Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WTO gives Chile right to slap sanctions against US
Gulf Daily News ^ | 18 December 2004 | Gulf Daily News

Posted on 12/19/2004 8:27:04 PM PST by hedgetrimmer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last
The WTO now grants the rights to do business.
1 posted on 12/19/2004 8:27:04 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Not only that it dictates how by pushing around our elected legislature. Could someone please remind how the WTO benefits America...
2 posted on 12/19/2004 8:29:12 PM PST by Texas_Jarhead (I believe in American Exceptionalism! Do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Where are the people who fought me on this forum stating what a grand idea the WTO was? If it's going to continue on like this (and you know it will), they should rename it WTF.


3 posted on 12/19/2004 8:34:22 PM PST by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead
Not only that it dictates how by pushing around our elected legislature. Could someone please remind how the WTO benefits America...

It's all about transferring our wealth to other nations. It brings them up and brings us down.

4 posted on 12/19/2004 8:34:36 PM PST by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: boycott

This is nothing compared to UNLIMITED TEXTILES from China which starts in 13 days. This is insanity.Come the revolution...


5 posted on 12/19/2004 8:37:01 PM PST by miremains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead
Could someone please remind how the WTO benefits America

It doesn't.It only benefits some multinational corporations and a lot of nongovernmental agencies taking US tax dollars to add layers of bureaucracy to US businesses. For example, did you know there was an internet portal so companines can issue wto dispute notifications? Why does the WTO require a separate organization to do this?

H. RES. 441

Condemning the report issued on November 10, 2003, by the World Trade Organization (WTO ) dispute settlement Appellate Body in which the Appellate Body determined that imposition by the United States of import restrictions on certain steel products was in violation of international law, and for other purposes.

Whereas during the WTO proceeding the European Union (EU) has offered a series of arguments with no basis in law to justify its efforts to retaliate against the United States for its safeguard measures;

Whereas on November 10, 2003, a WTO dispute settlement Appellate Body issued a report on the proceeding that was adverse to the United States;

Whereas subsequent to the issuance of report of the WTO Appellate Body, the European Union and others have threatened immediate retaliation against the United States in the form of counter import restrictions which are clearly inconsistent with the requirements and policy of the Safeguards Agreement and the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (as described in section 101(d)(16) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act);

Whereas the European Union has failed to adhere to the requirements of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, as agreed to by all WTO member countries, and further has made groundless threats of retaliation in an inappropriate attempt to influence the WTO with respect to the proceeding;

Whereas, in addition, the decision of the WTO Appellate Body does not require repeal of the safeguard measures by the United States but only modification of the measures to conform with the Agreement on Safeguards;

Whereas any action to respond to a report of the WTO that is adverse to the United States may only be taken pursuant to the requirements of section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, including notification to Congress of administrative action taken pursuant to such section; and

Whereas the WTO dispute settlement process is not working and has been guided by politics rather than by legal principles
6 posted on 12/19/2004 8:37:14 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead
Could someone please remind how the WTO benefits America...

It allows the Chinese to subsidize its exports thereby letting Wal-Mart and other discounters to fill up their shelves with cheap Chinese goods.

7 posted on 12/19/2004 8:37:16 PM PST by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Lol


8 posted on 12/19/2004 8:40:39 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan

The US is the sheep with two wolves voting on what's for dinner. Why did anyone think this would work?


9 posted on 12/19/2004 8:41:09 PM PST by pacpam (action=consequence applies in all cases)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead
Not only that it dictates how by pushing around our elected legislature. Could someone please remind how the WTO benefits America...

Well, for one thing, it forces free-market capitalism down the throats of Washington's socialist politicians. I got no problem with the WTO chucking laws we should have chucked years ago.

10 posted on 12/19/2004 8:44:18 PM PST by ChicagoHebrew (Hell exists, it is real. It's a quiet green meadow populated entirely by Arab goat herders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pacpam

More on the WTO:
In 1996, two of the world's largest printing companies were fighting to win a contract to supply presses to the Dallas Morning News.


Goss, a company named after two Chicago brothers who started a printing business in 1885, badly needed the order to reverse a sharp decline in sales that would later lead it to file for bankruptcy and close its US manufacturing plants. But Tokyo Kikai Seisakucho (TKS), a Japanese rival was determined to win the sale at any cost.

What began as a standard commercial tussle nearly a decade ago has mushroomed into an international tit-for-tat that could have significant ramifications for future disputes under the World Trade Organisation.

Last year, Goss persuaded a US jury that TKS - whose biggest shareholders are the giant Mizuho and Mitsui banks, and Sompo Japan insurer - had used fraudulent and predatory tactics to win a $7.4m (€5.6m, £3.8m) contract with the Dallas newspaper and several other US papers.

Under a little-used law called the 1916 Anti- Dumping Act, which was aimed at stopping "predatory" pricing, the jury awarded Goss triple damages for the loss, or more than $30m.

But the 1916 act was challenged by Japan and the European Union after Goss filed its lawsuit against two Japanese and two German printing companies. All except TKS later settled out of court with Goss.

In 2000, the WTO deemed the law to be in violation of US international trade obligations. The US Congress last month finally repealed the law, but did not do so retroactively.

In response, Japan earlier this month passed legislation that would allow TKS to sue Goss's Japanese subsidiary for recovery of the money, declaring that any lawsuits filed under the 1916 act "have no legal validity".

Goss has appealed to several agencies of the US government for help, but so far Washington seems to have little desire to intervene. A US trade official said only: "We have been urging Japan not to follow through with this law and we'll continue to do so."

A senior congressional aide acknowledged that the US had no real means to prevent Japan from enforcing the new law. That is of little comfort for Goss, which says TKS's actions ended up destroying its US business even though it retains manufacturing plants in Europe and Japan. Goss closed the last of its US manufacturing plants in 2001. "You've got 2,000 highly skilled, highly paid jobs that are gone as a result of this process, and they aren't coming back," says Mr Brown. "The Japanese government should be ashamed."

***
But the WTO doesn't have any real effect. It can only make suggestions.





11 posted on 12/19/2004 8:44:26 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: boycott
It's all about transferring our wealth to other nations. It brings them up and brings us down.

Yep, that was the whole point in the first place.
12 posted on 12/19/2004 8:45:29 PM PST by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Arkinsaw

The European Commission is set to launch a special monitoring mechanism to impose ‘safeguard measures’ against sudden rise in import of textile and clothing from China in the quota free regime, beginning next year.
‘China, whose textile and clothing have been graduated for the new EU generalised system of preferences will be subject to a special monitoring mechanism so that an initiative for a ‘safeguard measure’ may be triggered in time,’ the EC in a recent proposal said.

According to WTO rules, the EU may adopt specific safeguard measures until the end of 2008 in cases where Chinese imports threaten development of trade in textile and clothing.


***

D'ya think the its OK for the EU to impose nontariff barriers? Apparently the WTO thinks this is fine. Isn't it great that a supranational agency can grant authority to the EU to impose safeguards for the EU, while at the same time encourage sanctions against the US for trying to do the same thing?


13 posted on 12/19/2004 8:52:46 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead

The only effect is that the price of beans will go up 12 cents. These... forget it. Time for a shower.


14 posted on 12/19/2004 8:53:54 PM PST by Cobra64 (Babes should wear Bullet Bras - www.BulletBras.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
In December, it is hoped, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) meeting in Hong Kong will bring the year to a triumphant close with the announcement of a deal to further liberalise global trade in ways that should give a big boost to the economies of poor countries.

The WTO acts to give advantage to boost the economies of poor countries. To do this, they must harm the competitiveness of the United States, in order to give "poor countries" an economic advantage.

Why would a free people allow a supranational agency to supress their competitiveness in favor of others? Is that not the antithesis of competition? Do we really think we can afford to give the competitive edge away in business as nation? When a national government decides to do away with the competitive edge of its citizens, how does that promote individual rights, the cornerstone of our Constitution?
15 posted on 12/19/2004 8:57:21 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
I've often wondered if we don't have enough people wandering the halls at the Commerce department to negotiate trade agreements individually with each country.

Why does this country even need the WTO?

16 posted on 12/19/2004 9:04:18 PM PST by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Are the 2,000 highly skilled and highly paid jobs gone from their foreign plants? Or their domestic ones?
17 posted on 12/19/2004 9:04:25 PM PST by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan

Our country only needs the WTO to give authority to the socialist countries of the world who exercise veto power over us. In other words, countries jealous of the sucess of the US and the US economy now have a way to get back at us, without ever changing from socialism to a free competetive society.


18 posted on 12/19/2004 10:20:52 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan

One more piece of information, the WTO by their own description is "consensus based". Groups that operate on consensus demonstrate that the group not the individual is paramount. The United States government was created to protect the individual, but consensus based international organizations don't recognize individuals or the rights of individual countries ( unless of course those rights can be used to limit the rights of US citizens).

Consensus based organizations are about process and conflict resolution, not about equal justice or equal rights. Consensus is the outcome of the Delphi technique, not the just application of the rule of law or the rights of the individual.


19 posted on 12/19/2004 10:33:47 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

The WTO doesn't seem to make much of a difference. We impose our own protections, the WTO allows other countries to do the same. Couldn't they have just as well done that on their own without the WTO? It seems to be nothing more than a layer of unnecessary bureaucracy.


20 posted on 12/19/2004 10:42:50 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson