General Discussion

Jim Beard

(2,535 posts)

28. You are correct and I want the truth rather than talking point.

Sun Feb 28, 2016, 11:36 PM

Feb 2016

I went to Kos and then the link to the original article. This is what it said....

USTR said it initiated this dispute in February 2013 because it considered that India's domestic content requirements are inconsistent with WTO rules that prohibit discrimination against imported products. The US, it said, has consistently made the case that India can achieve its clean energy goals faster and more cost-effectively by allowing solar technologies to be imported from the US and other solar producers.

Read more at: http://www.oneindia.com/international/wto-rules-against-india-on-us-solar-exports-2023454.html
World Trade

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

U.S. Wins WTO Case to destroy India's Solar Power Industry [View all] Bubzer Feb 2016 OP

I don't want trade agreements if they restrict communities from acting locally in their best Ed Suspicious Feb 2016 #1

What I want to know is this.... Bubzer Feb 2016 #3

The early 90s with NAFTA and WTO GATS. They were/are the two prototypes for US-style FTAs. Baobab Feb 2016 #14

Can you think of a better Republican whinefest Gabi Hayes Feb 2016 #4

The republican base has wanted the US out of the WTO (and the UN, the IMF, the World Bank and pampango Feb 2016 #5

The WTO is like the Mafia, you can't just leave. they know that, Thats just an act. Baobab Feb 2016 #16

Bernie was co-sponsor of a bill in 2005 to have the US withdraw from the WTO. pampango Feb 2016 #20

Yes, i totally support Bernie Sanders- Okay, here the section is GATS Article XXI procedure. Baobab Feb 2016 #29

None of your links have anything to do with "To leave the US would have to compensate the injured pampango Feb 2016 #39

USA!! USA!! Spreading democracy...or, something. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2016 #2

as I understand it, India can still build its own solar power industry RussBLib Feb 2016 #6

You're correct. This article is highly misleading. First, the WTO is a voluntary agreement and okaawhatever Feb 2016 #13

You are correct and I want the truth rather than talking point. Jim Beard Feb 2016 #28

Thanks for that. I'm going to read the article now. nt okaawhatever Feb 2016 #30

More BS by the BS fans, no doubt. looks like a win for the US to me. Jitter65 Feb 2016 #15

Exporting LNG may cause a lot of homelessness-as well as a building boomlet in the US Baobab Feb 2016 #17

"Where have you been the last 20 years?" (Joking) (thats okay, I know.. here!) Baobab Feb 2016 #31

The WTO is a paper tiger. closeupready Feb 2016 #7

Are you kidding? India signed the agreement to prevent exactly this from occurring. randome Feb 2016 #9

No, I'm not kidding. The WTO does NOT enforce their rulings. closeupready Feb 2016 #11

Sure they do, look at the WTO US Online Gambling Case Baobab Feb 2016 #18

Which remained unenforced. So you reinforce my point. closeupready Feb 2016 #21

All international agencies are tools malaise Feb 2016 #8

And few of those international agencies existed under Herbert Hoover. FDR started pampango Feb 2016 #10

Partly true but I'm thinking more of the multilaterals malaise Feb 2016 #12

The real point is that prior to FDR, none of these international institutions existed. Under Herbert pampango Feb 2016 #19

FDR was in a world of 100% tariffs. jeff47 Feb 2016 #26

"The solutions for a 100% tariff world are not necessarily the solutions for a 0% tariff world."Good pampango Feb 2016 #38

Good response ut in diminishing the role of excessive nationalism malaise Feb 2016 #33

FDR and Truman proposed and supported the diminishment of 'national sovereigty' represented by pampango Feb 2016 #36

True but members of the 'club' are often given a pass malaise Feb 2016 #37

Obama Administration and india sending message to disregard Bernie and his talk about Baobab Feb 2016 #32

Wow, you're going to be really surprised and disappointed to find out where Sanders stands on this Recursion Feb 2016 #34

If you think this is about Obama malaise Feb 2016 #35

IMO this ruling is probably good for India LittleBlue Feb 2016 #22

our doesn't destroy their industry . it just means they compete with foreigners JI7 Feb 2016 #23

Who're you kidding... they'll be undercut by companies with old money. Bubzer Feb 2016 #24

isn't this a new industry ? one problem in India was lack of competition and JI7 Feb 2016 #25

It's a new industry, yes... lacking much in the way of support... Bubzer Feb 2016 #27