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
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI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. Aprils post, Tuna Case Shows Everything You Need To Know About Trade Agreements, explained:
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 839 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (31)
ReplyReply to this post
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
good thing our president and congress oppose corporate rule lolololol. when pigs fly that is nt
msongs
May 2015
#2
My guess is every law student is introduced to concepts of alternative dispute resolution
HereSince1628
May 2015
#6
Binkie The Clown
(7,911 posts)1. They don't have to attack the law. They own the law.
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.
msongs
(67,347 posts)2. good thing our president and congress oppose corporate rule lolololol. when pigs fly that is nt
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)6. My guess is every law student is introduced to concepts of alternative dispute resolution
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.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)3. Seriously?
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)4. There are other sides to the story, like the Tuna issue.