trade liberalization.
Projecting the effects of the TPP with a different economic model, based on more realistic
assumptions about economic adjustment and income distribution, leads to different results. We
project that the TPP will lead to a contraction of GDP in the United States and in Japan, and
negligible income gains in other countries. We also project job losses and higher inequality in all
participating economies. In the face of negligible or negative income gains, the costs of the TPP
are projected to fall asymmetrically on labor.
Furthermore, when analyzed with a model that recognizes the risks of trade liberalization, the
TPP appears to only marginally change competitiveness among participating countries. Most
gains are therefore obtained at the expense of non-TPP countries.
Globally, the TPP favors competition on labor costs and remuneration of capital. Depending on
the policy choices in non-TPP countries, this may accelerate the global race to the bottom,
increasing downward pressure on labor incomes in a quest for ever more elusive trade gains.

tis the only thing I can think of now .........

[Katman]

I wonder if Sue Bradford if, god help us she was in a position of power, would make the decision to not join the TPPA if everyone else did? Surely even she can't be that stupid/short sighted/have no understanding of where her bludging supporters "wages" come from?

At the end of the day NZ has no option but to follow the crowd as we are way way way too small to go it alone or threaten the other members. Its a harsh reality.

Every country involved has their share of protesters.

The TPPA needs to be shut down entirely.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/mul...0205-0001.html

At least Bernie Sanders has come out and stated that the TTPA will not be ratified if he becomes President.

[RDJ]

and here's the summary if you dont want to read all 24 pages.

In the main existing assessments, the TPP is projected to generate small gains in GDP in most
participating economies. However, these projections are based on an economic model that
assumes full employment and invariant income distribution, thereby excluding, from the outset,
some of the most serious risks of trade liberalization.
Projecting the effects of the TPP with a different economic model, based on more realistic
assumptions about economic adjustment and income distribution, leads to different results. We
project that the TPP will lead to a contraction of GDP in the United States and in Japan, and
negligible income gains in other countries. We also project job losses and higher inequality in all
participating economies. In the face of negligible or negative income gains, the costs of the TPP
are projected to fall asymmetrically on labor.
Furthermore, when analyzed with a model that recognizes the risks of trade liberalization, the
TPP appears to only marginally change competitiveness among participating countries. Most
gains are therefore obtained at the expense of non-TPP countries.
Globally, the TPP favors competition on labor costs and remuneration of capital. Depending on
the policy choices in non-TPP countries, this may accelerate the global race to the bottom,
increasing downward pressure on labor incomes in a quest for ever more elusive trade gains.

Thank you, I did read that. And I think the takeaway from it - for me anyway - is that gains are obtained at the expense of non-TPP countries which means if we don't join, we are losing. Whether or not is it is a race to the bottom - we will have to see. it is not for nothing that economics is designated the dismal science. And economic predictors have an even worse track record than the global warmenists - which is quite a (negative) achievement.

Also, it remains a significant worry that many people who are opposing the TPPA are doing so on the basis of a World Bank report. The WB is one of the most corrupt international organisations in existence (but still far behind the UN and UNHCR).

[Woodman]

Every country involved has their share of protesters.

The TPPA needs to be shut down entirely.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/mul...0205-0001.html

At least Bernie Sanders has come out and stated that the TTPA will not be ratified if he becomes President.

I agree with you.... God help me