Home | About | Donate

Full Text of TPP Released to Public... And It's Horrible


#1

Full Text of TPP Released to Public... And It's Horrible

Jon Queally, staff writer

It's a disaster for people, the planet, democracy, and the future of the global economy.

That was the immediate assessment of informed critics as world governments, including the United States, on Thursday morning made the full text of the controversial Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) available to the public for the first time.


#2

Obama cares more about his legacy among his soon to be 0.01% comrades than he does his legacy to the planet. Big surprise there, as single payer never got any real consideration. Transparent he is.


#6

Now we Coloradoans need to get on the stick with our two pro-TPP Senators, Michael Bennet (CorpD - CO) and Cory Gardner (CorpR - CO)


#7

Indeed. As Obama's underlings have bragged, his is the most transparent administration in US history.

It's just not transparent in the way that they meant.


#8

What's most mortifying is that in spite of the fact that Mother Nature is sending out more and more S.O.S's... the corporate capitalist big fools insist on marching on into the big muddy.

While it's now known that Exxon's lies (and obfuscation) about oil's link to global warming have led to massive losses of life and lands, THIS corporation is given more power.

And while it's also known that Monsanto lies about the safety of its franken faux foods, and lies about their capacity to feed the multitudes; this disastrous corporation will also receive more power in this deal.

And how DARE politicians hide events and policies of this magnitude while insisting that citizens live in a "free" country?


#9

Everything you state is true and well-argued, but I think the problem goes back much further than Capitalism.

The financial elites that prey upon others through today's version of Shock Doctrine Capitalism are largely heirs of old money; and that old money became concentrated into a small percentage of hands centuries ago.

The various monarchies that ruled in Europe held enormous wealth inside small family circles, and the same became true in America. The present Bush and Clinton family legacies suggest a case in point. (Add in any number of names from the Forbes' billionaire's club... starting with Pete Peterson, the Koch Brothers, the Walton heirs and you notice where a good deal of national, and these days, global POLICY gets made.)

The Vatican, one of the richest institutions in the world accumulated its massive wealth by bribing churchgoers into thinking they could pay for Spiritual Salvation. How often was it that churches gilded in gold left starving parishioners outside to fend for themselves? How many policies of servitude, slavery, and punishing pogroms did the church sponsor?

Wealthy families dominate the political landscape throughout Latin and South America, too. And these families joined hands with corporate overlords to see their own lands raped (and peasant peoples suppressed)... for personal gain. John Perkins explains that these same protocols STILL exist.

The Saudi royals do their arms deals and turn the weapons on any protesters so bold as to challenge their hegemonic controls.

My point is that capitalism came later to the story; and while wishing to fight it is a noble cause, generally until a problem is recognized from its roots (rather than what's apparent from a surface level), it will find a way to grow back... like the Cancer that it is.

No society can allow for immense wealth concentration. A threshold should be reached at which time, anything over that fiscal limit recycles back to The People and/or The Commons.


#10

Don't forget, these deals involve other nations where elites are equally ready, willing, and able to betray their populations, too. Part of the TPP involves building a U.S.-South Asian bulwark to Chinese naval (and that means trade & shipping) power. Japan was promised weapons and a return to its pre-W.W.II status as aggressor in exchange for turning its most pristine islands over to military bases. Just what the world needs--more Mars rules!


#11

Excellent comment Maxwell, oh that i too could say/write things so well.


#12

Yes, they were ready for the poor house. That is the reason that Hillary understands all of us poor slobs.


#13

I keep remembering Obama telling Elizabeth Warren that she was ignorant and had no clue when she stated that TPP was toxic. Another example of his cynicism.


#14

The idea of being absolute monarchs hooks their grandiose egos. They'd love to have absolute power, even the power of actual life and death, with no responsibility. "All for ourselves and nothing for other people".

And they'll keep trying to get it as long as we let them run around loose.

If we want them to stop, we --we here and those like us-- will have to be the ones to do it, because the ones whose job it is to do it have long since been subverted, bought, and paid for.


#15

Excellently stated..


#16

Mars and Pluto... In the time just before Pluto entered Capricorn, I read that that energy of Pluto here, can be expressed either as a Transformation/destruction of the structures by which civilization lives..... meaning, a thorough purging of the hierarchical system... therefore, leveling out power and bringing about more equality..
OR.... Pluto here, in Capricorn, could be that the hierarchy... usurps the power and is able to wield it to become an oligarchical regime.... yes, world wide... It seems that the latter is winning out at this point... we are not finding ways to reach up and take down that oligarchy... we're trying,... but which will win...
We still have until 2023 ... and when Pluto is done in Capricorn... what will it's expression be in Aquarius?.... I think that it could be that the egalitarian/humanitarian energy Aquarius may be able to squash the Capricorn power mongers at last... but, it all shall be seen... WE still have a huge fight on our hands.... Another expression of Capricorn energy that I have read... a more positive expression, is that in Capricorn, the highest form of it's energy is learning to use the resources of the material world, for the good of all and not just the self...


#17

I don't think there's a time in recorded history that the power's that be have readily ceded power to the masses. Nor acted in good faith without unrelenting scrutiny and encouragement i.e. pressure.

I agree with the author when he says......"The good news is that the TPP can still be stopped..." I tend to hearken back to my heroes at times like this and Zinn is one of them.

“The challenge remains. On the other side are formidable forces: money, political power, the major media. On our side are the people of the world and a power greater than money or weapons: the truth.
Truth has a power of its own. Art has a power of its own. That age-old lesson – that everything we do matters – is the meaning of the people’s struggle here in the United States and everywhere. A poem can inspire a movement. A pamphlet can spark a revolution. Civil disobedience can arouse people and provoke us to think, when we organize with one another, when we get involved, when we stand up and speak out together, we can create a power no government can suppress. We live in a beautiful country. But people who have no respect for human life, freedom, or justice have taken it over. It is now up to all of us to take it back.”

― Howard Zinn, A Power Governments Cannot Suppress


#19

The Clinton's were not broke for long in 2001 as Simon & Shuster soon advanced Hillary more than $8 million for a book deal, followed by a $10 million advance for Bill's memoirs from Knopf (a world's record for a non-fiction advance to date), more than offsetting the $11 million they owed in legal fees. Not to mention that Bill was already collecting $100,000 a pop for corporate speaking gigs, giving him an 8 figure annual corporate speaking fee income ever since ($17 million in 2013 alone).

TPP is Obama's ticket to outdoing the Clintons' post-White House gravy train.


#20

To label Obama's chastising Warren for telling the truth is more than "another example of his cynicism", it is another example of Obama lying.


#21

gee, i had hoped to find and begin reading the newly released~with a fine toothed comb~full text of this trans~pacific partnership agreement so that we_the_people might discuss the document, but the site marked as full text offers only bits and pieces, definitions and summaries. last week i searched to find the authors of the tpp and found it has been written not by human beings, but by u.s. corporations~especially energy, agricultural and pharmaceutical. in the name of transparency, what the hell is going on!?

p.s. maxwell, i realise that i didn't specifically address your fine post. i wanted to enter a post that isn't as a reply, but don't know how. :fearful:
hummingbird, aka natureschild


#24

You click reply up at the top, and then it is a reply to the article rather than to another reply.


#25

I'm sure it sucks, but unlike some of the other comments I haven't had time to read much of it yet. I must be a slow reader, anyway, I'm going to be doing my best to read the whole thing. Already there are some interesting fall-outs, for example on 'territory' it seems to define a nation's territory to basically mean whatever it says it is. That's pretty handy for those countries in territorial disputes.
"Annex 1-A
. . .
territory means: . . .
(e)with respect to Japan, the territory of Japan, and all the area beyond its territorial sea, including the sea-bed and subsoil thereof, over which Japan exercises sovereign rights or jurisdiction in accordance with international law including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the laws and regulations of Japan; . . ."
Basically whatever Japan says belongs to it. Or that's my take on this.
Might be reason why South Korea isn't signing, at least just yet, as the wording seems to give the Dokdo Islands to Japan as well as the disputed Daiyu Islands and South Korea would be agreeing to that by signing. Quite the coup.


#26

During the Roosevelt era he proposed a 100% top tax rate on the rich and settled on a tax rate of 94%. The affluent few have worked hard to reduce this to the current level where many pay less tax than those who work for them. The top tax rate should return at least to what they were at the beginning of the Reagan administration (70%) .