Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TTIP Documents Revealed

international.sueddeutsche.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 94 posts

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#21

Post by thesimon »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #17

> The U.S. government concurrently has criticized the fundamental prevention principal of the EU Consumer Centre which protects 500 million Europeans from consuming genetically modified food and hormone-treated meat. Good for the EU. If only our government showed the same care for its own citizens.

Related to food: The German site says the US are pushing to remove the protected designation of origin. "Parma" ham could be manufactured in Kentucky, Camembert in New York and Champagne in California. Crazy.

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#22

Post by onetimePete »

auganov wrote: post #15

That overzealous secrecy around TTIP is a shame. It doesn't look like such a bad piece of legislation. The overall theme seems to be some deregulation on EU side (as generally EU is the over-regulated side) and bringing regulatory standards closer together. The IP protections are the most concerning part so far IMO? I don't know much about that kind of negotiations, the secrecy might as well be the right strategy to…

I am a citizen, i voted for those regulations, these are the laws i wanted, you try to step upon.

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#23

Post by toomuchtodo »

inDigiNeous wrote: post #18
auganov wrote: post #15

That overzealous secrecy around TTIP is a shame. It doesn't look like such a bad piece of legislation. The overall theme seems to be some deregulation on EU side (as generally EU is the over-regulated side) and bringing regulatory standards closer together. The IP protections are the most concerning part so far IMO? I don't know much about that kind of negotiations, the secrecy might as well be the right strategy to…

The most alarming features of this proposed legislation are the facts that it contains this: ".. it also contains an ‘investor protection’ provision allowing corporations to effectively sue governments for taking action to harm their business." (source: http://www.publicfinanceinternational.org/news/2016/02/ttip-... ) So .. effectively, this could mean that a corporation could overrule a government in legislation if…

My biggest issue with the TTIP; thanks for calling it out.

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#24

Post by zavi »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #17

> The U.S. government concurrently has criticized the fundamental prevention principal of the EU Consumer Centre which protects 500 million Europeans from consuming genetically modified food and hormone-treated meat. Good for the EU. If only our government showed the same care for its own citizens.

> The U.S., for example, demands that statutory prohibitions on products to protect human health should only be allowed to be passed if it has been scientifically proven that these products really are harmful.

Sounds like a reasonable argument.

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#25

Post by seqastian »

thesimon wrote: post #21
matt_wulfeck wrote: post #17

> The U.S. government concurrently has criticized the fundamental prevention principal of the EU Consumer Centre which protects 500 million Europeans from consuming genetically modified food and hormone-treated meat. Good for the EU. If only our government showed the same care for its own citizens.

Related to food: The German site says the US are pushing to remove the protected designation of origin. "Parma" ham could be manufactured in Kentucky, Camembert in New York and Champagne in California. Crazy.

it is impossible to get this through the parliaments in europe.

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#26

Post by Symbiote »

DanBC wrote: post #20
spdy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"(as generally EU is the over-regulated side) Why is regulation a bad thing? These rules exist for a reason in health/food for example.

Generally I agree with you. The recent changes to VAT feel like a mess. Maybe I'm missing something there and they're not as bad as they seem?

Aren't they exactly what was wanted, to stop big companies like Amazon from taking advantage of the tax system (invoice everything in Luxembourg) that aren't practical for small businesses?

Or, to prevent foreign online retailers from undercutting local ones simply through lower "local" taxation rates.

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#27

Post by Symbiote »

cmarschner wrote: post #12

The estimated benefit of TTIP is 400,000 jobs and 0.5% GDP for the EU. Not much. Apparently, the few selected MoP in Germany who were given access to the drafts had a few hours to look at a 1000+ pages, in English legalese, with a dictionary but no internet access. Apparently, the drafts were full of certain spelling errors. The assumption was that they were personalized and injected on purpose such that photographs…

What would those MPs lose if they leaked the text? It seems like a vote-winning action...

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#28

Post by davidw »

tomp wrote: post #14
edko wrote: post #11

How about some reciprocation on immigration laws as well? How fair and free can this agreement be if the immigration flow in one of the directions is so much easier than in the other?

Which direction is that (honest question, I suspect US -> EU being easier, but I recall companies having trouble "importing" Americans as well...)?

US -> EU is not easy although it depends on the exact country you're talking about. Maybe a bit more rational in many cases, but not easy.

Re: TTIP Documents Revealed

#30

Post by sago »

seqastian wrote: post #25
thesimon wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Related to food: The German site says the US are pushing to remove the protected designation of origin. "Parma" ham could be manufactured in Kentucky, Camembert in New York and Champagne in California. Crazy.

it is impossible to get this through the parliaments in europe.

I suspect the US are very aware of this, and it is one of the reasons for the secrecy. They start with overly harsh demands, then can 'concede' back to a favourable position. Pre-seeding your concessions is important. If you publish those harsh demands to the citizenry of the other side, however, you're in danger of your negotiating partners losing their mandate as a result.
Post reply on HN