Tobacco Issue Puts Pacific Trade Pact at Risk

[bemildred]

A U.S. proposal to prevent the tobacco industry from suing foreign governments over antismoking measures threatens to imperil congressional support for a proposed 12-nation Pacific trade agreement.

With negotiations coming to a head in Atlanta, U.S. trade officials introduced language to single out the tobacco industry and allow countries to block it from using so-called investor-state dispute settlements to sue foreign governments over graphic warning labels, packaging rules and other cigarette restrictions.

The tobacco provision is receiving stiff resistance from Republican Sens. Thom Tillis and Richard Burr of North Carolina, a tobacco-growing state, and from farm-state lawmakers worried that agricultural interests in their districts could face a similar fate.

The opposition highlights the potential for lawmakers to back away from a deal that already has razor-thin support on Capitol Hill. Legislation to expedite the trade agreement through Congress passed the House this year with a 10-vote margin, but now 17 House lawmakers and a handful of senators who voted for the fast-track bill are expressing concern.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/tobacco-issue-puts-pacific-trade-pact-at-risk-1443828381

[WDIM]

1. So does that mean the MJ industry can sue?

States should be sued for prohibition of MJ. They are denying economic prosperity to millions of law abiding citizens. and allowing criminals to corner the market on a plant that is a commodity.

I bet MJ is excluded some where in there. Tobacco industry. What makes them worse than big pharma? Fatty foods? Oil and Gas? chemical producers?

We need to scrap the TPP. Billionaires bringing lawsuits agaist the people and the laws their representatives passed. This gives corporations and billionaires special protection. We are meant to have equal protection under the laws.

[bemildred]

2. They are not able to bribe the Congress enough to get that kind of "support" yet. nt

[WDIM]

3. The criminals pay them more to keep it illegal. nt

[bemildred]

4. They have plenty of money, because it is illegal. nt

[randome]

5. A country can prohibit whatever it wants for whatever reason it wants.

So long as that prohibition is applied across the board to both foreign and domestic companies.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[bemildred]

6. In other words, no encouraging domestic production against foreign competition.

Which is bad economic policy.

[randome]

9. It's not bad if it intertwines the governance of more nations.

In the long term, trade treaties encourage cooperation and less destructive endeavors.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[bemildred]

10. That's an opinion.

Economic development in a Capitalist economic system REQUIRES protection of domestic production, because of the predatory nature of the economic process, or they will get eaten by outsiders. Globalization OBVIOUSLY is monopolistic in its tendencies, that is the idea behind it. It is more about preventing competition than fostering it. Capitalists proceed according to a very simple dog-eat-dog philosophy which works OK for the dogs, the big ones anyway, but is no way to run an economy which has to work for everybody.

Further, locally controlled, bottom-up economic systems are much more efficient that globally managed top-down arrangements, Ii's too clumsy and the information bottlenecks and politics make things freeze up after a while like we are seeing now.

And especially in a post-cheap-hydrocarbon world, which is where we are going like it or not.

[randome]

11. Too many smaller companies are chomping at the bit as much as the larger corporations for the TPP.

Nothing prevents more local control and regulation of U.S.-based companies other than a lack of political will on our side. Unfortunately, I don't see that changing unless we start roundly repudiating the GOP. Which we may well see in our lifetimes. (One can hope.)

Integration will happen regardless. The best thing to do is manage the outcome as best as possible. Otherwise, trading will be done 'on the sly' via black markets.

The TPP is not, by any means, perfect but it's an attempt to manage the inevitable outcome of selling products to a greater number of customers.

As always, IMO.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[bemildred]

12. They are fools looking to get bought out. Pump and dump.

It's become very popular since we legalized financial ponzi schemes as long as they are obfuscated with enough fake math.

The point you raise about black markets is very important however. It's easy to overdo the protection too. What the government ought to do is foster competition, which means protecting the little guys, like I said. Instead we promote mergers and acquisitions and pretend that its good when its merely very profitable for a few. We love monopolies, they make so much money.

[WDIM]

7. Thats from the TPP?

Therefore they can prohibit tobacco but they cant label it?
As long as they apply the same labels to domestic and foreign whats the problem?

[randome]

8. So far as I know, the only labeling issue...

...is when a country implies that their products are somehow safer without any evidence to prove it. Such as 'GMO Free'. If they applied that label to their own products but did not allow similar labels on competing products, they would be ripe for a lawsuit.

So far as I understand it, that is.

As far as MJ goes, we can't expect the entire world to abide by America's health standards as represented by, what, 2 or 3 states that allow MJ to be sold? Not everyone is going to agree it's a good thing.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[WDIM]

13. Everyone should agree

That ruining a person's life invading their homes with automatic weapons and putting peoole in danger for peacefully possessing a plant is not justice.

The prohibition black market only creates more crime and exposes people to hard drugs.

But everyone never agrees on anything. So we repress peoples rights if they dont agree with us? MJ doesnt have to be legal or illegal it is just a plant and like all other plants it should just be. And if a person is growing it and using it peacefully they should be left alone.

Now we should regulate the sale of it and that should be on a local level. It is bad economics to prohibit such a valuable commodity. It would put millions of people to work. Thousands of farmers thousands of store owners and staff. Then there is processing and packaging and theb of course the tax revenue. It is a violation of an indvudual's right to self determination and the right to prosper at one's pursuits.