The Trans-Pacific Partnership

[Greyblades]

So, I'm surprised that this hasnt come up yet.

[Beskar]

You are forgetting the TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership).

Have fun reading on that too.

[Brenus]

That is because it is secret. The aim is to create a super Company of India, in which big companies will be allowed to ignore democracy and rules of laws if they go against them making money, as stupid Health & Safety rules, work for children and other leftist inventions to stop pillaging and exploiting the weakest.
They however should be careful.

[Papewaio]

Yes push to hard and even the Kiwi's will side with the French Foreign Legion and help with the revolution for the people.

[Hooahguy]

If the bit Ive been hearing about how corporations will be able to sue countries over their own laws is true, then its very, very concerning.

[Husar]

If the bit Ive been hearing about how corporations will be able to sue countries over their own laws is true, then its very, very concerning.

This.

But not only this, there is also the simple fact that they make it incredibly hard to even read the documents and then they call the ones opposing them conspiracy theorists or so. Well, if there is no conspiracy, put the trade agreements on the internet, or do you have something to hide? It's a ridiculous process and it does actually seem to be yet another corporate attempt at undermining democracy as the videos say.

John Oliver had this case where big tobacco would sue small countries that can't afford an expensive process in order to revoke anti-smoking laws. These secret private courts seem like a logical extension of that and billionaires ruining Argentina and other countries because they can. So I don't really think it's a conspiracy theory and rather an actual conspiracy. If not there should be no problem releasing the contracts officially. Surely the Iran nuclear deal that you can read entirely on the internet is a more sensitive document than a supposedly harmless trade agreement?

[Sarmatian]

If the bit Ive been hearing about how corporations will be able to sue countries over their own laws is true, then its very, very concerning.

That is nothing new. If you're setting up a multilateral long-term agreement, there needs to be a way to make sure it is enforced. Creating a separate court to do that makes sense.

That is a way for countries, corporations and people to protect their interest. For instance, I own a company in New Zealand which makes mobile phones and I want access to US market. Apple uses its power and influence to limit my access. I can then turn to a court to demand that full access is given.

Corporations are able to sue countries already, nothing new there.

From what little I've been able to gather from these videos, Americans have nothing to fear, because everyone will have to adapt the American rules when it comes to copyright and intellectual property.

[Montmorency]

I can then turn to a court to demand that full access is given.

Regardless of how a legislature comes to develop and pass its laws, perhaps international courts should not have any authority to make or break those laws on the basis of multinational corporations and their arguments on market access and competition.

Of course it's nothing new, but I don't think there would be a comparison in terms of de jure judicial authority set in place against national sovereignty.

If one criticizes EU governance, then how could one feel about an EU government operating from, for example, China?