Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter • Hacker News Board

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#41

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:25 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #26

brudgers wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been several carefully crafted changes to the language of American politics over the past twenty-five years and "citizen" has been replaced by "taxpayer" [1] as the relevant political constituency. Since corporations ostensibly pay taxes, their personhood has been lifted. Likewise, since wealthy individuals tend to pay more taxes on an absolute basis (despite an increasingly regressive system) their interests…

I think you are letting the citizenry off the hook for their part in this. The only reason corporations gained this power is because they have more collective money (or at least are more willing to use that money) to lobby. The only reason lobbying works is because politicians need money to get elected. The only reason politicians need money to get elected is because people are so susceptible to political marketing.…

I, for one, am glad to learn that we can fix all this by voting more often, or better, or whatever. Now that I think back, my junior high civics class taught me the same thing!

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#42

Post by spacemanmatt » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:26 PM UTC

fixxer wrote: post #32

dragonwriter wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can a progressive democrat please explain to me why their hero is supporting this? Did Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren start supporting TPP when I wasn't looking? Or was "progressive" an elaborate typo for "centrist"?

Ha. Fair weather fan.

Obama has always been a centrist, even though he campaigned as a progressive. Actions are louder than words.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#43

Post by nfoz » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:26 PM UTC

Where can I see the leaked document?

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#44

Post by thedaveoflife » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:26 PM UTC

themgt wrote: post #34

When the director of policy for Doctors Without Borders tells the public that "U.S. negotiators have basically functioned as drug lobbyists" and "We consider this the worst-ever agreement in terms of access to medicine", there's really little more that needs saying. I love that the best defense unnamed "U.S. officials" can offer is that "major compromises" will likely still be made. In other words: yes we're acting a…

Maybe the best way to ensure access to medicine is by providing economic opportunities to the worlds most impoverished citizens. In other words, if the trade off is say a 10% increase in per capita GDP in exchange for less access to generics, maybe the former is better than the latter?

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#45

Post by hackuser » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:26 PM UTC

fixxer wrote: post #2

Can a progressive democrat please explain to me why their hero is supporting this? PS To those trying to claim he isn't a progressive... Obama may not be the progressive you want, but he is the one you deserve.

Obama is not a progressive and I don't think he's been particularly supported by progressives (other than the fact that they tend to vote for Democrats).

The possible exception is his initial campaign when he was an unknown quantity and, like all such politicians, everyone projected their "Hope" onto him.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#46

Post by spacemanmatt » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:27 PM UTC

fixxer wrote: post #38

diogenescynic wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know it's mostly House/Senate republicans who are voting for it right? Strange bedfellows really.

You're aware that the Executive Branch's vote is equal to the consolidated power of the Congress, right?

It still has to get to his desk, and that means a lot of Republican support. There's no dodging that.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#47

Post by shmerl » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:28 PM UTC

TPP and any similar agreements should be totally opposed until they'll be negotiated in public.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#48

Post by jessaustin » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:31 PM UTC

vgfbdgfhkzsdrhh wrote: post #37

thisisdallas wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm by no means a progressive democrat and I am certainly no fan of Obama. In saying that, it's absolutely necessary to understand republicans are pushing for this just as much as democrats. It's not a red vs. blue issue, it's a red and blue issue. To answer your question, there are probably many reasons, but one reason is because corporations are paying politicians. Here is a story from The Guardian that explains th…

That Guardian article is intentionally misleading. All it says is that some large companies support the TPP, and some employees of those large companies donate to politicians' campaigns. The data don't show anything other than standard fundraising.

Come on dude, was that statement really so controversial you had to use a green account to make it? If you think there's nothing wrong with the status quo pipeline of corruption from corporate interests to political pockets, then have the courage of your convictions!

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#49

Post by lhc- » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:32 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #30

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #8

There is a very interesting podcast (LSE series about a year ago now), with the chair of the previous round of physical goods talks explaining what has gone wrong, and how to fix it. In essence the idea is a good one - set out worldwide standards of trade - like WTO - for intellectual goods as well as physical. If I remember it's things like having same standards of animal welfare innabbatoirs (the U.S. Think EU chic…

If the idea is "highest [regulatory] standard wins," I doubt the IP provisions of that new deal would be any more palatable to the folks here on HN than the TPP will be. The "behind closed doors" concern is mostly fake. "Secrecy" is a story line that tests well with folks who don't know how policy gets made in general. For example, the PPACA (aka Obamacare) and Dodd-Frank bills were extensively negotiated in private…

Warren was not a senator while the ACA was being drafted.

Re: Leaked: What's in TPP’s intellectual property chapter

#50

Post by chad_oliver » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 9:33 PM UTC

thedaveoflife wrote: post #44

themgt wrote: post #34

When the director of policy for Doctors Without Borders tells the public that "U.S. negotiators have basically functioned as drug lobbyists" and "We consider this the worst-ever agreement in terms of access to medicine", there's really little more that needs saying. I love that the best defense unnamed "U.S. officials" can offer is that "major compromises" will likely still be made. In other words: yes we're acting a…

Maybe the best way to ensure access to medicine is by providing economic opportunities to the worlds most impoverished citizens. In other words, if the trade off is say a 10% increase in per capita GDP in exchange for less access to generics, maybe the former is better than the latter?

Perhaps, but there is no way that the TPP is going to produce at 10% increase in GDP per capita. I'm generally supportive of free trade agreements, but in the case of the TPP, all the low-hanging economic fruit has already been picked. There are no significant remaining trade barriers that can be removed to generate quick growth.