Search Result(s)

Make no mistake about it, the duopoly is trying to roll back the gains of the last 3/4 century, here's why and how.

Why: The global neoliberal project, led by the US and a few other rich and powerful countries, are trying to roll back democracy in order to literally roll back all the rights that Americans and workers here and elsewhere have WON, in order to FORCE a global race to the bottom on work and labor standards. They have been planning and negotiating this deal between North and South oligarchs for over 30 years. And guess what, we all lose! The war is especially on labor and decent work, and anti-discrimination law. Ironically because of WTO "non-discrimination" rules-

The Trade, Investment and Competitiveness Implications of Unilateral Green Economic Pursuit (UNCTAD)

(NOTE: The creator of this site strongly disagrees with this approach to global economic integration) This PDF shows how trade in services (GATS) and procurement agreements such as the WTO "AGP" (or GPA) may likely block local green jobs programs in any countries that have made extensive commitments, due to restrictions against "local content requirements". This may mean that the "Green New Deal" could not be implemented under these FTAs without a withdrawing from the conflicting portions of these agreements entirely. Otherwise, going forward could have the exact opposite effect as desired with regard to local employment. It could actually decimate local employment in those areas. See Pages 11 and 12 in this document.

The Limited Case for Permitting SME Procurement Preferences in the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement

"Any agreement to liberalize procurement markets should deal with the reality that some states have longstanding policies supporting firms owned and controlled by historically disadvantaged individuals, rooted in the constitutional orders of those states. Substantial noneconomic rationales, grounded in notions of social justice and human rights, support these programmes, but the domain of these rationales as they are currently understood is limited to domestic societies. This limitation affects all negotiations to liberalize trade across national borders, in that states (or their leaders) do not hold the view that they have obligations to support the programmes of other states in the area of social justice. I argue that all WTO members should have an equal opportunity to implement noneconomic policies having to do with promoting justice within their borders for their citizens. "