Rand supports TPP?

Generally, trade agreements amount to managed trade and not free trade. Having said that, the fact that no one can give a good response to r3volution 3.0 is telling. We just reflexively hate things that government does, and for good reason, but we look foolish when we can cite specific examples of the things we hate. And if anyone posts a link to something about NAFTA in response to this, I will scream.
 
Generally, trade agreements amount to managed trade and not free trade. Having said that, the fact that no one can give a good response to r3volution 3.0 is telling. We just reflexively hate things that government does, and for good reason, but we look foolish when we can cite specific examples of the things we hate. And if anyone posts a link to something about NAFTA in response to this, I will scream.

I don't see what particular argument rev3.0 made that you're referencing. Most working class people can agree that these "free trade agreements" have led to less manufacturing and industry in the US, which has led to lower wages and less productive jobs, which has led to bigger gov't in the form of safety net programs. How many times does someone have to see the same playbook being run over and over before they catch on that these agreements aren't helping THIS country at all? Besides, if one supports national sovereignty then loosening of borders for any reason, trade or otherwise, never results in more sovereignty, always less.

Then there's the part about how the TPP further helps make China the economic center of the world. You haven't noticed the dollar is dying a slow death as the global reserve currency and will be replaced soon? The TPP helps this further along, with the blessing of our "leaders". While China is busy buying up all of our scrap metal and copper to build cities that will be filled in the near future (the transition from being an export economy to an internal consumption economy supporting it's own citizens), Americans are busy going deeper into debt to buy ass implant surgery, while our own infrastructure falls apart. You and rev3.0 don't think these "free trade agreements" have anything to do with this?
 
Last edited:
Having said that, the fact that no one can give a good response to r3volution 3.0 is telling. We just reflexively hate things that government does, and for good reason, but we look foolish when we can cite specific examples of the things we hate.


I've included lots of info about TPP provisions in this thread; for which I've recieved +rep from at least 10 different RPF members:
[h=3]Rand Paul to Obama: "Prioritize" Passage of Trans-Pacific Partnership[/h]

I don't think there is any sense in cross posting here. The threads should really be merged.
 
I've included lots of info about TPP provisions in this thread; for which I've recieved +rep from at least 10 different RPF members:
Rand Paul to Obama: "Prioritize" Passage of Trans-Pacific Partnership

I don't think there is any sense in cross posting here. The threads should really be merged.

Yep. Of course, by moving the better thread on it to "Rand Paul On The Issues" and keeping "Rand Supports TPP?" in place we keep the less informative, more politically spun one on the front page of the site under "Ron Paul & Rand Paul: News & Discussion" whereas the flow of information that is relative to the issue and discussed more thoroughly won't be seen by casual passers by. So then If we go to the Top News page we'll see this thread instead of the other, more thorough, one. You see? Is a shame, really, because it truly is a malicious piece of corporate lobbying with dire repercussions. Gosh.

We gots battles going on, presence. Attacks from every direction. Is why I went and fetched my helmet. Heh...:)


Remember this...

First they ignore you

Then they laugh at you

Then they fight you ----- (We're presently here)

Then you win
 
Last edited:
Here's the best summary I have found of what was in the leaked document from Wikileaks:
http://keionline.org/node/1825

I'll just post this here:
Patents on Surgical Methods
An interesting example of how the US seeks to change national and global norms are the provisions in the TPP over patents on surgical methods. The WTO permits countries to exclude “diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals.” The US wants to flip this provision, so that “may also exclude from patentability” becomes “shall make patents available.” However, when a version of the IP Chapter was leaked in 2011, the US trade negotiators were criticized for ignoring the provisions in 28 USC 287 that eliminated remedies for infringement involving the “medical activity” of a “medical practitioner.” The exception in US law covered ”the performance of a medical or surgical procedure on a body.” The US trade negotiators then proposed adding language that would permit an exception for surgery, but only “if they cover a method of using a machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.” The US proposal, crafted in consultation with the medical devices lobby, but secret from the general public, was similar, but different from the U.S. statute, which narrowed the exception in cases involving “the use of a patented machine, manufacture, or composition of matter in violation of such patent.” How different? As Public Citizen’s Burcu Kilic puts it, under the US proposal in the TPP, the exception would only apply to “surgical methods you can perform with your bare hands.”
Why is the United States putting so much effort into narrowing if not eliminating the flexibility in the WTO agreement to provide exceptions for patents on “diagnostic, therapeutic, and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals”? It did not hurt that AdvaMed, the trade association for the medical device manufacturers, hired Ralph F. Ives as Executive Vice President for Global Strategy & Analysis. Before becoming a lobbyist for the medical device industry, Ives was the head of pharmaceutical policy for USTR. And Ives is just one of an army of lobbyists (including former Senator Evan Bayh) representing the medical devices industry. ITAC3, the USTR advisory board for Chemicals, Pharmaceuticals, Health/Science Products And Services, includes not only Ralph Ives, but also representatives from Medronic, Abbott, Johnson and Johnson, DemeTech, North Coast Medical and Airmed Biotech -- all companies involved in the medical device business. All are considered “cleared advisors” to USTR and have access to the TPP text.
 
Last edited:
@robert68

What does that article tell us about the TPP? Nothing whatsoever, other than that it will probably strengthen intellectual property rights - on which libertarians are split with most libertarians believing in intellectual property (Ron and Rand included). Where's the boogie man?
.

The split in the libertarian movement is to whether intellectual property exists. Nobody in the libertarian movement, even the Cosmotarians over at Reason, favor the sort of draconian IP laws envisioned by the crafters of the TPP. TPP takes American IP law that even IP believing Libertarians think is awful, makes it worse, and then exports it to Asia.
 
Actually, if you listen to what Rand actually said, he did not endorse TPP. He said we should "prioritize negotiations" on the TPP. This still leaves Rand wiggle room to oppose the TPP depending on the actual results of those negotiations.
 
Back
Top