Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP)

CharlasBrits

Únete a LibraryThing para publicar.

Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP)

1antimuzak
Abr 1, 2023, 2:02 am

This information needs to be spread far and wide. This trade deal with the Pacific Trading Block was to be expected given that we are now a weak single country, unprotected by membership of the strong EU trading block, in a neoliberal globalised world in which the stronger partner in a trading agreement can always set the conditions and rules. So, this trading agreement will undermine environmental and food standards and probably other things also. It should serve as a warning for a potentially much more significant deal with the USA.

See: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/31/pacific-trade-deal-brexit-...

2UncleMort
Abr 1, 2023, 9:24 am

If the Guardian is against it then it's definitely a good deal.

3antimuzak
Abr 1, 2023, 4:11 pm

>2 UncleMort: Have you actually read the article? Insults are no substitute for a reasoned argument.

4UncleMort
Abr 1, 2023, 5:40 pm

Of course I read the article. It's highly biased and lacking in substance. Even most of the links provided lead to websites with a similar bias. Typical Guardian tripe.

5antimuzak
Abr 2, 2023, 1:56 am

>4 UncleMort: As I said before, insults are no substitute for reasoned argument. Please outline your disagreements with the arguments in the article, hopefully showing some knowledge of how trade deals work and how they are negotiated, also with some knowledge re. this particular trade deal. Otherwise, how can anyone take you seriously?

6UncleMort
Abr 2, 2023, 4:44 am

>5 antimuzak: I knew this was coming. How about you outline your agreements with the arguments in the article, hopefully showing some knowledge of how trade deals work and how they are negotiated, also with some knowledge re. this particular trade deal.

7antimuzak
Abr 2, 2023, 8:22 am

Its you who are criticising the article, not me, I outlined a digest of my thoughts in the first post. The article also outlines the writers research and understanding of this trade deal which you assert you have read and understood so there is enough there for you to engage with and to critique. I assume from your replies that you know very little about this area and that you are unable to justify, through any reasonable argument, your assertion of bias. If you were to do so I would be very pleased to engage with you and to argue with your points, and perhaps even to accept some of them. As it is I can't engage with prejudice and insults as a substitute for knowledge and argument.

8Cynfelyn
Abr 2, 2023, 2:58 pm

CPTPP comprises eleven Pacific nations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, with a population of about 500 million people with a joint gross domestic product (GDP) of £9 trillion in 2021.

The EU now comprises a single market of 27 countries with a population of 447 million with a GDP of around US$16.6 trillion in 2022, constituting approximately one sixth of global nominal GDP and the third-biggest global economy after the United States and China. So the two trade blocs are fairly similar in size and economic activity. However:

The shortest journey from the UK to CPTPP territory is probably Derry, Northern Ireland, to St John's, Newfoundland, about 2,000 miles (3,200 km).

The shortest journey from the UK to EU territory is Dover, Kent, to Calais, France, at about 26½ miles (42½ km), a journey of less than two hours.

Prioritising trade with the Pacific trade bloc rather than with the Euopean bloc is the opposite of a green move in an age when it should be all hands to the pumps.

And thinking of Northern Ireland, the peace depends on the Good Friday Agreement, which includes an open border between NI and EU. If the UK joins the CPTPP, I can't see how it can be the whole of the UK joining, rather than in effect only GB. There is no way lower standard CPTPP goods circulating in NI could be kept from leaking into the EU, which would be intolerable. Joining would re-create the internal UK border down the Irish Sea, scuppering Sunak's 'Windsor Agreement'.

9UncleMort
Abr 3, 2023, 5:25 am

I'll admit I know little about trade deals but then again I would assume the same of most people. However I wouldn't use The Guardian as my main source of information (nor The Daily Mail come to that) they have their own agenda to push. That has been my point.

Opening up trade is obviously a good thing, Especially since Brexit. All we have to ensure is that the deal doesn't become a political union. I voted for joining the ECC back in the day as that was an economic union. Maastricht changed that and trade has become second to politics.

>8 Cynfelyn: I believe there should have been a hard border between NI and Ireland. But as a sop to the hardliners and to prevent a resurgent of violence a fudge was concocted. I cannot see a way out of this mess.

10andyl
Abr 3, 2023, 5:41 am

>9 UncleMort:

How disingenious. It is obvious to anyone that trading with a close neighbour is easier than with someone halfway across the world.

What >8 Cynfelyn: doesn't mention is that the trade flows with the EU are much, much higher than the GDP comparison might indicate.

Also joning a trade bloc means we obey their rules - the CPTPP countries were quite keen they were no massive opt-outs for the UK. So for example we have no control of how ethical the palm oil we import has to be hence we are likely to see more habitat destruction.

>8 Cynfelyn:

It is all very confusing. The UK had free trade agreements with a number of the countries. The EU has FTAs with some, and are negotiating more. So I guess a lot depends on the originating country. But at worst it is all CPTPP -> mainland Britain -> NI - with the resurrection of a border in the Irish Sea. Whether some of that can be ameliorated with just tagging and checking the consignments with CPTPP origin goods I don't know.

Únete para publicar