- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Messages
- 10,032
- Reaction score
- 4,966
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
So I posted about the EU-Moldavia trade agreement, and that's nice, but now for something bad.
http://corporateeurope.org/trade/2013/09/busting-myths-transparency-around-eu-us-trade-deal
So read the whole page if you're interested in the top link.
This link however is a to website that will provide some other information, mainly, how the trade agreement between the EU and the USA should be done:
Alternative Trade Mandate | Trade isn
http://www.alternativetrademandate.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ATM-Document-Final-EN.pdf
The pdf provides an easy read.
Now of course, the document is made in order to better benefit the EU and it's people according to the views of the NGOs that worked on it. Now I don't subscribe to all the things listed there, especially when it comes to labor rights and business. For instance, this is crap in their proposal:
or this:
Almost everything written here is idiotic and hippie: Issue #9: Intellectual Property Rights are rights for all – not just a few
So yeah
There are a lot of things I disagree with in the alternative view. But they do raise a good point in regards to transparency. So they are correct in what they want as an end result, but their proposals are at times stupid, silly and rather hippie-like. And hippies don't get to make public policies.
http://corporateeurope.org/trade/2013/09/busting-myths-transparency-around-eu-us-trade-deal
Busting the myths of transparency around the EU-US trade deal
On 7 October, the second round of negotiations for a far-reaching transatlantic trade deal will begin in Brussels. Amidst calls for greater openness and public participation, the European Commission has gone into propaganda mode, promoting myths about the transparency and accountability of the talks. See through its feel-good rhetoric with Corporate Europe Observatory’s myth-busting guide to secrecy, corporate influence and lack of accountability in the transatlantic trade negotiations.
digital rights activists have warned the European Commission that secrecy “could kill TTIP just as effectively as it killed ACTA”.
In response, the Commission has gone on a PR offensive. In a series of Q&A, briefing papers about transparency in EU trade negotiations and leaflets explaining why TTIP is not ACTA, the Commission’s trade department (DG Trade) is portraying itself as the model of transparency. “There is more interest in this potential deal than any we have worked on before,” they say, “We realise that this requires new initiatives to shed more light on what is going on throughout the negotiations.”
However these “new initiatives” of theirs cast more shadow than light. Let us guide you through some of the key myths about openness and accountability in DG Trade.
So read the whole page if you're interested in the top link.
This link however is a to website that will provide some other information, mainly, how the trade agreement between the EU and the USA should be done:
Alternative Trade Mandate | Trade isn
http://www.alternativetrademandate.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ATM-Document-Final-EN.pdf
The pdf provides an easy read.
Now of course, the document is made in order to better benefit the EU and it's people according to the views of the NGOs that worked on it. Now I don't subscribe to all the things listed there, especially when it comes to labor rights and business. For instance, this is crap in their proposal:
Of course we should have different trariffs, morons.stop the practice of using differential tariffs to discourage imports of processed goods, while encouraging raw materials and thereby protecting European manufacturing.
or this:
I think privatization to a point is good. So is competition. not only should some services be privatized, but privatized in a way that creates competition between the companies. Having the state fully own public services without any chance of private companies emerging in those fields is stupid.reverse its focus on privatising public services, and the aggressive pursuit of opportunities for European companies to run public services elsewhere.
Almost everything written here is idiotic and hippie: Issue #9: Intellectual Property Rights are rights for all – not just a few
So yeah
There are a lot of things I disagree with in the alternative view. But they do raise a good point in regards to transparency. So they are correct in what they want as an end result, but their proposals are at times stupid, silly and rather hippie-like. And hippies don't get to make public policies.
Last edited: