Slashdot Mirror
EFF: the Final Leaked TPP Text Is All That We Feared (eff.org)
An anonymous reader writes: Wikileaks has released the finalized Intellectual Property text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which international negotiators agreed upon a few days ago. Unfortunately, it contains many of the consumer-hostile provisions that so many organizations spoke out against beforehand. This includes the extension of the copyright term to life plus 70 years, and a ban on the circumvention of DRM. The EFF says, "If you dig deeper, you'll notice that all of the provisions that recognize the rights of the public are non-binding, whereas almost everything that benefits rightsholders is binding. That paragraph on the public domain, for example, used to be much stronger in the first leaked draft, with specific obligations to identify, preserve and promote access to public domain material. All of that has now been lost in favor of a feeble, feel-good platitude that imposes no concrete obligations on the TPP parties whatsoever." The EFF walks us through all the other awful provisions as well — it's quite a lengthy analysis.
Economix explains the Trans-Pacific Partnership
http://economixcomix.com/home/...
"90% of the things I buy to live (Food, Toiletries, shelter) are owned and made by 13 companies."
It seems that the U.S. government now only helps rich people become richer. There is no democracy.
Companies That Control the World's Food (That is the 2nd page of the article.)
Food Processing's top 100
When it comes to treaties, the house of senate has to approve it, whereas the house of represenatives has no say in it.
Not in the US, where corruption is so widespread in its political system that good politicians who care for the people never get a chance in hell to gather enough money to buy themselves a seat or a presidency.
-- Cheers!
There is plenty of power to create laws to more specifically deny/manage such campaign contributions, but they want to just go for the throat and change the constitution.
You' haven't been paying attention. Since the Citizens United ruling, such laws as you describe would violate the First Amendment. That's why getting money out of politics requires a new amendment.
Thank God Americans live in a Democratically elected Republic. We don't have to move elsewhere to return to the prosperity of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s before we reduced our top marginal tax rate from 90% to 35% and indebted our future generations and destroyed the ability of our middle class to educate itself and collectively bargain for a piece of the pie from their corporate en-slavers. And like we did in the 1930s and 1940s, we can use our right to vote to do it again.
And maybe your family can rise out of poverty too and get educated and contribute again.
It's amazing how much money the liberal states provide the to republican "pull yourself up by your boot straps" welfare states.
http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/united-states-federal-tax-dollars/
---
Democratic liberal states make money.
Unlike dollars allotted, tax dollars received show where the money was actually spent. New Jersey receives 61 cents for each tax dollar paid, Nevada 65 cents, Connecticut 69, New Hampshire 7 cents, and Minnesota 72 . Illinois receives 0.75 for each tax dollar they pays, followed by Delaware At 77 cents and California at 78 cents per dollar paid.
--
Republican welfare states mooch and live off of it.
The states receiving the most are number five Alabama, which receives 1.66 per tax dollar paid, number four North Dakota with1.68, West Virginia at 1.76 , Louisiana,1.78, Alaska, 1.84 , Mississippi 2.02 and New Mexico at 2.03, over 100% of every taxdollar paid.
---
The cognitive dissonance of these moochers is amazing. Against welfare, yet living off of it. But I don't mind, I'm a city dweller and and taxed adequately, but I also understand that getting ahead is not just an individual act, but a collective one as well. You people want individual freedom unless it is the decision to choose who you want to marry or what medical procedures you can have. Then freedom is a bad thing. The cognitive dissonance amazes me.
I enjoy the nice roads, clean environment, business friendly and responsive government. I will gladly pay more to ensure everyone gets a chance at the American dream through hard work and education.
No offense, but maybe if you get pounded on the head enough you will understand that cynicism and sarcasm is very, very hard to pull off effectively in person with tonal and visual cues, and all but impossible on the printed page. My most friendly advice is to avoid trying it. It doesn't work.
I'm voting Sanders. He's had 30 years of consistent messaging. Finally a third party in the white house.
Same here, and his record of consistency is one of the reasons. He voted against the war AND against the PATRIOT act.
-
I'm excited at that possibility.
Me too...can't wait for it to happen.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
What makes you think the Left has dropped guns as an issue? Or did you miss the photo ops as a result of this latest school shooting? Seems to me both Hillary and Obama spent some time calling for "common sense gun laws" (for which read: make guns illegal)....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"