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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

djean111

(14,255 posts)

26. The trade talk is deliberately meant to cloud that issue of Investor State takeover of sovereign

Reply to AdHocSolver (Reply #17)

Wed Jan 28, 2015, 02:25 PM

Jan 2015

states. The Investor State can sue to weaken or get rid of any law or regulation that affects their profits, or might affect their profits, and the cases will be decided in a corporate court, with corporate judges, and the taxpayer must pay or roll back or weaken, according to the decision. Britain is just now realizing that the TTIP will put this into place, and is demonstrating against it.

Actual TRADE issues are only 5 of the 28 or 29 parts of the TTP, but the chosen defense of criticism of the TPP is to concentrate on trade issues. Happening right here in this thread, either through ignorance or through cold calculation. IMO.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Calling TPP a 'Death Pact,' Health Advocates Rally Outside Secretive Trade Talks [View all] Faryn Balyncd Jan 2015 OP

K & R AzDar Jan 2015 #1

aren't they too late? hollysmom Jan 2015 #2

Well, we don't have a free trade pact with China Recursion Jan 2015 #3

I don't think so. hollysmom Jan 2015 #4

We manufacture more today than at any point in US history Recursion Jan 2015 #5

Are you in favor of the TPP? How about the Fast Track? nm rhett o rick Jan 2015 #6

I'm for fast track as a permanent feature; I'm marginally against the TPP Recursion Jan 2015 #7

Why do you support Fast Track? Do you favor a unitary executive? nm rhett o rick Jan 2015 #10

I think treaties in general should receive an up or down vote as negotiated by the executive Recursion Jan 2015 #11

You keep using that same canard in every thread about trade Populist_Prole Jan 2015 #8

What of them? Recursion Jan 2015 #9

You're tap dancing! Populist_Prole Jan 2015 #19

Take a step back and read what I'm actually saying Recursion Jan 2015 #22

Your last paragraph says it all Populist_Prole Jan 2015 #25

At first, I was merely amused by your fairy tale economics theories. AdHocSolver Jan 2015 #27

According to Bernie Sanders: baran Jan 2015 #12

Why is that difficult to believe? Think of how many receptionist and travel agent jobs Recursion Jan 2015 #16

More sophistry Populist_Prole Jan 2015 #21

And wheat threshers. Actual argument isn't sophistry. Recursion Jan 2015 #23

Bullshit Populist_Prole Jan 2015 #24

let me amend this - we do not make many neccessities anymore hollysmom Jan 2015 #13

Most of our generic drugs are made in China, a country we don't have a free trade agreement with Recursion Jan 2015 #14

my name brand is made in China. hollysmom Jan 2015 #15

Most of the goods that we buy are manufactured in low wage countries such as china. AdHocSolver Jan 2015 #18

Yup. China. A country with whom we have no free trade agreement. Recursion Jan 2015 #20

The TPP will mean more U.S. jobs being outsourced to low wage countries. AdHocSolver Jan 2015 #17

The trade talk is deliberately meant to cloud that issue of Investor State takeover of sovereign djean111 Jan 2015 #26

K&R StopTheTPP Jan 2015 #28