It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TTip leak. Greenpeace releases documents on Monday.

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2016 @ 11:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: jacobe001

Why don't you ask the American Corporations about that, that got in bed with Communist China?

You do know 250 Million Chinese had their lands stolen and bull dozed over and forced to go work in the cities?
That is how Communism works, which you seem to support


Well, if those American Corporations are also in bed with them, then isn't that also how Capitalism works as well???




posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: onequestion

Nothing. We are selling nothing to China.



China among many other countries have protectionist measures to protect their economy and workers.
While in our country, they threw the doors wide open for unskilled and skilled Americans to compete globally with third world and slave labor so that shareholders could make bank.
What a novel concept that a government should work for all citizens.
If you want a box of fruit loops in China, it will set you back 15 bucks


www.idealtaxes.com...
China's multiple barriers to American products



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: jacobe001




China among many other countries have protectionist measures to protect their economy and workers.
Yeah. I know.


While in our country, they threw the doors wide open for unskilled and skilled Americans to compete globally with third world and slave labor so that shareholders could make bank.
Yeah. It was nice when no one else had our industrial capability. Too bad that changed.


If you want a box of fruit loops in China, it will set you back 15 bucks
I don't like Fruit Loops. I probably wouldn't want to live in China either. I would like to visit, but I wouldn't order Fruit Loops.

edit on 5/2/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: onequestion


Why don't you just say that's it's widening the profit margins benefitting the shareholders
Yeah. I know you don't like the idea of profit.


The profits they are making are not due to Capitalism though but do to Corporatism where the workers have no freedoms or rights. Bargaining Power for all parties is required under Capitalism. That does not exist in China.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:05 AM
link   
a reply to: jacobe001


The profits they are making are not due to Capitalism though but do to Corporatism where the workers have no freedoms or rights.

Actually, I was talking about profits by US companies, if you follow the context.


In any case, this thread is not actually about China anyway.




edit on 5/2/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:08 AM
link   
a reply to: jacobe001

Corporatism/Capitalism, what's the difference besides the name, really???

That driving force of American Capitalism/Corporatism is being spread abroad. You know so other countries can get a piece too.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: mOjOm

These trade deals are never good for the people they are supposedly.meant to serve they are for the major shareholders and the Elite that's it


Until they run out of other peoples money which is the consumer
At which point it will be time to blame what is left of the unions or it is the $8 hr burger flipper which caused all the problems



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: jacobe001

As those on the Right keep telling me, Communism is the next logical step to Socialism.

I guess Corporatism is the next logical step in Capitalism.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: onequestion
How much would those products cost if they were manufactured here? Would people buy them? Why, if they are more expensive? Why would manufacturers produce something if it means that people won't buy them or would lose money selling them?




I don't know, why not ask Apple about that?
When they started selling their iphones here using Communist Labor, shareholders were making money hand over fist

time.com...
Apple’s $649 iPhone 6 Reportedly Costs $200 to Make

I guess they would not make as much profits eh?

Say...we know the limit on minimum wage, what is the maximum limit for shareholders?
There is no limit which shoots right to the problem, It is never enough especially when you can sell out your country to third world labor



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: jacobe001

Don't forget that a few farmers and tech co.pabies made 120 billion

Even tho we lost 350 billion

Your trying to talk to a wall



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jacobe001




That is how Communism works, which you seem to support

No.
I don't support communism. Quite the opposite, if anything. I think private ownership is a far superior system to government ownership.

Seems the Chinese have been realizing that more and more. Privatization of industry has been increasing there.



Does this seem like Capitalism to you for the workers or do you mean only to business owner side of the deal?


www.nytimes.com...

China’s Great Uprooting: Moving 250 Million Into Cities


The shift is occurring so quickly, and the potential costs are so high, that some fear rural China is once again the site of radical social engineering. Over the past decades, the Communist Party has flip-flopped on peasants’ rights to use land: giving small plots to farm during 1950s land reform, collectivizing a few years later, restoring rights at the start of the reform era and now trying to obliterate small landholders.

Across China, bulldozers are leveling villages that date to long-ago dynasties.


Where was the citizens and workers rights in this?



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: jacobe001

Corporatism/Capitalism, what's the difference besides the name, really???

That driving force of American Capitalism/Corporatism is being spread abroad. You know so other countries can get a piece too.


There is a big difference
Capitalism involves the voluntary exchange of goods, services and labor.
It all has to be voluntary and not forced

When you open up the market place to others that are not playing the same game, it puts our country and its workers at a disadvantage.

We would not tolerate what they have in China here, but by expanding our markets globally, we have done just that since they are now part of us.

The workers need more rights and freedoms abroad or the trade deals need to be flushed down the toilet



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jacobe001


The profits they are making are not due to Capitalism though but do to Corporatism where the workers have no freedoms or rights.

Actually, I was talking about profits by US companies, if you follow the context.


In any case, this thread is not actually about China anyway.





If we are doing business with China then it has everything to do with us as well.
They become part of our market place with supply and demand and all the economic rules that go along with it



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: jacobe001

As those on the Right keep telling me, Communism is the next logical step to Socialism.

I guess Corporatism is the next logical step in Capitalism.


Yep, Corporatism brought us all these "Free" Trade Pacts going back 30 years that have been a disaster for the majority of Americans



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: jacobe001

I guess they would not make as much profits eh?
Yup. And when it is no longer profitable enough the product is dropped. Investors go away. Good news for everyone.


Say...we know the limit on minimum wage, what is the maximum limit for shareholders?
None. Nor is there a limit on how much they can lose. Shareholders don't like losing money. Limiting gains does not encourage investment.

 


If we are doing business with China then it has everything to do with us as well.
They become part of our market place with supply and demand and all the economic rules that go along with it
Both China and Europe, as well as a number of other places are part of our market (as well as our supply). The agreement of the OP is not about China.

edit on 5/2/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: earthling42



Also their is a disagreement on ISDS (Investor-state dispute settlement).
The EU want's a public institute where arbitration cases are settled, the US is opposed to this, they do not want it.


I am absolutely NOT a fan of ISDS. However it has been in EVERY SINGLE TRADE AGREEMENT for decades including NAFTA and TPP.

The USA has always insisted on this clause. Always. Why would it suddenly switch teams? Short answer it didn't. Some Congressmen expressed unease over its inclusion in TTIP, but that is a long way from the US being opposed to it - Congress has no role in treaty making (the President negotiates them, the Senate approves/disapproves).

In fact it was the EU that balked at the ISDS in TTIP and caused its abandonment

ISDS is designed, partly, to prevent foreign investments from being arbitrarily seized (nationalized) by the foreign government. You wouldn't like to spend a bazillion bucks in Sandoilistan only to have that investment nationalized without compensation, would you? Tobacco companies seem to think it prevents governments from implementing public health regulations (Phillip-Morris sued Australia (2011) for requiring 'plain label packaging' - and lost by the way).

I don't want my investments being seized, but I don't like the way some people think it is a road to exploitation. There are other ways to protect investments, the ISDS is to open to abuse, in my opinion.

In response to the Phillip-Morris suit, the (then) Australian Government declared:

The Government has not and will not accept provisions that limit its capacity to put health warnings or plain packaging requirements on tobacco products or its ability to continue the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme... In the past, Australian Governments have sought the inclusion of investor-state dispute resolution procedures in trade agreements with developing countries at the behest of Australian businesses. The Gillard Government will discontinue this practice.


Of course the Government changed and the new Government flipped and has approved several trade treaties, including with China, that includes in ISDS.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 03:42 AM
link   
a reply to: earthling42

20 minutes from now there will be a press conference.

And TTIP will go BOOOOM....
xD


edit on 2 5 2016 by DerBeobachter because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 04:30 AM
link   
The documents are published online.

Mods, can you please insert the link to the documents into the OP of this topic?

Thanks in advance.
edit on 2-5-2016 by earthling42 because: Mod request



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 05:03 AM
link   
If the US had a larger manufacturing base, it might have more product to sell.

Laws are not the only way to reduce Chinese imports. People could stop buying it. Do people really need about half of the stuff they sell? Doubt it.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 05:38 AM
link   
To me, Phage reads as though he is pro GMO, pro big business, and pro American hegemony, I don't like the reports I have read of GMO's, I don't like the way American 'big business' work's and it seems to me, DC likes to boss the world , I thought 'empire' died with the British one, okay, the Russian one.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join