3 ms·
Opening up trade is bad by default... to those that benefit from the barriers that are in place. I am always suspicious of a lot of emotive campaigning in resp
by kokey 11y ago
Opening up trade is bad by default... to those that benefit from the barriers that are in place. I am always suspicious of a lot of emotive campaigning in response to trade agreements that opens up trade.
- Brakenshire 11y agoIt's not that opening up trade is bad by default, it's that opening up trade is not an absolute value which overrides all other considerations (in this case, an individual's right to protection from harm by third parties, or a democracy's right to make decisions within its own borders).
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- msvalkon 11y agoDid you by chance read the article? This has little to do with opening up trade and much to do with providing ridiculous amount of power to any major corporation. EDIT: Suppose I'm a producer of bottled water from Germany. I bottle a lot of water in California. The Californians vote to move to heavy water rationing and regulation due to the threat of continuous draught. This hurts my business, so should I be allowed, as a corporation, to sue the state of California, have any possible trials and hearings within a closed courtroom and possibly overrule the vote?
- RobertoG 11y agoAgree, the motivation of all this is, at least, worrisome. You should be allowed, as a corporation, to sue the state of California... in California. But this is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about the creation of new special courtrooms above the laws of California, staffed by people that worked for corporations and when they left the job are going to work for corporations again. If this is not worrisome, you tell me what it is.
- beastofthefield 11y agoYou found an unlikely and emotion invoking scenario that wouldn't happen in real life. Most likely it would be a business that is unfairly constrained from trading with US freely or vice versa by arbitrary and nonsensical laws written by misguided anti-growth bureaucrats.
- glesica 11y agoTTIP doesn't open up trade. There have been plenty of articles about this. Actual trade barriers between the participants are already incredibly low. http://www.cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/correction-to-mankiw-economists-actually-agree-just-because-you-call-something-free-trade-doesn-t-make-it-free-trade http://www.cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/correction-to-manki...
- twoodfin 11y agoThere are plenty of ways to have trade barriers that aren't tariffs. Differing regulatory standards, for one.
- glesica 11y agoSure, other things can be considered trade barriers. Different currencies, or even different languages as well. The problem is that most people would prefer to have those differences even if it means less trade, which is why the only way they will get this steaming pile of shit ratified is by trickery and secrecy. Nothing is quite like bringing freedom to people by force...