Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLoony right backs TPP trade deal (in Australia)
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2015/04/loony-right-backs-tpp-trade-deal/
7:20 am on April 7, 2015 By Leith van Onselen
One of the key ring leaders for the loony right, The Australians Judith Sloan, has written an extraordinary attack on those of us who oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement the US lead trade deal between 12 Pacific Rim nations, including Australia. In her typical vitriolic tone, Sloan labels opponents of the TPP as ratbags and misinformed, while completely glossing over the dangers:
One topic that attracts more ratbags making hysteric and misinformed comments than most is the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
just mention the TPP and all the usual suspects release their pent-up hatred of the US, multinational companies, trade and capitalism
The agreement simply has become shorthand for the many developments that the overexcited members of the Left despise, such as more jobs and higher incomes
[The] real beneficiaries of trade agreements are consumers who can gain access to cheaper and better products and services
Has Sloan been living under a rock? Going by the chapters that have been leaked via WikiLeaks, the TPP would establish a US-style regulatory structure that would hand considerable power to US pharmaceutical and digital firms, limiting choice and raising prices for consumers in Australia.
The leaked draft of the intellectual property chapter included a Christmas wishlist for pharmaceutical companies, including the proposal to extend patent protection and strengthen monopolies on clinical data. Most worryingly, the US is seeking patents for new forms of known substances, as well as on new uses for old medicines a proposal which could lead to evergreening, whereby patents can be renewed continuously, forcing-up Australian consumers (and taxpayers) pharmaceutical costs via reduced access to cheaper generic drugs and reduced rights for the Government to regulate medicine prices. Such a move also risks stifling innovation in the event that patent terms are extended too far.
The US has also sought to prevent circumvention of technology that restricts products to certain regions a move that would hand greater power to US content creators and push-up prices for consumers.
FULL story at link.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 401 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Loony right backs TPP trade deal (in Australia) (Original Post)
Omaha Steve
Apr 2015
OP
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)1. "higher incomes"
Wingnuts are stupid, almost beyond belief. It's pretty obvious that one of the main goals of the TPP is to eliminate labor regulations and drive down wages for the sake of corporate profits.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)2. Yeah really
"The agreement simply has become shorthand for the many developments that the overexcited members of the Left despise, such as more jobs and higher incomes
"
That is a howler.
That level of sophistry would make most corporate shills blush.
As if corporations actually wanted higher incomes and more jobs. They couldn't care less about any agreement that wouldn't allow labor arbitrage.