Support NeoGAF

[gcubed]

Trump did it, it must be bad.

TPP was garbage, people.

why?

 

[KRod-57]

Trade deals aren't negotiated in secret for the sake of generating content for the conspiracy industry.

https://np.reddit.com/r/unitedkingd...d_reads_the_paper_everyday_and_hasnt/cq9w6y2/



Also, these treaties would be useless if they weren't enforceable. Concerns about companies suing governments for lost profits are usually overblown. Companies can sue governments not because legislation reduces their profits, but because legislation unfairly targets foreign companies with stronger regulations than domestic companies, or perhaps because foreign governments are failing to introduce stronger regulations that were required by the treaty (and the TPP did require stronger environmental and labour standards than are currently in place in many of the participating countries), unfairly giving the companies competitors in that country an advantage. Unfairly because the country had signed a trade treaty, and if they really want to put in place such legislation they are free to withdraw from the treaty (which I suppose the US is doing).

EDIT: Also "free trade" has always been a huge stretch for the trade deals it's usually applied to. Crucially, the movement of labour remains very restricted, but also the movement of everything else isn't every really all that "free" either. The European single market is the closest thing that exists in the world. ( This is also why it's laughable when Brexiters say they want access to the European market without open borders for immigration).

What we're talking about is a process in trading policies that has been around for about 30 years, where the trade deals themselves are being negotiated by corporate executives. It's not a simple matter of two countries agreeing to lower their tariffs, but an exchange in policies, laws, and intellectual properties. These are exchanges that potentially increase the cost of goods in foreign countries and the US as well, when the purpose of free trade is to be for the benefit of the consumer.

And these tribunals that allow companies to sue tax payers.. they're not made up of judges or government officials, they are made up of corporate executives. We've seen these tribunals sue tax payers over things as trivial as a label on meat products saying where the product is from.. not a tax on the product, but a simple label.

You're explanation for why these companies are having to negotiate in secret fails to understand the concerns that people have about the corporations being in charge of these trade policies to begin with. Just as we don't like corporate executives writing our laws and regulations, we do not like corporate executives writing our trade agreements. We're talking about companies determining policies that normally only treaties would deal with, and these companies negotiating these details in secret means congress cannot amend the outcome, they can only vote on whether or not the agreement is passed.

The reality of these trade agreements is people feel they are losing their national sovereignty to corporate interests. THAT is the problem

In regards to Brexit, Britain didn't have open borders with their neighboring European countries even as a union member

 

[chillybright]

That was fast.

 

[system11]

Good. TPP was shit anyway. TTIP next.

I don't even care even they're doing it for insane reasons, please Mr Trump, kill the TTIP next.

 

[Abounder]

Not even Korea signed on, RIP.

TPP is an issue where both Obama and Hillary went against the party/populism but where there's a corporate will there's a way, we'll be seeing SOPA on steroids soon enough

 

[Syncytia]

TPP was already dead, Congress wasn't going to vote for it. This executive order does nothing that wasn't already in motion, the US is just 'officially' out.

Also this could have been used as leverage for "negotiations" with China but what do I know, I'm not the orange man that makes the best deals.

 

[Mr.Mike]

What we're talking about is a process in trading policies that has been around for about 30 years, where the trade deals themselves are being negotiated by corporate executives. It's not a simple matter of two countries agreeing to lower their tariffs, but an exchange in policies, laws, and intellectual properties. These are exchanges that potentially increase the cost of goods in foreign countries and the US as well, when the purpose of free trade is to be for the benefit of the consumer.

And these tribunals that allow companies to sue tax payers.. they're not made up of judges or government officials, they are made up of corporate executives. We've seen these tribunals sue tax payers over things as trivial as a label on meat products saying where the product is from.. not a tax on the product, but a simple label.

You're explanation for why these companies are having to negotiate in secret fails to understand the concerns that people have about the corporations being in charge of these trade policies to begin with. Just as we don't like corporate executives writing our laws and regulations, we do not like corporate executives writing our trade agreements. We're talking about companies determining policies that normally only treaties would deal with, and these companies negotiating these details in secret means congress cannot amend the outcome, they can only vote on whether or not the agreement is passed.

The reality of these trade agreements is people feel they are losing their national sovereignty to corporate interests. THAT is the problem

In regards to Brexit, Britain didn't have open borders with their neighboring European countries even as a union member

I suspect we won't resolve our disagreement about whether or not corporate interests do actually have an undue amount of influence over the negations. But trade deals have always been about more than just tariff's, and indeed for the most part are tariff's are already (well, this might change a lot soon) relatively low, and the main purpose of the trade deals being negotiated in recent times is to reduce regulatory barriers (through standardization for example) and to avoid a race to the bottom by having everyone agree to meet some minimum standard for various regulations. Certainly the labeling of products with countries of origin, presumably to influence purchasing decisions, seems like an entirely reasonable issue for foreign competitors to bring up (it's a bit on the line, but I suppose that's why the government would have tried that move).

The various countries involved aren't giving up their sovereignty, and it is still ultimately up to them to accept the treaty that their elected officials (and I do contend that the negotiations are conducted by the President/Prime Minister and their army of bureaucrats, not the corporate boogeyman). Indeed we have right here an example of a sovereign nation rather harshly rejecting a trade deal.

And the UK is, for the moment still, part of the European market where people are free to move between countries to live and work. And this is the crucial part for the free movement of labour, not whether or not you might have to go through a checkpoint to enter the country.

 

[killer rin]

TPPs dead... now hopefully the remaining countries can negotiate a different and better deal without all the BS the USA tried to include

 

[PillarEN]

At least he's done one good thing today.

Yes I do think this may be one of the very few things that I will give to Trump. The TPP was something I was hoping Obama wouldn't support either.

 

[4Tran]

TPPs dead... now hopefully the remaining countries can negotiate a different and better deal without all the BS the USA tried to include

With the US out they would probably have to negotiate a brand new deal and from scratch. And since the original purpose of TPP was to keep China in check and this was an American idea, any new deal would probably have to include China now. Of course, instead of the US as the senior partner, it'll now be China. Fun times.

Yes I do think this may be one of the very few things that I will give to Trump. The TPP was something I was hoping Obama wouldn't support either.

The TPP and TTIP were supposed to be the capstones to Obama's presidency. They were the main items of legacy he was going to leave behind.

 

[PillarEN]

The TPP and TTIP were supposed to be the capstones to Obama's presidency. They were the main items of legacy he was going to leave behind.

That's alright. Disagreed on this one with the old POTUS.

 

[DarknessTear]

Look, I hate Trump too but isn't this good news?

 

[flkraven]

All these people that feel so strongly that tpp is bad, what is your reasoning?

 

[SuperBanana]

All these people that feel so strongly that tpp is bad, what is your reasoning?

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is more about protectionism than trade. It was conceived as a regional defence pact, to corral Pacific Rim nations into a formal bloc in an effort to counter the rising military and economic might of China.

Driven by the United States, what measures were devoted to trade overwhelmingly were focused on exactly the opposite; extending monopoly powers of American corporations and maintaining tariffs and quotas for US farmers unable to compete in a free trade world.

Only a politician could be so cynical.

But it is the inclusion of the dreaded Investor State Dispute Settlement clauses that is of most concern for they are a direct assault on national sovereignty and the democratic rights of those who make up a nation

That. Fuck the TPP.

 

[DrFurbs]

All these people that feel so strongly that tpp is bad, what is your reasoning?

It allows corporations to have far more power than it should be necessary for then to operate competitively. Like sue entire countries for anything that affects their corporate interests and especially anything that remotely affects their profits.

Seriously, this needed to die and TTIP.

 

[4Tran]

Look, I hate Trump too but isn't this good news?

I think that TPP was bad for most signatories, but there are good and bad ways of getting rid of its problems. The best would have been to renegotiate and eliminate the most egregious provisions and restructure the deal to be more beneficial to all the parties. By killing it so unceremoniously, it undermines the confidence in the US's ability to live up to its international agreements. Furthermore, the US was going to stand to gain the most out of the deal and China was going to be the big loser. A reversal of this nature also flips the beneficiaries. Moreover, anyone in Asian region looking to make a trade deal is also going to automatically gravitate towards China as the senior partner in negotiations.

 

[janoDX]

So we found the one good thing on the 20 things he has done wrong on 4 days.

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

I think that TPP was bad for most signatories, but there are good and bad ways of getting rid of its problems. The best would have been to renegotiate and eliminate the most egregious provisions and restructure the deal to be more beneficial to all the parties. By killing it so unceremoniously, it undermines the confidence in the US's ability to live up to its international agreements. Furthermore, the US was going to stand to gain the most out of the deal and China was going to be the big loser. A reversal of this nature also flips the beneficiaries. Moreover, anyone in Asian region looking to make a trade deal is also going to automatically gravitate towards China as the senior partner in negotiations.

People would rather see a pissing match between Trump and China with Taiwan caught in between instead of using the TPP to limit them.

 

[cryptosporidium]

I look forward to studying more economic theory but as of now im of the opinion that these liberal free trade deals conflict with Canadas welfare state as they aim to slowly raise the standard of living globally. that slow progression cause wages to stagnate here as the cost of the welfare state increases which is why the things we love like healthcare, pensions, etc are unsustainable

again no economic backing, but just how i figure it works

 

[4Tran]

People would rather see a pissing match between Trump and China with Taiwan caught in between instead of using the TPP to limit them.

The problem with this idea is that, as Trump blunders, China gains more diplomatic strength and furthers their ability to isolate Taiwan. TPP was supposed to be a key piece of the diplomatic leverage to put pressure on China, but it's now become a windfall for China instead. If the US keeps this up, China will end up being the leader in East Asia and Southeast Asia by default.

 

[Black_Red]

Well, at least Trump's presidency does have some good things.

TPP is shit, and only protects the big international corporations.

 

[Gestault]

TPP is shit, and only protects the big international corporations.

Now to be fair to the premise, international corporations would be the ones most involved in an international agreement.

 

[Black_Red]

Now to be fair to the premise, international corporations would be the ones most involved in an international agreement.

Well yes, but in cases where a country needs some goverment intervention to "help" the people those corporations could sue the state.

If I remember correctly, they said on the news that banning menthol cigarettes, toys in food advertising (Happy meals), "popular pharmacies" (Sell medicine at REALLY low prices without utilities) and some other recent changes on the country would be impossible with TPP. And Chile is one of the most obese countries in the world and if I remember correctly we're leading the ranking with the younger smokers.

 

[janoDX]

Talking about Chile...

They're out. http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/...cela-proyecto-de-tpp-tras-la-salida-de-ee-uu/

 

[Chezzymann]

Interesting how the narrative on TPP has flipped over the past two years, if I remember correctly the common opinion on GAF and Reddit was that it was bad in 2015, now it's good

 

[Mr.Mike]

Interesting how the narrative on TPP has flipped over the past two years, if I remember correctly the common opinion on GAF and Reddit was that it was bad in early 2015, now it's good

I'm definitely not seeing a strong consensus one way or the other, not with how much I've been arguing over this lol. Seems to me to be mostly against the TPP.

 

[Instro]

Interesting how the narrative on TPP has flipped over the past two years, if I remember correctly the common opinion on GAF and Reddit was that it was bad in 2015, now it's good

The main problem with the common opinion on this is that it has been so skewed by hysterical conspiracy nuts passing misinformation around as fact.

 

[Rentahamster]

Interesting how the narrative on TPP has flipped over the past two years, if I remember correctly the common opinion on GAF and Reddit was that it was bad in 2015, now it's good

You could do a search.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1068944&highlight=pacific+partnership

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1069736&highlight=pacific+partnership

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1049589&highlight=pacific+partnership

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=714969&highlight=tpp

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=480309

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=707199&highlight=tpp

 

[DrFurbs]

Here's an example of how bad TTP is. If your country decides to ban smoking in public places (is it hasn't already) or tired to improve the nation's health by reducing sugar. The corporations whose interests were affected can legally sue your government (your taxes) for loss of profit.

Tell me how TTP is good?

 

[Rentahamster]

I guess I'll post this here now, since this is the regular TPP thread.

Having been to WTO and other globalization-related protests in the past, it's amazing how the phrase "fair trade" that was shouted out by socialists and anarchists and revolutionaries, is now being used by President Trump, in a meeting full of multi national corporation CEOs.

I wouldn't have believed it back then.

 

[VeteranGamer]

They need to have impeachment papers drafted by Friday.

Was this necessary?

 

[spons]

Removal of protection for workers and complete disregard for sustainability, safety and lack of control by national parliaments. Just what we need!

It just adds a layer of extra bullshit on the massive globalization effort. Good to see at least TPP killed off, now for TTIP. Thanks, Trump.

 

[Nikodemos]

I guess I'll post this here now, since this is the regular TPP thread.

Masquerading protectionism as fair trade is a feat worthy of the Supreme Soviet of the Communist Party of the USSR. It'd be like calling the invasion of Czechoslovakia in '63 a humanitarian intervention.

 

[Antiwhippy]

Removal of protection for workers and complete disregard for sustainability, safety and lack of control by national parliaments. Just what we need!

Now get ready to see all those again with RCEP!

Except maybe the lack of control by national parliaments part. Maybe.

 

[numble]

For those arguing that the TPP would be used as leverage against China--well, some existing TPP members are now hoping China will join the TPP:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-asia-idUSKBN15800V

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said he had held discussions with Abe, New Zealand Prime Minister Bill English and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong overnight about the possibility of proceeding without the United States.

"Losing the United States from the TPP is a big loss, there is no question about that," Turnbull told reporters in Canberra on Tuesday. "But we are not about to walk away ... certainly there is potential for China to join the TPP."

...

Australia held open the possibility of China, the world's top exporter, joining a revised deal.

"The original architecture was to enable other countries to join," Australian Trade Minister Steven Ciobo told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation on Tuesday.

"Certainly I know that Indonesia has expressed interest and there would be scope for China if we are able to reformulate it."

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

The problem with this idea is that, as Trump blunders, China gains more diplomatic strength and furthers their ability to isolate Taiwan. TPP was supposed to be a key piece of the diplomatic leverage to put pressure on China, but it's now become a windfall for China instead. If the US keeps this up, China will end up being the leader in East Asia and Southeast Asia by default.

Yeah but pissing matches is more obvious and instantly gratifying though....

For those arguing that the TPP would be used as leverage against China--well, some existing TPP members are now hoping China will join the TPP:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-asia-idUSKBN15800V

China now filling in the space Trump left for them?

 

[4Tran]

Yeah but pissing matches is more obvious and instantly gratifying though....

It doesn't work very well when the US undermines its own position by first ceding tons of territory to China. Then again, with Trump as President, it's impossible for the US to look like the adult in the room.

China now filling in the space Trump left for them?

Yup. Trump is leaving a power vacuum and China is the most obvious candidate to fill it. And so an anti-China deal ends up working to strengthen China's international standing.

 

[Funky Papa]

Europe could join TPP, says former World Trade Organisation chief and EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy

Trump cemented his campaign promise to rip up free trade agreements on Monday (23 January) when he announced that he was taking the US out of the 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership. Lamy said the deal was already dead. TPP has been signed but not yet ratified.

“He killed a zombie,” Lamy said. But Trump’s move to axe TPP could be Europe’s golden ticket to join the deal at the last minute, while the other 11 trade partners involved are hanging in limbo.

Malmström acknowledged that Trump is likely to put negotiations over the EU-US free trade agreement TTIP “in the freezer at least for a while”. TTIP has drawn outrage in several EU countries amid criticism that the deal would lower environmental standards and give multinational firms the power to challenge national laws.

Lamy said the European Commission officials who crafted the deal “have themselves not even understood what they were doing when they started TTIP”.

I don't know what to make of this other than both China and the EU are keen to fill that vacuum.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Fuck trump, but this was always something I was glad he was for. Bernie and a number of Dems wanted to flush the tpp too.

 

[Nikodemos]

Europe could join TPP, says former World Trade Organisation chief and EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy



I don't know what to make of this other than both China and the EU are keen to fill that vacuum.

An economic alliance between China and EU against the US/Russia/satellites? Hoo boy, begun the trade wars have.

That said, the way Trump is acting in just the first three days of his presidency, it might not be that bad an idea.

Though anybody owning stock in transnational companies will likely take a hit as we return to Protectionism ver. 2.0.

 

[numble]

An economic alliance between China and EU against the US/Russia/satellites? Hoo boy, begun the trade wars have.

That said, the way Trump is acting in just the first three days of his presidency, it might not be that bad an idea.

Though anybody owning stock in transnational companies will likely take a hit as we return to Protectionism ver. 2.0.

A 10-20% reduction in corporate income tax (as well as reductions in regulations) is worth more to a company's operating margin than any of these proposed tariffs or the exit from the TPP. See how the stock market has been reacting to the expectation of lower corporate income taxes.

 

[Mr.Mike]

A 10-20% reduction in corporate income tax (as well as reductions in regulations) is worth more to a company's operating margin than any of these proposed tariffs or the exit from the TPP. See how the stock market has been reacting to the expectation of lower corporate income taxes.

Only in the short run. In the long run freer trade, and stability, are worth much more. Also part of the rise has been an expectation that inflation will increase, which is why bonds have dropped.

 

[numble]

Only in the short run. In the long run freer trade, and stability, are worth much more. Also part of the rise has been an expectation that inflation will increase, which is why bonds have dropped.

Can you show me the study that says the 2-4% reduction in tariffs under the TPP, with income taxed at a corporate rate of 35% (including 35% tax for repatriating offshore money) is worth more to multinational companies than tariffs at current rates but taxed at 15% with no tax on repatriation of offshore cash?

It doesn't make sense at first blush because companies can still trade at the already low pre-TPP tariff rates (in which case you would always trade a 2% reduction in tariffs applied to a small subset of your products to a 10-20% reduction in taxes for all of your income), and tax cuts benefit companies that do not benefit from the TPP (industries that already have no duties on their products, industries that are focused on domestic or non-TPP markets, etc.).

 

[Chaos2Frozen]

It doesn't work very well when the US undermines its own position by first ceding tons of territory to China. Then again, with Trump as President, it's impossible for the US to look like the adult in the room.


Yup. Trump is leaving a power vacuum and China is the most obvious candidate to fill it. And so an anti-China deal ends up working to strengthen China's international standing.

Looks like both China and EU wants in on it.

 

[Funky Papa]

Lots of rumblings abut the Art of the Deal™. Paris counts on Trump to shock EU into action on trade

President Donald Trump’s decision to take the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the world’s biggest free trade agreement, heralded the beginning of a new era in global trade policy.

The European Union will have to rethink its trade policy if it wants to contend for the position of global free trade leader, vacated by the United States.

“The American election handed Europe a unique opportunity to confirm itself as the world’s leading trading power,” France’s Secretary of State for Foreign Trade Matthias Fekl told MPs in Paris on Tuesday (24 January).

“This should change the attitude of the European Union towards trade negotiations,” he added, calling on Europe to leave behind its “voluntary servitude” on the issue of free trade.

“There is an inversion of roles,” said Fekl. “On the one hand we have President Trump, who has adopted a very harmful attitude of withdrawal and national egotism, and on the other, the Chinese president attended Davos to present himself as the defender of international free trade.”

“It is quite interesting on an intellectual level, but it is also very worrying in reality,” the secretary of state added.

But the White House’s new-found protectionism could provide just the shockwave the EU needs to advance its stagnant trade policy.

Interesting times are ahead if America devolves into a protectionist/isolationist economy.