tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937267072910448819.post8164994835695499189..comments2023-05-08T18:32:18.324+08:00Comments on 埃西亞商會: 為什麼支持服務貿易協定,也不該讓他草率通過?克羅迪斯特http://www.blogger.com/profile/05578397305267125092noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937267072910448819.post-71982202874542867832014-04-16T18:33:54.530+08:002014-04-16T18:33:54.530+08:00貿易條約內容是兩邊的交換傷害跟交換利益
都要經過兩國很多內部折衝才能達到
常常其中一條的變更
對方就...貿易條約內容是兩邊的交換傷害跟交換利益<br />都要經過兩國很多內部折衝才能達到<br />常常其中一條的變更<br />對方就不願意了<br />這樣<br />逐條表決與整包表決<br />又有何不同??漫步在雲間https://www.blogger.com/profile/00641549878506086073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937267072910448819.post-48518690258650565812014-03-22T04:15:03.220+08:002014-03-22T04:15:03.220+08:00然後我去看了 Stiglitz的原文,對於"對等"的描述只有下述:
There...然後我去看了 Stiglitz的原文,對於"對等"的描述只有下述:<br /><br />There are a few basic principles that those entering the discussions will, one hopes, take to heart. First, any trade agreement has to be symmetrical. If, as part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the US demands that Japan eliminate its rice subsidies, Washington should, in turn, offer to eliminate its production (and water) subsidies, not just on rice (which is relatively unimportant in the US) but on other agricultural commodities as well.<br /><br />似乎不包含簽約雙方本身條件的對等,是否鄭教授過度引申了"對等"的的含意?Reno Yehhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02795087372283213051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937267072910448819.post-36612512757233456102014-03-22T03:49:04.629+08:002014-03-22T03:49:04.629+08:00您好我不是學經濟學的,但也算常造訪貴站,您乎傾向完全自由主義經濟?我明白在一些議題上經濟學者之間都沒...您好我不是學經濟學的,但也算常造訪貴站,您乎傾向完全自由主義經濟?我明白在一些議題上經濟學者之間都沒有個共識,但後我也不想淪為跟oo諾貝爾xx教授他們比起**我相信哪個這種信仰選擇裡,所以希望能拋磚引玉一下<br /><br />吳建輝先生的這篇文章 http://www.appledaily.com.tw/realtimenews/article/new/20140320/363907/ 中提到有關國會參與談判階段甚至於資訊公開的段落,似乎與您的看法有出入,想請教您以您的角度來看,其論點之然與不然之處為何?謝謝~Reno Yehhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02795087372283213051noreply@blogger.com