Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 11:37 AM Mar 2015

The NYT on the Wikileak Investment Chapter of the TPP

and holy shit but that bolded last paragraph of the excerpt:

WASHINGTON — An ambitious 12-nation trade accord pushed by President Obama would allow foreign corporations to sue the United States government for actions that undermine their investment “expectations” and hurt their business, according to a classified document.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership — a cornerstone of Mr. Obama’s remaining economic agenda — would grant broad powers to multinational companies operating in North America, South America and Asia. Under the accord, still under negotiation but nearing completion, companies and investors would be empowered to challenge regulations, rules, government actions and court rulings — federal, state or local — before tribunals organized under the World Bank or the United Nations.

Backers of the emerging trade accord, which is supported by a wide variety of business groups and favored by most Republicans, say that it is in line with previous agreements that contain similar provisions. But critics, including many Democrats in Congress, argue that the planned deal widens the opening for multinationals to sue in the United States and elsewhere, giving greater priority to protecting corporate interests than promoting free trade and competition that benefits consumers.

The chapter in the draft of the trade deal, dated Jan. 20, 2015, and obtained by The New York Times in collaboration with the group WikiLeaks, is certain to kindle opposition from both the political left and the right. The sensitivity of the issue is reflected in the fact that the cover mandates that the chapter not be declassified until four years after the Trans-Pacific Partnership comes into force or trade negotiations end, should the agreement fail.

<snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/business/trans-pacific-partnership-seen-as-door-for-foreign-suits-against-us.html

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The NYT on the Wikileak Investment Chapter of the TPP (Original Post) cali Mar 2015 OP
read this. read the whole thing. cali Mar 2015 #1
Sue away. There is still a tribunal that decides these things. randome Mar 2015 #2
oh for fuck's sake. I have no more patience for denialist nonsense. cali Mar 2015 #3
+infinity!!! newfie11 Mar 2015 #4
So the TPP will encourage greater competition? bvar22 Mar 2015 #9
kick cali Mar 2015 #5
This so-called trade agreement Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #6
I've cut and pasted what TPP is really all about... joeybee12 Mar 2015 #7
I also do not understand why any small country would support this. We at least have the money jwirr Mar 2015 #8
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
1. read this. read the whole thing.
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 11:41 AM
Mar 2015

It's one of the better articles I've seen this morning on the ISDS piece of the TPP.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
2. Sue away. There is still a tribunal that decides these things.
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 11:45 AM
Mar 2015

Sometimes this sounds a little like the panic of frivolous lawsuits.The overall effect of the TPP, I believe, will be to encourage greater cooperation. That's not necessarily a bad thing, is it?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)
[/center][/font][hr]

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
3. oh for fuck's sake. I have no more patience for denialist nonsense.
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 11:48 AM
Mar 2015

There is more than enough evidence for anyone to see that this is problematic. Hell, even Chuck Schumer finds it so. Gee, forgive me for believing my own eyes and people like Warren and Brown and Sanders and Schumer over YOU.

And we're done on this subject. It just pisses me off too much and I don't need a hide.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
9. So the TPP will encourage greater competition?
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 07:43 PM
Mar 2015

Has this magical effect been produced by ANY of the other "Free Trade Deals" ?


Here is the results of the Korean Free Trade Deal negotiated by Obama in 2011
in which American Workers were promised more jobs and a leveling of the trade deficit.

The agreement with Korea is the largest offshoring deal of its kind since NAFTA. The deal is set to displace 159,000 American jobs in the first seven years. Even the official U.S. government study on the Korea pact says that it would increase our trade deficit – meaning more job loss – and it hits the "jobs of the future" sectors hardest – solar, high speed trains, computers.

http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=3595



So far, this "deal" has cost 60,000 American Jobs.
One of the scarier parts is that the Korean Free Trade Agreement is the prototype for the
TPP, and contains much of the same language....word for word.


Can you name a "Free Trade" Deal that has actually improved the working conditions for American Workers?

Please do so.
I'll wait.

Ichingcarpenter

(36,988 posts)
6. This so-called trade agreement
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 12:26 PM
Mar 2015

This so-called trade agreement is just a ploy for international corporations

to dominate and subjugate and privatize the sovereignty of nations, the planet, progress and humans for their own selfish controlling shortsighted greed

They answer to know one except their major shareholders and you an't one of them and neither is the rest of the planet.

 

joeybee12

(56,177 posts)
7. I've cut and pasted what TPP is really all about...
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 12:28 PM
Mar 2015

But critics, including many Democrats in Congress, argue that the planned deal widens the opening for multinationals to sue in the United States and elsewhere, giving greater priority to protecting corporate interests than promoting free trade and competition that benefits consumers.


Why is anyone surprised?

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
8. I also do not understand why any small country would support this. We at least have the money
Thu Mar 26, 2015, 01:32 PM
Mar 2015

to fight back if we are sued. They are going to be sitting ducks. Not that they aren't already. Corporations pretty much take every advantage of poorer countries already.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The NYT on the Wikileak I...