Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Mon May 18, 2015, 02:50 AM May 2015

I知 Not Making This Up: Corporations Use Trade Deals To Attack U.S. Law

http://www.nationofchange.org/2015/05/17/im-not-making-this-up-corporations-use-trade-deals-to-attack-u-s-law/

But there are already disputes in trade tribunals that could result in U.S. laws being changed.

Country-of-origin (COOL) laws requiring that meat and pork (and fish and chicken) be labeled with their country of origin have been challenged by meat and pork corporations in Mexico and Canada. U.S. consumers want to know where their products come from. Apparently, letting consumers have information about the origin of the products they buy could cause them to make choices that hurt the profits of certain non-U.S. companies. So they want to make that against trade rules.

These companies took their complaint to the World Trade Organization, and WTO ruled against the United States.

Canada and Mexico can put retaliatory tariffs on U.S. imports, including pork and beef, if the U.S. does not change its laws.

This is similar to the ban on putting “dolphin-safe” on the label of canned tuna because giant Mexican corporations causes U.S. consumers not to buy their not-dolphin-safe tuna. April’s post, Tuna Case Shows Everything You Need To Know About “Trade” Agreements, explained:
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I知 Not Making This Up: Corporations Use Trade Deals To Attack U.S. Law (Original Post) eridani May 2015 OP
They don't have to attack the law. They own the law. Binkie The Clown May 2015 #1
good thing our president and congress oppose corporate rule lolololol. when pigs fly that is nt msongs May 2015 #2
+1 newfie11 May 2015 #5
My guess is every law student is introduced to concepts of alternative dispute resolution HereSince1628 May 2015 #6
Seriously? Enthusiast May 2015 #3
There are other sides to the story, like the Tuna issue. Hoyt May 2015 #4

Binkie The Clown

(7,911 posts)
1. They don't have to attack the law. They own the law.
Mon May 18, 2015, 02:53 AM
May 2015

They stir the pot just to prove that they own the spoon. Trade agreements are just another of their tools for manipulating with their wholly-owned subsidiaries otherwise known as governments.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
6. My guess is every law student is introduced to concepts of alternative dispute resolution
Mon May 18, 2015, 08:34 AM
May 2015

and the Federal Arbitration Act.

My guess is that ADR is typically presented as something that -should- be included in contracts.

But it'd be interesting to hear from DU lawyers about how they were introduced to ADR.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I知 Not Making This Up: C...