Trans Pacific Partnership - continuing the conservative assault on working people

[Anung Un Rama]

ahoy Anuung, avast ye!



the projections have US exports moving up a full percent. real income would go up 57 billion (more on this later). like i said, incremental improvement for US based business interests.



if you're objecting to the grand language used in promoting the TPP, i don't know what to say. anyone even mildly curious about the trade deal could just read about it. if an economic illiterate like me can make sense of it, anyone can.

i was expecting it to be a net postive. it is just that. i am happy.

its not that complicated.



"business alliance" and "geopoitical interests" are not mutually exclusive terms, Anuung. the TPP serves both.
i'm unclear on where you're even going with this, to be honest. are you saying you would like the TPP to have been more explicit in its thrust to disable China economically?



Anuung my friend, everything is negotiated "in secret". even legislation that you like. its all done that way - particularly multilateral trade deals, where each nation is of course trying to maximize their side of the pie. its natural and normal.



i wasn't speaking literally. China, for obvious reasons, is glad the US pulled out of the TPP.



that kind of sweeping assertion is not a point i'm willing to concede to you, just because you say its so.



when a restaurant discovers a statin drug that lowers cholesterol and lengthens the life of mankind, you make sure to get back to me on that one.

i like to eat out as much as anyone, but your comparison seems kind of silly to me.



i'm glad you raised that point, Anuung.

this is the core of our disagreement - and i think it holds true for most of the people who actually have policy problems with the TPP.

alot of folks are angry that the TPP will probably end up enriching a select few oligarchs in this country. you probably know in your heart of hearts that, yes, this will be beneficial to US corporate interests - you're just ticked off that every time any cream rises, the wealthy swoop in and scoop it all up.

the problem isn't free trade. the problem isn't globalism. the problem is the fruits from free trade and globalism are coalescing at the top - so the issue is tax policy.

the issue is income inequality - a real problem in this country. i mean, where does that 57 billion i referenced early go, exactly? who gets it?

the issue is wealth inequality - which has gotten insane in the United States. our wealth gap (net worth as opposed to income) is worse than Russia. its worse than Iran. that is seriously fucked up.

taking away globalism and the TPP isn't going to address these issues - it just pointlessly kneecaps US corporations a bit and that's not going to help workers at those US based interests at all.

the TPP isn't a problem.

its tax policy.

what do you care if a US corporation is able to strike favorable trade deals that enriches it - so long as that largesse doesn't all end up in some zillionaire's pocket?
what if that money was used to help fund a single payor program? what if that money is funneled towards PEW scholarships?
what if that money is used to help buttress our senior entitlement programs (since these programs are about to eviscerate the US budget)?

you're fighting the wrong fight.

- IGIT

Part 2 (presses post by accident)

And yeas the oligarchs gets 99% of that potential 1% gain in gdp after 30 years.

Guess what, those same oligarchs are pretty much the people who wrote the TPP. They’re also the people who pushed for this latest tax reform. And they’re the same people who want to raid Medicare and social security to their benefit. I think it’s naive to act as if the tpp is some innocuous instrument.

Globalism has actually kneecapped the US worker more than the corporations. You have to remember who is beholden to who.

It’s not the wrong fight. It’s a tangential fight. And even if “we” “won” the tpp fight we lost huge on the tax fight.

 

[Rod1]

Part 2 (presses post by accident)

And yeas the oligarchs gets 99% of that potential 1% gain in gdp after 30 years.

Guess what, those same oligarchs are pretty much the people who wrote the TPP. They’re also the people who pushed for this latest tax reform. And they’re the same people who want to raid Medicare and social security to their benefit. I think it’s naive to act as if the tpp is some innocuous instrument.

Globalism has actually kneecapped the US worker more than the corporations. You have to remember who is beholden to who.

It’s not the wrong fight. It’s a tangential fight. And even if “we” “won” the tpp fight we lost huge on the tax fight.

So the Japanese government is the same who pushed the US tax reform? because its not like the US was the one that created the TPP, the US asked to be invited after talks were already underway.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

So the Japanese government is the same who pushed the US tax reform? because its not like the US was the one that created the TPP, the US asked to be invited after talks were already underway.

And then we dictated the terms.

 

[Rod1]

Because that’s what TPP helps pharmaceutical companies do. Yo wouldn’t be happy if restaurants or grocery stores had the power to raise their prices by that margin.

No, thats what the FDA helps pharmaceutical companies do.

 

[Rod1]

And then we dictated the terms.

LOL, sure all the nations involved were taking marching orders from American corporations.

You guys think too damn highly about yourselves.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

No, thats what the FDA helps pharmaceutical companies do.

The FDA has no jurisdiction in Vietnam and they have no control over pricing.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

LOL, sure all the nations involved were taking marching orders from American corporations.

You guys think too damn highly about yourselves.

I’m not a transnational corporation, so it has nothing to do with how I feel about myself. The TPP involved 40% of the world’s GDP with America and 16% without America. Who do you think was dictating the terms? Brunei? Peru?

 

[Rod1]

The FDA has no jurisdiction in Vietnam and they have no control over pricing.

Exactly.

 

[IGIT]

hail Anuung!

1. Those are the projections for 30yeara out. 1%. Guess what, they’re just projections, not guarantees. It could just as well wind up being -2%.

i was just citing the document you linked, since you were citing it.

2. I’m saying that keeping pharmaceutical prices high isn’t a geopolitical strategy. The tpp is pure protectionism that does nothing for the American people.

you're right. that part related to trade and IP protections. still - economic alliances always have a geopolitical aspect to them. sometimes more so, sometimes less.

And no, I’m not looking for more explicit language that we’re trying to torpedo China. I’m simply saying that the tpp does nothing to China, in spite of claims to the contrary. Why lie or distort/exaggerate the truth if the deal is so amazing? Why keep it secret and not explain in bit by bit to the American people

once more, i disagree with the bolded, particularly the "nothing" part.

3. The restaurant analogy works even better when you use statins as your benchmark. The industry already made billions in prophets off statins. And Merck did all the work on that, the rest just tweaked the molecule to get market share. Now these meds have been inexpensive for awhile now, but all of a sudden they’re skyrocketing in price (all meds, not just statins). Everybody is following the Shkreli/ Valeant model. Is that acceptable to you, to take long time inexpensive medications, even orphan drugs, and increase their price by 5000% because they can? Because that’s what TPP helps pharmaceutical companies do. Yo wouldn’t be happy if restaurants or grocery stores had the power to raise their prices by that margin.

citing Shkreli is like citing Judith Miller. they are outliers.

if you want to lower the profit margins of big pharma and biotech, you don't need to stop the TPP to do it; just have our POTUS talk to Paul Ryan and get the legislation moving. hell, Trump has declared he'd do as much, right?

i gotta head to my shoot, but to address the 2nd part of your post, i'll just say this;

increased fortunes for US based corporations doing trade isn't the problem
the profits of biotech and pharma aren't the problem
globalism and outsourcing are not the problem
automation and robotics aren't the problem

the problem is how financial upside of the above are redistributed.

does it all go to the super rich?
does it go helping to fund state and 2 year colleges?
does it go to perhaps help fund single payor?
does it all go to MacDonald Douglas and Raytheon?
does it go into "a rising tide lifts all boats" sort of Federal spending?

its about tax policy, and as Jack noted, fiscal policy that doesn't funnel the money into unfortunate places (like lining the pockets of the affluent or our bloated military).

- IGIT

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Exactly.

Precisely

 

[Anung Un Rama]

hail Anuung!



i was just citing the document you linked, since you were citing it.



you're right. that part related to trade and IP protections. still - economic alliances always have a geopolitical aspect to them. sometimes more so, sometimes less.



once more, i disagree with the bolded, particularly the "nothing" part.



citing Shkreli is like citing Judith Miller. they are outliers.

if you want to lower the profit margins of big pharma and biotech, you don't need to stop the TPP to do it; just have our POTUS talk to Paul Ryan and get the legislation moving. hell, Trump has declared he'd do as much, right?

i gotta head to my shoot, but to address the 2nd part of your post, i'll just say this;

increased fortunes for US based corporations doing trade isn't the problem
the profits of biotech and pharma aren't the problem
globalism and outsourcing are not the problem
automation and robotics aren't the problem

the problem is how financial upside of the above are redistributed.

does it all go to the super rich?
does it go to perhaps help fund single payor?
does it all go to MacDonald Douglas and Raytheon?
does it go into "a rising tide lifts all boats" sort of Federal spending?

its about tax policy, and as Jack noted, fiscal policy that doesn't funnel the money into unfortunate places (like lining the pockets of the affluent).

- IGIT

shkrrlli not as much of an outlier as you’dije to think. Remember Mylan (epicenter) and Valeant? Now everybody is doing it. It’s a trending model.


A projection is a projection. I cited the official government projectionsxand they’re weak especially considering the size of the agreement and the time span. Tons of things could change those numbers to be a negative growth. But you’re taking it at face cskue kind it’s a guaranteed win.

 

[Rod1]

I’m not a transnational corporation, so it has nothing to do with how I feel about myself. The TPP involved 40% of the world’s GDP with America and 16% without America. Who do you think was dictating the terms? Brunei? Peru?

Nobody these were negotiations that lasted years with nations that dont need to bend over to the interests of the USA.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Nobody these were negotiations that lasted years with nations that dont need to bend over to the interests of the USA.

In theory, sure.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

hail Anuung!



i was just citing the document you linked, since you were citing it.



you're right. that part related to trade and IP protections. still - economic alliances always have a geopolitical aspect to them. sometimes more so, sometimes less.



once more, i disagree with the bolded, particularly the "nothing" part.



citing Shkreli is like citing Judith Miller. they are outliers.

if you want to lower the profit margins of big pharma and biotech, you don't need to stop the TPP to do it; just have our POTUS talk to Paul Ryan and get the legislation moving. hell, Trump has declared he'd do as much, right?

i gotta head to my shoot, but to address the 2nd part of your post, i'll just say this;

increased fortunes for US based corporations doing trade isn't the problem
the profits of biotech and pharma aren't the problem
globalism and outsourcing are not the problem
automation and robotics aren't the problem

the problem is how financial upside of the above are redistributed.

does it all go to the super rich?
does it go helping to fund state and 2 year colleges?
does it go to perhaps help fund single payor?
does it all go to MacDonald Douglas and Raytheon?
does it go into "a rising tide lifts all boats" sort of Federal spending?

its about tax policy, and as Jack noted, fiscal policy that doesn't funnel the money into unfortunate places (like lining the pockets of the affluent or our bloated military).

- IGIT

What effect go you think tpp would have had on China?

 

[IGIT]

AUR -

shkrrlli not as much of an outlier as you’dije to think. Remember Mylan (epicenter) and Valeant? Now everybody is doing it. It’s a trending model.

Martin Shkreli is not a pharma or biotech company. he's just grifter scum; and they exist in all professions. Valeant isn't a US company - what they do or don't do can't be affected by US law. they're Canadian.

A projection is a projection. I cited the official government projectionsxand they’re weak especially considering the size of the agreement and the time span. Tons of things could change those numbers to be a negative growth. But you’re taking it at face cskue kind it’s a guaranteed win.

i was only citing the numbers that you were citing. you weren't disputing them when you introduced them into our chat. i was only referring to them.

i gotta run!

- IGIT

 

[Rod1]

Precisely

What part of the TPP would give patent protection to Daraprim? specially since it doesnt even has patent protection in the USA

 

[Rod1]

In theory, sure.

Considering that the TPP still passed with all the other nations involved its quite safe to assume that whatever was passed in the CPTPP wasnt the US dictating orders to the lesser nations.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

What part of the TPP would give patent protection to Daraprim? specially since it doesnt even has patent protection in the USA

Daraprim isn’t the only drug in the world.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Considering that the TPP still passed with all the other nations involved its quite safe to assume that whatever was passed in the CPTPP wasnt the US dictating orders to the lesser nations.

They made changes.

 

[Rod1]

Daraprim isn’t the only drug in the world.

Thats the one you used as an example...