Regarded as one of the worst years for some of Hollywood’s favorite celebrities, for more than half of the U.S.’ voting population and for those who truly enjoyed having a normal headphone jack on their iPhone, 2016 brought a lot of change and hardship. Reflecting after New Year’s on what potential 2017 can bring to people that were disappointed with 2016, it’s clear that in major part, flipping the sheet on the fridge calendar isn’t going to fix gaping problems that 2016 brought about.
One of the hottest issues globally in the last year is the British exit of the European Union, or Brexit: an issue that captivated economists, politicians, and the general public for a large portion of the summer. As time moves forward and we begin a new year, the widespread fault lines that Brexit created haven’t let up. For most, Brexit’s economic effect isn’t visible- especially from the stocks that you’re forced to look at when you pull down an iPhone’s notification bar- or even something that you don’t see as a consumer in a European economy. However, the long term affects that most economists expect to see details majorly in the search for the European Union to try and achieve economic stability, a search that currently has little impact on most markets or other international economies.
Prior to the Brexit, one of the major reasons of support for staying a part of the European Union wasn’t a Brexit’s effect on Britain, but rather the implications it would have on the economies of other European Union countries.
The analysis on this idea was that “a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.” Whereas other countries such as Greece, who had seriously weighted economic issues such as bankruptcy, lowered GDP, and high levels of unemployment, countries like Britain that maintained strong economies were used as a balancing mechanism for the overall weight on the European Union. So, even though there were economies that were seriously under-performing, the essential saving grace of economically strong countries provided stability in the European Union. The loss of this, triggered by the Brexit has set the European Union in search of a new way to provide and maintain some level of stability in a newly onset period of ‘economic limbo’.
Although not beginning in 2016, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), a trade agreement between the U.S. and E.U., is in the E.U.’s crosshairs as a way out of economic limbo, however- that simply isn’t a reality. Its purpose, per the U.S. Trade Representative, is to “help unlock opportunity for American families, workers, businesses, farmers and ranchers through increased access to European markets for Made-in-America goods and services.”
Essentially, the TTIP is akin to any other trade deal, such as NAFTA, where countries lower tariffs and barriers to increase international trade, which has positives and negatives. On the one hand, there’s greater markets for overpopulated goods, and allows for smaller business to reach international markets with little barriers- yet, on the other hand, is also a simple unrestricted outsourcing, an issue with its own set of problems. So, as far as economic stability goes, the TTIP is simply a risky gamble for Vegas, even. With a seriously low level of support, only 18% in the U.S., the frequented call from those in opposition is that the deal is one to promote large corporations power, and damage consumer prices along with small businesses, all things that trade deals are put into place to stop.
TTIP is not a ‘trade agreement’, it’s a corporate money grab.
As much as we’re all excited about a new year, 2017 could bring even more catastrophic effects than we saw last year- particularly if the TTIP is put into place. Cries from both the European Union and United States come in more rapidly in response to the closer politicians get to closing in on the trade deal being passed- a decision that has longer standing impacts than the Brexit. So as much as we want to see change- many fear that we won’t be able to achieve it.
