|
Audit the Fed
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Thunder Moose posted:
Maybe when it exists we can have a lively discussion on it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
China is specifically not a signatory of TPP but surprisingly that's not the most wrong part of that post.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:Yeah I'm sure there's nothing at all to worry about an up or down vote with the GOP controlling both houses. Surely they'll stop it if it ends up being a massive giveaway to multinational corporations with nothing at all to benefit anyone else whatsoever The chance of it failing is actually greater because it's an Obama thing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 00:07
|
|
.
|
rudatron posted:No it isn't, because all the industries that wrote it are gonna whip them into line. Which wouldn't happen in a Democratic controlled Congress?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:So, even without knowing what's specifically in the bill, an understanding of history tells me that when the government tries to put together an enormous international treaty, takes the advise of private interested parties while shunning public scrutiny, and promises economic prosperity for all, I should be skeptical if not immediately opposed to the agreement. Which international treaties do you think were completely conducted in public?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:The one where the world begged your mom to get an abortion. Unfortunately, in the real world, you can't win them all. Rude.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:
You said this one shuns public scrutiny. Aren't all treaties at some point shunning public scrutiny?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:To varying degrees, yes. And your point is? What makes you think this one shuns public scrutiny more than normal? I assume it must, otherwise you wouldn't put it (shunning public scrutiny) as a reason for distrusting the treaty.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
rudatron posted:No no, it would happen. But 'OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA' is what the GOP sells to the base, they're smart enough to not oppose the hand that feeds them (hint: its not voters). The incidents of the debt ceiling seem to dispute this.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
Ponsonby Britt posted:I think people are conflating two propositions here. The first is "treaties should be negotiated in secrecy." The second is "Congress should be limited to an up-or-down vote." The second doesn't necessarily follow from the first. Most every treaty the US has ever negotiated has been negotiated in secrecy, and then given to the Senate for approval. There was no "fast-track authority" in those cases - the Senate had the opportunity to debate and discuss the implications, and decide whether or not to approve the agreement. They could freely choose to weigh the costs and benefits of approving the agreement, versus the costs and benefits of demanding new terms and risking a collapse of negotiations. That wouldn't be present under fast-track. The point of fast-track is to constrain the Senate's authority (and ultimately the authority of the people they represent). The purpose of fast-track from all reports I've seen is for the benefit of other governments, since the US has a precedent of establishing treaties and then not ratifying them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
Ponsonby Britt posted:Here we have a treaty that was negotiated in secret, and presented to the Senate as a fait accompli. It was unable to pass in its original form, and because of that was defeated. If Wilson had been willing to allow amendments, the treaty could have passed. If he had included representatives of the Lodge bloc in the negotiations in the first place, they could have kept the negotiations secret while getting a deal they could support. But Wilson refused to do either of these things. Instead he insisted on strict secrecy in the negotiating process, and then an up-or-down vote on his preferred draft. Of course you're assuming the other countries would pass whatever the US would pass.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:Hey, maybe the US government was designed to keep us out of these kinds of agreements! Oh, so you're an isolationist.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:There's that straw man again. N/A without more data
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
Boon posted:
Hmm, I can't think of another major piece of law proposed by President Obama that few people read or understood but was widely opposed.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:I have a hard time understanding how Africans are going to be affected by a treaty that has no African countries involved, even as observers. Probably the same way that generics are going to become repatented.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:how real are the environmental protections in the TPP? Everything good will be edited out and everything bad will stay forever because most cynical = better than.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
Caros posted:Nope. How much do you agree with the phrase "Audit the Fed"?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
tekz posted:Our leaders have definitely demonstrated that they'd never ever put the interests of their donors and the people who give them super high paying private sector jobs after leaving office over the good of the public and the country as a whole. Oh look, one minor change and I have a 5 year old post.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:Eight pages and you're all still fishmeching over this, the least important part of the subject And yet it keeps getting brought up.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
It sounds like "corporate courts" is a massive scare tactic by ignorant people, similar to how CDNs were called "fast lanes to the internet" back during the net neutrality panic.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
tekz posted:That does seem terrible because they're two of the few organizations interested in investigating and exposing the terrible poo poo US and US-aligned governments are doing. Oh don't worry, I'm sure Russia Today will still exist.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:I'm guessing he's being somewhat sarcastic. As it stands now, U.S. Copyright law means that Mickey Mouse won't fall into fair use until about 30 years after the heat death of the universe. Well, that post that LookingGodInTheEye quoted said nothing about economic benefits, just that the laws weren't out of the average, and that even Communist Sweden had Life + 70. computer parts fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Oct 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Also no idea why Mexico's copyright term is life plus 100 years? According to Wikipedia it was only extended to that in 2003 (pre-1994 it was Life + 50, 1994-2003 was Life + 75). Also very strange is that this also extends to government works. Unlike the US, they aren't Public Domain by default. The really strange thing is that according to an article about TPP Mexico currently has IP laws ranging from 50-75 years after death, and TPP would extend them to 95 years. Either that's specifically referring to works created before 1994 and 2003 respectively, or it's a lie.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
walgreenslatino posted:In a complete and utter shock, the deal is almost exactly what was leaked months ago. Doesn't sound like it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Not if either Clinton or Sanders wins the election next year. Or if Wikipedia tries a blackout. Oh no, the Wikimedia foundation might miss their annual scam drive
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
There are no heightened restrictions for anyone in a developed nation.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 04:26 |
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's kind of creepy how TPP proponents are only concerned with what impacts the US in the bill. Status update: making the rest of the world as corporate-friendly as america is not a good thing. It's kind of creepy how you didn't read a post that was trying to justify why Wikipedia would do a blackout (presumably to the English version).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 17:49
|
|