TTIP

Status
Not open for further replies.

That's possible, I'm just not sure what the fear is based upon. The EU don't have a huge track record of opening up markets to trade so it would go against type in that regard, and I'm not sure what anyone involved would gain from reducing EU powers.

It would take power away from nation states and give it to corporations. Which perhaps they are in favour of, since they despise nation states. I'm not sure what the Beurcrats gain, however I definitely do not trust them.

Here's the European commission;



Here is Barroso proud of being voted for in secret;

 
Interesting "easy" document on the whole thing from the pro-TTIP side of things.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/march/tradoc_153266.pdf

Problem is it regurgitates the promises of the USA/Canada/Mexico pact, which turned out to be largely nonsense. It isn't disclosure; it's propaganda.

TTIP is too ropey on the right of companies to sue governments, and the ability to limit environmental impacts from company decisions. Regardless of what the pro side say, it all comes down to what they say they 'want' to do, when the evidence on what TTIP is about flies in the face of those claims.

I have a feeling that people will be told whatever is needed to get it over the line, but we'll see it cause real, serious problems in operation.
 
I'm yet to be convinced or have yet seen a coherent argument put forward for it and because of that I'm with the no's.
 

NEA.

Cheese on toast for me.

Enjoy
Cream-Cheese-Spread-700x700.jpg
 

Earlier on I linked to a document on the Gov.uk website that was saying pretty much the same thing as the similar document on the EU website so I'm not sure what debating it in parliament would do. I agree that even more transparency would be good to dispose of these myths though.

Transparency when effecting an act that will be binding on all our citizen's is essential wouldn't you think ? I don't know whether it's a typo., or what, but the bold quoted suggests you're pre-judging before the facts are available mate.
 
Transparency when effecting an act that will be binding on all our citizen's is essential wouldn't you think ? I don't know whether it's a typo., or what, but the bold quoted suggests you're pre-judging before the facts are available mate.

Isn't that what is going on though? People are complaining that they don't know what's being negotiated, but that they've heard rumours that it's going to be awful. Then when the EU come out and say, "well actually, it isn't going to be like that at all", then the EU are accused of being dishonest/corrupt.

If that isn't being predisposed to a point of view I'm not sure what is :) This may well turn out to be an absolute turkey of a deal, but I'm really not sure quite what evidence we have of that being the case, or indeed of the people negotiating this of being as corrupt as is alleged.

I mean in practically every political debate on here, the majority have fallen broadly into line behind the notion that the private sector can't be trusted because it's blinded by profit. Now it seems that most of those are also saying the public sector can't be trusted because they're also blinded by something or other.

It's all a bit tinfoil hat to me.
 
Isn't that what is going on though? People are complaining that they don't know what's being negotiated, but that they've heard rumours that it's going to be awful. Then when the EU come out and say, "well actually, it isn't going to be like that at all", then the EU are accused of being dishonest/corrupt.

If that isn't being predisposed to a point of view I'm not sure what is :) This may well turn out to be an absolute turkey of a deal, but I'm really not sure quite what evidence we have of that being the case, or indeed of the people negotiating this of being as corrupt as is alleged.

I mean in practically every political debate on here, the majority have fallen broadly into line behind the notion that the private sector can't be trusted because it's blinded by profit. Now it seems that most of those are also saying the public sector can't be trusted because they're also blinded by something or other.

It's all a bit tinfoil hat to me.

I'm not sure why you're being skeptical towards one point of view, and yet willing to give benefit of the doubt to the other side in the 'debate'. Just read the preface to the *.pdf link I placed on the last page, it's an academic critique from someone who holds a Chair at one of our reasonable Uni's, and it's referenced :)
 
I'm not sure why you're being skeptical towards one point of view, and yet willing to give benefit of the doubt to the other side in the 'debate'. Just read the preface to the *.pdf link I placed on the last page, it's an academic critique from someone who holds a Chair at one of our reasonable Uni's, and it's referenced :)

'tis just my disposition innit :) I'd rather trust someone until given reason not to than t'other way round. I'm broadly in favour of free trade, and the negotiators haven't given me any reason to doubt their integrity, so thus far I'm not until there's reason to.
 
'tis just my disposition innit :) I'd rather trust someone until given reason not to than t'other way round. I'm broadly in favour of free trade, and the negotiators haven't given me any reason to doubt their integrity, so thus far I'm not until there's reason to.
Exactly, you shouldn't doubt anyone's integrity here (by your own standards), attend to the facts.

Sorry Bruce, have you read that preface yet ?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top