Trans-Pacific Partnership

[Isgrimnur]

Agreement finalized

The United States and 11 other Pacific Rim nations on Monday agreed to the largest regional trade accord in history, a potentially precedent-setting model for global commerce and worker standards that would tie together 40 percent of the world’s economy, from Canada and Chile to Japan and Australia.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership still faces months of debate in Congress and will inject a new flash point into both parties’ presidential contests.
...
Several potentially deal-breaking disputes kept the ministers talking through the weekend and forced them repeatedly to reschedule the promised Sunday announcement of the deal into the evening and beyond. Final compromises covered commercial protections for drug makers’ advanced medicines, more open markets for dairy products and sugar, and a slow phaseout — over two to three decades — of the tariffs on Japan’s autos sold in North America.
...
Its full 30-chapter text will not be available for perhaps a month, but labor unions, environmentalists and liberal activists are poised to argue that the agreement favors big business over workers and environmental protection.
...
Still, in Congress the outcome for ratifying the agreement “will be affected by what’s in it, and that’s the way it should be,” said Representative Sander Levin of Michigan, in an interview here before the deal came together. He was the one lawmaker to come to Atlanta to monitor final talks.

Mr. Levin, the ranking Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction for trade, has supported some trade pacts but was skeptical of this one. He is concerned about unfair competition from Japan for his state’s automakers and union workers. In particular, Mr. Levin objected that language addressing Japan’s devaluation of its currency, which reduces the cost of its auto exports, would not be in the trade agreement but rather in a side agreement that would be hard to enforce against currency scofflaws.

The Office of the United States Trade Representative said the partnership eventually would end more than 18,000 tariffs that the participating countries have placed on United States exports, including autos, machinery, information technology and consumer goods, chemicals and agricultural products ranging from avocados in California to wheat, pork and beef from the Plains states.

Japan’s other barriers, like regulations and design criteria that effectively keep out American-made cars and light trucks, would come down.

While many opponents object that the trade pact will kill jobs or send them overseas, the administration contends that the United States has more to gain from freer trade with the Pacific nations. Eighty percent of those nations’ exports to the United States are already duty-free, officials say, while American products face assorted barriers in those countries that would end.
...
The accord for the first time would require state-owned businesses like those in Vietnam and Malaysia to comply with commercial trade rules and labor and environmental standards.
...
Unions and human rights groups have been skeptical at best that Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei will improve labor conditions, or that Malaysia will stop human trafficking of poor workers from Myanmar and Southeast Asia. The United States reached separate agreements with the three nations on enforcing labor standards, which would allow American tariffs to be restored if a nation is found in violation after a dispute-settlement process.
...
In a concession likely to be problematic with leading Republicans, the United States agreed that brand-name pharmaceutical companies would have a period shorter than the current 12 years to keep secret their data on producing so-called biologics, which are advanced medicines made from living organisms.
...
But arrayed against the United States, which said the protection was a necessary incentive for drug makers to innovate, were virtually every other country at the table, led by Australia. The generic drug industry and nonprofit health groups also strenuously opposed the United States’ position, pressing for access to the data within five years to speed lower priced “biosimilars” to market. The compromise is a hybrid that protects companies’ data for five years to eight years.

Strap in, folks. It's going to be a bumpy ride.

[LordMortis]

:exploding head in anger:

Bernie or bust!

[El Guapo]

Everything in that summary (mostly taking tariffs down) seems reasonable, though it doesn't seem to touch on the controversial stuff that people were talking about during the negotiations.

[LordMortis]

Everything in that summary (mostly taking tariffs down) seems reasonable, though it doesn't seem to touch on the controversial stuff that people were talking about during the negotiations.

We had a meeting about this last week. Bear in mind this is just for auto. I hear Agriculture and other industries have it worse. I don't have links as this was based from notes I took on a power point presentation of what was slated to be passed as of last week.

NAFTA currently requires 63% of auto and 60% of auto components to be built in NAFTA countries to be eligible for NAFTA tariff reduction. The TPP require that only 45% of auto and 30% auto parts be manufactured in a TPP trading country. So in essence, the multi nationals will be able to build upwards of 55% of their vehicles and more of their components outside of TPP regulation on human rights among other things and still get TPP preferred status on tariffs and security.

Edit:

Here we go, I found an explanation and appeal for Auto

http://www.prosperousamerica.org/inside ... _of_origin

http://kaptur.house.gov/index.php/news- ... -of-origin

And this is just Auto. I'm only exposed to a small portion of what's not being broadcast.

[GreenGoo]

Dairy Farmers were protesting last week. I didn't actually find out what they were protesting about, but I believe it was this deal.

[LordMortis]

Dairy Farmers were protesting last week. I didn't actually find out what they were protesting about, but I believe it was this deal.

From what I hear (and don't know) agriculture is supposed to get the absolute worst of all of this.

[Jeff V]

If this agreement results in access to better beer when I'm in the Philippines, then it has my full support.

[Max Peck]

Dairy Farmers were protesting last week. I didn't actually find out what they were protesting about, but I believe it was this deal.

CBC

Canada has granted new access for TPP member countries to its supply-managed agricultural sector.

Imports representing roughly 3.25 per cent of Canada's current annual dairy production will be allowed, as well as 2.3 per cent for eggs, 2.1 per cent for chicken, 2 per cent for turkey and 1.5 per cent for hatching eggs.

Fluid milk will be included in the dairy allotment, but 85 per cent of the milk will be directed to Canadian processors.

All TPP countries will have equal access to the new dairy allotment, although exporters like New Zealand and Australia are more likely to ship butter or cheese across the longer distances than fluid milk.

Entrenched monopolies don't like competition. Who knew?

[Isgrimnur]

What's the expected impact on the syrup cartel?

[Isgrimnur]

Entrenched monopolies don't like competition. Who knew?

That's okay. Your taxpayers will just be cutting them "butthurt checks".

Ottawa said Monday it will spend $4.3-billion over 15 years to compensate dairy, chicken and egg farmers, who are ceding what Canadian officials called “limited access” to their now highly protected markets under the TPP deal. The subsidies will “keep producers whole,” according to a government press release.

[GreenGoo]

Entrenched monopolies don't like competition. Who knew?

That's okay. Your taxpayers will just be cutting them "butthurt checks".

Ottawa said Monday it will spend $4.3-billion over 15 years to compensate dairy, chicken and egg farmers, who are ceding what Canadian officials called “limited access” to their now highly protected markets under the TPP deal. The subsidies will “keep producers whole,” according to a government press release.

Yeah, I did see the conservatives promising to simply pay them for dealing them out of the equation. Hilarious.

[Max Peck]

Behold, the full text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, in all of its nefarious glory.

[El Guapo]

There's also an article in the NY Times today about how Vietnam has agreed to grant workers labor rights (the right to unionize and to strike) as a condition of the TPP. Though there's debate about the mechanisms involved.

[Isgrimnur]

Just makes it easier to get the list of people to round up later.

[LordMortis]

Who is the personal assistant taking care of the the reading again?

And thank you New Zealand for publication.

Still not published in the US.

https://ustr.gov/tpp/#news

[El Guapo]

Who is the personal assistant taking care of the the reading again?

And thank you New Zealand for publication.

Still not published in the US.

https://ustr.gov/tpp/#news

I don't know if OO has an intern in charge of reading long documents and summarizing them for us. I mean, I have stessier, but he's already on Patriots-related reading assignments.

[Max Peck]

Well played America. You win, this time...

Jim Balsillie fears TPP could cost Canada billions and become worst-ever policy move

Jim Balsillie warns that provisions tucked into the Trans-Pacific Partnership could cost Canada hundreds of billions of dollars — and eventually make signing it the worst public policy decision in the country's history. After poring over the treaty's final text, the businessman who helped build Research In Motion into a $20-billion global player said the deal contains "troubling" rules on intellectual property that threaten to make Canada a "permanent underclass" in the economy of selling ideas.

Last month, in the middle of the election campaign, the Conservative government put Canada's signature on the controversial 12-country pact. The Pacific Rim agreement, which includes the massive American and Japanese economies, has been described as the world's largest-ever trade zone. But Balsillie said parts of the deal will harm Canadian innovators by forcing them to play by rules set by the treaty's most-dominant partner: the United States.

The fallout could prove costly for Canada because technologies created by these entrepreneurs have the potential to create huge amounts of wealth for the economy, he says. "I'm not a partisan actor, but I actually think this is the worst thing that the Harper government has done for Canada," the former co-chief executive of RIM said in an interview after studying large sections of the 6,000-page document, released to the public last week. "I think in 10 years from now, we'll call that the signature worst thing in policy that Canada's ever done... It's a treaty that structures everything forever — and we can't get out of it."

Balsillie's concerns about the deal include how it would impose intellectual property standards set by the U.S., the biggest partner in the treaty. He fears it would give American firms an edge and cost Canadian companies more money because they would have to pay for someone else's ideas instead their own. On top of that, Balsillie believes the structure could prevent Canadian firms from growing as it would also limit how much money they can make from their own products and services.

Balsillie, who spent much of his time building RIM by negotiating agreements around the world, called the comprehensive final text a "brilliant piece of literature."

"It's such brilliantly systemic encirclement. I'm just in awe at its powerful purity by the Americans... We've been outfoxed."

And unlike legislation passed in Parliament, he noted treaties like this one set rules that must be followed forever. This deal, he added, also features "iron-clad" dispute mechanisms. "I'm worried and I don't know how we can get out of this," said Balsillie, who's also helping guide the creation of a lobby group that would press for the needs of Canada's innovation sector. "I think our trade negotiators have profoundly failed Canadians and our future innovators. I really lament it." He said the government should have dispatched a more-sophisticated negotiating team.

[El Guapo]

You fell right into our trap, Canada.

Seriously, I should read foreign press more often. Reading the American press the government is weak, ineffectual, and constantly being outfoxed by even trivial adversaries.

[RunningMn9]

See LM? At least we beat the Canadians!

[Defiant]

Seriously, I should read foreign press more often. Reading the American press the government is weak, ineffectual, and constantly being outfoxed by even trivial adversaries.

That reminds me of a great joke:

Rabbi Altmann and his secretary were sitting in a coffeehouse in Berlin in 1935. "Herr Altmann," said his secretary, "I notice you're reading Der Stürmer! I can't understand why. A Nazi libel sheet! Are you some kind of masochist, or, God forbid, a self-hating Jew?"

"On the contrary, Frau Epstein. When I used to read the Jewish papers, all I learned about were pogroms, riots in Palestine, and assimilation in America. But now that I read Der Stürmer, I see so much more: that the Jews control all the banks, that we dominate in the arts, and that we're on the verge of taking over the entire world. You know – it makes me feel a whole lot better!"

[Rip]

Blame Canada.

A U.S.-based company that accused the Canadian government of using phony environmental concerns to keep wind turbines off the Great Lakes could be close to a ruling in its $568 million suit.

A panel of international law experts could rule any day now on whether Ontario's open-ended "temporary ban" violated the North American Free Trade Agreement, as alleged by Windstream Energy.

In creating the moratorium, Ontario said it needed more time to study the environmental impact of the turbines, but documents obtained by Windstream seem to show the real reason was aesthetic, not environmental.

Indiana-based Windstream's 100-turbine offshore windfarm near Kingston on Lake Ontario was key to a deal the company had struck with Ontario's power authority. The company claims a $6 million security deposit was illegally seized and all its investments in the project rendered a loss.

Windstream's attorneys argue that under NAFTA, investments by U.S. companies in Canada cannot be arbitrarily scuttled. A decision is due imminently from a three-member panel convened by the Netherlands-based Permanent Court of Arbitration and consisting of international law experts from Finland, Spain and the United States.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/12/en ... tcmp=hpbt2

[GreenGoo]

Not in my back- pool.

[Moliere]

President Trump signs order to withdraw from Trans-Pacific Partnership

[Carpet_pissr]

Yay. We're all saved.

[malchior]

We just gave up trade in Asia to China. I guess that is a good outcome.

[Moliere]

Yay. We're all saved America is Great Again.

[Carpet_pissr]

Now to dismantle NAFTA, pull out of the UN and NATO, and denounce the Geneva Convention.

Wheeee!!! I already feel greater!

[Jeff V]

Now to dismantle NAFTA

Why would you do this before there is a wall in place to keep current low-wage workers from coming across the border to resume their former jobs?

[coopasonic]

Now to dismantle NAFTA

Why would you do this before there is a wall in place to keep current low-wage workers from coming across the border to resume their former jobs?

Because it was a bad deal. The worst deal. Sad.

[Grifman]

Trump exists in an economic world which does not exist. Every trade deal will produce winners and losers within the domestic economy of every country. That's why these things have to be negotiated. Sure, maybe Trump can negotiate better deals (doubtful) but if he does, what does he say to the domestic losers of any deal he negotiates? He's set up unrealistic expectations as to what can be done in these deals. Nobody's going to sign a deal that gives him 100%, but even if he gets 75%, the 25% that lose out because of his deal are going to feel betrayed.

[Max Peck]

Now to dismantle NAFTA

Why would you do this before there is a wall in place to keep current low-wage workers from coming across the border to resume their former jobs?

Because it was a bad deal. The worst deal. Sad.

No, NAFTA is the worst deal.

[Alefroth]

We just gave up trade in Asia to China. I guess that is a good outcome.

He just ceded a ton of leverage to China for nothing. He's the best negotiator!

[Stefan Stirzaker]

From Australia, it seems we're just going to add new members (Indonesia etc) and go it without USA.

"There is also the opportunity for the TPP to proceed without the United States and I've had active discussions with other leaders as recently as last night with (Japanese) Prime Minister Abe about that," Mr Turnbull said.

[LordMortis]

President Trump signs order to withdraw from Trans-Pacific Partnership

As someone who is still opposed to the TPP (as it stood)

1) Can he do that?
2) Isn't this essentially the same Congress that fast tracked the TPP?

We're supposed to be a nation of laws, not arbitrary whims.

No, NAFTA is the worst deal.

That's not so smart. NAFTA was much more thought out and much more relevant to common interests in the US than the TPP.

[Exodor]

President Trump signs order to withdraw from Trans-Pacific Partnership

As someone who is still opposed to the TPP (as it stood)

1) Can he do that?
2) Isn't this essentially the same Congress that fast tracked the TPP?

Congress wasn't going to approve TPP anyway so Trump's order is meaningless.

[Kurth]

From where I spend my days in Beaverton, OR, this is a decidedly bad turn of events.

[Max Peck]

No, NAFTA is the worst deal.

That's not so smart. NAFTA was much more thought out and much more relevant to common interests in the US than the TPP.

And yet that didn't stop Trump from saying that NAFTA was the worst deal ever made while simultaneously saying that TPP was the worst deal ever made.

I have no doubt that what the Trumptonians want to do is scrap NAFTA and renegotiate bilateral deals with Canada and Mexico. I expect that Mexico is going to get screwed over big league, given they're one of his chosen scapegoats. He hasn't had much to say about Canada yet (thankfully, he's like every other President in that regard), so we'll probably just be offered the normal Trump-grade raw deal.

[LordMortis]

The thing NAFTA haters don't understand is that it has succeeded.

1) It lifted Mexico up in standard in living, which eased tensions on the border and eventually made labor flight to Mexico less appealing.
2) The crime associated with the poverty of Mexico, largely (though by no means completely) moved south.
3) It was good for business to open the borders up for lighter delays. And let me tell you, CTPAT is no small thing to stay certified on.
4) It has integrated the process of creating complex things in North America, which combined with labor in Mexico becoming more expensive, has brought jobs back in to the US.

Crushing the value of the Peso will only re-open the attractiveness of Mexican labor. Big Business loves to exploit poverty.

These same logistics do not apply to the TPP as far as I can tell. (Admittedly, I've not read 1000s and 1000s of pages of documents)

[malchior]

LA Times with a good look into why scrapping TPP wholesale may be a strategic blunder

The move delighted Beijing, which no longer needs to worry about a U.S.-led deal Chinese officials saw as an attempt to undermine its rise. These leaders now have a rare opportunity to tilt the geopolitical landscape and promote an agenda more aligned with China’s goals for global trade.

“If China is required to play that leadership role, then China will assume its responsibilities,” Zhang Jun, head of the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s international economic affairs department, told reporters on Monday.

[Max Peck]

Since we're already talking about NAFTA here...

Mexico may leave NAFTA if renegotiation unfavorable: minister

Mexico could pull out of the North American Free Trade Agreement if a renegotiation of its terms does not benefit Latin America's second-largest economy, Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo said on Tuesday.

"There could be no other option. Go for something that is less than what we already have? It would not make sense to stay," Guajardo said when asked on television if Mexico could pull out of the trade deal with Canada and the United States.

"The strategy for this treaty needs to be one in which everyone wins. It's impossible to sell it here at home if there aren't clear benefits for Mexico," he added.

U.S. President Donald Trump has vowed to withdraw from NAFTA, which took effect in 1994, if he cannot renegotiate it to benefit American interests.

Trump formally withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership on Monday and said he would renegotiate NAFTA "at the appropriate time."