Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 13-03-2015, 00:19   #1
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Slidell, La.
Boat: Morgan Classic 33
Posts: 1,101
Trans-Pacific Partnership

Given the numbers of South Pacific rim and North American members and their diverse political views, was curious to hear if anyone had any opinions on the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership...
__________________

__________________
jimbunyard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2015, 05:40   #2
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,573
Images: 240
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Given the lack of transparency, it's difficult to form a rational opinion.

The TPP is the world's largest economic trade agreement that will, if it comes into force, encompass more than 40 per cent of the world's GDP.
Despite the wide-ranging effects on the global population, the TPP is currently being negotiated in total secrecy by 12 countries. Few people, even within the negotiating countries' governments, have access to the full text of the draft agreement and the public, who it will affect most, none at all. Large corporations, however, are able to see portions of the text, generating a powerful lobby to effect changes on behalf of these groups and bringing developing country members reduced force, while the public at large gets no say.
https://wikileaks.org/tpp-ip2/
__________________

__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2015, 05:55   #3
Registered User
 
Alan Mighty's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Scarborough Marina, Moreton Bay
Posts: 659
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Quote:
Originally Posted by GordMay View Post
Given the lack of transparency, it's difficult to form a rational opinion.
Gord, as usual, presents a gem of succinct gem of wisdom.


Still, the silence on CF is surprising. And prompts inquiry into why the US wants the mainstream media to report nothing about the TPP.


Like not a few Australians, I cruise to Southeast Asia and sometime beyond to Northeast Asia. And so dare to offer a few (with another nod to Gord who correctly points to the lack of information that the many self-proclaimed 'democratic' governments are giving to their citizens) irrational opinions:


1. The US is putting a lot of diplomatic resources into the TPP, probably for a tiny return.


Much of the big and easy benefits of 'free trade' have already been won. The remaining unclaimed fruit are going to be hard picking. The TPP will undoubtedly make some people richer. In the state of ignorance in which elected leaders choose to keep us, we can only guess that the US Big Pharma and the US Big Intellectual Property are likely to be the chief winners. Bully for them. You might be heavily invested in them or employed by them, in which case you may be a winner.


Of course, if the Obama administration brings the TPP to bed, then Obama gets to point to the TPP as a major achievement, something to give substance to his 'Pivot to Asia' rhetoric. Good luck with that. He's not got many other successes to leave his mark in history.




2. The TPP is quite divisive to East Asia, but then East Asia is at a peak of divisiveness (and at a time when the US, perhaps because of its expenditure of force on Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., seems either temporarily weak or already headed down a historical slide to the bottom).


The big division is of course about China. The US has excluded China from the TPP negotiations, albeit while saying that China can be included later.


But note the recent reaction of US State Department to the UK, when the UK gave notice that it would sign up to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank proposed by China. Many in Asia see the AIIB as a replacement for the Asian Development Bank, a development bank that complements the Bretton-Woods structures without disturbing them - and of course the ADB is always directed by a Japanese (in the same way that a European always directs the IMF and a USA citizen always directs the World Bank Group) and is headquartered in the biggest ex-US colony in Asia, the Philippines.


So the US State Department's reaction to the UK suggests the US does want to contain China and sees the AIIB as a break out challenge from that containment. And if you follow that suggestion, then the US exclusion of China from the TPP might be seen as part of its attempt to make containment of China a big content of the Pivot to Asia.


If Republic of Korea and Australia move in the next 6 months to join the AIIB, I'm sure we'll see US State Department do some fancy footwork and change its talking points fast. My bet is for ROK and Aus to join, based on the real economic ties between each of them and China.


If ROK and Aus do join AIIB, they will devalue the TPP, in the sense that the reason they join the AIIB is precisely that those two economies see themselves as already economically integrated with China. And what's the point of a trade pact which includes ROK and Aus, but excludes their biggest trade and economic partner?


Note that the divisions in East Asia are not all about China. ROK and Japan have their own territorial disputes. Russia and Japan likewise.


And the Southeast Asian economies? Individually and collectively caught in crises of identity. ASEAN is a permanent crisis of identity. Remember the old days in the 1960s as SE Asia stumbled towards ASEAN? Each of the founding economies had their bureaucracies draw up a list of what they were prepared to buy from the other members. Quoting from memory, the Indonesia list had nuclear power plants and snowplows on their list. A serious basis for economic integration.


But China's existence and recent history are a big part of the divisions in East Asia. Take the South China Sea, for example. After solid economic growth in the 1950s, China spent much of the 1960s and the 1970s in internal leadership squabbles. So when its neighbours used the fast economic growth on offer (exporting light industrial goods to the world) to get rich, China tore itself apart. And did not have a unified leadership to direct power projection in the race for maritime resources that was unleashed by the process leading up to the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea.


By missing that opportunity in time, China lost a chance to solidify its claim to the South China Sea. So now we have to watch an inelegant dance as China sees how far its power projection can work. Japan is happy to play a role - gifting resources to Philippines and Vietnam in the hope that Japan wins approval from the US and that Philippines and Vietnam cause problems to China.

3. The TPP is quite divisive to the political-economic elites of Asia economies.


I usually cruise Led Myne from Australia through Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand every year or two. The mainstream media in each of those economies and their readers are kept just as ignorant of the content and future implications of the TPP as in the US and Australia. Of course, the diplomatic resources each of those economies brings to the TPP negotiating table is much less than what the US projects. Singapore, as an open economy entirely dependent on trade has to go along. The others are likely to go along just because the local economic elites usually control the political decisions. But I suspect that in Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia would be quietly happy if the TPP falls over for other reasons than themselves.


The big circus caused by the TPP is of course in Japan. Any time a domestic circus in Japan gets reported in the Japanese press, you know it's a big deal. That's just a reflection of the nature of Japan and its society (and its media, not known for investigative reporting on the scale of Watergate). But pick up any Nippon newspaper from the past few weeks and read the headlines: the circus of Japan's protected economic sectors that have been lobbying hard for their sectors to be excluded from the TPP. And, as you're familiar, what's the currency of lobbying in democracy? You guessed it, the 'democratic' economy of Japan has the best democracy money can buy. So the content of the current circus in Japan is something you could guess: Abe, the premier, 7 of his ministers, and the leader of the weak (but nevertheless still there) chief opposition party have all accepted big yen from the agricultural sectors that are at risk if the TPP were to go ahead without excluding them. The Minister for Agriculture, Nishikawa, has just resigned. One of the many groups pouring fat envelopes into Nishikawa's pocket was a company in the sugar industry, which of course wants to exclude its tariff protection from the sight of the TPP.


Back to ASEAN: each of the individual economies has its own crisis of identity. Indonesia is a bright spot at the moment and a candidate to be the first genuine democracy in Southeast Asia if current trends continue. For the rest, the difference is to what degree business has captured the political elite or the political elite captured the economy or the two are interpenetrated. Look at the circus of Thailand: the current monarch is about to die (although out of respect he will likely give precedence to Lee Kuan Yew). Next in line is the son who had appointed his pet poodle as the Air Chief Marshall of the Thai Airforce (the poodle died recently). The son, if he inherits, inherits a big chunk of the Thai economy. But the son, as well as having a strange relationship with women and a poodle (if you search the web, you should be able to find the video of Prince V and his then wife having lunch to celebrate the birthday of said poodle; it's worth a look. Said wife sits there naked, served by the usual obliging palace servants in their uniforms. And said wife gets down on all fours at one time to eat with said poodle) has a connection with the persons in the two former democratically elected governments, person who are out of favour with the rest of the Bangkok politico-economic elite including the Bangkok nobility. Need I mention Malaysia and its communal divisions, let alone its constant capacity to produce scandals (e.g. the Mongolian woman, Altantuya, who was killed by the elite bodyguards of the prime minister apparently without orders but nevertheless military explosives were used to spread her corpse around the environment - all somehow inexplicably linked to the purchase of French submarines for the Malaysian navy with said submarines apparently unable to dive in tropical water; or the current scandal involving a sovereign wealth investment company that may have been associated with money underwriting the purchase of luxury apartments in NY City and the production of the 'Wolf of Wall Street' movie - or maybe those really are just unfounded rumours pushed by people with seditious tendencies)? Or the Philippines and it's latest crisis, in which President Aquino's administration is shaking because of a bizarre police action, with gendarmes bursting into a camp of an armed group, which had negotiated what might have been an end to yet another insurrection, only to find that they had no military back-up from the nearby army unit but that the armed group was battle ready and did not appreciate having their morning prayers and coffee interrupted?


4. Look at the volume of trade and its routes yourself
Any compulsive reader of CF would have seen such Europeans as Dockhead and CarstenB suggesting a look at the volume of marine traffic (as revealed by AIS on marinetraffic.com) to be aware of what a busy waterway is like.


Have a go yourself: point your browser to marinetraffic.com. Move the map so ROK and Japan are at the centre of your screen (links to the individual cells of the map don't work, you have to do the mouse work yourself). Then zoom in. Count the ships around ROK and Japan. Then move down the China coast looking at the big ports, starting with the Bohai (ports such as Tianjin), then around the coast of Shandong (count the ships travelling from ports in Shandong to ports in ROK), then south along the China coast to the Taiwan Strait and then to Hong Kong/Pearl River Delta. Have a look at the mess of ships around such export ports in Taiwan as Kaohsiung. Then look at the Singapore Strait, noting the activity at both Port of Singapore and also Port of Tanjung Pelapas, the port set up in Malaysia to steal traffic from Singapore. Depending on your patience, watch the march of ships up and down the Malacca Strait. If you've time on your hands, do your own a statistical survey - you can either hover your pointer over a ship and see its destination and other details or you can click on Destination (menu on the top) and see the ships in view. See how important East Asia is to the world? and how important China is to East Asia?


Then ask yourself:
why really is the US putting resources into the TPP?


Is an attempt at 'containing' China worth it? Or might some other approach to China be better for the future?


What real benefits will US voters get from screwing a tiny benefit from the sugar industry (to pick one industry in Japan hiding behind the tariff wall)?


If China continues its economic rise, how kindly will its leaders in 2035 think about what they likely perceive as slights from the 2015 leaders of the US?


Al
__________________
“Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others.” - Otto von Bismarck
Alan Mighty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2015, 06:16   #4
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,573
Images: 240
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Having read, and almost digested, Al’s cogent analysis, I have to amend my opening remark to read “... difficult, but not impossible ...”.
Thanks Al!!!
__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2015, 06:53   #5
Registered User
 
transmitterdan's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Boat: Valiant 42
Posts: 4,019
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Thanks, Al. Really appreciate that!
__________________
transmitterdan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2015, 07:11   #6
Registered User
 
Alan Mighty's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Scarborough Marina, Moreton Bay
Posts: 659
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Sorry I could not be as concise as Gord.

Recognising that CF is a family friendly website, please don't click on the link below to see the video of Prince Vajralongkorn's birthday lunch for the recently departed Air Chief Marshal of the Thai Air Force. It's long and boring anyway. And really lousy music. Sure, you get to see Prince V's wife in much the same costume as the SWL mermaid of a famous anchor tragic. But who needs that? Watch Videos Online | thailand-crown-prince-dog-birthday.mpeg | Veoh.com


Al
__________________
“Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others.” - Otto von Bismarck
Alan Mighty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2015, 19:23   #7
Registered User
 
Alan Mighty's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Scarborough Marina, Moreton Bay
Posts: 659
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mighty View Post
1. The US is putting a lot of diplomatic resources into the TPP, probably for a tiny return.

Much of the big and easy benefits of 'free trade' have already been won. The remaining unclaimed fruit are going to be hard picking. The TPP will undoubtedly make some people richer. In the state of ignorance in which elected leaders choose to keep us, we can only guess that the US Big Pharma and the US Big Intellectual Property are likely to be the chief winners. Bully for them. You might be heavily invested in them or employed by them, in which case you may be a winner.

Of course, if the Obama administration brings the TPP to bed, then Obama gets to point to the TPP as a major achievement, something to give substance to his 'Pivot to Asia' rhetoric. Good luck with that. He's not got many other successes to leave his mark in history.
The latest revelation from Wikileaks (The Investment Chapter, see: https://wikileaks.org/tpp-investment...er/page-1.html), reinforces my earlier remarks.


If the Wikileaks document is accurate, I find it hard not to read the implication that the TPP Investment Chapter is in the interest of corporates and their lawyers and not governments.


So a corporate, including one that is state-owned would have the standing to challenge the laws, regulations, rules, and other actions that a government issues in its own jurisdicition. And that challenge would take place in some forum run by ?United Nations, ?World Bank or ?some other international tribunal.


You can read this as the TPP being a major step forward towards a new international capitalism, in other words a big step towards a new political economy that transcends petty national boundaries and that will facilitate a new surge creating value to be shared by humans.


Or you might read this as a major assault on sovereignty purely in the interests of big corporates, not an advance in world trade, and an assault on national regulations aimed at facilitating or maintaining competition between firms.


However you read it, the Investment Chapter of the TPP underlines that the US is pouring diplomatic resources into something that may not have a significant benefit/cost relationship.


Al
__________________
“Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others.” - Otto von Bismarck
Alan Mighty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2015, 20:18   #8
Senior Cruiser
 
atoll's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: gettin naughty on the beach in cornwall
Boat: 63 custom alloy sloop,macwester26,prout snowgoose 37 elite catamaran!
Posts: 9,310
Images: 75
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mighty View Post
Sorry I could not be as concise as Gord.

Recognising that CF is a family friendly website, please don't click on the link below to see the video of Prince Vajralongkorn's birthday lunch for the recently departed Air Chief Marshal of the Thai Air Force. It's long and boring anyway. And really lousy music. Sure, you get to see Prince V's wife in much the same costume as the SWL mermaid of a famous anchor tragic. But who needs that? Watch Videos Online | thailand-crown-prince-dog-birthday.mpeg | Veoh.com


Al
hilarious ,I think our royalty could definitely get some tips from the princes' wife on hosting tea parties!

boris Johnson's birthday is coming up soon.....perhaps kate and wills could do something similar............

great insites from you on the geopoletic of the region,though passing through the Singapore straights recently it is noticeable the vast amount of shipping permernently anchored there.
__________________
my catamaran building project updates http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...36#post2502136
atoll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2015, 20:26   #9
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Nanaimo BC, Canada
Boat: Cooper 37
Posts: 17
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

In Canada, we've been through several "free trade agreements". The house is still out on who actually benefits. Whats painfully obvious, is that we continue to lose industry, and production to the third world, in the name of profit. Fewer good paying jobs, less full time work, fewer benefits.
Free trade to me, anyway, is another word for equalization of the standard of living. To bad for those who have enjoyed the "more" for so long.
__________________
Jaguar2728 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2015, 20:36   #10
Marine Service Provider

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: north carolina
Boat: command yachtsdouglas32
Posts: 3,113
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mighty View Post
The latest revelation from Wikileaks (The Investment Chapter, see: https://wikileaks.org/tpp-investment...er/page-1.html), reinforces my earlier remarks.


If the Wikileaks document is accurate, I find it hard not to read the implication that the TPP Investment Chapter is in the interest of corporates and their lawyers and not governments.


So a corporate, including one that is state-owned would have the standing to challenge the laws, regulations, rules, and other actions that a government issues in its own jurisdicition. And that challenge would take place in some forum run by ?United Nations, ?World Bank or ?some other international tribunal.


You can read this as the TPP being a major step forward towards a new international capitalism, in other words a big step towards a new political economy that transcends petty national boundaries and that will facilitate a new surge creating value to be shared by humans.


Or you might read this as a major assault on sovereignty purely in the interests of big corporates, not an advance in world trade, and an assault on national regulations aimed at facilitating or maintaining competition between firms.


However you read it, the Investment Chapter of the TPP underlines that the US is pouring diplomatic resources into something that may not have a significant benefit/cost relationship.


Al
I find it funny that I was recently called something a kin to a Fox news mouth piece..Since we are placing labels I will stick a GongRen Ribao (Workers Daily) label upon you..Ha ha ha
__________________
tropicalescape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2015, 21:28   #11
Marine Service Provider

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: north carolina
Boat: command yachtsdouglas32
Posts: 3,113
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mighty View Post
The latest revelation from Wikileaks (The Investment Chapter, see: https://wikileaks.org/tpp-investment...er/page-1.html), reinforces my earlier remarks.


If the Wikileaks document is accurate, I find it hard not to read the implication that the TPP Investment Chapter is in the interest of corporates and their lawyers and not governments.


So a corporate, including one that is state-owned would have the standing to challenge the laws, regulations, rules, and other actions that a government issues in its own jurisdicition. And that challenge would take place in some forum run by ?United Nations, ?World Bank or ?some other international tribunal.


You can read this as the TPP being a major step forward towards a new international capitalism, in other words a big step towards a new political economy that transcends petty national boundaries and that will facilitate a new surge creating value to be shared by humans.


Or you might read this as a major assault on sovereignty purely in the interests of big corporates, not an advance in world trade, and an assault on national regulations aimed at facilitating or maintaining competition between firms.


However you read it, the Investment Chapter of the TPP underlines that the US is pouring diplomatic resources into something that may not have a significant benefit/cost relationship.


Al
Yea that part about "may not have significant benefit/cost relationship" that part was in regard to places like Russia,China, by the way hows the weather at PLA army unit 61398 or are you with unit 61486?
__________________
tropicalescape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2015, 06:03   #12
Moderator Emeritus
 
GordMay's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Thunder Bay, Ontario - 48-29N x 89-20W
Boat: (Cruiser Living On Dirt)
Posts: 31,573
Images: 240
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, Jaguar.
__________________
Gord May
"If you didn't have the time or money to do it right in the first place, when will you get the time/$ to fix it?"



GordMay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2015, 06:13   #13
Marine Service Provider

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: north carolina
Boat: command yachtsdouglas32
Posts: 3,113
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbunyard View Post
Given the numbers of South Pacific rim and North American members and their diverse political views, was curious to hear if anyone had any opinions on the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership...
Yea I have an opinion and it goes like this : I (and obviously you ie. CHINA) think it will be set in motion much to the chagrin of the ones that stand to lose from it..It will put the 21st century on a course to become the century of more great advancments for the countrys that join forces to trump the would be "evil doers" and or as GW so eloquently stated the "Axis of Evil".. If you think otherwise well you must be with them!! The Shanghi co-operation agreement in comparison will set Russia ,China and those poor land locked country's that don't have a real choice in whether they join or not on a course of "catch up" once again..Lavrov said that the SCO would establish a rational and just world order (much like the Archipelago of Gulags system did or the Cultural revolution) ...What would a world be like if the SCO did in fact establish a counter balance to the UN and the TPP?.. I dare not imagine as it would not be pretty for the millions that would live under the yoke of suppressive atheistic governance honed by a history of hate and vengeance....Being that I and lots of others in this part of the world have a very strong spirit of capitalism we will do well when TPP is introduced and will welcome it for what it is and not what The SCO would like us to believe...So I say bring it on and if the SCO is to be bring it on too, we capitalist like a good fight and we also dont mind watching our adversary's fall,just dont expect us to pick you up and dust you off to fast afterward,we will eventually but first we must bask in the victory for a little while, then as usual we will extend a helping hand..
__________________
tropicalescape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2015, 22:26   #14
Registered User
 
Alan Mighty's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Scarborough Marina, Moreton Bay
Posts: 659
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Bullying and childish name calling by Daryl Cunningham has not had much effect, certainly not on the leaders of South Korea, Australia or Taiwan.

Sad that bullies such as Daryl (tropicalescape) poison the otherwise friendly atmosphere at CF. Also sad that the volume of bullying from Daryl and a small number of others overwhelms the efforts of moderators to keep CF open and friendly.


As foreshadowed, the Republic of Korea and Australia have signed up to China's Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Taiwan is likely to announce that it will also join, probably at or just after the Bo'ao Forum.



The next significant actor in line is Japan: if Japan joins the AIIB, then Obama's attempt to contain the AIIB is dead.


At the same time, officials in Malaysia have indicated they are ready to sign up to the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement. Australia is also ready to sign (the Australians dream that the TPPA will remove the last hurdles that stop them selling sugar to Japan - Australia recently signed an economic partnership agreement with Japan, but Australia could not out-negotiate the Japanese and their tariff wall).


My guess is that both the AIIB and the TPP will go ahead.


Obama will have a win over the TPP, something to boast about as his mark on history and some real content in his pivot to Asia. (Goodness knows why Daryl/tropicalescape got his knickers in a knot about the TPP; it's not as if tropicalescape has demonstrated a love for Barry Obama).


And then it will be up to China to do what it can with the AIIB.


Over the next year of so, look for the contrasts between the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the AIIB.


The ADB, headquartered in the Philippines (the largest of the US's former colonies in Asia), is controlled by Japan and the US. And look at what they haven't done.


To explain what the ADB hasn't done, you could go back and read the story on ASEAN the past week's Economist (see Banyan: Trouble at home | The Economist) Let me make it easy for you: the article says the only stable polities in ASEAN are: 1 Muslim sultanate (Brunei); 2 communist regimes (Vietnam and Laos); and 1 thugocracy (Cambodia; Myanmar/Burma used to be a stable thugocracy, but is now falling apart under various tensions).


To cut a long story short, the two economies that could have benefitted from infrastructure investment over the past few decades are Laos and Vietnam. The ADB, governed by Japan and the US, has refused. Do you really think that Laos and Vietnam would be stable communist regimes if they were richer? Of course not. So the ADB refusal to invest in road, rail, telecommunications etc in Laos and Vietnam has guaranteed that the two stayed as stable communist regimes.


And that refusal of the ADB means that China, via the ADB, could now (if it chooses) invest in Laos and Vietnam. And of course if China does, it cements ties between itself and Laos, Vietnam.


See what shortsightedness does?


US officials in State Department long ago realised that China's economic rise is unstoppable. And argued that the US should ensure that it builds international institutions that would be fair to the US in the (unlikely, but possible) eventuality that China did become No. 1. Sadly, the Obama administration has, like earlier administrations, not followed that thinking.


Just like tropicalescape thinks that he's fighting a Cold War against the PLA and the USSR communist party using bullying tactics. Good luck with that, Daryl!


Al
__________________
“Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others.” - Otto von Bismarck
Alan Mighty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-03-2015, 07:47   #15
Marine Service Provider

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: north carolina
Boat: command yachtsdouglas32
Posts: 3,113
Re: Trans-Pacific Partnership

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mighty View Post
Bullying and childish name calling by Daryl Cunningham has not had much effect, certainly not on the leaders of South Korea, Australia or Taiwan.

Sad that bullies such as Daryl (tropicalescape) poison the otherwise friendly atmosphere at CF. Also sad that the volume of bullying from Daryl and a small number of others overwhelms the efforts of moderators to keep CF open and friendly.


As foreshadowed, the Republic of Korea and Australia have signed up to China's Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Taiwan is likely to announce that it will also join, probably at or just after the Bo'ao Forum.



The next significant actor in line is Japan: if Japan joins the AIIB, then Obama's attempt to contain the AIIB is dead.


At the same time, officials in Malaysia have indicated they are ready to sign up to the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement. Australia is also ready to sign (the Australians dream that the TPPA will remove the last hurdles that stop them selling sugar to Japan - Australia recently signed an economic partnership agreement with Japan, but Australia could not out-negotiate the Japanese and their tariff wall).


My guess is that both the AIIB and the TPP will go ahead.


Obama will have a win over the TPP, something to boast about as his mark on history and some real content in his pivot to Asia. (Goodness knows why Daryl/tropicalescape got his knickers in a knot about the TPP; it's not as if tropicalescape has demonstrated a love for Barry Obama).


And then it will be up to China to do what it can with the AIIB.


Over the next year of so, look for the contrasts between the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the AIIB.


The ADB, headquartered in the Philippines (the largest of the US's former colonies in Asia), is controlled by Japan and the US. And look at what they haven't done.


To explain what the ADB hasn't done, you could go back and read the story on ASEAN the past week's Economist (see Banyan: Trouble at home | The Economist) Let me make it easy for you: the article says the only stable polities in ASEAN are: 1 Muslim sultanate (Brunei); 2 communist regimes (Vietnam and Laos); and 1 thugocracy (Cambodia; Myanmar/Burma used to be a stable thugocracy, but is now falling apart under various tensions).


To cut a long story short, the two economies that could have benefitted from infrastructure investment over the past few decades are Laos and Vietnam. The ADB, governed by Japan and the US, has refused. Do you really think that Laos and Vietnam would be stable communist regimes if they were richer? Of course not. So the ADB refusal to invest in road, rail, telecommunications etc in Laos and Vietnam has guaranteed that the two stayed as stable communist regimes.


And that refusal of the ADB means that China, via the ADB, could now (if it chooses) invest in Laos and Vietnam. And of course if China does, it cements ties between itself and Laos, Vietnam.


See what shortsightedness does?


US officials in State Department long ago realised that China's economic rise is unstoppable. And argued that the US should ensure that it builds international institutions that would be fair to the US in the (unlikely, but possible) eventuality that China did become No. 1. Sadly, the Obama administration has, like earlier administrations, not followed that thinking.


Just like tropicalescape thinks that he's fighting a Cold War against the PLA and the USSR communist party using bullying tactics. Good luck with that, Daryl!


Al
The only poison on CF is the venom that spits forth from the state mouth piece of those that are obviously on the LOSING end of the battle of the minds... You folks over at PLA cyber control and over at the Lubiancka cyber control unit are in the death throws of a dying way of thinking that has no place on a sailing forum or in any nation state ..If you think outing my name will intimidate me you are once again mistaken as I have operated as NOC all of my working days and I have fought the type of effort that you are attempting to push forward since I was 18 yrs old..I remember standing in front of the Russian foreign attaches recidence in Jamaica in 1983 taunting the diplomates and informing them that their days were numbered and that one day they would see the fall of the system they stood for,and as is most often the case I was correct..I will not share anymore information about the TPP or engage in conversation about the AIIB either as it is what you want and I like the thought of cutting you off when you are attempting to "get a feel " for what others think about such sensative matters...Once again you are not so Mighty after all are you...ps..Give the folks on CF some credit they can see what you wrote for what it is and that my new friend is Bull ****, yall know what Bull **** is dont you? You should know by now!
__________________

__________________
tropicalescape is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
partnership

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trans-Pacific boat choice Opensea General Sailing Forum 0 28-01-2015 16:54
Crew Available: Auckland, NZ - Seeking offshore experinece and trans-Pacific eddiechambo Crew Archives 0 04-12-2013 17:40
Crew Wanted: Trans-Pacific Alex56 Crew Archives 11 12-05-2013 22:29
Crew Available: Trans Atlantic or Trans Pac Castelic Crew Archives 0 14-04-2013 11:06
Free: Trans-Pacific Alex56 Classifieds Archive 1 09-04-2013 07:04



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 19:40.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.