ike17055

clemynx said:

ike17055 said:

wizard69 said:

This is a prime example of the EU's obsession with successful American companies.    Frankly i think the goverment here in the USA needs to take a more active roll in adressing this harassment.   

Google's success, and that of others, is in part how we can afford to continue paying the bulk of Europe's defense, while they sneer at us and laugh publicly at American admonishment for Europe's broken financial committment-- to itself. Trump gets a lot wrong, but he is right on this: if Europe wants to complain about how they cannot "depend" on America, perhaps they should stop shortchanging their own responsibilities, and quit always trying to play the U.S. for chumps, and begin to act like allies are supposed to act for once. 

???

Europe would be fine without the US. YOU decided to put bases in Europe after the war. YOU can take them away we wouldn't care.

Europe doesn't depend on the US for anything.

The best way of being good allies is NOT leaving an international climate treaty and insulting basically every European leader.

Then why are all the "leaders" of Europe whining about the lack of zealous and open-ended (over) commitment to NATO by new administration?  Even as the NATO countries shortchange the treaty that requires them to pay their fair share. (I mean, since you are so concerned with treaty obligations...)

The u.s. Indeed Should leave its bases in Europe. Our future lies in our own hemisphere, and in East Asia. Frankly, with friends like EU, the Russians can have Europe...but too late, the Middle Easterners and Pakistanis pretty much got it all first. 

Perhaps EU leaders DESERVE to be insulted.  Diplomacy has gotten us nowhere for decades. Pay for your own defense. We are foing broke propping up your nanny state ways. 

foggyhill said:

anton zuykov said:

rotateleftbyte said:

You could not be more wrong. Google has a virtual monopoly of search (>80%) so they have to play fairly.

       Isn't it the case that Google achieved that 80%+ through hard work? So, what is wrong with them using their tools to their advantage?
What you arguing for, is that if a small company competes against Boeing for building airplanes, then the gov-t should tell Boeing what to do in order to make it fair.
And if Boeing has an advantage (of course they do - in terms of knowledge and R&D done), then, they should lay it off, since they are competing unfairly and by using their tools, they create an "unfair advantage" for themselves when they compete against that small company.

Read up on monopolies and then comment. I don't want to have to deal with that level of ignorance.

In Europe they just used to rely on bribes. Now, they have the EU acting as a mafia lawyer. For all the political corruption people note in America, it is still Europe's politicians who are most often caught engaged in bribery. 

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. 

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. 

your posts are nothing less than bizarre approximations of logic.

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.