and Investment Partnership Betrayal
Trade Agreements - Part II
The other leg to the Trans-Pacific Partnership is the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership. In Part I scrutiny of the TPP proposal indicates that standards of monopoly amalgamation
far exceeded efforts to advance actual competitive trade. From the White House Fact Sheet, the aims of the TTIP are:
• Further open EU markets, increasing the $458
billion in goods and private services the United States exported in 2012 to the EU, our largest export market.
• Strengthen rules-based investment to grow the world’s largest investment relationship.
The United States and the EU already maintain a total of nearly $3.7 trillion in investment in each other’s economies
(as of 2011).
• Eliminate all tariffs on trade.
• Tackle costly "behind the border" non-tariff barriers that impede the flow
of goods, including agricultural goods.
• Obtain improved market
access on trade in services.
• Significantly reduce the cost of
differences in regulations and standards by promoting greater compatibility, transparency, and cooperation, while maintaining
our high levels of health, safety, and environmental protection.
Develop rules, principles, and new modes of cooperation on issues of global concern, including intellectual property and market-based
disciplines addressing state-owned enterprises and discriminatory localization barriers to trade.
Promote the global competitiveness of small- and medium-sized enterprises.
Opponents of TTIP echo the same loss of national sovereignty, similar to the reservations
with TPP. The IPS-Inter Press Service reports on the concerns and consequences.
"The claims that this deal will somehow be an economic cure-all and generate
significant growth are simply not supported by any reliable evidence," Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen‘s Global Trade Watch.
"But we do know that the talks are based on
the demands of U.S. and EU corporations that have been pushing for decades to eliminate the best consumer, environmental and
financial standards on either side of the Atlantic."
stated in the IPS account is that "Tariffs between the U.S. and E.U. are already low, and critic’s note that what
the deal really seeks to accomplish is the removal of "non tariff barriers" (also referred to as "trade irritants")."
"Non-tariff barriers is a commonly-used euphemism which refers to the array of financial,
environmental, health and other policies which the public has put in place to safeguard its own interests," Ben Beachy,
a research director for Public Citizen, told IPS.
Under T-TIP, standards
such as those mentioned by Beachy would be "converged", so that regulations from state to state would be more closely
aligned. Supporters of the deal say this uniformity would facilitate trade, but Beachy contended that the greater effect would
be to lower regulation levels to a point that "democratic electorates would never stand for."
Not surprising, the European Commission seeks to rely upon esoteric and speculative economic
models to project that increased growth will ensue, while avoiding the hard political concerns in The Economic Analysis Explained study - The overall impact of TTIP.
"The CEPR study predicts
that an ambitious TTIP deal would increase the size of the EU economy around €120 billion (or 0.5% of GDP) and the US
by €95 billion (or 0.4% of GDP). This would be a permanent increase in the amount of wealth that the European and American
economies can produce every year."
The video, Economic effects
of a transatlantic free trade deal (TTIP) projects the winners and losers, while disclosing that individual
countries would be relinquishing their own policies to an unelected economic bureaucracy.
The flaws of any corporate or trade delegation research is that the conclusions are baked
into the assumptions. Acknowledging the formation of a unified supra-national trade and commerce authority to implement economic
decisions is usually outside the parameters of such studies. So when a Bertelsmann Foundation survey admits the obvious, it
"In some respects, TTIP could be
considered as a new sort of trade agreement—one that provides a framework for mutual regulatory decision-making
and sets high standards that other countries outside the US and Europe can eventually join as well. This framework approach
allows negotiators to quickly conclude an historic tariff and investment deal and leave the door open to future streamlining
on those policy differences that might be too difficult to bridge today."
order to appreciate the radical departure from national regimes and the transfer of administration and authorization of law
by treaty, through regulation into an economic federation of non-governmental governance, is startling.
Grasp the vast extend and scope of this betrayal, in the skillful presentation
on the YouTube, AVN | US & EU Merger - TransAtlantic Trade
& Investment Partnership. The banksters controlled media and press remain virtually silent
and tightlipped about the economic coordination into a Corporatocracy of elites control. The New World Order consolidated
economic structure, progresses with every trade treaty.
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership have the objective of merging the American economy into and under the European
Union model of supranational dictates. If this were not the path to betrayal, what would you call it? With the fallout from
the nuclear option by "Democrat Dictator" Harry Reid, the filibuster will not stop ratification of treaties in the
False promises of job expansion are nothing but hideous promises
for the uninitiated or unintelligent. The TTIP is just another tactic to maintain and expand the Anglo –American hegemony.
Only favored companies that operate under the oversight and protection of central bankers, benefit from monopolistic trade
Protective tariffs built America. Free Trade agreements
are destroying the middle class. Increasing economic activity under a framework that effectively excludes the next generation
of the working population only fattens the Plutocrats appetites for even more dominance.
TTIP assurance to "Promote the global competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises" is a total
fraud. Ask any business executive, the commerce race is stacked in favor of the corporatist. Then pose the same question to
a small business owner, who knows they seldom even get the chance to play the international trade game at all.
James Hall – November 27, 2013
Read Part I - The Trans-Pacific Partnership
Subscription sign-up for the BATR RealPolitik Newsletter
Discuss or comment about this essay on the BATR Forum