> Does any TPP article do more than fearmongering? Its clear there are people who are against low barriers to trade by principle.
Yes. Mises is made of people who are against low trade barriers on principles. /s
https://mises.org/library/we-need-actual-free-trade-not-tpp
> We Need Actual Free Trade, Not the TPP
> Nyhan is apparently deeply confused, however, since he equates the Trans Pacific Partnership with “trade liberalization.” In fact, the TPP is not about any type of liberalization, but is about centralizing political power.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/nz-it-industry-mobilises-to-fig...
> "We're an export-driven sector, so we love free trade", Taylor said. "However this can't come at the cost of the future of the technology industry, and that's what it will be if New Zealand's current law banning software patents is traded away in the TPP."
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/22/opinion/paul-krugman-trade...
> In any case, the Pacific trade deal isn’t really about trade. Some already low tariffs would come down, but the main thrust of the proposed deal involves strengthening intellectual property rights — things like drug patents and movie copyrights — and changing the way companies and countries settle disputes. And it’s by no means clear that either of those changes is good for America.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/the-mis-selling-...
> William Daley’s pro-TPP op-ed in today’s Times is just awful, on multiple levels. No acknowledgment that the real arguments are not about trade but about intellectual property and dispute settlement; on top of that a crude mercantilist claim that trade liberalization is good because it means more exports; some Dean Baker bait with numbers — $31 billion in trade surplus! All of 0.2 percent of GDP!
http://www.vox.com/2015/10/5/9454511/tpp-cost-medicine
> So in the United States, there are really protective rules around this: Any maker of a biologic gets 12 years of data exclusivity. The FDA can't approve a similar drug that relies on the original data during this time. ... By contrast, in other countries, there are looser rules — or no rules — around such data exclusivity. Japan offers eight years, for instance. Brunei offers zero.
> At the moment, it's up to countries to decide whether things like a small change in a drug molecule should warrant a patent extension. But the final TPP creates patent-related obligations in countries that never had them before, explained Rius Sanjuan. To put it simply, this would directly target a country's ability to define its own patent law and put a higher standard on when generics can become available.