General Discussion

polly7

(20,582 posts)

17. The people in those poor countries do not 'share the wealth'.

Reply to Hoyt (Reply #15)

Sat Nov 7, 2015, 01:27 PM

Nov 2015

Look it up.

And no, they are not better off !!!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

116 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Just how bad the TPP is - guaranteed profits on EXPECTATIONS of profits [View all] packman Nov 2015 OP

K&R for exposure 2naSalit Nov 2015 #1

Sigh. Again? randome Nov 2015 #2

You need to read what is posted. fasttense Nov 2015 #43

This "Trade Deal"- ruffburr Nov 2015 #3

Hyperbole much? VanillaRhapsody Nov 2015 #77

Denial much? nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #85

They KNOW a Dem will be in the WH, dixiegrrrrl Nov 2015 #4

Yes, that's something I posted here earlier. polly7 Nov 2015 #5

What the hell is an "International Tribunal" anyway? packman Nov 2015 #6

United Nations and WTO. Hoyt Nov 2015 #11

Wrong MFrohike Nov 2015 #35

You really need to do some research before making comments like that. Hoyt Nov 2015 #51

You should read your links MFrohike Nov 2015 #90

Your mistake there is in somehow seeing the WTO as "competing" with TPP, which makes no sense Recursion Nov 2015 #93

Sigh MFrohike Nov 2015 #94

No, you're really just wrong there Recursion Nov 2015 #95

Nope MFrohike Nov 2015 #96

This message was self-deleted by its author Recursion Nov 2015 #97

Actually, they are related. Whether it's WTO or WB is sort of immaterial except to those who play Hoyt Nov 2015 #98

Right MFrohike Nov 2015 #109

That's like saying Medicare is not a government program because private insurance Hoyt Nov 2015 #110

What? MFrohike Nov 2015 #111

Jeez, even the NYT calls them tribunals, not to mention Senator Warren. Hoyt Nov 2015 #112

And? MFrohike Nov 2015 #113

Of course the WTO is the arbitration mechanism. Recursion Nov 2015 #88

Oh? MFrohike Nov 2015 #91

In what sense do you see it as a competing organization? Recursion Nov 2015 #92

Your description of the selection process for "judges" is incomplete BelgianMadCow Nov 2015 #59

You mean World Bank under United Nations. Hoyt Nov 2015 #60

You mean the Stiglitz who was the World Bank's Chief Economist. Hoyt Nov 2015 #61

yes. He became critical of it and isn't there anymore. n/t BelgianMadCow Nov 2015 #62

Every organization deserves criticism. Here's what Stiglitz said when pushed in interview: Hoyt Nov 2015 #63

Bush joked about international law and international lawyers daleo Nov 2015 #67

It's the WTO. The judges are appointed through a process that's gone on for 50 years Recursion Nov 2015 #89

Same dispute mechanism that 150+ countries have signed since 1959. Yet, now, it's an issue. Hoyt Nov 2015 #7

Yes, many countries want to attract jobs and investment. polly7 Nov 2015 #8

Well, the TPP has provisions that help in that respect. Hoyt Nov 2015 #9

Riiiiight. polly7 Nov 2015 #10

They do not "win" most of the time, plus thousands of potential issues are never arbitrated. Hoyt Nov 2015 #12

I don't believe you. I also don't trust one single bit that the people in poorer nations will polly7 Nov 2015 #13

Yet they beg to be part of the agreements. Clearly they are better off than before. Hoyt Nov 2015 #15

The people in those poor countries do not 'share the wealth'. polly7 Nov 2015 #17

Sure they do. Mexican workers are lining up for jobs at Audi for $8/hour vs the 50 cents Hoyt Nov 2015 #19

Because Mexican farmerS were DECIMATED by NAFTA and have polly7 Nov 2015 #21

They were the ones making 50 cents a day. In any evenr, Mexico begged Hoyt Nov 2015 #22

Ok .............. hold on. polly7 Nov 2015 #23

The TPP's arbitration courts are an abomination. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #24

So after 2500 trade agreements worldwide since 1959, the investor dispute mechanism is now an issue. Hoyt Nov 2015 #28

Yup, fasttense Nov 2015 #46

TPP helps them organize. Hoyt Nov 2015 #56

Many of those countries adopted or inherited a system of civil law. They don't know JDPriestly Nov 2015 #52

all those European countries, including England and Denmark, sign the agreements. Hoyt Nov 2015 #55

With the exception of England, I believe they are civil law countries. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #57

They sign the agreements, yielding to arbitration, which is also in EU agreements. Hoyt Nov 2015 #58

The bottom 70% of the world's population have seen large income gains in the past 25 years. pampango Nov 2015 #27

Tell that to them. I don't think they'll believe it. nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #29

Excellent post. Hoyt Nov 2015 #30

It's bullshit. nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #31

Analysis is bullshit. Fears are real. n/t pampango Nov 2015 #36

Nah. Not fears. polly7 Nov 2015 #38

Please post your analysis of global income changes. pampango Nov 2015 #39

Post em yourself. I just have articles showing how 'real' people have polly7 Nov 2015 #41

Real people have suffered and real people have benefitted. That's the conclusion of pampango Nov 2015 #47

84 people own 52% of global wealth...they have trade policies to thank for it. Rex Nov 2015 #33

We do indeed need to 'sprite the 1%'. Progressive countries do that with progressive taxation, pampango Nov 2015 #37

I wonder how much of that is due solely to China? hifiguy Nov 2015 #66

You mean their 1%-ers want in. The 99% are 100% against them. n/t eridani Nov 2015 #69

Even the lower middle class here are the greedy 1%ers to rest of world. Hoyt Nov 2015 #70

The purpose of "trade" agreements is to force poor people in rich countries to give money to-- eridani Nov 2015 #71

Ask a Mexican who was making 50 cents a day, who is now working for Audi at $8/hr Hoyt Nov 2015 #73

All the ones forced off their land by privatization of the ejidos came here eridani Nov 2015 #76

Luke Krugman says, too many people blame NAFTA for things caused by other factors. Hoyt Nov 2015 #78

Privatization of rural communal land was bloody well not caused by other factors eridani Nov 2015 #79

+1,000,000. nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #80

Exactly. polly7 Nov 2015 #81

Apparently poisoning poor people with mine tailings is done only to help them n/t eridani Nov 2015 #83

Yep, I'm sure we'll see a 'study' soon that shows us just exactly how. nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #84

This is not about trade. This is about a CORPORATE COUP. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #25

Exactly right! nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #26

+1 You nailed it. Enthusiast Nov 2015 #45

Thank you! polly7 Nov 2015 #48

Corporations lose sometimes in our courts. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #32

corporate whores can always justify corporate whoring Skittles Nov 2015 #68

Excuses are easy to make up. And that is what corporate whores do. They don't have to be GoneFishin Nov 2015 #74

You're right, Skittles. nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #82

The truth shall set you free Progressive dog Nov 2015 #14

We are going to have trade. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #18

No country would allow trade on terms that require Progressive dog Nov 2015 #34

I am very familiar with NAFTA's arbitration clause. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #54

Lot of trade stuff you oppose Progressive dog Nov 2015 #64

I am opposed to trade agreements that give power that should be exercised by JDPriestly Nov 2015 #72

Bullshit. TPP is a corporate coup. And "we" don't get shit when jobs are sent overseas unless by GoneFishin Nov 2015 #75

TPP is not a corporate coup. Progressive dog Nov 2015 #100

You are advocating precisely what FDR wanted to avoid. pampango Nov 2015 #50

And the corporations have so exploited and dominated and bullied FDR's ideal JDPriestly Nov 2015 #53

So we should give up on FDR's ideals and go back to the Coolidge/Hoover trade policy - high tariffs, pampango Nov 2015 #101

We should renegotiate all of our trade agreements to make sure they protect human rights, not JDPriestly Nov 2015 #102

I'll stick with FDR, Sweden and Germany on trade policy but I do agree that all agreements pampango Nov 2015 #103

I know what FDR wanted. I don't think it included having corporate arbitration panels JDPriestly Nov 2015 #104

The concept of neutral arbitration in trade disputes was introduced by FDR's ITO. pampango Nov 2015 #105

It is undemocratic. FDR was not all-seeing and all-knowing. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #106

You have your opinion. I'll side with FDR, Sweden and Germany. n/t pampango Nov 2015 #107

More horseshit about how TPP has something to do with "trade" eridani Nov 2015 #86

This! nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #87

More bullshit that TPP is about corporate takeover. Progressive dog Nov 2015 #99

Yes there is--which is why Canada is the most sued country in the world eridani Nov 2015 #108

And the US has won ALL the cases under NAFTA Progressive dog Nov 2015 #114

Fuck corporations suing governments for not getting the profits they expect n/t eridani Nov 2015 #116

So true, but the American people including people here on DU, are so poorly educated about JDPriestly Nov 2015 #16

I see the "but it is just like all the other trade deals" is still be thrown about. Rex Nov 2015 #20

K/R marmar Nov 2015 #40

All Made Possible By The Sell Out President And Former Secretary Of State cantbeserious Nov 2015 #42

Kicked and recommended to the Max! Enthusiast Nov 2015 #44

Great article, packman, thank you. +1000. nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #49

K & R AzDar Nov 2015 #65

The reinstitution of slavery or feudalism is the end game. hifiguy Nov 2015 #115