5 ms·
Absolutely agree; but it's never too late to react. Europe could impose tariffs on US tech or forbid it altogether to bid on government contracts. Etc. What ar
by bambax 2mo ago
Absolutely agree; but it's never too late to react. Europe could impose tariffs on US tech or forbid it altogether to bid on government contracts. Etc.
What are we waiting for.
- hunglee2 2mo agothe bilateral deals signed means we (the world, minus the US) is already divided. Got to scrap those deals first, which isn't going to happen. The shark has scattered the shoal and we're all going to get picked off - perpetually signing worse deals, then having to renegotiate again before signing ever worse terms.
- amelius 2mo agoIf Trump can scrap bilateral deals, then others can too, using similar tactics if necessary.
- LeFantome 2mo agoWhy does any country need a deal with the US? Canada is more integrated than anybody and they are walking away. Canada believes productive trade with the rest of the world is better than a bad deal with the US. China was prepared to do the same. The world should take notice.
- bambax 2mo agoExactly. If Canada can do it, who can't??!?
- disgruntledphd2 2mo agoHonestly, if Trump keeps giving intelligence to Ukraine against Russia, then it was worth paying the (idiotic) tariffs. That was the EUs top priority. The other issue was that each country had its own products they didn't want to lose sales from. More generally, the EU isn't built for a world of presidential powers exercised at whom, which is becoming more of an issue this decade.
- lokar 2mo agoThere some sense that the structure of the EU is predicated on a stable rules based international order.
- bawolff 2mo agoI dont think this is true. I imagine the designers of the EU were fully aware that foreign govs might renege on deals and built mechanisms to deal with that. For the most part, the rules based international order is built around the idea that following it is in everyone's best interest and going against it will have negative consequences. That is why it has lasted so long.
- inigyou 2mo agoHuh? There has never been a rules based international order, only the superficial appearance of one.
- bawolff 2mo agoYes, that is what people mean by a rules based international order. Its not literally followed rigidly, but there are certain norms that are followed 90% of the time, and that makes things more predictable which is a good thing. How often are diplomats executed to send a message to there home country? Basically never. That is the system. Its far from perfect, definitely not comprehensive, but does do some good every now and then.
- 2mo ago
- telesilla 2mo agoGeopolitics to make sense.
- k33n 2mo ago> What are we waiting for. Responsible governance around something like when and how to retaliate (if at all) against tariffs comes down to one of the most fundamental forces of economics and trade: real leverage. Whether or not the US should exercise its leverage to attain outsized and favorable terms on the economic stage is the peanut gallery conversation that happens on social media. The two worlds couldn't be farther apart. What will actually happen in the end is just a math equation that has never changed and will never change.
- bambax 2mo agoThat's just not true. Geopolitics isn't maths, never has been, never will be. Maths is an input amongst many, and doesn't decide the outcome.
- enraged_camel 2mo ago>> What are we waiting for. For Europe to become fully self-sufficient when it comes to defense, for one thing.
- LeFantome 2mo agoI think it can be Europe, Canada, Australia, and South Korea. The world has the technology. Canada has the resources and the manufacturing capacity. Europe has the money. It can be done. Look at Ukraine. They are becoming a military superpower in terms of technology and experience.
- exceptione 2mo agoEurope has the money, the tech, the manufacturing capacity and the know-how. There is a reason Europe conquered the world in just a few years; the lady is way too good at war. One of the reasons post WOII we were quite satisfied with the idea of paying the USA with all kinds of privileges and support to their defense industry and have our own defenses knee-capped. War is horrible, we know that all too well. Reluctantly but surely the wheel has turned now. There are still gaps for intel gathering capabilities (think AWACS), but Saab is already working on alternatives. Also, Europe has to confront its inheritance of fragmentation (in which the USA has played a big role). Just look at all the various types of fighter jets being developed independently across Europe. That is very wasteful. Also, European armies have to incorporate the lessons from Ukraine. The Germans make the world's best tanks, but the advent of drones on the battlefield has shaken up all old mil. doctrines. Aside 1: there are quite some areas where European weapon systems are state of the art, but you won't hear about that unless you are more in the know. The US is hurting itself here in a big way. Going alone = $$$$$$$$$$$$ Aside 2: The European Union has been conceived as an 'ever closer union' from the beginning as to lower the likelihood of new wars on the continent; something the USA pushed us to btw post-WOII. Canada and Australia have raw materials, something which Europe doesn't have abundantly. Sharing development costs across the free world is mainly why you see Canada, Japan, Australia etc having a heightened interest in Europe. There is world-wide a lot of interest in the European defense sector, but South Korea and Israel have also interesting defense sectors.
- jdeisenberg 2mo agoPossibly waiting for a reasonable replacement for US tech. For example, if the US should decide to shut off MasterCard and VISA services to Europe, it would create non-trivial difficulties for the European banking system.
- 8note 2mo agoits also a one time trick for america, similar to the strait of hormuz it would be so disruptive that europe would have to make and use an alternative, and then the US could not regain that market
- exceptione 2mo agoNow imagine the costs for the oligarchs to let that not happen. 'Might makes right' also applies internally. When the rules don't apply you will see fiefdoms eating each other and white collar crime cranked up to the max. In these dynamics there is a reason to get from your clan a tsar in power who can guarantee some level of stability. If you see a lot of sycophancy displayed around the don you know why.
- ColdStream 2mo agoThere is a reason the US is worried about things like Pix is Brazil. Viable alternatives are coming online that cuts them out of the set of power.
- inigyou 2mo agoAnd UPI in India. And you know what? Those systems are working better than the US systems do. In Europe there's Weego or whatever it's called which is just a standardized QR code layer on top of the instant SEPA payments you can already do?
- tpm 2mo agoThe banking system would probably be fine, only card payments would suffer but there are mostly already alternatives available.
- 2mo ago
- 8note 2mo agotariffs on tech i think is harder than just not accepting US patents and IP, and refusing protections on it
- bad_haircut72 2mo agoCopyright is a very quick one to change though. Imagine if suddenly you would no longer be getting doorknocks from the police for downloading Movies/Music/Games/Software from American companies. Europe just gets GTA6, for free, one hour after it comes out (or a day if it takes that long to crack it). Huge amounts of American wealth rely on the rest of the world playing by their rules.
- Animats 2mo agoRussia did that years ago. Which is why "ok.ru" has American movies. Of course, who knows what else is embedded in the download. But what might work would be if the EU dropped back to the minimum copyright term of the Berne Convention - 50 years. Preferably measured from first publication.
- codedokode 2mo agook.ru ("classmates") is a social network with web UI and an app, so you do not need to download anything. Also, foreign movies are shown in cinemas (unofficially) regardless of copyright owner opinion.
- inigyou 2mo agoBut politicians seem to treat copyright law as a sacred cow. When Stop Killing Games reached the threshold to trigger a mandatory response from politicians, their response was unanimously "sorry but we can't do that because we'd have to change copyright law." Yes, I think that was the point.
- mupuff1234 2mo agoDoesn't Europe already have a digital service tax?