This theory is very daring, but let’s just assume for a moment that this effect would really occur. Who will ensure that it won’t just be a small group of individuals who rake in these profits and that growth losses in other areas won’t be carried by society as a whole?
But if you mention trade diversions as a point of criticism and then say model calculations are too vague, how can you be sure that developing and newly industrialising countries will be the losers in TTIP?
One can look at the effects previous free trade agreements have had.
Mexico opened itself up to the United States and Canada through NAFTA and to the EU through a bilateral free trade agreement.
And still: It would be desirable for negotiations to take place within a multilateral organisation again, where everyone is at one table.Sure, certain exporters concentrate on the EU and the United States, but there are also standards in South Korea, China or Brazil that are relevant for other exporters. But isn’t the harmonisation of standards in an economically strong EU-US economic bloc a step in the right direction to at least make life easier for some of the exporters?The US and the EU are welcome to match their technical norms, but not with the added demand that other countries in the world be forced to accept these norms as well.Since then, Mexico has become more unstable, inequality has become more severe, the winners mostly include big corporations who were able to expand their market share.Trends like this can often be observed under free trade agreements.