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
In reply to the discussion: TPP branded as trade agreement, but what's really at stake. From Public Citizen. [View all]TheKentuckian
(25,722 posts)60. When it is too late? So what, the only time it matters to be against is when you can stop it.
By the time you realize you can't rationalize it away (if ever such a thing is even possible , I strongly suspect misleading spin to appear falsely neutral) the decision will have been ceded to the TeaPubliKlans.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
70 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
TPP branded as trade agreement, but what's really at stake. From Public Citizen. [View all]
madfloridian
Apr 2015
OP
This is an extremely important issue and yet I don't see one single Right-Red Arrow
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#54
And a really good link here. Often I can not get to Wikileaks, times out on me.
madfloridian
Apr 2015
#9
What's the rush? It's been years in the making (in secret). The least our Congressional leaders can
jalan48
Apr 2015
#12
I'm glad that the word 'sovereignty' has been raised. This is the most concerning
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#13
And just imagine you are one of those little countries subject to this plan. They would not have the
jwirr
Apr 2015
#26
This is how it would work. Those Corps could sue the US, that would be the people of course,
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#45
And being more than a trade agreement is not necessarily a bad thing depending on the details.
pampango
Apr 2015
#17
I have. They are. Every complicated agreement has parts I don't like including, I'm sure,
pampango
Apr 2015
#20
When it is too late? So what, the only time it matters to be against is when you can stop it.
TheKentuckian
Apr 2015
#60
You do realize we've never lost an investor-state dispute? Not one? Your claims regarding payout
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#21
"I'm less concerned about the U.S. than other nations." That is an interesting take on TPP.
pampango
Apr 2015
#24
I don't think that it is so much US that will bring down those standards. I think the added power
jwirr
Apr 2015
#30
Because we have enough money to fight - those little countries are not going to be in the same
jwirr
Apr 2015
#28
That doesn't mean we shouldn't lose. For example the despicable Renco case
riderinthestorm
Apr 2015
#35
Yes the corporations deeply wish to include in the agreements a path around regulation
HereSince1628
Apr 2015
#31
Clearly there are two factions re. this issue. The Corp Faction vs. The People Faction.
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#55
The cream of idiocy was the notion that President Obama would veto the bill if it was bad.
Jesus Malverde
Apr 2015
#57
I'm not sure they ever supported the President, seems they're doing the bidding
Jesus Malverde
Apr 2015
#59
k & R Thanks for this very important post MF. It's the Big Tuna for corps, pols & investors,
appalachiablue
Apr 2015
#56
Ability of corporations to squeeze the life out of individual cities, small nations
lostnfound
Apr 2015
#69