Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 181 posts

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

#61

Post by fweespeech »

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?

http://www.brookings.edu/research/testimony/2012/05/16-us-tr...

> Economic modeling estimates that the benefits to the U.S. from the TPP will be $5 billion in 2015, rising to $14 billion in 2025

Yeah, its not worth it.

Btw US GDP is ~$16 trillion. This isn't going to move the meter at all. Its primarily about securing foreign IP rights for US companies, Obama's legacy, and strategic influence.

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

#62

Post by slg »

jessaustin wrote: post #41
slg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

I am sensing sarcasm, so I just want to point to the 2014 primary turnout numbers. Less than 18% [1] of total eligible voters cast a ballot in the 2014 primary elections. When you have that much apathy, it suddenly becomes a lot easier to sway elections with a few million dollars.

[1] - http://humanevents.com/2014/10/08/republican-2014-primary-tu...

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

#63

Post by zanny »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #54
jessaustin wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

Only if you'd scale that up to the entire country. But maybe not even then. You vote for the candidate that can best convince you to vote for them. So this is the metric the system will optimize for. Politicians that make good decisions or stick to their principles get outcompeted by those who focus on marketing themselves and pandering to the public. Even if you make the electorate more educated and engaged, this wi…

It also does nothing to correct the apathetic public we have had for the past... sixty? Years. The incredible amount of gerrymandering done to rig the house of representatives is incredible, and the Senate is already inherently biased because its giving every voter in Wyoming 67 times the influence of a voter of California. Unsurprisingly, Wyoming has not elected a non-Republican senator in over fifty years.

It should be no surprise that the will of the people no longer has any real correlation with the policy voted into law by congress.

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

#64

Post by zanny »

gcb0 wrote: post #15
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…

no matter how much you care. if politicians can only run a campaign with millions of dollars, and that amount only come from corporations, and the corporations can see who voted on what it wanted, then the public is largely removed from politics.

That should not be news to anyone. The only thing that has recently changed is Citizens United makes it easier to just avoid having to pass through money through more middlemen to bribe politicians.

Before radio and TV, only the rich elite who had the time to research politics voted. After radio and TV, only the rich elite who had the money to buy election ad slots got representation.

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

#65

Post by logfromblammo »

dmitrygr wrote: post #11

I, for one, am glad to know that that interests of everyone important are well protected in this treaty. I just wish I knew how to join this class of people who are important. Apparently being a citizen is not enough anymore.

~Oh, no, no, no. You can't just be an important person any more. That's like being only a millionaire. You want to be a very important person nowadays, otherwise you're just the froth, floating on the scum, floating on the unwashed rabble.~

It appears that certain people have forgotten that the grandest plans of the grandest men may be thrown into chaos by a mere handful of angry serfs. I think I would very much prefer to be anonymous and free to act than to be important, and mortally afraid of every moving shadow, or wound up too tight because people are not respecting mah propertah or mah authoritah.

I think that perhaps now might be a good time to learn some glassware-only techniques for solid-phase peptide synthesis and HPLC purification. Alternately, become an unlicensed expert on CRISPR-based gene modifications. I'm very concerned about the provisions for "biologics", and I would much prefer that biohacking be freely available to the people, rather than locked up for the exclusive benefit of the VIPs. There are some genies out there that need to be unbottled quickly, before some jerkasses decide that they're the only ones who deserve to get wishes.

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

#66

Post by [deleted] »

hga wrote: post #18
bediger4000 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. I generally like Obama (except for Espionage Act prosecutions, continued existence of Guantanamo detention centers, and drone wars), but this one makes no sense. Can a conservative republican explain why the Republican leadership is supporting this? I can't really understand why free market people would be in favor of state-granted and enforced-at-taxpayer-expense monopolies. Nor do I understand why extreme p…

As a "conservative Republican" since the Nixon era (didn't know why it was important that he beat HHH and George Wallace in '68, knew why it was and still is important that he beat McGovern in '72), I can say in short that we don't support these things. Why does the Republican leadership support them? At the more reductionist level, I've seen it best described as a "donor riot"; rather obviously the interests of the…

[deleted]

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

#67

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

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.

He's not my hero. I didn't vote for him mainly because I'm not in a swing state; but if I were and you ran him against Romney and Paul Ryan tomorrow, I'd hold my nose and go vote for him. I might even go find myself an ACORN volunteer t shirt and go register a bunch of poors to go vote for him too. Go ahead though, and tell me how much better we'd all feel about TPP if your horse would've won.

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

#68

Post by marcosdumay »

api wrote: post #19
snowwrestler wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a progressive Democrat, but I understand why Obama is pursuing this deal. First, let's consider a contrast. Neoconservatives have for decades been obsessed with the Middle East. This is mostly because of its strategic importance as the source of oil. There presents itself now an opportunity to change this strategic focus because of two trends. 1) Domestic oil production is up; so is fuel efficiency; so is the…

A second point would be that China's consumer class is booting up. The US wants to position itself to sell into that, effectively to reverse the trade deficit.

If the US government stops running those huge deficits, partially financed by foreigners, the US trade deficits will close naturally.

I just don't know why you'd want to do that, and why you'd want to do that now. But run those deficits too far, and you'll be forced to anyway.

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

#69

Post by zanny »

gcb0 wrote: post #16
LinkDJ wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, pot became legal? Why didn't anyone tell me!

don't know why you're down voted, but your irony is correct. pot is still very much illegal on the federal level... that's important because that's the level that handle your taxes.

Your income taxes, yeah. Your sales tax, highway tolls, certifications (state car inspection, state certifications to operate certain businesses, etc) and additional resource taxes (gas tax, tobacco tax) are going to your state, and your property / zoning taxes are going to your principality.

The federal level matters because it supplants state law. The FBI and other federal agents can arrest anyone in any state where pot is legal statewide under federal law. You just get out of having local PD arresting you for it.

Post reply on HN