Trump Slams EU Over $5 Billion Fine on Google (reuters.com)

U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday criticized the European Union and said the bloc was taking advantage of the United States, pointing to the record $5 billion fine European antitrust regulators imposed on Google. From a report: European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker is scheduled to meet with Trump at the White House next Wednesday to discuss trade and other issues. "I told you so! The European Union just slapped a Five Billion Dollar fine on one of our great companies, Google. They truly have taken advantage of the U.S., but not for long!" Trump said in a post on Twitter .

Comments

not for long

[bugs2squash]

what does he mean by "not for long" ? does he mean a couple of years until we get a new president, or was this a total surprise to the US government such that he could not have shown off his deal-making art and nixed it before now ?

Re:not for long

[ichimunki]

A new president? Or a new precedent? Because the USA already has a precedent in this exact situation -- Microsoft and IE.

Google probably makes a few more than $5b from the EU markets. But unless there is more to this than a fine, then DJT is right... it's just a money grab. The ruling as it stands doesn't flat out require them to change their business practices, just levies fines for non-compliance. And at a paltry 5% of their daily take in the EU. So they can continue this practice indefinitely and just pay the tax if they want.

Re:not for long

[The Cynical Critic]

He thinks his sanctions are going to really hurt the economies of their targets and force them to come to the negotiating table and agree to new trade agreements with terms much more favorable to the U.S than currently existing agreements. What he's referring to here is obviously the future after the EU bows to his sanctions and agrees to new trade agreements that prevent them from levying sanctions against american companies for breaking their laws.

Only problem with this "brilliant" plan is that the European leadership knows exactly what the purpose behind the sanctions is and in the case of Junker and Macron have even publicly stated that they can see this and won't come to the negotiating table while the sanctions are still in place.

As for why he's using sanctions in particular is that it's about the trade deficit he's obsessed with he knows that sanctions against countries and blocks that the U.S has a trade deficit with will be more effective than any return sanctions they may impose on him instead. This is the only part of it that makes any kind of sense, but it's kind of negated by the fact that the targets can retaliate trough alternative means like refusing to recognize U.S physical or intellectual property rights, which then swings the balance in their favor.

Re:not for long

[Immerman]

>So they can continue this practice indefinitely and just pay the tax if they want.
That's pretty much standard for corporations, regardless. Fines are pretty much the only punishments applicable to corporations, short of dissolving their charter or banning them from doing business.

So, corporation breaks law, corporation gets fined, corporation pays fine and continues breaking the law because paying the fine is more profitable than obeying the law - that's how it's been done the world over for decades - Microsoft was notorious for that. The EU seems to have taken the lead however in establishing future fines as well, so that the company doesn't have to be re-sued for continuing to break the law, they just automatically get continuing fines so long as they're not in compliance, which increases their cost and decreases costs on the legal system.

I would like to see it go a step further myself. Say a 10% increase for every month they continue to break the law. Make sure their bean counters can see the oncoming storm of exponential growth looming in the future, so that they have serious incentive to set things right, rather than just regarding it as an overhead cost of doing business.

Re:not for long

[hcs_$reboot]

More tariffs?

Re:not for long

[houghi]

The thing is that fines will get higher as they go on. A fine is not a 'get out of jail' card. It does not mean they can continue doing what they do.
First there is a fine, then there is a higher fine and there also is the abilityto take away the licence to do business.

This has nothing to do with milking companies. This is about punishment and hurting them in the wallet. And they have the power to say "all you (European) bank accounts are now below to us."

Re:not for long

[AmiMoJo]

he knows that sanctions against countries and blocks that the U.S has a trade deficit with will be more effective than any return sanctions they may impose on him instead

Maybe not. When a US company moves jobs out of an area the local politicians seem to get a lot more blame than in Europe. We have seen this at work already with the tariffs on Harley Davidson bikes and how pissed off people are about those jobs going overseas.

Also, the EU is more politically diverse than the US. Lots of national governments, no big federal administration or powerful politicians to blame.

In other words the EU can probably hurt Trump far more than he can hurt the EU, but attacking his base and other politicians that support him.

Re:not for long

[ichimunki]

In the reporting I've read there is no mention of the fines increasing as time goes on-- only that they will be subject to a 5% revenue fine. The appeal of the current case could take years... by the time this is all settled, Google may well have found a way around Android, and starting this whole fight all over again.

If the EU wanted more than money (which it desperately can use), it could use many other legal mechanisms to resolve the issue. But why would they want to actually resolve the issue when they can soak Google and send the money to EU countries that could use the cash? I'm not trying to defend Trump here, by the way, because I don't see why he cares... except that he has some bizarre fixation on trade imbalances.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Youâ(TM)re forgetting this whole concept, that if you do business in a forgien country/region, all your business done in that country/region must comply with their laws. So if your business, in said country/region, violates the law in its operatiob in said area, your stuck dealing with the legal ramifications, or risk losing the ability to do business in the area.

Re:not for long

[gtall]

You are giving el Presidente Tweetie too much credit. In his mind, the R voters don't like free trade agreements (they haven't yet lost jobs by losing those) and he can understand one number...at a time. The Big Number he's capable of understanding is the trade deficit number, but only as a number. He gets nothing else about trade because he has a mercantilism view of trade. He also knows that he can use that number in tweets and those go well with big stupid numbers and Fox...well they would seeing as they are essentially a mouth-organ for sound bites that his base likes.

Couple that with his distorted view to bargaining between nations which he figures should be just like bargaining for investment dollars. He bargained by promoting a dream that made the foolish banks and others bet money on him. His 4-6 bankruptcies showed how foolish that is. However, governments do not work like that, at least mature European governments and some Asian governments. They see trade as being something much more complicated, which it is.

When Trump doesn't get people or governments to give what he wants, he acts like the 15 year he is. He resorts to threats. It's worked for him before when he was holding other peoples money and they wanted to withdraw it. He threatens them with a loss. He doesn't really have a loss to threaten anyone with here except his trade deficit number. But since he never understood what that number represented beyond just a number, he ascribes to it all sorts of magical properties which translates in his mind of governments giving him what he wants.

Re:not for long

[zifn4b]

A new president? Or a new precedent? Because the USA already has a precedent in this exact situation -- Microsoft and IE.

It's not the same situation. That was a domestic issue. American company dealing with American justice system. This situation is an American company in a foreign country's judicial system. Last time I checked there was no world government.

Re:not for long

[Immerman]

They don't though - they're no more a US company that any other international corporation. They have offices and data centers all over the world, and the always popular Irish tax-dodging offices to hide their profits.

If they don't want to comply with EU law, they're quite welcome to simply not do business in the EU - geoblocking is quite simple, and the EU can block them as well. But that would means giving up all the profit from selling ads targeting Europeans.

Re:not for long

[Immerman]

Since when? What fantasy world do you live in, and how can I get there?

A fine is generally a one-time payment. Continue breaking the law, go to court again, pay another fine. That's what MS did for decades - except that they usually managed to avoid even being fined since the US government is such a corporate pushover - it took the EU actually making the punishments hurt (including some ongoing fines as I recall) to get them to behave even as decently as they do now.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Google does business in the eu. They hire people there, have contracts with local telecoms there, sell advertising space there, etc. that's enough to make that part of their business subject to EU law.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but you don't run all your profit through your Ireland "headquarters" in order to dodge US tax, like Google do.

If Google want to entirely pull out of the EU they can start actually paying their taxes.

Re:not for long

[rally2xs]

"In other words the EU can probably hurt Trump far more than he can hurt the EU, but attacking his base and other politicians that support him"

You obviously are not part of the base. I am. And there's nothing they can do to "attack the base" that is going to work short of somehow getting him to NOT put America first, and start cooperating with the globalists to F the USA and move jobs out of the country again, put everyone back on welfare that was before, etc. Not going to happen. Donald doesn't care, he's got all the money he needs so they cannot bribe him. And he will continue to attempt to bring jobs back from outside the country, advocate for US companies that are getting raped by Mafia-like organizations like the EU, and so forth. This $5B is simple a "protection racket", just like the mob. We're tired of it, Trump is tired of it, and he will use his considerable influence to see that it doesn't happen.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

yes, thats a nice story.

Now back to the subject at hand. What would you do if u did business and hired people in the EU and they had the temerity to come fine you for not following local laws?

Re:not for long

[rally2xs]

Betcher ass, more tariffs.

Look, Trump walks into the G7 and, as 1st order of business, he says, "Lets drop all the tariffs, 100%." The others just look at each other, and said, "Lets move on to the next subject." The fact is that when we tariff something at 2.5%, they're tariffing our stuff at 25%. That's not free trade, its UNfair trade. Trump wants Fair Trade, because free trade is not possible - the others won't give up their tariffs.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Claiming he "only understands it in a mercantile fashion" is a pretty reasonable complaint about Trump, but I will point out that many other countries have been using this metric successfully, whether they claim it or not. It's not unreasonable to have a president apply a metric that we've been pretending isn't correct, while many others seem to do just fine with it.

Re:not for long

[ichimunki]

It's the same situation in a different jurisdiction. Because of all the trade treaties and agreements, many world governments are, for all intents and purpose, entangled to the point that we might as well have a "world government"... there is significant reciprocity between the jurisdictions that mutually benefit both (or at least benefit the ownership class in both areas). The real question here isn't why Trump is so angry at the EU, but why the US DOJ and FTC aren't aggressively pursuing the same type of case against Google.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Did anybody ever tell you that you're a fucking moron?

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

This $5B is simple a "protection racket", just like the mob.

No. Google (much as I admire their products) broke the EU law. Maybe you could read up on the complaint, it's pretty clear. (The EU - unlike the US - has a history of not being a complete pushover to corporate interests.)

I'd agree that nothing the EU can do will "attack the base" of Trump. By definition his base believe what he says, so I don't think anything is going to change that.

FWIW, I believe that the Google fine is NOT politically motivated, so maybe I'm irrational too.

Re:not for long

[apoc.famine]

If you would bother to learn what you're talking about instead of just repeating incorrect political talking points, you'd seem much more intelligent.

Tariffs are only a fraction of the issue. If you're not a moron, you also look at the amount spent subsidizing the product in each country, and you look at the total of both goods and services exchanged between the two countries, and weight those including the tariffs. That's actually fair accounting, and not cherry-picking a number to prove your point.

If one country can make one product cheaper, it doesn't make sense to try to have balanced trade with them. It's in our best interest to buy that product or service at a lower dollar amount, and spend the resources we'd have normally spent making it on something we can do more efficiently. Making everything cost more and run less efficiently just to get a trade deficit number which will make Trump feel like a winner is stupid. This is why pretty much every serious economist is against what Trump is doing.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

And all of those innovative European companies can swoop in to fill the void!

Once they're done paying the fees and taxes, the mandatory bribes, spent millions abiding by thousands of draconian regulations, implemented government back doors to all user data, met diversity hire quotas, hired mandatory privacy advocates, and been sued into oblivion for patent infringement.

You mean they'd be operating in the US? I'd have expected them to remain in the EU :)

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Looking inside the mind of one of his pigeon, fascinating.

Re:not for long

[Dragonslicer]

And he will continue to attempt and fail to bring jobs back from outside the country

Fixed that for you.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Donald doesn't care, he's got all the money he needs so they cannot bribe him.

Look at him, he's so rich, he can't be corrupt!

Re:not for long

[HornWumpus]

Every nation claims to be for free trade. They all lie. It's about the political power of domestic producers.

For example: Sugar beats are not an economic crop. They can't compete. If a nation grows sugar beats, you know they protect their sugar market. Germany grows a lot of sugar beats.

They're _all_ mercantilists, China more than anybody.

Re:not for long

[zifn4b]

No it's not. American company pays fine to US government or ceases to be incorporated, money goes to American tax payers. American company pays fine to EU government else can't do business in EU, money goes to non-American taxpayers. Google is not obligated to do anything for the EU under any sort of threat of law. Google could say eh, well EU you want to treat us like that, we just won't offer our products or allow them to be licensed in your country. EU can't just slam something down an American company's throat. It's a negotiation and each side has something to potentially lose unless they are able to reach a compromise. Regardless of what ethical and moral concerns you may have valid or invalid, that's not the issue. The issue is business and law, nothing more, nothing less.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

So whenever someone upsets you, you just throw a tantrum and run away. Like a 3 year old.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

So if im an american visiting the eu and i kill someone does it not count because the crime was commited in the us?

Because thats what all of you idiots are essentially saying.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

And lose access to worldâ(TM)s biggest economy, the EU? Sure, Alphabetâ(TM)s BoM would certainly approve... European car manufacturers got fined big time in the US during the emission scandal. They did wrong, they got punished â" Google did wrong (again) and they get punished.

The world does not revolve around the US anymore.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

I presume you see the US fines against VW and BP in the same light as the EU fines against Google.

Break the law, pay the fine.

Re:not for long

[AmiMoJo]

I think they will realize that he isn't putting America first when their jobs get shipped overseas because of retaliatory tariffs, or even his own tariffs on the components that go into their products.

Re:not for long

[apoc.famine]

No, it does not. This is what we've been mostly doing over the last 30 years when our workers' wages have stagnated for the last 30 years. This way of doing things has seen the near-collapse of our manufacturing base, with widespread underemployment and unemployment and Trump is putting a stop to it.

Nicely done getting all worked up about the first half of a sentence while ignoring the critical second half! The near-collapse of our manufacturing base is because it's cheaper to make things in other countries. Correct. But you ignored the second half of that very sentence which said,

...and spend the resources we'd have normally spent making it on something we can do more efficiently.

That's the missing part. We haven't done that. What "we've" done is pocket the money we saved and failed to reinvest it back into another product or service. You know, those things created by people doing a thing we call a job.

Just because the US has failed on this doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do.

Isolationist trade policies make just about everything cost more while everyone else willing to trade globally gets cheaper goods and services, and a higher quality of life. The issue isn't in the global market. It's in the the social and political systems that deny the full benefit of the global market from a subset of the population.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

kewl story bra.

Re:not for long

[The Cynical Critic]

If you think Trump's supporter base will be swayed by EU and Chinese sanctions, then man do you not know anything about them. Because any ill effects of return sanctions are just going to drive them to further support Trump as they believe they're all un-justified attacks on the U.S regardless of what preceded them. They really do believe the rest of the world has been taking advantage of the U.S when in reality it's just U.S companies doing what's most profitable for them regardless of the consequences to the working class and U.S trade balance.

As for the "protection racket" accusation, what protection racket simply tells you to get your business practices in line with local law and doesn't actually spring to action until after several years of non-compliance? Because the EU has been telling Google to stop these particular anti-competitive business practices since 2011, thus giving Google more than enough time to either change their practices or take their business elsewhere. There's nothing that forces Google to do business in Europe if they don't like the consumer protection laws, but if they do, then they will either have to follow those laws or get into trouble with regulators like they are in right now.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Google is subject to EU law if they want to do business there but the EU can't rule that Google's incorporation be dismantled if they don't like how Google runs their business. EU can't levy any criminal charges against Google. Only the US government can do that because Google/Alphabet are incorporated in the US.,

In order to do business in country X, they must have a legal entity in country X. Said entity is subject to the laws of country X.

Anything else you need explained to you?

--Zontar The Mindless
(A/C because modded yadda yadda)

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

"In other words the EU can probably hurt Trump far more than he can hurt the EU, but attacking his base and other politicians that support him"

You obviously are not part of the base. I am. And there's nothing they can do to "attack the base" that is going to work short of somehow getting him to NOT put America first, and start cooperating with the globalists to F the USA and move jobs out of the country again, put everyone back on welfare that was before, etc. Not going to happen. Donald doesn't care, he's got all the money he needs so they cannot bribe him. And he will continue to attempt to bring jobs back from outside the country, advocate for US companies that are getting raped by Mafia-like organizations like the EU, and so forth. This $5B is simple a "protection racket", just like the mob. We're tired of it, Trump is tired of it, and he will use his considerable influence to see that it doesn't happen.

If you seriously think Trump cares about anything other than (1) Media attention (2) money for himself (3) adoration of tyrants, then you really haven't been paying attention the last 18 months or so.
You're either a Russian troll, or have no concept of how economics work (just like Trump)
BTW, if Donald has all the money he needs, why couldn't he have sold off his business interests before taking office, like all the ethical, non-sociopathic presidents who came before him?
His attempts to "bring back jobs" seems to purely be hot air to collect votes, and starting a trade war really won't improve things.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

he can afford to provide his base with an income. because thats the only source his base will have at current rate of "progress" and "winning". Make Unemployment Great Again.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

When you say "globalists", you're referring mostly to American companies that have moved their manufacturing/services offshore to save money. So how is this president helping those companies and its American employees again?

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

his distorted view to bargaining between nations which he figures should be just like bargaining for investment dollars

It's sensible in its own way. Try to stop TPP, break up NAFTA, encourage a hard Brexit, anything to stop multilateralism and smaller nations from banding together to negotiate with the USA.
Basically, he's taking his personal style of soulless bully and applying it to the foreign policy of the USA.
When it gets to the point that all other nations would rather deal with China, Russia, and India, rather than having to weather indignities from the formerly respected USA, then the policy has really completely failed.

Re: not for long

[HornWumpus]

No, do business with EU companies in the USA. Serve pages to EU customers from servers located in 'free enough' places.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Historically the EU has no problem with increasing fines for non-compliance.

An example would be threatening to fine Microsoft for each day they are out of compliance:

https://slashdot.org/story/06/06/27/1459246/eu-prepared-to-fine-microsoft-25-million-per-day

As you can imagine, Microsoft got their shit together rather quickly after that.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump has already said that he's going to run again.
God Help America if he is elected for a 2nd term. He will drive you into 4th world status and certainly not MAGA.

Re:not for long

[lgw]

but it's kind of negated by the fact that the targets can retaliate trough alternative means like refusing to recognize U.S physical or intellectual property rights, which then swings the balance in their favor.

IP rights? Maybe. It would be pretty funny for the Pirate Bay to suddenly be legal. Physical property rights? Refusing to recognize US borders? They'd need a far bigger army.

Re:not for long

[LynnwoodRooster]

With the now lower (to EU standards) corporate income tax in the US, there is suddenly a lot less reason to keep a company based in Ireland or elsewhere. Your tax load is not longer twice as high in the US; Google may very well decide that an extra percent or two of income tax is no longer a barrier, and just leave.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

You're kind of an uneducated moron, aren't you?

Re: not for long

[MachineShedFred]

If Google was stopped from doing business in the EU, who do you think gets hurt worse? Google, or the EU?

Think real hard before you answer about the near-monopoly status if not de-facto monopoly status that Google either holds and would be vacating, or would essentially be granted to Google competitors by that move. And then ask yourself if you've actually done any good.

Google would sting a little, but in the end they'll make it up with growth in Asia and not really care that much. The EU would be a complete shit show for Internet search, online advertising, and smartphones. And do you think the average EU citizen would be happy when Google geo-blocks the entire EU from using search, G Suite, YouTube, and Google Play? Instead those services show you in 7 different languages a nice "We're sorry, but your government is filled with unelected twunts that don't allow us to do business there, so have fun sideloading all your apps on your phone and fucking around with trying to get Bing or Yahoo to show you what you're really looking for" message instead of what they expected? Oh, and when the UK pulls the trigger on Brexit finally, Google comes pounding back in the same day, making Brexit guy feel a lot better about their decision immediately.

No, this is a cash grab, pure and simple. The EU doesn't have the balls to actually cut the cord to Google, and Google won't voluntarily stop doing business in the EU as long as the fines remain a single-digit of revenue.. So the EU will hand Google a bill, Google will first filibuster and appeal to delay paying it until the revenue stacked up by doing whatever it is the EU doesn't like dwarfs the fine and then they'll begrudgingly pay it, and everyone goes on like they did before. The EU will dump that cash into some member state that needs a bailout, and then we start all over again.

Re:not for long

[pjt33]

The EU definitely had a part to play in monopoly abuse proceedings against MS. It was the EU that forced MS to offer people a choice of browsers.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm.. you know, eventually the US would end up fining them too.

Geez, people take extreme corruption so for granted now. You know, right, that most Democrats and Republicans (and the public is committed to making sure those two are the only ones who can win elections) would enforce the law too, don't you? That the rule of law is currently suspended in USA, is merely an anomaly (due to everyone in America hating the DNC's shitty pick for president in the 2016 election).

Re: not for long

[HornWumpus]

WTF? No. They're called international payments.

Any other wrong 'explanations' you want to post?

Re:not for long

[HornWumpus]

Get to work Democrats. Give us someone better than Trump next time.

But they won't, they will pivot left.

Re: not for long

[MachineShedFred]

Ask yourself which statement is more true:

A. Google needs the EU more than the EU needs Google.
B. The EU needs Google more than Google needs the EU.

I have a feeling that if Google wanted to "Brexit" themselves right out the EU, they'd see a hit to the quarterly revenue, but make up the growth in Asia and be fine in a year or two. However, the EU would be totally fucked, and handing Apple a monopoly in the smartphone market because the vacuum left by Google Play being gone turns Android into a first-class wild west shit show of people trying to be the major market app and media distributor, but dealing with everyone having to sideload their store, which 90% of the market won't do. And because new devices running Android still can't use Google Play, we take a step back to the early-2000s where each carrier has their own store, with their own ridiculous pricing for shit that's just free on Google Play or the iOS App Store.

Hey, maybe they set up shop right in the Eurostar departure lounge in Ashford after Brexit selling devices with pre-loaded VPN configurations that activate when the phone sees it is inside EU borders, and on the box is a big middle finger emoji surrounded by the circle of stars from the EU flag.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is that Google's fine is proportional to the crime.

Re:not for long

[No Longer an AC]

However, governments do not work like that,

See what Trump said when he was told a country is not a golf course.

At one point, Mr. Trump even compared his renovation of Trump Turnberry to how he is hoping to overhaul the United States. When a reporter pointed out — correctly — that a country is hardly a golf course, Mr. Trump replied: “No it’s not, but you’ll be amazed how similar it is. It’s a place that has to be fixed.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/0...

God help us if he fixes the US like he "fixed" Turnberry, which has been losing money ever since he bought it.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't though - they're no more a US company that any other international corporation.

Indeed, they're an Irish corporation. Their international headquarters is there, and they employ a larger percentage of the Irish population than they do any other nation's, about 100x the global rate.

Re:not for long

[LynnwoodRooster]

To "hurt" the EU, you only have to hurt Germany. Germany is the economic heart of the EU; all other members of the EU are smaller, GDP-wise, than California. Put the pressure on Germany, and Germany will insist the EU yield - as it has done in the past. The EU thinks it's all unified, but put pressure on just the singular player (Germany) and its chancellor (Merkel) and you can get what you want. And Merkel isn't too popular right now, I bet having some big car and pharmaceutical import duties on German products would bring them right in-line mach schnell!

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

The EU will lose 16% of its value when Brexit is finalized. It will then be behind the US again.

Re: not for long

[zifn4b]

A country forcing another country to pay money is called international extortion. Nice try snowflakes. You can mod facts down all you and spread all the disinformation you like, but reality is still reality. Think I'm joking? Get a degree in business and specialize in international business.

Re: not for long

[zifn4b]

Yes and like I said, that is a legal arrangement to do BUSINESS in that country. If Google doesn't pay the fine and decides to pack up and not do business anymore in the EU, there isn't a fucking thing the EU can do to punish Google via its legal system.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll gladly vote for a sociopath that makes failed attempts. Politicians that willingly bring in workers to suppress tech wages with their left hand while entering trade deals that make themselves rich outsourcing jobs with their right are far worse.

All those upmods asserting Trump will fail don't mean a damn thing in the ballot box. If you want anyone but him to win again you better start making an attempt to understand the american people and their needs.

Get ready for another four more years of Donald Trump and the GOP. Learn to care or get the stick.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that not all economies are the same size. If I'm doing business with a small country that makes say an iPhone that is exported to Americans, then there will be a trade deficit almost no matter what. They simply do not have enough demand for an equal amount in dollars for products being exported from the U.S.

Notice the trade deficit with Canada vs the EU. The EU is much much closer in trade dollars because they have a population large enough when you add up all the countries of its members. Canada having far few people results in a larger deficit. This isn't a hard concept but it clearly lost on Trump.

I get him wanting other countries to tear down their tariffs but you don't need to napalm the bridge to get them to modify their behavior. He is the quintessential bull in a china shop.

Re: not for long

[Megol]

Their assets can still be seized to pay for the fine. Standard procedure.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? It's obviously a money grab.

Who exactly is being "harmed" by Google to the tune of $5B?

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, the EU is not cash strapped, and 5 B is an infinitesimal $ figure to their economy. Some EU states are, particularly former eastern block, but GDP per capital frequently is similar to or greater than the US - with a few countries in the 50% to 80% greater range

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Well Trump does like to use his "instincts" instead of advice, so I doubt he spent any time at all researching the issue before tweeting.

Re:not for long

[Darinbob]

Google most certainly can be coerced by foreign countries if it does business in those countries. The US issues fines and penalties for non-US companies, so it's only fair to allow it to go the other way as well.

Re:not for long

[Darinbob]

I suspect that Trump thinks that deals he makes are only "wins" if the other side also loses. He's not searching for what is a good arrangement for both parties, but instead about what's the most that the US can get in the short term.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole global economy is a rugged game you dim wit. You think the US really is land of the free and the home of the brand and that business is a Utopia of fairness and equality opportunity?

I've got a bridge to sell you, you dumb shit.

Re:not for long

[Darinbob]

Damaging US allies and hurting the world economy with tariffs will hurt America. I see no way that his actions are putting America first except in a simplistic world view. I think he genuinely believes there cannot be winners unless there are losers.

Re:not for long

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

. And he will continue to attempt to bring jobs back from outside the country

Not only has that horse left the barn, the barn was torn down. If you think that his actions are going to result in immediate jobs, you're daft. No one is going to invest in re-building that infrastructure.Stuff that's still standing maybe, but I remember reading about the new Chines owners of Anchor Hocking visiting the old factory, before they cut it to pieces and shipped everything to China.

Good luck with that shit. Trumpster.

Re:not for long

[CanadianMacFan]

Like the US never ordered around companies based in other countries and made them follows US laws. As in punishing European companies for doing business in Iran 90 days after the US pulled out of the agreement to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Those companies were legally doing business in Iran as per the agreement which Iran was complying with.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump is trumping this up because he is trying to gain back what he lost with China. He fucked up big time, and this is his way back from saving face.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

...and spend the resources we'd have normally spent making it on something we can do more efficiently.

That's the missing part. We haven't done that. What "we've" done is pocket the money we saved and failed to reinvest it back into another product or service. You know, those things created by people doing a thing we call a job.

Because the US still has a lot of supply-side economic advocates who think all of that magically happens with tax cuts. You can have 40 years of tax cuts NOT jump-starting the economy and not paying for themselves, and they'll still believe in the "job creator" myth.

Re: not for long

[HornWumpus]

Where is that happening? This is the EU punishing an American company in retaliation for America having punished a German company largely owned by a German state (Porsche/VW/Audi: the world's new 'generic motors').

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

How are the Chinese doing without Google? Just fine. Somehow they manage to be the most powerful economy in the world even without the benefit of petty totalitarians in Mountain View snooping everything they do. Weird, huh?

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

Google isn't an American company anymore. In order to facilitate tax dodging they made themselves an Irish company.

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

Abandoning American workers is why Hillary Clinton lost the election. And why the next Democrat will lose in 2020. Democrats *used to* be the party of the working man. Now they're the party of kicking the working man in the face.

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

Hahahahahahahaha! Good one! The United States exports hardly anything. Financial paper, yes. Idea monopolies, yes. Extracted natural resources, yes. Actual products - hell no. We can't lose a "trade war". Because we're already down & out. The economy in the manufacturing states has been in a state of total collapse longer than I've been alive. There is *nowhere* to go but up. I didn't vote in the last election, because I didn't like either of them. But after watching him for 2 years, President Trump has my vote in 2020. He's definitely not perfect. But at least he's on our side.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

All companies doing doing business in Iran were "punished" and it didn't if they were "based in the EU" or not...the EU is fining a single company based on some random idea that Google is acting anticompetitively.

U may have a point but I'd suggest finding a different example that is relevant.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

So tell me Sherlock, why is Apple not being fined for their "monopoly position"?

And don't tell me uts because they own the HW as well. That's just another monopoly position.

If the EU was being fair they'd force Apple to allow others to build "compatible iPhone hardware" and/or require Apple to allow different default SW on the iPhone.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

"His attempts to "bring back jobs" seems to purely be hot air to collect votes, and starting a trade war really won't improve things."

Democrat partisans sure do hate the American working class.

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

I think the President is just tired of America being the willing (eager?) loser in every single trade deal for several decades. You can talk all you want about how "free trade" is good for everyone. The millions of victims of the policies you advocate, however, are not fooled.

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

Look everybody - an anti-Trumper *gloating* about American factories literally being shipped to China. This is why you lost. This is why you will lose again and again.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

You tell 'em, Fritz! Europa uber alles!

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Except the fine has nothing to do with those operations/business oractices...it's about a "dominant position in search", and as far as I know Google makes no revenue on searches...if this was about "dominant position in ad serving" than at least the EU would be attacking the proper business revenue.

Re: not for long

[Darinbob]

We're not the loser in all the trade deals for the last several decades. It may be what Trump thinks but it's pretty delusional. The snag is that if one person loses a job they will complain bitterly, even though 2 people got jobs.

If free trade is bad, then maybe we shouldn't trade between the states, let California keep its wealth and Alabama go to it by itself?

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Like the shit show in China, where Baidu and Tencent emerged? Some would call that a desirable outcome.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

It's 12.5% in Ireland for trading income, 25% for other income, so in general still lower in Ireland.

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

It seems you are ignoring the millions of workers who have been impoverished by the policies you advocate. What do you say to the masses who have seen their livelihoods destroyed so a few bourgeoisie could profit?

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm curiouse. If its as simple as you keep portraying why do you think google (and 100other US companies) don't dp what your suggesting? does it seem more likely that your just THAT much more briliant then them? Or maybe, juuust maybe ypur missing something here.

Re: not for long

[zifn4b]

The EU can't come into USA and seize Google's assets. If Google has assets in the EU, they might be able to do that. In order to do something like that in the USA, the EU would have to make an appeal to the USA much in the same way the USA had to make an appeal to Norway regarding DVD Jon breaking DECSS. USA's laws did not apply in Norway. I'm sorry you're just wrong. The EU's laws do not apply in the USA and vice versa. You can't go to another country and seize a company's assets based on your laws. Your laws don't apply here and vice versa. Research your international case law regarding these sorts of things.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

absolutely! Just as the EU gets to impose its will on google (same as china by the way) so does the US get to do the same with companies that operate there. And just as google left china in response to what they saw as too much preasute they could leave the EU too. (I happen to quite strongly believe that this wont be their response but they sure would have the right to if it were.)

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Come now. The fine is about a textbook case of unfair competition. Specifically leveraging dominance in one market to unequally push ones own products in a different market. If that is not a "business practice" then nothing is.

Re: not for long

[LynnwoodRooster]

US Corporate tax rate is 21% for all activities. So all of Google - which is not trading income - would be a lower tax rate in the US. It will probably stay in Ireland just because of inertia and convenience, but if suddenly it gets more expensive because of EU fines, there is really no financial reason to stay in Ireland any more.

Re:not for long

[parkinglot777]

American company pays fine to US government or ceases to be incorporated, money goes to American tax payers

Really? Money goes to American tax payers? Where is the money?

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Abandoning American workers is why Hillary Clinton lost the election. And why the next Democrat will lose in 2020. Democrats *used to* be the party of the working man. Now they're the party of kicking the working man in the face.

What you said has nothing to do with the parent. You are trolling by attempting to relate something else into the discussion. Also, what you said doesn't mean Republicans aren't abandoning American workers. They still are and it is getting worse because they are now showing that they are pleasing corporations more and more.

Re:not for long

[chapstercni]

It'll be great. And I am quite serious.

Re: not for long

[HornWumpus]

Ignoring your idiotic ideological rant: Don't do business in the parts of the world where the game is rigged against you.

Fucking moron.

Re:not for long

[Highdude702]

Youve always had a choice. The EU just made Microsoft stop pre Installig IE in Windows. Which has only been replaced by harder to remove edge. Glad I run Linux where multiple browsers are normally pre installed for your choice.

Re: not for long

[Darinbob]

What happens with big trade deals is that millions lose their jobs and millions get new previously non existent jobs. So it's bad news for some people but great news for others. And this happens with or without free trade. With fair trade the balance is not between a few million workers and a few bourgoisie.

Free trade is often used as the bogey man excuse for a different problem. Big corporate farms with few workers are cutting into small and family run farms, yet it gets blamed on trade imbalances (and it's a political hot potato, as it pits voters against campaign donors). Coal jobs are down because of changes in the industry and in customer demand, not because a previous administration tried to dismantle it. The solution is to be adaptable and get new jobs that are not like the old jobs. Ie, soybean sales are down then grow something else.

For example, take NAFTA. The biggest bogeyman for those against fair trade. Here's a report from the Heritage Foundation. Yes, the freaking Heritage Foundation, bastion of conservatism and anti-liberal think tank.
https://www.heritage.org/trade...

Protectionism has never helped the economy overall. Sometimes tariffs will increase profits for a domestic producer because there are now a shortgage of product, but relatively few new workers are hired to increase production. This leaves other businesses that use those products in the lurch paying higher prices. For example, the US lumber industry benefits from tariffs against Canadian lumber, whereas 1/3 of lumber used by the home building industry comes from Canada because there's not enough supply domestically. Tariffs added have increased lumber industry profits but raised prices on new homes, wthout increasing the number of workers.

Re: not for long

[astrofurter]

Yup, the "R" face of the Corporate party pumps out propaganda with the same content but different wording than the "D" face of the Corporate party. Surprise surprise.

So you basically refuse to acknowledge the abject, pathetic failure of the "free trade" policies you advocate. This is why the disinherited working class of America voted against you, and will vote against you again & again.

Re: not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

Google would have committed the exact same offences and would thus have received the exact same fine had the US not forced VW to pay absurdly disproportionate amounts of money.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

We can criticize the president without using stupid, sophmoric nicknames. I'll fucking mod down anyone who makes /. read like youtube comments.

Re:not for long

[NeoTubNinja]

And there's nothing they can do to "attack the base" that is going to work short of somehow getting him to NOT put America first, and start cooperating with the globalists to F the USA and move jobs out of the country again, put everyone back on welfare that was before, etc. Not going to happen.

You know he has a lot of his own factories outside of the USA right? Guess it's a "Do what I say and not what I do" situation here.

Also what about the times where he threw American intelligence under the bus in favor of appeasing Putin? Guess it's a "good guys on both sides" situation here.

Globalists to F the USA? Alex Jones, is that you?! Yo whatup dawg. I'm right down the street from you!

Donald doesn't care, he's got all the money he needs so they cannot bribe him.

So much money that they are still working on his tax return.

And he will continue to attempt to bring jobs back from outside the country, advocate for US companies that are getting raped by Mafia-like organizations like the EU, and so forth.

LOL unless you're Amazon, Harley or somebody who gets on his bad side. Let me guess, he isn't going to start with his companies though.

This $5B is simple a "protection racket", just like the mob.

If there is anybody who knows about mob mentality, it's Trump who employed Roy Cohn who ACTUALLY represented mafia members.

What I find "funny" about this last statement is how when poor Mexicans seeking asylum are crossing the border, they're enemy #1 and separating families is "just part of doing business" because they "broke the law". When Google breaks the law, you make up excuses instead of using previous rhetoric about "breaking the law". If that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what is. Turns out, if you break the law, you get punished.

Re:not for long

[Anonymous Coward]

This $5B is simple a "protection racket", just like the mob.

No. Google (much as I admire their products) broke the EU law. Maybe you could read up on the complaint, it's pretty clear. (The EU - unlike the US - has a history of not being a complete pushover to corporate interests.) ...
FWIW, I believe that the Google fine is NOT politically motivated, so maybe I'm irrational too.

You are irrational, or at least incredibly naive. No government thinks about bringing an extra 5 billion dollars into it's control as anything but a political decision - even if there are allegedly restrictions on how they can spend it. Natural language is ambiguous: so long as the bureaucrats or politicians have some leeway or wriggle room, there will be all kinds of political wheeling and dealing over how that money gets spent - with all kinds of conflicts of interest, under-the-table deals, and manipulation of events, while all parties involved are doing their best to create the illusion that nothing unethical is going on.

It will, of course, be massively unethical, but so long as they can spin it correctly they will get away with it. In this day and age, every form of wrong-doing will be protected by a bodyguard of lies. In the eyes of senior government officials, a sucker is born every day, and collectively the suckers make up the group known as the "public".

If the government had statutes (or other legal requirements) that required the money to be spend in certain ways, and that took ALL discretionary control away from the politicians and the bureaucrats, NOT allowing it to go into a "general fund" or to be spent on anything that one would normally expect government to be paying for (both of which would simply amount to money laundering), then the previously mentioned ethics problem wouldn't exist.

There are all kinds of ways this could be implemented, such as dividing all money from fines among all citizens not involved in the cases, not legal professionals, not working for any businesses competing with the involved parties, and not working for government at any level. For that matter, they could just burn the money (or come up with a modern day equivalent). But no such statute exists.

Further, there is a lot of anti-US sentiment in Europe - however irrational it may be - especially considering that Google is a multi-national company with many Europeans owning huge amounts of Google stock. Nevertheless, the anti-US sentiment is real however stupid and delusional. The bureaucrats and politicians who are implementing this are looking to ride the wave of that sentiment, to gain access to higher offices and/or votes. That is politics, plain and simple.

This decision is as political as they come, even though Google probably is doing some inappropriate stuff. But both the ends and means have to be legitimate for an action to be good, and that isn't the case here - as is so often the case.

Please grow up.

Re:not for long

[rally2xs]

Yeah, he's got a lot of factories overseas. You must be yet another person that doesn't understand business. Trump is a businessman. That means he does things to make the most money. The most money can be made by manufacturing overseas. Is he happy about it? No, he's furious. He's so furious that he ran for President in order to change the way we do things so that it will be the more profitable thing to manufacture in the USA instead of overseas. It's working. I could be better if we got rid of the income tax, but otherwise its working.

He did not throw American intelligence under the bus to please Putin. He simply misspoke. He corrected it about 24 hours later. But the fake news media hasn't much reported that, or accepted it, and continue to mislead the public.

I've never heard Alex Jones on the radio, or TV if he's on that. I know he's a wingnut. Globalists are my take on what these cockroaches are doing by shipping jobs out of the USA, and not doing a damned thing to make the USA competitive, and even resisting making the USA competitive, so that we can manufacture here. They are scum. They're BOTH Democrats and Republicans. They hate Trump because he's trying mightily to upset their gravey train. I'm hoping he succeeds.

And, they are not poor Mexicans seeking asylum. They are fraudsters that are seeking a better economic situation by illlegally taking American jobs. To be elegible for asylum, you have to be persecuted by your GOVERNMENT. Most of these people are being threated by the cartels. Tough shit, not eligible. Stay and fight the cartels, make your country better. Don't come here and make our country worse by lowering wage scales, knocking Americans out of work, espeically poor black Americans who lose their jobs first when illegals show up, etc.

Yeah, the "families", many of which are not really, DID break the law. What do they want, special treatment? You rob a bank in the USA, you go to jail, and you are separated from your kids. Trump just upped the ante by making crossing the border equivalent to robbing America's banks. You go to jail. Don't like it? Then don't cross the border illegally. Do it legally. Why do you suppose they don't simply get a ($160) Visa, buy a $400 plane ticket into the USA, and overstay that visa and do it the easy way? Well... duh... they're already criminals in their own lands, so cannot qualify for a visa. They HAVE to sneak, pay coyotes 1000's of dollars, because they CAN'T do it the easy way. They're already scum. Trump knows it. Anyone that thinks a bit about it knows that any idiot that COULD get in for a $160 visa and a plane ticket would do it. But they can't. Make sense to you yet? Think...

Re:not for long

[rally2xs]

"I'd agree that nothing the EU can do will "attack the base" of Trump. By definition his base believe what he says, so I don't think anything is going to change that."

We don't necessarily believe what he says, we just don't give a shit about the trivialities. The stuff he says that aren't right are trivial - the size of his crowds on inauguration day, for instance. If that's wrong, does anybody bleed? Does anyone lose money? Nope, its just an inaccurate statement. What he says that counts is accurate. He tells us he's going to (try to) build a wall, he's struggling mightily to do it and will probably succeed. He tells us he's going to bring jobs back from overseas, well he's doing it. He tells us he's going to cut taxes, he did it. Find me a politician that fulfills as many of his campaign promises as Trump. I don't think there are any. That is why we didn't vote for any of the other 17 Republican primary candidates - we knew that they would _all_ tell us what we wanted to hear, and the go to Washington and do exactly what the Koch Bros or the other campaign donors wanted, and not necessarily what is good for America. Trump says he's going to get control of the southern border, well he's doing it. The important stuff he tells the truth about, and you can take it to the bank.

Re: not for long

[rally2xs]

Unemployment is at historic lows, moron.

Re: not for long

[rally2xs]

What you don't seem to realize that those losing good manufacturing jobs _are_ getting different jobs, but the "different" jobs pay a fraction of what they were making. That is the scenario when good-paying manufacturing jobs leave the country, and those that were doing those jobs get puke retail jobs at minimum wage, or slightly above it. Trump is trying to put a stop to that. Some retail jobs may go away, but manufacturing jobs will replace them. That is a good thing. We need manufacturing jobs. Some people are good with their hands, want to work with their hands, and don't want to be feeding a bunch of computerized machines urine samples in some med lab after 2 years of training. They want to turn wrenches, install machines with 50 hp motors to stamp car bodies or build something else, and don't want to be cooped up in a lab. Those people are not happy in labs, and many are doing everything they can, which is considerable to stay out of labs. They're home watching soap operas while a spouse is making the minimum wage at Walmart, they are near-starving, and are not contributing to a consumer-driven recovery. Until Trump. They're going back to work again, while Trump jawbones (remember jawboning? You have to be pretty ancient like me - that is what the press called JFK's tongue-lashings of the steel industry when they weren't doing what he thought was good for America) Harley Davidson for attempting to make bikes in Europe, I think it is, or maybe China. Trump thinks the bikes should be made in Wisconsin and shipped to Europe and China, but Europe has huge tariffs. We don't tariff the stuff we get from them anywhere close to what they tariff our stuff. That is what has Trump pissed off, and trying to raise our tariffs to match theirs. That's simply fair. They can have 25% tariffs but ours can only be 2.5%? No, no, no. Ours are going up. F them. The era of doormat USA is over. We're fighting back.

Re:not for long

[KingBenny]

usually corporations break laws after doing the math but in this case they might have expected another number , yes indeed , i mean that's what law is for :) to be used by those who can afford it. As for the Trump-slamming, i hope this doesn't point at "sanctions due to favouritism" ... ? on the last post on the fine i already saw the quantum foam bubbling ready to sell custom android OS homecooked and tweaked for specific hardware setups ... it might do a few haxxers good like that :) much ado about nothing if you ask me, but in the end i doubt anyone will get hurt other than the EU itself, they're just too greedy ... how much of that do you think will trickle down to the people sleeping next to their own piss on the streets of brussels and paris ? how much of that will mysteriously trickle up to the people in 10k suits making speeches on how "it should not be" and point a moralizing finger at the likes of syria (that'l teach em) for making lofty speeches looking good ... if i KNEW they would put the money to good use, i could see the benefit in bleeding the whale a little, but the money will just dissipate upwards so all this is gonna do is create animosity and a very few very rich caterers to champagne parties

I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Viol8]

... but I agree on this. Sure, google made the manufacturers install their apps, but so what? They got the OS for free and thats the whole point. Its not the same as MS making people pay for their OS but still forcing OEMs to install their shit.

Google has to make money out of android somehow and if they can't do it via the play store or some other method they'll simply start charging for the OS itself.
Its exactly the same as what happened when people starting bitching about various bank charges. So now the banks dropped the charges and instead a lot of them charge you a flat fee just to have an account. Nice going people, thanks for that.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

You should join a credit union.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Awesome, I'm all for paying for Android if I get an option NOT to install Google Play Services and other crapware.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody in the EU is saying that Google charging for Android is a bad thing. They are saying that illegal trade practices like forcing certain services and applications upon vendors of smartphones, is a bad thing.

If Google must charge for Android in order not to do that, then charge for Android.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[cre1mer]

The EU problem is that Google is using contracts to enforce provisions with free software. The solution is for Google to charge a license fee and then use contracts to enforce provisions on licensed software. This might work out better for Android users as it would also fix OS fragmentaton by preventing carriers from selling new phones with an obsolete version of Android.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[thePsychologist]

Google has to make money out of android somehow and if they can't do it via the play store or some other method they'll simply start charging for the OS itself.

Google can still give one version with crap apps away for free and a license for a crap-free version. I'd gladly pay extra for more choice. The problem is that Google tried to force the shit version on everyone.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[oic0]

Credit unions are required to charge an opening fee of some sort. You have to buy in.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[DogDude]

Google has to make money out of android somehow and if they can't do it via the play store or some other method they'll simply start charging for the OS itself.

You clearly don't understand what Open Source is, or the point of it. Read

Its exactly the same as what happened when people starting bitching about various bank charges. So now the banks dropped the charges and instead a lot of them charge you a flat fee just to have an account. Nice going people, thanks for that.

Hey dummy, QUIT USING BANKS! Use a credit union. That's your own fault.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you seen a doctor lately? You seem to be developing a goiter in your latest videos.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Dixie_Flatline]

It's been said many times that the USA concentrates on price when litigating anti-trust cases—did prices go up because of monopoly pressure? If yes, then that constitutes damage to the consumer, and that warrants some sort of penalty or correction.

By contrast, the EU focuses on competition. Does it look like a dominant player is using their power to quash competitors and thereby harm the consumer on the much longer term by denying them access to services or products that might be better?

I think it's clear that this bundling represents a long-term disservice to customers. Maybe Google will have to charge a (small) licensing fee, but that makes it possible for manufacturers to take on other services and give the market some competition. It may change nothing at all, and Google will always be pre-installed because they're the one with the best search (and search is a virtuous cycle—even if Google and Bing started at exactly the same place, but Google started with 50.1% market share, Google would eventually pull ahead because delivering search results and seeing which ones are chosen is valuable data that leads to better searches in the future, which brings in more users, and so on).

Anyway, the EU has its own criteria, and their own laws, and they'll enforce them.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[The Cynical Critic]

If Google doesn't like the EU's consumer protection laws they're completely free not to do business in the EU, similarly to how any company can refuse to do business anywhere if they don't like the local laws. However they still decided to do business in EU with Android and continued to do so after the EU warned them back in 2011 that their forced bundling was against EU laws.

To put it simply: If you don't like the laws in a particular market, there's nothing that forces you to do business in said market and if you still decide to do business in that market while breaking those laws you've got nobody to blame but yourself if you get in trouble because of it.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

but it *IS* the same as when microsoft pushed the fuck out of ie (and msn) and forced the oems to leave it as the default; which nobody on this site was ok with. europe forced the browser choice, and that benefited everybody.. including microsoft, which was forced to actually start working on their browser again. microsoft enjoys record profits, even after 'giving away' windows 10 for two years (they need to get slapped around some more by europe over the forced-download of 'suggested' apps and shit like resetting user-set defaults). google makes a metric fuckton of money, and they still would even if handset makers and carriers weren't forced to leave google shit as the defaults. not being able to get a non-googleized handset (without hacking or rooting them) is exactly why we haven't replaced our flip phones with 'smartphones'.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Viol8]

"You clearly don't understand what Open Source is, or the point of it. Read"

You seem to be confusing charging for the source code with charging for a build that includes closed source code. Perhaps you should learn to read yourself.

"Hey dummy, QUIT USING BANKS! Use a credit union. That's your own fault."

We don't all live in our parents basement or in the 3rd world. Some of us require the various facilities of a proper bank to do business.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[penandpaper]

Some of us require the various facilities of a proper bank to do business.

A credit union can do a lot of what a "proper bank" does. One of the main difference is that instead of being insured under the FDIC they are insured by the NCUA.

From what I understand, (at least through the Credit Union I use) is that as a member you have an equal share of ownership in the Credit Union. Which is why to qualify there are more restrictions. Mine, as an example, requires you to be employed by or retired from a member firm or employer or a blood relative to current member.

Another difference is that you can get better loans and lines of credit through Credit Unions (go figure the name). Although, you may get lower interest rates on your savings account.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

A share of a business is not a fee.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't. The only requirement was that I live or work in the county.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[beanpoppa]

Google doesn't require manufactures to install Google apps to use Android. Android is open source, and manufacturers are free to use it without any requirements from Google, which is exactly what Amazon did with their FireOS. What Google does insist upon is that if you want to include Google services, such as their Play store, you must include all of their core apps. I hardly think this is unreasonable.

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Ken_g6]

That's funny. I don't think I've ever paid a fee at any of several credit unions. There might be a minimum deposit, but it's refundable if you leave.

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for your support dear user! :)

May I suggest also buying my legendary hat that I wear in my videos? You will find my amazon affiliate link for the hat in every video that I make along with other very interesting affiliate link offers.

Thanks again, at last, one user who isn't a creimertard!
--
Dwayne Johnson's Rampage As A Kaiju ("Weird Beast") Monster Movie

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Upon further Googling I see no evidence of your claim of an opening fee. From my credit union.

"How to Join West Virginia Federal Credit Union

Simply open a $1 Share Savings Account. Your $1 deposit immediately entitles you to take advantage of the wide array of products and services West Virginia Federal Credit Union has to offer. West Virginia Federal Credit Union is a full service financial institution, dedicated to offering the most modern financial products and services, from Share Savings Accounts to Share Draft Checking Accounts with online access and Online Bill Pay. West Virginia Federal Credit Union strives to offer account options that match our member's lifestyles."

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Deathlizard]

Yeah. That really saved Microsoft from being fined.

Oh Wait... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

I use a Zoom H2 audio recorder with a pop filter 12" away from my mouth...

That's Great Chris!

Now you definitely a poop filter as well,,,
--
Balena!

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazon ships tons of those things, yes. But they are not Android devices.

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank for your business! "I'm Feeling Lucky: The Confessions of Google Employee Number 59" by Douglas Edwards is selling like hotcakes again. ;)

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Monster_user]

Do you really think there is a market demand for "crap-free" versions at the manufacturer level, and/or the carrier level?

The EU's interests in maintaining a free market and diverse ecosystem aside, I don't think a case can be made that Google forced anything on anyone. Google Android phones are popular for many reasons, and avoiding paying more for an OS is a free-market concept, which means market competition pushed for the Google Android OS we have currently.

Interesting thing to note is that this could put RIM/Blackberry back in business. RIM could be in the position to provide the leading for-cost Android based operating system. If Nokia is still a Microsoft subsidiary then they won't even be competing. Motorola thrives on the generic free Android versions, as will most others seeking to compete against Samsung and Blackberry.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[luther349]

you mean the same stuff where apple is even worse and i dont see them getting picked on.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[magzteel]

Google has to make money out of android somehow and if they can't do it via the play store or some other method they'll simply start charging for the OS itself.

Google can still give one version with crap apps away for free and a license for a crap-free version. I'd gladly pay extra for more choice. The problem is that Google tried to force the shit version on everyone.

Phone manufacturers are not forced to use Android.
Phone customers are not forced to buy a phone that uses the Android OS.

If customers don't like Android, the apps, or the phone company customisations they should buy something else

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Rob Y.]

The only think that seems unreasonable about it to me is the bit about "if you make any phones with the Play store and Google shit, all your phones have to include it". Assuming that Fire phones don't corrupt Android, they why should Samsung or Motorola not be allowed to do the same.

Of course, Fire phones may well corrupt Android if their replacements for Google services don't work with all apps. At that point, Android is no longer a single platform for developers - and selling your fork as Android would be misleading. So maybe Google has a point there - and the only remedy should be removing the requirement to place Google apps front and center on the first boot. I wonder if having them in the app drawer instead of on the front screen would be in violation too. How about a quick installer icon - and allowing OEM's to include similar installers for competing products?

As far as allowing for competing app stores - why? If part of Google's business model is to take a cut of app sales, the only 'anti-competitive' aspect of that is competing app stores. But if the app store is the thing they're selling, who says others are free to create a competing business there. That's not the same as bundling search or email with your phone OS. Those functions are unrelated to the OS. It gets muddied, I guess, because Google sells music and video in the 'app' store. So maybe those functions need to be broken out.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Carriers can install their own (see Samsung) versions of stuff. The only stipulation from google as far as i can see is that the apps have to be installed, and their icons have to be on the first home screen.

Samsung was able to use their S Voice and their own browser as default, even though they had to bundle Google Assistant/Now and Chrome.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? They run the SAME source code and SAME applications on those Amazon branded dvices.

They are not marked as ANDROID because they didn't want to adhere to the licensing requirements of Google, but it's basically Android in every way except name.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[DogDude]

We don't all live in our parents basement or in the 3rd world. Some of us require the various facilities of a proper bank to do business.

We run millions of dollars each month through our credit unions. Banks are for suckers.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[ichimunki]

Amazon's tablets are very much Android devices. You can install any Android app on them you want... including Google Play.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

No opening fees, but typically a $5-10, fully refundable deposit.

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

BlackBerry's own OS was miles ahead of where Android is now four years ago, but they can't make phones with that OS anymore because now they make crappy Android phones. Sucks.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[barc0001]

> Credit unions are required to charge an opening fee of some sort.

That's not a *fee*. That's buying shares in the Union. When you close your account you have to sell the shares and you get money back for it. In my case when I joined a credit union I paid I think it was around $20 to purchase those shares. Through the last 20+ years with dividends and the share price rise, splits, new issues, etc, my credit union shares are now worth just over $300. Makes me wish I could have bought more as an investment!

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

what's the problem with google modifyong android as demanded by the EU and charging for the resulting OS?

Also things beong free is npt a blanket excuse to build them as you want. obviouse safty issues aside their are and should be (way more) limits on what can be done with the data collected with free products, to whome they can be marketed, etc. I don't see why illegally anti-competitive behavior should be an exception. These laws are there to protect consumers not corporate bottom lines and the simple fact of the matter is that android has an enormouse market share.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[slack_justyb]

you mean the same stuff where apple is even worse and i dont see them getting picked on.

First, that's whataboutism. But I'll let it pass because it's got a bit of a point here but there's also a fine distinction. So, starting out, you aren't wrong to an extent. You've got a pretty good point and it's worth talking about.

Direct and indirect. Google is indirect, so changes they make affect them indirectly. Apple is direct so changes they make directly affect them. Now that doesn't invalidate the bundling issue you bring up, b-u-t, we don't have a really clear legal guidance on that... YET. But what we do have is when a company has an indirect relationship with their end product, forcing terms and conditions that limit choice, is anti-competitive.

So that's not saying Apple's bundling is bad, just that we don't have any legal precedent in international trade about anti-competitiveness for end products that have direct relationships with the maker. That's not barring anyone from filing suit, just makes the legal outcome a fuck-ton of murky. Google's abuse has a ton of prior case law, when you look at it as a manufacture with an indirect relationship to distributors. And that's why you don't see a lot ever being brought on to Apple. Not that it's not anti-competitive, just that there's no telling how the case would play out.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not true at all, it should not be 4 insightful. My credit union requires a deposit of $1, nothing more.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Google has to make money out of android somehow and if they can't do it via the play store or some other method they'll simply start charging for the OS itself.

Google can still give one version with crap apps away for free and a license for a crap-free version. I'd gladly pay extra for more choice. The problem is that Google tried to force the shit version on everyone.

I'm still curious what "crap apps" people are so upset about. Beyond the common core apps that every modern OS installs like a web browser, email client, app manager, etc I don't find Google to be that bad. If the search bar is really that awful it can can removed from the home screen. You can't remove the search bars from any other major OS either though you can hide them.

The real problem is not being able to remove these apps which is somewhat Google's fault but is largely the manufacturer locking boot loaders and doing anything they can to keep you from rooting. The devices Google sells direct like their Pixel line are open so you can flash them, root them or remove whatever you want. Now I'll concede that it isn't as easy as it should be which is definitely bull shit but try removing the core apps from iOS. Good luck with that.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Its exactly the same as what happened when people starting bitching about various bank charges. So now the banks dropped the charges and instead a lot of them charge you a flat fee just to have an account. Nice going people, thanks for that.

Meanwhile in dirty socialist EU, I have never paid any banking fees.

No flat fees, no bank charges, no ATM charges, no transaction fees, no credit card fees.

Nill. Zero.

Perhaps you're so used to getting scammed and having your government not care about it whatsoever that you cannot fathom a government such as the EU who would do something to protect consumers rather than simply filling its pockets.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Strider-]

A credit union can do a lot of what a "proper bank" does. One of the main difference is that instead of being insured under the FDIC they are insured by the NCUA.

And in other parts of the world, there's even less difference. Canadian credit unions are insured by the same deposit insurance systems as the major banks, can issue mortgages, loans, credit lines, etc... the only time it's gotten a little dicey has been doing large international wire transfers, but then the credit union system has their own "Bank" that they can use for these purposes.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Dragonslicer]

Around here, credit unions have some kind of membership requirement, but don't charge any kind of fee to open an account. My primary accounts are with my university's credit union, which I opened when I was a student. I also could join a credit union through my current employer, and I don't see anything about a fee to open an account.

The closest to a fee that I've had to be is at another credit union that I have an account at, which requires that you be an employee of certain companies or members of certain organizations; since my employer at the time wasn't part of the credit union, I made a donation to the FSF, which is part of the credit union.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Dragonslicer]

We don't all live in our parents basement or in the 3rd world. Some of us require the various facilities of a proper bank to do business.

Care to give an example of such a facility that credit unions can't provide?

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[PrimaryConsult]

Not all banks charge a fee. Heck some even refund your ATM fees spent at other ATMs. Brokerage banks (Charles Schwab, et al) that have a tiny ATM/branch office footprint will do both of these things. I don't know what their deposit minimums are for these features but for about 2 years I had $100 sitting in there untouched, came back and found it had grown to about $100.30...

The catch is of course that they have maybe 1-2 "branches" all located in major cities only.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

what happened to canada trust?

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[nnet]

Money laundering for criminal profits.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[jbengt]

It's been said many times that the USA concentrates on price when litigating anti-trust cases—did prices go up because of monopoly pressure? If yes, then that constitutes damage to the consumer, and that warrants some sort of penalty or correction.

You can mainly blame the Reagan administration for that. They wanted to make it harder to prevent mergers and acquisitions, so they changed the criteria from protecting the small companies from unfair practices of their larger competitors to calculating whether consumers would (theoretically) pay more for goods and services.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Dragonslicer]

Well played, sir.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly don't understand what Open Source is, or the point of it. Read

You clearly don't understand. The source is open and freely available. The branding, co-marketing, and additional services are a business model that requires license agreements. OEMs have the choice of freely using the open source OS with no strings (other than those of the open source license) or to sign an agreement to gain access to the additional value adds. They're free to decide that. Amazon has shown it's possible to sell lots of devices without Google. But they also have the brand leverage and unique features to be able to create a compelling product without the Google stuff.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

The EU only looks at whether or not there is a European competitor or not. They don't care if a European company has dominance. It's only when a foreign one does that their legislative body masquerading as a court takes action.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Powercntrl]

Google has to make money out of android somehow and if they can't do it via the play store or some other method they'll simply start charging for the OS itself.

What you're saying is that if they're forced to compete fairly in the OS market, they might actually have to charge for their product (like almost every other software company)? Wow, cry me a fucking river.

Perhaps if Google wasn't dumping their shit onto the market for free, we might actually see some competition spring up.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Cajun Hell]

It's true! In 2007 I had to pay $5 to open a savings account to get into a credit union. Not just three dollars, not even four. Five whole dollars. My $5.xx (I think it's made less than a dollar interest) is still there in my balance too, mocking me!

I should stick it to my credit union by withdrawing my $5.xx savings, going to a bank, and using that money to pay a fraction of one month's fees.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

You are right. Google should be prohibited from doing business in Europe completely. But only after they pay.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

So when the US imposes a $25 billion dollars worth of fines on VW for breaking US laws it's fine, but when the EU imposes fines on Google for anti-competitive behavior they're somehow out of line?

Makes total sense.

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[rnmartinez]

So true. Everyone wants stuff for free and cries privacy but Android (and Linux) represent literally millions of dollars worth of development that no manufacture had to pay for - including EU based vendors.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[baker_tony]

Yeah, because Android is free they should've been able to break the law!
Fucken asshole governments looking after the citizens of their countries rather than supporting big business, what's the world coming to!?

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, google made the manufacturers install their apps, but so what? They got the OS for free and thats the whole point.

You don't see the inherent contradiction in those two sentences?

Not every cost comes in coin. If they are compelled to do something for the OS, then they didn't get it for free. If the cost of the OS is to help Google engage in anti-trust violations, then it's pretty expensive.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Namarrgon]

They *do* give a version away for free, as in beer and libre, and it comes with all the choice you want - it's called AOSP. Fully open-source, comes with zero Google spyware, has a suite of basic apps you can ignore or replace, you can take your pick of app stores (e.g F-Droid) or just sideload. And it happily runs the vast majority of Android apps - everything that doesn't specifically require a Google service. Best of all, there is a thriving community creating many dozens of variants that can be easily installed on most popular phones, or at least those that don't lock their bootloader too tightly. You can even add back in the Google services if that's what you want, and get both worlds.

As a user, you can choose not only your hardware, but your OS variant too. Nothing is forced on you. As a company, all Google requires is you make a choice between Google Android with their services, or AOSP Android - and a number of companies have freely chosen the latter, including Amazon, B&N, and most Chinese phone vendors.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[gweihir]

The rules in the EU are different and there are good reasons for the rules used there. Google decided to ignore these laws for more than half a decade. Now they are paying a price for it. What do you not understand here?

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[gweihir]

I hardly think this is unreasonable.

EU legal experts disagree with you. You lose.

Re: I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

It was especially bad for older phones. My mom had a 512MB phone and while she didn't need more than a couple of apps it was still a struggle to install them with all the Google crap taking most of the space. My wife had a 1GB phone which sounded plenty at the time but it had the same problem! Google apps could not be uninstalled and you had to keep them from being updated as they bloated to 600MB - more than half the entire space! Yes an option to uninstall them would make the phones worth much more !

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Viol8]

I live in the UK, not the USA. The rules are different here and credit unions are either small operations that have few facilities or they're simply a way to transfer money.

Re:I don't agree with Trump about much...

[Anonymous Coward]

From the "How to join" page at my credit union.

Simply open a $1 Share Savings Account. Your $1 deposit immediately entitles you to take advantage of the wide array of products and services West Virginia Federal Credit Union has to offer. West Virginia Federal Credit Union is a full service financial institution, dedicated to offering the most modern financial products and services, from Share Savings Accounts to Share Draft Checking Accounts with online access and Online Bill Pay. West Virginia Federal Credit Union strives to offer account options that match our member's lifestyles.

I dont understand the misinformation being spread about credit unions.

Leftie heads spinning in 3... 2... 1...

[Anonymous Coward]

All the left-wing Friends of Google (tm) don't know who to root for. What will prevail? Trump Derangement or Google Fanboism?

Re:Leftie heads spinning in 3... 2... 1...

[Anonymous Coward]

Rightie heads spinning (after pulling it out of their asses) It's the evil left wing Google elite, but also it's the evil socialist EU. Who to root for? Am I doing this right?

Re:Leftie heads spinning in 3... 2... 1...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's simple. EU socialists are more foreign than domestic ones. Therefore they're more evil.

TRUMP!

[JBMcB]

Trump posted something on Twitter? Well that's worth an entire post.

Re:TRUMP!

[Anonymous Coward]

The first retarded vatnik white trash President shows further signs of dementia!

Re:TRUMP!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, he IS your president.

If...

[Anonymous Coward]

Russia had imposed the fine then do you think Trump would have said anything against it, or if he'd even have supported it?

EU has always been tough on US companies.

[jellomizer]

Trumps actions isn't going to help. It will just strengthen the EU Resolve to enforce it.

The problem is the world is so integrated with the US economy, that they need to play nice with the US however, current dummassery from the people granted power in the US Government. Means the world is going to find ways to uncouple its dependence on the US, as it is becoming considered too irrational and unpredictable.

This uncoupling does include US Companies and their dependence on every resource.

That said, EU has been rather consistent legally with Microsoft and Intel. They tend not to like near monopolies as much as the US does. (At least the ones they don't have control over)
 

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[jenik]

US 320 milion people, EU 500 million people US GDP 20 trillion USD, EU 20 trillion Tell me again why should EU play nice?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

The EU have usually been pretty tough on all businesses. EU companies have been fined vast amounts too in the past, only difference being you didn't notice, presumably because it didn't blip on your radar.

That said, I think this one is honestly weird, since it's targeting limitations which are pretty easy (not cheap though, but that's a different issue) to work around if you're a large company. If you're not, you're never going to compete with Google anyway so it's kind of hard to see where the damage is.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because it takes very very little to destroy the EU economy. The Volkswagen debacle should tell you something. Moreover the whole of the EU couldn't even take on Serbia without the US back in 1999. If push comes to shove, the EU will fold.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[penandpaper]

the world is going to find ways to uncouple its dependence on the US, as it is becoming considered too irrational and unpredictable

This is probably true but are the alternatives really better? Maybe in the short run.

I think the Europeans have an incredible situation at the expense of the US. I don't think the current situation is as favorable to the US as it should be for mutual reciprocity. Any long term relationship must be beneficial for both parties. While it maybe beneficial to US interests to ensure EU stability at some point the costs do not out weigh the benefits. The geopolitics have changed and the US EU relationship must be addressed to ensure mutual reciprocity and the long term benefit of both.

It doesn't help the general tone of European sentiment toward the US is quite condescending and smug.

Re: EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Post WW2, where they turned up late, the US has preferred fighting wars against small countries who can't fight back like Panama or Grenada. Anything bigger and it tends to get its ass whipped, eg. Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, okay, even small countries can whip the US of A's ass. All those tax dollars spent on weapons and they still can't win. Sad!

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be entertaining to watch the US interfere with EU's attempts to collect judgement. Just once I want to see what happens when bank account balances go out of sync internationally.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting fact: if you don't constantly start bullshit wars in places you have no business in, seven fighters is more than enough.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

So kinda like New York and California have some kind of influence and many of the others are failed states?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[MrL0G1C]

Failed states by what metric?

Apply the same metric to the states in the US and report back.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[houghi]

EU has always been tough on companies. They do the same to EU companies. It is just that the US companies somehow like to do this much more in public than the EU companies who like to keep this behind closed doors.

In July 2016, the Commission fined MAN, Volvo/Renault, Daimler, Iveco, and DAF a total of 2.93 billion euros for forming a cartel and colluding on truck prices for 14 years

In November 2008, several car glass producers were hit with a cartel fine for illegal market sharing and exchanging commercially sensitive information.
French firm Saint-Gobain received the largest fine of 880 million euros, while U.K. firm Pilkington was hit with a fine of 357 million euros. Japanese company Asahi's fine was reduced by 50 percent to 113.5 million due to leniency, while Blegium's Soliver received a fine of just 4.4 million euros.

Spanish telecom Telfonica received a fine of 151 million euros in July 2007 for setting unfair prices for five years in the Spanish broadband market, according to the Commission.

French drugs giant Servier, Teva and five other drug companies were fined â427.7 million in July 2014 for colluding to delay the introduction of a generic version of perindopril, a popular blood pressure treatment.

And there are more.

That said, the fines are also based on the companies revenue and as the US ones are generally bigger, they get the bigger fines.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

>US interests to ensure EU stability

the EU ensures its own stability.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you not fear Russia?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[jellomizer]

Unless Germany decides to align itself with Russia?

However most stable countries and leaders are able to compartmentalize Economic disputes with military ones.

Re: EU has always been tough on US companies.

[jellomizer]

The US Military has been primed for Full Scale War, Where everyone in the border is a target.
The problem is politically most of us don't fall for the propaganda of the Evil Enemy. But a bunch of innocent people caught in a tough situation between bad leaders. So we can't just bomb a country capital plant a flag and declare victory. We need to win hearts and minds. This is why we havn't been winning small wars. Because post WWII We learned that we cant just go killing everything just to win. Because you can Win the War but fail the Objective.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[jellomizer]

Europe can win in an economic battle, but there will be a cost to it. You can slowly change your relationship over time, that way if EU wants to stop playing nice the harm will be minimal. say a 5% hit. Vs now which can be a 60% hit.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[k6mfw]

Means the world is going to find ways to uncouple its dependence on the US, as it is becoming considered too irrational and unpredictable.

The recent debacle where Trump badmouths our European allies and praises Putin, then I saw on CSPAN this 1958 film "Why NATO" thinking how much has changed in 60 years https://www.c-span.org/video/?... particularly attitudes back then when a visiting Republican president was there since previous visit as the Supreme Allied Commander of WWII.

I'm thinking Putin has effectively weakened the alliance between US and NATO, much more effectively than his predecessors all without the use of military hardware. Also think about during past 70 years has been relatively peaceful in Europe, I can't think of any other era of a time this long with no major conflicts.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Kind of like all the backwater states that voted for the orange buffoon?
Without California and New York propping up the union, Louisiana would be Guatemala.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[ichimunki]

Um, why would Germany fear Russia? Russia would have to go through at least two other countries to get to Germany. Germany is surrounded by other countries that are not a military threat to it at this point. And while Russia might be able to conquer Belarus and Poland to get to Germany... why the hell would it want to? They're much better off selling them fuel than they are setting off WWIII.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Great AC's think alike! See comment below.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[imgod2u]

CA, NY and TX have some kind of influence or power. The other 47 or so are pretty much failed states.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[imgod2u]

The EU is getting mightily close with China these days. And trade with China would prove -- especially over the next decade or 2 -- way more lucrative.

A wholistic Asian-European-African alliance would be interesting. Russia acting as the military arm to provide security. China as the production and financial engine (supplanting the US). EU as the research, educational and cultural engine (supplanting the US). Africa as the raw materials and labor engine (China's already investing there to turn it into such).

The Americas would be left to their own devices. Which wouldn't be a bad thing if we didn't also piss off the other North American nations we do the most trade with....

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct. He is supporting Americans over other people which is a hate crime but his supporters are hateful so they support hate crimes. Trump is helping American so he needs to be stopped.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

who else ?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless Germany decides to align itself with Russia?

However most stable countries and leaders are able to compartmentalize Economic disputes with military ones.

No. Foolish too where true. All military disputes are economic or religious in origin.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[rally2xs]

War was started in NYC on 9/11/2001.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Germany has 7 fighters in their air force that are currently working. 1 battalion in their army.

LOL, you are laughable. You mean they are going to conquer Germany the same way how USA (with its great military advantage) conquered Vietnam, Korea, Iraq and whatever other countries USA tried to flex their muscles over lately.

Number of fighter jets does not matter when the population of the conquered country does not like the conquerors.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Martin S.]

That is because US companies have a habit of breaking EU laws and believing they should get away with it in Europe because, well, they get away with it in the US.

That is frankly a very stupid reasoning.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe because Russia does not have such a good track record invading compared to USA. I imagine being concerned if USA would try to invade ... but Russia? And even USA is not doing very well at it.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[penandpaper]

As with all things there is a cost. What cost are Europeans willing to pay to abandon the US relationship?

I think there is something whimsical that in your scenario, Europeans are the aristocrats that do not produce, protect, or supply anything that couldn't be done by other nations. They get to sit on high in their ivory towers while the rest of the world protect and supply their sophisticated tastes. How long would that really last? Considering part of the issue with US EU relations is that the EU doesn't contribute enough to defense.

It also seems rather petty that many Europeans are quick to abandon a relationship that has benefited them for decades when one party would like to be treated more equitably. That really doesn't sound like a recipe for long term stability with anyone especially if you want to act like the aristocrats of the world.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Europe can win in an economic battle

I doubt it. The EU isn't doing too well financially. A few countries are doing fine but as a whole it's a mess. Those few countries are balancing that whole house of cards on their heads. We're another banking or economic crisis away from it all falling down.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[jwhyche]

Trumps actions isn't going to help. It will just strengthen the EU Resolve to enforce it.

Sometimes trumps twitters are entertaining. Sometimes he is is own worse enemy. Maybe we should fit trump with a shock collar and get the remote to his secret service goons.

"Sir are you on twitter?"
"No...."
Burrrzaaapppp

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

US 320 milion people, EU 500 million people
US GDP 20 trillion USD, EU 20 trillion

Tell me again why should EU play nice?

US 320 milion people, EU 500 million people US GDP 20 trillion USD, EU 20 trillion Tell me again why should EU pay for its own defense ?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

... Russia acting as the military arm to provide security. China as the production and financial engine (supplanting the US). EU as the research, educational and cultural engine (supplanting the US). Africa as the raw materials and labor engine...

Let me guess, you are in Europe? That whole division you lay out reminds me of something I once read. One or more groups get all the hard-work low-pay shit jobs, while one small group gets the easy life. What was it called?

Ah yes. Here it is... Animal Farm

Good luck with that. I don't think it's gonna end how you think it's gonna end...

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Dragonslicer]

CA, NY and TX have some kind of influence or power. The other 47 or so are pretty much failed states.

Nah, Massachusetts is doing fine, and Connecticut is doing pretty well for itself as a suburb of New York City. I think the Seattle area is keeping Washington state in good shape. There are a few others that are getting by.

So closer to 40 than 47.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[HornWumpus]

Nobody knows how it will turn out for Putin. Depends on if the euros step up their defense spending. If they do, Putin has hurt Russia's long term position.

If we really wanted to get Russia's attention, we'd ship Germany 10000 metric tons of steel and 1 metric ton on weapons grade. Putin would _shit_ itself on camera.

The fact is Russia is now an economic basket case with a large arsenal of nukes. Just a resource exporter/price taker, like Nigeria

Re: EU has always been tough on US companies.

[djinn6]

I think the real objective is winning the hearts and minds of your political base. The US military is fully capable of wiping out Syria and ISIS entirely, but what's the point?

If the US wanted a poor country with shitty infrastructure to take care of, it already has one called Puerto Rico.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[times05]

Except if New York gets attacked (economically or otherwise) California won't say "I'll sit this one out, you guys go ahead". In EU on the other hand there's no confidence that the country behind you has your back, if anything the talk about Brexit, Frexit, Grexit or whatever other exit is much more likely if s... hits the fan.

It's the lack of control and unity that's the problem. In US if state is doing something seriously wrong, governor will be replaced. In EU you have to sanction the whole country (like Poland right now over some nonsense about its courts for example, or like again Poland, Hungary and Chechs refusing refugee quotas). You can't just remove their president and put someone that will do what he's told by court of the land like you could with US Governor.

And this is all small potatoes, as far as crises go, imagine something really BIG, like a big war. How many will simply exit, refuse to fight, or worse yet join the enemy?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

What cost are Europeans willing to pay to abandon the US relationship?

Pretty much anything, if the gains are much higher.

As other poster noted, the rest of the world is rising up to provide the things the US used to have a near monopoly on. It's the US, not the EU, that is threatened with being replaceable. Do remember on reason Trump was elected was because a good portion of the country felt nothing is "made in America" anymore, and that America is "losing" everywhere, and oh all the jobs are going to China and illegals are taking people's jobs etc.

Europeans are the aristocrats that do not produce, protect, or supply anything that couldn't be done by other nations.

If you speak of "Europeans" as all the countries in EU combined, they have a GDP of 17 trillion, not too shabby behind the US 20 trilion. While individually a European may not produce more (less GDP per capita), there's a good 200 million more of them.

This also means Europe is a market with 200 million more potential customers than the US. You question is better asked to Google and other US companies are willing to abandon this market (ditto the Asian and African markets)

They get to sit on high in their ivory towers while the rest of the world protect and supply their sophisticated tastes.

Other way around. Europe is the place that produces sophisticated tastes. "Made in Europe" is the brand for fancy (and expensive) stuff that rich snobs buy, with "Made in Germany" having an extra reputation of being backed by quality engineering. "Made in China" (used to be Taiwan or Japan) is the brand for cheap mass produced crap that plebs around the world buy. "Made in America" varies as it depends on the product (processors? Good. A Fix Or Repair Daily car? Not so good)

Considering part of the issue with US EU relations is that the EU doesn't contribute enough to defense.

This is only an issue because American politicians wanted to distract their own people from realizing that American politicians fucked up. The US spent so much more than Europe on defense, but it's the US who was hit by 9/11. Turns out spending more doesn't mean you get more.

Instead of admitting that the US were over spending and/or the US was being wasteful with their spending, they point fingers at Europe as a diversion.

It also seems rather petty that many Europeans are quick to abandon a relationship that has benefited them for decades when one party would like to be treated more equitably.

This is projection. It's Trump who is threatening to walk away from NATO (and NAFTA and other agreements) that other countries were happy to continue until Trump brought it up.

That really doesn't sound like a recipe for long term stability with anyone especially if you want to act like the aristocrats of the world.

This again is projection. Europeans aren't acting like aristocrats of the world. They're just acting as citizens of their own sovereign nations, exercising their sovereignty. It's their country. It's their rules. Follow them, or get out.

Really, it's not so different than how Trump supporters feel about immigrants. Take every rhetoric you could say about enforcing laws on immigration, and apply it here with Google as the immigrant.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[times05]

That is pretty funny indeed. Those guys will work for us, those guys will defend us and those other guys will give us their resources, while we sit there teaching everyone and spreading our culture..... Who could possibly object to such an arrangement? lol

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[djinn6]

How about median household income?

The poorest countries in the EU, Spain and Italy, are have median household incomes of around $20,000, while the poorest state in the US, Mississippi, is at $40,000. The richest European country is Luxembourg, with 600,000 people at $52,000. Fairfax County, Virginia, with 1.1 million people, is at $115,000.

Though I don't agree with GP's categorization of "failed states", those are reserved for the likes of Syria.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

As with all things there is a cost. What cost are Europeans willing to pay to abandon the US relationship?

Trump is not going to ask them.

It also seems rather petty that many Europeans are quick to abandon a relationship that has benefited them for decades when one party would like to be treated more equitably.

You have a trade deficit because you produce not enough worth buying and trade with promises of dollar bills instead of goods. If you don't have wares to offer in exchange, "treating you equitably" would mean refusing to get paid in dollar debts and stop selling you anything but Euro debts in exchange for your dollar debts.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[szabo.m.peter]

First, i doubt your claim. Multi national companies are quite good at assessing risks and adopting to different markets.

Second, i doubt misbehaviour is a specialty of US companies. Just think of how Volkswagen (and pretty much every other European manufacturer) cheated on the US/EU emission tests...

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[rally2xs]

>>What cost are Europeans willing to pay to abandon the US relationship?

>Pretty much anything, if the gains are much higher.

If going it alone means they are going to have to protect themselves rather than relying on US military capability, they're going to find that their defense expenses are going to make their socialistic, free healthcare descend further into the abyss so Europeans will end up waiting the rest of their lives to see their doctor, since whatever's wrong with them will kill them before they get to their doctors. The US already mops the floor with Europe and everyone else in terms of cancer survivability, and it will only get worse if the Euros start diverting their healthcare money to making ships and planes and tanks and miltech.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Says someone who doesn't know jack shit about history other than what Hollywood told him. (Hint; it was basically all wrong.)

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[djinn6]

I imagine letting Russia take care of the military would turn the entire continent into Russian territory in short order.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[penandpaper]

Um... A lot of your comment seems like you didn't read the GP and took my comment out of that context. Let's bring that back into context to make sure we are on the same page.

A wholistic Asian-European-African alliance would be interesting. Russia acting as the military arm to provide security. China as the production and financial engine (supplanting the US). EU as the research, educational and cultural engine (supplanting the US). Africa as the raw materials and labor engine (China's already investing there to turn it into such).

Europeans are the aristocrats that do not produce, protect, or supply anything that couldn't be done by other nations. They get to sit on high in their ivory towers while the rest of the world protect and supply their sophisticated tastes. How long would that really last?

In the scenario proposed and the division of members in that scenario, Europeans come off as aristocrats in that scenario. Because while the Russians are the soldiers, the Chinese are the bankers and factory workers, and Africa is the mine, Europe sits in an ivory tower to spread its culture. That is not a recipe for a long term equitable relationship in my mind.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't help the general tone of European sentiment toward the US is quite condescending and smug.

This is the real problem. The US people are willing to give their money, effort, and technology away in various ways. But at this point the arrogance of EU and others, the constant rhetoric against the US while also relying on the US has been shaping a sea change. At this point there's a growing percentage of Americans that would revel in a war of aggression against the EU. A war the US leadership would giddily win. It's been 75 years since they have been able to play with their toys.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[MrL0G1C]

Those figures don't sound right for italy and spain TBH....Very very old figures?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[MrL0G1C]

"Money, while it cannot buy happiness, is an important means to achieving higher living standards. In Italy, the average household net-adjusted disposable income per capita is USD 26 063 a year, lower than the OECD average of USD 30 563 a year. But there is a considerable gap between the richest and poorest â" the top 20% of the population earn close to six times as much as the bottom 20%."

Note it doesn't say income, it says Disposable income, big difference, similar for Spain.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

US 320 milion people, EU 500 million people US GDP 20 trillion USD, EU 20 trillion Tell me again why should EU play nice?

When you remove the population of the PIIGS (which also are debtors and have high unemployment rates) it's more on par with the U.S. And this doesn't count the migrants arriving by the millions annually that are a major financial hit to social services.

The EU would burn from within. No contest with the U.S.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

And don't forget the huge fines that the US has enforced against european companies (Volkswagen dieselgate recently, french banks like BNP for 9 billions and société générale, Total, Alcatel or other companies because they might have subsidiaries working with Iran or Cuba...).
In the last few years the EU started acting like the US, the amounts that used to be ridiculously low (like 100k$ for a very large company) are now more in line with what the US has been doing for decades, using it as a weapon in an economic one.
Alstom might be one of the most obvious ones : the USA imposed a 800 millions fine, and just after that GE, an american company, bought Alstom that was thus much cheaper to buy.
It's funny how most americans think that the EU is the one waging a war there.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

European manufacturers such as Ford, General Motors, Nissan, Honda, Mazda and Geely?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

Except Intel which got away with just a 1B fine for stifling the hell out of AMD (and some people believe Intel are still doing that) and Intel was a bloody monopoly and they abused their monopoly to hell.

Meanwhile Google doesn't stifle anyone (yes, they push Google search and Google Chrome but you're free not to use them ever if you have them on your phone preinstalled) yet is hit with a five times larger fine.

I'm sorry, the EU advocates: this 5B fine is simply insane and mostly inappropriate.

Listen, EU, Android is not your adversary. Android is not a monopoly even though over 80% of smartphones run it. Various Android OEMs compete with each other and compete with Apple. Android is simply an OS which is useful for them and given to them mostly for free. Try creating an Android alternative and have people buy your devices. Let's see how it worked for Nokia under Stephen Elop. Oh, it didn't. Let's see how it works for Samsung and their Tizen OS. Oh, and once there was FirefoxOS.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[LynnwoodRooster]

You have Germany. Then you have everyone else. The State of California alone has a GDP greater than all of the EU save Germany. As Germany goes, so goes the EU. So all we really need to worry about is Germany - push them as needed, and the rest of the EU will fall in line.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[djinn6]

Disposable income is just income minus taxes. Even at $26,000, that still doesn't reach the $32,000 that people in Mississippi makes after taxes (2016 data).

Actually I made a mistake earlier, Spain and Italy aren't the poorest. Latvia, Greece and Poland are even worse off.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[gweihir]

Unless Germany decides to align itself with Russia?

You should not listen to really, really stupid people that spread rumors like this. There is no risk of that happening anytime soon.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[MrL0G1C]

No, disposable income is income minus ( taxes+all bills), disposable income is spare money to spend on anything. It's really not comparable to income or income minus tax.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[djinn6]

From Investopedia:

Disposable income, also known as disposable personal income (DPI), is the amount of money that households have available for spending and saving after income taxes have been accounted for.

From the US Census (p 422):

Disposable personal income is personal income less personal current taxes.

Re: EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Nocturna81]

Although you do have a point, the handling of the flooding of new Orleans and the hurricane disaster in Puerto Rico don't exactly instill stellar confidence in the practical application of this theory.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[MrL0G1C]

Well, that's the way the US census is doing it, but the EU organisation doing the measuring in the EU is not counting disposable income that way.

Re: EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

They canâ(TM)t create much of real value like the USA. They need to steal the spoils of their smart biz model.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Um... A lot of your comment seems like you didn't read the GP and took my comment out of that context

No, I read it perfectly. If anything I'd say I read it more carefully than you. I'll bold the part that you seem to have missed

A wholistic Asian-European-African alliance would be interesting. Russia acting as the military arm to provide security. China as the production and financial engine (supplanting the US). EU as the research, educational and cultural engine (supplanting the US). Africa as the raw materials and labor engine (China's already investing there to turn it into such).

Research and education are valuable contributions to this alliance. It's actually one thing the US still prides itself in. When people bash US education, one thing Americans will point out is that many foreigners still want to study at US schools. The other thing US likes to brag about is its "innovation" and technology, which relies on research and education.

You seem to have not read or deliberately ignored those items and only focused on culture.

Leaving that aside, you say that in your mind, spreading culture makes them the aristocrats. I ask: why? I suspect you have a seriously primitive idea on what culture constitutes, but before I go on, I'm going to ask you to tell me what you think culture is.

Hint: it's not just sitting there on an ivory tower.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

If going it alone means they are going to have to protect themselves rather than relying on US military capability

*If* it means that. It may very well not mean that.

In the scenario proposed by the GGP, Europe will be friendly with Russia and China who will provide military security, so I think you're overestimating how much more EU has to spend to defend itself.

The other part of the equation is what exactly EU has to defend itself from. As I noted, despite all its spending the US was the one hit by 9/11. Not only does this show that spending more doesn't mean you get more value, it also shows that the terrorists' main target isn't the EU, but the US. Europe had plenty of juicy targets to fly planes into, each with its own cultural and psychological significance. The terrorists didn't (and still haven't AFAIK) went after any of them. They went after the US.

In other words, a lot of the threats EU faces today is BECAUSE of their continued association with the US. So distancing itself from the US may very well have a positive effect for EU's safety.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[szabo.m.peter]

No, I meant BMW, Mercedes, Volvo, Peugeot, Citroen, Renault and many others.

I understand that all these companies are multi-national, but they are definitely considered "European" brands primarily.

Wikipedia link

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[djinn6]

Interesting claim. You have a source for that?

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, it's only bad when European companies do it. I get it.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[szabo.m.peter]

I do not think I said that. Original claim:

That is because US companies have a habit of breaking EU laws and believing they should get away with it in Europe because, well, they get away with it in the US.

My answer:

First, i doubt your claim. [...]

Second, i doubt misbehaviour is a specialty of US companies. [...]

You are debating something I never said, and is actually irrelevant to the original point.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[imgod2u]

You forgot the other 2 parts Europe would offer: Education and Research. Those are very very important things and is currently dominated by the US (in no small part because those educated in the EU's primary schools often immigrate to the US and stay here).

Also, don't discount cultural hegemony. The world is US centric due to Hollywood and that's a huge boon for the US.

Those who think the EU provides the US with nothing (or less than the US provides the EU) tend to be the ones who think military spending is all that matters; they are wrong.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[imgod2u]

That depends. I think Russia gets a bad rap in terms of their conquest ambitions. Looking at history going back to Peter the Great, all they've wanted are to capture areas of resource caches and to get some warm water ports. The West has denied them that at every turn.

I don't see them as any more conquest hungry than the West (including the US). They'll likely have more influence and controlled areas compared to today. But likely won't have (or want) as large of a global military footprint compared to say, the present day United States.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[penandpaper]

I think there is something whimsical that in your scenario, Europeans are the aristocrats that do not produce, protect, or supply anything that couldn't be done by other nations. They get to sit on high in their ivory towers while the rest of the world protect and supply their sophisticated tastes.

You forgot the other 2 parts Europe would offer: Education and Research.

No I didn't. Ivory Tower is an apt description. Or put as "an environment of intellectual pursuit disconnected from the practical concerns of everyday life". Not concerning yourself with defense, money, manufacturing, or resource supply so that you can only care about "education, research, and culture" is the summit of disconnect from practical concerns.

Those who think the EU provides the US with nothing (or less than the US provides the EU) tend to be the ones who think military spending is all that matters; they are wrong.

In the scenario given, the EU provides nothing that the other members would no be able to provide. Why would they care about European culture?

Even now, the US provides those things and defense and there is still trepidation and resentment and somehow a scenario where the EU can fulfill that role without providing for defense all the while expecting taking advantage of the resources, defense, money, and manufacturing of others will somehow be stable is fanciful.

The entire scenario is a joke.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[imgod2u]

I think there is something whimsical that in your scenario, Europeans are the aristocrats that do not produce, protect, or supply anything that couldn't be done by other nations. They get to sit on high in their ivory towers while the rest of the world protect and supply their sophisticated tastes.

You forgot the other 2 parts Europe would offer: Education and Research.

No I didn't. Ivory Tower is an apt description. Or put as "an environment of intellectual pursuit disconnected from the practical concerns of everyday life". Not concerning yourself with defense, money, manufacturing, or resource supply so that you can only care about "education, research, and culture" is the summit of disconnect from practical concerns.

The fact that you see no value in Research and Education kind of speaks volumes. All "practical" concerns of modern day started as "Ivory Tower" research. Including the computer you're typing on. And no, it's not something "anyone can do". Research takes critical mass, infrastructure (of Universities, research groups, etc.) and has momentum in and of itself. To this date, China is trying to catch up to the US in terms of advanced research and can't despite its huge population and (relatively) good primary education.

But ya, keep thinking the "Ivory Tower" aren't useful or that it isn't an industry that can't be easily replicated.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[penandpaper]

I didn't say I don't value Research or Education. You are building a strawman.

You really miss my point. So, I will ask a simple question. Why would anyone risk their blood and sweat for someone else to sit in a cushy lab when they could build up their own lab?

Your arrogance is off the charts.

Re:EU has always been tough on US companies.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would anyone risk their blood and sweat for someone else to sit in a cushy lab when they could build up their own lab?

Easy. Comparative advantage. You know how to look up wiki for ivory tower, so go look it up there too.

Now would you go back and answer my question (https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12375990&cid=56979500)

To repeat: what do you think culture is?

Hint: it's not just sitting in an ivory tower

Re:He's your president

[magusxxx]

Thank you, Mr. Putin, we already know what you think.

Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Daneel Olivaw R.]

Also, enough posts about trump making asinine comments, it stopped being funny in 2016. I am outside US, I am sick of comment section filled with right vs left.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[drinkypoo]

Twitter is Part Of The Problem. They refuse to enforce their ToS against @POTUS, who has used the platform to incite violence and spread hate speech, because they are click-whores. No one should link to Twitter.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[nnet]

Then don't read them. No one's forcing you.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because there making a crap ton of money off of him. Lots of people are driven to the twitter platform.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Anonymous Coward]

How would you know?

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Tablizer]

enough posts about trump making asinine comments, it stopped being funny in 2016.

Elect a clown, expect a circus ... a bad circus.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Drethon]

Also, enough posts about trump making asinine comments, it stopped being funny in 2016. I am outside US, I am sick of comment section filled with right vs left.

Hows the job market where you live? Those of us not outside the US may have to consider alternatives. And not solely because of Trump these days.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Tablizer]

No, it's because Twitter's stated policy is to give more leeway to elected officials because they shape and give policy. Whether that's fair or not is another matter.

That means if you or I call somebody a "smelly cunt face", then they may delete our message or account. But if a politicians calls somebody that, it stays.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[skam240]

"I am outside US, I am sick of comment section filled with right vs left."

Not to be rude but slashdot editors have stated multiple times over the years that this is a US based site and therefor don't care about complaints about it being US-centric .

You might as well complain about The Guardian covering too much British news,

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Twitter is Part Of The Problem. They refuse to enforce their ToS against @POTUS, who has used the platform to incite violence and spread hate speech, because they are click-whores. No one should link to Twitter.

POTUS is inciting violence and spreading hate speech? I've not noticed this. What specific Tweets are you talking about? I've seen a bunch of "fake news" claims tweeted and a couple of other things about current events, but I've not seen any hate speech or attempts to incite violence. Admittedly I've not read ALL of Trump's tweets, who's got time for that, so maybe I missed something?

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[ArchieBunker]

No it is becoming tiring. Not one fucking article is free of someone from either side mentioning Trump. Every single day the biggest headline is what Trump said or did. Reddit is the worst because the entire site is dedicated to removing him from office. I looked at voat.co but its mostly tin foil hat conspiracy theorists who are stuck in the 1970s.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, enough posts about trump making asinine comments, it stopped being funny in 2016. I am outside US, I am sick of comment section filled with right vs left.

From outside of U.S., it looks more like the comment section is filled with right vs right. The left, well, has left. "Left" and "Right" may indicate the direction Democrats and Republicans choose to wipe their ass with using the Constitution, respectively.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Becoming tiring? I live in the US, and it became tiring two years ago! Every fool has to state what his political idea of the moment is.
Very tiring, and sucks the air out of a room!

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Anonymous Coward]

Whether you like it or not Trump is the most unconventional US president there has ever been. He openly courts enemy leaders whilst criticizing his own intelligence services. He tells his military allies that they are his enemies. He starts a global trade war. This has nothing to do with left or right, these are unique policies that have no foundation in either right wing or left wing politics.they are Trump policies. If you do not wish to discuss them then go and stick your head in the sand.

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[Peter P Peters]

+1

Re:Can't we just link it to twitter?

[skam240]

Funny, I find complaints about slashdot content tiring. The exact same ones have been voiced over and over again for the last two decades.

foes

[Anonymous Coward]

So, is EU our foes, or not? Ofay, I say.

Greatest Irish company

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah Google are such patriots they moved their whole operations to Ireland to avoid contributing anything to the USA, combined with their little Luxembourg sandwiches meaning Trumps secretary probably contributes more, hence your infrastructure is crumbling around you while certain individuals make out like the bandits they are

LOL MAGA

Re:Greatest Irish company

[hcs_$reboot]

True on the taxes side. But Google has many people at work, and that contributes to grease the wheels of the Economy.

Re:Greatest Irish company

[ArchieBunker]

Tell me you wouldn't do the same thing to save shitloads of money?

Re:Greatest Irish company

[imgod2u]

Looking at last Quarter's statement:
https://abc.xyz/investor/pdf/2...

Alphabet paid ~$1.1B in taxes in Q1 (quarter of the year). It amounts to roughly ~11%. So while a fairly low rate, it's complete hyperbole to say they don't contribute *anything* to the Federal budget.

That doesn't take into account the payroll taxes, Medicare taxes and income taxes of their employees. Realistically, corporate taxes don't make sense. Tax the investors -- they can't move overseas.

Re:Greatest Irish company

[Anonymous Coward]

That doesn't take into account the payroll taxes, Medicare taxes and income taxes of their employees. Realistically, corporate taxes don't make sense. Tax the investors -- they can't move overseas.

Oh, so now I don't pay any taxes to the Feds it's all paid by my employer?

Re:Greatest Irish company

[jbengt]

Realistically, corporate taxes don't make sense. Tax the investors -- they can't move overseas.

If you don't tax corporations, the investors will incorporate.

Re:Greatest Irish company

[serviscope_minor]

That doesn't take into account the payroll taxes, Medicare taxes and income taxes of their employees.

that's deeply disingenuous. companies that pay a higher rate of corporation tax ALSO have to pay those taxes.

Realistically, corporate taxes don't make sense.

I disagree: if that happens more investment will be done through corporate vehicles and so never get taxed.

Tax the investors -- they can't move overseas.

The big ones can.

Re:Greatest Irish company

[HornWumpus]

The whole corporate tax rate thing is largely bullshit.

Because worldwide nations that want to attract capital to their markets compete on ((1 - corporate tax) * (1 - capital gains) * average national corporate ROI), aka after tax ROI.

Not because they want to, they HAVE TO.

Re:Greatest Irish company

[Dragonslicer]

Realistically, corporate taxes don't make sense. Tax the investors -- they can't move overseas.

If you don't tax corporations, the investors will incorporate.

At some point, though, the money has to make it to a real person, at which point you can tax it as income. I'd be perfectly fine with eliminating taxes on corporate income/profit if you shift that tax to the real people that benefit from the corporate income/profit (i.e. investors and executives). That would, however, also require closing many loopholes, such as individuals getting non-monetary benefits like use of corporate property.

Re:Greatest Irish company

[Anonymous Coward]

But that is just capitalism working exactly as it is supposed to. There can't be anything wrong with that, right?

Re:Greatest Irish company

[imgod2u]

that's deeply disingenuous. companies that pay a higher rate of corporation tax ALSO have to pay those taxes.

Companies that pay a high rate operate only in the US. The US portion of Google also pays a high rate. The "average" is moved lower because Google pays lower taxes in other areas where it operates. I see nothing unfair or disingenuous about that.

It also doesn't take away from my point: Google does pay taxes. So it's complete hyperbole to say that they don't. Now, is it at a rate we want? Well, that's a subjective point. I'd prefer a 0% corporate tax and treating dividends/stock buybacks as income taxable at income rates.

I disagree: if that happens more investment will be done through corporate vehicles and so never get taxed.

And there's nothing wrong with that. That just means it'll be spent acquiring business. Investors tend to demand higher dividends for a non-growth company and growth from a non-dividend company. So it'll have to be paid to a person (or entity) eventually. That payment to investors should be taxed at income tax rates.

Tax the investors -- they can't move overseas.

The big ones can.

Not really. Very few hedge fund managers would be willing to move to Ireland or the Caymans full time just to save on taxes.

FUCKING A!

[Anonymous Coward]

Only Trump can fine! Them damn China thieves and spies and father rapers! Damn well deserved! Make Putin OUR FRIEND by sucking him dry as much as Trump can. And we win!

Re:FUCKING A!

[Anonymous Coward]

Make Putin OUR FRIEND by sucking him dry as much as Trump can.

So THAT'S what happened in the private Helsinki meeting. That explains Putin's grin and Trump's slobbering.

Tit for tat

[Anonymous Coward]

The US fining VW within an inch of bankruptcy over emissions had nothing to do with this fine on Google I am sure.

Re:Tit for tat

[Anonymous Coward]

Or the repeated fines against all EU Banks that have to pay for US Banks nonsense.
Or the threats about EU companies which want to trade with Iran.
Or...

Re:Tit for tat

[jeremyp]

Nothing at all since the EU also fined VW

https://www.theguardian.com/bu...

Re:Tit for tat

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, that was just a standard US money grab.

Re:Tit for tat

[serviscope_minor]

Why does this bullshit keep getting modded up.

The EU regularly fines the crap out of EU companies, including Volkswagen.

VW only gets $2B bill from US

[Anonymous Coward]

even its impact to the world is much bigger. EU is one giant greedy gov. Not even saying Google is not evil, but the fine does not fit the crime.

Re:VW only gets $2B bill from US

[Anonymous Coward]

The US wanted to have $46B from VW:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-emissions-emails-idUSKBN0UM1WZ20160108

Re:VW only gets $2B bill from US

[Highdude702]

Destroying the environment is not the same as saying you can use my OS so long as you include my other products for free.

Insane...

[beheaderaswp]

The EU has to regulate their markets in a way that suits their needs. There's no universal principle which dictates how to regulate a capitalist economy. There's no "one size fits all" solution.

Most US Presidents can hardly manage their own economy. I hardly think they are qualified (or have sufficient information) to make a call for a foreign economy.

If Google was found in violation in the EU- it's their call. Google can negotiate.

Trump, might be considered to be defending one of our companies. Though the action is only impressive if the observer is totally clueless.

Re:Insane...

[Rick Schumann]

I take it you're not a citizen of the United States? I am, born and lived here my entire life, and I'll tell you right now, if you didn't guess already: Donald Trump does not speak for all Americans, he only speaks for some of them, and of that subset, most of us have little to no respect for them -- or Donald Trump, either. He's a loudmouth, uncouth, misogynistic, probably racist asshole, definitely un-Presidential, and quite frankly he was elected by frustrated people with low IQs and severe myopia (if you catch my drift) who were only really interested in 'pissing off liberals' and not in what's best for the United States. So whatever else you think or do, don't lump all 300,000,000+ of us together in the same group, we're just as appalled as the rest of the world is.

..and now, as typical for Trump supporters, I'll be down-modded into the basement, marked as a 'Troll', and generally have the most vile insults imagineable thrown at me for daring to speak against the Pussy-Grabber-in-Chief, Orange Julius Caesar Trump. Do your worst, you bastards.

Re:Insane...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Maxine Water's press secretary,

You obviously typed too fast and forgot to add xenophobic and homophobic. Please refer to Democratic Socialist handbook page 9359, list all "liberal" talking points on all Internet postings without fail comrades. Failure to do so could lead to loss of valuable social justice points.

Re:Insane...

[Chris Mattern]

You miss the point. Trump may say he's going to dictate to the EU how they can regulate their economy, but he doesn't actually expect to be able to do so. He's playing to the crowd. Trump always plays to crowd; once you realize this he becomes much easier to understand.

Re:Insane...

[Anonymous Coward]

my entire life

All 14 edgy years of it?

You should probably ask your mom to take you to a therapist for that crippling case of TDS.

Re:Insane...

[penandpaper]

I love to break it to you but he does speak on behalf of all Americans. He is the leader of the nation and the top diplomat. He is your president. :)

If those frustrated people wanted to "piss off liberals" judging your post (and past posts) then it seems like mission accomplished.

thrown at me for daring to speak against

Actually, speaking from experience, any pro-Trump comment is modded to oblivion with a lot of toxic responses. No one is afraid to speak out against Trump. Literally no one. More people are afraid to speak in defense of anything Conservative. Especially, if you are surrounded by left wingers. Just look at Hollywood and Universities. As a recent example, see Mark Duplass and the Tweet he made saying Ben Shapiro's intentions are good and the subsequent backlash of left wingers. How dare he!

Daring to speak against Trump? lol. Sure thing buddy.

Re:Insane...

[Rick Schumann]

love to break it to you but he does speak on behalf of all Americans. He is the leader of the nation and the top diplomat. He is your president. :)

Nope. POTUS is supposed to serve the PEOPLE, not the other way around -- and I did not vote for the son of a bitch, nor do I want him in office now. He's a cancer on our nation and needs to be REMOVED, along with his entire Administration, and IDGAF what you think, because you're (ostensibly) one of his supporters, therefore your motives are suspect. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, myopian.

Re:Insane...

[penandpaper]

Serve. Lead. Commander and Chief. Same thing. Semantics that you seem to lose sleep over. lol. Your president supports you, even you don't support him. He's like Jesus that way. :)

There is something funny about someone bemoaning motives are suspect or being myopic when you advocate for a coup in the same breath.

I quit smoking thank you. I found salvation laughing at... with you.

Re:Insane...

[Rick Schumann]

Trollololol

That's my conclusion about you. Get fucked.

Re:Insane...

[penandpaper]

And here I thought you were expecting " the most vile insults imagineable thrown at me" yet you started the obscenity against my innocuous post. Seems you are a bit delusional about your president.

Re:Insane...

[Anonymous Coward]

..and now, as typical for Trump supporters, I'll be down-modded into the basement, marked as a 'Troll', and generally have the most vile insults imagineable thrown at me for daring to speak against the Pussy-Grabber-in-Chief, Orange Julius Caesar Trump. Do your worst, you bastards.

I see no reason to insult you, but your poor wording leaves a bit to be desired. Am I supposed to know who or what you mean by "them"? You use "them" several times, in ways that make no logical sense unless they are different "thems".

You seem to be all frothy at the mouth about something, but the comment you replied to doesn't seem to have anything particularly interesting or upsetting in it.

Maybe it's just you? You should go outside for some fresh air. It's a beautiful day.

Re:Insane...

[penandpaper]

P.S.

Trollololol

You should go back to 4chan pol. You seem like type of garbage that would frequent that cesspool.

It's unbecoming of /..

Re:Insane...

[Anonymous Coward]

Y U SO MAD THO??? xD xD xD

dude rejects your bullshit and you comment back to him twice? xD xD xD

Re:Insane...

[thegarbz]

There's no "one size fits all" solution.

Actually there is. It's called the perfect market, a term that a lot of people actually confuse with a free market. You need regulation to turn a free market into a perfect market and a perfect market is in theory the one size fits all best solution to an economy.

The problem is that the regulations governing the markets in many markets are lobbied for by people who stand to gain something from having more freedom and a less perfect market.

The USA has similar laws as the EU when it comes to anti-trust. The only difference is their prosecutors generally have neither legal teeth nor the balls to go after large corporations. You can see that clearly every time a large company wants to merge:

US Gov: "We think there's a risk consumers will be worse off"
Megamerger: "We promise to play nice"
US Gov: "euurrh okay" approved.
Megamerger: "psyche! we just raised prices"
US Gov: "euurrh that caught us by surprise, we didn't see that coming"

That plays out very differently in many other countries.

Re:Insane...

[Powercntrl]

More people are afraid to speak in defense of anything Conservative.

Problem is, that word means both "resisting change" and "operating in the most efficient manner possible". It is a contradiction in itself.

Re:Insane...

[Powercntrl]

He's a cancer on our nation and needs to be REMOVED

And he will be, either by the next election or by term limits. All this talk about impeachment just adds fuel to the alt-right's fire, they're the biggest bunch of sore winners I've ever seen.

I say, grab some popcorn and watch the train wreck unfold. I'm sure Trump's supports will fucking love it when they walk into Walmart and Chinese tariffs have driven up the costs of everything.

Re:Insane...

[penandpaper]

Nearly all conservatives I know want to conserve or "resist change" to the Constitution (unless done properly i.e. amendment process) and the culture that surrounds the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and American exceptionalism.

"Operating in the most efficient manner possible" when taken into politics is a Trojan horse. What is operating and toward what end? Are we being efficient at ignoring due process? The government should operate the enumerated powers in the most efficient manner possible but any deviation from those enumerations then you are going to get a political fight. Change for changes sake is not good. Progress toward tyranny is not good even if done as efficiently as possible.

IOW, in politics, "resisting change" and "operating efficiently" are not contradictory.

Re:Insane...

[chapstercni]

I too, was born in the USA.
I too, was raised here.

I am STOKED, and I am quite serious about Trump.

I am so freakin glad that Hillary did not win.

Trump is 10 times better (ok, more than that) than Obama.

I support the Constitution. The federal gov't is way out of control.

States rights should usually trump (get it?) the feds.

I'm not a conservative, I am a Constitutional Libertarian.

Yes, I will vote for Trump in 2020. I am very happy with his ability to yank the chains of all the leftists. I like that he speaks and tells it the way it is.

FUCK political correctness.

So many Americans think JUST like me. Many do not speak up, because they would suffer from the tolerant (not) left wing.

Yes, MAGA.

I do not apologize for what I think, say or believe.

I absolutely believe America First.
Every. Single. Time.

And, IDGAF what you think.

Re:Insane...

[Anonymous Coward]

All this talk about impeachment just adds fuel to the alt-right's fire, they're the biggest bunch of sore winners I've ever seen.

For all their talk about leftist snowflakes, they're the whiniest crying group I've yet to see. They got a guy clearly unfit to lead the country in any capacity elected because they threw a tantrum and wanted to burn it all down.

Re:Insane...

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are right-wingers also so god-damned obsessed with hollywood and celebrities? I truly don't give a shit. The reason people are afraid to speak in defense of conservatism, is because most of the shit the advocate is indefensible.

Change banks

[i286NiNJA]

Its exactly the same as what happened when people starting bitching about various bank charges. So now the banks dropped the charges and instead a lot of them charge you a flat fee just to have an account.

Funny my bank doesn't charge me anything except for reasonable rates on insurance and 9% apr on my credit card.
They said if I overdraft my bank account they will charge me 6 dollars unless I call them a day in advance.

Re:Change banks

[Sperbels]

Remember when banks actually paid you to deposit your money there?

Re:Change banks

[ichimunki]

Remember when the prime rate was routinely in the double digits? Yeah, me neither. In the 80s and 90s prime never went below 5%. Since then it's rarely been above 5%. You want to be paid interest on your savings account? Blame the Fed, not the banks. But for most of the past two decades the government has decided that liquid savings are useless, perhaps as a way to help push people into retirement accounts and equities funds and home buying. Plus, if we make savings account unattractive, that boosts spending, which keeps people employed. I'm not taking a position on whether these policy decisions are right/wrong, just saying that you need to look at the bigger picture.

Re:Change banks

[HornWumpus]

The feds can't afford to pay interest on their debt. Neither can any western european government.

Everything else is an unintended consequence.

Re:Change banks

[Anonymous Coward]

My credit union does pay interest on my savings account.

Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Rashkae]

The real smoking gun for Google is that they forbid phone makers from releasing *any* android phone that is not on their Google Play platform. If a company wanted any Google Play supported phone, they *all* had to be Google Play phones. That's a big no no and obvious abuse of Monopoly power.

However.... just like the time Microsoft was forced to stop dictating what software is pre-installed on PC's, government regulation here is just going to make things worse for consumers. For all it's faults and obscene privacy invasion, Google is a relatively benign overlord. If they loose the ability to dictate how phones are pre-configured, the end result will not be a utopia of phone carefully pre-configured to protect end-user privacy. It will be phone makers selling out and pre-configuring phones with malicious advertisement hijacking search engines, and app repositories stuffed with even more malware than Google's Play store.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Anonymous Coward]

Did the short-lived Amazon Fire Phone come with Google Play? Because their tablets do not, and someone upthread mentioned them as an example of an Android player that didn't use Google's defaults.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Drethon]

Problably wont happen but I keep thinking it would be interesting if the response to one of these fines would just the be company being fined geofencing all of their devices/services and seeing what happens.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[angularbanjo]

Yep; a proliferation of app suppositories rather than repositories.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[atrex]

Here comes Samsung Sandroid and the Samsung Store!

Well, Google does sell some premium handsets with their own branding now. And there's a couple third parties (OnePlus?) that sell a pretty clean stock Android. (Obviously you could still unlock any other handset and deal with custom roms and all the issues there in to get a clean install). I wish someone would go after the carriers for all the privacy invading and battery eating bloatware that they load down phones with.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[luther349]

the user can install play store pretty easily. wheres the fine for apple. you cant do anything not apple approved on there devices without hacking them.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Anonymous Coward]

I loved how they found Google to be a monopoly by limiting the market to licensable operating systems. In that case, Apple has a monopoly on non-licensable OS devices with rounded corners.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Anonymous Coward]

Right. That's why BlackBerry can't make real BlackBerry devices anymore even though they have a superior OS of their own. They make Android phones now and couldn't even release a real BlackBerry if they wanted to which is total BS. This choice of two awful, archaic poke-at-the-grid-of-apps OSes is not right. We should have more choices, but Google is preventing other companies from giving them to us. Symbian, Meego, WebOS, BlackBerry 10 -- all were better than Android in every way except that they didn't make it super-simple for somebody else to know every detail of your life.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Anonymous Coward]

Which we can just choose not to buy and get the better Google Play version.

There is no such thing as a benign for-profit monopoly. "Apparently benign" or even "currently benign" sure, but capitalism is based on growth. They already have an 80% market share, and get a good chunk of the ad revenue from that other 20% anyway. So how do they grow profit from that year on year and make their shareholders happy? They either have to start charging manufacturers more (whoops, it's free and based on a lot of Open Source code so any price>0 raises a bunch of problems), or monetise the end users, who might not want anything to do with Google.

They've been pushing the monetisation angle hard, but as it turns out offering people a "free" product that has a spiders web of strings attached in order to leverage your monopoly position in one area to reinforce another is illegal in the EU. Who knew? Well, they obviously knew, because they have enough lawyers that not running such a business plan by them would be willful negligence, but thought that the fine would be less than what they stood to make. It almost certainly is (their ad revenue from android traffic in EU is in the billions-per-quarter range), but they are arguing the toss anyway because they would rather have more money than less money.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Anonymous Coward]

wheres the fine for apple. you cant do anything not apple approved on there devices without hacking them.

Right next to their 50% market share.

the user can install play store pretty easily

So how do I get rid of googles crap/spy ware? I don't like playing remote support for my mother every time google tries to get more information out of her and I would love a phone were they weren't fixed as system applications with randomly automatic reinstall on update.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[Powercntrl]

the user can install play store pretty easily. wheres the fine for apple. you cant do anything not apple approved on there devices without hacking them.

I think it has something to do with marketshare in the EU. iPhones aren't quite as popular as they are in the USA.

And even here in the USA, you're allowed to be a complete anti-competitive corporate dickwad, as long as you've bought the right politicians. Apple spends a lot of money on that.

Re:Google Went too far, the remedy will be worse

[sad_]

The real smoking gun for Google is that they forbid phone makers from releasing *any* android phone that is not on their Google Play platform. If a company wanted any Google Play supported phone, they *all* had to be Google Play phones.

who, except for some /. folks, would have bought an android phone without the google stuff on it? what other store would come with the phone instead?
people want android phones because of the google stuff that is included on it.

Back assward

[Tablizer]

USA should have more anti-trust rather than Europe having less. Oligopolies and monopolies degenerate competition and choice. He's talking out of the wrong end to fix the wrong end.

Re:Back assward

[hcs_$reboot]

Where do you see European monopolies in the US? Champagne?

Re:Back assward

[Tablizer]

No, I mean USA should clamp down on MS, Google, etc. for typical anti-trust patterns of behavior in the USA.

Re:Back assward

[hcs_$reboot]

wooooooosh ;-)

Re:Back assward

[houghi]

AB InBev has an almost monopoly on water in the US. Theyt are located in Belgium, about 100m from where I live,

Re:Back assward

[Anonymous Coward]

As a major company or government, why would you want more choice?

Take a look at all the major companies. There's usually just one or two massive players. Being kind to these massive players means you keep them there and any other companies get kicked to the side.

Re:Back assward

[Tablizer]

I'd like to request help on de-whoooshing.

Re:Back assward

[HornWumpus]

In America 'Champagne' is sparkling white wine.

In the EU 'Champagne' is sparkling white wine from the Champagne region of France. Which the EU thinks it has a monopoly on. Like Cognac (all brandy is Cognac in Russia BTW).

Re:Back assward

[Dragonslicer]

In the EU 'Champagne' is sparkling white wine from the Champagne region of France. Which the EU thinks it has a monopoly on.

Why shouldn't they? The US doesn't let anyone else sell "Coca Cola". "Champagne" is effectively just a trademark.

Re:Back assward

[gweihir]

The US does not understand capitalism. Hence they do not understand that monopolies kill capitalism. That is the real problem here.

Re:Back assward

[HornWumpus]

Those are facts on the ground.

If they really insist, we might misspell it, just to humor them.

Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an Android phone - Samsung.

First, I cannot install anything directly to the SD card.

Second, I cannot move any of the Google apps to the SD card.

I cannot delete any of the Google apps.

When updating, I get the "not enough memory" error on my 8 Gig phone with a 32 Gig SD card.

Meaning, I am NOT getting any security updates.

I think Google should be fined $50 billion to make them notice.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[MBGMorden]

As opposed to Apple where you don't even have the option of installing an SD card?

8GB is nothing. Buy a phone with more internal memory and use your SD card for pictures and other media storage.

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Monster_user]

8GB is not "nothing", and buying a $900 phone to replace a year old $600 phone is not a smart financial decision.

I'd be surprised if the Android operating system has exceeded the 8GB capacity limits, though it may be close. I suspect that the 32GB SD card the GP has is largely empty and unused. Methinks there is more to the story,...

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[squiggleslash]

The problem here is Samsung, not Google. Android has had the ability to use the SD card as extended storage, rather than a separate drive, since version 7 (maybe 6, can't remember the exact version); Samsung purposely disabled the feature claiming (wrongly, I use it) that it leads to performance issues.

Google implemented exactly what you want. They just didn't force Samsung to not disable the feature.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Anonymous Coward]

>_ First, I cannot install anything directly to the SD card.

That seems to depend on the Android version... but, yes, it happens here, too.

>_ Second, I cannot move any of the Google apps to the SD card.

Likewise. For those who know the smart phone *is* a computer, that is very dismaying.

>_ I cannot delete any of the Google apps.

And often also other "useful" apps put there by the equipment maker, not just Google's.

>_ When updating, I get the "not enough memory" error on my 8 Gig phone with a 32 Gig SD card.

An unjustifiable issue (given the RAM), but I find it in smaller phones I have. Of course, for old enough phones -- and Android versions --, support has to end one day. In the present age and time, though, a disposal solution should be available -- e.g. through a prevalent, widely disseminated exchange and recycling program. That could even prove profitable for phone makers. It's a win-win.

>_ Meaning, I am NOT getting any security updates.

Yes, that's the scary corollary. There's a lot of worrying about government, utilities, facilities, corporations etc., but the common citizen is left to her/his own devices (literally, in the case). Not exactly the responsible thing to do.

>_ I think Google should be fined $50 billion to make them notice.

Even that won't make a difference, I'm afraid.

As I posted elsewhere on this very site, we need Linux. Android is better than others (iO$, Window$), but there's ample space for abuse.

My Linux computers are all up-to-date. It's not 100% safe, but it's better than the paid alternatives -- including Android. Again, that is quite disheartening, since Linux is the base of Android.

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Anonymous Coward]

AC should do their research for your phone next time.

Samsung has chosen NOT to take advantage of Adoptable Storage and only supports the old "Move To SD" option that relies on app compliance. Many other manufacturers allow this as an option.

I've run into storage limits before, and i've made do. Uninstall some apps temporarily or force a clean up of all temporary data / cache to let the update install.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[luther349]

thats not google sucking thats the app devs not enabling sd card support.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[luther349]

he buys a shit phone then blame google. thats your modern consumer for you.

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[luther349]

if he payed 900$ for a 8gb phone a year ago he was totally ripped off lol. he probably payed 30$ for the thing. flagships have been 64/128 gb sense 2017.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not googles fault, that's Samsung's fault.

Install AOSP if you don't like it.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[imgod2u]

It actually does lead to performance issues though. The SD card is orders of magnitude slower. And -- especially Samsung's software -- uses a lot of paging due to its high memory usage.

Not to mention apps loaded from the SD load really slow (noticeably).

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[barc0001]

In this day and age, 8GB *is* nothing for a phone. That barely holds the OS. I have a 16GB Android tablet and the damn thing only had 6GB free after the OS and the non-removable apps when it came out of the package. These days for an Android device 32GB is what I would consider bare minimum if you intend to use it for anything other than phone calls and texts.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[squiggleslash]

I don't think you're right.

Base level phones these days generally come with 2G of RAM, and usually more. That's more than enough for the most memory intensive mobile apps. But even if it wasn't, the usual response of Android is to kill idle apps, not "page" them, largely because there are major technical problems with that. This isn't hypothetical, it's been true on every device I have. If I load a large number of apps, eventually trying to go to an app loaded much earlier in the day results in the app being loaded from scratch, revealing that it was terminated.

But on top that, the entire concept of paging is complex given how Android works.

In a normal operating system, paging is done in two ways: read only data from executables (including stored libraries) is paged in directly from the file system, and the application's working storage may be paged to and from a swapfile. Both are, for practical purposes, not relevant in Android. Android's "executables" are APK files, zip'd files of non-native bytecode. And swapfiles (or swap disks) would be a disaster in a flash storage environment because they're constantly being written to.

So, in practice, what you're left with is time taken to load an app. And quite honestly, I'm not seeing any practical difference between apps loaded from SD card, and from internal storage. I don't doubt it's technically slower, but it's not slow enough to be an issue.

And it certainly isn't slow enough for Samsung to be justified in disabling the feature.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[djinn6]

Not surprising. Samsung has every reason to make you buy a new phone, while Google doesn't care as long as you keep searching.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Frederic54]

"not enough memory has nothing to do with RAM, Android displays this message when there is not enough flash space to install a new app.

> As I posted elsewhere on this very site, we need Linux.

Last time I checked, all Android OS are using Linux kernel.

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[MBGMorden]

You don't have to buy a $900 phone for more storage. The $60 prepaid phones (ie, Samsung Luna J3) are coming with 16 GB these days.

If your phone has 8GB of storage it's either several years old already or it cost $20.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Anonymous Coward]

It actually does lead to performance issues though. The SD card is orders of magnitude slower. And -- especially Samsung's software -- uses a lot of paging due to its high memory usage.

Not to mention apps loaded from the SD load really slow (noticeably).

I call BS on this statement. I have a Galaxy S5 that uses the SD card as its primary disk AND IT'S ENCRYPTED.

There is no noticeable differences when comparing this another S5 that uses the local disk and is not encrypted.

Re:Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an s9, and just put in an SD card. Save all my photos to it by default. Don't see what the problem is.

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you in most of what you said, aside from the 8GB remark. It is indeed nothing on most phones. I just bought a brand new phone with 16GB of storage, and half was taken right out of the box already by the system and pre-installed apps (that can't be uninstalled). Luckily I don't have a need for a lot of storage, but for anyone who is active on multiple apps, the storage is a big problem.

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Monster_user]

Several years old, ain't old. Any computing device over $200 without a contract should last at least six years. Most smart phones are in the $600 range without contracts.

Re: Absolutely! Android sucks because of GOogle.

[Monster_user]

I specified $600 for the 8GB. I still consider my 16GB iPhone 6 to be fairly "new". I must have blinked since I acquired it.

One of our great companies

[Anonymous Coward]

"One of our great companies"

Yep, one that played a key role in turning us into a surveillance society, where your children and especially grand children will grow up knowing nothing but mass surveillance and think "privacy" only applies to other individuals (not corporations) -- as they were taught by their masters.

Taken advantage? WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

"They truly have taken advantage of the U.S."

Hey idiot, do you understand that Google are the ones who are taking advantage of everybody on the fucking planet, including your own stupid ass?

Re:Taken advantage? WTF?

[luther349]

if you see there crying about the play store on 3rd party firmware. that fyi can be installed by the user later. why are they not picking on apple.

Re:Taken advantage? WTF?

[h33t l4x0r]

Trump is an expert when it comes to search engines. Especially Bing. You know, bing bing, bong bong, bing bing.

Whacked for exact same reason Microsoft was

[CraigCruden]

I am sort of on the fence on this one but I do believe some of the practices of Google have to change. EU anti-trust laws are there to protect competition - which is slightly different than the US. And in the EU Google is dominant in Android AND search. If you sell an "Android Phone" you are contractually unable to sell a competing phone distribution. You are required to install all the google apps and the play store. Even without all the apps installed, and 'play store' Google still makes a considerable amount of money from the app (they don't pay Apple 3 billion dollars a year to be the default search engine for nothing). Basically, they are doing EXACTLY what Microsoft -- and got whacked by the US government for back when they were dominant in everything. When you are not dominant you can get away with that, when you are - you have to make adjustments. Google can make rather minor changes to comply with the ruling and they will still be dominant.

How is that incompatible?

[Anonymous Coward]

Android is Open Source, because it's largely built on open source and they had no choice. Most of its APIs are Java APIs and free because they're not Google's to sell.

Nothing stops them splitting the Play Store and the rest of the bundle in two and selling them separately.

This is not a fight Google can win, so they should just comply. Microsoft tried to fight, paid to get Bush into power (and largely screwed over the USA in the process) without actually winning in the end. Bush made a lot of noise, but could not do anything. Microsoft complied, and the world was better for Microsoft's eventual compliance includng the USA. It permitted the rise of Chrome browser and the rise of Google and Android.

In trade, Trump's already starting a trade war with EU, which is rather stupid given the low level of tarifs the EU provides to USA, the equal levels of tarifs on both sides (e.g. US Truck tariffs vs EU Car tariffs) and they're the USA largest trading partner. So he'll just suck trade out of the USA exports.

He has no diplomatic leverage either.

He's kinda irrelevent to the whole thing now. Nobody thinks USA would join NATO defense if Russia attacked, so America is not considered a defense partner they cannot upset.

The UK Nuclear deterent (which requires the US codes) could ever be used against Russia with Trump in that office. So UK doesn't need to keep him sweet.

Nobody think USA is a partner in democracy (you didn't vote for him, and you certainly didn't vote for Putin). It's not like they'll cut him some slack because he represents Americans and American interests, when he doesn't.

Nobody thinks USA can defend itself against Russian attack, If Trump had been consulted when Russia attack American troops in Deir Ezzor, then he's have blocked and you'd be bringing back body bags from Syria with Russian bullets in the corpses.

So what's he going do? Write nasty tweets? Ask his Russian friends to hack? Ask his Russian troll friends to MEME on Reddit? What?

Re: How is that incompatible?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft was not broken up, so they still won.

Re:How is that incompatible?

[jbengt]

Microsoft tried to fight, paid to get Bush into power (and largely screwed over the USA in the process) without actually winning in the end. Bush made a lot of noise, but could not do anything. Microsoft complied, and the world was better for Microsoft's eventual compliance includng the USA.

If you cheat to win a race, take home the blue ribbon and prize money, are caught, and then agree not to do it again but keep the prizes, you should not get to call that compliance with the rules.

Double standards...

[Anonymous Coward]

If it was to be Amazon it would praise the shit out of it...

Re:Double standards...

[luther349]

wheres the fine for apple who is way more closed off then android. they say waa waa 3rd party firmware dont come with play store that can be easily installed. you cant even have a 3rd party firmware on apple.

Re:Double standards...

[Dragonslicer]

wheres the fine for apple who is way more closed off then android.

Apple isn't preventing other companies from manufacturing potentially competing products. From a consumer point of view, Apple's behavior isn't any better than Google's, but legally there's a difference, since Apple isn't using their monopoly position to force behavior from other companies.

Re:Double standards...

[luther349]

what are you on buddy. you can't make a competing apple product. they will sue the away.

Re:Double standards...

[Dragonslicer]

I'm not sure exactly what your point is. A couple possibilities I can think of:

1) Nobody else can manufacturer and sell "Apple" products. That's a trademark issue, which has nothing to do with this antitrust judgment.
2) Apple doesn't allow other manufacturers to use iOS for their products. There's nothing illegal about refusing to license your proprietary and/or copyright-protected software.

If Google didn't let anyone else use Android for their phones, there would be no antitrust issue. This judgment is because Google is attaching requirements to the agreements with the manufacturers that restrict what other products the manufacturers are allowed to make. That is the anti-competitive behavior that EU fined Google for.

Re:Double standards...

[swilver]

In the context of smart phones, Apple is just a small fry, that captured some early market and decided that it wasn't "hip" enough to cater to everyone, so others waltzed in and took and overtook the market. Classic Apple mistake. They'll soon be irrelevant again.

wants a trade war

[Anonymous Coward]

gets a trade war.

Re:wants a trade war

[luther349]

one they will lose if google decides to just pull out of the eu market. no more android or YouTube. also where is the fine for apple they are way more locked down then android..

Re:He's your president

[Drethon]

I bet you have never held an original thought in your life. Waiting for someone to tell you into what to think?

Thank you, Mr. Trump, we already know what you think.

In Soviet America...

[coop247]

...we officially support trampling rules and privacy in the name of oligarch profits.

Textbook monopoly abuse

[Njovich]

I love Google, but what they did was textbook abuse of a monopoly. They established a monopoly, and then used that monopoly to force their other products onto consumers and companies. That's just a textbook version of abusing your monopoly power. Then they also made the mistake of not just doing that, but forcing major corporations with massive lobbying power like Samsung to ship their products. EU regulates competition tightly, and enforces this against EU companies just as fiercefully as against US companies. Google could have seen this one coming from miles. They probably just thought this type of fine and ruling was a fair price to pay for it.

Well, no surprise there.

[atrex]

Trump and the feds have pretty much abdicated or outright endorsed monopolies here in the U.S. (and let's be clear, the feds have been doing so long before the reign of Trump), so it's no surprise that he'd act butt hurt over the EU leveling a large fine against an "American" company. Plus, I'm sure he intends to use it the headlines as justification for more illegal tariffs against the EU.

isnt google a us company

[luther349]

just stop selling to the eu. tell them to stuff there fine. what are they going to do. the brits can bluff all they like but as soon as a majority of the company's stop selling to the eu that law will go away real fast. watch how fast the eu public loses there mind when they dont have YouTube.

Re:isnt google a us company

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly the same retarded comment as was made by the hard of thinking when MS was fined. And of course, MS pulled out of the EU back then...no, wait...

Here it is again for simpletons like you:
Google could only justify this to its shareholders if the cost of doing business in the EU was greater than the profits they make. It's not. So they won't. They will try their best to work around this and drag out the appeals. But ultimately, unless their appeals are successful, they will comply (to the minimum extent they can get away with).

Huge multi national companies don't act like spoilt children when they can't have their way. They work around the 'problem' the best they can.
Your post makes as much sense as a car company, when told to fit catalytic converters, saying 'nuh-uh, you can't buy our cars any more because that will reduce our profits from $10billion to $9.8 billion'

Re:isnt google a us company

[gweihir]

Google has not been an US company for a very long time. They are a global company.

Re:isnt google a us company

[Anonymous Coward]

EU GDP bas been ~10% larger than the US in recent years. It would be corporate suicide for Google (and US) to "tell them to go stuff *there* fine" far more than it would bother the EU to lose cat videos. You are a first class Idiot.

Re:isnt google a us company

[Anonymous Coward]

Stuff where fine ? The eu public loses where mind ?

It's eerily strange how the only thing capitalized from a long series of sentences is YouTube.

google shill detected.

Pots, Kettles

[DavenH]

Didn't British Petroleum get fined over 20 billion USD to the US when they messed up in the Gulf?
Didn't Volkswagen get fined 2.8 billion USD to the US when they messed up their emissions?

Re:Pots, Kettles

[Anonymous Coward]

'British Petroleum'? Would that the be the one that merged with an American company twenty years ago and became BP?

Re:Pots, Kettles

[Anonymous Coward]

VW's total payments in the US were over $30 billion. For a comparable emissions violation, General Motors paid a grand total of $45 million.

Re:He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Well even the villiage idiot needs some one to look down on.

Android is not free

[Anonymous Coward]

Google already charges manufacturers for their bloatware.

ROFL. Keep barking with no teeth or claws.

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you kindly take a gander at wich wannabe continent has more constant murder going on?

When was the last weeke where there *wasn't a school shooting in the US*?

And you export it to entire regions too. In the form or recruiting, arming, training and financing fighters who then "whoops" become terrorists. What a convenient "surprise" for your mass-murder industry! Just like the last 58 times. On to the next war!

Re:ROFL. Keep barking with no teeth or claws.

[HornWumpus]

Fair enough. Let's count the total violent megadeaths in the 20th century...not the answer you want?

Europe certainly needed adult supervision in 1946, perhaps they can get their act together now, but I wouldn't count on it.

Re:ROFL. Keep barking with no teeth or claws.

[times05]

According to this:
https://crimeresearch.org/2016...

You are wrong. Sorry, couldn't quickly find anything more recent than 2016 on the topic. Not sure how the trend went after that, but I doubt Europe has decreased violent crime... if anything it probably got worse... because more refugees. It seems like riding over large crowds of people in vans is a popular trend in EU nowadays, at least in some circles.

Re:ROFL. Keep barking with no teeth or claws.

[LynnwoodRooster]

Yes let us take a look. First place is Central America, then Africa, then South America, then Asia. Why do you hate brown people?

I don't get it

[erp_consultant]

How is what Google did considered monopolistic practices? First of all, Google does not have a monopoly on mobile phones. Apple is doing just fine in that arena and if you don't like the conditions that Google imposes then go get an iPhone. This is not like the Microsoft case where, at the time, well over 90% of all personal computers were running Windows and there was no viable alternative.

I thought the whole idea of having a "store" to download apps was to help protect users from getting malware on their phones. It is much like the Linux model of Package management where software is housed in a trusted, centralized location and you can download it with a high level of confidence that it is virus free. Contrast that to the Windows model where you go here, there and everywhere to get software. It is especially problematic with "free" software that is frequently laden with spyware. Anyone remember Limewire?

Google has spent a lot of time effort and money enhancing Android. OK, they bought it from someone else but they have improved it greatly. Are they not entitled to make a profit from their store just like Apple does? Samsung and others have profited greatly by piggybacking on Android.

I guess I'm just struggling to see just who the EU is protecting us from.

Re:I don't get it

[imgod2u]

The EU isn't protecting consumers. The EU is protecting manufacturers (with huge lobbying power) and is probably a bit miffed about how their phone makers got absolutely demolished by the US and Asia.

Their manufacturers want Google services but don't want all of Google services. They want to be able to pick and choose services that they get for free without having to install the entire "Google experience". And Google, who makes their money entirely based on everyone using their search and services and everything else together, obviously doesn't want that.

Plenty of Asian manufacturers (Xiaomi, OnePlus, etc.) don't buy into Google's services at all. They have their own suite. So Google isn't forcing their services with Android. Google's simply offering packages instead of a-la-cart services.

But EU laws seem to be geared towards "if you're big, you're bad, even if you followed all the rules and played fair and continue to do so". Stupid? Yes. But I suppose it's their choice to make.

Re:I don't get it

[hey!]

Maybe the phone vendor has a different vision for what an app store should contain.

Now granted, this is a common type of excuse for making life difficult for customers who want to switch vendors, but there are legitimate reasons for doing something like that, like catering to customers with special security concerns. Or maybe you'd want to offer an app store that only had open source apps.

This is where context matters. How much choice does the consumer have? Since Android has about 85% of the smartphone market, and apple about 15%, the answer is not much.

I know some people are wondering...

[Anonymous Coward]

I know some people are wondering what this whole Trump is a Putin lap dog trend they're hearing. Its just most cattle Americans being fed these stories in their bubble which no one hears outside of the US.

The Russia is our enemy narrative and every other stupid thing you hear..

If you live 2 weeks out of the US this whole nest in your head will clear up and you will understand how it feels going through rehab

Re:I know some people are wondering...

[ArchieBunker]

Wish I hadn't commented. You need modded up.

Ummm.... no the remedy is just right

[Freischutz]

However.... just like the time Microsoft was forced to stop dictating what software is pre-installed on PC's, government regulation here is just going to make things worse for consumers. For all it's faults and obscene privacy invasion, Google is a relatively benign overlord. If they loose the ability to dictate how phones are pre-configured, the end result will not be a utopia of phone carefully pre-configured to protect end-user privacy. It will be phone makers selling out and pre-configuring phones with malicious advertisement hijacking search engines, and app repositories stuffed with even more malware than Google's Play store.

Well, for one thing this is only an issue for Google in the EU and in that neck of the woods there will not be a bonanza of “pre-configuring phones with malicious advertisement hijacking search engines, and app repositories stuffed with even more malware than Google's Play store. Anybody selling phone a like that in the EU will be having a rather serious discussion with the EU comission about some very large fines. But, fret not, Google will be free to continue its anti-competitive practices outside of EU jurisdiction, that much is clear from president Trump’s recent tweets.

Re:He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

You might want to get a refund on your Crystal Ball. A mind reader you are not.

Oh and one more point

[slack_justyb]

Just one more point. If you ever hear about bringing laws up to date to match technology. Well, this is an incredible good example of that need. Bundling software and limiting choice isn't good, but we literally have to use 1800s era law about 3rd party business and direct/indirect goods and services to bring about a case on Google. Updating laws to indicate that bundling software and limiting choice is bad would greatly make the jobs of prosecutors a whole world easier.

Not putting America first

[Martin S.]

... because International trade is not a zero sum game, trade barriers harm American interests. Then I don't expect his base to understand that, but they will understand the mass unemployment that is coming their way as a result of his and your ignorance of Economics 101.

While the targets, such as the EU, Japan, the rest world with trade more with each other.

EU signs its biggest free trade deal with Japan

Re:Not putting America first

[Darinbob]

Republicans back before the great depression were very protectionist and pushed for tariffs. These never worked out well and after the depression they changed their minds finally and the economy made major leaps forward. We became an economic superpower with free trade.

Re: Not putting America first

[astrofurter]

C'mon, you know large parts of the European working class have been driven into destitution by "free trade" policies. Don't they keep suspending democracy in southern Europe, because the financialist puppets keep losing? "Free trade" is awesome if you're a rich, rootless bourgeoisie. For everyone else it sucks dog balls.

my god

[Anonymous Coward]

that man really need to get a grip on reality.
google makes more money by far from europeans than from americans.
that guy really eeds to go back to his kindergarden cage and stay there.

US fines to EU banks

[Anonymous Coward]

how many $ billions paid by EU banks for US fines ?

US pays lion share for EU defense

[Anonymous Coward]

Meanwhile the EU is getting cozy with China and buying natural gas from Russia. I know NATO is not the EU, but does the EU really think the US will continue to defend them when they are selling out to our competitors.

Trump pointing all of this out is disturbing to many on both sides of the pond but for many it is something that needed to be said for a long while.

Re:US pays lion share for EU defense

[times05]

Defend from what? Cheap Russian gas or cheap Chinese manufactured goods??!?!

WE MUST HELP EUROPE NOW!!! Too long have they suffered under cheap natural gas that drives their economy! We must ship our much more expensive cr..p using super expensive boats instead of pipeline! Too long have they had access to cheap Chinese goods! We must sell them our stuff that costs 10X to make!

Yeah right....Want to help Europe? Take some refugees from countries US destroyed (for no reason whatsoever might I add, other than create chaos it seems). Or at the very least STOP creating more refugees with bombings/destroying infrastructure and supplying terrorists in middle east countries.

fuck trump

[Anonymous Coward]

5b is too low

Re:I am APK the LORD of HOSTS

[Anonymous Coward]

APK please update "I demand your age sex and location so that I can threaten to show up and kick your ass and will call you a pussycake but am actually too scared to actually do anything but be a keyboard warrior." to include "But i cower like a little girl when someone mails me a postcard"

Re: He's your president

[sexconker]

They're already in complete disarray. Half of the youth vote and most of the black vote is going to #WalkAway .

I wish we had a relevant party for them to go to. I do not want Republicans to rule the roost unilaterally.

Re:He's your president

[Crashmarik]

That's right he's your president.

Yeah and he's right. The EU has had a vendetta against American tech companies, going back to to Boeing.

That's ridiculous

[rsilvergun]

you think our president has nothing better to do all day besides posting useless comments on the internet? Oh.... wait....

Re:He's your president

[fatwilbur]

I know this is a joke, and it gave me a chuckle as well, but there's actually a very disturbing trend I've seen accelerate over the last couple of months, in that anyone who supports Trump or disagrees with MSM interpretation of the summit is labelled a Russian troll.

I know for the fervently anti-Trump crowd, de-legitimization has been a common tactic all along, but mixing it with the concerted effort to paint Russia as a boogeyman really feels like a throwback to McCarthyism now.

The rest of his tweet:

[rnturn]

``They truly have taken advantage of the U.S., but not for long!'' Trump said in a post on Twitter.

...

``I'll announce tariffs on EU search engines. That'll show 'em!''

Slams? Getting tired of this headline word.

[Dripdry]

It seems to be the most used, and over-used, headline word lately. Everyone is slamming everything, and it comes across as flat and juvenile now. This isn't WWE or a dramatic Soap Opera episode.

Dear journalism, please stop.

Yours,
David

Re:Why Do We Listen?

[rally2xs]

1). He lies, constantly;

Obama barely ever exhaled without lying. He owns the lie of the century, "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor." So don't talk to us about this.

2). He insults people and organizations, constantly;

We want politicians to tell it like it is, and then get all sidways when they do it? Gimmie a break. But still, that is something he SAID. I personally don't give a about what he SAYS, as long as he keeps DOING the right things - securing the border, promoting manufacturing, promoting job growth, bringing back jobs from overseas, deregulating American businesses so that they can make some money and thus bring prosperity to American workers, protecting the 2nd Amendment and all the other Constitutional Rights, etc. etc.

3). He reverses his comments (but never entirely), usually within the same paragraph. Sometimes within the same sentence;

Not living and dying on what he SAYS. I mostly ignore what he SAYS, and go on what he DOES. He's doing the right things in my opinion.

"4). He gets into trouble and then always diverts attention to some other issue."

The "trouble" is usually liberal snowflakes that get all hyperventilated over something he SAID, and are not worth dwelling on.

Re:Get over it. We've had to.

[ArchieBunker]

Trump "traumatizes" you, really? You're the one keeping it going. Turn off your computer or your phone and go outside. See how easy that was? I'll ask you this, what has changed in your daily life since Trump was elected? I'm going to guess nothing besides getting angry.

Gallup poll: Russiagate total FLOP for Dems

[Anonymous Coward]

Gallup today shows that less than 1% of Americans consider the manufactured Russia BS a pressing issue.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-19/gallup-shows-how-much-americans-really-care-about-situation-russia

The DNC is circling the toilet drain.

Re:Gallup poll: Russiagate total FLOP for Dems

[Darinbob]

Americans in general don't consider most things to be important. The majority of senators however do think that the Russia issue is important, even Republican senators (except for those too scared to disagree with Trump). This is not to say that Trump was elected illegitimately, that's not at all what the Russian issue is about at all.

Re: Gallup poll: Russiagate total FLOP for Dems

[Anonymous Coward]

You trust Senators/Politicians to actually be looking out for "our" interests? Seriously?

If they are worried about Russia meddling in elections at all its because the Politicians can't control the narrative and influence the population themselves.

There was no hacking of voting machines etc to change the election. So at worst Russia "influenced the message" but it's still up to the electorate to decide if the message is relevant to how they vite.

If you seriously think there's sufficient dumbasses influenced by fake sites etc to sway an election without thought then Russia is clearly not the problem.

Re:He's your president

[No Longer an AC]

Obama and the Dems were wrong about Russia in 2012 and since then we've seen Russia shoot down MH-17, attack Ukraine, take over Crimea, threaten Europe and attempt to assassinate people in Britain just for starters.

Why is Russia suddenly considered trustworthy now?

And Obama didn't do enough to combat Russia back in 2016.

Why does that justify ignoring it now?

And why is Trump trying to scare people into thinking nuclear war is the only alternative to playing into Putin's hands?

No more "SLAM"!

[Anonymous Coward]

I am just putting in a vote to say we should ban the word SLAM for people disagreeing

It's become silly. Every second headline is SLAM

I see SLAM and I assume things are clickbait

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Chose the lesser of the two evils:

Trump all the way, without a doubt! Everything around him is just noiseâ" Hypocrisy, jealousy, close mindedness, and entitlement.

People love credibility on what thier politicians say, itâ(TM)s time to have credibility on what leaders DO! Trump is a leader, not a political scum.

Re:He's your president

[Kernel Kurtz]

mixing it with the concerted effort to paint Russia as a boogeyman really feels like a throwback to McCarthyism now.

I was just mentioning the other day how you could surely use ole Joe right about now.

Like George Orwell he was clearly ahead of his time.

No zero sum game

[spinitch]

Google and EU should find a way to get along. Democracy probably better off. The fines are a money grab under a guise of trying to force a change in undesirable behavior. Where's is the lame WTO now? Concede WTO has its flaws. Trade wars by Democracies counter productive, we have bigger common foes that should face united.

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Truth. Doesnt matter who is in office, American companies have limited markets in Europe and are subject to some ridiculous protectionism.

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

I know I fed the criminal and stood by as he robbed other people, and mocked your buddy when he said the dude was dangerous, but then he robbed me instead of you so I blame you for everything.

O...M...G...!!!1?!?!!/1!

[Anonymous Coward]

You just discovered that Slashdot sucks? Why, it sure as shit does, and has for the greater part of 2 fucking decades. What, are you 12?

Re:He's your president

[spun]

I'm sure that "Waiting for someone to tell you into what to think" sounds perfectly fine in the original Russian, but to American ears it sounds off.

Re:He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

The toilet?

Not the first time Google got caught

[Anonymous Coward]

There was a fascinating court case for patent violation and monopoly abuse with a little company called Skyhook, that does wifi based geolocaiton. They settled for $90,000,000. Google's internal emails, exposing their plans for monopoly abuse, were turning up in the Boston Globe because the judge refused to seal the records. See http://www.businessinsider.com... for some samples.

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Be careful of the company you keep.
Russian bots are using #WalkAway to try to wound Dems in midterms

Russia is still supporting great patriot Trump and the GOP in elections. It must be because they want world peace and the prosperity of the USA.

get your glasses checked

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, developed countries in Europe and Asia have the lowest homicide rates - with Liechtenstein, Singapore and Iceland having homicide rates of lower than 0.3 per 100,000.

The Americas is the most murderous region in the world - with double the average homicide rate of the next murderous region, Africa.

Re:get your glasses checked

[LynnwoodRooster]

Central America is the most murderous region in the world. An order of magnitude higher than than the US, in fact. I see a lot of Central and South America and Africa and Asia well before the US or Canada. And of course Europe includes Moldova, Russia and Ukraine, all of which are more murderous than the US.

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahahahahaha - you linked to *CNN*. Fake news central!

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

So let me get this straight. You link to an astroturfing article clearly supporting the Democrats, published on a national news orgs website in an attempt to discredit a Republcan grassroots election effort.

You don't even see the irony at all do you?

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

THIS is probably the worst part of this whole deal.

I expect politicians to be hypocrite, and the more rabid in each party can really show impresaive amounts of it but this particular subject has all the Democrats, Obama, his whole old Administration and their duplicitous media fawns taking hypocrisy to a level previously unseen.

It is absolutely clear that the Obama administration thought Hillary was going to win and put it in her to address maybe even setting it up as a way to give her a huge "win" post election in "taking action against Russia" (though clearly I'm stepping in to conspiracy theory territory there).

CNN, MSNBC etc should be all up in Dems faces about this but they aren't...they've entirely given the Dems a pass on their handling of this and turning it around like it's all about Trump.

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

"a Republcan grassroots election effort."

Wut? #Walkaway is supposed to be an ex-Democrat grassroots election effort, isn't it?

You're saying it's actually a Republican initiative? That explains why the Putin bots are helping.

Wouldn't the free market take care of that?

[rsilvergun]

I mean, wouldn't consumers see the crummy phones and refuse to buy them? Wouldn't there be a rush of high quality phones that protected privacy? Or, well, could it be that the free market isn't a Wunderheilung (and yes, I shamelessly used google translate for that).

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

#WalkAway has nothing to do with Russians. It is despicable the lengths CNN will go through to discredit those sick of the Democrats.

Re: He's your president

[joao.cordeiro]

It's useless to say some one is wrong with out any providing any point to support it.
You could state the lack of Congress support on any agressive move against Russia.

Return of the Symbian

[spinitch]

Return of the Symbian ;) Google better watch out , those EU software powerhouses set for disruption. RIP

Re: He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Glad finally someone has an inside Russian channel to tell us what happened. Or he has complete disregard for truth like his favorite orange clown, one of the two.

Re:He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, I think the reasoning is more that anyone with a functioning brain can't possibly believe all the bullshit Trump is spewing. Therefore, the reasoning goes, if there is anyone posting here who can string more than two words together, and he is still defending Trump's bullshit, he must be paid to do so.

Of course this reasoning is flawed, because it ignores the possibility that the poster has been brainwashed.

Re:He's your president

[LynnwoodRooster]

It doesn't justify ignoring it - and no one is. What IS being denied (and has zero evidence to support the claim) is that Russia colluded with the Trump campaign. It's one thing to interfere - it's another to collude. There's nothing about collusion, even to the point that Rod Rosenstein EXPLICITLY states as much. Russia is a problem - but not the way the main media and the Democrats are playing it.

It is curious, though, how few Democrats (none) are taking President Obama to task for his willful ignorance and outright interference in Russian meddling...

Trump is against the EU?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

It is funny, though, to see all the Trumpicans rush to defend Google because Dear Leader has declared the EU an enemy of 'Murica.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

It is curious, though, how few Democrats (none) are taking President Obama to task for his willful ignorance and outright interference in Russian meddling...

It isn't curious though, and you just explained why right before that sentence: interference is not the same thing as collusion.

Likewise, Ignorance isn't interference isn't collusion. It's not illegal to be ignorant. Or stupid. Those aren't things to take Obama "to task" for.

If being stupid or ignorant is grounds to go after the president, it's a case "be careful what you wish for". I dare say the entire late night comedy host industry is making their living off of picking out dumb shit the president says.

Re:He's your president

[LynnwoodRooster]

Collusion is not illegal (interference is), and collusion has no evidence behind it (but interference does). And Obama explicitly told his cyber security chief to ignore the documented Russian interference in the election. It's not ignorance - it's willful action to aid and abet.

Re:He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially when you consider the "boogeyman" that the Democrats now attack,

Sometimes boogeymen exists, and you SHOULD be wary of them, and they do cause problems. But that doesn't mean that everything is their fault, or that every person like our own LynnwoodRooster is a Russian troll.

was dismissed by the same Democrats as "irrelevant" in the 2012 election.

It's almost like things change in six years.
And the Democrats were cause flat-footed by surprise when they should have known better? That's not much of a news flash.

Re:He's your president

[Anonymous Coward]

And Obama explicitly told his cyber security chief to ignore the documented Russian interference in the election. It's not ignorance - it's willful action to aid and abet.

It's not ignorance - it's willful action to aid and abet.

Ummm... no it isn't.

First, Obama didn't tell cyber security to "ignore" Russian interference. He told them to "stand down" on a bunch of retaliatory things cyber security was devising to do (including hacking Russia back). Telling your side not to do one specific kind of retaliation isn't the same as helping the enemy.

Second, even if the stand down orders effectively helped, it takes more than that to establish "willful" action (or inaction) on Obama's part. A guard not locking the doors effectively helped the robber, but that act alone doesn't mean the guard was willfully helping the robber - the guard could still just be an idiot.