Wikileaks Releases Secret Trans-Pacfic Partnership Agreement... Vol. 1984

Crystalmethod said:

Does anyone know what that supposed benefits to this is?
Are there any?

Or is this something that's happening cause people are bieng paid?

Click to expand...

Crystalmethod said:

Does anyone know what that supposed benefits to this is?
Are there any?

Or is this something that's happening cause people are bieng paid?

Click to expand...

RealShoeMice said:

So what does this mean for everybody that uses torrents aka everybody

Click to expand...

a blinkin said:

Just tried to explain it to my friends in broad strokes. But man, the more I read, the more I'm convinced that **** is actually about to go down. I remember those zeitgeist videos from years ago wherein they foresaw the world bank and corporations infiltrating the government... Didn't want to believe the world would come to that.

Click to expand...

Crystalmethod said:

Does anyone know what that supposed benefits to this is?
Are there any?

Or is this something that's happening cause people are bieng paid?

Click to expand...

zapatohead408 said:

What is the significance of the Bush family doing this?

edit: nvm, just did some research. They're gonna privatize the water.

Click to expand...

KingKoopa said:

zapatohead408 said:

What is the significance of the Bush family doing this?


edit: nvm, just did some research. They're gonna privatize the water.

Click to expand...

You can't just drop this **** without some kind of link bruh 

Wasn't this a plot in one of the Bond movies?

Click to expand...

FrankMatthews said:

I understand it's not really public info and that in itself is cause for concern. But this is being framed as if a bunch of foreign companies are gonna come in and sue us blind and dictate our practices. I'm more inclined to believe that is what these us corporations intend to go do in all these foreign countries. I'm not really seeing the direct threat, at least not on the magnitude this thread implies, to the us citizen. Jobs here are ****** either way. Just seems like more back room thuggery with which to take over the world. They have separate back room deals to screw us over.

Click to expand...

[h1]Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal Is Reached[/h1]
By JACKIE CALMESOCT. 5, 2015

ATLANTA — The United States, Japan and 10 other Pacific basin nations on Monday agreed after years of negotiations to the largest regional trade accord in history, an economic pact envisioned as a bulwark against China’s power and a standard-setter for global commerce, worker rights and environmental protection.

The announcement here that weary trade officials had finally agreed on the Trans-Pacific Partnership was merely “an important first step,” the United States trade representative, Michael B. Froman, said. Now their agreement faces months of debate in each of the 12 nations, including in Congress, where some bipartisan opposition was immediate.

The trade issue also is certain to become a flash point of presidential politics in 2016, with populist anti-trade sentiment roiling both parties.

For a day, however, President Obama could celebrate a potentially legacy-making achievement that links countries representing two-fifths of the global economy, from Canada and Chile to Japan and Australia. The trade initiative, dating to the start of his administration, is a centerpiece of Mr. Obama’s economic program to expand exports. It also stands as a capstone for his foreign policy “pivot” toward closer relations with fast-growing eastern Asia, after years of American preoccupation with the Middle East and North Africa.

“When more than 95 percent of our potential customers live outside our borders, we can’t let countries like China write the rules of the global economy,” Mr. Obama said in a statement. “We should write those rules, opening new markets to American products while setting high standards for protecting workers and preserving our environment.”

The Pacific accord would phase out thousands of import tariffs as well as other barriers to international trade, like Japanese regulations that keep out some American-made autos and trucks. It also would establish uniform rules on corporations’ intellectual property, and open the Internet even in communist Vietnam.

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 as varied as avocados from California or wheat, pork and beef from the Plains states.

The overall economic and political heft of the 12-nation group suggests that, as trade officials predicted, its agreement would be a model for future accords. It would overhaul the system of settling disputes between nations and foreign companies, while barring tobacco companies from using that process to block countries’ antismoking initiatives. It also would enforce higher standards of labor conditions and environmental protection, including wildlife-trafficking.

After five days here and sleepless nights of tense haggling, the agreement came together at 5 a.m. Monday, the trade officials said. When the 11 men and one woman (Magali Silva of Peru) filed onto a dais in a hotel ballroom several hours later to meet reporters, scores of aides burst into applause and some ministers joined in.

Mr. Froman read a joint statement that hailed a “historic agreement” that would promote growth, good jobs, higher living standards and good governance. But the ad-libbed comments of several ministers, including those from New Zealand and Canada who had been at the center of a final, heated standoff over dairy exports, spoke to a shared sense of accomplishment.

Ed Fast, the minister of Canada, where criticism of the trade accord has been prominent ahead of federal elections this month, conceded there had “very tough discussions.”

But, he added, “At the end of the day, here we are as 12 T.P.P. partners, having achieved something that at times many people didn’t think was achievable.”

For New Zealand, a small nation that is a major dairy exporter and would gain new access to markets in Canada and the United States, among other countries, the minister, Tim Groser, interjected, “Look, long after the details of this negotiation on things like tons of butter have been regarded as a footnote in history, the bigger picture of what we’ve achieved today will be what remains.”

Other people will join this agreement,” he predicted. While Mr. Groser refused to specify countries that would join the Pacific trade partnership, South Korea and Thailand are among nations that have been named.

“We each have our own domestic processes to go through. We’ll be consulting closely with congressional leadership on the next steps and the timetable,” Mr. Froman said, adding, “We’re confident that people will see this as a very strong deal.”

Several potentially deal-breaking disputes had kept the 12 trade officials 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.

Yet the trade agreement almost certainly will encounter stiff opposition.

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. Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized the Pacific trade accord as “a bad deal,” injecting conservative populism into the debate and emboldening some congressional Republicans who fear for local interests like sugar and rice, and many conservatives who oppose Mr. Obama at every turn.

While many opponents say 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.

Also, the administration contends that increased United States sales abroad would create jobs in export industries, which generally pay more than jobs in domestic-only businesses.

The parties to the accord also include Mexico, Peru, Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei.

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. Mr. Froman called the labor and environmental rules the strongest ever in a trade agreement and a model for future pacts, although some environmental groups and most unions remained implacably opposed. The worker standards commit all parties to the International Labor Organization’s principles for collective bargaining, a minimum wage and safe workplaces, and against child labor, forced labor and excessive hours.

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.

On the environment, the accord has provisions against wildlife-trafficking, illegal or unsustainable logging and fishing, and protections for a range of marine species and animals including elephants and rhinoceroses.

For the first time in a trade agreement there are provisions to help small businesses without the resources of big corporations to deal with trade barriers and red tape. A committee would be created to assist smaller companies.

The agreement also would overhaul special tribunals that handle trade disputes between businesses and participating nations. The changes, which also are expected to set a precedent for future trade pacts, respond to widespread criticisms that the Investor-State Dispute Settlement panels favor businesses and interfere with nations’ efforts to pass rules safeguarding public health and safety.

Among new provisions, a code of conduct would govern lawyers selected for arbitration panels. And tobacco companies would be excluded, to end the practice of using the panels to sue countries that pass antismoking laws. On Sunday, Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, hailed the provision as “historic.”

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. Senator Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over trade, has threatened to withdraw his support for the accord if United States negotiators agree to loosening pharmaceutical industry protections against American law.

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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/business/trans-pacific-partnership-trade-deal-is-reached.html?_r=0

Click to expand...

nawghtyhare said:

Can I get a quick run down of the implications

Click to expand...

RustyShackleford said:

All the governments have to ratify it, but it is probably a done deal, and early reports is that it is not as doom and gloom as people thought

Will still have to read it and hear breakdowns by economist

Elizabeth Warren bout to go in doe

Click to expand...

Gordonson said:

nawghtyhare said:

Click to expand...

Here's a quick overview of what this would (will ) mean, with a small edit:

Yeah said:

Cliffnotes:
- The USA, UK, Australia, and a number of Asian countries (12 Nations total) have been secretly drafting a legislative proposal that would change international laws regarding patents, copyrights, trademarks, industrial design, AND [COLOR=#red]law enforcement.[/COLOR]
- The "Enforcement" section of this draft would pretty much trample over individual rights, civil liberties, internet privacy, and essentially destroy all creative commons licensing (creative, intellectual, biological, and environmental.) It allows for the use of "Secret evidence," and is essentially SOPA and ACTA combined.
- China AND Russia have both been purposefully kept out of the loop, and have not had any input on this proposal.
- The Obama Administration is getting ready has been given approval to fast track this WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION/AMENDMENTS, and Obama has already said he intends on signing it.
- Lobbyists (Chevron, Halliburton, Monsanto and Walmart) have just as much access to this bill as many US Congress members, if not more.


Full Press Release (and the leaked draft) here: https://wikileaks.org/tpp/pressrelease.html


George Orwell was right.

Click to expand...

****, man. The good ol' tactic of letting the people have a couple wins so they don't realize that they're taking/are about to take an even bigger loss.

Click to expand...

BlackDynamite said:

I'm late, this is from 2013 but can someone provide some cliffs or a link as to what this trade would do for us and people all over the world?

Click to expand...

Gordonson said:

nawghtyhare said:

Can I get a quick run down of the implications

Click to expand...

Go back to Page 3, where you had asked and received and already

RustyShackleford said:

All the governments have to ratify it, but it is probably a done deal, and early reports is that it is not as doom and gloom as people thought

Will still have to read it and hear breakdowns by economist

Elizabeth Warren bout to go in doe

Click to expand...

These reports discuss the portions covering intellectual property, ISDS, what it would mean for the pharmaceutical industry, etc.?

Genuinely asking, because everything I've read about this on popular media outlets have seemed to cherry pick the pieces of this massive agreement that they choose to discuss.

Click to expand...