×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 最优利率和cashback可以申请特批,好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询,Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。
Ad by
  • 最优利率和cashback可以申请特批,好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询,Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。

【给DAYNIGHT(日夜)等同学,关于TPP(泛亚太经贸网)到底会给加拿大带来多少好处。】现在只是有一个临时协约,各国家还需要与自己的议会商讨是否最后加入。保守党坚决支持,自由党说要看看细节再决定,NDP第一眼就说坚决不同意。

本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Why the TPP is such a big—and good—deal for Canada (为啥“泛亚太经贸网”对加拿大有这么多好处?)


Yes, there will be costs. But on average, we can expect TPP trade liberalization to deliver higher productivity, higher GDP, and higher incomes to Canadians (是的,加拿大加入后,会付出代价(呼啦啦语:“天下没有免费的午餐,干啥都得付出代价,难道不是?”), 但是,总的来说, 加拿大可以提高生产力,可以有更高的GDP,同时,也可以给加拿大人带来更高的收入。)

以下是英文全文 (详情请打开连接):

On October 4th, 1987 negotiators completed the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement. Exactly 28 years plus a day later, 12 countries agreed to form the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP for short). This is a big deal. The TPP will include Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam. Together, they account for about 40 per cent of global GDP and over 800 million people. The 12 countries are projected to grow even larger and account for 50 per cent of global GDP by 2050. It’s no exaggeration to call this the largest free trade deal in the world.

So, what’s in the TPP? As there are way (way) too many aspects of the deal to cover in one post, I’ll try to summarize the key changes that may find their way into the current election campaign. For interested readers, though, a technical summary is available here.

What the TPP won’t do

Let me start by saying what is not part of the TPP. There will no doubt be many misleading claims over the coming weeks about this deal, and it is useful to head them off right from the start.

It won’t lead to the privatization of crown corporations like Canada Post or Via Rail. It won’t undermine the ability of the Canadian government to subsidize Canadian cultural industries. In fact, the CBC and Telefilm Canada are specifically exempt from the provisions governing State-Owned Enterprises.

The TPP also won’t constrain governments from tackling environmental challenges. This point deserves more attention. Naomi Klein recently claims that TPP will limit the ability of countries to take action on climate change. This is just silly. Carbon taxes are in no way a violation of anything in the TPP deal. Similar charges are levelled against NAFTA, overlooking the fact that B.C. has a carbon tax which doesn’t violate anything. B.C.’s approach is perhaps the world’s best example of good environmental policy that we should all think carefully about—and one that (hopefully) Alberta will adopt very soon (though again, a topic for another day). TPP does nothing to prevent this.


Related: Maclean’s in-depth primer on the TPP, one of many election issues

Finally, one will also no doubt hear that TPP will increase drug costs. This is false, but there was indeed the potential that this could have been true. One of the main sticking points, primarily between Australia and the United States, was the length of monopoly status afforded to prescription drug companies when they bring out a new drug. For a drug to receive government approval, it must submit a large quantity of data. This data is useful to competitors, such as generic drug companies, when they produce competing drugs. So-called “data protection periods” prevent these competitors from using the original data. (A great Bookings Institute backgrounder on Prescription Drugs and the TPP is here.)

In the United States, this period is 12 years. In Canada, it is 8. In Australia, it is only 5. The US wanted longer periods, while most other countries wanted shorter. The longer the period, the longer the monopoly status of the original drug manufacturer, the longer the drug’s price remains high, and so on. There are some who label the exclusivity periods the “Death Sentence Clause.” That is a little over the top, but it would have certainly increased healthcare costs.

What does TPP do? The countries agreed on a five-year period, as Australia was demanding. As Canada already has a longer period than this, the TPP doesn’t change much at all from our perspective.

What the TPP will do: Lower trade barriers

Let’s get to the heart of the deal: trade liberalization. The TPP will lower tariffs as well as lower non-tariff technical barriers almost across the board. There are far (far) too many changes to list. There are roughly 18,000 tariff lines in the United States that will change for TPP countries. Canada has even more, with about 19,500 tariff lines. (A user-friendly download facility through the WTO is available here.) In time, almost all tariffs on goods and services going in and out of these 12 countries will fall to zero.

Consumers are the big winners here. All too often we focus on lower tariffs for Canadian producers when they export abroad. But we must not forget that lower import tariffs mean lower prices for all of us on the goods and services that we buy. Lower prices means our incomes can go further and our standards of living increase.

How large are the tariff changes likely to be? There is huge variation across products, but in the graph below I plot the simple average tariff rates for TPP countries that we don’t already have a trade agreement with.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
Sign in and Reply Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下沙龙 / 谈天说地 / 【给DAYNIGHT(日夜)等同学,关于TPP(泛亚太经贸网)到底会给加拿大带来多少好处。】现在只是有一个临时协约,各国家还需要与自己的议会商讨是否最后加入。保守党坚决支持,自由党说要看看细节再决定,NDP第一眼就说坚决不同意。 +1
    本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛Why the TPP is such a big—and good—deal for Canada (为啥“泛亚太经贸网”对加拿大有这么多好处?)


    Yes, there will be costs. But on average, we can expect TPP trade liberalization to deliver higher productivity, higher GDP, and higher incomes to Canadians (是的,加拿大加入后,会付出代价(呼啦啦语:“天下没有免费的午餐,干啥都得付出代价,难道不是?”), 但是,总的来说, 加拿大可以提高生产力,可以有更高的GDP,同时,也可以给加拿大人带来更高的收入。)

    以下是英文全文 (详情请打开连接):

    On October 4th, 1987 negotiators completed the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement. Exactly 28 years plus a day later, 12 countries agreed to form the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP for short). This is a big deal. The TPP will include Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam. Together, they account for about 40 per cent of global GDP and over 800 million people. The 12 countries are projected to grow even larger and account for 50 per cent of global GDP by 2050. It’s no exaggeration to call this the largest free trade deal in the world.

    So, what’s in the TPP? As there are way (way) too many aspects of the deal to cover in one post, I’ll try to summarize the key changes that may find their way into the current election campaign. For interested readers, though, a technical summary is available here.

    What the TPP won’t do

    Let me start by saying what is not part of the TPP. There will no doubt be many misleading claims over the coming weeks about this deal, and it is useful to head them off right from the start.

    It won’t lead to the privatization of crown corporations like Canada Post or Via Rail. It won’t undermine the ability of the Canadian government to subsidize Canadian cultural industries. In fact, the CBC and Telefilm Canada are specifically exempt from the provisions governing State-Owned Enterprises.

    The TPP also won’t constrain governments from tackling environmental challenges. This point deserves more attention. Naomi Klein recently claims that TPP will limit the ability of countries to take action on climate change. This is just silly. Carbon taxes are in no way a violation of anything in the TPP deal. Similar charges are levelled against NAFTA, overlooking the fact that B.C. has a carbon tax which doesn’t violate anything. B.C.’s approach is perhaps the world’s best example of good environmental policy that we should all think carefully about—and one that (hopefully) Alberta will adopt very soon (though again, a topic for another day). TPP does nothing to prevent this.


    Related: Maclean’s in-depth primer on the TPP, one of many election issues

    Finally, one will also no doubt hear that TPP will increase drug costs. This is false, but there was indeed the potential that this could have been true. One of the main sticking points, primarily between Australia and the United States, was the length of monopoly status afforded to prescription drug companies when they bring out a new drug. For a drug to receive government approval, it must submit a large quantity of data. This data is useful to competitors, such as generic drug companies, when they produce competing drugs. So-called “data protection periods” prevent these competitors from using the original data. (A great Bookings Institute backgrounder on Prescription Drugs and the TPP is here.)

    In the United States, this period is 12 years. In Canada, it is 8. In Australia, it is only 5. The US wanted longer periods, while most other countries wanted shorter. The longer the period, the longer the monopoly status of the original drug manufacturer, the longer the drug’s price remains high, and so on. There are some who label the exclusivity periods the “Death Sentence Clause.” That is a little over the top, but it would have certainly increased healthcare costs.

    What does TPP do? The countries agreed on a five-year period, as Australia was demanding. As Canada already has a longer period than this, the TPP doesn’t change much at all from our perspective.

    What the TPP will do: Lower trade barriers

    Let’s get to the heart of the deal: trade liberalization. The TPP will lower tariffs as well as lower non-tariff technical barriers almost across the board. There are far (far) too many changes to list. There are roughly 18,000 tariff lines in the United States that will change for TPP countries. Canada has even more, with about 19,500 tariff lines. (A user-friendly download facility through the WTO is available here.) In time, almost all tariffs on goods and services going in and out of these 12 countries will fall to zero.

    Consumers are the big winners here. All too often we focus on lower tariffs for Canadian producers when they export abroad. But we must not forget that lower import tariffs mean lower prices for all of us on the goods and services that we buy. Lower prices means our incomes can go further and our standards of living increase.

    How large are the tariff changes likely to be? There is huge variation across products, but in the graph below I plot the simple average tariff rates for TPP countries that we don’t already have a trade agreement with.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
    • 自由党比NDP就要严谨一些,人家没有立马说反对。NDP就不那么负责,看都没怎么看,研究都没咋研究,就一口说不行。所以,昨儿的最新民意:NDP支持率第三,只有23%了。
      • 安省保守党在安省政坛的表现,与你说的NDP一样,为反对而反对。
    • 【另外】美国民主党候选人希拉里女同学说,她坚决反对TPP,因为她个人认为不会给美国带来多少好处。当然,那只是她个人的认为。
      • 国会在右派共和党控制下,奥巴马要得到议会的批准不难。当年NAFTA也是左派总统在右派控制国会的支持下通过的。
        • 美国和加拿大一样,都得等大选后看议会能不能通过。
          • 美国的大选还有一年呢,不用等这么久。
            • 我估计,这个TPP最终从零时协约走到正式合约,说不定要超过一年多呢。还有不少国家想参加,所以,国家数目还会上升,现在南韩,秘鲁与哥伦比亚等都想参加。所以,这个TPP最终定下来,估计要一两年时间,路漫漫。
      • 变色龙。西姐在当国务卿的时候,大力推介TPP。。。。。。 +1
        • 希拉里的民意支持率也在下滑。
    • 右派支持自由贸易,左派支持贸易保护主义,所以两党的反应都是合乎逻辑的。 +1
      • 即便我不支持保守党,我也支持TPP,因为很明显嘛。现如今是地球一体化,整个地球就是一个村落了。大家都在一条船上,任何一个国家都不可能独善其身,所以,自由贸易是必须的。
        • 如果你有这种经济观点,那就是右派,应当支持保守党。 +1
          • 难道左派看不到全球是一个整体?在一条船上?不会吧?这么明显的事实?嗯?
            • 左派得到工会的支持。如果国际自由贸易,外国的低价商品进入市场,那就会影响受工会保护的行业。
              • 所以,不是左派看不到全球一体化,而是左派闭着眼做梦,心里除了工友,没别的,短视。
                • 左派vs右派:How to Tell Whether You're Right Wing or Left Wing
                  • 那些纸上谈兵的嘢,就不提了。这还要著书立说来分析出来?切。现代人啥都有,就是没有直觉,灵感与自然,啥都要长篇大论一通来证明。
                    • 好像不著书立说证明,心里就不踏实一样。
    • 点我的名那不是让我为难么?这个问题现在比较敏感,不太好多说。再说把你拍得满头包你也没感觉,因为你什么也不懂。 +2
    • 加拿大既无强势产业如美国日本,又无劳动力成本优势如越南,这种二流国家是自由贸易的最大输家。短期内好象加拿大的消费者买到了廉价商品,实际上最后我们都没有钱了。
      • 加拿大人口少,市场小,又缺乏有战略头脑的政府首脑和勤奋工作的国民,前景堪忧。开放市场与不开放市场有什么区别?反正现在就剩下倒卖房产了,连Tim Horton咖啡都已经归了Burger King了,还有什么?
      • 规划和刺激知识型经济,支持知识型中产阶级,鼓励勤奋工作,是王道。固步自封,死路一条。
      • 加拿大的汽车工业,汽车零件,农业都受冲击很大。二流国家的来料加工和外劳服务,越来越难混了。尤其还没有一个Drug plan, 就等着美国佬的药在加拿大赚钱吧--很快大家就要体验旅行墨西哥治病,从印度兄弟那买genetic药了。
    • 已经有了一个WTO,为什么在搞一个TPP。不都是自由么。