Well the difference is that EU tries to impose fair rules that will benefit (or hurt, as is too often the case) everyone equally, while Trump wants to impose unfair rules that only benefit US corporations and himself.
No, the EU has a habit of protectionism disguised as legitimate interest. I recall a case study from when I was in high school, where the EU set the safety limits on a certain contaminant in a product—peanuts, I think it was—way, way stricter than any evidentiary basis, because EU farms could meet the restriction, but African or South American farms could not.
It’s hardly comparable to anything Trump is doing, but it’s worth mentioning, since you did claim EU laws are all about affecting everyone equally.
They also paid for a study on how digital piracy affects profits and then buried it when the result showed that it didn’t have a negative impact.
The EU cares about the EU and its wealth, not its citizens. It’s still a big step up over the land of the free-to-sell-its-citizens-wellbeing-to-the-corporations, though.
Maybe, but it’s hardly news. I graduated highschool well over a decade ago, and the case study I mentioned was not exactly new when I was studying economics in school.
Well the difference is that EU tries to impose fair rules that will benefit (or hurt, as is too often the case) everyone equally, while Trump wants to impose unfair rules that only benefit US corporations and himself.
No, the EU has a habit of protectionism disguised as legitimate interest. I recall a case study from when I was in high school, where the EU set the safety limits on a certain contaminant in a product—peanuts, I think it was—way, way stricter than any evidentiary basis, because EU farms could meet the restriction, but African or South American farms could not.
It’s hardly comparable to anything Trump is doing, but it’s worth mentioning, since you did claim EU laws are all about affecting everyone equally.
They also paid for a study on how digital piracy affects profits and then buried it when the result showed that it didn’t have a negative impact.
The EU cares about the EU and its wealth, not its citizens. It’s still a big step up over the land of the free-to-sell-its-citizens-wellbeing-to-the-corporations, though.
This deserves a post of its own.
Maybe, but it’s hardly news. I graduated highschool well over a decade ago, and the case study I mentioned was not exactly new when I was studying economics in school.
Old news is usually “new” to a lot of people. I should look into it myself as someone who has a vote in EU elections.