TPP details leaked - be afraid...

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › TPP details leaked - be afraid...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#934482 15-Nov-2013 15:09

jeffnz: yes it is off topic and you are really only splitting hairs, a government 'wins' an election based on seats, it really doesn't matter if 2 million vote or 1 thats the law, like it or not.

Sure. But my point was that winning an election is not the same as voter endorsement of specific policy.

Twitter: ajobbins

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek

#934487 15-Nov-2013 15:22

ajobbins:
jeffnz: yes it is off topic and you are really only splitting hairs, a government 'wins' an election based on seats, it really doesn't matter if 2 million vote or 1 thats the law, like it or not.

Sure. But my point was that winning an election is not the same as voter endorsement of specific policy.

True, and it does seem that an awful lot of people seem to be saying "yes I voted for National, but I thought they were kidding about the asset sales when they mentioned them prior to the 2008 election, then again in detail prior to the 2011 election". But the point I was making is that at least National stood up repeatedly and said "If you vote for us, we are going to sell off assets". The only mention of the TPP has been vague talk of opening up the US to our dairy exports. Nothing about wrecking Pharmac, stopping parallel imports, increasing copyright terms or any of the other interesting leaked bits on Wikileaks. In a word, transparency.

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#934490 15-Nov-2013 15:45

By nature, free trade deals are often negotiated in secret (This isn't new), the issue with TPP is the extreme positions being taken by the US.

I really don't understand why everyone seems to be so keen on a free trade deal with the US. My understanding is that prior and current free trade deals with the US by other countries have never turned out well for anyone but the US.

Twitter: ajobbins

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#934507 15-Nov-2013 16:27

radicall:

Thank you for recognising it is a bigger issue and my passion for it.

Cheers.

I was trying to be polite, I don't actually see it as a big issue

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

k1wi

484 posts

Ultimate Geek

#934518 15-Nov-2013 16:48

ajobbins: By nature, free trade deals are often negotiated in secret (This isn't new), the issue with TPP is the extreme positions being taken by the US.

I really don't understand why everyone seems to be so keen on a free trade deal with the US. My understanding is that prior and current free trade deals with the US by other countries have never turned out well for anyone but the US.

For the same reason as free trade agreements with China are such a big deal - because they're the two most important players economically and geopolitically...

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#934536 15-Nov-2013 17:14

k1wi: For the same reason as free trade agreements with China are such a big deal - because they're the two most important players economically and geopolitically...

EXCEPT: We know we're going to get a raw deal before we've even broached the subject.

Twitter: ajobbins

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Vocus

#934545 15-Nov-2013 17:27

IMO the only ones who think America are "important" are themselves. We've not had free trade with them for a long time, and as far as I can see, we're fine without it. We should not be kow-towing to these bullies! We stood up to them about nuclear warships and nuclear weapons, and now's the time to do it again. If only we didn't have such spineless, money hungry leadership, maybe we would be.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#934549 15-Nov-2013 17:32

ubergeeknz:. If only we didn't have such spineless, money hungry leadership, maybe we would be.

thats a bit OTT, why call people spineless and money hungry, that's just emotional ranting.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Vocus

#934563 15-Nov-2013 17:46

OK, how about leadership with a track record in bending over when overseas interests ask (eg. the Hobbit deal, Dotcom Raid) or valuing monetary gains over social costs (eg. the Skycity deal, changes to benefits). Unemotional enough?

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#934566 15-Nov-2013 17:50

ubergeeknz: OK, how about leadership with a track record in bending over when overseas interests ask (eg. the Hobbit deal, Dotcom Raid) or valuing monetary gains over social costs (eg. the Skycity deal, changes to benefits). Unemotional enough?

subjective to say the least and selective. Basically I'd have to say its rubbish but that's my opinion of yours

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Vocus

#934567 15-Nov-2013 17:51

jeffnz:
ubergeeknz: OK, how about leadership with a track record in bending over when overseas interests ask (eg. the Hobbit deal, Dotcom Raid) or valuing monetary gains over social costs (eg. the Skycity deal, changes to benefits). Unemotional enough?

subjective to say the least and selective. Basically I'd have to say its rubbish but that's my opinion of yours

You have any examples to the contrary?

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#934573 15-Nov-2013 17:58

ubergeeknz:
jeffnz:
ubergeeknz: OK, how about leadership with a track record in bending over when overseas interests ask (eg. the Hobbit deal, Dotcom Raid) or valuing monetary gains over social costs (eg. the Skycity deal, changes to benefits). Unemotional enough?

subjective to say the least and selective. Basically I'd have to say its rubbish but that's my opinion of yours

You have any examples to the contrary?

I don't need examples I was pointing out yours were subjective as to what the intentions were/are, I'm pretty sure I won't change your thinking my main point is the petty insults and character assassinations some people use when it comes to politics that don't agree with theirs is boring.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Vocus

#934586 15-Nov-2013 18:05

jeffnz:
ubergeeknz:
jeffnz:
ubergeeknz: OK, how about leadership with a track record in bending over when overseas interests ask (eg. the Hobbit deal, Dotcom Raid) or valuing monetary gains over social costs (eg. the Skycity deal, changes to benefits). Unemotional enough?

subjective to say the least and selective. Basically I'd have to say its rubbish but that's my opinion of yours

You have any examples to the contrary?

I don't need examples I was pointing out yours were subjective as to what the intentions were/are, I'm pretty sure I won't change your thinking my main point is the petty insults and character assassinations some people use when it comes to politics that don't agree with theirs is boring.

Politics is subjective, that's the thing right? Your good is my bad and so on. We all have a right to an opinion. Mine is that our government bends over too much to foreign interests and does not protect NZ's own interests enough. It is my opinion. And you are free to disagree. But saying it's subjective is somewhat redundant.

My main point is, TPP gives away a lot of freedom, and I don't that the benefits to us of having a free trade with the USA outweigh this fact. The worst part to me is that it is being negotiated in secret, which is not acceptable in a democratic society. Again, my opinion. But a reasonable one, that we should all be privy to things that have the potential of affecting our day to day lives. And if it's for the common good, why keep it a secret?

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#934587 15-Nov-2013 18:09

ubergeeknz:
jeffnz:
ubergeeknz:
jeffnz:
ubergeeknz: OK, how about leadership with a track record in bending over when overseas interests ask (eg. the Hobbit deal, Dotcom Raid) or valuing monetary gains over social costs (eg. the Skycity deal, changes to benefits). Unemotional enough?

subjective to say the least and selective. Basically I'd have to say its rubbish but that's my opinion of yours

You have any examples to the contrary?

I don't need examples I was pointing out yours were subjective as to what the intentions were/are, I'm pretty sure I won't change your thinking my main point is the petty insults and character assassinations some people use when it comes to politics that don't agree with theirs is boring.

Politics is subjective, that's the thing right? Your good is my bad and so on. We all have a right to an opinion. Mine is that our government bends over too much to foreign interests and does not protect NZ's own interests enough. It is my opinion. And you are free to disagree. But saying it's subjective is somewhat redundant.

My main point is, TPP gives away a lot of freedom, and I don't that the benefits to us of having a free trade with the USA outweigh this fact. The worst part to me is that it is being negotiated in secret, which is not acceptable in a democratic society. Again, my opinion. But a reasonable one, that we should all be privy to things that have the potential of affecting our day to day lives. And if it's for the common good, why keep it a secret?

I tend to agree with your main point but disagree with the childish insults that you seem to think you need to make your point.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#934609 15-Nov-2013 19:30

ubergeeknz: OK, how about leadership with a track record in bending over when overseas interests ask (eg. the Hobbit deal, Dotcom Raid) or valuing monetary gains over social costs (eg. the Skycity deal, changes to benefits). Unemotional enough?

I think it's a bit of a weak argument though. I personally don't agree with either the Hobbit deal (or any form of subsidy to the film industry, domestic or foreign, for that matter), or with the SkyCity proposal.

However, there is at least a case to be argued that they weighed up the costs (more pokies, taxpayer dollars etc) against the benefits (jobs, taxes, international profile, tourism) and decided that, on balance, agreeing was in the country's interest.

I don't agree that they were the right decisions to make. However, its a huge leap from that to conclude that they knowingly acted against the interests of the country just for their own benefit, or some alleged shadowy "foreign mates".

It isn't only the Nats who make such deals. Labour and the Alliance/NLP/Progressives (ie Anderton) all agreed deals in their time (eg assistance for the Lord of the Rings Trilogy). While I don't agree with that either, I'm at least prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt - that they made a decision because they felt that, on balance, they honestly considered advantages to NZ exceeded the disadvantages. I'm prepared to give the current mob the same benefit.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5