But if a region wants to pass legislation that says "Beef sold in our country must only be fed grain from XXX region," then that is a biased law, as it not only limits beef imports, but can also heavily affect grain imports. A corporation, could take that region to tribunal to either scrap or alter the legislation, or ask for a monetary compensation for effected sales of said product. The company would have to prove how much money they'd be losing due to the passed legislation and really can't pull an unrealistic amount out of thin air.
That's the jiffs of it. Everything else that people are saying, is fear mongering.
Ok, so English isn't my language but I'll try to make myself clear, no animosity :
Your example is good, in the way that if a region decides to pass legislation, based on environmental ethics or ideas, that says "short circuit" (not sure how to express that in english, it's the idea that you shouldn't import goods from far away when you can have the same thing from a closer area) have to be privileged because it's a effing environmental scandal to transport things that are already available in the area, they should be able to do it without having to pay all the companies in the world some kind of compensation.
I get that idea, and local agricultural (among other goods) will always be predominant in a given region. It is already cheaper for someone to buy local.
Flooding the market with the same type of products however removes the monopoly that certain businesses have, gives consumers more choices and promotes innovation. All of these lower prices for goods.
A population can always be persuaded to buy local through advertising or government subsidies but the consumer should have the last say in what they are going to purchase, not a government.
Yes, but the very idea of "government subsidies to promote local" could be attacked by big companies for loss of profit with a system so vague as the one in CETA.
Also, lower prices on goods are not the ultimate goal to achieve in a society. Fair prices, social security, less pollution, public health, those should be far more important matters. But that's of course a personal point of view, so i can understand the logic behind yours ^^
(And, no, it is not necessarily cheaper already to buy local, by the way, especially not within a free trade space.)
(...) and I believe the Canadian International Trade Minister is right in saying, if you can't do it with us, you're not going to be able to do it with anyone.
Oh, on that, I thought it was kind of unfair of her to play the "Canada is so nice" card Of course Canada is a great country, of course, as Belgian, I can relate to the canadian social structures and stuff. That's not the point.
It's all about companies versus states, private corporations vs people. I saw it more as a critic aimed at EU itself, at the fact that EU is more concerned about satisfying lobbies and companies vs caring about european people. And nobody said canadian companies were the devil and european companies were super great and let's favor them, that really was not the point : the point was not to use CETA (or TTIP or TAFTA or whatever it's called) as an occasion to give even more power to private companies. When they're companies from your own land, your parliament can legislate and make the game fair. Take away that power, and what ?
It's just a question of if you are willing to sign away your freedom in exchange for wealth.
Western National Governments can all lay claim to some degree of democratic accountability. Corporations, however well meaning, have no democratic accountability. Thus, if you believe in Democracy, a decision made by a national government (however unfair) should ALWAYS trump corporate interests. "Legal Challenges" should simply be impossible.
Of course, the real question is "do you believe in Democracy?" China is doing pretty well without even paying lip-service to the idea, and a large proportion of the people are quite happy.
I wrote a short play about how the politics of my country feel to me right now.
[An NBA team's point guard sprains his ankle, and two coaches discuss who to put in.]
Coach 1: In my opinion, the next-best guard on our roster is Rajon Rondo. Coach 2: Rondo is awful. We need to try something different. 1: I think "awful" is an exaggeration, but who do you have in mind? 2: Bieber. 1: Who? 2: Justin Bieber. 1: What are you talking about? 2: He's sitting right there, in the front row. This is going to be awesome. 1: How is he even in this conversation? 2: Oh, so you think Rondo is the greatest? He's garbage! 1: Not the greatest, but he is, you know, a basketball player. 2: Exactly! He has been in the league for years and never accomplished anything. 1: Well, he did win that one championship with Boston. 2: Rondo is the worst shooter in the history of the NBA! He's a locker room cancer! 1: That's a stretch, but the main point here is that-- 2: Ugh, this team is so bad now. It used to be great, but now it's full of those people. 1: "Those people"? 2: Oh, so now I'm a racist?! Stop silencing me! 1: I mean, it seems like you might be, but again, let's focus. 2: Bieber has game! I saw it on Instagram. He will win this thing for us. 1: Dude, please listen to yourself. 2: Rondo uses steroids! 1: Do you have any evidence of that? 2: Bieber is six inches taller than Rondo! 1: Come on now, that's just demonstrably false. 2: You are such a lying liar! 1: It seems like you're projecting. 2: Rondo is the devil! 1: That's not nice. 2: Rondo is Adam Silver in disguise. The conspiracy goes to the very top! 1: Can I drink in here? I need a drink. 2: Bie-ber! Bie-ber! Bie-ber!
Voted yesterday! Now to sandbag and hope the losing side doesn't burn it all down.
The sore loser rhetoric is nothing new in American politics. Remember the push for some states to leave the union after Obama won the second time, claiming democracy had failed them?
Yeah, I had forgotten that. This election feels a lot different than those innocent days of 8 years ago. Certain elements of American society are REALLY stirred up. I choose to believe it's mostly a really vocal but small minority of the electorate.
Eh, America is basically a caricature of what it once was. We will either end up with a psycopathic manchild who doesn't believe there could be any consequences for his actions, or one of the most corrupt politicians in our short history.
Eh, America is basically a caricature of what it once was. We will either end up with a psycopathic manchild who doesn't believe there could be any consequences for his actions, or one of the most corrupt politicians in our short history.
There is no comparison between the two. Hillary Clinton is no more or less corrupt than 90% of other politicians. Donald Trump is a fascist. Even if Hillary WAS as corrupt as you believe (or have been made to believe) you think she is, that is still magnitudes better than ushering in an authoritarian racist. People seem to forget that in 1933, Hitler was really no more or less odious than Trump is now. It took over a decade for his plans to come to fruition. The Olympics were held in Germany in '36. And he never got more than 33% of the vote legitimately. Trump is well poised to beat 40% at least.
That being said, I was nervous about the outcome until we have started to see some actual hard vote numbers coming in, and Trump is toast. Latino voters are coming out in droves to save us from this monster, and god bless them for it. The media will sell the horse-race til the last hour, but this cake is already baked. She's basically already won Nevada, and the early vote number and demographics in Florida are trending her way as well. She doesn't NEED Florida, but if she wins it, the game is over. Trump basically has to draw a Royal Flush. Not impossible, but extremely unlikely.
@jjstraka34 They are both equally horrendus, just in different ways. Voting has basically come down to which possibility scares you more and therefore voting for the other person.
Truthfully, it won't matter too much which major candidate wins because at least 80% of all government policies and procedures currently in place at the Federal level will continue to exist in the new administration. We never get "change" from Washington, D. C., only slight shifts in the wind.
What most people don't realize is that the closer to home an election is the more impact it has on you. State Senators, State Representatives, city council members, sheriff, tax assessor, mayor, local judges, other associated county or municipal positions, and so on and so forth--these people often have a direct impact on your daily life.
Trump isn't a fascist; he is a businessman. Loud and obnoxious at times, yes, but not a fascist. At worst, his Administration would be a scaled-up version of his reality TV show--loud and obnoxious. To claim that Hillary is no more corrupt than most other politicians is not a good thing. The sad truth, though, is that politicians are corrupt because we allow them to be. When we don't subject them to recall votes or kick them out of office for being corrupt we are giving our unspoken approval of their poor behavior.
I voted for Johnson. Whoever wins on Tuesday, I can sit back and point at the people who voted for the winner and say, with a clear conscience, "this is your fault".
Truthfully, it won't matter too much which major candidate wins because at least 80% of all government policies and procedures currently in place at the Federal level will continue to exist in the new administration. We never get "change" from Washington, D. C., only slight shifts in the wind.
What most people don't realize is that the closer to home an election is the more impact it has on you. State Senators, State Representatives, city council members, sheriff, tax assessor, mayor, local judges, other associated county or municipal positions, and so on and so forth--these people often have a direct impact on your daily life.
Trump isn't a fascist; he is a businessman. Loud and obnoxious at times, yes, but not a fascist. At worst, his Administration would be a scaled-up version of his reality TV show--loud and obnoxious. To claim that Hillary is no more corrupt than most other politicians is not a good thing. The sad truth, though, is that politicians are corrupt because we allow them to be. When we don't subject them to recall votes or kick them out of office for being corrupt we are giving our unspoken approval of their poor behavior.
I voted for Johnson. Whoever wins on Tuesday, I can sit back and point at the people who voted for the winner and say, with a clear conscience, "this is your fault".
Trump isn't a fascist; he is a businessman. Loud and obnoxious at times, yes, but not a fascist. At worst, his Administration would be a scaled-up version of his reality TV show--loud and obnoxious.
The Washington Post had an interesting assessment by a history professor of how fascist Trump is. His conclusion: "He is semi-fascist: more fascist than any successful American politician yet, and the most dangerous threat to pluralist democracy in this country in more than a century, but — thank our stars — an amateurish imitation of the real thing."
Regarding the worst-case scenario for a Trump administration, I disagree. His campaign could be described as a scaled-up version of his reality TV show, but presidents have the power to do real harm.
I voted for Johnson. Whoever wins on Tuesday, I can sit back and point at the people who voted for the winner and say, with a clear conscience, "this is your fault".
I am willing to take my chances. I don't agree with everything the Libertarian Party supports but I dislike them significantly less than I dislike the two major parties. I am going to let my fellow American citizens in on a little secret, though--there really aren't any significant differences between Republicans and Democrats any more, other than the letter denoting their party affiliation.
@JuliusBorisov: Americans increasingly tend to live in bubbles of like-mindedness, both geographically (the so-called Big Sort) and in their media consumption. The data on Democratic and Republican primary voting in New York City is illuminating. At the time, I lived across the street from a neighborhood in which 375 people voted in the Democratic primary and 0 voted in the Republican one.
My point is that this election feels very different depending on where you are in the US and who you talk to. I don't personally know any (open) Trump supporters, so the polls showing how many people support him just seem baffling and strange. Likewise, people at Trump rallies have said that they're sure the polls are rigged because they've never met a Clinton supporter.
With the people I talk to, I get the impression that there are no Trump or Clinton supporters, rather people that hate Trump or Clinton to the point of voting for the other just to deny a win. Granted this could just be in my area.
Finland: the most purely right, local racist party inclusive government since, well, our worst ever interior minister Horelli wanted to court the favour of the nazis by handing over nine war prisoners cum refugees.
The war prisoner bit was clearly against Geneva convention, the refugee bit against just human decency even at the time.
I am glad to say it was a one-time occurence because it was viewed immoral by the populance of Helsinki and protested against, and Horelli even got bit of punishment for it, but not as much as he should have deserved I think.
("Sana: Luovutetut" for reference)
But our current government does not bother me that much, because by being forced unto actual political responsibility, our racist party will be in the opposition for years to come.
It is easy to promise a lot of things from an irrisponsible opposition - but once in power, it is a matter of actual compromise, and action.
I'd perso like to see Kokoomus in opposition next time around - the most right wing party in Finland that actually subscribes to parliamentary representation in earnest.
Comments
Yes, but the very idea of "government subsidies to promote local" could be attacked by big companies for loss of profit with a system so vague as the one in CETA.
Also, lower prices on goods are not the ultimate goal to achieve in a society. Fair prices, social security, less pollution, public health, those should be far more important matters.
But that's of course a personal point of view, so i can understand the logic behind yours ^^
(And, no, it is not necessarily cheaper already to buy local, by the way, especially not within a free trade space.)
Of course Canada is a great country, of course, as Belgian, I can relate to the canadian social structures and stuff.
That's not the point.
It's all about companies versus states, private corporations vs people.
I saw it more as a critic aimed at EU itself, at the fact that EU is more concerned about satisfying lobbies and companies vs caring about european people.
And nobody said canadian companies were the devil and european companies were super great and let's favor them, that really was not the point : the point was not to use CETA (or TTIP or TAFTA or whatever it's called) as an occasion to give even more power to private companies.
When they're companies from your own land, your parliament can legislate and make the game fair. Take away that power, and what ?
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiArsnq0v3PAhVEJcAKHab2BqUQqQIIJDAA&url=http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/725992/CETA-Belgium-EU-Canada-trade-deal-European-Court-of-Justice-ECJ&usg=AFQjCNFECRJxqJAeJ5Tiwql49TK8ZqLnZw&bvm=bv.136811127,d.bGg
Whatever happens, I know that when the votes are counted, one of them is going to be mine.
Western National Governments can all lay claim to some degree of democratic accountability. Corporations, however well meaning, have no democratic accountability. Thus, if you believe in Democracy, a decision made by a national government (however unfair) should ALWAYS trump corporate interests. "Legal Challenges" should simply be impossible.
Of course, the real question is "do you believe in Democracy?" China is doing pretty well without even paying lip-service to the idea, and a large proportion of the people are quite happy.
[An NBA team's point guard sprains his ankle, and two coaches discuss who to put in.]
Coach 1: In my opinion, the next-best guard on our roster is Rajon Rondo.
Coach 2: Rondo is awful. We need to try something different.
1: I think "awful" is an exaggeration, but who do you have in mind?
2: Bieber.
1: Who?
2: Justin Bieber.
1: What are you talking about?
2: He's sitting right there, in the front row. This is going to be awesome.
1: How is he even in this conversation?
2: Oh, so you think Rondo is the greatest? He's garbage!
1: Not the greatest, but he is, you know, a basketball player.
2: Exactly! He has been in the league for years and never accomplished anything.
1: Well, he did win that one championship with Boston.
2: Rondo is the worst shooter in the history of the NBA! He's a locker room cancer!
1: That's a stretch, but the main point here is that--
2: Ugh, this team is so bad now. It used to be great, but now it's full of those people.
1: "Those people"?
2: Oh, so now I'm a racist?! Stop silencing me!
1: I mean, it seems like you might be, but again, let's focus.
2: Bieber has game! I saw it on Instagram. He will win this thing for us.
1: Dude, please listen to yourself.
2: Rondo uses steroids!
1: Do you have any evidence of that?
2: Bieber is six inches taller than Rondo!
1: Come on now, that's just demonstrably false.
2: You are such a lying liar!
1: It seems like you're projecting.
2: Rondo is the devil!
1: That's not nice.
2: Rondo is Adam Silver in disguise. The conspiracy goes to the very top!
1: Can I drink in here? I need a drink.
2: Bie-ber! Bie-ber! Bie-ber!
If you can vote on Tuesday, please do.
That being said, I was nervous about the outcome until we have started to see some actual hard vote numbers coming in, and Trump is toast. Latino voters are coming out in droves to save us from this monster, and god bless them for it. The media will sell the horse-race til the last hour, but this cake is already baked. She's basically already won Nevada, and the early vote number and demographics in Florida are trending her way as well. She doesn't NEED Florida, but if she wins it, the game is over. Trump basically has to draw a Royal Flush. Not impossible, but extremely unlikely.
Truthfully, it won't matter too much which major candidate wins because at least 80% of all government policies and procedures currently in place at the Federal level will continue to exist in the new administration. We never get "change" from Washington, D. C., only slight shifts in the wind.
What most people don't realize is that the closer to home an election is the more impact it has on you. State Senators, State Representatives, city council members, sheriff, tax assessor, mayor, local judges, other associated county or municipal positions, and so on and so forth--these people often have a direct impact on your daily life.
Trump isn't a fascist; he is a businessman. Loud and obnoxious at times, yes, but not a fascist. At worst, his Administration would be a scaled-up version of his reality TV show--loud and obnoxious. To claim that Hillary is no more corrupt than most other politicians is not a good thing. The sad truth, though, is that politicians are corrupt because we allow them to be. When we don't subject them to recall votes or kick them out of office for being corrupt we are giving our unspoken approval of their poor behavior.
I voted for Johnson. Whoever wins on Tuesday, I can sit back and point at the people who voted for the winner and say, with a clear conscience, "this is your fault".
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/polls.html?_r=0
Doesn't it feel like that inside USA?
Regarding the worst-case scenario for a Trump administration, I disagree. His campaign could be described as a scaled-up version of his reality TV show, but presidents have the power to do real harm. Hmmm.
My point is that this election feels very different depending on where you are in the US and who you talk to. I don't personally know any (open) Trump supporters, so the polls showing how many people support him just seem baffling and strange. Likewise, people at Trump rallies have said that they're sure the polls are rigged because they've never met a Clinton supporter.
The war prisoner bit was clearly against Geneva convention, the refugee bit against just human decency even at the time.
I am glad to say it was a one-time occurence because it was viewed immoral by the populance of Helsinki and protested against, and Horelli even got bit of punishment for it, but not as much as he should have deserved I think.
("Sana: Luovutetut" for reference)
But our current government does not bother me that much, because by being forced unto actual political responsibility, our racist party will be in the opposition for years to come.
It is easy to promise a lot of things from an irrisponsible opposition - but once in power, it is a matter of actual compromise, and action.
I'd perso like to see Kokoomus in opposition next time around - the most right wing party in Finland that actually subscribes to parliamentary representation in earnest.
Today I will be wearing my patriotic red-white-blue scarf to work since I didn't get one of those nifty "I voted" stickers.
Then I'll promptly hide my head under a pillow until it's all over.
We got real spiffy stickers in my neighborhood.
The fate of the country hangs in the balance...
florida
*grumble grumble*