Slashdot Mirror


Why Did Japan Just Ratify The TPP? (businesstimes.com.sg)

The controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership can't go into effect without U.S. approval, Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has acknowledged. Yet despite president-elect Trump's promise to withdraw from the agreement -- Friday Japan's parliament voted to approve it. An anonymous reader quotes the Business Times. Was last Friday's vote simply a Quixotic tribute to a dying cause or -- as some are asking -- does Mr. Abe know something that others don't? They note that he is the only foreign leader to have met with the anointed heir to the U.S. presidency since the election result was announced. What went on in New York's Trump Tower during that "informal" meeting is unknown but some speculate that there may have been some equally informal -- but nonetheless significant -- dealmaking between the two men on the TPP. This seems quite possible, analysts say, because the TPP is of great importance to Japan and to Mr. Abe's grand design for Japan to remain a pivotal Asia-Pacific power.
The EFF has decried "the intense push to ram Internet issues into international law through the TPP," and complained Friday that Japan's newly-passed law "includes the extension of Japan's copyright term from 50 to 70 years after the death of the author, which makes today a very sad day for Japan's public domain."

And in addition, "There remains a risk that other TPP countries such as Singapore -- and even countries that weren't part of the original deal, such as Taiwan -- will soon also bring their domestic legislation into conformity with the requirements of this dead agreement."

51 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. The President is not the State Department by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Our completely-unaccountable-to-voters State Department is still trying to get TPP to pass despite the political environment changing around them. Japan ratified because they want a good relationship with the people who will still be in charge when Trump takes office.

    1. Re:The President is not the State Department by Desler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's your problem right there. Actually believing anything that comes out of Trump's mouth. He's broken numerous campaign promises and he's not even in office yet.

    2. Re:The President is not the State Department by dbIII · · Score: 2

      That's a dumb theory considering everyone and their mom believes that Trump will kill off TPP. It's practically the only thing he has said he will do that people actually believe he will do.

      I expect that view is going to appear to be very naive some time around February. Why trust anything he's said given his track record? If we are naive enough to believe that Trump really wants a trade war with China then the TPP is the instrument that has been built over years to do that. So which Trump lie is the real lie today? Are you wrong? Me? Both?

      I'm betting he's screwing over the voters who have already given him what he wants instead of screwing over Abe who is yet to deliver what Trump wants.

    3. Re:The President is not the State Department by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

      That's a dumb theory considering everyone and their mom believes that Trump will kill off TPP. It's practically the only thing he has said he will do that people actually believe he will do.

      What Trump said is irrelevant. What matters is how much he likes the people who will benefit from it.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:The President is not the State Department by dehachel12 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      how is that? I don't see any difference in the end result.

    5. Re:The President is not the State Department by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's a dumb theory considering everyone and their mom believes that Trump will kill off TPP. It's practically the only thing he has said he will do that people actually believe he will do.

      As with the Investigatory Powers Act in the UK, there are two kinds of people in the general population when it comes to TPP: Those that are against it and those that haven't heard of it. The latter group is a lot larger. If there's something that will make the second group happy, it will more than offset doing something that will make the first group unhappy. And Trump can always smile and say 'well, you know, I was against TPP when Crooked Hillary was behind it, but we've made some changes and the new one is a lot better. A lot of the people who were moaning about it, they hadn't read it, and I hadn't read it. Now I know what it says, and now that we've removed the bits that Crooked Hillary really liked, now we can pass it and it will make America great again.'

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:The President is not the State Department by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      Translation: Fuck, the asshole hired Goldman Sachs people, I need some way to argue myself out this box my stupidity put me in.

      He's populated his cabinet with like-minded bazillionaires (well, presuming the Senate approves). Simply put, you voted for the Elite, but this is an Elite unconstrained by even a modicum of decency.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  2. It's about Crushing the Agricultural Association. by thesjaakspoiler · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It has nothing to do with international affairs, it has one main national goal : taking on the Agricultural Association tht has more money and power than the government. The Japanese Agricultural Association (JA) is a very powerfull association that distorts vast amounts of money from the Japanese farmers like Italian mobsters. Money that the government wants to have but it did not have any means to take on the JA. Until the TPP came around. Nobody here in Japan knows that the TPP is also about copyrights. As far as most people know, it's about agricultural goods and meat coming freely into the country without having all kinds of associations like JA being able to control that.

  3. Taiwan? by srw · · Score: 4, Funny

    Did you just call Taiwan a country? China's gonna be pissed!

    1. Re:Taiwan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Taiwan isn't a country. The Republic of China (ROC) is a country, with Taiwan comprising the majority of its present territory.
      Their flag is the ROC flag, their anthem is the ROC anthem, all their money says ROC, one of their two main political parties is the Kuomintang (i.e., the Nationalist party that fought the Communists in the Chinese Civil War), and their vehicle license plates say "Taiwan Province" on them. Only ultra-progressives in the Taiwan Independence movement actually consider "Taiwan", rather than the ROC, to be a country.

      Although the average person in Taiwan has a very distinct "Taiwanese" identity (vs a Mainland Chinese identity), the country is still organized as the Republic of China. I think it's slowly shifting towards a "Taiwan" identity, but it's a very slow shift. A big part of that is probably because they want to maintain the status quo with China (the PRC). While I was living there, they changed the postage stamps to have TAIWAN printed on them instead of REPUBLIC OF CHINA. When I first noticed it, I pointed it out to a native friend of mine, and his reaction was, "Oh shoot! China is going to invade!" (i.e., most people in Taiwan don't consider screwing with the status quo with the PRC to be worth the risk.)

    2. Re:Taiwan? by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 4, Funny

      No.

      Betteridge's Law is clear, the answer is no. No one called Taiwan a country, and Japan ratified the TPP because no. It's a law, like gravity, so it is clear. No.

    3. Re:Taiwan? by Wuhao · · Score: 3, Funny

      What makes a country "legitimate?"

      Twitter followers

    4. Re:Taiwan? by Xest · · Score: 2

      A lot of people don't really understand how a country is defined, including yourself.

      A country is merely a defined political division, that means it needs some kind of border, but even a government isn't technically necessary - consider Iraq post 2003 invasion, administered by the US and it's allies with the Iraqi government ousted, but still very much a country in itself, it didn't simply cease to exist as such. Taiwan most definitely is a country. This is much the same as England, Scotland, and Wales, which are also individual countries, but comprise the nation state called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In this respect England demonstrates also why mere political division is sufficient to define a country as England doesn't have it's own government, it's governed by the government of the United Kingdom as a whole.

      Countries can exist within countries, the presence of an overarching country does not mean Taiwan is not in itself also a country.

      I doubt even China would have a problem with calling Taiwan a country, they'd have a problem if you start treating it like an independent nation state though by calling it's government and speaking to them directly, or if you started using the word "independent" when referring to Taiwan as a country.

      The problem is that people all too often use country as shorthand for independent sovereign state, but whilst all independent sovereign nation states are countries, not all countries are independent sovereign states, so it's important to not confuse the two.

  4. I read something else by Xenographic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > Was last Friday's vote simply a Quixotic tribute to a dying cause or -- as some are asking -- does Mr. Abe know something that others don't?

    I read something else in this part. Obama killed the TPP because Trump was against it and he couldn't pass it in the lame duck session, so he might as well deny others credit for killing the deal he & Hillary negotiated.

    So I assume they're wondering if Abe either knows that Hillary has a non-zero chance or they think Trump could be persuaded to go for it.

    Personally, whatever happens, I want this to die and stay dead.

    1. Re:I read something else by davester666 · · Score: 2

      Persuad Trump? He's flip-flopped on all kinds of stuff already, and it's not like suddenly people started telling him "No, that is a stupid idea because of A B and C". And since he's got significant assets in IP, it would not surprise me at all for him to try to push TPP through.

      He's also the first person to call out "Booorrrrriiiiiiinnnnnnnggggg" during the President’s Daily Security Briefing.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    2. Re:I read something else by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 4, Funny

      He agreed to sign it if they renamed it the Trump Pacific Partnership

    3. Re:I read something else by Dracos · · Score: 2

      The entire corporate establishment wants the TTP, there's too much at stake for them if it dies. Trump doesn't really give a shit about it, but he's not about to pass up some gain for himself if he threatens to kills it.

    4. Re:I read something else by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He's flip-flopped on all kinds of stuff already

      Sure, he's flipped on a lot of issues, but opposition to free trade, along with restricting immigration, were his two big signature issues. If he flips on those, then he stands for absolutely nothing.

      Disclaimer: As someone who didn't vote for him, I have been happy to see all his flipping to positions that actually make sense, and I would be even happier if he flips on these as well. But his supporters would rightfully feel betrayed.

    5. Re:I read something else by dehachel12 · · Score: 2

      >s. If he flips on those, then he stands for absolutely nothing.
      you may want to lookup kleptocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    6. Re:I read something else by DrEasy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not sure he's opposed to free trade. He's mostly said that the existing deals were bad. He wants to re-negotiate trades that he considers bad. That doesn't make him anti-free trade.

      Now Sanders was clearly anti-free trade.

      --
      "In our tactical decisions, we are operating contrary to our strategic interest."
    7. Re:I read something else by gtall · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I take exception that Trump stands for absolutely nothing. He stands for himself, and only himself. He'd throw the U.S. under bus if it suited his purpose.

      His modus operandi is well-known. He sees something he doesn't agree with (today, tomorrow might be a different story), finds an opposing figure or group, starts a food fight like he was in high school, and then counters the inevitable blowback with a wookie defense.

    8. Re:I read something else by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Sure, he's flipped on a lot of issues, but opposition to free trade, along with restricting immigration, were his two big signature issues. If he flips on those, then he stands for absolutely nothing.

      Annnnnd Bingo! He stands for very little other than himself, which is close enough to nothing for all intents.

      Now if for some weird reason he and congress decides to stand firm on so many of these issues, the US will begin to find itself isolated as the world moves on. Isolation will lead to dropping the dollar as the standard currency, and adopting the yen.

      The TPP won't be the sole reason, but since the world is very interconnected, it will be come a death by a thousand cuts situation.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    9. Re:I read something else by Rob+Y. · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the parts of the TPP that were bad were the intellectual property bits - and the bit about letting multinational corporations bypass local rules. Trump gave no indication that he's opposed to those things. In fact, his 'winning is everything' ethic might actually favor them.

      The parts of the TTP that were good - yes there were some, and that's where Hillary's 'gold standard' quote came from - had to do with environmental and labor standards that previous trade deals had not included or made enforceable. That plus the prospect of serving as a counterweight to China in the region. On those issues, Trump probably either doesn't care - or doesn't know enough to have an opinion.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    10. Re:I read something else by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      So I assume they're wondering if Abe either knows that Hillary has a non-zero chance or they think Trump could be persuaded to go for it.

      Clinton came out against the TPP too, so whether it's Clinton or Trump, it'd involve them both breaking their campaign promises.

      so he might as well deny others credit for killing the deal he & Hillary negotiated.

      Clinton didn't have a lot to do with the final form of the TPP, most of the seriously contentious stuff coming after 2012. Most of the negotiations involved John Kerry's State Department after she left. It was a very easy decision for her to disassociate herself from it.

      At this stage I don't think anyone seriously thinks Clinton will become President, so whether Abe slept through the election or not, that's not what he's considering. A more likely scenario is that over the next four years someone other than Trump will become President. That might be because he's impeached, it might be that enough electors switch votes to force the election of someone else, or he might lose interest once he's forced to do the job.

      That leaves a fairly wide opening for the TPP, especially assuming the replacement is a Republican.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  5. On November 18 Abe spoke to Trump by dbIII · · Score: 5, Informative

    On November 18 Abe, Prime Minister of Japan, visited the USA and spoke to Trump.
    Abe is now passing Japan's part of the TPP.

    Haven't you guys worked out yet that what Trump said before the election and what he is going to do are different things? He's got a very long history of promising various deals and not delivering.

    1. Re:On November 18 Abe spoke to Trump by whodunit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe we should wait until his ASS ACTUALLY HITS THE CHAIR IN THE FUCKING OVAL OFFICE BEFORE WHINING ABOUT HIM BREAKING HIS PROMISES.

      Unless you plan to do that anyway, no matter what, in which case have the common fucking decency to at least PRETEND you're waiting to see what he does. In my day we did our oppo research by breaking into places and jimmying file cabinets open - in the dark, because flashlights would get you Watergated! Now you kids just "hack into something." Or send some DUMBASS an email that says "gib login pls" and Bob's yer uncle!

      GET OFF MY LAWN!

  6. 12 countries since 2008, not only USA today by raymorris · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Twelve countries are party to TPP. It only has to be ratified by six in order to become binding (on those six). As currently written, the US and Japan have to be among the six, but certainly the other 11, or some of them, could decide to put it into effect among themselves. TPP can exist without the US, if Japan is included. Heck, the US isn't party to a precursor of TPP, the Transpacific Economic Partnership Agreement.

    Also, Trump could have a heart attack tomorrow - he may never become president. After all these years of negotiations, there's no reason for Japan to just drop it, based only on something someone said during a campaign; people say all kinds of things during campaigns. The US could even ratify TPP in 2020, after Trump leaves office. (At least I don't know if any time limit offhand.)

    1. Re:12 countries since 2008, not only USA today by fermion · · Score: 4, Insightful
      At the very least, there is going to be a renegotiation of the trade deal if the US drops out. Trade is critical to the growth of the world economy, and if the US wants to play isolationist and not reap those benefits, other countries will bind together to do so.

      More realistically, Trump is playing another con game. While he seems to prefer to produce his clothing in Mexico(which is why a tariff is not likely to happen), the building material for his developments still overwhelming come from Asia. Even Congress when given an opportunity to establish that we use only US materials to build using US tax dollars was unwilling to impose that restriction. Furthermore, his daughter depends on Asia to produce her goods.

      So what we know is anything that streamlines trade with Asia makes Trump rich, and anything that makes it harder makes him less rich. Now, Trump may want to renegotiate the deal on specific points that do not benefit his company, so it makes sense that he would be talking about not ratifying the deal as a negotiating tactic.

      But if you want to know what will happen, look in the news about how the supply chain for US manufacturers is world wide, how any disruption with Asia would raise prices and cost jobs, and the number of Goldman Sachs former executives in his cabinet.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    2. Re:12 countries since 2008, not only USA today by mutantSushi · · Score: 3, Informative

      It only has to be ratified by six countries... that comprise at least 85% of GDP of the signatories The US alone is roughly 65% of the combined GDP by my calculations, and thus necessary for TPP. That is written into the terms of the agreement, and can't be changed without creating a new agreement. Obviously there are other trade agreements out there, and other countries can join them without US.

    3. Re:12 countries since 2008, not only USA today by mutantSushi · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not ratifying TPP means US will "not reap the benefits of it". OK, those being... 0.4% GDP growth by 2030 according to World Bank? That just is not grounds for "absolutely must have this agreement". And what of this "disruption" of trade with Asia? Not passing TPP does not disrupt anything. It means simply the status quo continues. TPP is the disruption to status quo relation of law and society. Yeah, Trump is an idiot and you hate him. Doesn't really have much bearing on TPP.

    4. Re:12 countries since 2008, not only USA today by Cyberax · · Score: 4, Informative

      TPP is not a trade deal per se - the trade barriers are already low. It's a geopolitical deal to make sure the Pacific Rim countries are not dominated by China in future. TPP does have some nice areas - it requires Pacific countries to establish minimum wage laws, pollution controls and workplace safety regulations in line with other countries.

      Unfortunately, copyright lobby is also using as a Trojan horse to smuggle in pro-copyright laws.

      And you can bet that China is not sleeping - they are promoting their One-Belt-One-Road initiative to make a China-dominated trade pact.

  7. Re:~~~ China Hoverboard ~~~ by TroII · · Score: 2

    You're a year late, hoverboards are old and busted. Do you have any Tickle Me Elmos?

  8. Re:As a fan of public domain and foe of infinite c by dbIII · · Score: 2

    I'm glad the US is pulling out of TPP

    From this news it looks very much that it is not.
    Enjoy the exciting times of the uncertainty of living under the rule of someone who thinks autocracy is a good idea and has few to oppose him. A few months ago The Word of Trump was no TPP, while now it looks like The Word of Trump as uttered to Abe is that there will be a TPP. House and Senate will not stop him and the Supreme Court will be stacked with enough new members to ensure Trump gets his way.

  9. Of course he will sign the TPP by quax · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While he is cosing up to Russia, the latest insults towards China indicate that the latter will be designated as the new hostile nation #1, and the TPP is all about containing and insulating China.

  10. Well... by God+of+Lemmings · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The only reason I think that Japan would have done it, is if they think that the current coup to put Hillary in power by flooding the news with propaganda about "Russian hacking" will definitely succeed, which will result in Hillary signing the TTP into law. I would rather not actually see this happen, considering how horrible the law actually is (Personally I don't like the idea of it killing the Dojinshi industry, not to mention the US jobs and jobs of whatever other modern country joins in). This was more likely a leak than a hack, considering the suspicious death of Seth Rich.

    --
    Non sequitur: Your facts are uncoordinated.
    1. Re:Well... by locater16 · · Score: 2

      Let's not forget, the mole people really want that copyright extension to extend to everywhere. Their media empire parts such as Disney love to have permanent control, hell since Stan Lee and George Lucas are still alive they've got at least 70+ years on a lot of Marvel and all of Star Wars. I would of course not like to see the TPP be brought into law. Killing off Dojinshi industry will be bad for us lizard people, our base of operations is shrinking ever more to the mole people, and our last ditch effort with Trump is turning sour. I mean seriously, never trust an owl jew like Trump, will stab you in the back first chance they get!

    2. Re:Well... by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only person who has said they "do not believe" the intelligence is Trump himself.

      And the FBI. Which reported a very different set of conclusions.

      Regardless, what is it you think happened? Voting machines got hacked or something? What happened was some leaked email. The only reason that had any impact on the election was because it showed how corrupt the Clinton machine and the DNC are. That might have been the last straw for some people not interested in voting for Hillary anyway, but it didn't cause the complete blow-out of all of those state legislative seats, the governorships, both houses of congress, etc. The Russians didn't have any meaningful impact at all. Hillary was a terrible candidate who lied at every turn and heaped scorn on the people she said she wanted to lead. And people across the country were sick of it. California and NY were taken for granted by Clinton, and those states did indeed step up and do their obedient liberal duty. But lots of other liberal-centric places refused to take the Hillary bait, and defected or stayed home. If you think that was about the Russians, you're delusional. Yes, the CIA's right - the Russians definitely had a preference for who they wanted to see win. Just like the British government did. And the Italians. And China. And the government of Canada. So what?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Well... by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 2

      Hmm, the way I remember it, Hillary was against TPP too. In fact, I don't see much difference between the two of them anymore.

    4. Re:Well... by ScentCone · · Score: 2

      If they were trying to help us out, they should have released both; not just the opponent of the one they wanted to win.

      What makes you think that there were leaks of anyone else's email, besides the DNC stuff? Assange says the leaks were internal, not Russian hackers. Do you have better information than he does?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  11. Re:As a fan of public domain and foe of infinite c by Desler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You actually believed Trump when he said that? How dumb are you?

  12. Re:It's about Crushing the Agricultural Associatio by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 2

    Incidentally, this is also part of why the Obama administration, and others before it, wanted a trade agreement - because we want to sell more agricultural products to Japan. The copyright stuff was shoehorned in there by the **AA, and it was an unfortunate side effect, not the initial intent.

  13. Quod Erat Demonstrandum by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny

    The only reason I think that Japan would have done it, is if they think that the current coup to put Hillary in power by flooding the news with propaganda about "Russian hacking" will definitely succeed, which will result in Hillary signing the TTP into law. I would rather not actually see this happen, considering how horrible the law actually is (Personally I don't like the idea of it killing the Dojinshi industry, not to mention the US jobs and jobs of whatever other modern country joins in). This was more likely a leak than a hack, considering the suspicious death of Seth Rich.

    Trump supporters don't drink the kool-aid - they snort the powder.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  14. Whine when they break by dbIII · · Score: 2

    OVAL OFFICE BEFORE WHINING ABOUT HIM BREAKING HIS PROMISES

    He's already breaking some with his appointments. Why give him a free pass when cries for Hillary to be lock locked up happened any time Goldman Sachs connections were mentioned?

  15. Whatever happens... by MrKaos · · Score: 4, Funny

    It must be the lefties fault.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  16. Re:Get over it. by dehachel12 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >Hillary lost
    I am over that. But I am still not over Bernie losing.

  17. Re:It's about Crushing the Agricultural Associatio by Kagetsuki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm guessing you live in Japan like me, so just wanted to point out for anyone interested that this is pretty much dead on. I would like to point out that it's neglecting the immensely positive push it got from car and electronics companies. If the TPP passed as-is Japanese cars and electronics could easily take over the US market place and would likely decimate the US domestic market. Really it would have been great for Japan, which is why I personally wanted it to pass, but the honest truth is as Trump points out it was an abysmal deal for the US. Personally I hope they just renegotiate it.

  18. Re:What do you mean, "WHY"? by jandersen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ah, the new and exciting world of post-truth, where all you need is an opinion and an inflated ego. It worked for Trump, so it must work for everybody else.

    It is obvious why they do this: They want the TPP to work, and they are sending a political signal, not least to Trump. but also to other, interested parties in the region. Basically, what they say is: "We want closer cooperation - ideally with the US, but we might get this to work without." I haven't studied the details (or even the headlines, tbh) of the TPP, but given the internet, easy travel, trans-national corporations etc, globalisation is a fact, and if the US want to isolate themselves, the rest of the world will go on without. You may point to Brexit, but the take-away point here is that UK is in no way talking about isolationism - quite the opposite, in fact: they want to become more international than they felt they were able to in EU (I don't agree with Brexit, but that's beside the point). Globalisation will happen with you or to you; I think it is better to take active part in the processes and see if you can influence them in your favour. By refusing to be part of it and sulking in a corner, all you achieve is to be left out of influence.

  19. Re:It's about Crushing the Agricultural Associatio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but the honest truth is as Trump points out it was an abysmal deal for the US

    The negative impact on the US auto industry really misses the point, protectionism is almost always to the detriment of the country as a whole. Under the deal the Japanese agricultural industry suffers, but all Japanese people get cheaper food. It's a net benefit to Japan, even though it has a negative impact on that specific industry. At the same time the US agricultural industry gains from this.

    Likewise: under the deal the US auto industry suffers, but all Americans get cheaper cars. Since almost all Americans drive, it's a net benefit to the US. And, at the same time, the Japanese auto industry gains from this. Exactly the same situation as above.

    Third thing: the copyright stuff is being handled in the opposite way - favor the industry over the whole population. This is why people protest it, but it's easy to see why the politicians do it this way. The loss to industry is easy to quantify, even if they do give ridiculously inflated numbers, but the monetary benefit of shorter copyright terms is very hard to measure. You're trying to estimate the value of all of the works which could exist but don't, thanks to copyright. So politicians favor the safer option, ignoring all of the non-monetary value of the potential works that they're stifling, and go with copyright protectionism.

  20. Re:Get over it. by Desler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Translation: "Stop pointing out that i got conned by a liar! Waaaaaaaah!"

  21. Re:Answer: China by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

    China may be rapidly militarizing, but even at current rates it is decades away from being able to project force with the ability of the US and even some of the US's allies. China has exactly one aircraft carrier actually in the water at this point.

    And while I think Trump is a farcical moron, all he's really doing with this latest saber rattling is making open that which has been US policy for decades. Yes, the US won't acknowledge the Taiwanese government, even as arms it to the teeth and makes it clear that any attempt by China to seize Taiwan would lead to retaliation. And really, with China's military as it is, it's dubious it could even take Taiwan, which is one of the most fortified chunks of rock on the planet.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  22. Re:What do you mean, "WHY"? by imgod2u · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've studied the TPP. That anyone who is in favor of American exceptionalism would be against it is mind-blowing. The U.S. and Japan basically bullied a bunch of smaller but up-and-coming countries to play by Westernized rules with a lot of exceptions that American and Japanese industries don't have to follow those same rules as swiftly (think agriculture, which is exempt from a lot of the TPP tariff reductions).

    It basically extends U.S. corporate hegemony to China's doorstep. And before you go all "but but corporations are greedy!" you want American corporations to do well more than you want a Chinese state-sponsored company to do well.