What's new

Who will be the Winners and Losers in the World's Biggest Trade Deal: TPP

It was the "German" guy :azn: who started it. Cut the root of the problem.

the German guy can prove his germanness by writing entire posts in German. I have never seen nihonjin write complete pparagraphs in Japanese beyond one liners.
 
Down to the wire on the Trans-Pacific Partnership | East Asia Forum
27 July 2015
Author: Peter Drysdale, East Asia Forum

Officials and ministers from around the Pacific are descending on Hawaii this week for what should be the final round in the negotiation of the terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The big two in the arrangement — Japan and the United States — appear to have settled, and this bilateral between the two largest parties to the negotiation will be by far its most significant outcome. But there is still uncertainty about whether the agreement will be put to bed within the week and what its shape will finally be.

The rush to the wire is important. It is ordered around the legislative imperatives that President Obama faces in trying to stitch this part of his pivot toward Asia together before his term expires.

If the TPP deal is not concluded within the first two weeks of August, as Rick Katz of the Oriental Economist points out, it will be legally impossible to bring the TPP to a Congressional ratification vote during the 2015 calendar year and that means it would likely spin out into the next US presidency. If the agreement cannot be done by the end of the month, there will be a sense of failure and loss of momentum. The Japanese know, for example, that the United States needs to ratify the TPP during 2015; otherwise, it will be hard to get it ratified until the next presidential term and that could spill over into 2018, not 2017, and possibly not be done at all. If the agreement is to be signed at all it has to be signed very soon otherwise governmental energy in the region will ebb away. This way thinking about where things are at has clearly helped persuade Japanese negotiators to get over the line.

The TPP is the most important free-trade agreement to be negotiated in many years. If completed, it will cover a larger part of world trade than any such preferential deal before it, with its members accounting for nearly 40 per cent of the world economy. Its aim is to set a new standard for what trade agreements should cover. So far there have been five years of negotiations among the twelve partners, over the 29 chapters of dense rules and tariff details that will comprise the arrangement.

One problem remains the TPP’s complexity. Even in respect of commodity trade, it will incorporate a morass of regulations, such as content rules specifying how much of a product must be made from local inputs and inputs from partner countries to qualify for entry to partner markets. Moreover, these ‘rules of origin’ have been negotiated bilaterally so when the deal is done, it is likely to have some of the characteristics of a series of bilateral arrangements rather than a genuinely common set of regional rules. This is far from ideal or platinum-standard in terms of economic efficiency since it will protect suppliers within the arrangement against lower cost suppliers outside it, such as China, Indonesia or Europe for instance, diverting trade away from them rather than creating it within the TPP.

Yet, after failure to seal a big global WTO deal, the TPP offers the chance of some success. The Japan–US component of the TPP should deliver substantial agricultural trade liberalisation, although not, it seems, the zero option that would have completely opened up Japanese agricultural markets to international competition and symbolised real progress with the Abe government’s structural reform agenda. The prospect of dairy market liberalisation in North America would also bring substantial trade and income gains although political resistance to liberalisation of dairy in the middle of a Canadian election cycle is threatening to scuttle that, with uncertain consequences.

Canada has still apparently to put an offer on the table for dairy and poultry, prompting talk in Washington late last week that the TPP might go ahead this time without the participation of Canada, New Zealand and Malaysia (for unrelated human rights violation reasons). Leaving Canada out, or getting it to agree that it will have to join late, could have repercussions for New Zealand’s participation. The US dairy industry has argued that the United States should not open its dairy market to New Zealand and others unless it was counterbalanced by Japanese and Canadian dairy market opening. Remarkable though that turn of events might seem, the final straight up and down vote on TPP in the US Congress might depend on negotiators’ taking the threat seriously. Canada’s trade minister, Ed Fast, dismissed the threat as ‘another tactic to negotiate through the media’ and declared that Canada would ‘negotiate at the negotiating table’, and would not ‘be bullied into negotiating this through the media’. So there’s still a way to go.

Excluding dairy would be a sorry outcome for the value of the agreement. Dairy accounts for one-third of New Zealand’s total exports; New Zealand alone produces one-third of total global exports of dairy products. If Canada does not deliver, New Zealand — one of the original members of TPP when it was called the Pacific-4 — might not be able to sign on. As Katz reports an Asian analyst remarking: ‘What kind of agreement is it that keeps out the most efficient dairy producer in the world? So much for a “21st-century, high-quality” agreement that is the “gold standard” for future agreements’!

In this week’s lead, Shiro Armstrong scrutinises other aspects of the TPP likely to occupy a lot on negotiating time later this week. He argues that these issues, though vexed and still difficult to resolve, are trivial compared to the ability to get a straight up-or-down vote in the US Congress — now secured through TPA or fast-track authority, without which the deal would be a non-starter. The remaining issues, he says, can be easily horse-traded at the political level and compromises can be made in order to complete the deal.

Armstrong identifies the principal flaws in the TPP that may well overwhelm the positives in any agreement. ‘The first is that the core of the new rules involves aspects that further private (read: large multinationals) interests at the expense of general welfare in member countries. The most egregious of these is stronger intellectual property (IP) rights protections, which are anti-development and simply transfer wealth to US pharmaceutical companies and Hollywood’. Twelve-year or even seven-year data protection for biologics is, as one Asian negotiator has put it, ‘outrageous’. Other issues are the exclusion of China, India and Indonesia from membership any time soon, with hurdles to entry that are unreasonably high; the investor -state dispute settlement provision; and the trade diversionary structure of trade rules.

‘The temptation’, writes Armstrong, ‘will be strong to rush across the finish line for what will be a major political trophy — but the risk is that the TPP will be an agreement that does more harm than good for economic and political relations in the Asia Pacific’.

An agreement on the TPP this week is not the final destination. If it’s to be more than a surrogate bilateral agreement between Japan and the United States it will need to expand its membership, to include China and the rest of Asia. And if it’s not mainly about commodity trade liberalisation but about setting new rules for global commerce, the rules that are proposed had better be thoroughly scrutinised by all partners to the agreement before they finally sign on, not just by the US Congress.

Peter Drysdale is Editor of the East Asia Forum.

Canadian dairy stalling Trans-Pacific Partnership deal: sources - The Globe and Mail

"the Canadian government is preparing a financial compensation package for dairy and poultry farmers as a way to blunt the impact of signing onto a Trans-Pacific deal."

"“This isn’t the Trans-Pacific Partnership. This is the United States Trade Pact because of their tactics. They are being too aggressive,” said Wally Smith, president of the Canadian Dairy Farmers of Canada, which represents more than 12,000 farms."


Canada will be pushed to go into TPP this round imo
 
Very well explained, and I think local businesses might be affected because of either cheaper goods or higher quality goods flooding markets crushing companies which are smaller and can not compete with the bigger competition. Proton in Malaysia would be affected by Ford for example or Japanese cars.


@Nihonjin1051 please explain if this is correct or not when you have the time to do so ... I do not understand if this point of view is correct


Basically it's giving sovereignty to multi billion corporation as i said if Vietnam bans something on health or other issue than big corporation from USA or where they are can sue Vietnam on TPP Basis.

Also lets just say if McDonald open a burger shop in Vietnam and suddenly vietnam want to close it then Mcdonalds can sue vietnam on the basis of TPP.

It's basically giving semi autonomy to big corporations and giving large leverage over your country.

Canadian dairy stalling Trans-Pacific Partnership deal: sources - The Globe and Mail

"the Canadian government is preparing a financial compensation package for dairy and poultry farmers as a way to blunt the impact of signing onto a Trans-Pacific deal."

"“This isn’t the Trans-Pacific Partnership. This is the United States Trade Pact because of their tactics. They are being too aggressive,” said Wally Smith, president of the Canadian Dairy Farmers of Canada, which represents more than 12,000 farms."


Canada will be pushed to go into TPP this round imo
Because USa corporation sued canada for 500 million dollar recently on that basis.The TPP give corporation power to sue our government in foreign tribunals for any law and regulation they claim affects their future profits.

It's giving your sovereignty to muti billion companies.


The Trans-Pacific Partnership Would Undermine
Internet Freedom

Remember SOPA - the "copyright" legislation before Congress last year that public outcry stopped cold? Well, the same corporations behind SOPA have pushed to insert its most pernicious provisions into TPP. Says who? The organizations that stopped SOPA like the Electronic Freedom Foundation and the ACLU.
Under this TPP proposal, Internet Service Providers could be required to "police" user activity (i.e. police YOU), take down internet content, and cut people off from internet access for common user-generated content.
Violations could be as simple as the creation of a YouTube video with clips from other videos, even if for personal or educational purposes.
Mandatory fines would be imposed for individuals' non-commercial copies of copyrighted material. So, downloading some music could be treated the same as large-scale, for-profit copyright violations.
Innovation would be stifled as the creation and sharing of user-generated content would face new barriers, and as monopoly copyrights would be extended. The TPP proposes to impose copyright protections for a minimum of 120 years for corporate-created content.
Breaking digital locks for legit purposes, such as using Linux, could subject users to mandatory fines. Blind and deaf people also would be harmed by this overreach, as digital locks can block access to audio-supported content and closed captioning.
 


Basically it's giving sovereignty to multi billion corporation as i said if Vietnam bans something on health or other issue than big corporation from USA or where they are can sue Vietnam on TPP Basis.

Also lets just say if McDonald open a burger shop in Vietnam and suddenly vietnam want to close it then Mcdonalds can sue vietnam on the basis of TPP.

It's basically giving semi autonomy to big corporations and giving large leverage over your country.


Because USa corporation sued canada for 500 million dollar recently on that basis.The TPP give corporation power to sue our government in foreign tribunals for any law and regulation they claim affects their future profits.

It's giving your sovereignty to muti billion companies.


The Trans-Pacific Partnership Would Undermine
Internet Freedom

Remember SOPA - the "copyright" legislation before Congress last year that public outcry stopped cold? Well, the same corporations behind SOPA have pushed to insert its most pernicious provisions into TPP. Says who? The organizations that stopped SOPA like the Electronic Freedom Foundation and the ACLU.
Under this TPP proposal, Internet Service Providers could be required to "police" user activity (i.e. police YOU), take down internet content, and cut people off from internet access for common user-generated content.
Violations could be as simple as the creation of a YouTube video with clips from other videos, even if for personal or educational purposes.
Mandatory fines would be imposed for individuals' non-commercial copies of copyrighted material. So, downloading some music could be treated the same as large-scale, for-profit copyright violations.
Innovation would be stifled as the creation and sharing of user-generated content would face new barriers, and as monopoly copyrights would be extended. The TPP proposes to impose copyright protections for a minimum of 120 years for corporate-created content.
Breaking digital locks for legit purposes, such as using Linux, could subject users to mandatory fines. Blind and deaf people also would be harmed by this overreach, as digital locks can block access to audio-supported content and closed captioning.

The thing is, even concerned Americans are very much against TTP and TTIP as they, too, will be the losing part of this dirty treaty. The only winners are foremost the large US MNC followed by large MNC from developed countries.

It's practically modern slavery through the backdoor where national govs. have zero rights to defend their populace once they have sold their citizens to the treaty.

Under this treaty, workers' rights will be in the gutter as fighting for better payment or working conditions can be sued by the MNCs for affecting their future profit.

At second thought, it's even worse than slavery, since back in those time, the slaves might not get the same amount of food, but at least they were not poisoned with GMO, hormones and antibiotics. Now, they want to force you to buy the poison since companies like Monsanto wants to practically monopolise the whole food production chain. Under the treaty, you would not even be allowed to use the seed that farmers have been using for millennia since that would affect Monsanto's profit.

Not even the old fascist in the 1930's could ever dream up such a monstrosity.
 
TPP trade is not China meal, if China join the victim is China. The rich will be the U.S. Because they rules and their policy. Vietnam love it then go with the U.S. Lol the one thing I don't get it why Vietnam joining the Silk Road lol. Why they don't keep TPP? If TPP so good, lol don't join the Silk Road economic too.
 
The thing is, even concerned Americans are very much against TTP and TTIP as they, too, will be the losing part of this dirty treaty. The only winners are foremost the large US MNC followed by large MNC from developed countries.

It's practically modern slavery through the backdoor where national govs. have zero rights to defend their populace once they have sold their citizens to the treaty.

Under this treaty, workers' rights will be in the gutter as fighting for better payment or working conditions can be sued by the MNCs for affecting their future profit.

At second thought, it's even worse than slavery, since back in those time, the slaves might not get the same amount of food, but at least they were not poisoned with GMO, hormones and antibiotics. Now, they want to force you to buy the poison since companies like Monsanto wants to practically monopolise the whole food production chain. Under the treaty, you would not even be allowed to use the seed that farmers have been using for millennia since that would affect Monsanto's profit.

Not even the old fascist in the 1930's could ever dream up such a monstrosity.

You understand it pretty well it's the lowest of the lowest kind of slavery and selling your country to the big corporations.I watched a show where in future there was no country left but big cooperation controlling the landmass.Soon they will fire people and replace them with robots saying it increase their profit and government won't be able to do anything.
 
You understand it pretty well it's the lowest of the lowest kind of slavery and selling your country to the big corporations.I watched a show where in future there was no country left but big cooperation controlling the landmass.Soon they will fire people and replace them with robots saying it increase their profit and government won't be able to do anything.

This scenery that was once only thought of a dystopic sci-fi movie in our mind is becoming reality in front of our eyes. What fascinate me more is there are people willing to enslave themselves, if only to despite their perceived foe, e.g. the Vietnamese vs. Chinese. Einstein was right when he said: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
 
TPP trade is not China meal, if China join the victim is China. The rich will be the U.S. Because they rules and their policy. Vietnam love it then go with the U.S. Lol the one thing I don't get it why Vietnam joining the Silk Road lol. Why they don't keep TPP? If TPP so good, lol don't join the Silk Road economic too.
Their government, their rules
Vietnamese constantly make mistakes that resulted in 1000 years being Chinese colony, 100 years of French rule, now the beginning of being ruled by Americans.
 
The Chinese clowns in here are prasising their gods for TPP to fails, but guess what years later these Chinese clowns will beg U.S and TPP members let China be a part, and in return they will sell Russia again to beg for U.S economic help. That is their nature, clown and untrust are Chinese traits.
Hahaha see what I said is right, look at bunch of Chinese clowns bashing and praising for TPP to fails. You are not a part so why worry.:D
 
This scenery that was once only thought of a dystopic sci-fi movie in our mind is becoming reality in front of our eyes. What fascinate me more is there are people willing to enslave themselves, if only to despite their perceived foe, e.g. the Vietnamese vs. Chinese. Einstein was right when he said: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Our views are same and your word are golden :cheers:
 
See comradenam or niceguy to prove Einstein was right. :D :cheers:

Vietnam should not do what bad for China but put their energy on what good for Vietnam. However this deal will bring lots of economically benefit to Vietnam but of what cost? (basically your are giving your sovereignty rights to increase your GDP)
 
impressive, having read comments above, more interesting than the original article.
@Götterdämmerung @Sam. Well said.

Vietnam should not do what bad for China but put their energy on what good for Vietnam. However this deal will bring lots of economically benefit to Vietnam but of what cost? (basically your are giving your sovereignty rights to increase your GDP)
Very constructive, sir. A country should put her interests first, not just bashing others by harming their own interests, very stupid.
 
impressive, having read comments above, more interesting than the original article.
@Götterdämmerung @Sam. Well said.


Very constructive, sir. A country should put her interests first, not just bashing others by harming their own interests, very stupid.
You are a citizen of China and I am a citizen of India for better or worse but we are. I would never want to be citizen/servant of Waltmart/Tata/beidou.

It is basically the colonization of pacific countries and we Indian very well know how treacherous these big company can be. Hell Indian colonization was started by East India company(British company)

Do read about that,who doesn't learn from the past doom to repeat it and become the past.
 
Back
Top Bottom