Home | About | Donate

Economists Warn Democrats 'Going Too Small' on Infrastructure Risks Economic and Climate Catastrophe

News & Views
#21

I still predict that, at day’s end, the Biden administration won’t make a practical improvement in poor and low-income Americans’ quality of life, however much he wants or even tries to deliver such greatly needed assistance. Fiscal conservative ideology/politics, big business interests and most of the corporate news-media are unwilling to let it pass. No wonder the DNC refuses to allow a Bernie Sanders candidacy, regardless of what voters want.

I can vividly recall the previous Democratic president, Barack Obama, capitulating—like so many other neo-liberal presidents before him and likely after him—to big money politics by drinking (at least what supposedly was) a glass of health-hazardously lead-laden Flint, Michigan water. This signified that the water was safe to drink, which he must have known was not. As a then-admirer of Obama, I muttered ‘Say it isn’t so’.

I henceforth saw U.S. presidents, and Canadian prime ministers, mostly as large corporate and power interest puppets.

#22

What has been decided can be “undecided”, if there’s the will to force the issue. Right?

#23

Youre wrong.

Corporations that invest even a small amount are given certainty. There is no expiration date.
Look up “indirect expropriation”

#24

So there is not a single thing we can do about it?!?
What about something “unprecedented”, like in Trump years, when “unprecedented” meant, has never been done yet & he’d proceed to do as he dam* well pleased anyway. No one stopped him. It turned out that many things were not actually laws & could + were, broken & unspoken “things”.

#25

Ok, looked it up ~ but still not sure I understand…?
Indirect expropriation . In case of an Indirect expropriation , the investor’s legal title to its investment often remains unaffected and it may have physical control of its property, but the investment will still be deprived of its economic use.
Mar 12, 2021

#26

How can they make decisions/deals that can never, ever be undone, no matter what?!
Shouldn’t there be an “escape hatch” of some sort in the legal maneuvers?
BTW ~ am just asking these things, not trying to argue with you. I don’t understand it & you obviously know alot about it.

1 Like
#27

They might be open to criticism now more than any time in he recent past. Learn more about them, then go through the Biden Administration and USTR. He’s the only one who could do it. But the cost might be astronomical, the longer we wait the higher the cost.

Then if we can get the votes (there are 164 countries in the WTO). We have but one vote, but we are probably the most influential country.

Right now our main concern seems tobe maintaining our drug companies monopoly on vaccines. If we were to reverse course there we might be able to get more votes for changes, other countries would then have the right to demand compensation for their losses. I don’t know how those losses are calculated, (the ‘damages’ or valuation. )

It may be this method: ~https://www.iisd.org/events/webinar-valuation-investment-arbitration-spotlight-discounted-cash-flow-analysis

Here is another webinar you might want to view:
~https://www.iisd.org/events/webinar-termination-and-renegotiation-investment-treaties

hope that is insightful! Good luck.(to all of us)

2 Likes
#28

They probably think that way about the social contract. Look it it from their perspective. Machines now do more and more jobs virtually for free. People are living longer. Workers from all over the world can work via the internet remotely. They can alao travel anywhere in the world in 18 hours (although it might be very expensive to do that from some places, but if I needed to be I could be in China or India or most other nations tomorrow now. )

What this is doing is putting tremendous downward pressure on wages. The US oligarchs feel as if they are stuck with the highest prices on workers (thats noit at all true, because lots of countries have higher costs. This is why the WTO meets every two years to liberalize more areas irreversibly. The real reason. Its because the power is shifting to oligarchs more and more.

They dont want to go much longer paying these ‘high’ wages unless the workers are really the best in the world.

What do you do better than anybody else in the world? If not better, what do you do cheaper than anybody else?

I am just trying to think like the oligarchs I have known might think in this situation.
Have you ever read Coase’s “The Problem of Social Cost” ? You should find it and read it.

Its been a very influential paper in the area of “Law and Economics” Its literally changed the legal landscape all around the world.

Its approach is not one that I agree with. I think its unrealistic and evil to think our country can adjust to this change. Nor is it one we ever voted for or would vote for. So what gives them the right to force this so called “law and economics” cult-like ideology’s agenda it onto us? Without informed consent which has never occurred, , Nothing. Its an illegitimate theft of our country and all it stands for.

2 Likes
#29

GATS and its ilk are exactly that, its their escape hatch from our expectations, after all, they own everything, or will soon.

If we don’t want that they will push us out, if we let them. Because our country elevates ownership and property rights above all else. Lots of our laws have built in Catch 22’s.

We all have been convinced a lot of things “would” change for he better in the future but some of those promises are what are called bullshit promises.

There is a good legal essay with that name. Read it.

1 Like
#30

Segments of Biden’s Covid relief proposal actually improved during congressional negotiations. The CTC is a perfect example. It is now $300 per-month for children under 6 and $250 per-month for children over 6. The credit is fully refundable and extends to US territories as well. Reps Torres, DeLauro, and DelBene were key advocates and the improvements were modeled on legislation they proposed in the previous session.

#31

Thank you!

1 Like
#32

No, because corporations make investments so that evidently now, due to ftas gives them rights to certainty (that last forever).

#33

I think they maade it the way they did because they knew countries voters would say stuff like you just did and push them to fix things so they set it up like Ulysses tying himself to the mast. Thats the way that Ellen Gould described it.
Like with drugs - AIDS drugs in the 90s millions of people were dying and saying drugs should be cheaper, and wanting them to break their rules and so on. You know, they were literally dying when certain drugs could save their lives but they wanted $35 a day for the rest of their life… But Yousef Hamied came to them and said, I made these AIDS drugs and will sell them much much cheaper, say for $1 a day instead. Isnt technology wonderful? So tens of millions of peoples lives were saved… But a few corporations got really angry… But they didn’t have a moral leg to stand on. Just WTO . . It took one guy, a billionaire, breaking their rules and embarrassing them to get them to allow him and CIPLA, to sell the drugs for a profitable margin, around a dollar a day. (instead of around $35/day) The US was very angry and didn’t want to allow it but we looked like real assholes for behaving that way… Since so many children were dying.

Anyway, his is an incredible story thats in an award winning film. Fire in the Blood.

Check it out…

1 Like
#34

Thanks…will do. Hmmm…now to find it & rent it. How old is it?

#35

Their web site is fitbmovie dot com I think. It won a sundance award in 2013.

Here is a trailer.
~https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVf2UUu_w4o

There are also some panel discussions online about it. Some of the people in the film hang out on a mailing list ip-health, at keionline dot org. That is the main place the core ip-health issues get discussed online it sees to me.