3 ms·

TPP is designed to formalize the reality that corporations tell governments what to do, not the other way round. Why else would governments sign away control of

TPP is designed to formalize the reality that corporations tell governments what to do, not the other way round. Why else would governments sign away control of their own economy to secret tribunals appointed by the self same corporations.

maxerickson 11y ago
Countries can withdraw from the treaty. As a practical matter the forces that led them to negotiate it in the first place will tend to prevent that from happening, but control simply is not being signed away.
- jgome 11y ago
  But why would they? They are ruled by the very same upper classes and large corporations that rule all other countries... And their ideology is that of the "competition" (that is, supported and subsidized by the state) and profits at all costs. They make their own class everywhere, no matter their nationality.
  - maxerickson 11y ago
    To me, a phrase like "sign away control" implies a limited ability to change course. But the treaty requires the ongoing consent of each country. As a citizen of the US with a certain employment profile, I believe that the TPP mostly benefits me. Which doesn't mean I support it, I don't have a strong opinion either way. I think much of the criticism of the process is fair, but I think a lot of people are also looking past the broader motivations of it (bringing countries towards the US before they go towards China).
    - jgome 11y ago
      Actually, I live in one of the countries that "benefit" from this treaty, and people here think the same as you: it benefits the US, some of the US people, and US corporations, not the people of this country. You see, I don't see people in Chile wanting tighter IP/patent/copyright law, people in Chile also don't want to give their sovereignity to a random foreign court (like it happens with, say, Argentina)... but quite the contrary. Except, of course, for those who make money off these laws and treaties, because, for them, the TPP is most probably a winning bet. Why wouldn't them want to sue their own government to profit even more? Why would, then, they avoid treaties that force their own government to follow the rules of a foreign country that is so admired and beloved by rich people (and wannabes, too) like the US?

maxerickson 11y ago

Countries can withdraw from the treaty. As a practical matter the forces that led them to negotiate it in the first place will tend to prevent that from happening, but control simply is not being signed away.

jgome 11y ago
But why would they? They are ruled by the very same upper classes and large corporations that rule all other countries... And their ideology is that of the "competition" (that is, supported and subsidized by the state) and profits at all costs. They make their own class everywhere, no matter their nationality.
- maxerickson 11y ago
  To me, a phrase like "sign away control" implies a limited ability to change course. But the treaty requires the ongoing consent of each country. As a citizen of the US with a certain employment profile, I believe that the TPP mostly benefits me. Which doesn't mean I support it, I don't have a strong opinion either way. I think much of the criticism of the process is fair, but I think a lot of people are also looking past the broader motivations of it (bringing countries towards the US before they go towards China).
  - jgome 11y ago
    Actually, I live in one of the countries that "benefit" from this treaty, and people here think the same as you: it benefits the US, some of the US people, and US corporations, not the people of this country. You see, I don't see people in Chile wanting tighter IP/patent/copyright law, people in Chile also don't want to give their sovereignity to a random foreign court (like it happens with, say, Argentina)... but quite the contrary. Except, of course, for those who make money off these laws and treaties, because, for them, the TPP is most probably a winning bet. Why wouldn't them want to sue their own government to profit even more? Why would, then, they avoid treaties that force their own government to follow the rules of a foreign country that is so admired and beloved by rich people (and wannabes, too) like the US?