Elections can be swayed, dissenting opinions crushed, and people ostracized simply by virtue of the few true gatekeepers to connected society.
After watching the tech companies decided who can speak and who can’t, even going so far as to completely shut down entire social platforms on a whim, with highly debatable logic, the EU doesn’t want the kind of nonsense they’ve seen over the last year and looking like the future of the USA to infect Europe as well.
Somebody needs to do something. Not just roll over and let these things happen.
All 4 of the mentioned CEO's should provide a unified letter of intent to withdraw operations entirely from the EU...
Let the EU Tech sector step in and provide like products and services etc. You know the "competition".
Oh that's right, there are none comparable...
If that happens, it’s just admitting abuse of of power and giving the EU the ammo they need. Such a letter of intent will also never happen because competitors may also benefit from some of it, e.g Facebook (a terrible tech bohemitj itself) may benefit from Apple being knee-capped by the EU).
I think it’s a good thing. Big tech is too powerful and it’s a pretty terrible situation as it is.
If they really withdraw from a huge market, it’s their loss. And some company or companies will fill the void.
The beatings will continue until EU competitiveness improves.
It won’t, by its very nature the EU is uncompetitive thanks to the overly bureaucratic control of Brussels.
Uncompetitive?
What do you mean?
Competitive with what? It's interior market alone gives it the kind of commercial clout the rest of the world envies.
You keep right on believing the EU isn’t an aging, schlerotic fossil
As a trading bloc it is 'old' but what does that have to do with anything?
Where is it uncompetitive? I can't see anything that holds water except for energy but that isn't really a case of competitiveness. It's more a dependency which is being tackled via technology as I write.
When the EU US trade deal (TTIP) fell through no one here batted an eyelid. Well, some actually celebrated.
The EU has two of the three biggest 5G ICT companies. The US has none. Unable to compete with Huawei, it tried to literally destroy the competition. In Aviation, Airbus is thriving when compared to Boeing which is suffering from a historically disastrous situation. COVID response has been far better within the EU than in the US. The US was even accused of trying to purchase EU-purchased PPE on the tarmac at airports. The EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts and of course offers basically free universal health care. That's something most here would rather not see plunked into the competitiveness bag. The same applies to 'annual leave'. Europeans have more paid holidays than US citizens but the boat hasn't sunk yet.
A business is supposed to succeed, often to the detriment of others who fail to compete. Are we supposed to now stifle the winners because they succeeded? All these companies were pimples on the ass of a mosquito at their start, and, in the case of Apple, faced very real moments of complete failure more than once. But now, look at one they have done. It should be a textbook example in business schools.
What brain could envision an Apple "broken up"? How? And why? The OS and HW are so well integrated, its EXACTLY one of the reasons they are so successful. Their semi-walled garden ecosystem is EXACTLY what so many of their customer appreciate and want. The security of such an approach REQUIRES certain controls and limitations, and there is no benefit for governments to tell an innovative technology company to "open up". IT'S THEIR BUSINESS. IT WORKS. LOOK AT THE SUCCESS AND DESIRES OF THE CUSTOMER BASE. If it didn't work, people would not gravitate to it. And I'm no fan of Google or Facebook, but if people want to use them with full knowledge and consent as to the data collection and tracking they impose, that's their choice.
Apple is one of the largest companies in the world, but generally holds a minority market position in most of the segments they operate in. They just happen to do extremely well in the highest margin segments of those markets.
If someone breaks the law, Apple or anyone else, they should of course be investigated and be held accountable if guilty. But you can't artificially create competition. In the mobile space, what happened to Nokia? What happened to Blackberry? What happened even to Microsoft? They made poor choices or didn't innovate in a timely fashion, and lost. That's their fault.
All 4 of the mentioned CEO's should provide a unified letter of intent to withdraw operations entirely from the EU...
Let the EU Tech sector step in and provide like products and services etc. You know the "competition".
Oh that's right, there are none comparable...
Let’s set aside the utter stupidity of your proposal for a moment to consider one small wrinkle in your plan.
You do realize that three of these companies offer only internet based services right? And that the EU isn’t going to ban its citizens from accessing the internet? So given those facts, how would this “pull out” affect anyone other than the companies who would be pulling out?
“on the continent” is a highly inaccurate phrase. There are plenty of countries in Europe that aren’t part of the EU and over whom it has no control. Confusing the EU with Europe is like referring to the USA when talking about North America; which I would imagine would annoy the Canadians and Mexicans.
If you curtail the power of Apple, Google, Amazon, and Facebook in the EU then you also curtail the power of Apple, Google, Amazon, and Facebook on the continent. That's not inaccurate at all.
So if you curtail the power of those companies in Canada and Mexico then that will curtail their power in the USA? Because that is the equivalent of the nonsense you’re spouting.
No? Europe is not equivalent to the USA. The former is a continent the latter is a country within a continent.
If you curtail the power of those companies in Canada and Mexico then that will curtail their power in North America, yes. Though to a lesser degree than the EU within Europe because the USA is the dominant economic power in North America whereas the EU is the dominant power in Europe.
I'm not sure why you're taking exception to this, let alone why you're accusing me of spouting nonsense about simple economic truths.
Once again you’re confusing countries with continents, you’re like those people who can grasp the difference between the U.K. and England and use the terms interchangeably. I suggest you buy an atlas.
The beatings will continue until EU competitiveness improves.
It won’t, by its very nature the EU is uncompetitive thanks to the overly bureaucratic control of Brussels.
Uncompetitive?
What do you mean?
Competitive with what? It's interior market alone gives it the kind of commercial clout the rest of the world envies.
In global trade the EU is uncompetitive. You can’t say it’s competitive when referring to its single market because it uses regulations and tariffs to favour its internal industries over external ones because they are so uncompetitive. The EU doesn’t believe in free-trade, it’s a protectionist trade-bloc.
“on the continent” is a highly inaccurate phrase. There are plenty of countries in Europe that aren’t part of the EU and over whom it has no control. Confusing the EU with Europe is like referring to the USA when talking about North America; which I would imagine would annoy the Canadians and Mexicans.
If you curtail the power of Apple, Google, Amazon, and Facebook in the EU then you also curtail the power of Apple, Google, Amazon, and Facebook on the continent. That's not inaccurate at all.
So if you curtail the power of those companies in Canada and Mexico then that will curtail their power in the USA? Because that is the equivalent of the nonsense you’re spouting.
No? Europe is not equivalent to the USA. The former is a continent the latter is a country within a continent.
If you curtail the power of those companies in Canada and Mexico then that will curtail their power in North America, yes. Though to a lesser degree than the EU within Europe because the USA is the dominant economic power in North America whereas the EU is the dominant power in Europe.
I'm not sure why you're taking exception to this, let alone why you're accusing me of spouting nonsense about simple economic truths.
Once again you’re confusing countries with continents, you’re like those people who can grasp the difference between the U.K. and England and use the terms interchangeably. I suggest you buy an atlas.
I'm really not, and I'm not sure what you're misunderstanding. The EU makes up a majority of the countries of Europe, and the majority of the population and GDP. If you do something that significantly affects the EU then you implicitly do something that affects Europe. Whereas in your example doing something that affects Mexico and Canada probably will not affect the USA significantly because they are completely independent countries. This would be a pretty basic Venn diagram.
Your point is hardly improved by repeated attempts to insult someone who is just having a conversation with you.
The beatings will continue until EU competitiveness improves.
It won’t, by its very nature the EU is uncompetitive thanks to the overly bureaucratic control of Brussels.
Uncompetitive?
What do you mean?
Competitive with what? It's interior market alone gives it the kind of commercial clout the rest of the world envies.
In global trade the EU is uncompetitive. You can’t say it’s competitive when referring to its single market because it uses regulations and tariffs to favour its internal industries over external ones because they are so uncompetitive. The EU doesn’t believe in free-trade, it’s a protectionist trade-bloc.
All trade blocs are 'protectionist'. You could argue they are protectionist by definition although I'm sure we are interpreting 'protectionist' in different ways.
Let's look at a simple example. An EU citizen applying for residency to work in the U.S. The very first question you will be asked is why an American cannot do the job you are applying for. You will be required to justify your answer. Can you see the protectionism there?
Tariffs on average have come down by a huge margin since the depression. And thanks to the WTO and trade blocs, not even the economic crisis of 2007-2017 saw a massive increase in tariff abuse.
The EU is protectionist in all manner of ways. Consumer protection, food standards, health...
These are all covered by WTO rules.
Then there are the measures used to provide protection against things like dumping and subsidies. All completely understandable and present worldwide.
As for protecting internal industries from external ones, I fail to see what your point is.
Perhaps a key here is the term 'fair'. There is nothing stopping anyone from opening companies within the EU and doing business on equal terms to the rest of EU companies.
In fact, that is what all four of these companies did. The problem is they want to have their cake and eat it and try to operate in ways that are not 'fair' with regards to competition, finances and influence etc.
If anything, they are being 'protectionist' too, but only to protect their dominant positions. It is the task of the EU to prevent companies from having an unfair impact on everyone else.
And don't fall into the trap of thinking this is some kind of witch hunt. Far more EU companies have fallen foul to EU regulations than non-EU companies.
The beatings will continue until EU competitiveness improves.
It won’t, by its very nature the EU is uncompetitive thanks to the overly bureaucratic control of Brussels.
Uncompetitive?
What do you mean?
Competitive with what? It's interior market alone gives it the kind of commercial clout the rest of the world envies.
You keep right on believing the EU isn’t an aging, schlerotic fossil
As a trading bloc it is 'old' but what does that have to do with anything?
Where is it uncompetitive? I can't see anything that holds water except for energy but that isn't really a case of competitiveness. It's more a dependency which is being tackled via technology as I write.
When the EU US trade deal (TTIP) fell through no one here batted an eyelid. Well, some actually celebrated.
The EU has two of the three biggest 5G ICT companies. The US has none. Unable to compete with Huawei, it tried to literally destroy the competition. In Aviation, Airbus is thriving when compared to Boeing which is suffering from a historically disastrous situation. COVID response has been far better within the EU than in the US. The US was even accused of trying to purchase EU-purchased PPE on the tarmac at airports. The EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts and of course offers basically free universal health care. That's something most here would rather not see plunked into the competitiveness bag. The same applies to 'annual leave'. Europeans have more paid holidays than US citizens but the boat hasn't sunk yet.
I can’t believe you said “the EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts” . You do realise it’s vaccinated far, far fewer proportion of its population that the U.K. and even the US. In fact, the U.K. has vaccinated more people than the whole of the EU. While the nations of the EU were bickering over how much of whose vaccine should be ordered as part of an EU-wide vaccine purchasing pool, the U.K. was actually placing orders with vaccine manufacturers, which put us at the front of the queue for deliveries.
As for PPE. You clearly don’t know half of what was going on. In France they were actually still burning their excess stock of PPE at the end of January, before then having to scramble around like everyone else trying to buy some.
The EU does NOT have “free universal health care”. Health care varies from nation to nation, some have universal health care, others don’t.
As for Airbus, well if you compare to Boeing then every aircraft manufacturer is doing well. But you’re forgetting the A380 white elephant that they’ve now stoped making or the numerous issues and overspend with the A400M.
The beatings will continue until EU competitiveness improves.
It won’t, by its very nature the EU is uncompetitive thanks to the overly bureaucratic control of Brussels.
Uncompetitive?
What do you mean?
Competitive with what? It's interior market alone gives it the kind of commercial clout the rest of the world envies.
You keep right on believing the EU isn’t an aging, schlerotic fossil
As a trading bloc it is 'old' but what does that have to do with anything?
Where is it uncompetitive? I can't see anything that holds water except for energy but that isn't really a case of competitiveness. It's more a dependency which is being tackled via technology as I write.
When the EU US trade deal (TTIP) fell through no one here batted an eyelid. Well, some actually celebrated.
The EU has two of the three biggest 5G ICT companies. The US has none. Unable to compete with Huawei, it tried to literally destroy the competition. In Aviation, Airbus is thriving when compared to Boeing which is suffering from a historically disastrous situation. COVID response has been far better within the EU than in the US. The US was even accused of trying to purchase EU-purchased PPE on the tarmac at airports. The EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts and of course offers basically free universal health care. That's something most here would rather not see plunked into the competitiveness bag. The same applies to 'annual leave'. Europeans have more paid holidays than US citizens but the boat hasn't sunk yet.
I can’t believe you said “the EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts” . You do realise it’s vaccinated far, far fewer proportion of its population that the U.K. and even the US. In fact, the U.K. has vaccinated more people than the whole of the EU. While the nations of the EU were bickering over how much of whose vaccine should be ordered as part of an EU-wide vaccine purchasing pool, the U.K. was actually placing orders with vaccine manufacturers, which put us at the front of the queue for deliveries.
As for PPE. You clearly don’t know half of what was going on. In France they were actually still burning their excess stock of PPE at the end of January, before then having to scramble around like everyone else trying to buy some.
The EU does NOT have “free universal health care”. Health care varies from nation to nation, some have universal health care, others don’t.
As for Airbus, well if you compare to Boeing then every aircraft manufacturer is doing well. But you’re forgetting the A380 white elephant that they’ve now stoped making or the numerous issues and overspend with the A400M.
COVID: The EU put almost 3 billion euros on the table for accelerated investigation, production and supply of a vaccine. That production has to be shared out among member states. Individual member states have also contracted their own supplies.
Approving the vaccine is not something that can be rushed. A new approval is due to come online this week but the company contracted to supply it has defaulted on its contractual obligations. The EU is carrying out an investigation right now and demanding to know where the 'lost' doses are. As a result, there is a threat of the EU blocking the export of vaccines out of the EU. You might not be aware that the UK is currently dependent on EU production facilities to maintain its vaccination promises.
Universal Health Care: almost all EU countries have universal healthcare.
PPE: you didn't counter my claim.
Airbus: The A380 does not Airbus make. But as you mention that particular aircraft, you will remember that Boeing felt compelled to design its own competitor. Nothing changes the facts though. Airbus is in a far more competitive position than Boeing. The Max fiasco was actually far, far more than a simple product fiasco.
The beatings will continue until EU competitiveness improves.
It won’t, by its very nature the EU is uncompetitive thanks to the overly bureaucratic control of Brussels.
Uncompetitive?
What do you mean?
Competitive with what? It's interior market alone gives it the kind of commercial clout the rest of the world envies.
You keep right on believing the EU isn’t an aging, schlerotic fossil
As a trading bloc it is 'old' but what does that have to do with anything?
Where is it uncompetitive? I can't see anything that holds water except for energy but that isn't really a case of competitiveness. It's more a dependency which is being tackled via technology as I write.
When the EU US trade deal (TTIP) fell through no one here batted an eyelid. Well, some actually celebrated.
The EU has two of the three biggest 5G ICT companies. The US has none. Unable to compete with Huawei, it tried to literally destroy the competition. In Aviation, Airbus is thriving when compared to Boeing which is suffering from a historically disastrous situation. COVID response has been far better within the EU than in the US. The US was even accused of trying to purchase EU-purchased PPE on the tarmac at airports. The EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts and of course offers basically free universal health care. That's something most here would rather not see plunked into the competitiveness bag. The same applies to 'annual leave'. Europeans have more paid holidays than US citizens but the boat hasn't sunk yet.
I can’t believe you said “the EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts” . You do realise it’s vaccinated far, far fewer proportion of its population that the U.K. and even the US. In fact, the U.K. has vaccinated more people than the whole of the EU. While the nations of the EU were bickering over how much of whose vaccine should be ordered as part of an EU-wide vaccine purchasing pool, the U.K. was actually placing orders with vaccine manufacturers, which put us at the front of the queue for deliveries.
As for PPE. You clearly don’t know half of what was going on. In France they were actually still burning their excess stock of PPE at the end of January, before then having to scramble around like everyone else trying to buy some.
The EU does NOT have “free universal health care”. Health care varies from nation to nation, some have universal health care, others don’t.
As for Airbus, well if you compare to Boeing then every aircraft manufacturer is doing well. But you’re forgetting the A380 white elephant that they’ve now stoped making or the numerous issues and overspend with the A400M.
COVID: The EU put almost 3 billion euros on the table for accelerated investigation, production and supply of a vaccine. That production has to be shared out among member states. Individual member states have also contracted their own supplies.
Approving the vaccine is not something that can be rushed. A new approval is due to come online this week but the company contracted to supply it has defaulted on its contractual obligations. The EU is carrying out an investigation right now and demanding to know where the 'lost' doses are. As a result, there is a threat of the EU blocking the export of vaccines out of the EU. You might not be aware that the UK is currently dependent on EU production facilities to maintain its vaccination promises.
Universal Health Care: almost all EU countries have universal healthcare.
PPE: you didn't counter my claim.
Airbus: The A380 does not Airbus make. But as you mention that particular aircraft, you will remember that Boeing felt compelled to design its own competitor. Nothing changes the facts though. Airbus is in a far more competitive position than Boeing. The Max fiasco was actually far, far more than a simple product fiasco.
All of the big EU countries have universal healthcare of some flavour, but they are not all free, there is plenty of private health insurance in the EU, including in Germany and France, the biggest population countries.
Comments
I think it’s a good thing. Big tech is too powerful and it’s a pretty terrible situation as it is.
If they really withdraw from a huge market, it’s their loss. And some company or companies will fill the void.
Without clear examples of your argument that feels very broad and just a “thing to say”. Can you please elaborate?
Where is it uncompetitive? I can't see anything that holds water except for energy but that isn't really a case of competitiveness. It's more a dependency which is being tackled via technology as I write.
When the EU US trade deal (TTIP) fell through no one here batted an eyelid. Well, some actually celebrated.
The EU has two of the three biggest 5G ICT companies. The US has none. Unable to compete with Huawei, it tried to literally destroy the competition. In Aviation, Airbus is thriving when compared to Boeing which is suffering from a historically disastrous situation. COVID response has been far better within the EU than in the US. The US was even accused of trying to purchase EU-purchased PPE on the tarmac at airports. The EU has done well with its COVID vaccine efforts and of course offers basically free universal health care. That's something most here would rather not see plunked into the competitiveness bag. The same applies to 'annual leave'. Europeans have more paid holidays than US citizens but the boat hasn't sunk yet.
What brain could envision an Apple "broken up"? How? And why? The OS and HW are so well integrated, its EXACTLY one of the reasons they are so successful. Their semi-walled garden ecosystem is EXACTLY what so many of their customer appreciate and want. The security of such an approach REQUIRES certain controls and limitations, and there is no benefit for governments to tell an innovative technology company to "open up". IT'S THEIR BUSINESS. IT WORKS. LOOK AT THE SUCCESS AND DESIRES OF THE CUSTOMER BASE. If it didn't work, people would not gravitate to it. And I'm no fan of Google or Facebook, but if people want to use them with full knowledge and consent as to the data collection and tracking they impose, that's their choice.
Apple is one of the largest companies in the world, but generally holds a minority market position in most of the segments they operate in. They just happen to do extremely well in the highest margin segments of those markets.
If someone breaks the law, Apple or anyone else, they should of course be investigated and be held accountable if guilty. But you can't artificially create competition. In the mobile space, what happened to Nokia? What happened to Blackberry? What happened even to Microsoft? They made poor choices or didn't innovate in a timely fashion, and lost. That's their fault.
I suggest you buy an atlas.
Your point is hardly improved by repeated attempts to insult someone who is just having a conversation with you.
Let's look at a simple example. An EU citizen applying for residency to work in the U.S. The very first question you will be asked is why an American cannot do the job you are applying for. You will be required to justify your answer. Can you see the protectionism there?
Tariffs on average have come down by a huge margin since the depression. And thanks to the WTO and trade blocs, not even the economic crisis of 2007-2017 saw a massive increase in tariff abuse.
The EU is protectionist in all manner of ways. Consumer protection, food standards, health...
These are all covered by WTO rules.
Then there are the measures used to provide protection against things like dumping and subsidies. All completely understandable and present worldwide.
As for protecting internal industries from external ones, I fail to see what your point is.
Perhaps a key here is the term 'fair'. There is nothing stopping anyone from opening companies within the EU and doing business on equal terms to the rest of EU companies.
In fact, that is what all four of these companies did. The problem is they want to have their cake and eat it and try to operate in ways that are not 'fair' with regards to competition, finances and influence etc.
If anything, they are being 'protectionist' too, but only to protect their dominant positions. It is the task of the EU to prevent companies from having an unfair impact on everyone else.
And don't fall into the trap of thinking this is some kind of witch hunt. Far more EU companies have fallen foul to EU regulations than non-EU companies.
Apple, FB, Amazon, Google: Um...
As for PPE. You clearly don’t know half of what was going on. In France they were actually still burning their excess stock of PPE at the end of January, before then having to scramble around like everyone else trying to buy some.
The EU does NOT have “free universal health care”. Health care varies from nation to nation, some have universal health care, others don’t.
As for Airbus, well if you compare to Boeing then every aircraft manufacturer is doing well. But you’re forgetting the A380 white elephant that they’ve now stoped making or the numerous issues and overspend with the A400M.
Approving the vaccine is not something that can be rushed. A new approval is due to come online this week but the company contracted to supply it has defaulted on its contractual obligations. The EU is carrying out an investigation right now and demanding to know where the 'lost' doses are. As a result, there is a threat of the EU blocking the export of vaccines out of the EU. You might not be aware that the UK is currently dependent on EU production facilities to maintain its vaccination promises.
Universal Health Care: almost all EU countries have universal healthcare.
PPE: you didn't counter my claim.
Airbus: The A380 does not Airbus make. But as you mention that particular aircraft, you will remember that Boeing felt compelled to design its own competitor. Nothing changes the facts though. Airbus is in a far more competitive position than Boeing. The Max fiasco was actually far, far more than a simple product fiasco.