5 ms·
It doesn't make sense because you didn't read the original board. It clearly states 'including trade barriers'. You're attacking a strawman. Countries, includi
by 0xy 2y ago
It doesn't make sense because you didn't read the original board. It clearly states 'including trade barriers'. You're attacking a strawman.
Countries, including the EU, like to have 'low tariffs' and then have sneaky backdoor taxes or outright bans on US goods through things like milk quotas (Canada), 'biosecurity' (Australia) or EU courts issuing spurious fines on US companies (based on vague laws that only get enforced against US companies, like DMA).
- reaperman 2y agoI think you might be granting the administration too much benefit of the doubt. They aren't based on "tariffs + trade barriers", they're just based on trade deficit alone. https://x.com/JamesSurowiecki/status/1907559189234196942 https://x.com/JamesSurowiecki/status/1907559189234196942 https://archive.ph/kRkRh https://archive.ph/kRkRh
- energy123 2y agoVAT isn't a trade barrier.
- 0xy 2y agoDMA is. GDPR is. Both are applied principally against competitors using arbitrary fines invented by the EU. No compliance guidance is given, because the laws are inherently vague.
- jbverschoor 2y agoIt's not. It is not anything specific against for example the US. We have many consumer protection laws. Has nothing to do with the US.
- 0xy 2y agoLink me to a single example of an EU company getting fined under DMA. After all, you said it was applied equally so it should be easy :)
- CorrectHorseBat 2y agoNone of the gatekeepers are EU companies. You might say that's proof of it being unfair, but can you name a EU company which should be one? I can't really think of one, US companies are just so much bigger on the internet, even in the EU. Looking at the other law you mentioned, GDPR, there are many EU companies receiving GDPR fines.
- 0xy 2y agoAbsolute nonsense, of course. Your case disintegrates completely given Spotify was given a specific and targeted carve-out in DMA. The law is written to arbitrarily tax US "gatekeepers" while explicitly excluding EU gatekeepers. Booking.com is another, also carved out.
- Ragnarork 2y agoIf a city enforces a new speed limit somewhere and only people living outside of the city break that speed limit, you argue that the law isn't applied equally because no resident of the city has been fined so far? That's the most backward way of trying to prove a point (without even addressing whether DMA and GDPR are a good thing or not, just based on that...)
- yard2010 2y agoThat's not just some bs - the other side of the coin is crooked billionaires and other reptilians taking advantage of anything in their way blinded by their massive greed and psycopathic traits. Excuse me, this is not how a society should roll. Not a sustainable one at least.
- patapong 2y agoIn that case, VW being fined 17bn for dieselgate should also count as a trade barrier?
- Epa095 2y agoIt doesn't make sense because it is not a table of tariffs (including or excluding trade barriers) at all. It is a table of the current trade deficit against each country as a ratio.
- cwillu 2y ago> milk quotas (Canada) You mean the milk quota on imports that (a) trump negotiated and (b) the us has never hit?
- 0xy 2y agoNo, I mean the trade dispute that the Biden admin began. [1] [1] https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2022/january/united-states-prevails-usmca-dispute-canadian-dairy-restrictions https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-...
- cwillu 2y agoAh, so a practice that ruled on years ago, and which it turns out still didn't have any significant impact on imports anyway? Also, remind me, when was the last time that the US actually complied with an unfavourable ruling from the trade panel?
- marceldegraaf 2y agoVAT is not a "sneaky backdoor tax", it's imposed on all goods, regardless of where they're produced or imported from. DMA (and similarly, GDPR) are enforced in EU countries just as much. It's just that the US tends to have more gigantic tech companies that do shady things with user data. Apparently the US doesn't care, but the EU actually does, and so it enforces its laws.
- pembrook 2y agoWe’re talking many 10s of billions in “fines” specifically levied against US tech firms where there is no EU competitor. I don’t necessarily disagree with all of the laws themselves (some are incompetent EU risk aversion, some are good protections) but given the massive never ending fines being applied in bad faith and constantly moving goalposts it is indeed a defacto tariff on US tech firms.
- jonathanstrange 2y agoThe fines are not imposed in bad faith, they're imposed for actual, provable violations of the law. Companies who do not violate the law are not fined. Complaining about fines is another way of saying "We'd like to trade in the EU while violating EU laws that every EU company also has to adhere to."
- pembrook 2y agoThe laws are specifically designed to target US firms without affecting EU ones and enforcement of fines and the size of them is highly selective -- the most attractive targets with the highest willingness to pay without getting to the point where they would pull out of the market. If you do not see the moral hazard in this, I don't know what else I can tell you. If the EU had a seriously competitive tech industry, many of these laws would have never been created, as the EU is not some moral believer in privacy (they fight against encryption domestically), they are just run-of-the-mill protectionists like all governments.
- 2y ago
- 52-6F-62 2y agoComments like this make me wonder why some Americans think they should be able to move on every other country “like a bitch”. In some places, dollar is not god. Important, but not god.