Search Result(s)

The Necessity Test The following communication has been received from the delegation of Korea with the request that it be circulated to the Members of the Working Party on Domestic Regulation.

COMMUNICATION FROM THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA 1. There have been many constructive discussions on how to define the “necessity test” in the context of domestic regulation for trade in services. The proposals made by Canada, Australia, and EC have each contributed to stimulating and advancing the discussions in this area. However, as each proposal and relevant agreement uses different wording for outlining and defining the necessity test, there has been some confusion as to the exact meaning and implications of its use. 2. Korea is of the view that the different wording – such as “trade-restrictive” or “burdensome,” – despite some variance in nuance and focus, does not differ in their implications. This paper thus aims to clarify any differences that exist, elaborate on the possible alternatives that can be used, and suggest a draft provision for the necessity test that could be used in establishing multilateral rules for domestic regulation. 3. In the meantime, there still remain unresolved issues like what should be considered a “legitimate policy objective,” or what factors should be considered to determine the feasibility of an alternative measure. For an effective and strict application of the necessity test, these two issues need to be resolved. However, they will have to be discussed at another time.

Proportionality analysis and models of judicial review

Proportionality analysis describes a particular legal technique of resolving conflicts between human or constitutional rights and public interests through a process of balancing. As a general tendency, the current vivid academic debate on proportionality pays, however …

Towards Developing Subsidy Disciplines Under the GATS

Read this carefully so you can understand how the GATS is undermining public education and pulling up the ladders that might otherwise improve social mobility, such as subsidized higher education. All around the world, We are doing this, as are many other rich nations. Its a stealth war on the very idea of a middle class. Everywhere. Note also that this is an Indian government funded think-tank. GATS is really a global con job to con countries out of funding public education, holding out the bait of lower taxes to the wealthy. Judging by email, some readers of this site seem unable to grasp what is going on, as its so far away from what we're fed on TV. Note: "Trade Distortion" is when the normal hierarchies of quality/value/cost (i.e. poor people getting poor services, rich people getting acceptable ones) are disrupted by government intervention or lack of intervention or any other "measure", "devaluing" a service. See also the related principles of minimal derogation, (minimal trade restrictiveness") and proportionality. This applies to healthcare too. Any tiers at all will be expanded. The only way out is to make services free. Thats the only way to preserve their jobs too. Otherwise GATS will outsource them eventually. Unless professionals are willing to work for even less than people in developing countries with rich families who view it as part of the cost to educate them. People with advanced degrees from developing countries are never poor, always rich. So these trade deals do not hep the poor in any way shape or form, they help those who have the most money in very poor countries.

Medicaid Expansion in Health Reform Not Likely to “Crowd Out” Private Insurance

"Contrary to claims by some critics, the Medicaid expansion in the new health reform law will overwhelmingly provide coverage to people who otherwise would be uninsured, rather than shift people who already have private coverage to Medicaid." --- comment: This concept of "crowd-out" was literally created by the GATS and it's concept of minimal trade restrictiveness which requires that all government-subsidized measures be the most minimal possible - as well as possibly time limited, for example, only available to either an individual for only a few years, or possibly a country - for only a short period, perhaps a decade or less, (or perhaps only if they are and remain an LDC) . In this case, Medicaid is kind of a loan, not an insurance program, as it is subject to repayment, and only available to the destitute, and near destitute with assets that will only become available at their deaths, such as a home - after their other options have been used up. This "prevents healthcare prices from falling", and "preserves the profit in selling insurance", and "the value of the insurance companies investment". These are the most important things in a for-profit healthcare system. Especially as it becomes "The one bright spot in a dismal economy"