Row 584

Row ID: 584 | Dataset Entry | Axioma AXP Content Repository

Content Data

This page contains data entry 584 from the Axioma AXP content repository. The structured data below represents the complete record for this entry.

Thank you for sharing your insight into how politics and the legal systems of the individual member states form the bigger picture of this issue. That's really what I came here to learn. I had no idea about the s 301 rulings. I think 'trade purist' is a very adequate description of where I stand with my education at the moment, I would preferably like to grow out of that in near future. Come to think of it, 'trade purist' would be a nice flair to have on this subreddit.

To wrap this discussion up, I agree with you. A strong democratic country with the right internal checks and balances would prevent vexatious AD duties, double counting, and unlawful use of administrative power by its public institutions. But the point is that members of a free trade agreement should not NEED to have such a strong internal legal system for the agreement to facilitate fair and free trade between its members. If the existence of free trade relied on making every country have the same legal framework as the US, EU or Aus, free trade would be science fiction. The aim of the WTO is to bring *different* countries into the realm of free and fair trade. The efficacy of its provisions should not be so heavily dependent on the laws of its member states. Indeed, the DSB has explicitly stated that a member's domestic law being contradictory to WTO law is no excuse at all for breaching WTO law.

The fact that the AD duties, as they stand in current WTO law, merely *allow* member states to double count and exaggerate duties against another member is problematic for the exact reason you mentioned. It is problematic because any given WTO member can use AD duties as a *punitive,* rather than *compensatory,* measure against its political adversaries (i.e. it can be used as a sword rather than a shield). As the saying goes "where there is ambiguity, there is politics."

FieldValue
text Thank you for sharing your insight into how politics and the legal systems of the individual member states form the bigger picture of this issue. That's really what I came here to learn. I had no idea about the s 301 rulings. I think 'trade purist' is a very adequate description of where I stand with my education at the moment, I would preferably like to grow out of that in near future. Come to think of it, 'trade purist' would be a nice flair to have on this subreddit. To wrap this discussion …
label r/internationaltrade
dataType comment
communityName r/Internationaltrade
datetime 2021-04-05
username_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lakx6cWpJdTJwM3NITzkxS3V2QnhCb1hfQVFSR0FiQVVGNTJhWms5OXdqdHhhUmpjV2ZBTko2Zlo0MS1YV2dMYWl0dGpGVDFlUEYtWXFXeEl2S0ZNak5hQ1E9PQ==
url_encoded Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak9EaFI1cm0tbFdKSHNrbUZtbEZNUkZOaUhZYzBUdnVtVXMzaTVHQi1LazBjT1lBM0Z6dnJjT1VjMjZzbnZMYzNXNjRqY1lHS2I1cl84RnZHUjVzYlVFVGUzaG03TE92LUR4X2FpbHprbHhOX1dCT0JreTdZOWVYaXM1VmxtWUJQQlhGcVdtTWhEbmJTQ2NYN3EzTDRzd21SV0tObThGUnVQMzBQUTd6NW1yTzRzRmM5aUF4VXl5dTE2SXc2azV3ZUVCaThXQlNSTk9RX1ZaQzlHM0tIZkJOWWlWZnZJRmVtUGVURENNdWhsZEhlcz0=

Raw Record

{
  "text": "Thank you for sharing your insight into how politics and the legal systems of the individual member states form the bigger picture of this issue. That's really what I came here to learn. I had no idea about the s 301 rulings. I think 'trade purist' is a very adequate description of where I stand with my education at the moment, I would preferably like to grow out of that in near future. Come to think of it, 'trade purist' would be a nice flair to have on this subreddit.\n\nTo wrap this discussion up, I agree with you. A strong democratic country with the right internal checks and balances would prevent vexatious AD duties, double counting, and unlawful use of administrative power by its public institutions. But the point is that members of a free trade agreement should not NEED to have such a strong internal legal system for the agreement to facilitate fair and free trade between its members. If the existence of free trade relied on making every country have the same legal framework as the US, EU or Aus, free trade would be science fiction. The aim of the WTO is to bring *different* countries into the realm of free and fair trade. The efficacy of its provisions should not be so heavily dependent on the laws of its member states. Indeed, the DSB has explicitly stated that a member's domestic law being contradictory to WTO law is no excuse at all for breaching WTO law.\n\nThe fact that the AD duties, as they stand in current WTO law, merely *allow* member states to double count and exaggerate duties against another member is problematic for the exact reason you mentioned. It is problematic because any given WTO member can use AD duties as a *punitive,* rather than *compensatory,* measure against its political adversaries (i.e. it can be used as a sword rather than a shield). As the saying goes \"where there is ambiguity, there is politics.\"",
  "label": "r/internationaltrade",
  "dataType": "comment",
  "communityName": "r/Internationaltrade",
  "datetime": "2021-04-05",
  "username_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lakx6cWpJdTJwM3NITzkxS3V2QnhCb1hfQVFSR0FiQVVGNTJhWms5OXdqdHhhUmpjV2ZBTko2Zlo0MS1YV2dMYWl0dGpGVDFlUEYtWXFXeEl2S0ZNak5hQ1E9PQ==",
  "url_encoded": "Z0FBQUFBQm5Lak9EaFI1cm0tbFdKSHNrbUZtbEZNUkZOaUhZYzBUdnVtVXMzaTVHQi1LazBjT1lBM0Z6dnJjT1VjMjZzbnZMYzNXNjRqY1lHS2I1cl84RnZHUjVzYlVFVGUzaG03TE92LUR4X2FpbHprbHhOX1dCT0JreTdZOWVYaXM1VmxtWUJQQlhGcVdtTWhEbmJTQ2NYN3EzTDRzd21SV0tObThGUnVQMzBQUTd6NW1yTzRzRmM5aUF4VXl5dTE2SXc2azV3ZUVCaThXQlNSTk9RX1ZaQzlHM0tIZkJOWWlWZnZJRmVtUGVURENNdWhsZEhlcz0="
}
Explore Dataset Explore Row

Entry Information