Thai exports in dire straits unless govt joins TPP, trade experts warn

[Humberstone]

No Stalin said it, and its ironic that it applies to your comment. While the German economist Karl Marx said, "Religion is the opium of the people ". This applies to the Red cult as well and explains their unwavering support for thaksinomics and its corrupt criminal founder. But back to the topic, name me one free trade agreement that has a free market and name me one capitalist country that's doing well?

Sorry, but Karl Marx never said "Religion is the opium of the people".

[dru2]

No Stalin said it, and its ironic that it applies to your comment. While the German economist Karl Marx said, "Religion is the opium of the people ". This applies to the Red cult as well and explains their unwavering support for thaksinomics and its corrupt criminal founder. But back to the topic, name me one free trade agreement that has a free market and name me one capitalist country that's doing well?

Sorry, but Karl Marx never said "Religion is the opium of the people".

'Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people'. Karl Marx, Collected Works, Vol. 3

[swissie]

TPP is bad bad bad, for everyone except US big business.

See Professor Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics and University Professor at Columbia University on the topic ... http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-secret-corporate-takeover-by-joseph-e--stiglitz-2015-05

Finally somebody shining a light on the real problem of these trade deals. Look at NAFTA. All good jobs shifted from America and Canada to Mexico. Did it increase the quality of life and pay increases for Mexicans? Nada. Their still dirt poor and angry much like the citizens of another country near and dear to our hearts. The reason that these negotiations are so secret is so that ordinary citizens cannot see how big business is screwing them over running to cheap labor countries with questionable environmental practices. Its all about Greed and cheap labor. In time through robotics and 3D printing these jobs will return to Western shores. By that time the workers there will be so full of paranoia they will perform in a rather robotic fashion as well and will accept the wages that BB dictates they are worth. The Republicans will by then have reduced the size of government to a shadow of its former self. They will have dried up all welfare payments and forced these people into low paying jobs and will have cut taxes for the rich to next to nothing. They will also have taken away women's rights over their bodies so that there will be an endless supply of young cheap labor to replace the increased numbers of sick and dying. They will have a ticker tape parade down main street in New York with the Koch Bros. and their ilk as parade marshals sitting in the limo's tossing pennies to the shouting crowd. After all pennies will be worthless by then. All transactions will be electronic anyways by then so that the underground economy dies and the Fed can easier print edollars out of thin air and keep track of you and your money. 2084 sounds to far in the future how about 2035

Unfortunately I have to agree, sentence by sentence, word by word. No, the future doesn't look bright. The "Masses" with their right to vote could stop it.

But like comrade Lenin said, some 97 years ago: The "Masses" are merely useful idiots.

Cheers.

So you cannot answer.

Lenin said no such thing and you are a charlatan.

WAZA post # 28 says Stalin said it. Just take your pick. Does it matter who said it?

Cheers.

[dru2]

Unfortunately I have to agree, sentence by sentence, word by word. No, the future doesn't look bright. The "Masses" with their right to vote could stop it.

But like comrade Lenin said, some 97 years ago: The "Masses" are merely useful idiots.

Cheers.

So you cannot answer.

Lenin said no such thing and you are a charlatan.

WAZA post # 28 says Stalin said it. Just take your pick. Does it matter who said it?

Cheers.

Well, Waza would appear to be wrong, too. A Google search of the phrase "The "Masses" are merely useful idiots" reveals that only one person is recorded as ever having used this phrase, and that person is... Swissie!!

Edited October 14, 2015 by dru2

[soalbundy]

Unfortunately I have to agree, sentence by sentence, word by word. No, the future doesn't look bright. The "Masses" with their right to vote could stop it.

But like comrade Lenin said, some 97 years ago: The "Masses" are merely useful idiots.

Cheers.

So you cannot answer.

Lenin said no such thing and you are a charlatan.

WAZA post # 28 says Stalin said it. Just take your pick. Does it matter who said it?

Cheers.

Well, Waza would appear to be wrong, too. A Google search of the phrase "The "Masses" are merely useful idiots" reveals that only one person is recorded as ever having used this phrase, and that person is... Swissie!!

He definitely said ''ouch'' at the end followed by, ''why pick on me''

[dru2]

He definitely said ''ouch'' at the end followed by, ''why pick on me''

I didn't really mean to be unpleasant, and certainly not to cause offense. I can't help it - I'm a historian!

[waza]

No Stalin said it, and its ironic that it applies to your comment. While the German economist Karl Marx said, "Religion is the opium of the people ". This applies to the Red cult as well and explains their unwavering support for thaksinomics and its corrupt criminal founder. But back to the topic, name me one free trade agreement that has a free market and name me one capitalist country that's doing well?

Free trade agreements are targeted agreements and they do deliver on what is agreed to. I see the repetition of the falsehood about NAFTA, so I will use NAFTA as an example. The intent of NAFTA was to eliminate trade barriers between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. In that respect, it unlocked the shackles on those operations which provided goods and services, making trade more "free". No one has ever claimed that there was a free market. A free market is one that has no regulations whatsoever. Anti dumping regulations, fair trade practices, intellectual property rights were strengthened under NAFTA. Trade barriers make goods and services more expensive than they need be and are an indirect form of hidden taxation which punish efficient and cost efficient operations.

You ask that we name a capitalist country that is doing well. That is a relative term. On the whole capitalist countries are doing much better than countries which are not. If capitalist countries are such failures, why are all those Eritreans, Arabs, and Afghanis running to the capitalist countries of the EU, USA and Canada? They aren't running to Zimbabwe, Russia, or the socialist utopias of Cuba or Ecuador or Venezuela are they?

Seems to me that capitalist countries like Switzerland, Germany, Australia, Canada etc. are all doing much better than non capitalist countries.

.

A free trade agreement is of advantage to corporation, or unlocks the shackles keeping corporation in check. It is of greatest advantage to the dominant countries, consider the US is the largest market in the world, what advantage would it get from reducing barriers to its market? The only advantage for the individual is they may get a minimum wage job working in a multinational manufacturing company that is paid his taxes back as incentives to situated that company in their country. Trade barriers protect local companies from the predatory actions of multinational company buy levelling the playing field, while the revenue from the tariffs add to the overall budget of that country. Furthermore, they act as an incentive for multinational company to set up shop in that country to avoid tariffs, an example would be the end of car manufacturing in the UK and Australia because the tariffs were reduced.

Your second point is a classic mistake of ignorance, you are confusing capitalism with democracy, they are not the same. They are running to these countries because they are democratic and have a good humanitarian record and are have a excellent social security safety net. Russia is a good example of a capitalist country with a debatable democratic political system and as you observed the refugees aren't running there.

Edited October 15, 2015 by waza

[geriatrickid]

No Stalin said it, and its ironic that it applies to your comment. While the German economist Karl Marx said, "Religion is the opium of the people ". This applies to the Red cult as well and explains their unwavering support for thaksinomics and its corrupt criminal founder. But back to the topic, name me one free trade agreement that has a free market and name me one capitalist country that's doing well?

Free trade agreements are targeted agreements and they do deliver on what is agreed to. I see the repetition of the falsehood about NAFTA, so I will use NAFTA as an example. The intent of NAFTA was to eliminate trade barriers between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. In that respect, it unlocked the shackles on those operations which provided goods and services, making trade more "free". No one has ever claimed that there was a free market. A free market is one that has no regulations whatsoever. Anti dumping regulations, fair trade practices, intellectual property rights were strengthened under NAFTA. Trade barriers make goods and services more expensive than they need be and are an indirect form of hidden taxation which punish efficient and cost efficient operations.

You ask that we name a capitalist country that is doing well. That is a relative term. On the whole capitalist countries are doing much better than countries which are not. If capitalist countries are such failures, why are all those Eritreans, Arabs, and Afghanis running to the capitalist countries of the EU, USA and Canada? They aren't running to Zimbabwe, Russia, or the socialist utopias of Cuba or Ecuador or Venezuela are they?

Seems to me that capitalist countries like Switzerland, Germany, Australia, Canada etc. are all doing much better than non capitalist countries.

.

A free trade agreement is of advantage to corporation, or unlocks the shackles keeping corporation in check. It is of greatest advantage to the dominant countries, consider the US is the largest market in the world, what advantage would it get from reducing barriers to its market? The only advantage for the individual is they may get a minimum wage job working in a multinational manufacturing company that is paid his taxes back as incentives to situated that company in their country. Trade barriers protect local companies from the predatory actions of multinational company buy levelling the playing field, while the revenue from the tariffs add to the overall budget of that country. Furthermore, they act as an incentive for multinational company to set up shop in that country to avoid tariffs, an example would be the end of car manufacturing in the UK and Australia because the tariffs were reduced.

Your second point is a classic mistake of ignorance, you are confusing capitalism with democracy, they are not the same. They are running to these countries because they are democratic and have a good humanitarian record and are have a excellent social security safety net. Russia is a good example of a capitalist country with a debatable democratic political system and as you observed the refugees aren't running there.

You are offering hypothetical assumptions. Let's deal in fact. Under the NAFTA, despite claims to the contrary, both the USA and Canadian populations have benefited greatly. Hundreds of thousands of Canadians now live and work in the USA. That movement was made easier by the allowances for professional movement. You tout trade barriers as a means of protecting local firms from predatory foreign companies. The reality is that protectionist tariffs allow companies to remain inefficient and to charge consumers higher costs. Again using NAFTA, one saw that while some Canadian industries lost jobs to the USA, others gained. It was a trade off. CAE, Bombardier and their suppliers all benefited. US firms supplying specialty textiles gained market share in Canada because the old textile firms who had not upgraded in 50 years were collapsing because they were obsolete.

You reference an imaginary scenario with the automobile industry in the UK and Australia. Why not deal with a real world example? Under NAFTA which incorporated the Auto Pact, Canada's auto industry was protected and it still has export markets. What did happen was that obsolete plants were closed and upgrades occurred in those that remained. New investors (Honda and Toyota) came in to Canada.

Ahh so I am ignorant to point out that the "refugees" are making a beeline to western countries. Russia is an oligarchy economy which incorporates elements of capitalism, it is also a strong backer of the Assad regime. Most of the Syrians fleeing are the urban dwelling supporters of Assad. They benefited from his corrupt regime. They came out regularly to shout Death to America, Death to England, Death to Israel. They celebrated on 9/11. They celebrated the bombings of the London tube and the Madrid subway. Now, these Assad supporters flee from ISIS because ISIS sees them for what they are; corrupt, opportunistic thieves who exploited the rural poor. They like money and the west offers easy pickings. The fact is that none of the western countries are true democracies, or true capitalist economies. They are hybrids. However, they work because of their hybrid state. Democracy has never succeeded when there was no incentive to maintain the freedoms democracy brings. Capitalism offers the rewards needed to keep democracy alive.