Confirmed: Philippines wants to join TPP

[dichoi]

Korean can join in TPP too. It is good for Asia, except China. No US market, no Chinese rise.

 

[Aepsilons]

Korean can join in TPP too. It is good for Asia, except China.

Korea should be included.

 

[Kyle Sun]

Please provide cold, hard, empirical data to support this claim.

Please.

It is obvious.
Remember the car trade war between USA and Japan during 1990s ? even USA also needs to protect their own industry .

Generally speaking, TPP is enhanced version of FTA . PH/Viet/Cam can make a great leap forward of GDP if these countries finally join TPP . But their industries capability will be destroyed for sure.PH Viet do not have any chance to survive . That is why such negotiation is so hard. The question is who will be sacrificed for the TPP .
Until now , Japan is still struggling to protect its interest.
PS(South Africa is some kind of example )

 

[Aepsilons]

It is obvious.
Remember the car trade war between USA and Japan during 1990s ? even USA also needs to protect their own industry .

Generally speaking, TPP is enhanced version of FTA . PH/Viet/Cam can make a great leap forward of GDP if these countries finally join TPP . But their industries capability will be destroyed for sure.PH Viet do not have any chance to survive . That is why such negotiation is so hard. The question is who will be sacrificed for the TPP .
Until now , Japan is still struggling to protect its interest.
PS(South Africa is some kind of example )

My request still stands. Please provide me (and others) cold, hard, empirical data. If you don't have data, then you don't have an argument.

You don't even have a hypothesis.

lol.

TPP is going to be very good if we look at the future. Japan is in the forefront it will be make a good corridor.
what do you think @Nihonjin1051

Hi buddy @Nandy9

Well its an interesting paradigm , really. Over time, the reduction of tariff levels has become less of the focus of international trade discussions. The new focus has been on the so called ‘beyond the border’ measures such as regulatory barriers. There are two types of barriers that recent trade talks have sought to deal with:

1) Regulatory cooperation

2) Regulatory reform



Regulatory cooperation seeks to address divergences in regulatory outcomes through the use of mutual recognition agreements, recognizing equivalent standards or through harmonization. Regulatory reform deals with changes to the regulatory process itself.

The TPP is a very unique, dynamic, and comprehensive relationship in that it resembles a skeletal system, which is the exchange of goods and services, but for this skeleton to work well, there must be harmonization of commercial laws among parties to the agreement. In fact, sufficiently harmonized commercial laws are what ultimately enable the real commercial integration and economic development of nations. In short, and in the brief, the harmonization of the commercial laws of different countries is the necessary step to fulfill commercial integration beyond mere provisions on market access barriers, delving into more major trade and investments.

In the case of Japan and the United States; some of the issues that had taken time was the need to address , effectively and judiciously at that, the regulatory cooperation and regulatory reform processes. Japan , like the United States, is a democracy, wherein the nation’s laws, specifically the nation’s manufacturing sector are governed by specific laws that have national, prefectural aspects to it had to be addressed individually in order to reform processes to even be implemented, and had to be passed legislatively as well as administratively. This is the reason why it had taken some time to iron out concerns on both sides (United States and Japan) in the attempt to find the harmonization of the trade agreement. This seems to have been achieved in recent meetings and agreements. @LeveragedBuyout --- I’d like to hear your view.

The fact that new countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam are joining the agreement is a good sign. And Japan welcomes this new development.



Best,
@Nihonjin1051, Ph.Dc.



Reference:


Backer, L. C. (2014). The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Japan, China, The U.S., And The Emerging Shape Of A New World Trade Regulatory Order. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 13(1), 49-81.

Gómez-Tarragona, E. B. (2015). The Tpp: How To Facilitate Business Through Legislative And Regulatory Reform?. Ilsa Journal Of International & Comparative Law, 21369.

 

[Kyle Sun]

My request still stands. Please provide me (and others) cold, hard, empirical data. If you don't have data, then you don't have an argument.

You don't even have a hypothesis.

lol.





Hi buddy @Nandy9

Well its an interesting paradigm , really. Over time, the reduction of tariff levels has become less of the focus of international trade discussions. The new focus has been on the so called ‘beyond the border’ measures such as regulatory barriers. There are two types of barriers that recent trade talks have sought to deal with:

1) Regulatory cooperation

2) Regulatory reform



Regulatory cooperation seeks to address divergences in regulatory outcomes through the use of mutual recognition agreements, recognizing equivalent standards or through harmonization. Regulatory reform deals with changes to the regulatory process itself.

The TPP is a very unique, dynamic, and comprehensive relationship in that it resembles a skeletal system, which is the exchange of goods and services, but for this skeleton to work well, there must be harmonization of commercial laws among parties to the agreement. In fact, sufficiently harmonized commercial laws are what ultimately enable the real commercial integration and economic development of nations. In short, and in the brief, the harmonization of the commercial laws of different countries is the necessary step to fulfill commercial integration beyond mere provisions on market access barriers, delving into more major trade and investments.

In the case of Japan and the United States; some of the issues that had taken time was the need to address , effectively and judiciously at that, the regulatory cooperation and regulatory reform processes. Japan , like the United States, is a democracy, wherein the nation’s laws, specifically the nation’s manufacturing sector are governed by specific laws that have national, prefectural aspects to it had to be addressed individually in order to reform processes to even be implemented, and had to be passed legislatively as well as administratively. This is the reason why it had taken some time to iron out concerns on both sides (United States and Japan) in the attempt to find the harmonization of the trade agreement. This seems to have been achieved in recent meetings and agreements. @LeveragedBuyout --- I’d like to hear your view.

The fact that new countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam are joining the agreement is a good sign. And Japan welcomes this new development.



Best,
@Nihonjin1051



Reference:


Backer, L. C. (2014). The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Japan, China, The U.S., And The Emerging Shape Of A New World Trade Regulatory Order. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 13(1), 49-81.

Gómez-Tarragona, E. B. (2015). The Tpp: How To Facilitate Business Through Legislative And Regulatory Reform?. Ilsa Journal Of International & Comparative Law, 21369.

I have a hypothesis : TPP will destroyed the industries of PH/Viet.
If these countries want to protect their industries , the negotiation will be very very long time. Just like WTO .
If they rush to TPP , their industries will gone.
This is my prospect of TPP. And I do not have data of future .

If you insist, just study how South Africa killed their own industry.

 

[Aepsilons]

I have a hypothesis : TPP will destroyed the industries of PH/Viet.
If these countries want to protect their industries , the negotiation will be very very long time. Just like WTO .
If they rush to TPP , their industries will gone.
This is my prospect of TPP. And I do not have data of future .

If you insist, just study how South Africa killed their own industry.

You have a hypothesis, now prove it. Find me COLD hard empirical data to support your hypothesis.

And stop using tertiary circumstances not any way related to the issue as 'data' or 'proof'. lol.

Thanks.

 

[Aepsilons]

Why are you entertaining them it's just useless. Haven't you seen the thread of 'India ranked best for investment' they are still whining and saying india don't innovate

LOL !

As a scientist and an educator , I always find it interesting when a student tries to say something without any empirical defense. I would fail a student outright if he or she were to write an essay without even a proof or defense of a thesis. Its like saying, "It is because i think it is and that's enough"

No, just No. LOL!!

 

[Kyle Sun]

You have a hypothesis, now prove it. Find me cord hard empirical data to support your hypothesis.

And stop using tertiary circumstances not any way related to the issue as 'data' or 'proof'. lol.

Thanks.

Okay.
I do not have any source to back up my claim.

I make such claim because China once faced the same situation when we joined the WTO .

China Gov required 10 years or 15 years protection time of our own industries before we open the market fully.

The negotiation was very difficult . China had much better industry than Viet/PH and We still need to protect our industry.


PH/Viet 's industry is very weak, no way to compete with USA/JAPAN or AUS.

Now you ask them to open the market with zero tariff,tell me your prospect of their industry.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Divide that number for 1.3 billion Chinese, your poverty rate still higher than Vietnam try to solve that issue.

lolwut? no its not. Vietnamese are far poorer than Chinese. Your GDP per capita is in the 1000's of dollars on par with African countries while ours is already 7000+ overall, on par with some European countries, and 15000+ in coastal provinces.

 

[Beidou2020]

Why are you entertaining them it's just useless. Haven't you seen the thread of 'India ranked best for investment' they are still whining and saying india don't innovate

What Indian 'innovation'?

India ranked 'best' for investment but FDI into China was $128 billion (largest in the world) and FDI into India was $35 billion

 

[Kyle Sun]

LOL !

As a scientist and an educator , I always find it interesting when a student tries to say something without any empirical defense. I would fail a student outright if he or she were to write an essay without even a proof or defense of a thesis. Its like saying, "It is because i think it is and that's enough"

No, just No. LOL!!

IF the TPP is so nice , ask your gov sign it.
Do not waste so much time to argue with USA.

 

[Aepsilons]

Okay.
I do not have any source to back up my claim.

Then you don't have an argument. Period.

Everything else is just subjective-based statements.

There is no room for subjective statements in objectivity focused literature.

The latter is an example of researcher bias, and would negate any notion of validity and generalizability in study.



Thanks,
@Nihonjin1051

IF the TPP is so nice , ask your gov sign it.
Do not waste so much time to argue with USA.

Clearly you haven't read my post response to Nandy9. If you did, you would have a better comprehension of the dynamic correlated to Japan and US negotiations. The search to find harmonization in regulation takes time, as it has component legislative, judicial and executive review.

Thanks.

 

[Kyle Sun]

Then you don't have an argument. Period.

Everything else is just subjective-based statements.

There is no room for subjective statements in objectivity focused literature.

The latter is an example of researcher bias, and would negate any notion of validity and generalizability in study.



Thanks,
@Nihonjin1051



Clearly you haven't read my post response to Nandy9. If you did, you would have a better comprehension of the dynamic correlated to Japan and US negotiations. The search to find harmonization in regulation takes time, as it has component legislative, judicial and executive review.

Thanks.

I just illustrate with the example of South Africa and US-Japan car war.

Then you don't have an argument. Period.

Everything else is just subjective-based statements.

There is no room for subjective statements in objectivity focused literature.

The latter is an example of researcher bias, and would negate any notion of validity and generalizability in study.



Thanks,
@Nihonjin1051



Clearly you haven't read my post response to Nandy9. If you did, you would have a better comprehension of the dynamic correlated to Japan and US negotiations. The search to find harmonization in regulation takes time, as it has component legislative, judicial and executive review.

Thanks.

again, i said my "prospect".

 

[Beidou2020]

Korean can join in TPP too. It is good for Asia, except China. No US market, no Chinese rise.

Chinese market is now bigger than the US market in many categories
US is only ahead in services consumption. Most goods consumption, China is either ahead of the US or about to surpass the US.

US needs China's market far more than China needs the US.

China's rise will only accelerate from now as China's market is now massive which allows domestic Chinese companies to sell into the Chinese market and advance technologically.

China is now without a shadow of a doubt the most powerful Asian country and China's lead will only get bigger as China's market get even bigger, Chinese investors go global, Chinese technology advances, Chinese brands become global, Chinese military advances.

Chinese tourist spending alone is big enough to support entire economies. That's how big and powerful China is.

Asia belongs to China and Chinese influence over Asia is only growing as the renminbi becomes the dominant Asian currency and Japan goes into complete irrelevancy.

 

[Aepsilons]

RIP to that post.

LOL!

*sips cup of coffee*