The catch-phrase of the day seems to be "The problem is not free trade, it's government regulation". I've seen it dozens of times these last few days, on conservative/finance-oriented news sites.
Some do try to fake some semblance of balance, by saying "over-regulation", instead of "regulation". Apparently this sort-of push against TTIP has all the "pundits" scrambling for a rallying call.
I suppose this is the same over-regulation that gave us:
- The 2008 crash.
- The endemic painkiller addition.
- Horsemeat-as-beef.
- The diesel emission cheating.
- Flint water.
- BP's "spill".
I'll stop here, OK?
The problem is not actually regulation, and I'll go ahead and say it - for most of these cases, I doubt we need more regulation.
I believe we have three problems at work, here. The first two concern inspection and enforcement.
We often hear that politicians and public officials are corrupt. I believe that is true, more often than not. What's even worse is the usual (wrong) conclusion most people so eagerly jump to: Remove these corrupt guys and gals and replace them with others who happen to be not-corrupt.
OK. But it takes two to play this game. One thing that's hardly mentioned is that public officials come and go, but the game remains the same. Why? Because the other side of the equation, the private entities, are not "removed". When they are caught, they're slapped with a more-or-less inconsequential fine and we're all back to business as usual. In the meantime, we get all the same familiar voices yapping about "burdensome regulations" and "private efficiencies".
So, to the third problem, which is actually the most complicated of all - punishment.
The reason why the game never changes is because, despite all the regulation, there is no actual punishment. If you can take a gamble with little actual risk, why would you not do it? Morals? Ethics? Yes, those are nice thoughts, but that's not how these things seem to work, once you find yourself in a position you can profit from.
What would be fit punishment? Well, these people are, ultimately, destroying lives. Can anyone explain why they shouldn't pay with their own lives?
Too harsh, you say? We'll just wait until TTIP is in motion, then, and we'll have this conversation again.
No, I don't believe this current brouhaha will stop TTIP. You see, the motive behind TTIP is not really trade. I spot three main themes here:
- The goal to defend against China/India/Whatever-country-you-feel-is-the-Menace.
- The goal to eliminate the European Social System once and for all.
- The goal to make states powerless against corporations.
None of the issues raised about TTIP by those who can actually decide about it (the elected officials, not the people) touches on these points. The bulk of the discussion is about limited "quid pro quo" issues that can easily be solved - protect some farmers here, some cinema there, and off you go.
So, to answer the question "Is there really hope against TTIP?", I'd say "Probably not". Unfortunately.
