ike17055

clemynx said:

ike17055 said:

clemynx said:

SpamSandwich said:

rotateleftbyte said:

It's just a matter of perspective. 

You think that the American dream is real and that customers have a choice. I think you are naive, that the American dream has been shown to be a lie, that the US are a big scam, that consumers only have the illusion of a choice and that big companies prey on their consumers. 

I live the the American dream everyday. The choices we have are truly astounding.the freedoms are incredible, if unfortunately under intense pressure of politicans who want us to be "more like Europe."  You have no clue what you are talking about. 

More like Europe would be great. Let’s take France : 

Work 35 hours per week
5 weeks of paid vacation per year
Paid medical leave
Paid maternity leave for 3 months and paternity for 2 weeks
Paid retirement at 63 
Free healthcare for all
Free ambulances 
College at 600$ per year
Better trains and public transportation 
Better food
Basically it's a paradise compared to the US. 

Keep your version of paradise. I have been there. Your generous benefits are in part, affordable (but not really affordabke) through machinations and manipulations including short changing defense and taxing the crap out of initiative. The only reason you don't look like Puerto Rico right now is that America pays for Europe's defense disproportionately, and (largely American) tourist dollars provide a huge lift too. The labor situation in Europe is horrible, and job creation is largely stagnant, so even the home-growns (not to mention the "immigrants") suffer from lack of opportunity (except for welfare benefits) all because of the demands paying for the nanny state safety net.  in a few years, especialy if US defense committment wanes, a lot of what is "free" won't be available at all...and unless the BBC is lying, France does not appear to be paradise to a growing Muslim population that is disenfranchised and detached economically and politically. Troubles in Paradise. 

foggyhill said:

ike17055 said:

anton zuykov said:

MisterKit said:

Nice to see a system that favors the people and not corporations.

A favor? It is about as much of a favor as Chavez did to his people.

In a truly free society, consumers decide who serves the people and they do so with their choices on where to spend their currency. Not an interventionist government that treats the endorsement of consumers as a crime. 

What endorsement?

If they control a service and you don't see the alternatives and drive them all out of business, they (or you) don't have a choice, they (or you) don't see the alternative.

They can then gouge you, provide substandard service and there will be no alternative; you will be stuck.

If they're big enough, in many countries with weak anti-trust laws or tootless ones, they can even influence government policy to keep others out.

This is illusory free market that will stay fair and self regulate only exists in the mind of people's notion of economics stopped, at economics 101 were they simplify everything so you can grasp basic concepts.

So, bring on some more of this libertarian tripe, go on.

The consumers endorse a product or service by choosing it over other competitors...usually a direct relationship to its ability to satisfy consumer wants.  No one says it is self regulating, but having governments choosing winners and losers based on a sense of "equality" is completly foreign to a marketplace that functions correctly. It is prone toward manipulations and politics and lots of non-economic factors. Most "market failures" are not failures of the market at all...they usually result from market interventions that warp fundamental influences of a true market that governs through both the self-interest of buyer and seller.  Amazingly, ideas that are foundational to both political and economic freedoms began among European scholars, yet were largely orphaned there until eventually being adopted and nurtured by the Americans. 

avon b7 said:

nht said:

foggyhill said:

nht said:

foggyhill said:

nht said:

clemynx said:

ike17055 said:

The European elites continue to demonstrate that they have no real understanding of free markets and competition. 

Nonsense. This decision is precisely defending European consumers. Nothing elite about it. Quit defending megacorporations instead of actual consumers. 

And the US should defend US companies from unfair EU fines.  We need to curbstomp the EU and maybe they will stop targeting US companies with these excessive fines.  It's a blatant money grab.

Brussels wants us to not protect our steel industry from Chinese dumping because it might hurt them (this after imposing their own 73% tariffs on Chinese steel) and threatens us with "retaliation" if we do but hits US companies with huge fines based on worldwide earnings at the same time.  Fuck them.  Hit Europe as hard as possible with steel tariffs but let UK steel in.  Frankly if the EU want to sell us anything they can go through the UK.  That'll make them understand not to be total douches during Brexit.

Let them try their "nuclear option".

Right... Unfair, you do know they fine their own company just as much hey bud.

Stating some baseless claims doesn't make it true.

No, they don't "fine their own company just as much" which is why they call it a "record-breaking fine" as opposed to "the usual wrist-slap fine".

"Apple ordered to pay a record-breaking €13bn".
"Google hit with a record €2.4 billion fine".
"EU issues a record $1.45B fine to Intel".

So yes, stating some baseless claim doesn't make it true.  The EU hits US companies with huge record breaking fines that aren't levied on EU companies. 

One is a god damn tax thing, it's as much a snub on Ireland as apple and apple will likely never pay, so get  a clue and stop lying. The fine is proportional to the size of the company, if the company is a smaller company with a non monopolistic position, they get hit less. How the hell is that hard to understand.

It's not hard to understand when you take it in the proper context:

""We don't want to become a digital colony of global internet giants," Montebourg said in May. "What's at stake is our sovereignty itself.""

Döpfner warned: "Voluntary self-subjugation cannot be the last word from the Old World. On the contrary, the desire of the European digital economy to succeed could finally become something for European policy, which the EU has so sorely missed in the past few decades: an emotional narrative."

The EU (via Juncker, Vestager and Oettinger) has declared war on US tech companies because EU tech companies are uncompetitive without an uneven playing field.  That hurts German and French sensibilities.

Ehem. The EU hasn't declared war on anyone. It has taken decisions to give itself more homegrown technology and not depend as much on external technology

That is why it is developing its own processors for initial use in supercomputing, but will further develop them for other uses.

These are completely logical steps.

Again, Europe is certainly free to pursue its national interest first and foremost.  In fact, that is the duty of every sovereign nation.  But please don't hide behind bogus EU rulings to do so.   You seem to be admitting that EU exists to bamboozle the world into thinking it is somehow "fair."

So, if NATO is a sham to allow Europe to shortchange its defense by getting America to pay, and the EU is a sham to provide legal cover for protectionism, hmmmmm, why, oh why, would those Americans get the idea that a climate treaty that does not apply to the world's largest polluters is somehow, not on the up and up?? I wonder...

MrJones said:

Well, you wantend America first, we want EU first. 
Thanks!

Except we pursue our right to promote our national interests first through policy changes and electoral changes, not using the EU as a political prop for stealth protectionism. 

clemynx said:

ike17055 said:

In fact, it is You who could not be more wrong. "Freer" and "more equal" are essentially contradictory in the marketplace. The freedom to succeed, or fail, is dependent largely on individual or organizational abilities and desire to exceed and outperform the practices of all others, not equality. The power of the consumer to choose ultimately picks the winner, not socialist interventions toward equality. This is the fundamental piece of free markets that European decisionmake

Agreed. But since any sane person would say that equality is more important than a "free market" that only makes companies richer, there is no doubt that the EU is doing the right thing.

No, no sane person who understands the real world and cares about personal freedom would choose "equality" in the European sense over freedome of choice.   This attitude is why my ancestors and those of millions of others fled Europe. Nothing has really changed much.you still look to The State for your answers to everything. The free market provides for a lot more than making the rich richer.  It does that too, for sure. Often to a fault, but that is usually due to politically driven government policies, not free markets.