Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Full Text of Trans-Pacific Partnership Released (Officially, This Time) (mfat.govt.nz)

Posted by timothy on from the upsides-and-downsides dept.

EmagGeek writes: The full text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, has been officially released, and is available for the public to see. According to CNN, The TPP is a 12-nation deal that touches on 40% of the global economy. The provisions of the deal would knock down tariffs and import quotas, making it cheaper to import and export, and open new Asia-Pacific markets. Negotiations have been going on for years, led by the United States and Japan — with China conspicuously absent from the list of signees.

35 of 247 comments (clear)

  1. This is fantastic. by gavron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I once went on a date where the girl said "I am going to set everything up. It will be a surprise. You'll like it! Don't try to guess what's going to happen!"

    It was a great time!

    The TTP is almost like that. We don't know what's coming until it does; we all get fucked; big pharma and big media have a great time.

    E

    1. Re:This is fantastic. by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 4, Funny

      we all get fucked; big pharma and big media have a great time.

      So the TPP is all about movies, drugs, and sex that one partner enjoys way more than the other? Say, that really does sound like a date!

    2. Re:This is fantastic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      we all get fucked; big pharma and big media have a great time

      Pretty much this.

      This agreement is mostly about giving corporations a wish list of things which in general won't benefit citizens.

      Because America are so fucking beholden to corporate interests they're pretty much fucking over the world to benefit multinational corporations. Stupid shit like being able to sue governments if they don't like how a law impacts them.

      Thanks, assholes, for letting your corrupt politicians on the payroll of corporations to fuck up the world. We really fucking appreciate it.

      This is pretty much the nail in the coffin for societies which are rules by governments instead of corporations.

      Fucking stupid fucking American bullshit fucking libertarian fantasy economics in which we all get fucked for corporations is magically going to improve our fucking lives.

      Fuck you America, fuck you.

    3. Re:This is fantastic. by truck_soccer · · Score: 2

      You're welcome? It's not like we (citizens) have any say in what our government does. That's the greatest illusion in history. Federal elections are decided by who has the most money from "Special interests". Local and state government elections are all about who you know (read: money changing hands) And we all hoot and rave about how democracy is great and we're free. We are free to do as THEY say. We have the right to get our property taken by them, we have the right to expect no real privacy, we have the right to expect freedom of speech unless it involves unpopular opinion. When someone uses the old "if you don't like the laws you should vote someone else in" all I can do is shake my head and sigh. If we're going to have any impact on our governance in the future, there needs to be a purge of all the currently held seats in the judiciary, executive, and legislative branches on state and federal levels. Our entire system has been infiltrated and poisoned by greed.

    4. Re:This is fantastic. by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So the TPP is all about movies, drugs, and sex that one partner enjoys way more than the other?

      Sure, if you mean using date rape drugs and filming it ... because that's pretty much what this stupid deal is doing to us.

      It's a grab bag of stuff from the wishlist of multinational corporations, pushed through by people who are more beholden to corporate profits than their own citizens, and largely written by the industries it benefits.

      Mark my words, this really is just more "race to the bottom" crap, and won't benefit citizens.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:This is fantastic. by Zak3056 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're welcome? It's not like we (citizens) have any say in what our government does. That's the greatest illusion in history. Federal elections are decided by who has the most money from "Special interests".

      The older I get, the more I reject that notion. Sure, the media is manipulating you and election season is a three ring circus, and yes, there is undoubtedly election fraud that nudges things a bit, but in the end, the people still vote, and the people elect the government they deserve. Everyone pretty much agrees with YOUR statement, "special interests blah blah blah" but upwards of 90% of you (at least the ones that vote) KEEP VOTING FOR THE SAME PEOPLE! What the fuck do you expect is going to happen?

      Douglas Adams summed the situation up really well in So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish:

      “On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.”

      “Odd,” said Arthur, “I thought you said it was a democracy.”

      “I did,” said Ford. “It is.”

      “So,” said Arthur, hoping he wasn’t sounding ridiculously obtuse, “why don’t the people get rid of the lizards?”

      “It honestly doesn’t occur to them,” said Ford. “They’ve all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they’ve voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.”

      “You mean they actually vote for the lizards?”

      “Oh yes,” said Ford with a shrug, “of course.”

      “But,” said Arthur, going for the big one again, “why?”

      “Because if they didn’t vote for a lizard,” said Ford, “the wrong lizard might get in.”

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    6. Re:This is fantastic. by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      I once went on a date where the girl said "I am going to set everything up. ...

      It was a great time!

      we all get fucked;

      Sounds like quite an evening.

      big pharma

      Sounds like an evening that would be hard to remember.

      and big media have a great time.

      And now it sounds like an evening that you'd rather forget. Pornhub link?

    7. Re:This is fantastic. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      Here's the difference between a hot girl and Big Pharma,Media, Corporations et al ...

      TPP is like being promised the hot girl, and getting fucked in your virgin ass by a bunch of well hung dudes.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:This is fantastic. by johnlcallaway · · Score: 2

      The problem with the US elections has nothing to do with money (at least not directly) or whether people are capable of deciding who to vote for.

      I'll prove it with this statement ... why don't you run for office???

      I'll wait while you form a response ....

      I'll bet the reasons fell into either it doesn't interest you, you can't afford to take the time off, you don't want the public scrutiny, you don't think you could get elected, you are too busy, or a ton of other reasons.

      Which is why we basically have dedicated politicians, only someone who really wants to be a politician wants to run for office. And they usually have some sort of dedicated income so they don't worry about having a job if they lose. Or in 4 years when they get kicked out.

      I've talked with a few people who have run for local political positions, and most have said they would never do it again because of the experience. My wife discourages me from public office whenever I bring it up because she was involved in local elections when she was young.

      We get the politicians we get because no one else wants the job.

      On a side note, I always find it funny that people complain about money in politics, and how they want to get rid of it. But what they really mean is they want to get rid of all the money from groups they don't approve of. They don't want the Koch brothers to have any say, but they don't mind if the Sierra Club or Everytown does. They complain about how money influences politics. But can't answer the question about why, if it influences it so much, doesn't the NRA give a lot of money to anti-gun politicians in order to sway their opinions??

      Maybe it's the actions of the politicians that attract the money, not the money changing the actions of the politicians. Doesn't it make more sense for organizations to give money to the politicians they want to get elected rather than give money to those that disagree with them?? In other words, just because ice cream sales go up in the summer and it's hot in the summer doesn't mean that ice cream makes it hot out. Just because the NRA gives money to a politician that votes against gun control doesn't mean that the money caused him to vote that way. After all, Bloomberg has pretty big pockets too.

      --
      I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
  2. First post, substantive by john.r.strohm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is something fundamentally wrong when the "most open administration in history" has to let New Zealand publish the document, rather than posting it themselves.

    There is something fundamentally suspicious when there is no all-up posting made. You have to download a rather large number of chunks to get the whole thing.

    Why do I get the feeling that someone is STILL trying to hide something?

    1. Re:First post, substantive by cdrudge · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is something fundamentally suspicious when there is no all-up posting made. You have to download a rather large number of chunks to get the whole thing.

      Or you could just download the zip file of all the chapters that is at the bottom of the page.

    2. Re:First post, substantive by Crowd+Computing · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Or you can focus on the file containing the topic likely to be of most interest to Slashdot readers: intellectual property. A quick search through the chapter turned up the following section on the public domain:

      Article 18.15: Public Domain
      1. The Parties recognise the importance of a rich and accessible public domain.
      2. The Parties also acknowledge the importance of informational materials, such as publicly accessible databases of registered intellectual property rights that assist in the identification of subject matter that has fallen into the public domain.

      The agreement merely asks countries to "recognise" [sic] and "acknowledge" the importance of the public domain. This contrasts with the provisions on copyright and patents, which demand compliance in many instances, including the following example on "Criminal Procedures and Penalties" (Art. 18.77):

      Each Party shall provide for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied at least in cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or copyright or related rights piracy on a commercial scale.

      The definition of "commercial scale" is particularly troubling: "significant acts, not carried out for commercial advantage or financial gain, that have a substantial prejudicial impact on the interests of the copyright or related rights holder in relation to the marketplace."

    3. Re:First post, substantive by bigpat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The agreement merely asks countries to "recognise" [sic] and "acknowledge" the importance of the public domain. This contrasts with the provisions on copyright and patents, which demand compliance in many instances, including the following example on "Criminal Procedures and Penalties" (Art. 18.77):

      That hits the nail on the head... All the parts that screw people over are iron clad, specified to the extreme while all the consumer, labor, environmental protections are all fluffy piles of bull shit wrapped in language you could drive a truck full of slaves through to their coal fired baby seal killing factory.

  3. ESR's warning about "honeytraps" at tech confs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can anyone shed some light on this warning from Eric Raymond about social justice honeytraps at tech conferences?

    Is there any basis to these allegations?

    Is it true that Linus himself has been targeted by these groups?

    What the hell is going on here, and why isn't this front-page news on Slashdot?

    1. Re:ESR's warning about "honeytraps" at tech confs? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Because we're all fed up with SJW bullshit?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. It also does away with national sovereigty! by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you want to outlaw something traded under this agreement in your own country?
    Nope! Your government will be tried in an international court!

    Want to legalize something not legal in this agreement or buy it from a supplier not under the agreement while one who is under it sells it at a higher price?
    Nope! Your government will be tried in an international court!

    Trade is only the excuse for this agreement. Just like the patriot act and affordable care act specifics are so vague it to allow any interpretation desired by those who head up the agreement. It's also structures in such a way that nations not complying with changes afterward will be punished. This is not an "agreement" as it's called, it's a treaty. Notice corporation wrote most of it.

    This is the official handing over of the government to corporations. It's been happening in practice, but that pesky constitution and balance of powers occasionally gets in the way. This is the bypass for it.

    If you DON'T bully your representatives, beg, plead and even threaten them to keep this from passing we're all going to be part of the "expanded EU".

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:It also does away with national sovereigty! by pecosdave · · Score: 2

      As long as the people at the top aren't the same people funded by people like George Soros who want it in place. Right now the top executive positions in the U.S. government and those in the Republicrat party (as in the single party establishment masquerading as separate parties) want it. We will have to put people in power to replace them who have the backbone to stand up to it.

      There's a sever lack of backbone in most who get elected, then the ones who have it get chased out of office.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    2. Re:It also does away with national sovereigty! by Halo1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do you want to outlaw something traded under this agreement in your own country?
      Nope! Your government will be tried in an international court!

      It's not even a court. It's an ad-hoc panel that consists of private lawyers. Worse: very expensive lawyers that spend most of their time representing parties in front of similar panels. They can even rule over complaints filed by parties that they have previously represented.

      I would strongly recommend to read the analysis of ISDS by the European Economic and Social Committee, as it appears in CETA (a TPP-style agreement between the EU and Canada that is now also in the ratification phase). It contains a lot of interesting information and citations of other documents.

      --
      Donate free food here
    3. Re:It also does away with national sovereigty! by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, here's the problem with all of this: this was a treaty America wanted, actively pushed it as being important, and allowed industry to write most of it (like all US laws and treaties are written by industry).

      America pushed this on the rest of the world, not the other way around.

      If there's a treaty expanding copyright terms and otherwise giving corporations the upper hand, it's being championed by Americans, and pushed on other countries.

      Sorry, but this is hardly the first treaty the US has championed which only serves corporate interests. And the rest of the world has no sympathy when Americans suddenly say how bad this treaty is -- because it's your government who pushed for it.

      Your government has been so thoroughly coopted to serve the interests of huge multinationals, you should be yelling at your own politicians, instead of acting tough by saying you'll grow a pair and tell the world this is an unfair treaty. We already know this.

      Why do Americans keep thinking this is being done to you by other countries? It's your own politicians who drive this crap.

      So don't whine about your sovereignty, because this is what the rest of the world has been dealing with for years. And it usually is the US threatening trade sanctions if we don't give up OUR sovereignty for YOUR interests.

      Cry us a river, you're not the only ones getting fucked over here. But you have been driving the bus.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:It also does away with national sovereigty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You do realize that "Canada's Trudeau" has only been in power for like, two days, right? He literally started yesterday morning. If you want to blame a Canadian leader for TPP, blame Harper like the Canadians do.

    5. Re:It also does away with national sovereigty! by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, here's the problem with all of this: this was a treaty America wanted, actively pushed it as being important, and allowed industry to write most of it (like all US laws and treaties are written by industry).

      America pushed this on the rest of the world, not the other way around.

      If there's a treaty expanding copyright terms and otherwise giving corporations the upper hand, it's being championed by Americans, and pushed on other countries.

      Sorry, but this is hardly the first treaty the US has championed which only serves corporate interests. And the rest of the world has no sympathy when Americans suddenly say how bad this treaty is -- because it's your government who pushed for it.

      Your government has been so thoroughly coopted to serve the interests of huge multinationals, you should be yelling at your own politicians, instead of acting tough by saying you'll grow a pair and tell the world this is an unfair treaty. We already know this.

      Why do Americans keep thinking this is being done to you by other countries? It's your own politicians who drive this crap.

      So don't whine about your sovereignty, because this is what the rest of the world has been dealing with for years. And it usually is the US threatening trade sanctions if we don't give up OUR sovereignty for YOUR interests.

      Cry us a river, you're not the only ones getting fucked over here. But you have been driving the bus.

      **************
        Let's get a few things out in the open:

      1) This thing ( as are most things worth knowing ) was kept secret from everyone including those Americans you seem to rather enjoy putting all the blame on. *
      2) For non-Americans, does your government listen to you ? Can you talk, call, or email your Representative and actually make a difference ?

      Yeah, us either. There are only two ways to get noticed:

      A) Extreme Violence will get everyone's attention. Make sure what you need to say is short, because your life is going to be a rather short one as well.
      B) Extreme amounts of money to buy any legislation you want

      If you wield neither method, you're just another peon in a sea of peons that will never have a voice.

      So guess who our Representatives DO listen to ? Yep, the very same corporations who both wrote the draft and will benefit from it.

      So, I'm curious. Short of an armed revolution, what would you propose we Americans** do to remedy this situation ? Seeing as how our government doesn't bother listening to anyone other than their Sugar Daddy corporations with unlimited funding, I am truly curious as to what steps you would recommend taking.
      I know ! Maybe we should do another Occupy Movement ! Because that worked out so well the last time we tried it :|

      Tip: Protests are a laughable waste of time as evidenced by the aforementioned Occupy Movement. Once they tire of your silliness, they'll declare you to be a hazard, terrorist, nun-killer, whatever and remove you and your fellow protesters by force. Resist, and watch them grin ear-to-ear as any restrictions they may have had are removed and their behavior turns lethal.

      * The American Government does not represent the will of the people any longer. Hasn't for a long time. Anyone claiming otherwise is naive.

      **The extremely small fraction of the populace that even still gives a shit are far outnumbered by those that do not. As their votes are just as powerful as mine, Quantity > Quality. We lose. Every. F*cking. Time.

      So, to conclude, make sure you understand where the f*cking blame really sits and that the American Government represents only the American Government in all matters. They could give two shits about what anyone else thinks. ( Including their own citizens )

  5. We have to pass it to see what's in it by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That usually works out well, right?

  6. Remember Trump and Sanders by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Remember that only 2 people are against this: Trump and Sanders. The Clinton's gave us NAFTA and fully supported this agreement as the gold standard. The Republicans always push for "free trade". For the sake of yourselves and your children vote either Trump or Sanders. If it weren't for "free trade" we'd all be making approximately double what we are now as shown here:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/bus...

    or here:

    http://www.epi.org/blog/inequa...

    1. Re:Remember Trump and Sanders by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Protectionism is a good way to make an economy poor. People have this ideal that they'll make twice as much salary and have a bigger piece of the pie, except they don't realize the pie just gets smaller.

      --
      Support my political activism on Patreon.
    2. Re:Remember Trump and Sanders by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      On the domestic scale sure on the international scale not always the case. What you have said has been in the economics text books so long most people accept it uncritically but it fails to consider the long term effects of trade imbalances.

      Generally with a nation as large and divers as ours with an array of resources as vast as ours one would be tempted to think trade imbalances could not occur but they do. The problem the free traders consistently fail to deal with is that the economies of our trading partners are not in many cases as market oriented as our own and our own economy is not really a true open market anymore either. The rules over and above the enforcement of private property rights create opportunities to game the system and so the system gets gamed.

      If we were to:
      Drop the new Obamacare employer mandates
      Drop the individual mandate
      Drop all payroll and corporate taxes
      Replace income taxes with a flat tax
      Either rollback health/safety and environmental protections -or- restrict trade to nations with comparable regulation and enforcement

      Then we could have free trade with the remaining partners. Otherwise the ability to game the system is always going to temp people to shop the market the imposes the least penalty for the negative externalizes of whatever it is they do and lowest cost labor while still selling the output of that production into the more lucrative American market and enjoying the gifts of our society themselves. Their will be a net outflow of wealth until the US reaches nearer equilibrium in terms of median personal wealth with the rest of the world. I know there are many on the left of the political graph who think there is Justice in that, and may influencers on the Right side who don't care because they are 1%ers doing the gaming and don't care what happens to the rest of us.

      Personally I'd rather the USA stay the worlds richest nation! That is almost certain to be whats best for me, my family, and my friends. I have no desire to try and hold any other nation down or prevent the expansion of the middle class around the world. Good luck to them, but I see no reason we need to give away what's ours to enable that. Now some lefties are going to return to say we unfairly came by what we have. Yes okay maybe if you want to say we took the land from the Natives, but other than that no not really if you look at the whole of those situations and the alternatives.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:Remember Trump and Sanders by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 2

      The US has had a trade deficit with the world for 35 years...

      Coincidentally the middle class has been declining for roughly the same time. Also unless you are completely unaware of history you will note that workers now put in *far* more hours than they use to. Why is that? Race to the bottom. If China et al are willing to put in more time than so should we. Ultimately we can have a happier lifestyle via protectionism or we can sink to the lowest standards the planet has to offer. Regarding economists and free trade, you know full well economists have contrived scenarios where free trade makes sense but in the real world it's a race to the bottom. Free trade works between similar standards of living yes. When you have large imbalances in the standards of living then it settles to the new lower standard. Unless you are someone who has immense schadenfreude in lowering your standards of living then you should be against a race to the bottom.

    4. Re:Remember Trump and Sanders by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      The economics textbooks are based in incorrect theory.

      Productivity forms the basis of wealth economics. Everything requires human labor to produce; we can mitigate this by many factors, ranging from advanced techniques (technology: the science of improved techniques) to simply finding an available limited supply.

      For example: humans can produce gold by producing electricity and using that to run a fusor to convert vaporized lead base metal ions to gold by fusion with hydrogen; this requires so much labor investment (to produce electricity, mostly) that simply mining gold out of the ground is cheaper (less human labor involved in total). When the mines run dry, this will invert: we currently use fusors to make cesium because producing it from pollucite mining takes more human labor time (rather, more time times labor unit cost; eventually it just becomes time, but the markets turn over on cost).

      Similarly, transitioning from blacksmiths to assembly lines changes from many, many hours of expensive, skilled labor to very few hours of cheap, unskilled labor. The transition comes because the labor time multiplied by labor price (wage) is lower per unit produced; that doesn't make a nation wealthy, though. What makes the nation wealthy is transition from 800 hours invested in making a particular good (say, a kitchen knife) to 4 hours invested in making that same good (the cost of all the oil, the machinery, maintenance, machine operators, mining of ore, refining of ore...). We now have 796 hours of unused labor time--that means unemployment--and can apply that labor to producing new goods.

      That's the first point, and you must understand how it fits into the overall movement of an economy. First, however, you must understand the point itself: if you have 1,000 hours in which to do work, you can only perform 1,000 hours of work (tautology). Therefor, if you reduce the work required to produce your current set of goods by 500 hours, you have time enough to make twice as many of the same goods *or* make the same goods plus new goods. Wealth is developed by increasing the production of goods per person available, which only happens by increasing the production of goods per labor hour; the growth of a large amount of wealth allows a nation to skim some of that per-person productivity to provide things like welfare services and public roadways without destroying the lives and livelihoods of anyone (i.e. without shoving the poor into starvation or the rich down into the middle class).

      On to the second point: Markets.

      I mentioned unemployment. Look back up, you'll see it.

      Each time you find a way to produce the same with less labor, you reduce your need for employment. This is fine, so long as you don't remove too much of the labor force all at once; that's a long conversation I'd like to pass over for now, but perhaps we can leave off the finer points for now and simply agree that 0.5% of the jobs moving around year to year is fine, while 50% of the jobs vanishing in one year is very bad.

      With the reduction of labor, the cost to make a good goes down; profits made by charging a higher price than labor costs can stay the same with a lower price. Factors ranging from direct and indirect competition to the simple consumer pressure of inflation (people hate seeing prices rise) helps push these prices down toward costs, rather than just offering permanent higher profit margins. (Inflation works this way because the buying power of money moves constantly toward the total income divided by the total productive output for a reasonable period of time: goods cost about what they're traded for. In other words: If people have 20% more money *and* there are 20% more goods being sold, you have no inflation; if people have 20% more money *and* there are no more goods being sold, you have 20% inflation; and if people have 20% more money *and* there are 10% more goods being sold, you have 10% inflation, but goods aren't 10% more expensive.)

      With this reduction

      --
      Support my political activism on Patreon.
  7. No coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You know what else is in the Pacific?

    R'lyeh.

    Chew on that for a bit. It's happening.

  8. How do we know that it is the *REAL* full text? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

    Your analogy is only partly valid because the so-called 'full text' may not the the real full text !

    They have been cheating us for so long, what is there to keep them from cheating us just a little bit longer?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  9. EULA by andrewa · · Score: 2

    I'm as likely to read this as I am a typical EULA, and likely to get just as fucked either way...

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
  10. Mass, subterrainian civil disobedience by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is such an over-reach, especially the intellectual property parts, it's going to lead to mass civil disobedience in the form of a fundamental attitudinal shift from one of basically respecting the law to one of basically disrespecting it *on the part of everyone* including society's intellectuals, academics and cultural leaders.

    That's the deeper danger of this kind of law making, not to mention the content of the law itself. It leads to contempt for the law, contempt for Congress , the Executive and the Judiciary. Contempt leads to mass, defacto civil disobedience where ignoring or subverting the law becomes the norm, as in the days of prohibition.

    How is this good for the country?
     

  11. tarrif elimination schedule question by PhantomHarlock · · Score: 2

    New Zealand's tariff elimination schedule is pretty straight forward. It shows what it currently is and what it will be up to 7 years out (most are completely eliminated the first year.)

    On the US's schedule, it lists the "base rate" which I assume is what it is right now sans TPP, and then columns representing the other countries, which all say "EIF". Does anyone know what that stands for? Does that mean that for those countries the tariff is eliminated completely?

  12. "chicken tax" on light duty trucks by PhantomHarlock · · Score: 2

    Another question. Does anyone know if the TPP eliminates the chicken tax for participating countries?

    I did not find any mention of it in the US Motor Vehicle Trade document that is part of the TPP documents.

  13. Re: How do we know that it is the *REAL* full text by david_thornley · · Score: 2

    Anything the US ratifies, or passes into law, will be on the public record. Any portion of the agreement that is not made public is not part of the Congressional vote.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  14. Re:The Chinese are absent by tlambert · · Score: 2

    from this "deal", because they know better than throwing themselves under the American's bus.

    The Chinese are absent from this deal because they get whatever the deal gives to anyone else the U.S. trades with for free, without having to make concessions on their side of the table. The Chinese have MFN - Most Favored Nation - status, which means that the U.S. can not apply restrictions, nor charge more tariff, to China, as it does to the least restricted and tariffed trading partner.

    In addition, this give the Chinese an "American Hole", in the same way that NAFTA gave the U.S. a "Mexican Hole". If China is having a problem getting favorable terms with any of the 11 other nations (and, later, the other 2 nations considering joining the party), then they need only transship and do minor changes (the easiest is to just run a shrink-wrap operation in the ports at Hawaii, and (re)shrink-wrap the boxes) making it a product where "final assembly" (the term is intentionally vague) occurs in the U.S. and therefore it's subject to the TPP thereafter.

    The NAFTA version of this is to ship products which would ordinarily be tariffed through Mexico, and run through a maquiladora for similar treatment, such that they are technically "Products of Mexico", rather than where the major manufacturing and assembly took place, and therefore not tariffed, due to NAFTA.

    See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...