Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "George Galloway" channel.

  1. "Free trade" took the risks away from Big Biz when outsourcing manufacturing. But they still had to deal with the troublesome labour protection and minimum wages at the home market for those jobs who could not be outsourced (like the service industry). Sure migration and free movement within the EU helped to keep wages down. Plus the demand for additional housing in absence of social housing programs is a lucrative investment niche for the wealthy. But TISA will take care of that problem for real. It is also troublesome when investors lobby a government to let them grab public assests to make a profit (like for instance water supply which is a natural monopoly) - and the next government would have the LEGAL possibility to undo deals that are contrary to public interest. In France the water providers were getting into trouble, a part of the servicing of Paris was up for a new contract - and the task went back to the muncipality. The Parisians had enough of being taken advantage of. There are a lot of privatizations where it is not a time limited service contract but a sale for good. And it would be really important to make it a legal reality that such sales never can be taken back (and we are talking about public assets). The niches where private for-profit services are better are already in private hands. Education, transportation, HEALTH, the military, security, social services, museums, national parks are not meant to bring a profit.
    4
  2. Globalizations means the Western manufacturers can exploit the workforce of poor countries. And Tisa = "free" services" has the same intentions. The industrial investments will be protected, protected from being confiscated by the developing country - but more important: they will be able to export the cheap stuff to the wealthy countries without having to FEAR any "PROTECTIONIST" measures EVER - the governments of the wealthy nations voluntarily GAVE UP THAT POWER (and sold out the regular citizens for "neoliberal" ideology and cushy jobs after their active political career). Since the manufacturers cannot sell the stuff IN those poor countries (low wages = consumers there do not have spending power) they have to export those sweatshop products to the wealthy home countries (where the manufacturing jobs were lost). Now the "free trade" agreements took away the power of the sovereign nations to EVER impose prohibitive tariffs on those imports (tariffs that would discourage outsourcing of jobs, what good is it to produce cheaply and then having to pay a tariff or not being allowed access to the market at all). Deals like NAFTA, TPP, TTIP, CETA, TISA are meant to be valid for 30 years so even if Canada or Mexico wanted to get out of NAFTA - it would take THIRTY YEARS if they quitted right now until they would get back that economic sovereignity. The problem is: the governments could find agreements - but the big corporations that are incorporated in those participating nations (and it is no big deal to have a "postal" firm anywhere) could SUE the governments for damges. The U.S. is legally bound in the same manner, but they CAN bully their "partner nations" and demand special and extra concessions, and an U.S. president willing to bully Big Biz could maybe keep them from using the legal provistions to get their way. Mexico got some industrial jobs because of NAFT, but they are not very well paying so they do not much for the Mexican economy (not much disposable income for consumers won because of these jobs) - and their agriculture has been sacrified for that - the small farmers were devastated by the U.S. agricultural exports possible since NAFTA. Plus the U.S. consumers have less disposable income because they lost the manufacturing jobs that were (in the US) paying well.
    3
  3. "Corbyn does not wear nice suits" and "He is unelectable" has been settled. The polls showed Labour 5 points ahead - they had to do something. (I wonder if Blairites and Tories, Big Finance, the frackers and the merchants of death and the spooks * meet in "smokefilled backrooms" to discuss how to make Labour lose an election. Colluding MPs that lose their seat in the process would be handsomely compensated of course. MI5/MI6/GCHQ got loads of money, operate under secrecy and with little oversight and accountability (since their foundation think 1950s) - that ruins the best institutions. corbyn stands for better contacts with russia - can't have that. (The U.S. does not WANT Europe and Russia get closer. At. All !)
    3
  4. 25:00 "Trade as a generator of prosperity" ?? !! * Yes - SOME international trade IS HELPFUL - and it is not new (British Empire anyone ?). Globalization and "free" "trade" and "free service deals" like TISA ARE NOT beneficial for the economy or the regular citizens. They are not meant to be helpful for anyone but Big Biz. Of course you cannot sell that to a population who has the vote. The neoliberals have hijacked the academic and media discussion, the politicians are illiterate in economics or ideologically biased - and a few may know exactely what they are doing and are intentionally selling out their constituency. * that politician just repeats the usual talking points - he has no idea of the role of international trade in the economy and what kind of trade (and to what extent !) was / is beneficial - and when we started overdoing it . There is such a thing as the GOLDEN MIDDLE. Our economically illiterate politicians assume THE MORE "FREE" TRADE THE BETTER. We followed that strategy since the 80s/90s. Now compare the time after WW2 until the 70s/80s and the time after that. When was more "free trade" implemented - and how did that work out ? Stability of society, prosperity, middle class, unemployment, did the people vote for moderate parties or did they opt for fringe parties?
    2
  5. people have better lives than the generations before because of "Free Trade" or in that case because of the free Service agreement ??????? - in what alternate reality do the majority ! of Brits better than their parents ?? - and people should not indulge in fears regarding the "free service" agreement impacting the health service ? The Brits can watch live how their "elected "representatives" are busy defunding the most cost-efficient health service in Europe (only the Japanese beat the UK reg. costs among the wealthy nations).
    1
  6. He has more spine than all the other (it helps if you have convictions and not just a career). - haven't you noticed the latest attacks because of his reasonable stance on Russia (and before that he was called a "traitor" - credit to the BBC they didn't let the Tories get away with it.) His enemies in his party are just dying to have him make any "statement" which they can misrepresent, twist It is a case of chosing your battles wisely.
    1