Speaker: TPP: This is a fight worth joining
52 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
Islander, in reply to
nd it would be catastrophic for me and many others who have played medication roulette for a long time and finally found something that works.
One of my family takes Venlafaxine daily - because it's the only one -after playing
that medecine roulette for nearly 3 years - that brought her severe clinical depression under control. Last year, her chemist changed the prescription, assurring her that it was equivalent in every way...after 3 weeks of feeling increasingly ill, she went back to her GP -who got extremely angry (as did a GP in my family group.) The chemist will not - any time soon - or at all - change a GP's prescription. He said - apparently because I wasnt there - that there was a 'directive' to 'ween clients off Venlafaxine because it was so expensive...' -
Sacha, in reply to
If the TPP is agreed in the form that is feared, it could have implications for access to affordable medicines all over the world
That is the hope of the big pharma companies who have been privy to its details, yes.
-
I'm interested to know where the Price Waterhouse Coopers wage and manufacturing report sits in regard to the TPPA. It certainly proves the point that low wages are always the major link to where manufacturers tend to set up shop and it certainly puts the lie to New Zealand wages increasing at some stage without government influence.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101062486
There is talk of American interests reshoring in America because of the wages in emerging economies increasing and therefore reducing the need for multinationals to go off shore.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
There is talk of American interests reshoring in America because of the wages in emerging economies increasing and therefore reducing the need for multinationals to go off shore.
Yes, there's been talk of China manufacturing shifting to Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, wherever cheaper, for years, with others countering "but China's got the infrastructure", and in recent years I've been hearing more and more reshoring or not bothering to offshore.
-
The opposition to the TPP is not a minority far left movement
Correct. NZRise represents the NZ owned digital business sector. One of our very first acts was to attend the Vietnam round a few years ago and instigate the "lunch with negotiators" events. We are concerned about the TPP for all the reasons Hadyn points to. Scroll down this page for more info:
http://nzrise.org.nz/resources/
The key point is that this is not a deal that is an FTA. In exchange for very limited (and as yet undefined) market access the USA is seeking protection for its own industries and corporates. That's the "high quality" bit of this deal. It is going to cost us all money and people will die as a result of the increased costs of medical treatments.
MFAT and MBIE seem to have gone silent on Kiwi stakeholders. Used to be we got regular updates and were invited to briefings on progress. This has come to a grinding halt over the last 9 months.
-
The impacts aren't well explored.
While medicine and IT have well-stated objections, the effects will be felt across all areas of society.
In my new day job I'm reading quite heavily about pokie machines. As you might expect, the global industry is led by the United States, with Nevada being the testing ground for innovation. Machines are designed by teams of engineers and psychologists, whose criterion of success is maximising revenue per available customer (RPAC). How much money a person loses, in other words. They use a large number of tricks to keep the person on the seat, and have them spending money in a way which is not controlled by the user. Similarly, the spaces these inhabit are well designed, to make the user lose their normal sense of control and to make them extremely comfortable.
The harm from pokie machines is substantial, and they're the cause of most problem gambling. If New Zealand's Government was to regulate the design of imported machines, or restrict how casinos and pokie-bars were allowed to situate machines, there is a very high likelihood, based on the information we have about the TPPA so far, that New Zealand would be in violation of the agreement.
I'm still trying to get a meeting with Phil Goff, to have him hear my concerns. (Does he listen to anyone?) I think more lobbying of the unions is needed to get them to come on side and force him to take a stand closer to that of his party and New Zealanders.
-
This response from an American activist organisation on the TPPA which affects Americans:
start watching at 25.11 for the TPPA 'take action' comments, although the whole piece is worth listening to - Monsanto (there is an anti-Monsanto March tomorrow at Aotea at 2pm), Nestle stealing water and paying nothing, a low wage study re Walmart which proves a living wage does not affect consumers -http://sgtreport.com/2013/09/how-monsanto-runs-washington-wal-marts-war-on-wages/
-
While I am cautious about most forms of FTA, I can see that benefits accrue when the partners of the FTA are of approximately similar-sized economies. But when there is a significant imbalance in the size of the economies the agreements always tend to favour the larger economy, to the overall detriment (compared with agreements between similar-sized economies) of the smaller economy partner.
Consequently I would have been cautiously in favour of an agreement before the inclusion of Japan and USA, and would prefer that Australia, too, was excluded. It would allow a grouping of smaller but similar-sized economies which could work cooperatively in a global market-place. With these huge economies participating it seems likely to end up with them subsuming the smaller ones.
And I get really nervous when politicians tell us to 'relax'. It is that patronising 'we know best' attitude, when really I don't believe they do.
-
Sacha, in reply to
And I get really nervous when politicians tell us to 'relax'. It is that patronising 'we know best' attitude, when really I don't believe they do.
You only have to hear Groser, Joyce and co speak about the TPP after you've learned the most basic features of it to have that sensation. Far from reassuring, given how long the consequences can take to fix.
-
*This* is not an impossibility, and has been contemplated & signalled by USA writers since the 1940s-
So 0/70 or so then? Not a very good prediction rate.
-
gregfullmoon, in reply to
How would it be bad for New Zealand to walk away from it?
We are not gaining anything from it, are we?
And the USA doesn't want our dairy, and do we want more dairy farms anyway?
We have mutual trade arrangements with a number of the countries and one now with China. What's the worry? Do you think the World will suddenly stop buying our stuff?
Or are you worried that Disneyland will stop sending their latest versions of the Capitalist propaganda?
What do we lose please tell?
-
Sacha, in reply to
We are not gaining anything from it, are we?
Probably something, to be fair. But it's hard to weigh that up when they won't tell their citizens what they're trading off.
-
The Sydney Morning Herald is reporting on a leak of the IP Chapter
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/trade-deal-could-be-bitter-medicine-20131113-2xh4p.html
It sounds pretty bad for NZ from that. -
Chris Waugh, in reply to
NZ Herald, too. It looks to me like the USA should never have been allowed to join, and now that it is in, we should get out.
-
Here's the wikileaks link
-
Imperius wrecks...
the USA should never have been allowed to join
Damn straight! +1
Classic 'cuckoo-in-the-nest' behaviour,
or am I thinking of parasites?...and hell, the US ain't good at honouring the associations it already belongs to:
They, along with Israel, have lost voting rights at UNESCO for non payment of fees (they threw a hissy-fit at Palestine being given membership of UNESCO)
UNESCO press releaseMeanwhile they are hoping to re-militarise Japan as part of their posturing in front of China (the work in Australia continues apace)...
We need some adults in the room, immediately...
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
How would it be bad for New Zealand to walk away from it?
We are not gaining anything from it, are we?
Let's ignore the US, for the moment. Pretend their obnoxious positions aren't present, and it's the original trade agreement that was envisaged. A comprehensive winding-back of agricultural protectionism in the likes of Korea would be good for NZ. That would still happen, with or without the other bullshit which has been introduced, and still be good. It's just that the monetary and social costs imposed by the position of the US turns the entire agreement into negative territory for NZ. Our farmers will win monetarily from more income, which is why they're so bullish about the negotiations, but one can't help thinking that nobody has spelled out to them how many other costs will come from the agreement as it stands.
It was a reasonable agreement until the US got involved, and it's a shame that Goff seems to feel like he can't express regret for having been party to that happening.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
and hell, the US ain’t good at honouring the associations it already belongs to
Indeed not. Their long and ignominious history of losing before the WTO, only to be taken back for the exact same behaviour by the same victim "trading partner" shortly thereafter, speaks volumes to their true colours on trade: their way, or no way.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Let’s ignore the US, for the moment. Pretend their obnoxious positions aren’t present, and it’s the original trade agreement that was envisaged. A comprehensive winding-back of agricultural protectionism in the likes of Korea would be good for NZ. That would still happen, with or without the other bullshit which has been introduced, and still be good.
I've just been thinking this. I suppose the idea of just expelling the US and getting a deal done isn't realistic ...
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
I suppose the idea of just expelling the US and getting a deal done isn’t realistic …
I suspect not, no, particularly since trade negotiations work on consensus and the US wouldn't agree to being ejected when there's still the possibility of brow-beating everyone else into submission in the US's favour.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
I’ve just been thinking this. I suppose the idea of just expelling the US and getting a deal done isn’t realistic …
Too Big To Expel, much? The way things are going, it's looking less like a free trade agreement, and more like the East India Company with cellphones.
-
China must be loving this.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
China must be loving this.
You'd think, but I've searched Baidu News, Xinhua and The Beijing News and can't find anything. Still, it is only quarter past nine, and the Third Plenum is hogging all the column inches and pixels. Maybe there'll be something this afternoon.
-
Unrelated to the TPP (except as a sign of how the U.S.A. responds to treaty issues)- It must be said , the slowly unfolding U.S.A./ Antigua WTO dispute has been hilarious from the outside.
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/avast-me-hearties-antigua-legally-pirate-us-copyrighted-works -
I had a look at CNN to see how the US is responding, but couldn't find anything. The Washington Post, however, is on the case, I found these two:
Hollywood wish-list, which makes an interesting statement:But in other cases, the U.S. position appears to run counter to U.S. law. For example, Canada has proposed language protecting Internet service providers such as YouTube from liability if their customers use their service to distribute works that infringe copyright. American law has provided such liability protection since 1998, yet the Obama administration is listed as opposing a requirement that nations "shall limit the liability of, or the availability of remedies against, internet service providers."
And under fire from all sides.
[...] a treaty that officials argue is not as much about short-term market opening as it is about shaping global rules that countries such as China will eventually be obligated to obey.
Ummm.... cos only China breaks the rules, right?
And how is it the US Congress gets to amend the treaty?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.