21–30 of 239 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But we could say “fatted liver” and that would work, but of course food sophisticates need a more sophisticated term for their food to taste better.
Side note: grammatically "fattened liver" should be preferred over "fatted liver".
Same as “datums” is correct in some contexts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope, it is anti-competitive and bad for the economy, as it creates trade barriers and stifles innovation, as well as using your taxes badly. It essentially accounts to government subsidies for a certain company. And that's why it is illegal in the EU.
So you’re saying a state like Venezuela should always keep being a raw materials exporter and an importer of goods with added value because jumpstarting or maintaining an industry is bad for global free trade?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're essentially advocating for tariffs and "buy local" requirements. Not only they are bad for the economy, they're also mostly illegal in the EU. > If I were French and our rolling stock were competitive Well, it just wasn't as competitive as the German one.
> Not only they are bad for the economy, they're also mostly illegal in the EU. I wish we would stop with this meme, you should ask what they think in the UK of their private trains, I would prefer to keep the French train monopoly, at least it's cheap and it works.
Sure you might prefer, but your personal preference doesn't change the fact that protectionism is bad in the long term, and illegal in the EU.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you’re saying a state like Venezuela should always keep being a raw materials exporter and an importer of goods with added value because jumpstarting or maintaining an industry is bad for global free trade?
What does Venezuela has to do with the EU?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s from your taxes (unless the Germans are donating from their coffers), so yeah you should have a local preference if it’s competitive (near as good or better). It adds to local economy and also staves off monopolization of producers.
Nope, it is anti-competitive and bad for the economy, as it creates trade barriers and stifles innovation, as well as using your taxes badly. It essentially accounts to government subsidies for a certain company. And that's why it is illegal in the EU.
Why stop at the EU?
If Tau Cetians can produce trains cheap we ought to buy trains from Tau Ceti.
Never mind that it puts the locals out of a job, diminishes local pride in locally manufactured goods, and what do the Tau Cetians care if the trains are unreliable and in comfortable.
Economics doesn’t occur in a vacuum, and it doesn’t matter if my opinion is economically factually incorrect: the National morale does matter.
But, if you hold competition above all else, then we have an ideological mismatch, and no amount of fact or opinion sharing is likely to help.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not only they are bad for the economy, they're also mostly illegal in the EU. I wish we would stop with this meme, you should ask what they think in the UK of their private trains, I would prefer to keep the French train monopoly, at least it's cheap and it works.
> I would prefer to keep the French train monopoly, at least it's cheap and it works. Sure you might prefer, but your personal preference doesn't change the fact that protectionism is bad in the long term, and illegal in the EU.
It all depends, some industries are just not working privately, the privatization of electricity in France was also a failure for example. The privatization of the post system was also a failure but it matters less since the postal system is less important nowadays.
For the trains, the core issue here is that the network has a value has a whole, if you start to remove the unprofitable parts, it reduces the value of it as a whole. It would be like having only highways, it would not be useful even if it's where you have the most traffic.
> and illegal in the EU.
Well, then you understand why some people become anti-EU when their public service fails and politicians tell them it's perfectly normal and because of some EU policy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you’re saying a state like Venezuela should always keep being a raw materials exporter and an importer of goods with added value because jumpstarting or maintaining an industry is bad for global free trade?
What does Venezuela has to do with the EU?
The EU is an arbitrary distinction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope, it is anti-competitive and bad for the economy, as it creates trade barriers and stifles innovation, as well as using your taxes badly. It essentially accounts to government subsidies for a certain company. And that's why it is illegal in the EU.
If we take this to it’s logical extreme we can see how absurd it is. Why stop at the EU? If Tau Cetians can produce trains cheap we ought to buy trains from Tau Ceti. Never mind that it puts the locals out of a job, diminishes local pride in locally manufactured goods, and what do the Tau Cetians care if the trains are unreliable and in comfortable. Economics doesn’t occur in a vacuum, and it doesn’t matter if my opi…
I don't even know how to reply to that. Not only you're completely wrong, but you're a nationalist who would sink your country for "national pride".
Kinda like North Korea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does Venezuela has to do with the EU?
Economics basics. Support your own industry to maintain a viable industry. Why should India or Australia buy French rolling stock if they themselves won’t deploy it? At that point, close shop.
Sorry, but it is clear that you don't understand the very basics of economics...