Bernie Sanders says government should examine Apple, Google, Facebook breakup

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 49
    revenantrevenant Posts: 537member
    um ... I thought PCs were bigger than apple. will they go after windows? cable companies? or just make cable companies utilities?


    AppleExposedanantksundaram
  • Reply 22 of 49
    seankillseankill Posts: 492member
    I hate politics and both sides have gotten laughable but it would be entertaining and ironic to see Apple fall (broken up) from the politics (liberal agenda) it backs. 

    That said, Apple does have some good liberal policies.

    It’s all just a power or money grab these days with politicians. 
  • Reply 23 of 49
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 549member
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    The only way the Dems can make me vote for Trump is this.
    Keep in mind the bigger picture. It doesn't advance your interests if someone doesn't touch the Mac on your desk but still burns down the building around it.
    The bigger picture is the US dominance in technology is a strategic US advantage. It has zero to do with Macs or iPhones.  Breaking up our major companies and reducing our competitive advantages only strengthens our adversaries.
    I was using a metaphor there. The bigger picture is that strategic US advantages are already being undermined and obliterated across the board right now. Our major tech companies are already having to scramble to adapt to the instability introduced under current policies. Continuation and expansion of those destabilizing policies will render moot any concerns about talk of monopoly investigations. 
    Except for the fact that the US economy appears to be doing very well right now, at least by the numbers.  Although warning signs are present, such as the inverted interest rate yield curve on bonds where short term rates are higher than long term ones, which historically indicate a possible recession.
  • Reply 24 of 49
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 549member
    revenant said:
    um ... I thought PCs were bigger than apple. will they go after windows? cable companies? or just make cable companies utilities?


    Details...  Details...  Can’t let it get in the way of the political narrative when an election is looming.
    anantksundaramFileMakerFellerrevenant
  • Reply 25 of 49
    I am all for stopping Apple's monopolist practices by opening up iOS to third party app stores but breaking up Apple would destroy it. The one thing America has going for it is strong tech companies. Bernie's plan could put an end to that.
    anantksundaram
  • Reply 26 of 49
    dewmedewme Posts: 2,188member
    This has everything to do with political, cultural, and social influence and nothing to do with business and monopolistic behaviors. Companies like Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Google have greatly increased their social and cultural influence on the lives of ordinary citizens like never before. Whether you love or loathe social media and fandom in general, its rise and following has forever altered how influence is disseminated across large swaths of society. To those politicians, autocrats, bureaucrats, and entrenched social and cultural organizations who are used to establishing their own agendas, orchestrating their own narratives, and calling the shots this trend is very disturbing.

    What probably galls politicians most about companies like Apple is that Apple can attain massive brand loyalty across a huge (paying!) customer base by giving customers exactly what they want and continually improving their customer's lives. Ordinary people pay, pay, and pay again to be part of Apple's loyal customer community and Apple reaps massive rewards in the process. Apple doesn't have to use fear, threats, or constantly fabricate boogeyman scenarios to keep their customer base loyal and filling their coffers. On the other hand, Apple doesn't have to deal with the massive number of thankless tasks that governments have to deal with. Apple doesn't have to constantly enter into losing business ventures that make no economic sense whatsoever but are vital to society, where most of what the government (should) deal with is exactly of this nature.

    What I'm saying is that Bernie and politicians of his ilk really need to take a step back and learn a little bit about how and why companies like Apple have such high levels of (paying!) customer loyalty and try to apply some of the same approaches to how they build loyalty in their own constituents. Part of it has to do with serving their customer's needs, respecting their customer's privacy, security, and personal agency, providing complete end-to-end solutions, and building ecosystems that allow widespread participation. A better approach might be to talk about building better public-private partnerships and sharing best practices from private industries that are working well into the public sector. Destroying and disassembling private enterprises that are working well and winning and bringing them under the aegis of stumbling and bumbling public bureaucrats with well-intentioned but ultimately punitive results is a recipe for disaster. 
    JWSCanantksundaramFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 27 of 49
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,490member
    longpath said:
    Strangely, he doesn't call for breaking up actual monopolies such as cable companies, who have exclusive access to various areas. He only wants to break up companies that succeeded on their own merit.
    Only companies which are tightly connected to government (local, State or Federal) end up attaining any kind of monopoly status. There are no instances of monopolies forming in free, competitive markets.

    Here are a few monopolies which should be broken up: The IRS and the Federal Reserve.
    dewmeAppleExposedentropys
  • Reply 28 of 49
    par4par4 Posts: 6member
    I guess poor Bernie has forgotten what socialism is.   The definition is "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."   So why break up something you control anyway.   Has he given up or is he just seeking attention (best bet).    
  • Reply 29 of 49
    KuyangkohKuyangkoh Posts: 370member
    longpath said:
    Strangely, he doesn't call for breaking up actual monopolies such as cable companies, who have exclusive access to various areas. He only wants to break up companies that succeeded on their own merit.
    Government should investigate Bernie’s finances, how did get millionaire in his salary, that’s what we should look not the companies that give folks a decent living....
    bigtdsAppleExposedanantksundaram
  • Reply 30 of 49
    frankiefrankie Posts: 373member
    hodar said:
    Never allow a person, who hasn't ever built anything; tell you he can run everything.
    Dumb comment.  Bernie has built quite a following and been serving in the gov't for decades fighting the good fight for all Americans, unlike 95% of the gov't on both sides of the aisle who are all bought and paid for.  As the longest running independent we should all unite behind him.
  • Reply 31 of 49
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,490member
    frankie said:
    hodar said:
    Never allow a person, who hasn't ever built anything; tell you he can run everything.
    Dumb comment.  Bernie has built quite a following and been serving in the gov't for decades fighting the good fight for all Americans, unlike 95% of the gov't on both sides of the aisle who are all bought and paid for.  As the longest running independent we should all unite behind him.
    Friends don’t let friends vote for Marxists.
    JWSCAppleExposedanantksundaram
  • Reply 32 of 49
    matrix077matrix077 Posts: 779member
    frankie said:
    hodar said:
    Never allow a person, who hasn't ever built anything; tell you he can run everything.
    Dumb comment.  Bernie has built quite a following and been serving in the gov't for decades fighting the good fight for all Americans, unlike 95% of the gov't on both sides of the aisle who are all bought and paid for.  As the longest running independent we should all unite behind him.
    China will laugh so hard if he’s US president. 
    bigtdsSpamSandwichAppleExposedanantksundaramentropys
  • Reply 33 of 49
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 705member
    Sadly, this one point will turn off a lot of voters. Personally, I think we need a progressive democrat in the White House—especially after the current occupant, but to call Apple a monopoly is sheer nonsense. I also happen today  think Apple needs more time to disrupt the medical/pharmaceutical and automotive industries and, perhaps, even find a way to make electronic voting more secure. 
    AppleExposed
  • Reply 34 of 49
    AppleZuluAppleZulu Posts: 550member
    nht said:
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    The only way the Dems can make me vote for Trump is this.
    Keep in mind the bigger picture. It doesn't advance your interests if someone doesn't touch the Mac on your desk but still burns down the building around it.
    The bigger picture is the US dominance in technology is a strategic US advantage. It has zero to do with Macs or iPhones.  Breaking up our major companies and reducing our competitive advantages only strengthens our adversaries.
    I was using a metaphor there. The bigger picture is that strategic US advantages are already being undermined and obliterated across the board right now. Our major tech companies are already having to scramble to adapt to the instability introduced under current policies. Continuation and expansion of those destabilizing policies will render moot any concerns about talk of monopoly investigations. 
    No, it doesn't render moot any concerns about monopoly investigations.  Im not willing to trade one looney for another looney.  How about a candidate that isn't extreme left or extreme right?
    I'm not suggesting that trading one looney for another looney is a good idea. I am suggesting that the current looney is building a considerable track record at undermining and neutralizing the normative systems of checks and balances that create the stability that has thus far birthed and nurtured things like the Silicon Valley tech enterprises under discussion. Without those political and economic systems in place, the future success of those very businesses will be cast in considerable doubt. 

    On the other hand, even the people tossing around the idea of monopoly investigations are first about restoring those normative, stabilizing political and economic systems. The result would be preferable. Even if they were to advocate for, say, breaking up Apple as a 'monopoly' in some way, these individuals would actually respect the checks and balances on their power that could put on the brakes or entirely stop foolish actions. The current looney, not so much.
    avon b7
  • Reply 35 of 49
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 549member
    frankie said:
    hodar said:
    Never allow a person, who hasn't ever built anything; tell you he can run everything.
    Dumb comment.  [...]
    No, it is not.  How can one speak authoritatively on a subject that he/she is not particularly familiar with?
    SpamSandwichanantksundaram
  • Reply 36 of 49
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,490member
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    The only way the Dems can make me vote for Trump is this.
    Keep in mind the bigger picture. It doesn't advance your interests if someone doesn't touch the Mac on your desk but still burns down the building around it.
    The bigger picture is the US dominance in technology is a strategic US advantage. It has zero to do with Macs or iPhones.  Breaking up our major companies and reducing our competitive advantages only strengthens our adversaries.
    I was using a metaphor there. The bigger picture is that strategic US advantages are already being undermined and obliterated across the board right now. Our major tech companies are already having to scramble to adapt to the instability introduced under current policies. Continuation and expansion of those destabilizing policies will render moot any concerns about talk of monopoly investigations. 
    No, it doesn't render moot any concerns about monopoly investigations.  Im not willing to trade one looney for another looney.  How about a candidate that isn't extreme left or extreme right?
    I'm not suggesting that trading one looney for another looney is a good idea. I am suggesting that the current looney is building a considerable track record at undermining and neutralizing the normative systems of checks and balances that create the stability that has thus far birthed and nurtured things like the Silicon Valley tech enterprises under discussion. Without those political and economic systems in place, the future success of those very businesses will be cast in considerable doubt. 

    On the other hand, even the people tossing around the idea of monopoly investigations are first about restoring those normative, stabilizing political and economic systems. The result would be preferable. Even if they were to advocate for, say, breaking up Apple as a 'monopoly' in some way, these individuals would actually respect the checks and balances on their power that could put on the brakes or entirely stop foolish actions. The current looney, not so much.
    The current loonies all occupy Congress in the House and I understand there are about 60 of them also running for President.
  • Reply 37 of 49
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,407member
    AppleZulu said:
    nht said:
    The only way the Dems can make me vote for Trump is this.
    Keep in mind the bigger picture. It doesn't advance your interests if someone doesn't touch the Mac on your desk but still burns down the building around it.
    Apple IS the metaphor for the bigger picture. Either you get that or you don’t. End of story. 

    As an aside, Sanders is the far bigger nut. 
    edited June 19 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 38 of 49
    buzdotsbuzdots Posts: 451member
    nht said:
    The only way the Dems can make me vote for Trump is this.
    Go ahead, it won't hurt.  You might even feel refreshingly rebellious.

    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 39 of 49

    Yes, Break up Apple and it would certainly help competition except that the competition it helps would be mostly dudes like …Huawei , Samsung, Xiaomi, and hundreds Asian tech companies etc plus tens of dozens more in Europe (all heavily helped, subsidized, protected by tariffs by their own governments). They would be be laughing their heads off.

    Do people believe a WEAKER Apple can so easily fend of Huawei or Samsung?

    Breaking up Apple, USA’s largest taxpayer, does almost nothing for USA but helps Americas rivals around the world.

  • Reply 40 of 49
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,718member
    Apple isn’t a monopoly, socialists. People choose Apple products not because they have to but because they want to. 
Sign In or Register to comment.