the Trans-Pacific Partnership

economiccolla pse.com

infowars

This particular article has some great highlights, like it has been in the works since 2008.

The countries it involves: the United States, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Peru, Brunei, Singapore, Vietnam and Malaysia

The impact it will have on the American economy, or lack there of with their national debt.

As it is stated, please pass on the message and read the article for if this bill passes in America, there is slim chance that the other nations will not follow, IMO.

The TPP would pretty much be the death knell of the American economy. Not only that but provisions in it actually give legal authority to the laws of foreign countries here inside the US! WTH?
Even giving this consideration is treason in my mind.
This is the fast lane to economic ruin.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


The Coup de grâce of America and the ushering in of the global alliance or . . .

It is a pretty standard trage agreement. We have tons of them all pretty much the same. Nothing new or excititng beyond the dynamic economic nature of the nations involved. I would suggest reading the agreement for what it is not getting your info from the sites posted, they are either pushing and agenda or not very bright.

reply to post by MrSpad


just seeing your name makes me disregard anything you say and makes me smile. Thanks buddy. hhahahahaha. Glad your opinion is still around. hahahahahaha

Originally posted by MrSpad
It is a pretty standard trage agreement. We have tons of them all pretty much the same. Nothing new or excititng beyond the dynamic economic nature of the nations involved. I would suggest reading the agreement for what it is not getting your info from the sites posted, they are either pushing and agenda or not very bright.

nothing to see hear?
ok lets see,
corporations can sue governments for protecting citizen health
panels are unelected lawers who are not judges
court costs to bring cases are overly expensive
removes the right to copy for educational purposes
higher drug costs
forces GMOs onto countries that dont want them
removes liability for causing death for corporations
stops countries from labelling hazards eg toxins (cigarette warning labels NZ)

i could go on how bad it is but i think your here to say the opposite

its a corporate coup over democracy, and your in favour of being beholden to the largest international corps over sovereignty.

go read it before you spout non sense

xploder

Originally posted by MrSpad
It is a pretty standard trage agreement. We have tons of them all pretty much the same. Nothing new or excititng beyond the dynamic economic nature of the nations involved. I would suggest reading the agreement for what it is not getting your info from the sites posted, they are either pushing and agenda or not very bright.

ps every single word is secret,
how do you call it democratic when only big business is "allowed" to read and comment on it before it becomes law?
who do you work for?

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


Well said and don't worry about MrSpad its his/her MO.

*ahem*
Elections, contrary to previously held beliefs, have consequences. I would expect that any American manufacturing laborers who wake up one morning and discover their job has crossed the Pacific into Asia immediately go to their bathroom and give themself a stern stare in the mirror.

Originally posted by MrSpad
We have tons of them all pretty much the same.

Agreed, they all SUCK and they are all unfairly lopsided against America's working and middle class' well being. Glad to see we finally agree on something, Spad.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


from the EFF,


about the TPP in cartoon form so its easy to watch

xploder

It's all part of the bigger NWO plan ...this thread has a good vid worth watching to give you a idea who is behind the curtain pulling the strings www.abovetopsecret.com... Its all falling into place in our own times ...peace S&F

reply to post by MrSpad

It is a pretty standard trage agreement. We have tons of them all pretty much the same. Nothing new or excititng....

OH Thank you for such a GREAT lead in.

So lets look at the OTHER trade agreements.

World Trade Organization:

In February, a private organization with unique powers over world industry, trade and agriculture, issued a Preliminary Draft Ruling on a three-year-old case. The case was brought by the Bush Administration in May 2003 against European Union rules hindering the spread of genetically-engineered plants and foods. The WTO ruling, which is to be final in December, will have more influence over life and death on this planet than most imagine.

The ruling was issued by a special three-man tribunal of the World Trade Organization, in Geneva Switzerland. The WTO decision will open the floodgates to the forced introduction of genetically-manipulated plants and food products– GMO, or genetically-modified organisms as they are technically known– into the world’s most important agriculture production region, the European Union.

The WTO case arose from a formal complaint filed by the governments of the United States, Canada and Argentina...

The WTO tribunal recommended that the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), the world trade policeman, call on the EU to bring its practices ‘into conformity with its obligations under the (WTO’s) SPS Agreement.’ Failure to comply with WTO demands can result in hundreds of millions dollars in annual fines....

SPS stands for Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. On the surface it sounds as if health concerns were part of the WTO considerations. The reality is the opposite. Only minimal health standards are to be allowed to be enforced under WTO free trade rules...

Today the EU must pay a fine of $150 million yearly to maintain its ban on the US hormone-fed beef. WTO rules in effect put free-trade interests of agribusiness above national health concerns....
www.globalresearch.ca...

The WTO was passed in 1995. In 1996 the FDA and USA revamped the nation's food safety regulations replacing the old standards with the international HACCP standards and closing down food testing labs. Inspectors were no longer supposed to inspect food. Instead they were to inspect the paperwork produced by the corporations. The result was a doubling of food borne disease in the USA. This increase in sickness, caused by the adoption of international rules was then hyped by the US government and the media into a reason for imposing WTO rules on American farmers. (SEE: SHIELDING THE GIANT: USDA's “Don't Look, Don't Know” Policy )

The damage done to America's farmers and our right to grow food is just now showing up.
Trojan Horse Law: The Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009

Ignorance about the law’s broad reach (and how it will be construed by the courts) has thwarted opposition to the bill, which will likely pass Congress. For example, a newspaper claims the bill “doesn’t regulate home gardens.” ... like most federal laws, only purports to reach activities that affect “interstate commerce.” To an uninformed layperson or journalist, that “sounds as if it might not reach local and mom-and-pop operators at all.”

But lawyers familiar with our capricious legal system know better. The Supreme Court ruled in Wickard v. Filburn (1942) that even home gardens (in that case, a farmer’s growing wheat for his own consumption) are subject to federal laws that regulate interstate commerce. Economists and scholars have criticized this decision, but it continues to be cited and followed in Supreme Court rulings, such as those applying federal anti-drug laws to consumption of even home-grown medical marijuana. Indeed, many court decisions allow Congress to define as “interstate commerce” even non-commercial conduct that doesn’t cross state lines — something directly at odds with Rep. DeLauro’s claims.

reply to post by MrSpad


What about another TRADE AGREEMENT, NAFTA?
COHA – The Failures of NAFTA

Failures for the United States
....The combination of increased imports from Mexico and a growing trade deficit have led to job losses, mostly in high-wage, non-college-educated manufacturing positions, in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Colombia.(9) When these displaced American workers later re-enter the job market, they find difficulty securing new jobs and often have to settle for markedly lower wages. As of March 2011, the United States has lost approximately 700,000 jobs due to disruptions in supply chains brought about by NAFTA.(10)

In 1992, Gary Hufbauer.. the Institute of International Economics, predicted that “NAFTA will generate a $7 to $9 billion [USD] surplus that would ensure the net creation of 170,000 jobs in the U.S. economy the first year.”(5) However, quite the opposite occurred; the U.S. trade deficit with both Mexico and Canada increased, costing the United States an estimated 150,000 jobs in 1994 alone... while the United States actually had a trade surplus with Mexico of approximately $1 billion USD in both 1993 and 1994, by 2007 the growing trade deficit with Mexico had reached an all-time high, at $74 billion USD.(7) ...under NAFTA, the U.S. encountered the new problem of “revolving door exports.” Most U.S. exports to Mexico have consisted of mechanical parts, which are used to assemble goods in Mexican factories that are then imported back into the United States for cheap, a process known as the maquiladora system. Such exports have doubled since the implementation of NAFTA...

Failures for Mexico
....The poverty rate in Mexico rose from 45.6 percent in 1994 to 50.3 percent in 2000, and the number continues to climb.(11) In 2010, the World Bank reported the most recent poverty rate in Mexico at 51.3 percent.(12)....

Perhaps the most devastating blow dealt by NAFTA to the Mexican economy was the near destruction of Mexico’s agricultural sector, in which 2 million farm workers lost their jobs and 8 million small-scale farmers were forced to sell their land at disastrously low prices, or desert it, due to sharply declining food prices.(13) Importantly, the U.S. government subsidizes many domestically produced agricultural products, allowing the products to be sold to Mexico at prices 30 percent below the cost of production.(14) Thus, after NAFTA’s inauguration, U.S. agricultural exports crowded out Mexican agriculture produce, and the United States became the main food supplier of Mexico....

Due to the decline in the competitiveness of Mexican agricultural products, the rural population has been pushed from the countryside into the cities to seek employment in the booming manufacturing sector, one of the many paradoxical consequences of NAFTA. Many American corporations took advantage of this plethora of cheap labor and constructed factories along the U.S.-Mexico border, creating the the maquiladora system....

GEE, that sounds familiar!

It is EXACTLY what was done to the American farmer by the Committee for Economic Development.

...America saw its agricultural system intentionally subjected to political policies that radically transformed it. What was once a decentralized system that provided a means to self sufficiency and independence for tens of millions of farmers was purposefully centralized into a capital-intensive fossil-fuel dependent system that restructured local economies, permitting their wealth to be extracted by what are now transnational cartels

This transformation was the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful -- though unelected -- financial and industrial executives who wanted to drastically change agricultural practices in the US to better serve their collective corporate financial agenda. This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations....

In a number of reports written over a few decades, CED recommended that farming "resources" -- that is, farmers -- be reduced. In its 1945 report ... describes how agricultural production can be better organized to fit to business needs....

Their plan was so effective and so faithfully executed by its operatives in the US government that by 1974 the CED couldn't help but congratulate itself in another agricultural report called "A New US Farm Policy for Changing World Food Needs" for the efficiency of the tactics they employed to drive farmers from their land.[5]

The human cost of CED's plans were exacting and enormous.

CED's plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities. The loss of a farm also means the loss of identity, and many farmers' lives ended in suicide...
www.opednews.com...

Looks like the Committee for Economic Development, one of the Round Table groups is exporting a very successful plan.

When statesman/businessman Cecil Rhodes died in 1902 he was one of the wealthiest men in the world. In his will Rhodes devoted his entire fortune to the creation of the Round Table groups, the purpose of which would ultimately be to form a world government, or as he said in the will, “To and for the establishment, promotion and development of a Secret Society, the true aim and object whereof shall be for the extension of British rule throughout the world.”

Clinton who signed both the WTO and NAFTA was a Rhodes Scholar. Bush started the campaign for WTO and NAFTA and Clinton convinced Congress to ratify it. The difference between Democrats and Republicans is only in the minds of the voters. Their traitorous goals are the same.

reply to post by crimvelvet


The last part of that comment got cut. Here it is -
GEE, that sounds familiar!

It is EXACTLY what was done to the American farmer by the Committee for Economic Development.

...America saw its agricultural system intentionally subjected to political policies that radically transformed it. What was once a decentralized system that provided a means to self sufficiency and independence for tens of millions of farmers was purposefully centralized into a capital-intensive fossil-fuel dependent system that restructured local economies, permitting their wealth to be extracted by what are now transnational cartels

This transformation was the result of organized plans developed by a group of highly powerful -- though unelected -- financial and industrial executives who wanted to drastically change agricultural practices in the US to better serve their collective corporate financial agenda. This group, called the Committee for Economic Development, was officially established in 1942 as a sister organization to the Council on Foreign Relations....

In a number of reports written over a few decades, CED recommended that farming "resources" -- that is, farmers -- be reduced. In its 1945 report ... describes how agricultural production can be better organized to fit to business needs....

Their plan was so effective and so faithfully executed by its operatives in the US government that by 1974 the CED couldn't help but congratulate itself in another agricultural report called "A New US Farm Policy for Changing World Food Needs" for the efficiency of the tactics they employed to drive farmers from their land.[5]

The human cost of CED's plans were exacting and enormous.

CED's plans resulted in widespread social upheaval throughout rural America, ripping apart the fabric of its society destroying its local economies. They also resulted in a massive migration to larger cities. The loss of a farm also means the loss of identity, and many farmers' lives ended in suicide...
www.opednews.com...

Looks like the Committee for Economic Development, one of the Round Table groups is exporting a very successful plan.

When statesman/businessman Cecil Rhodes died in 1902 he was one of the wealthiest men in the world. In his will Rhodes devoted his entire fortune to the creation of the Round Table groups, the purpose of which would ultimately be to form a world government, or as he said in the will, “To and for the establishment, promotion and development of a Secret Society, the true aim and object whereof shall be for the extension of British rule throughout the world.”

Clinton who signed both the WTO and NAFTA was a Rhodes Scholar. Bush started the campaign for WTO and NAFTA and Clinton convinced Congress to ratify it. The difference between Democrats and Republicans is only in the minds of the voters. Their traitorous goals are the same.

reply to post by MrSpad



NAFTA and WTO were just warm-ups I haven't covered the big 'Trade Organization' The European Union.

West European nations create the Council of Europe in 1949. Six countries sign a treaty to run their heavy industries – coal and steel – under a common management. In this way, none can on its own make the weapons of war to turn against the other, as in the past. The six are Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.

In 1957, building on the success of the Coal and Steel Treaty, the six countries expand cooperation to other economic sectors. They sign the Treaty of Rome, creating the European Economic Community (EEC), or ‘ common market ’.
europa.eu...

Pascal Lamy was the two term Director-General of the World Trade Organization. It is interesting to see his vision of the world especially since he wrote that the decision to form a world government was made in the 1930's.

Lamy spend years in the EU before moving on to the WTO.

When Delors became President of the European Commission in 1984, he took Lamy with him to serve as chef de cabinet, which he did until the end of Delors' term in 1994. During his time there, Lamy became known as the Beast of the Berlaymont, the Gendarme and Exocet due to his habit of ordering civil servants, even Directors-General (head of departments) "precisely what to do – or else." He was seen as ruling Delor's office with a "rod of iron", with no-one able to bypass or manipulate him and those who tried being "banished to one of the less pleasant European postings".[2] Lamy briefly moved into business at Crédit Lyonnais. Promoted to second in command, he was involved in the restructuring and privatisation of the bank. Returning to the European Commission in 1999, he was appointed European Commissioner for Trade by Commission President Romano Prodi. Lamy served to the expiry of the commission's term in 2004. His ability to manage the powerful civil servants in his department was noted... en.wikipedia.org...

So what is Lamy's vision?

Global Governance: Lessons from Europe

What can the world learn about global governance from the diplomatic model of the European Union?

The European Union is the story of a desired, defined and organized interdependence between states....


Growing interdependence requires that our laws, our social norms and values, our mechanisms for framing human behavior be examined, debated, understood and operated together as coherently as possible. This is what would provide the basis for effective sustainable development in its economic, social and environmental dimensions....

governance needs to provide leadership, the incarnation of vision, of political energy, of drive....

needs to provide legitimacy, which is essential to ensure ownership over decisions which lead to change — ownership to prevent the built-in bias towards resistance to modifying the status quo....

a governance system must be coherent. Compromises would need to be found....

“good” global governance — a system which offers a good balance between leadership, efficiency and legitimacy, and which ensures coherence....


What marks the essence of the European governance paradigm is the coming together of a political will, a goal to be attained...

The fact that in an organization like the World Trade Organization, decisions are taken by consensus and where each country has one vote may not be enough to create a sense of legitimacy in the actions of the organization. More is required....

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has proposed with the creation of a Charter for Sustainable Economic Activity. It is a commendable effort to provide a “new global economic contract,” to anchor economic globalization on a bedrock of ethical principles and values which would renew the trust that citizens need to have that globalization can indeed work for them.

Among the many regional integration attempts, the European Union remains the laboratory of international governance — the place where the new technological frontier of international governance is being tested.

In another article Lamy writes.

...the international system is founded on the principle and politics of national sovereignty: the Wesphalian order of 1648 remains very much alive in the international architecture today. In the absence of a truly global government, global governance results from the action of sovereign States. It is inter-national. Between nations...

But it does not suffice to establish informal groupings or specialized international organizations... In fact, the Wesphalian order is a challenge in itself. The recent crisis has demonstrated it brutally....

on the question of efficiency, Europe scores in my view rather highly. Thanks to the primacy of EU law over national law. Thanks to the work of the European Court of Justice in ensuring enforcement and respect for the rule of law. And thanks to a clear articulation between the Commission, the Parliament, and the European Court of Justice. It also scores highly from the point of view of redistribution policies. The European structural funds and cohesion policies have overall played a key role in the development of European regions and Member States....

If you read what Lamy has written there is absolutely no question on what the goals actually are. The destruction of our sovereign nations.

reply to post by whatzshaken


There are a couple more comments about LAMY I wish to make.

Lamy, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair are all lecturers of the Fabian Founded London School of Economics where world leaders in economics, banking, industry and politics are trained. People like David Rockefeller, JF Kennedy and George Soros. Lord Anthony Giddens, former head of LSE is author of a book on The Third Way. FDR and Wilson both had high praise for The Third Way and they shifted America from a ‘free market’ toward “Third Way” that is government – corporation “cooperation” Can you say Neo-Corporatism? We now called it a “Mixed Economy” instead of “fascist Third Way” since that got a bit tainted during W.W.II.

As an economist friend noted:

Realize that the capitalist urge is not toward a competitive market. It’s the very LAST thing any profit maximizer wants. Even in Adam Smith’s “The Wealth Of Nations” he recognizes that ~’Rairly do men of means gather, even for merryment and [discourse?] but that the conversation turns to ways to [restrict competition and raise prices]’

What a profit maximizer wants is a monopoly where they can achieve the profit maximizing price point. Not competition. No “market” with many sellers.

So watch what GE does, as an example. It is always on the hunt for a market it can “dominate”. It uses political leverage to get its products mandated and the competition banned. It doesn’t want a market, it wants a ‘company store’."

(To put it bluntly Bankers and the leaders of Corporate Cartels are often Fabian Third Way Socialists as shown by Communist Cartoonist Robert Minor in his cartoon DEE-LIGHTED )

So this is what all these trade agreements are actually about, maximizing profit and killing competition. Sustainability aka Agenda 21 is all about the world wide formation of 'Company Towns' although they have been renamed Transit Villages

So back to Lamy remembering that the economic disaster was orchestrated by the banks via Bill Clinton (Five banking laws) and Ronald Reagan (Leveraged buyouts). That CAGW was a scam started by the UN to 'Blame' humans for the natural changes in climate so a tax on CO2 (ALL production) could be made.

...The world is in a state of serious distress. We are in the midst of the worst-ever economic crisis — and the first to have a global reach and which has seen a decimation of employment.

We are seeing our planet deteriorate due to global warming. We see droughts and violent floods. We see entire islands disappearing under water. And we see nuclear proliferation, which poses a serious threat to world peace and security.

As we wonder what went wrong and search for urgent solutions, there is a place on earth where new forms of global governance have been tried following World War II — in Europe.

It was more than half a century ago that the Frenchman Jean Monet, one of the shapers of post-war Europe, said, “The sovereign nations of the past can no longer provide a framework for the resolution of our present problems. And the European Community itself is no more than a step towards the organizational forms of tomorrow’s world.” His assessment was as valid then as it is now....
www.theglobalist.com...

So the PTB create a crisis and then use that to demand more power.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. ~ H. L. Mencken

Since politicians actually work for the banks and corporations I doubt there is much that can be done although the split in the ranks of the Republicans as newly elected Congress Critters try to keep their promises to the people gives me hope.

Too bad the rank and file 'Progressives' are so brainwashed by their visions of Utopia they can not see the slave collars hidden in the promises.

The Trans-Pacific Parnership is just another step towards universal serfdom and that is why the meetings are secret. That is why Congress, with only three nays just passed the "Anti-Occupy" law that ends America's right to protest.

whatzshaken
reply to post by MrSpad

 

just seeing your name makes me disregard anything you say and makes me smile. Thanks buddy. hhahahahaha. Glad your opinion is still around. hahahahahaha

I think you hit the nail on the head.

Just assume the opposite of whatever he claims and you'll probably find the truth of any issue.