Below is the email I got from Congressman Sarbanes as a response to my objections on the heinous TPP, the next vehicle for MAFIAA IP protectionism.
Based on his response, I probably won't be voting for him next election. Analysis to follow...
______________________
Dear Mr. ______:
Thank you for contacting me about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I strongly believe that U. S. trade agreements should address labor rights, human rights, and environmental protection. I place a very high priority on preserving high-wage jobs, and on increasing the competitiveness of our companies domestically and abroad. In short, I have concerns about the U.S. trade deficit and I want to ensure that fairness guides U.S. trade with other countries. Unfortunately, our trade policies have long assumed that "free trade" is the same as "fair trade." That assumption has touched off a race to the bottom where American jobs are shipped overseas to countries with non-existent labor standards and thread-bare environmental protections. We must reset our nation's trade policies to ensure that fairness and American values guide U.S. trade agreements so that we can level the playing field for American businesses. I will be sure to keep your views in mind should the full House of Representatives have an opportunity to consider any relevant legislation in the future.
Thank you for informing me of your views on this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding this or any other issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
John Sarbanes
Member of Congress
_________________
So where to begin?
Let's start with the contradiction in the second sentence:
You want to create jobs and increase our competitiveness? PROTECT TECHNOLOGY. And I don't mean with IP Law, I mean from it. High labor costs are unsustainable without increasing technological efficiencies. We need to protect innovation FROM Intellectual Property conflicts in order to allow it to actualize it's full potential and provide the greatest benefit it can to our manufacturing.
I'm convinced we could have eliminated nearly all manual factory labor by now if IP issues weren't getting in the way of progress among tech researchers and roboticists.
Besides, it's a trade deficit partly because no one ABROAD wants to buy what we sell. you can't help that by bludgeoning them with trade threats and IP "cooperation."
Look at it as a prisoners dilemma:
If we both have strict IP, everyone is worse off. If only one of us does, that person can try to sue outside their jurisdiction, but in general, I steal from you creatively (think Jazz, Brazillian disco, current remix scene, etc.) and you steal from me while I complain about it and waste resources trying to dam the internet. But we both culturally and intellectually benefit.
Even more glorious - the free sharing of culture and information creating new evolutions in science, technology, and art. That's a future to look forward to, and one that can't happen as long as we continue to jam our fingers in our ears to the voices of the citizens of the world who are EAGER to share their knowledge and experiences with a universe of people who care.
Based on his response, I probably won't be voting for him next election. Analysis to follow...
______________________
Dear Mr. ______:
Thank you for contacting me about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I strongly believe that U. S. trade agreements should address labor rights, human rights, and environmental protection. I place a very high priority on preserving high-wage jobs, and on increasing the competitiveness of our companies domestically and abroad. In short, I have concerns about the U.S. trade deficit and I want to ensure that fairness guides U.S. trade with other countries. Unfortunately, our trade policies have long assumed that "free trade" is the same as "fair trade." That assumption has touched off a race to the bottom where American jobs are shipped overseas to countries with non-existent labor standards and thread-bare environmental protections. We must reset our nation's trade policies to ensure that fairness and American values guide U.S. trade agreements so that we can level the playing field for American businesses. I will be sure to keep your views in mind should the full House of Representatives have an opportunity to consider any relevant legislation in the future.
Thank you for informing me of your views on this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future regarding this or any other issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
John Sarbanes
Member of Congress
_________________
So where to begin?
Let's start with the contradiction in the second sentence:
"preserving high-wage jobs, and on increasing the competitiveness of our companies"YOU CAN'T DO BOTH. Unless you are creating crippling tariffs, by definition higher labor costs are leading to higher product costs and, consequently, less competitive businesses. This is even beginning to be a problem in China. What happens when you "preserve" high paying jobs regardless of the impact on the market? SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, TPP, and a host of other destructive laws pushed through by legacy business. That's what.
You want to create jobs and increase our competitiveness? PROTECT TECHNOLOGY. And I don't mean with IP Law, I mean from it. High labor costs are unsustainable without increasing technological efficiencies. We need to protect innovation FROM Intellectual Property conflicts in order to allow it to actualize it's full potential and provide the greatest benefit it can to our manufacturing.
I'm convinced we could have eliminated nearly all manual factory labor by now if IP issues weren't getting in the way of progress among tech researchers and roboticists.
"...I have concerns about the U.S. trade deficit..."How's that for undercutting outsourcing? no need, because we can use machines instead of Filipinos! Sure as hell will shift the balance of trade in our favor. And how do you think the machines will be manufactured? By machines. Here. Supporting localized production. Isn't this what you want?
Besides, it's a trade deficit partly because no one ABROAD wants to buy what we sell. you can't help that by bludgeoning them with trade threats and IP "cooperation."
"American jobs are shipped overseas to countries with non-existent labor standards"See above. Solved that with robots.
"We must reset our nation's trade policies to ensure that fairness and American values guide U.S. trade agreements so that we can level the playing field for American businesses."Leveled? With the TPP? More like napalmed and nuked. Exporting laws that establish long term monopolies against natural rights does not create a net economic value for us OR them! Just like the principal of mirror tariffs, the restrictions put on American IP will be mimicked by foreign IP in America, fundamentally stymieing the "progress of Science and the Useful Arts" that copyright is constitutionally designed to protect.
Look at it as a prisoners dilemma:
If we both have strict IP, everyone is worse off. If only one of us does, that person can try to sue outside their jurisdiction, but in general, I steal from you creatively (think Jazz, Brazillian disco, current remix scene, etc.) and you steal from me while I complain about it and waste resources trying to dam the internet. But we both culturally and intellectually benefit.
Even more glorious - the free sharing of culture and information creating new evolutions in science, technology, and art. That's a future to look forward to, and one that can't happen as long as we continue to jam our fingers in our ears to the voices of the citizens of the world who are EAGER to share their knowledge and experiences with a universe of people who care.
No comments:
Post a Comment