4 ms·

> It's way harder for an alliance of US tech companies to influence small countries than a big block Seriously? Have you bothered to loom around the world, in

> It's way harder for an alliance of US tech companies to influence small countries than a big block Seriously? Have you bothered to loom around the world, in which countries are large multinationals seeing pushbacks and competition? Where does google have less than 50% market share? China, Russia. And In russia they had stiff competition from way back, like 2005 days, with Yandex and others. Where does pharma industry get held to account? India. Where does big tech get fined for privacy violations? EU. Boeing has crushed all competitors, in large part through law suits and shady dealing, except Airbus which is unconditionally backed by EU. Small nations can't seem to hold corporations to account even for blatant crimes. When UK parliament required Zukerberg to testify, he didnt even bother showing up. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/27/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-declines-to-appear-before-uk-fake-news-inquiry-mps https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/27/facebook-...

eastbound 3y ago
> Where does big tech get fined for privacy violations? EU. Every revolution yields extremely positive results at the beginning, during the phase where they seize a lot of private property and redistribute it. Then when it comes to actually producing goods, it may take 80 years for a tyrannical regime to fall down. The EU, of course, has a few positive trophies. Otherwise, people would notice. Likewise, when it tries to seduce a new country, it pours money into it. Look at Scotland! Every road and building and school seems to be a gift of the EU! Cue the “I like the EU because EU gave us everything!” Someone else is paying. It’s just a loan - The EU doesn’t “work” for you, doesn’t “pay” for you, it just gives you things it took elsewhere. And while those fines to M$ make me happy, well, I’ve paid a few billions every year to set up the EU, and those fines barely cover the working expenses of MPs, I’m paying for those MPs to work for me. And all they give us is a requirement to open our borders. The cycle is complete when the “new voters” vote for the EU because it gave them everything.
- skummetmaelk 3y ago
  The EU "may" become tyrannical in 80 years and therefore it's definitely, objectively, better for it not to exist. What kind of logic is that argument based on? BTW Spain and Portugal joined the EU in 1986 and are net monetary aid beneficiaries. So your argument about only receiving things initially is hilariously wrong.
  - eastbound 3y ago
    Hilariously. Now, rather than using humiliation as part of your handbook, please do not just cherry-pick a counter-example. It’s always mockery that you people are using, not reasoning, not rationality, not taking interest in your enemy’s argument, not taking empathy to understand why would someone ever be doubtful/hateful about the EU, no, just otherise “it”, consider it as an enemy, to take down at all costs, put it on the other side of the fence on a stake, and laugh at him. And then you take a high air when people get harassed into submission.
    - skummetmaelk 3y ago
      It's not cherry picking as there are several long time members who are net beneficiaries. Even if it was cherry picking, how is it irrational to pick counter examples? How does one make rational arguments then? You don't like the EU because you don't like "open borders". You'll find any reason to hate the EU without reasoning because you don't like "open borders". Doesn't matter what good the EU has done. It can never outweigh "open borders". The EU "steals" from its members and redistributes. Taxes are theft. Nevermind that modern economies rely on public services and infrastructure funded by taxes.
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  > Every revolution yields extremely positive results at the beginning... may take 80 years for a tyrannical regime to fall down. So the Glorious Revolution in Britain was a mistake, there should be no Bill of Rights, no parliament? The American Revolution has produced a tyrannical regime? Mr. No Revolutions here would rather still be property of a Medieval Lord. The Lord taxes you as he wishes and has sex with your wife on your wedding night before you do. > they seize a lot of private property and redistribute it You mean like when peasants seized the property rights over their bodies and redistributed those rights to themselves? Ye, terrible > then it comes to actually producing goods The French revolution produced so many goods that La Grande Armée wooped the asses of every European empire combined. If Napoleon knew when to stop, there would be 10 hours in a day and we'd know a painter called La Hitler. So where do I sign up for this revolution you are talking about? So far the only redistribution I see is when tech firms seize my private data and redistribute it to various predatory marketing schemes. So is it like a revolution by corporations against the state?

eastbound 3y ago

> Where does big tech get fined for privacy violations? EU. Every revolution yields extremely positive results at the beginning, during the phase where they seize a lot of private property and redistribute it. Then when it comes to actually producing goods, it may take 80 years for a tyrannical regime to fall down. The EU, of course, has a few positive trophies. Otherwise, people would notice. Likewise, when it tries to seduce a new country, it pours money into it. Look at Scotland! Every road and building and school seems to be a gift of the EU! Cue the “I like the EU because EU gave us everything!” Someone else is paying. It’s just a loan - The EU doesn’t “work” for you, doesn’t “pay” for you, it just gives you things it took elsewhere. And while those fines to M$ make me happy, well, I’ve paid a few billions every year to set up the EU, and those fines barely cover the working expenses of MPs, I’m paying for those MPs to work for me. And all they give us is a requirement to open our borders. The cycle is complete when the “new voters” vote for the EU because it gave them everything.

skummetmaelk 3y ago
The EU "may" become tyrannical in 80 years and therefore it's definitely, objectively, better for it not to exist. What kind of logic is that argument based on? BTW Spain and Portugal joined the EU in 1986 and are net monetary aid beneficiaries. So your argument about only receiving things initially is hilariously wrong.
- eastbound 3y ago
  Hilariously. Now, rather than using humiliation as part of your handbook, please do not just cherry-pick a counter-example. It’s always mockery that you people are using, not reasoning, not rationality, not taking interest in your enemy’s argument, not taking empathy to understand why would someone ever be doubtful/hateful about the EU, no, just otherise “it”, consider it as an enemy, to take down at all costs, put it on the other side of the fence on a stake, and laugh at him. And then you take a high air when people get harassed into submission.
  - skummetmaelk 3y ago
    It's not cherry picking as there are several long time members who are net beneficiaries. Even if it was cherry picking, how is it irrational to pick counter examples? How does one make rational arguments then? You don't like the EU because you don't like "open borders". You'll find any reason to hate the EU without reasoning because you don't like "open borders". Doesn't matter what good the EU has done. It can never outweigh "open borders". The EU "steals" from its members and redistributes. Taxes are theft. Nevermind that modern economies rely on public services and infrastructure funded by taxes.
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
> Every revolution yields extremely positive results at the beginning... may take 80 years for a tyrannical regime to fall down. So the Glorious Revolution in Britain was a mistake, there should be no Bill of Rights, no parliament? The American Revolution has produced a tyrannical regime? Mr. No Revolutions here would rather still be property of a Medieval Lord. The Lord taxes you as he wishes and has sex with your wife on your wedding night before you do. > they seize a lot of private property and redistribute it You mean like when peasants seized the property rights over their bodies and redistributed those rights to themselves? Ye, terrible > then it comes to actually producing goods The French revolution produced so many goods that La Grande Armée wooped the asses of every European empire combined. If Napoleon knew when to stop, there would be 10 hours in a day and we'd know a painter called La Hitler. So where do I sign up for this revolution you are talking about? So far the only redistribution I see is when tech firms seize my private data and redistribute it to various predatory marketing schemes. So is it like a revolution by corporations against the state?