Chrystia Freeland to sign TPP deal in New Zealand: Is this a fixed game?

72 posts / 0 new
Last post
monty1

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

As far as I know the only problem the NDP has with TPP at this point is that it would hurt car manufacturing and dairy which is about the weakest possible argument against TPP that anyone could find.

I generally avoid responding to this poster. I dislike how she treats facts. Here is a classic case. She says, " As far as I know..." she then goes onto state that the NDP's only objection to TPP is based on cars and dairy. Well, it took me only about two seconds to Google and find Mulcair talking about TPP and its effect on drug prices. But you know as far as she knows this is true. Wilful ignorance is not an excuse to try to mislead people.
">http://globalnews.ca/news/2266271/mulcair-vows-to-scrap-tpp-deal-if-elec...

JJ, you avoided addressing my point in favor of nitpicking, so please continue not responding.

The link you provided doesn't mention ISDS even though it is by far the most important aspect of the deal which my post made clear and you ignored.

 

I answered your point directly. You claimed that the NDP's only criticism of the TPP only focussed on autos and dairy. That was false. In about two seconds I found another criticism from Mulcair in early Oct. centering on prescription drugs. Simple point, Pondering, you mislead people. You said that they only made two criticism of TPP while that is a demonstrable falsehood. And finally on the NDP website it does talk about ISDS, intellectual property rights and more. So, once again your claim is in direct contravention of easily available evidence. Show some integrity.
">http://www.ndp.ca/news/tpp-liberals-dont-think-better-possible

My point was that ISDS is THE THE THE point to be focused on. This is something Mulcair and the NDP used to agree with me on.

This is something he should be SCREAMING about.

I have for YEARS said that if the NDP would come out STRONGLY over CETA I would support the NDP.

Having a petition on TPP now is a complete waste of time. Canadians are barely aware TPP exists. They trust the government knows best on trade deals. Not the Trudeau government, not the Harper government, ANY government.

I don't think YOU give a shit about either CETA or TPP. Your focus is on me and silly little games rather than actually fighting TPP.

 

This is too funny. Now that we have established that the NDP has complained about the investors clause and that makes you guilty once again of peddaling easily proven falsehoods you revert to type. Look at my post 37 in which I predict that because your falsehood was exposed you would now claim that the NDP was not saying it loud enough. And here you are right on cue saying that the NDP is not screaming their objection. Just like I predicted. Like you always do when you are caught in your falsehoods. Wow, if you are going to pedal falsehoods you really do need a new method when they are exposed. As for your claim that I focus on " silly little games". I do believe you are telling the truth in that statement. You do see demonstrating integrity and telling the truth as " silly" and " little". On the other hand you place great importance on trying to score political points. But the relevant question for me is if you can't score political points without using falsehoods is that a point worth making? You and I have come to radically different answers to that question.

Pretty harsh personal attack against Pondering for her opinion jjuares. Save for the feelings of Pondering, who is obviously big enough to let it fall off her shoulders, I personally enjoyed it because it's a vindication of my behaviour. The problem is YOU!

mark_alfred

No, the problem is Freeland signing the TPP.  The Libs have thrown the gauntlet down.  Time to take up the challenge before the Executive Branch of government gets the gears in place to ratify it.

Pondering

jjuares wrote:
This is too funny. Now that we have established that the NDP has complained about the investors clause and that makes you guilty once again of peddaling easily proven falsehoods you revert to type. Look at my post 37 in which I predict that because your falsehood was exposed you would now claim that the NDP was not saying it loud enough. And here you are right on cue saying that the NDP is not screaming their objection. Just like I predicted. Like you always do when you are caught in your falsehoods. Wow, if you are going to pedal falsehoods you really do need a new method when they are exposed. As for your claim that I focus on " silly little games". I do believe you are telling the truth in that statement. You do see demonstrating integrity and telling the truth as " silly" and " little". On the other hand you place great importance on trying to score political points. But the relevant question for me is if you can't score political points without using falsehoods is that a point worth making? You and I have come to radically different answers to that question.

What's established is that you have no interest in talking about political issues. The NDP has not made a big deal about CETA or TPP for years. It was not an election issue. Mulcair is now claiming that TPP is renegotiable so he is taking advantage of the ignorance of Canadians to make political points. The deal is yes or no, not maybe. The argument against not ratifying will be that if we don't our economy will take a huge negative hit.

The problem is not convincing governments not to ratify. It is convincing the general public that the deal is a threat to our sovereignty. That is the only way these deals will be stopped.

All trade deals have postives and negatives. By the way, TPP (and probably CETA) stands to benefit the prairies enormously. The arguments in favor of the deals confuse Canadians by pumping up the positives for industry and Canadians. For example, Trudeau has been saying that exporting produces the highest paid jobs for the middle class. (I have no idea whether or not that is true but it doesn't matter.) There will be benefits as well as drawbacks to the trade deals so politicians will broadcast the benefits and people will get confused and think it is just too complicated for them to judge, but hey, the whole world trusts Canadian businesses because we elected Trudeau so we trust him too.

So then the trade deals get signed and babblers cry the sky is falling because it is but the only people paying attention are activists because activists are focused on activists and being perfectly right about everything. The right wins because unlike the left they do focus on the average voter.

jjuares

monty1 wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

jjuares wrote:
Pondering wrote:

As far as I know the only problem the NDP has with TPP at this point is that it would hurt car manufacturing and dairy which is about the weakest possible argument against TPP that anyone could find.

I generally avoid responding to this poster. I dislike how she treats facts. Here is a classic case. She says, " As far as I know..." she then goes onto state that the NDP's only objection to TPP is based on cars and dairy. Well, it took me only about two seconds to Google and find Mulcair talking about TPP and its effect on drug prices. But you know as far as she knows this is true. Wilful ignorance is not an excuse to try to mislead people.
">http://globalnews.ca/news/2266271/mulcair-vows-to-scrap-tpp-deal-if-elec...

JJ, you avoided addressing my point in favor of nitpicking, so please continue not responding.

The link you provided doesn't mention ISDS even though it is by far the most important aspect of the deal which my post made clear and you ignored.

 

I answered your point directly. You claimed that the NDP's only criticism of the TPP only focussed on autos and dairy. That was false. In about two seconds I found another criticism from Mulcair in early Oct. centering on prescription drugs. Simple point, Pondering, you mislead people. You said that they only made two criticism of TPP while that is a demonstrable falsehood. And finally on the NDP website it does talk about ISDS, intellectual property rights and more. So, once again your claim is in direct contravention of easily available evidence. Show some integrity.
">http://www.ndp.ca/news/tpp-liberals-dont-think-better-possible

My point was that ISDS is THE THE THE point to be focused on. This is something Mulcair and the NDP used to agree with me on.

This is something he should be SCREAMING about.

I have for YEARS said that if the NDP would come out STRONGLY over CETA I would support the NDP.

Having a petition on TPP now is a complete waste of time. Canadians are barely aware TPP exists. They trust the government knows best on trade deals. Not the Trudeau government, not the Harper government, ANY government.

I don't think YOU give a shit about either CETA or TPP. Your focus is on me and silly little games rather than actually fighting TPP.

 

This is too funny. Now that we have established that the NDP has complained about the investors clause and that makes you guilty once again of peddaling easily proven falsehoods you revert to type. Look at my post 37 in which I predict that because your falsehood was exposed you would now claim that the NDP was not saying it loud enough. And here you are right on cue saying that the NDP is not screaming their objection. Just like I predicted. Like you always do when you are caught in your falsehoods. Wow, if you are going to pedal falsehoods you really do need a new method when they are exposed. As for your claim that I focus on " silly little games". I do believe you are telling the truth in that statement. You do see demonstrating integrity and telling the truth as " silly" and " little". On the other hand you place great importance on trying to score political points. But the relevant question for me is if you can't score political points without using falsehoods is that a point worth making? You and I have come to radically different answers to that question.

Pretty harsh personal attack against Pondering for her opinion jjuares. Save for the feelings of Pondering, who is obviously big enough to let it fall off her shoulders, I personally enjoyed it because it's a vindication of my behaviour. The problem is YOU!


It is not her opinion I object to. It is her use of falsehoods. Read post 37 in which I predicted how she would respond when her falsehood was exposed. She did exactly what I said she would. She has used this same tiresome tactic before. She tries to " redirect" the conversation away from her falsehood. She made a simple comment that the NDP only seemed to object to the TPP for two reasons. Then twhen that is proven to be false she then says that they didn't object for the most important reason. Then I showed that to be false she said that they didn't do it loud enough as I predict cted she would in my post 37. . She continues to spiral away from false statements. Hey, some people value money, prestige, fame. As for me, I value integrity and truthfulness. Just a personal preference on my part I guess.