Some people at the New York Times apparently feel so strongly about pushing the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Pact (TTIP) that it is prepared to abandon the longstanding separation between the news and editorial pages. A news article reporting on a statement from the new European trade commissioner on her commitment to achieving a deal with the United States described the deal as:
“a pact aimed at lowering tariffs and reducing regulatory barriers to encourage job creation and economic growth in Europe and the United States.”
Really? Who decided that encouraging job creation and encouraging economic growth is the purpose of the TTIP? Yes, the politicians pushing the TTIP say that it is about job creation and economic growth, but perhaps we should let the New York Times reporters and editors in on a little secret: politicians are not always truthful.
Get our free emails
In fact, since the trade barriers are already very low between the US and Europe, the economic impact of reducing them further will be trivial. On the other hand the deal will likely increase trade barriers in the form of stronger patent and copyright protection. Yes, that last word was “protection,” as in the opposite of free trade, as in increased barriers and higher prices. Economic theory tells us that this will generally lead to slower growth and fewer jobs.
If the New York Times were acting like a newspaper it could have described the TTIP as:
“a pact aimed at increasing the profits of the pharmaceutical industry, the entertainment industry and other powerful lobbies.”
But that statement probably would not help the cause of getting the deal approved.