4 ms·
So they point out what is wrong with your example, and you make even vaguer arguments in favor of it? Here, your argument is even weaker because it is essentia
by DannyBee 11y ago
So they point out what is wrong with your example, and you make even vaguer arguments in favor of it?
Here, your argument is even weaker because it is essentially "we give america power, and they use it".
The dollar's dominance is not america's fault, it's literally everyone else's :)
America has not militarily imposed it's will on france or any other european nation that i'm aware of in the recent past so i'm not sure you can really claim america forcing y'all to their point of view on that one.
If you think for a second that any country that has power will not use it against other countries in trade negotiations, that just seems ultra-naive to me.
"Recall that it is not obvious that revenue earned in a country that is not America should be taxed by America."
Hey, remember that time when france tried to tax all the Google revenue not earned in france by claiming google ireland has a permanent establishment in france (and then claims google owes it a billion in tax when the max google possibly earned was a total of 237 million in google france?)?
No worries though, i'm sure, unlike every other country, france wouldn't try to use it's power to force any other country or multi-national corporation to do anything.
They'll only do the right thing.
- vegabook 11y agoFrance would almost certainly do exactly the same, as indeed it did once upon a time when it was briefly dominant in Europe (late 17th/18th centuries). Yet it would have been correct to speak truth to might then, just as it is now.
- DannyBee 11y ago"Truth to might" I think this is a bit of hyperbole. Past that, can you point to a time in history when a utopic state of happiness and rightness ruled (IE you got what you wanted) and the world still functioned?