4 ms·

Yes -- the problem with negotiating the trade deal in public is the people you intend to screw over have time to use the democratic process to stop it before yo

by wfo 11y ago

Yes -- the problem with negotiating the trade deal in public is the people you intend to screw over have time to use the democratic process to stop it before you can put it into law.

serge2k 11y ago
No, the problem is that you end up handcuffed by various interests in the process of negotiating. If you try to give up one thing (e.g. free trade) in exchange for another (anti-counterfeiting provisions) and you get jumped on as soon as you suggest the first you never get a chance to broach the second. Maybe the solution is to have a mandatory waiting period after the full text is released. 90 days before any votes can take place, something like that. Gives people time to go through and actually evaluate the proposal as a whole.
Caprinicus 11y ago
That's not how this works. The TPP is public before it is implemented, it is secret before it is finalized. If a country has the democratic means to stop it, it can do so after it is finalized but before it is implemented. I'm not saying that I like the TPP as a whole or that some countries aren't getting screwed over, but the negotiation process would be fucktarded if it was public all the way through.
- wfo 11y ago
  Countries aren't getting screwed over, citizens are, certain industries or interests in each country are. These trade deals throw certain sectors of the country under the bus in favor of other sectors as they must. And the ability to rubber stamp a 6,000 page monolithic treaty which has already been agreed to is a complete joke. It's about as democratic as a parent asking a child, "would you like to go to boarding school or boot camp?" The democracy happened during the negotiations and amendments -- at that point the needs of each constituent were considered, included or excluded, compromised. Unfortunately the citizens of these countries or their elected representatives or anyone willing to represent their interests weren't invited to that party. The negotiation would be harder, sure if it were public but that's because making an agreement that is fair is a lot harder than asking corporate lobbyists to narrate a wishlist and typing it up. All they had to do was reconcile the many, many different wishlists (still very hard), not put forth an agreement that actual citizens would approve of (much harder but what they should actually be doing).

by wfo 11y ago

Yes -- the problem with negotiating the trade deal in public is the people you intend to screw over have time to use the democratic process to stop it before you can put it into law.

serge2k 11y ago

No, the problem is that you end up handcuffed by various interests in the process of negotiating. If you try to give up one thing (e.g. free trade) in exchange for another (anti-counterfeiting provisions) and you get jumped on as soon as you suggest the first you never get a chance to broach the second. Maybe the solution is to have a mandatory waiting period after the full text is released. 90 days before any votes can take place, something like that. Gives people time to go through and actually evaluate the proposal as a whole.

Caprinicus 11y ago

That's not how this works. The TPP is public before it is implemented, it is secret before it is finalized. If a country has the democratic means to stop it, it can do so after it is finalized but before it is implemented. I'm not saying that I like the TPP as a whole or that some countries aren't getting screwed over, but the negotiation process would be fucktarded if it was public all the way through.

wfo 11y ago
Countries aren't getting screwed over, citizens are, certain industries or interests in each country are. These trade deals throw certain sectors of the country under the bus in favor of other sectors as they must. And the ability to rubber stamp a 6,000 page monolithic treaty which has already been agreed to is a complete joke. It's about as democratic as a parent asking a child, "would you like to go to boarding school or boot camp?" The democracy happened during the negotiations and amendments -- at that point the needs of each constituent were considered, included or excluded, compromised. Unfortunately the citizens of these countries or their elected representatives or anyone willing to represent their interests weren't invited to that party. The negotiation would be harder, sure if it were public but that's because making an agreement that is fair is a lot harder than asking corporate lobbyists to narrate a wishlist and typing it up. All they had to do was reconcile the many, many different wishlists (still very hard), not put forth an agreement that actual citizens would approve of (much harder but what they should actually be doing).