Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Nov 06, 2015 8:18 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:I completely agree, however the ideological libertarian would claim that the marketplace polices fraud by making it harder for the fraudster to do business as their reputation proceeds them. (Alan Greenspan reportedly made this argument against the CFTC policing derivative investments*)

*Frontline: The Warning

again, my snark was not 'functional' libertarianism, but that hard ideological flavor that says all intervention in the marketplace is bad.


That does happen to some extent, but it's similar to allowing murder because people will naturally treat murderers in accordance with their reputation. Sure, that does happen, but it's messy, and not really a market. Libertarianism isn't anarchy, and I suspect you're thinking of an ideological stance that is closer to the latter than the former.

Market isn't a word that means "place without rules".

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 8:19 pm UTC

Obama has written an OpEd for the Washington Post.

TLDR: If we don't reach a trade agreement, China's agreement will come out first and it'd be bad for us. Obama expects TPP to create jobs as it reduces tariffs imposed on American Goods in other countries.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby commodorejohn » Mon May 02, 2016 8:29 pm UTC

"We have to screw you over so that somebody else doesn't get the chance to! That makes it better, right?"
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 8:39 pm UTC

commodorejohn wrote:"We have to screw you over so that somebody else doesn't get the chance to! That makes it better, right?"


Seems like the links in the opinion piece give strong arguments to the benefits of TPP.

China will want to lower pollution standards. US wants to raise them. That's a major benefit to leaving the US: you don't get to deal with the EPA. But if China were forced, through trade agreements, to improve their pollution standards (or more specifically: Malaysia and Singapore. China doesn't seem to be part of TPP), then US Workers would indeed be better competing against them.

I don't believe a trade deal is necessarily good or bad per se. We'd have to dig into the details to see. And the details look... rather long.

American manufactured goods currently face tariffs of up to 100% on certain goods in TPP markets, and American agriculture exports face tariffs over 700% on some products. Our workers are among the most productive in the world, but in cases like these, the deck is stacked against them. These imbalances favor foreign products at the expense of American exports. In Malaysia, for example, American motor vehicles face tariffs of 30%, while motor vehicles from Japan, Turkey, and elsewhere face no tariffs.


So clearly, the current status-quo isn't working. On the other hand, fuck me if you actually expect me to read through the Tariff Elimination Schedule to fact-check this monstrosity. (That was Mexico's Tariffs. There is one of those for every country in the TPP).

There seems to be a lot of "0%" in there. But... yeah. I'm not going through all of that.

-------------

I think I have some anti-copyright leanings, due to being part of the whole OSS stuff when I started up on the Internet a decade ago. I probably should stay away from the "protecting innovation" propaganda... I have a feeling that it will make me want to vomit.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby commodorejohn » Mon May 02, 2016 8:51 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I think I have some anti-copyright leanings, due to being part of the whole OSS stuff when I started up on the Internet a decade ago. I probably should stay away from the "protecting innovation" propaganda... I have a feeling that it will make me want to vomit.

On the contrary, you need to read it over and over and over until you realize that this isn't just some trade deal, it's about smokescreening a ton of this kind of horseshit under the guise of "you need to let us fuck you over or China will fuck you over worse!"
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby morriswalters » Mon May 02, 2016 8:53 pm UTC

Too little, too late. Negotiated in secret and without accounting for the dislocation it will cause. I oppose it on those grounds. I no longer trust Obama on this. I am officially over being treated like a mushroom and kept in the dark. And I don't like having the fear card tossed at me.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 8:54 pm UTC

commodorejohn wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:I think I have some anti-copyright leanings, due to being part of the whole OSS stuff when I started up on the Internet a decade ago. I probably should stay away from the "protecting innovation" propaganda... I have a feeling that it will make me want to vomit.

On the contrary, you need to read it over and over and over until you realize that this isn't just some trade deal, it's about smokescreening a ton of this kind of horseshit under the guise of "you need to let us fuck you over or China will fuck you over worse!"


Its no secret that the current American Political Class is a pro-copyright / pro MPAA and RIAA.

On the other hand, forcing Singapore / Malaysia (aka: Pirate Heaven) to follow the US's copyright laws (or something close to them) would certainly benefit US companies, even if those are US Companies / organizations I don't care about.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby commodorejohn » Mon May 02, 2016 9:01 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:On the other hand, forcing Singapore / Malaysia (aka: Pirate Heaven) to follow the US's copyright laws (or something close to them) would certainly benefit US companies, even if those are US Companies / organizations I don't care about.

Yes, it would benefit exactly the companies that are colluding with the government to fuck people over - so what's the appeal here? Frankly I'm in favor of the Malaysian pirates over those bastards.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 9:04 pm UTC

commodorejohn wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:On the other hand, forcing Singapore / Malaysia (aka: Pirate Heaven) to follow the US's copyright laws (or something close to them) would certainly benefit US companies, even if those are US Companies / organizations I don't care about.

Yes, it would benefit exactly the companies that are colluding with the government to fuck people over - so what's the appeal here? Frankly I'm in favor of the Malaysian pirates over those bastards.


"Colluding". Have you been listening to Trump recently or something? In any case, the benefit is clear. Hollywood makes more money. As is the purpose of trade deals. What the fuck else do you expect? Hollywood to not benefit from a trade deal? They have money, they have political power, and of course their stamp is going to be in a major political trade treaty designed to increase the bottom line of American Companies.

Now where I'm wondering is what's bad about that? Aside from the fact that you and I don't like MPAA or RIAA because they are sue-happy with regards to Happy Birthday or whatever. But for the most part, copyright is settled law and a very niche issue. The only people who seem to talk about it are random people like you or me on the internet. So it'd be too much to expect an anti-copyright measure to be placed into this agreement.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Mon May 02, 2016 9:06 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby commodorejohn » Mon May 02, 2016 9:05 pm UTC

I expect the government to not curtail the rights of American citizens in order to please the executives of megalithic media conglomerates, that's what I expect.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 9:07 pm UTC

commodorejohn wrote:I expect the government to not curtail the rights of American citizens in order to please the executives of megalithic media conglomerates, that's what I expect.


In a pro-trade deal?

That's where I'm getting confused. Without copyright law, there is no trade at all. Ownership of intellectual property needs to be asserted at some level.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Mon May 02, 2016 9:08 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby commodorejohn » Mon May 02, 2016 9:08 pm UTC

Anywhere, ever.

"The government should not fuck over the exact people it is supposed to protect" - Is this really so hard to grasp?

KnightExemplar wrote:That's where I'm getting confused. Without copyright law, there is no trade at all. Ownership of intellectual property needs to be asserted at some level.

And it already is. Copyright infringement is already illegal, and the media moguls are perfectly within their rights to take infringers to court - but that's not enough for them, because it costs them time and money to do so, and rather than assess when it's worth it to go after individual offenders, they've been trying for years to get the government to muscle in on the rights and privacy of ordinary Americans so that they can get what they want for free. That's bullshit, and in a just world they would've been decisively slapped down years ago.
Last edited by commodorejohn on Mon May 02, 2016 9:13 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 9:09 pm UTC

commodorejohn wrote:Ever, anywhere.

"The government should not fuck over the exact people it is supposed to protect" - Is this really so hard to grasp?


Yeah. Except the guys at Hollywood are arguing the opposite. A lot of artists I know of thinks that copyright law protects them.

EDIT: In fact, a number of small-time game developers seem to be pleased with Steam's DRM lockdown measures. Which is the primary motivation for going with Steam as opposed to a free anti-copyright group like Good ol' Games.

KnightExemplar wrote:That's where I'm getting confused. Without copyright law, there is no trade at all. Ownership of intellectual property needs to be asserted at some level.

And it already is. Copyright infringement is already illegal, and the media moguls are perfectly within their rights to take infringers to court - but that's not enough for them, because it costs them time and money to do so, and rather than assess when it's worth it to go after individual offenders, they've been trying for years to get the government to muscle in on the rights and privacy of ordinary Americans so that they can get what they want for free. That's bullshit, and in a just world they would've been decisively slapped down years ago.


Yeah, but they couldn't take infringers to court from Singapore and Malaysia. It looks like the TPP is setting up some means at an international court of some kind to allow enforcement in countries that are traditionally pirate-havens.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Mon May 02, 2016 9:17 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1076
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby commodorejohn » Mon May 02, 2016 9:17 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Yeah. Except the guys at Hollywood are arguing the opposite. A lot of artists I know of thinks that copyright law protects them.

I'm not against copyright law, I'm against letting the media conglomerates dictate what people can and can't do with their own possessions and use government muscle to intimidate people rather than pursuing the legal options they already have for stopping infringement and seeking recompense.

(Though I do think that they have been so egregious in their attempts to do so that I'd honestly kind of like it if the government turned it back on them and said "hey, Malaysia! Free shots! Copy all you want from these fuckers!")
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 9:24 pm UTC

commodorejohn wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Yeah. Except the guys at Hollywood are arguing the opposite. A lot of artists I know of thinks that copyright law protects them.

I'm not against copyright law, I'm against letting the media conglomerates dictate what people can and can't do with their own possessions and use government muscle to intimidate people rather than pursuing the legal options they already have for stopping infringement and seeking recompense.


I'm not aware of anything in the TPP that adds to the power of the pro-IP crowd. As far as I know, it looks like its simply forcing Singapore / Malaysia / Vietnam to stop using camcorders in movie theaters and then uploading the stuff to Bittorrent.

IE: It allows them to do what they're doing here in the US to the citizens of Singapore / Malaysia / Vietnam. But nothing 'new'. Ditto with the other pro-IP guys, like big-Pharma, Monsanto's genetic corn, pro-DRM Software guys, and so forth.

I'm not necessarily saying I like that fact. But I don't necessarily see anything "unfair" about it. And in any case, it is clearly a pro-American measure (Intellectual Property, like software, movies, patented corn and patented medicines, etc. etc. seem to constitute the greater part of the US's economy recently)

And if an agreement was designed to equalize the playing field between multiple countries and the US, I'd say it is "fair" for companies to adopt basically the US's standards and norms. Even if I don't necessarily agree with our norms around here.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Mon May 02, 2016 10:53 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
In Malaysia, for example, American motor vehicles face tariffs of 30%, while motor vehicles from Japan, Turkey, and elsewhere face no tariffs.


speaking as a Malaysian here, imported cars have some ridiculous tariff. Certainly more than 30%, more like 100%.
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Mon May 02, 2016 11:21 pm UTC

jseah wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
In Malaysia, for example, American motor vehicles face tariffs of 30%, while motor vehicles from Japan, Turkey, and elsewhere face no tariffs.


speaking as a Malaysian here, imported cars have some ridiculous tariff. Certainly more than 30%, more like 100%.


Whats the political feeling of the deal over there? Is it overall good? Or mostly meh?

With Trump and Bernie talking a lot about trade deals, I expect the American political environment to be superficially interested in the deal (no one reading it over or anything... but a lot of people having opinions on it.)
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Mon May 02, 2016 11:41 pm UTC

@political feeling: SG/MY
Random ppl: TPP? What? Can eat ah?
My friends: Meh, our political superiors know better. (Singapore only)
The more cynical: corrupt politicians lining their pockets again! (Malaysia only)

But more generally, we like the attention the US is giving us. China is worrying and frankly, no one in the region believes we can resist China for long if they feel like swallowing is. ASEAN isn't really strong enough to stand up against China.
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6181
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby sardia » Tue May 03, 2016 2:38 am UTC

jseah wrote:@political feeling: SG/MY
Random ppl: TPP? What? Can eat ah?
My friends: Meh, our political superiors know better. (Singapore only)
The more cynical: corrupt politicians lining their pockets again! (Malaysia only)

But more generally, we like the attention the US is giving us. China is worrying and frankly, no one in the region believes we can resist China for long if they feel like swallowing is. ASEAN isn't really strong enough to stand up against China.

Politically, it's a good deal for US, even if it has crappy support domestically in the US. I don't think there's ever been a trade deal the Environmental movement has been happy with. I think the greens will have better luck in their respective domestic movements.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Tue May 03, 2016 4:10 am UTC

Well, in the end, the deal benefits export oriented economies like Malaysia. We might have to give up some tariffs but but the majority of industries will benefit. Even non export oriented Singapore will benefit from the increased trade since Singapore's a major port.

Not being able to pirate movies vs better economy? Hmm not a hard choice, with more money you can pay for your games and movies no?
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue May 03, 2016 4:16 am UTC

jseah wrote:Well, in the end, the deal benefits export oriented economies like Malaysia. We might have to give up some tariffs but but the majority of industries will benefit. Even non export oriented Singapore will benefit from the increased trade since Singapore's a major port.

Not being able to pirate movies vs better economy? Hmm not a hard choice, with more money you can pay for your games and movies no?


Oh, don't say that or else the Trumpians will do what they can to scuttle the deal >_<

We all have to pretend that the deal is crap for the "other side". :roll: :roll:
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Tue May 03, 2016 4:26 am UTC

The US benefits too. Namely gaining influence in the region where China is threatening to loom large.
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue May 03, 2016 6:37 am UTC

jseah wrote:The US benefits too. Namely gaining influence in the region where China is threatening to loom large.


I can agree to that. It looks like the TPP is forcing the other countries to adopt the US's customs and norms through this deal.

However, a lot of the current presidential politics that are revolving around Trump and Sanders is anti-NAFTA (the precursor to this trade deal). You'll see many people come into this topic who will be straight-up against it, because two relatively popular presidential candidates are explicitly against it. The general concern is that manufacturing jobs may be transferred away to... well... Singapore, Mexico, Vietnam and Malaysia.

The tariff thing sounds like it is a big win to the US however. If the tariffs come down in Singapore / Malaysia, then it should help manufacturing in the US and even the odds against Japan.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby LaserGuy » Tue May 03, 2016 6:10 pm UTC

Considering that the US practically wrote the deal, we would expect that most of the benefits would flow to the US--or, at least to the people in the US who were actually able to participate in the process.

Not to mention that in order to sign off on a trade agreement, the US has to "certify" all of the other signing countries have implemented it to their satisfaction, in effect giving the US a bonus round of one-sided negotiations to enforce its preferred interpretation on any flexible provisions in the treaty.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4500
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby LaserGuy » Wed May 04, 2016 12:01 am UTC

It looks like the TPP is forcing the other countries to adopt the US's customs and norms through this deal.


On a related note, there has recently been a massive leak of a large part of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, the free trade agreement between the US and the EU. This deal is apparently attempting the eviscerate the much more stringent European environmental, labour, and consumer protection standards to harmonize them with the US ones.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Wed May 04, 2016 4:44 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:The tariff thing sounds like it is a big win to the US however. If the tariffs come down in Singapore / Malaysia, then it should help manufacturing in the US and even the odds against Japan.

LaserGuy wrote:Considering that the US practically wrote the deal, we would expect that most of the benefits would flow to the US--or, at least to the people in the US who were actually able to participate in the process.

The tariff part helps a lot less than you think. The internal markets in the ASEAN countries aren't that large, and if you compare with our export oriented industry, we can't even absorb our own production.

The exchange rate also functions as a pseudo-tariff on all goods. Add that to the much lower wages here, no one has any money to buy things from the US. Even without the insane tariff, I doubt many Malaysians earn enough dough to fork out for a US car.

You know when was the last time I saw stuff from the US on the supermarket shelves in SG/MY? Hmm, I can't recall actually! You see some from Japan/China but most stuff is made locally. I doubt we're going to see US-made snacks.
(for some reason, we have Japan made snacks. They're super expensive but somehow we like Japanese stuff, there's an entire section of the supermarket for Japanese-import like seasonings and rice)
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed May 04, 2016 5:48 am UTC

jseah wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:The tariff thing sounds like it is a big win to the US however. If the tariffs come down in Singapore / Malaysia, then it should help manufacturing in the US and even the odds against Japan.

LaserGuy wrote:Considering that the US practically wrote the deal, we would expect that most of the benefits would flow to the US--or, at least to the people in the US who were actually able to participate in the process.

The tariff part helps a lot less than you think. The internal markets in the ASEAN countries aren't that large, and if you compare with our export oriented industry, we can't even absorb our own production.

The exchange rate also functions as a pseudo-tariff on all goods. Add that to the much lower wages here, no one has any money to buy things from the US. Even without the insane tariff, I doubt many Malaysians earn enough dough to fork out for a US car.


Hmm, at least in raw dollars, a number of US Car companies are typically aimed at the lower end. True, Ford's #1 Car in America is the F150, and GM's big SUVs sell very well over here. But I know that both Ford and GM have budget cars (in particular, because that's the price range I was looking for). IE: Chevy Spark and Ford Focus.

Lets see... http://www.regentmotors.com.sg/model/focus/ ... Nope, can't find a price. Searching for "Chevy Spark Singapore" doesn't get me anything at all, not even a splash page. Maybe that vehicle isn't available there?

Of course, new cars are a relative luxury even in the US (most people buy used IIRC), but for a new car... at least in $$ USD, it seems like the Ford Focus is cost-competitive with Toyota Corollas. At least in the US. But a big tariff would spoil all of that for sure. I dunno what the prices are like once all the tariffs are factored in however.

EDIT: Found one:

http://www.sgcarmart.com/new_cars/newca ... Code=11704

Erm... wow. Cars are expensive over there. The exchange rate doesn't even seem to make the USD / Singapore Dollar that big of a difference...

You know when was the last time I saw stuff from the US on the supermarket shelves in SG/MY? Hmm, I can't recall actually! You see some from Japan/China but most stuff is made locally. I doubt we're going to see US-made snacks.
(for some reason, we have Japan made snacks. They're super expensive but somehow we like Japanese stuff, there's an entire section of the supermarket for Japanese-import like seasonings and rice)


I do like me some Yan-yans and Hi-Chew! Although they're very expensive around here (imported around the world.... probably raises prices a bit). And I usually only find them in specialty stores (Japanese candy stores).

You don't want American chocolate snacks anyway. Almost every foreigner I've talked to thinks that our chocolate sucks. If US was going to export something... you'd probably want our Beef / meats. Maybe we can export Jelly Beans?
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Wed May 04, 2016 9:38 am UTC

Singapore is special. All car prices are inflated regardless of origin due to the COE system (government caps total number of cars by auctioning car ownership licences, you need one per car, valid for 10 years only, non-transferrable). Even domestic cars have to pay this too.

This COE is usually a few 10ks.
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

ijuin
Posts: 799
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby ijuin » Wed May 04, 2016 3:38 pm UTC

Such a system of limiting car numbers can only work in an environment where it s possible to commute to work without a car. Good luck when your commute is ninety kilometers each way and no bus or train exists.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Thu May 05, 2016 12:32 am UTC

Singapore is small enough that if you started from any point and went 90 km in any direction, you wouldn't be in Singapore anymore. =P
this also means that level of traffic control is absolutely required. There are 5 million residents on an island 40km across.

But yes, that was just an explanation for why the cars were super expensive and not to use a comparison with other countries' prices.
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6181
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby sardia » Thu May 05, 2016 3:39 am UTC

Jseah, there's additional benefits to trade, mostly the ability to specialize. If both countries specialize in what they do best, then you get more then the sum of the parts.

jseah
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:18 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby jseah » Thu May 05, 2016 5:39 am UTC

Yes, that would be the point. But it does not change the fact that labour is cheaper is South East Asia than in the US and we run a more or less permanent current account surplus wrt US.
Stories:
Time is Like a River - consistent time travel to the hilt
A Hero's War
Tensei Simulator build 18 - A python RPG

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu May 05, 2016 12:31 pm UTC

jseah wrote:Yes, that would be the point. But it does not change the fact that labour is cheaper is South East Asia than in the US and we run a more or less permanent current account surplus wrt US.


The underlying issue is a matter of fairness I think. At least for one major political faction.

There's a perception around here that South East Asian countries have weaker / laxer trade unions, workers rights, and weaker environmental standards than the US. That workers in the US are screwed by not just "cheaper labor", but "unfair labor". A lot of it is misappropriated and sorta lumped together (I'm having to Wikipedia a lot of things right now, because its clear that I barely know the region).

Spoiler:
Hell, lets put it this way: most Americans can't tell the difference between Japan and China. I kid you not. Racism within the US treats all "Asians" the same. Its a bit annoying (I'm of Philipino descent for example), but even I catch myself making "Asian jokes" relatively often since its the cultural norm around here.


Going back to this trade deal though... I think where this TPP agreement is saying, is that the US as a whole isn't necessarily against the trade deficit between the two countries, as long as its "fair". And fair means that both of our countries adopt similar environmental and worker standards (ie: minimum wage, overtime hours, workers compensation).

On the other hand, the nativism and racism is growing in the US, shown through the current election cycle with Trump. (who is explicitly anti-trade, isolationist, and has some racist undertones). Bernie Sanders is also explicitly anti-Trade (although he isn't racist about it), so there are major political entities who are fundamentally against this... both Sanders and Trump would not like the news of a trade deficit created through the TPP.

On the other hand, "mainstream" politicians like the current President Obama and Speaker Paul Ryan clearly like this deal. But there's definitely political uncertainty here.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu May 05, 2016 12:41 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu May 05, 2016 12:41 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:There's a perception around here that South East Asian countries have weaker / laxer trade unions, workers rights, and weaker environmental standards than the US. That workers in the US are screwed by not just "cheaper labor", but "unfair labor".


Everyone, when lobbying for those things, eagerly tells everyone that the benefits of these things, at large, outweigh the costs, for a net gain.

If this were true, then this situation could not occur.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6181
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby sardia » Thu May 05, 2016 12:54 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:There's a perception around here that South East Asian countries have weaker / laxer trade unions, workers rights, and weaker environmental standards than the US. That workers in the US are screwed by not just "cheaper labor", but "unfair labor".


Everyone, when lobbying for those things, eagerly tells everyone that the benefits of these things, at large, outweigh the costs, for a net gain.

If this were true, then this situation could not occur.

Are you anti trade here? I think you're saying that a wide diffuse gains aren't worth the sharp localize losses. For example you move an AC factory overseas which lays off 500 workers. Then the country gets cheaper AC units which lets more people own them, saving lives from hear related deaths.
Are you saying the above isn't worth making a trade deal?

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu May 05, 2016 12:58 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:There's a perception around here that South East Asian countries have weaker / laxer trade unions, workers rights, and weaker environmental standards than the US. That workers in the US are screwed by not just "cheaper labor", but "unfair labor".


Everyone, when lobbying for those things, eagerly tells everyone that the benefits of these things, at large, outweigh the costs, for a net gain.

If this were true, then this situation could not occur.


In general, more trade means more benefits. Under free market conditions, people trade only if the trade is mutually beneficial to both sides. (If there was no benefit to any particular trade, then the side getting "screwed" would leave the deal). A "net gain" is the likely result of any increased trade agreement. Economic forces almost demand it to happen.

The question therefore, is whether or not the US gains as much as the other countries. Obviously, Sanders and Trump do not think so. Obama and Paul Ryan think it will, with respect to the TPP anyway.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu May 05, 2016 1:04 pm UTC

Not really the contention.

Say, labor unions. They usually make the claims that a nation with labor unions is better off than one without. Sure, there may be individual losers, but net gain overall, yes?

If that premise were true, then nations with labor unions should not HAVE to engage in protectionism, yes? And yet, labor unions are indeed lobbying against TPP.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby morriswalters » Thu May 05, 2016 1:12 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote: I think where this TPP agreement is saying,
Could you point me to an official copy?
Tyndmyr wrote:Everyone, when lobbying for those things, eagerly tells everyone that the benefits of these things, at large, outweigh the costs, for a net gain.

If this were true, then this situation could not occur.
There are multiple truths at work here. What is true in a general sense, doesn't have to be true in any specific sense. Leveling the playing field doesn't have to mean all boats get raised. It could be that some boats go up while others go down. So that the people who make out are the people whose boats are rising. If your boat isn't rising, it is hard to be happy for those whose boats are. In any case the secrecy lends itself to the idea that the public at large isn't smart enough to to deal with the information.
sardia wrote:Are you anti trade here? I think you're saying that a wide diffuse gains aren't worth the sharp localize losses. For example you move an AC factory overseas which lays off 500 workers. Then the country gets cheaper AC units which lets more people own them, saving lives from hear related deaths.
Are you saying the above isn't worth making a trade deal?
Go to the factory and look those 500 people in the eye and explain it to them. In that location, in their lifetimes, those jobs will likely never be replaced, and some portion of those lost incomes will never be recovered, and the price of air conditioners may not be the primary cause of heat related deaths, and you should know better. Without electricity the damn unit is just so much plastic and metal. And utility costs have not been trending down. We have plenty of cheap stuff.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu May 05, 2016 1:18 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Not really the contention.

Say, labor unions. They usually make the claims that a nation with labor unions is better off than one without. Sure, there may be individual losers, but net gain overall, yes?

If that premise were true, then nations with labor unions should not HAVE to engage in protectionism, yes? And yet, labor unions are indeed lobbying against TPP.


I fathom that this deal could be bad for labor unions (and their members) but overall good for the countries involved.

I'm not sure however... I do know that the FAQ seems to address a lot of my concerns.

If Vietnam doesn’t improve their labor standards, they won’t see the economic benefits of the agreement. It’s as simple of that, thanks to the binding and enforceable rules in TPP. By linking Vietnam’s access to our market to their upgrading their labor standards, the United States has new leverage to ensure that Vietnam improves their labor protections. And if they don’t, we won’t hesitate to take action against them through trade sanctions.

Vietnam will be required by TPP to put in place a host of new labor protections, including protecting the freedom to form unions and bargain collectively, strengthening bans on forced labor, and improving protections against employment discrimination.


morriswalters wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote: I think where this TPP agreement is saying,
Could you point me to an official copy?


https://ustr.gov/tpp/

And

https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership

Obama, really? Medium.com? I have assurances from the Washington Post article and the Obama OpEd that the medium.com link is legitimate.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10848
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trans Pacific Partnership Deal Reached

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu May 05, 2016 1:23 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Everyone, when lobbying for those things, eagerly tells everyone that the benefits of these things, at large, outweigh the costs, for a net gain.

If this were true, then this situation could not occur.
There are multiple truths at work here. What is true in a general sense, doesn't have to be true in any specific sense. Leveling the playing field doesn't have to mean all boats get raised. It could be that some boats go up while others go down. So that the people who make out are the people whose boats are rising. If your boat isn't rising, it is hard to be happy for those whose boats are. In any case the secrecy lends itself to the idea that the public at large isn't smart enough to to deal with the information.


If this were the case, one would expect most unions to be pro-TPP, yes? Sure, exceptions for edge cases, but if unions are generally beneficial, then, overall, competing evenly between a more unionized country and one that is less so(and China, etc is not terribly pro-union or workers rights) should overtly favor the unionized country.

This is not the case. It's not a few edge cases, it's the big, main unions coming together to oppose it. Teamsters, United Steel, Food and Commercial Workers, IAM, Comms Workers, the whole of AFL-CIO...

So, this explanation does not work.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mallich, speising and 7 guests