A potential TPP gotcha

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › A potential TPP gotcha

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ... | 22

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1401166 6-Oct-2015 17:48

shk292: And so the conspiracy theories and alarmism start all over again...

The trade minister says no change to parallel importing but some bloke on a blog somewhere has heard it's now illegal, so that must be true

Where's the source though that says that all parallel importing will remain exactly the same as it is currently? That Beehive documents say

New Zealand will not need to change its laws on parallel importing or require internet service providers to terminate accounts for internet copyright infringements.

But that doesn't mean the same thing, as saying everything will stay exactly the same from my interpretation.. Just skimming through the TPPA stuff on the link, it is all very broadly written and open to interpretation.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1401167 6-Oct-2015 17:52

gzt:
vexxxboy:
gzt: Now the deal is signed, the process of governments selling it to their own electorates is beginning. There is still a short period where they have monopoly of information advantage ; ).

why , there's only a vocal minority who actually care, most people couldn't care less.

The concern about PHARMAC was/is widespread. If there is no real impact it will not be a problem. It is likely our government will take a similar approach to Canada and increase subsidies for the affected area.

Canada's dairy subsidy increase is a sure election winner for next week but they will have problems sustaining it in the long term.

Another 100m on our pharmac budget (i think that was a govt estimate) it won't break the bank and it is probably sustainable but it does start changing the structure of our pharmaceutical market. I'm pretty sure they have not agreed to drug company supervision of the buying process that would be pretty bad.

It was reported by TVNZ that after 15 years, this could be around 2 billion benefit for NZers. Not too sure if that is in todays money, or 2030's money, but 100million cost to taxpayers on just pharmacs additional costs, is around 5% over a year. That doesn't sound too bad on the face of it. But estimated projections are often wrong. Look at the governments estimates for the Christchurch earthquake costs for a prime example of that.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1401168 6-Oct-2015 17:54

Yes agreed. Rule no 1 of NZ politics estimate as conservative as possible. Then dream up all kinds of excuses later on.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#1401236 6-Oct-2015 19:14

So all the drama, protests, hyperbole, suspicion, speculation, and rumor came to almost nothing?

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1401240 6-Oct-2015 19:21

scuwp: So all the drama, protests, hyperbole, suspicion, speculation, and rumor came to almost nothing?

So all the hype, speculation, spin, confidence, drama, and false hopes came to almost nothing?

Probably true.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#1401248 6-Oct-2015 19:33

scuwp: So all the drama, protests, hyperbole, suspicion, speculation, and rumor came to almost nothing?

Pretty much.

But no real surprises there. Every round of trade liberalisation and tariff in the last 30 years has prompted hand-waving shouts of "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" from those who are ideologically opposed to freer trade.

Usually a curious mix of left wingers who hark back to a misty vision of a centrally-planned fortress NZ utopia that never was, accompanied by the far more rational, but very self-interested, prophets of doom from selected business interests on the right who are see their cozy little protected hammerlock on consumers being broken. And in the end, some vested interests lose out and the country as a whole comes out better off.

I remember the 70s and early 80s, with ridiculous government intervention in the economy and massive import barriers:

very limited choice in the shops - any shirt you wanted, as long as it was a polyester Wyndham
clothing, footwear and cars being virtually unaffordable for the for the average family courtesy quotas and ludicrous tariffs
currency rationing by the Reserve Bank if you wanted to go overseas on holiday
no easy avenue to bypass rip-off retailers for a whole range of products (books, music, clothes.....)
massive miss-allocation of capital to industries in which we had no comparative advantage
soaring inflation

It wasn't that great. Beats me why anyone thinks we were better off.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1401251 6-Oct-2015 19:49

JimmyH:
scuwp: So all the drama, protests, hyperbole, suspicion, speculation, and rumor came to almost nothing?

Pretty much.

But no real surprises there. Every round of trade liberalisation and tariff in the last 30 years has prompted hand-waving shouts of "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" from those who are ideologically opposed to freer trade.

Usually a curious mix of left wingers who hark back to a misty vision of a centrally-planned fortress NZ utopia that never was, accompanied by the far more rational, but very self-interested, prophets of doom from selected business interests on the right who are see their cozy little protected hammerlock on consumers being broken. And in the end, some vested interests lose out and the country as a whole comes out better off.

I remember the 70s and early 80s, with ridiculous government intervention in the economy and massive import barriers:

very limited choice in the shops - any shirt you wanted, as long as it was a polyester Wyndham
clothing, footwear and cars being virtually unaffordable for the for the average family courtesy quotas and ludicrous tariffs
currency rationing by the Reserve Bank if you wanted to go overseas on holiday
no easy avenue to bypass rip-off retailers for a whole range of products (books, music, clothes.....)
massive miss-allocation of capital to industries in which we had no comparative advantage
soaring inflation
It wasn't that great. Beats me why anyone thinks we were better off.

Good lord.
I doubt anybody is arguing in favour of a return to Muldoonism. In his defense though (RIP) he is probably unfairly maligned, as he (until the bitter end) wasn't "radical" in any way - just a follower of widely accepted economic othodoxy of the time, as we have become now.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1401371 6-Oct-2015 22:09

Nobody in this thread has made that kind of argument. Nobody in NZ either as far as I am aware.

There are some serious dangers. Canada has been sued successfully multiple times under NAFTA mostly for environmental and health regulations:

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/6471460

Now TPP is not NAFTA but nobody wants to see NZ subject to that situation. The prime minister knows that and has stated it will never happen under TPP. Well I really hope he is correct about that and there is no potential for arm twisting over those things.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1401384 6-Oct-2015 22:34

gzt: Nobody in this thread has made that kind of argument. Nobody in NZ either as far as I am aware.

There are some serious dangers. Canada has been sued successfully multiple times under NAFTA mostly for environmental and health regulations:

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/6471460

Now TPP is not NAFTA but nobody wants to see NZ subject to that situation. The prime minister knows that and has stated it will never happen under TPP. Well I really hope he is correct about that and there is no potential for arm twisting over those things.

wow! it happens!

Very possibly a catch 22 situation. Don't be part of a trade deal and miss the boat but won't get sued. Get a chance to trade and get a chance to get sued. I'm not an exporter so I'd prefer not to get on the boat UNLESS that means I'm missing out. Am I?(rhetorical)

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1401391 6-Oct-2015 22:45

joker97:
gzt: Nobody in this thread has made that kind of argument. Nobody in NZ either as far as I am aware.

There are some serious dangers. Canada has been sued successfully multiple times under NAFTA mostly for environmental and health regulations:

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/6471460

Now TPP is not NAFTA but nobody wants to see NZ subject to that situation. The prime minister knows that and has stated it will never happen under TPP. Well I really hope he is correct about that and there is no potential for arm twisting over those things.

wow! it happens!

Very possibly a catch 22 situation. Don't be part of a trade deal and miss the boat but won't get sued. Get a chance to trade and get a chance to get sued. I'm not an exporter so I'd prefer not to get on the boat UNLESS that means I'm missing out. Am I?(rhetorical)

You are an importer (either directly or indirectly) so presumably we will see the cost of things being imported from TPP countries fall as NZ tariffs etc are removed?

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1401470 7-Oct-2015 08:30

Fred99:
JimmyH:
scuwp: So all the drama, protests, hyperbole, suspicion, speculation, and rumor came to almost nothing?

Pretty much.

But no real surprises there. Every round of trade liberalisation and tariff in the last 30 years has prompted hand-waving shouts of "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" from those who are ideologically opposed to freer trade.

Usually a curious mix of left wingers who hark back to a misty vision of a centrally-planned fortress NZ utopia that never was, accompanied by the far more rational, but very self-interested, prophets of doom from selected business interests on the right who are see their cozy little protected hammerlock on consumers being broken. And in the end, some vested interests lose out and the country as a whole comes out better off.

I remember the 70s and early 80s, with ridiculous government intervention in the economy and massive import barriers:

very limited choice in the shops - any shirt you wanted, as long as it was a polyester Wyndham
clothing, footwear and cars being virtually unaffordable for the for the average family courtesy quotas and ludicrous tariffs
currency rationing by the Reserve Bank if you wanted to go overseas on holiday
no easy avenue to bypass rip-off retailers for a whole range of products (books, music, clothes.....)
massive miss-allocation of capital to industries in which we had no comparative advantage
soaring inflation
It wasn't that great. Beats me why anyone thinks we were better off.

Good lord.
I doubt anybody is arguing in favor of a return to Muldoonism. In his defense though (RIP) he is probably unfairly maligned, as he (until the bitter end) wasn't "radical" in any way - just a follower of widely accepted economic othodoxy of the time, as we have become now.

It wasn't just Muldoon. It was all the govs for years before him that kept fortress NZ going like it was..

Regards,

Old3eyes

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1401504 7-Oct-2015 09:21

JimmyH:
Every round of trade liberalisation and tariff in the last 30 years has prompted hand-waving shouts of "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" from those who are ideologically opposed to freer trade.

Usually a curious mix of left wingers who hark back to a misty vision of a centrally-planned fortress NZ utopia that never was, accompanied by the far more rational, but very self-interested, prophets of doom from selected business interests on the right who are see their cozy little protected hammerlock on consumers being broken. And in the end, some vested interests lose out and the country as a whole comes out better off.

I remember the 70s and early 80s, with ridiculous government intervention in the economy and massive import barriers:

very limited choice in the shops - any shirt you wanted, as long as it was a polyester Wyndham
clothing, footwear and cars being virtually unaffordable for the for the average family courtesy quotas and ludicrous tariffs
currency rationing by the Reserve Bank if you wanted to go overseas on holiday
no easy avenue to bypass rip-off retailers for a whole range of products (books, music, clothes.....)
massive miss-allocation of capital to industries in which we had no comparative advantage
soaring inflation
It wasn't that great. Beats me why anyone thinks we were better off.

Labelling TPPA opponents as "opposed to freer trade" and "left wingers who hark back to a misty vision of a centrally-planned fortress NZ utopia" and "selected business interests on the right who are see their cozy little protected hammerlock on consumers" is inaccurate.

I'm all in favour of freer trade. My objection to the TPPA is that it appears to transfer power from our Govt, over which we have some (limited) control through periodic free elections, to multinational corporates whose sole motivation is their own profits. Ultimately this will lead to a worse lifestyle for most people.

I too remember the 70s and 80s (and to some extent the 60s) and agree with all those points. However, I'd say that "currency rationing" became impossible given the appearance of credit cards, and that bypassing rip-off retailers was due to the rise of Internet shopping. Removal of these things wasn't due to any wiser economic policy, just a pragmatic outcome of uncontrollable changes. I do also remember in the 70s and 80s:

Adequate & universal tertiary student allowances
A Prime Minister with a bach at Hatfields Beach rather than a holiday home in Hawaii
Effective EDs where you didn't have to wait 12 hours for treatment
Health insurance being unnecessary
High employment, with it being normal for students to get well-paid holiday work
No beggars on Queen St
Safe communities where it was normal for children to walk to & from school unaccompanied

DaveB

1139 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1401570 7-Oct-2015 10:30

frankv:

No beggars on Queen St

And let's not forget ........... No smokers picking up butts off the street and out of ashtrays!

sir1963

3260 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1401607 7-Oct-2015 10:57

mattwnz:
gzt:
vexxxboy:
gzt: Now the deal is signed, the process of governments selling it to their own electorates is beginning. There is still a short period where they have monopoly of information advantage ; ).

why , there's only a vocal minority who actually care, most people couldn't care less.

The concern about PHARMAC was/is widespread. If there is no real impact it will not be a problem. It is likely our government will take a similar approach to Canada and increase subsidies for the affected area.

Canada's dairy subsidy increase is a sure election winner for next week but they will have problems sustaining it in the long term.

Another 100m on our pharmac budget (i think that was a govt estimate) it won't break the bank and it is probably sustainable but it does start changing the structure of our pharmaceutical market. I'm pretty sure they have not agreed to drug company supervision of the buying process that would be pretty bad.

It was reported by TVNZ that after 15 years, this could be around 2 billion benefit for NZers. Not too sure if that is in todays money, or 2030's money, but 100million cost to taxpayers on just pharmacs additional costs, is around 5% over a year. That doesn't sound too bad on the face of it. But estimated projections are often wrong. Look at the governments estimates for the Christchurch earthquake costs for a prime example of that.

Positive benefits are grossly over represented (Power shares anyone ?)
Negative impacts are grossly underestimated.

However the touted "benefits" don't add up to much, another drought in Canterbury would have a bigger impact on GDP, as do exchange rate fluctuations.

the NZ GDP last year was US$188 Billion dollars ($NZ287 Billion)
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/gdp

so "about 2 Billion" is about 1%, i.e. near the level of a rounding error.

This is why politicians talk numbers so often. 2 Billion to the general population sounds like a LOT of money, but in terms of GDP, not so much.

To put it into perspective, last quarter Apple made US18 Billion profit, so the benefits to NZ are about 10 days of Apples profits.

sir1963

3260 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1401615 7-Oct-2015 11:06

JimmyH:
scuwp: So all the drama, protests, hyperbole, suspicion, speculation, and rumor came to almost nothing?

Pretty much.

But no real surprises there. Every round of trade liberalisation and tariff in the last 30 years has prompted hand-waving shouts of "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" from those who are ideologically opposed to freer trade.

Usually a curious mix of left wingers who hark back to a misty vision of a centrally-planned fortress NZ utopia that never was, accompanied by the far more rational, but very self-interested, prophets of doom from selected business interests on the right who are see their cozy little protected hammerlock on consumers being broken. And in the end, some vested interests lose out and the country as a whole comes out better off.

I remember the 70s and early 80s, with ridiculous government intervention in the economy and massive import barriers:

very limited choice in the shops - any shirt you wanted, as long as it was a polyester Wyndham
clothing, footwear and cars being virtually unaffordable for the for the average family courtesy quotas and ludicrous tariffs
currency rationing by the Reserve Bank if you wanted to go overseas on holiday
no easy avenue to bypass rip-off retailers for a whole range of products (books, music, clothes.....)
massive miss-allocation of capital to industries in which we had no comparative advantage
soaring inflation
It wasn't that great. Beats me why anyone thinks we were better off.

THAT is what the TPPA can bring back.
Geo locking of goods and services , we already have geolocked printer cartridges etc
Being able to sue when the licence of the goods gets harmed when other companies parallel import
Longer Patents, keeping medicines/goods at a higher price because generic/third party items can not be imported
Longer Copyright period.
Inability to maintain control over NZ land, the TPPA countries could come and buy all of NZ if it wanted and we become tenants in our own country

1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | ... | 22