politics

Trans-Pacific trade pact takes effect without U.S. amid protectionism

26 Comments
By Noriyuki Suzuki

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

26 Comments
Login to comment

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/02/fears-of-exploitation-as-japan-prepares-to-admit-foreign-workers

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Serrano

Let those who bark loudest carry the heaviest responsibility and see what they make out of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let the other countries prosper

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The US is definitely not needed. The world does well even without it."

The how come the U.N. still wants the U.S. to pay 22%?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

will be reduced in stages to 9 percent by 2033

I can barely contain my excitement.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Am I missing something? Isn't Japan being asked to change? Won't it take longer than that to schedule all the pre-meeting meetings about the actual meetings necessary before any concrete action can be taken by the stakeholders?

Yes, and course Japan will expect other members of TPP to lower their tariffs with immediate effect.

Nothing ever really seems to change with Japan. Still want their cake and eat it.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The US is definitely not needed. The world does well even without it. On the contrary, it's high time to show that things run even without the self-proclaimed world police.

LOL. Until those countries needs money or their sovereignty is threatened by Russia and China. Then they will start begging for U.S. aid or intervention.

My objection to the deal was the lack of a fair way to resolve disputes, and that is the perception of many Americans.

That's probably why Trump was against it and refused to join.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Only stupid govt will do stupid things.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Why does Japan need a 15 year gear period to reduce the tariffs on beef imports?

Am I missing something? Isn't Japan being asked to change? Won't it take longer than that to schedule all the pre-meeting meetings about the actual meetings necessary before any concrete action can be taken by the stakeholders?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Look at that NZ Minister Parker - he spent a whole 6 months pre-election whining about how his party wouldn't back the TPP - then they could wait to flip-flop after their 36% election win and sign the thing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Very good.. The more Trump's USA isolated, the better for the rest of the world !!!..

3 ( +4 / -1 )

we all need to get away and diversify off China and the USA so this is a great step away from them. If a country wants a trade agreement with them they should do their own deals and not interfere with the CPTPP

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Why does Japan need a 15 year gear period to reduce the tariffs on beef imports?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

It is time the nations of the world started of take more control of the US. Time to isolate the US and let them go it alone. As Trump said: America First, so let America fight its own battle and stop demanding the assistance of so-called allies. It appears the world still hasn't learnt that appeasing a bully does not lead to peace but to more bullying. The West needs to stop appeasing the US and start isolating the warmonger.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Th US is definitely not needed. The world does well even without it. On the contrary, it's high time to show that things run even without the self-proclaimed world police.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Wow, cheaper beef by 2033.

Cheaper is ultimately up to the retailer that you buy from. But the tariff reduction on beef imported into Japan - it's not total elimination - is implemented in stages until 2033. As CPTPP enters into force today, the 38.5% tariff drops to 27.5%.

So if tariff reductions means cheaper to you, then yes, it's cheaper. You couldn't really say it's the same or more expensive.

@do the hustle

They should stop calling it a trade deal. 

It's a deal, and it involves trade.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

This is a positive way forward for trade around the Pacific, and hopefully even wider if the organisation expands. Tariffs and quotas can be useful as a temporary way to protect your country against unfair subsidies and dumping, but long-term it hinders more than it helps (e.g. higher food prices and reciprocal trade barriers levied against you).

As a treaty, the TPP supersedes the domestic laws of each member country. That means once a pro-business legislation is passed, people cannot change it by voting against it.

That isn't how international trade pacts work. Although in Europe it is the case that EU law can force countries to act in a certain way, the TPP won't be passing legislation as the EU Commission, Council and Parliament do, so the effects won't be comparable. It is largely about removing tariff barriers to trade.

There is nothing in the TPP agreement that will stop any member country from, for example, increasing corporation tax, passing laws to increase worker rights, etc.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Wow, cheaper beef by 2033. About then, climate change should be raging. Connect the dots...

2 ( +4 / -2 )

In an unstable world the TPP brings some economic security to all countries involved.

I agree Japan doesn't benefit the most in the short term, but we will benefit in the long term.

More Asian countries should join the TPP. I'm in favor of letting China join as well if they play nice.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Wow! Cheaper kiwi fruit — all my Christmases have come at once!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm all for this, although I suspect that this pact will eventually end up developing a form of agricultural compensation scheme similar to the EU's CAP, that enables farmers to keep going. Except, instead of supporting France, like the EU does it will support Japan.  Problem is, instead of modernising and adapting, schemes and compensation funds like this only reward inefficiency. In a few years down the line, other members will start to question this and get annoyed if the shcem begins to eat up money and demand more.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

As a treaty, the TPP supersedes the domestic laws of each member country. That means once a pro-business legislation is passed, people cannot change it by voting against it. The TPP is undemocratic and designed to enhance corporate interests at the expense of ordinary people.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

My objection to the deal was the lack of a fair way to resolve disputes, and that is the perception of many Americans.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

They should stop calling it a trade deal. Japan has made so many stipulations it is no longer a deal. The foods japan grows and sells for ridiculously inflated prices have been cut out of the deal. The average consumer is going to see no benefit from this at all.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Great for the likes of Vietnam, bad for the likes of Canada and Japan (except for their billionaires).

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I would imagine that getting more South American countries in would eventually force the U.S to reconsider. I would seem pretty silly for the U.S to ignore the moves of countries in its own backyard, like Columbia if it signs up. If a country like Brazil signs up that would have to make the U.S rethink after Trump goes.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites