Because I was not aware that there are exactly the same concerns in the USA. In Europe TTIP is - as far as I can tell - mostly seen as a one-way street, empowering US companies over EU countries. The article kind of suggests the same view for the USA and TPP, empowering foreign companies over the USA.
It would now be interesting to know whether these are just one-sided views ignoring the potential damages EU companies could do to the USA respectively US companies to the other TPP countries, or if these agreements would really turn out to be one-way streets, Vietnamese companies hurting the USA and US companies hurting Germany because there is a very real gradient with regard to the relevant standards.
So can somebody tell what the US view on TTIP is? Are there the same concerns getting hurt by companies from EU countries?
Watch the John Oliver video elsewhere in this thread about Philip Morris using Hong Kong to sue Australia. No one knows how companies will use these proposed powers, it may become less legally clear what constitutes the home-nation of a corporation.
It would now be interesting to know whether these are just one-sided views ignoring the potential damages EU companies could do to the USA respectively US companies to the other TPP countries, or if these agreements would really turn out to be one-way streets, Vietnamese companies hurting the USA and US companies hurting Germany because there is a very real gradient with regard to the relevant standards.
So can somebody tell what the US view on TTIP is? Are there the same concerns getting hurt by companies from EU countries?