Scrutable

GENEVA/TOKYO -- The World Trade Organization ceased to function in any meaningful way Wednesday due to the U.S.'s refusal to approve replacement judges to its top appellate body, making it unable rule on any trade disputes.

What is supposed to be a seven-member roster of jurists shrank to just one on Wednesday. Three judges are needed to review cases, meaning that 14 trade disputes already filed are currently up in the air, with one revolving around India's tariffs against Japanese steel imports.

Seems the WTO has lost the ability to judge trade disputes since the US has refused to approve new judges.

Is this good or bad? Nobody wants to agree with Trump, yet this gives governments the latitude to control their trade preferences with other countries. Free trade has led to a lot of economic misery in certain cases, so now a progressive government would be able to protect jobs and workers
against changes in a way that couldnt be done before.

Good job there isn't a country that's just about to transition to relying solely on WTO rules to protect it's international trade, isn't it?

dyqik wrote: Wed Dec 11, 2019 8:37 pm Good job there isn't a country that's just about to transition to relying solely on WTO rules to protect it's international trade, isn't it?

Point.

If a single country can hobble what's supposed to be a global governing body then it's obviously not fit for purpose. It's not like the world needs yet another instrument to enforce US hegemony.

International organisations that require unanimity for stuff are easy.

Ones that don't are difficult. Like the EU.

A Corbyn Labour government would find its economic agenda easier to advance without a WTO I think.

Herainestold wrote: Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:04 am A Corbyn Labour government would find its economic agenda easier to advance without a WTO I think.

It wouldn't. You can't advance any kind of economic agenda by bringing in a sharp reduction in money and jobs, and sending your balance of trade to extreme imbalance.

dyqik wrote: Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:34 am

Herainestold wrote: Thu Dec 12, 2019 1:04 am A Corbyn Labour government would find its economic agenda easier to advance without a WTO I think.

It wouldn't. You can't advance any kind of economic agenda by bringing in a sharp reduction in money and jobs, and sending your balance of trade to extreme imbalance.

And having no mechanism for redress when the major players sh.t on us.

Why else is Trump disabling the WTO?

Lack of WTO enforecement would be good for Labour and bad for Conservatives.
As Trump likes Boris, the action makes no sense.
I think it could be good for smaller economies in the long term as it reduces the power of big American corporatiopns to have their way with lesser economies.

Herainestold wrote: Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:31 pm Lack of WTO enforecement would be good for Labour and bad for Conservatives.

[citation needed]

Labour does not benefit from UK businesses being destroyed by unfair competition.

Herainestold wrote: Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:31 pm Lack of WTO enforecement would be good for Labour and bad for Conservatives.
As Trump likes Boris, the action makes no sense.

It would not be good for any govt, if one of the big powers shites all over us. If a Labour (or any) govt tried to take advantage of no WTO enforcement to break their old rules, then the bigger economies simply retaliate, and we're f.cked.

Anyway, according to the CIA Factbook, we are in 8th place in the GDP table. The difference between the UK and the lowest of the top 3 (USA, EU, China) is more than five times as big as the difference between the UK and the lowest entry, some Pacific island, in 320th place. The top 3 are in a different economic universe to the rest of us. The USA's economic policy is not in place to please the UK government.

Herainestold wrote: Thu Dec 12, 2019 3:31 pm I think it could be good for smaller economies in the long term as it reduces the power of big American corporatiopns to have their way with lesser economies.

Really? The WTO is about economies, not corporations. WTO members are countries, see here. And if WTO is killed off, then one of the big economies shits all over a small economy. What does it do about it?

PS: All the above assumes we're out of the SM, by the way. We are about to be a country that used to be in one of the superpowers.