5 ms·
They'll keep laughing at the EU. They can eventually just find loopholes in local laws and hire everybody as a contractor. So that, they get a few euros more i
by thiago_fm 3y ago
They'll keep laughing at the EU. They can eventually just find loopholes in local laws and hire everybody as a contractor.
So that, they get a few euros more in exchange of peeing in bottles.
American companies are so abusive, that's why I invest on them, there's no way any other local European company can do the same that American companies can do here. They play under different laws around the world.
Nobody wants to say it, but I have the feeling countries eat it up because they need the tax revenue and bullets. It feels like the value of the dollar is backed by atomic bombs.
I find it amusing how much leeway Big techs have in the EU, everybody else need to follow the law, as European companies know that if they do things in a bad way, they'll get wrecked, 100% chance.
It doesn't feel like the EU is sovereign from the US, it's more like we're its vassal. They are above the rule of law and we're here to consume their shitty products.
See how much VW lost in Dieselgate, I've never seen a big America-n company getting that kind of scrutiny over here. They give a single billion digit fine and move on, even though they keep not respecting rules regularly.
- wizzwizz4 3y ago> American companies are so abusive, that's why I invest on them, You don't think this is immoral?
- WarOnPrivacy 3y agoSound investments and moral vetting often don't align. Some common examples: Housing equity competing with affordable housing. Stocks rise when new top management exploits existing resources for short term gains - making workers and products suffer. It's hard to retire on morals.
- buddylw 3y agoNo one said morality was easy.
- psychlops 3y agoThe moral vetting is done by the buyers who purchase goods thereby supporting the companies.
- WarOnPrivacy 3y ago> The moral vetting is done by the buyers who purchase goods thereby supporting the companies. Is the purchasing done by the brokers who purchase stocks or the HR dept that chooses a retirement fund or the employee who picks the employer that is least likely to leave them in financial straits? Which of these shouldn't make an immoral investment choice - and should continually vet the ever rotating circumstances of their choices (and be ever ready to jump ship)?
- pixl97 3y agoDear sir I have not had such a good laugh in a while, you should warn me before saying such funny things. For the most part this does not work. For one, the cheapest product tends to win. Consumers are highly price sensitive. Especially in the case where you have two mostly equal products that are only separated by their immorality in making the product. Second, companies love morality washing. Put up a bunch of advertisements on how good for the world they are at whatever touches their buyers hearts and opens their purse strings. It's all bullshit, using immoral money to buy happy feeling of morality. And lastly companies love buying premium 'moral' brands without much fanfare turning them into their corporate level of depravity while still pretending like the brand is a seperate moral entity. It doesn't fucking work for the end user, between the massive consolidation of companies in must industries giving us no choices, and between the constant amount of work needed to ensure the product you buy isn't owned by vampires it's almost like we need business regulation.
- psychlops 3y agoI am glad I brought joy into your life. Brace yourself for more humor follows! I do not consider consumers as faceless automatons purchasing the cheapest items based on the latest advertisements. They are each intelligent, obligated citizens who vote with purchases every day to elevate the industry they want to enrich. Companies are entities made up of such people and as such do not love (or hate) anything. Consider that your business regulators are also vampires, many of whom previously worked in the industries and may very well return. I suggest that quickly seeking an authoritative solution to a problem is very similar to buyers purchasing the cheapest product based on the latest advertisement.
- psychlops 3y agoIf not immoral, then it's cognitive dissonance.
- WarOnPrivacy 3y ago> If not immoral, then it's cognitive dissonance. This is a good observation. What is our obligation when our cognitive dissonance enables immoral/unethical activity at scale?
- psychlops 3y agoGood question. I suggest pertinent obligations are to reflect on opportunity, incentives and outcomes to ensure that our moral foundations are harmonious with our actions. If, at scale, there is dissonance then I would submit that reflection has not been done.
- Chris2048 3y ago> cognitive dissonance morality aside, it's not "cognitive dissonance". That would require "behavior does not align with their values or beliefs", and they never stated their values on the matter.
- psychlops 3y agoI reread what he wrote and you are correct. They may enjoy being a US "vassal" consuming "shitty products".
- Chris2048 3y agoThat wouldn't be required; His described actions are to invest in them, he didn't say whether he buys their products. Plus the EU presumably still seem to be a vassal to the US however he acted - unless you are suggesting that relationship should dictate his investment choices?
- gabrielgio 3y agoI think morality is shallow concept to base any analysis, because, in the end, where there is morality when you live in a system based on exploitation of labour?
- jszymborski 3y ago"I'm not punching you right now, sir, it's the violent system of oppression we live in."
- gabrielgio 3y agoI'm not advocating for violence, neither endorsing GP's action. I just stated that morality is weak base to judge any action.
- jszymborski 3y agoThis way of thinking is so commonly used to launder bad behaviour and really strips individuals of their agency in service of some cynical world view. IMHO.
- gabrielgio 3y agoYou mean something like? "If nothing is right/ethical/moral so I can do whatever to the other"
- nonethewiser 3y agoOr put another way, Europe cannot create their own Amazon.
- sekai 3y ago> Or put another way, Europe cannot create their own Amazon. Ozempic-maker Novo Nordisk enters the room
- thiago_fm 3y agoExactly, but somehow we tolerate Amazon...
- hef19898 3y agoSo? We have our own companies optimizing their taxes as it is.
- jimnotgym 3y agoNot with all the barriers we put up, making people pay tax, making people treat employees fairly, mashing people treat consumers fairly. If you meant they couldn't create Amazon the product, then there are lots of bookshops in Europe, thanks for asking.
- silent_cal 3y agoMuch like we can't have Chinese-style factories in the US, so we just let the Chinese do it.
- mistrial9 3y ago> American companies are so abusive, that's why I invest on them no, there are many "American companies" but you are thinking of certain, aggressive, investment backed ones, which you quickly "invest in" It is exactly "investors adding money to abusive companies to get faster returns" that YOU are part of
- 1234letshaveatw 3y agoSo true, I can't think of any EU actions specifically targeting American companies /s I think you forget that the 2 founding principles of the bureaucratic nightmare that is the EU are cronyism/wealth redistribution and fining US tech companies
- jimnotgym 3y agoDrop the /s and tell us an example?
- 1234letshaveatw 3y agoJust google "Apple EU fine" for starters?
- jimnotgym 3y agoI don't see anything targeted at US companies there. Just an infamous monopolist finding that breaking the law can catch up with you, even if it takes a very, very long time
- 1234letshaveatw 3y agoAhh, I see. Try searching "Microsoft EU fine" then?
- jimnotgym 3y agoThe problem is that Europe is a vassal. If Russia invades then the US will have to help defend Europe. Trump was right that European countries should spend more on defence, but at the same time very dishonest about the quid pro quo going on. Free rein for US companies, the Mastercard tax, the Visa Tax... Also for too long European defence spending actually means buying weapons from the US. Europe should spend more on defence and spend it at home, but that is the opposite of what Trump wants.
- hef19898 3y agoA vassal? This is getting better and better... Sonall NATO memebers are subservient vassal states of the US, Japan is what? An occupied territory? Just as a heads up: Trump ain't President at the moment, and when he was, the US was weak they ever were...
- simonh 3y agoAll true, but I think it's also broader than that. Europe is massively dependent on the US guaranteeing freedom of navigation globally. They're the only power capable of patrolling and defending every major sea lane simultaneously. The Houthi attacks in the Red Sea are affecting everybody. It's good to see the UK and now India get involved, but without the US the Houthis would more or less have free reign. Germany, Japan, even China plus many others are just as affected by it but what are they doing? What could they do?
- actionfromafar 3y agoIt remains to be seen what even the US can do in the Red Sea. Will playing whack-a-mole with Houthis help, as long as their backer Iran is left alone? (Not saying attacking Iran is a good idea, mind you! These things are complicated.) The Red Sea will have to be pretty calm for a long time before shipments are routed there again. The Houthis need to strike only very occasionally to deny shipping.
- gessha 3y agoEU spending less on war means they can spend more on social services and public investments. Vacations, higher salaries, healthcare, etc. In a better world the US would do that too. But they don’t because they need to protect trade (and democracy). That’s why US defense spending is larger than most EU country GDPs. To balance that, healthcare here sucks, my car get roughed up by the potholes, bridges cost an arm and a leg, no vacation for workers, minimum wage is not enough pay to feed a family/upskill, etc.
- hef19898 3y agoRe: EU fines against US companies, exihibts include Apple, Google and Microsoft (each with people crying trade war on HN). Re: Dieselgate, the CEOs of Audi and VW at the time are currently on trial in Germany. I hate it, really hate it, tgat everytime something international coms up, people cry about some country not being souvereign because of blabla...
- mdgrech23 3y agoHow do you think those of us in the US feel?
- silent_cal 3y agoMy sentiments exactly
- realusername 3y ago> It doesn't feel like the EU is sovereign from the US, it's more like we're its vassal. They are above the rule of law and we're here to consume their shitty products. I personally would not even call these tech giants American anymore, they are as powerful as countries.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- silent_cal 3y agoIf it helps at all, Americans are also vassals of the US government and its multinational corporations.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]