upvote

points

by m13212 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby sigmoid108 hours ago|
[-]
Google just got hit by yet another record antitrust fine by the EU [1]. But as long as they see these fines as cost of doing business, nothing will change. Especially if it always takes almost a decade to push this through the judicial system. Their net income last year alone was $130 Billion.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/eu-top-court-dismisses-google-...

reply
upvoteby ciefa6 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Eh, that is if they pay. Trump already made threats for tariffs in regards to those fines.
reply
upvoteby Danox5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Which is a federal sales tax against the citizens of the United States countries abroad do not pay no matter how many times taco lies.
reply
upvoteby 2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby ffsm85 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
You're splitting hairs in this case, while that's unquestionably true, it's irrelevant if there tariffs are only set on one party.

That's why Trump's tariffs on everything was so ... Uh ... "Interesting". If only one party gets the tariffs, you end up with other parties selling the goods instead, which does cause meaningful damage to the tariffed party

reply
upvoteby Grombobulous3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Or the tariffing party just continues buying very nearly the same amount of things at higher prices in many categories because those items don’t have perfectly elastic supply and demand.
reply
upvoteby ffsm82 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Technically true but highly misleading. The amount of good like that are few, less then 30% of the EU -> US trade.
reply
upvoteby Grombobulous1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
That’s actually kind of like not a good statistic though.

For 30% of transactions with the EU it’s just the US shooting itself in the foot and passing on higher costs to average Americans.

Imagine enacting a tax where 30% of the money collected was a net negative. I can’t think of many taxes that are that poorly constructed.

For the 70% of transactions where US companies and individuals decide to buy less or use alternative sources, doesn’t that at some point harm US businesses? At the very least you’re now artificially lowering competition, which tends to drive overall prices up and quality down.

reply
upvoteby oblio8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
The EU shouldn't be regulating Google like this.

The US should.

reply
upvoteby trollbridge7 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The DOJ brought an antitrust case against Google… and won.

Then the judge pretty much decided “no consequences”.

reply
upvoteby echelon6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It was the lamest excuse ever.

Something like, "I'm worried about impairing Google's ability to compete in AI" or some nonsense. (Paraphrasing here.)

Looks like all it takes to compete in AI is to issue stock or get a bunch of investors. I don't see how Google would struggle with that. It's completely orthogonal to antitrust enforcement.

reply
upvoteby 3form7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Why not both? Countries should be able to signal which business practices are undesirable.
reply
upvoteby oblio25 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The EU can't realistically bring Google to its knees. The US could.

I say that as a European that's very much in favor of government intervention to fix market distortions.

reply
upvoteby _blk7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Yes, laws are laws but one affects a branch, the other a root.
reply
upvoteby froggit7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Cut off enough branches and the roots die.
reply
upvoteby lofaszvanitt7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Hopeless. US already lost against corps. And that will be their downfall.
reply