Everybody Let's Stop the TPP: Share These Videos and Spread the Word • Hacker News Board

Re: Everybody Let's Stop the TPP: Share These Videos and Spread the Word

#31

Post by rayiner » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 3:50 PM UTC

twoodfin wrote: post #30

seoguru wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Elizabeth Warren said: “I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative’s policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant,” Warren explained. “In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that tr…

This is a pretty silly argument from Sen. Warren. Put aside the fact that she can't even be bothered to ascribe the argument to any named individual, nobody's arguing that the agreements themselves shouldn't be public and "transparent". A modern trade agreement represents a balancing of a huge number of private interests. Some will benefit and some will be harmed, but the overall outcome is expected to be positive fo…

Closed proceedings are the exception in the American system. Generally, there are two justifications, deriving from constitutional missions: security, and the inherently counter-democratic function of the judiciary. Even then, oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court are public and recorded.

The USTR cannot avail itself of such justifications.

Re: Everybody Let's Stop the TPP: Share These Videos and Spread the Word

#32

Post by judk » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 3:59 PM UTC

Nick_C wrote: post #22

bpodgursky wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Total information is not the same as informative labeling. Companies are not allowed to label the absence of irrelevant things for good reason--when a food is labeled as "X-free", X should in some way be something worth avoiding for some people (if you want a trans-fat-free / carb-free / gluten-free diet, etc.) This is what consumers expect when they see a label advertising the absence of something--that it is worth…

> Companies are not allowed to label the absence of irrelevant things for good reason Well, they are allowed to here in Australia. For example, we have milk marketed as "permeate-free" despite permeate being a natural milk product.

That seems highly relevant omission to label, then

Re: Everybody Let's Stop the TPP: Share These Videos and Spread the Word

#33

Post by novalis » Sun, Oct 06, 2013, 6:56 PM UTC

AmiiJewels wrote: post #6

There seems to be a lot of scare mongering in that video which doesn't help put the point across.."franken-foods"...really? GM foods are and will continue to be a great leap forward in sustainable, scalable agriculture. I still have no idea what the "TPP" thing is...when I look at the other sources I just get things like "you will be banned from being able to modify the save file on your game"...huh really? What if I…

"GM foods are and will continue to be a great leap forward in sustainable, scalable agriculture."

I see a lot of data that contradicts that statement, time and again. Is that a general feeling you have on the subject and/or does that get backed up by published numbers ?

Re: Everybody Let's Stop the TPP: Share These Videos and Spread the Word

#34

Post by snowwrestler » Mon, Oct 07, 2013, 3:42 PM UTC

olefoo wrote: post #24

snowwrestler wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The TPP is a multilateral trade agreement, all of which are negotiated in private by national representatives, then presented to their respective national governments for ratification. In the U.S. the TPP will require Congressional approval, which will be a very public and long process. Basically: the stuff about "secrecy" is pure scaremongering. There's nothing special about the way TPP is being out together.

It's going to be on put to a vote under so called "fast-track" rules; where it's not available for mark up or public comment and will have to get an up or down vote within 24 hours. If the text of a complex multi-lateral and "modular" trade agreement is public for less than 48 hours before a binding yes/no vote; that hardly seems like it's in good faith. And it certainly strikes this observer as an attempt to bypass…

> It's going to be on put to a vote under so called "fast-track" rules; where it's not available for mark up or public comment and will have to get an up or down vote within 24 hours.

Also not true. I'd be interested to see your source for this.

Trade Promotion Authority (TPA, also known as fast track) has expired. It could be renewed before TPP is submitted to Congress, but that is very unlikely. Without TPA, the TPP will be treated like any other bill in Congress.

Even if TPA is renewed, the committees have 45 days each to report the bill, then each house has 15 days to vote up or down. Hardly 24 hours. [1]

If you're looking for a precedent, review the timelines for the Colombia and South Korea free trade agreements. Each was submitted to the Congress under TPA rules...nevertheless the negotiations and debate and revisions took another 3 years before they were passed.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Promotion_Authority

Re: Everybody Let's Stop the TPP: Share These Videos and Spread the Word

#35

Post by twoodfin » Mon, Oct 07, 2013, 4:45 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #31

twoodfin wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty silly argument from Sen. Warren. Put aside the fact that she can't even be bothered to ascribe the argument to any named individual, nobody's arguing that the agreements themselves shouldn't be public and "transparent". A modern trade agreement represents a balancing of a huge number of private interests. Some will benefit and some will be harmed, but the overall outcome is expected to be positive fo…

Closed proceedings are the exception in the American system. Generally, there are two justifications, deriving from constitutional missions: security, and the inherently counter-democratic function of the judiciary. Even then, oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court are public and recorded. The USTR cannot avail itself of such justifications.

Am I misunderstanding, or are you suggesting that it would be exceptional for the U.S. to keep diplomatic negotiations private? ISTM that it's just the opposite: International discussions are almost always held in private. Why should what the USTR does be any different from, say, negotiation with an ally over a Status of Forces agreement?

Re: Everybody Let's Stop the TPP: Share These Videos and Spread the Word

#36

Post by Executor » Sun, Oct 20, 2013, 1:05 AM UTC

bpodgursky wrote: post #19

tbrake wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they disagree with GM business practices and don't want to buy them. Is such information available from the stores? On the packaging? At a kiosk somewhere? Where? It's the flipside of the oft proposed "let them vote with their dollars" solution that's not often discussed: in order to make informed decisions people need (easy, plain language) access to honest, total information. If the problem of information is…

Total information is not the same as informative labeling. Companies are not allowed to label the absence of irrelevant things for good reason--when a food is labeled as "X-free", X should in some way be something worth avoiding for some people (if you want a trans-fat-free / carb-free / gluten-free diet, etc.) This is what consumers expect when they see a label advertising the absence of something--that it is worth…

Bullshit. GMO provides power to both governments and corporations by allowing for the alteration of organic life. Why the hell do you want this? We do not have direct democracy.

There is a "scientific" cause to fear GMO's. Consider contamination of GMO species. Or the fact that some fast-growing GMO wheat has the consequence of having little nutrients.