TTIP, good or bad

[tovaris]

Read up!
Ofitial propaganda: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/,

So the trans atlantic trade agremant. Should the EU realy be making it?
Many EU members have alredy reched the quota of signatures on the petition againced it.
It wil basicly enable the US to export inferionr (conpared to our standards) goods to the EU, and international coroperations to privatize things such as wather sources.

What do you think? TTIP pros and cons....

[phuckphace]

plenty of cons here, like the cons who run the EU for example. Merkel's probably rubbing her hands together until they chafe

just more games that the grasping elites are playing with our money, nbd

[Vlerchan]

Many EU members have alredy reched the quota of signatures on the petition againced it.
Would you mind sourcing this claim? Thank you.

It wil basicly enable the US to export inferionr (conpared to our standards)[1] goods to the EU, and international coroperations to privatize things such as wather sources[2].
Both of these are if possible due to the investor courts which I oppose (see below). Regardless:

[1]: Is there a problem with letting European people judge the best value for their Euros? If these goods are so bad then there won't be buyers. If though there is buyers then it's just punishing European consumers to bar them from buying.

[2]: I've never heard of this being the case in jurisdictions with investor courts.

---

I'm all for the TTIP. Except for the investor courts. That idea should be scrapped:

Subordinating European democracies to International Finance is indefensible.

[tovaris]

“”Would you mind sourcing this claim? Thank you.



https://stop-ttip.org



[1]: Is there a problem with letting European people judge the best value for their Euros? If these goods are so bad then there won't be buyers. If though there is buyers then it's just punishing European consumers to bar them from buying.

---


Whel in US they can use GMOs while in the Eau they are forbiden.
They can put inferior ingredients into their products, just look at the american beef burger, how much beef does it contain?

[Microcosm]

It's moving toward a more open world economy. I like it. I don't know too much about this, but from a surface perspective it looks pretty interesting.

[Vlerchan]

https://stop-ttip.org
It seems to have reached the one million requires for a citizens initiative:

Perhaps it's because I'm on mobile but I'm not picking up stuff otherwise.

Whel in US they can use GMOs while in the Eau they are forbiden.
This is an awful decision on the EUs part.

They can put inferior ingredients into their products, just look at the american beef burger, how much beef does it contain?
I made a point addressing the idea of lower quality goods in my last post.

[phuckphace]

what I don't get is why anyone would defend the quantity-over-quality model. flooding the market with low quality cheap goods means the higher quality goods are priced out of the market (consumers will buy anything without caring where it comes from provided it's cheap). and of course all this is done in service of higher profit margins and more consumption, which is precisely the opposite of what we need.

[Vlerchan]

[F]looding the market with low quality cheap goods means the higher quality goods are priced out of the market (consumers will buy anything without caring where it comes from provided it's cheap).
This just isn't the case at all.

There's a number of tiers when it comes to a single good. You'll even see tiers when there's a more-or-less equalisation of quality because people at the least want to feel rich - eg: bottled water.

It might be the case that the higher quality goods are reduced in price in order to compete with the new entries. But then who does that hurt?

and of course all this is done in service of higher profit margins and more consumption, which is precisely the opposite of what we need.
It raises real incomes too.

How do you intend to leave the economic recession if not through increased consumption?

[Stronk Serb]

Against it. Flooding the market with crappy goods is going to force out the native brands pretty much damning the native economies.

[Vlerchan]

Flooding the market with crappy goods is going to force out the native brands[.]
If native brands are crappier.

In that case what's the actual loss?

[...] pretty much damning the native economies.
Please point to a state that was decimated as a result of free trade.

[Stronk Serb]

If native brands are crappier.

In that case what's the actual loss?


Please point to a state that was decimated as a result of free trade.

I think native brands are better or at least equally crappy so we don't need any more.

Serbia. We had thriving automobile, appliance, house chemicals, shipbuilding, tobbaco, furniture, cosmetic and pharma industries which are now defunct or almost pushed out by foreign products. That crippled the economy and the workforce employed there is now on the streets.

[Vlerchan]

I think native brands are better or at least equally crappy so we don't need any more.
If native brands are enough then surely these would out-compete foreign brands.

Serbia.
I have no idea of Serbia's exact trade history.

I would appreciate if all claims made where referenced.

That crippled the economy and the workforce employed there is now on the streets.

Internally, with 7.5 million people, the Serbian market is the 2nd largest in South East Europe. The average net monthly salary rose from merely €194 in 2004 to €537 in 2013. Coupled with rapid consumer loan expansion, this fueled a sharp increase in local demand that was particularly reflected in a double-digit surge in retail trade turnover on an annual basis.

In response to expanding local demand, international retail chains have opened up dozens of new stores across the country. By illustration, from 2004 to 2009 total retail and wholesale foreign investment reached more than €1.6 billion.

http://siepa.gov.rs/en/index-en/invest-in-serbia/liberalized-trade.html

You're citing problems that were caused by the Great Recession. Just look at:

Serbian GDP (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/serbia-gdp.png?s=serrbiagdp&d1=20000101&d2=20151231)
Serbian median wages (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/serbia-wages.png?s=serbiawag&d1=20000101&d2=20151231)
Serbian exports (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/serbia-exports.png?s=serrbiaexpxports&d1=20010101&d2=20151231)
It would also seem that Serbian stocks were gaining steam and Serbian unemployment was at a low before the Great Recession but I can't access the data for the quarters proceeding that. Regardless I think the cited figures are indicative enough.

[DoodleSnap]

In theory, a more open world economy sounds nice, but I can't help but pre-empt the hand-forcing that accompanies the larger food corporations of the US, and the forcing out of what should be more popular, and superior products. The customer doesn't always know what it likes, or should like.

[phuckphace]

It might be the case that the higher quality goods are reduced in price in order to compete with the new entries. But then who does that hurt?

most higher quality goods are produced at a higher cost in lower volume, as I understand it. the availability of cheaper foreign products undercuts them and sends wealth overseas instead of keeping it here where it can benefit our workers.

It raises real incomes too.

supposedly. doesn't seem to be helping the average American worker much.

How do you intend to leave the economic recession if not through increased consumption?

stimulus spending, tax cuts for the lower end, and an actual safety net.

by "consumption" I meant the pathological, resource-wasting American kind, where people will literally vote against a 0.02% sales tax increase but will line up for hours in front of a big box store to buy the newest iWhatever on release night. people generally consume more carefully and responsibly when prices are higher (with the exception of expensive-on-purpose luxury goods, but I'm banning those anyway.) I'm trying to find a balance of enough consumption so that the economy runs but not so much that our culture is ruined by greed and materialism.

[Vlerchan]

most higher quality goods are produced at a higher cost in lower volume, as I understand it.
That's more or less how I understand it for top-tier goods:

I'm talking about low tier goods becoming higher tier goods with the inclusion of new lower tier goods. I'm not sure if a shift in production will occur though I've never come across the idea in what I've read.

[T]he availability of cheaper foreign products undercuts them and sends wealth overseas instead of keeping it here where it can benefit our workers.
Sure. Some cash will be sent abroad. But that cash then gets reinvested - capital (investment flow) and current (trade flow) account must together balance - so whilst workers in some sector suffer workers in others prosper:

In the long-run it creates a more efficient use of recourses which leaves all people better off.

supposedly. doesn't seem to be helping the average American worker much.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/58425/edward-gresser/toughest-on-the-poor-americas-flawed-tariff-system

I normally quote the relevant but this is all relevant.

stimulus spending, tax cuts for the lower end, and an actual safety net.
I don't disagree with these:

Though I'd consider them all designed to boost consumption.

I'm trying to find a balance of enough consumption so that the economy runs but not so much that our culture is ruined by greed and materialism.
In order for the economy to run it needs consumption to keep expanding.

I also more or less agree with reducing greed and materialism. I just don't think pushing up prices like this is much of a solution.

[tovaris]

It's moving toward a more open world economy. I like it. I don't know too much about this, but from a surface perspective it looks pretty interesting.




http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/,

https://stop-ttip.org/,

http://www.waronwant.org/campaigns/trade-justice/more/inform/18078-what-is-ttip,



It seems to have reached the one million requires for a citizens initiative:



Sure has, and the number of us who have signed it increases dally.



This is an awful decision on the EUs part.



I disagree GMOs limit competition, you have to buy the seed from the same person you buy your pesticides from. Until we reach overall standards the EU should keep banning GMOs.



I made a point addressing the idea of lower quality goods in my last post.



So you want to flood our markets with cheep pink slime? And gasoline containing burgers? Chlorides chicken and meat full of antibiotics? While we built our EU on the standards which prevent that.



This just isn't the case at all.

There's a number of tiers when it comes to a single good. You'll even see tiers when there's a more-or-less equalisation of quality because people at the least want to feel rich - eg: bottled water.



Nobody really buys bottled water, thanks to the EU our water sources are in public domain. Water is a human right and the quality o water (at least in Slovenia) is better than the quality of bottled water in the US.



It might be the case that the higher quality goods are reduced in price in order to compete with the new entries. But then who does that hurt?



Khm, maybe the local economy...



If native brands are crappier.

In that case what's the actual loss?



Aha and which local brand is crapier?



Please point to a state that was decimated as a result of free trade.



Slovenia.

[Vlerchan]

Sure has, and the number of us who have signed it increases dally.
Funnily enough we happened to cover Citizen's Initiatives in our European Integration class today:

I'm not sure what you expect it to do but I'm confident it's going to change nothing.

I disagree GMOs limit competition, you have to buy the seed from the same person you buy your pesticides from
I wasn't aware of this. Would you mind producing evidence substantiating the claim.

Regardless it's a fallacious argument. There might exist limited competition within the GMO market but you are introducing GMOs to a competitive market. GMO corps will have to compete with all the non-GMO crops. So if the price of GMOs go up because firms aren't competing then people will just switch to then-cheaper non-GMO crops.

Regardless the easiest means of combating this problem is just to eliminate patents.

Until we reach overall standards the EU should keep banning GMOs.
I'm not sure what this means at all. Would you mind rewording? Thanks in advance.

So you want to flood our markets with cheep pink slime? And gasoline containing burgers? Chlorides chicken and meat full of antibiotics?
No. I don't. You're strawmanning my position.

What I want is for European consumers to be able to choose the best value for their Euro. So if a European consumer wants to sacrifice taste for savings then that should be her right. The market should exist to a greater extent as a reflection of European consumer's actual preferences. Is that a problem?

While we built our EU on the standards which prevent that.
Just to note I stated in the beginning that I was against firms being able to overturn regulations in investor courts:

Consider regulations designed to mitigate climate change for an actual argument.

Nobody really buys bottled water[.]
My family does. We have to.

We choose to buy the mid-tier Supervalue own-brand water. It's ~88c for 2 litres. We could also choose to purchase low-tier Supervalue own-brand water at ~32c for 2 litres or high-tier branded water at 1euro > X > 2euro for 2 litres. The fact that these other options exist indicates that there's a market for them and it's what people want:

You can substitute a number of other goods in here too.

[T]hanks to the EU our water sources are in public domain.
Ireland privatised its water systems last year.

Water is a human right and the quality o water (at least in Slovenia) is better than the quality of bottled water in the US.
The first claim isn't reflected in the EUs policies.

I would appreciate if verifiable evidence was produced to substantiate the second claim.

Khm, maybe the local economy...
Instead of refuting this I'm just going to ask you to explain how.

Aha and which local brand is crapier?
I don't know.

I was saying we only need to worry if our production here is uncompetitive (crappier).

In which case it's probably be better we despecialise from such production.

Slovenia.
I would have appreciated you explained how and preferably with verifiable evidence. I don't know much about its economic history.

Regardless it seems like it might be hard to connect Slovenia's issues with Free Trade. Like Serbia its issues start with the onset of the Great Recession. But also like Serbia it's data doesn't reach further back than the mid-2000s in a lot of cases.

Stock market (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/slovenia/stock-market)
Average Wages (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/slovenia-wages.png?s=sloveniawag&d1=20050101&d2=20151231)
Exports (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/slovenia/exports)
Unemployment rate (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/slovenia/unemployment-rate)
Slovenia joined the Central European Free Trade Agreement in 1996. It left to join the European Union and its common market in 2004. What can be seen with joining this much more affluent union is a drastic increase in exports - which pushed up GDP and the stock market - whilst also pushing down unemployment levels and up wages. This more-or-less ended with the Great Recession and not Free Trade.

[tovaris]

Funnily enough we happened to cover Citizen's Initiatives in our European Integration class today:

I'm not sure what you expect it to do but I'm confident it's going to change nothing.



You underestimate the power of a citizen iniciative. We can make them STOP.


I wasn't aware of this. Would you mind producing evidence substantiating the claim.

Regardless it's a fallacious argument. There might exist limited competition within the GMO market but you are introducing GMOs to a competitive market. GMO corps will have to compete with all the non-GMO crops. So if the price of GMOs go up because firms aren't competing then people will just switch to then-cheaper non-GMO crops.

Regardless the easiest means of combating this problem is just to eliminate patents.



You know you could just Google it...

here you go:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121229/03344321523/main-problem-with-patented-gm-food-is-patent-not-fact-that-its-gm.shtml


I'm not sure what this means at all. Would you mind rewording? Thanks in advance.



owerall GMO standards



Ireland privatised its water systems last year.


The first claim isn't reflected in the EUs policies.



http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/human_right_to_water.shtml

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/data.html

http://www.vo-ka.si/



I would have appreciated you explained how and preferably with verifiable evidence. I don't know much about its economic history.

Regardless it seems like it might be hard to connect Slovenia's issues with Free Trade. Like Serbia its issues start with the onset of the Great Recession. But also like Serbia it's data doesn't reach further back than the mid-2000s in a lot of cases.

Stock market (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/slovenia/stock-market)
Average Wages (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/slovenia-wages.png?s=sloveniawag&d1=20050101&d2=20151231)
Exports (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/slovenia/exports)
Unemployment rate (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/slovenia/unemployment-rate)
Slovenia joined the Central European Free Trade Agreement in 1996. It left to join the European Union and its common market in 2004. What can be seen with joining this much more affluent union is a drastic increase in exports - which pushed up GDP and the stock market - whilst also pushing down unemployment levels and up wages. This more-or-less ended with the Great Recession and not Free Trade.

just because you do not have evidence and data before 2000 doesnt mean it is not there.
Serbia rose after 2000 because at tat time they hit rock botom, they were blody bombed by NATO!!
And remember in 2000 Slovenia was only undergoing the first wave of privatization when the comonowned conpanies were distributed to the emplies, it was the introduction of true free market in 04 that realy got to us the extreem right goverment at the time had no merci.

[Vlerchan]

You underestimate the power of a citizen iniciative. We can make them STOP.
No. You can protest the European commission to legislate about the issue:

Good luck getting through the EUs excessive series of checks-and-balances after that.

here you go:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...t-its-gm.shtml
I was more hoping to see the claim that there's a need to purchase pesticide from the firm which produces the crops being substantiated:

Regardless this was all dealt with in my last post.

owerall GMO standards
What sort of standards? How does it help the problem?

http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade...to_water.shtml

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/data.html

http://www.vo-ka.si/
None of this defeats the claims I made.

Just because you do not have evidence and data before 2000 doesnt mean it is not there.
Serbia rose after 2000 because at tat time they hit rock botom, they were blody bombed by NATO!!
And remember in 2000 Slovenia was only undergoing the first wave of privatization when the comonowned conpanies were distributed to the emplies, it was the introduction of true free market in 04 that realy got to us the extreem right goverment at the time had no merci.
OK. What does this have to do with Free Trade decimating the Slovenian economy?

[TheBigUnit]

i can see american corporations making tons of profits from this, the lobbyists are prob jumping around everything, monsanto found a loophole

[Vlerchan]

From what I've read about the content of investor court rulings striking down prohibitions isn't something that is possible.

So the GMO ban will remain, Monsanto still won't be allowed to sell into the EU.

[tovaris]

/.../



If you keep ignoring my arguments and keep atempting to exist an a parallel plane we will not come to a conclusion. This is not a debate infront of a commision you know - you cannot convince me with vage inputs and ignorance of arguments


None of this defeats the claims I made.



You diddnt make a claim, you asked a question... -.-



No. You can protest the European commission to legislate about the issue:




Yeah that is kind of the point. Alongiside protiests which ara gaining in mass they will have no choice but to listen to us.



Good luck getting through the EUs excessive series of checks-and-balances after that.



If this doesn't work there is alwais the AK-47 option.



I was more hoping to see the claim that there's a need to purchase pesticide from the firm which produces the crops being substantiated:

Regardless this was all dealt with in my last post.



Do your own reserch, im to lazy to point out every little aspect of my avery sentence backed up by some website...

Here you go (again!):

http://www.ekoslovenija.si/si/hrana/zdrava_prehrana.htm&showNews=NEWSWZLZIJ5232011141857



What sort of standards? How does it help the problem?



If you want to debate GMOs you'll gona have to make a new thred.


OK. What does this have to do with Free Trade decimating the Slovenian economy?



Were you even reading? Our once stronges firms were bancroped by "tajkuns" buing them up and exausting them, they went under besause of thes free trade, the incses in the averege wage decresed while high wages kept rising. That is free trade for you my dear.

From what I've read about the content of investor court rulings striking down prohibitions isn't something that is possible.

So the GMO ban will remain, Monsanto still won't be allowed to sell into the EU.

investor curts are at the hart of such agremants. Look at canaca and us, they signed a similar agremant, when an american conpany wanted to do fracking in a certan area and the local population refuzed va a referendum. They simply sued Canada and won!

[Vlerchan]

If you keep ignoring my arguments and keep atempting to exist an a parallel plane we will not come to a conclusion. This is not a debate infront of a commision you know - you cannot convince me with vage inputs and ignorance of arguments.
I don't know which arguments you think O ignored. Or where my vague inputs or ignorance lies.

This just reads like an adhom.

You diddnt make a claim, you asked a question... -.-
I made one claim and requested for yours to be substantiated with evidence.

I can retrieve the text if required.

Yeah that is kind of the point. Alongiside protiests which ara gaining in mass they will have no choice but to listen to us [...] If this doesn't work there is alwais the AK-47 option.
As long as we can agree Citizen's Initiatives are a poor format for advancing the desires of the masses.

Were you even reading?
The actual econometric data. I linked to it in a previous post.

Our once stronges firms were bancroped by "tajkuns" buing them up and exausting them, they went under besause of thes free trade[.]
But more or less all of Slovenia's economic indicators demonstrates its economy did great.

The value of the Slovenian stock market grew several hundred percent which would indicate in particular that Slovenian firms did quite well.

the incses in the averege wage decresed while high wages kept rising.
The data demonstrates that the median wage rose.

The median wage rising would be something independent of the top wages rising.

That is free trade for you my dear.
Sounds great. Where do I sign up for more?

They simply sued Canada and won!
I'm unable to find the actual ruling. Could you link to the source? Thank you.

The case was also over some temporary regulations which is different to outright prohibition.

---

If you want to debate GMOs you'll gona have to make a new thred.
I agree. Let's leave it for now.