TPP Is Still Very Much Alive

The Tufts analysis, however, is merely a response to another report done by the World Bank claiming, "The model simulations suggest that, by 2030, the TPP will raise member country GDP by 0.4-10 percent, and by 1.1 percent, on a GDP-weighted average basis."

So now you've got the World Bank arguing with economists, Cory Doctorow only linking some of the results of those reports, and this mysterious job loss (where the hell do those jobs go, exactly?) various economists disagreeing with one another...

How the hell do people extract an overarching viewpoint from all this noise? The biggest concern for me is the IP stuff, but I can't tell if this, too, is fearmongering (I go to jail because I cosplayed Darth Vader?? There's simply no way that's how it works, I don't care what the agreement says).

Also the loss of sovereignty seems scary. It'd be terrible of Phillip Morris could sue the US Government for the cigarette labeling, like they did in Uruguay.

You elect officials who you trust to appoint other officials who will negotiate with the US's best interest in mind. If the deal goes through, you elect different people who you trust will fix the laws you don't agree with.

"The people" never have a say in any legislation, not directly, and there are countless meetings that take place on Capitol Hill which aren't open to the public.

We don't have a "democracy" as you describe it, and for very good reason. Populism is reactionary and predatory. It would be very harmful to minorities if we did live in a system where the most popular decisions were the ones that got made. Remember prop 8 in California, or more recently brexit?

A trade deal was openly proposed in 2008.[0] Wikileaks did not leak specific provisions until 2013.

I think it's reasonable to expect democratic accountability, which requires transparency in some part of the process.

That's compatible though with allowing a period of time where negotiators are allowed to work on drafts in private. Since legislators and the public are allowed to see the proposed agreement before ratification, I'm not as worried about the secrecy issue.

There was even an openly publicized notice and comment period where citizens were encouraged to weigh in on the draft with any concerns by writing directly to USTR.[1]

There are a lot of aspects of TPP I don't agree with, but the process wasn't quite as cloak and dagger as some have suggested.

[0] http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&o...

[1] http://www.flushthetpp.org/your-chance-to-officially-tell-th...

However I have heard this specific argument that it was done in secret with no accountability, which is why it's evil and must be stopped. But, I just don't see much validity in this argument.

1. Initial negotiations happened in private, as I would assume any/all types of treaties, agreements, partnerships of this type would be. Imagine trying to conduct any negotiation out in public, it would devolve into rumor, hearsay, misinformation and be counter productive. For the HN crowd, the best analogy might be trying to conduct a sale of your company, or negotiating some contract with an important ($$) client. Always in secret, until all parties are satisfied and agreed upon.

2. Now, this being a democracy and a government partnership, it needs to be voted upon before becoming law even after all sides have agreed on the contents of the document. And so the full document has been made available here[1]. This allows the entire congress, as well as concerned citizens, to understand the details. An argument can be made that there wasn't sufficient time provided for this review process, but nevertheless, that's what your lawmakers are elected for, to review these types of things, or vote no/yes in response.

[1]: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-full-text-of-the-trans-paci...