Comment by 0xDEAFBEAD
1 month ago
See this illustrates my point. The "soft power" talking point I sometimes see from Europeans is a complete lie. The idea is that giving Europe relatively favorable terms will cause Europe to regard the US well is a fabrication. In reality, giving Europe favorable terms just causes Europeans to view Americans as suckers.
You are deluded. Nobody "gave Europe a sweet deal". Those are the rules of the land. Companies are free to reject them, in which case they just cannot do business here. We did not force them to come. The fact that they are still obviously making tons of money in the EU should tell you how you are being taken advantage of.
So you acknowledge that this point about "protection money" (the point I was originally responding to) is nonsense then. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46736657
Right. It’s not really protection money. It’s just a duopoly under the control of a rogue foreign power that control any entity’s access to customer’s payments. So even if it’s not protection money, the risk of blackmail is high. It is a strategic weakness.
Protection Money is as much nonsense as "Europeans are ripping off Americans in Trade". Because they always conveniently leave out services, which would make the Balance between the US/EU even
As the other guy said you're completely deluded. Nobody "gave" us cheaper credit card fees from MasterCard or Visa. They were the result of a regulatory process.
MasterCard or Visa also aren't operating as a charity in Europe.
Before the capping of fees was introduced, their acceptance was shit at most businesses, and most bank consumers also didn't have one, as opposed to cards of the national scheme which had lower fees both for customers and merchants
So initially MasterCard/Visa profits in Europe are "protection money".
Then it comes out that MasterCard/Visa fees in Europe are actually far lower than in the US.
Now the Europeans are laughing at the Americans for being suckers.
This interaction basically sums up the entire EU/US relationship and the absurdity of Europe's rhetoric around it. Copy/paste this template, change a few words, and it applies pretty much everywhere.
We don't laugh at Americans for being suckers, we feel sorry for them that they have to live with all this nonsense, and their current horrible administration.
And we also look with horror because most of the bullshit in the US is coming to Europe with a 20 year delay
6 replies →
> soft power
Go look at what these people thought of us before Trump: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u...
> Sweden: 47% had a favorable opinion of the US.; Germany: 49%; France: 46%; The Netherlands: 48%
And this was after the US committed over $120 billion in aid (all weapons and cash) to Ukraine, and, for some reason, allowed Sweden to join NATO--the same Sweden that pledged neutrality when Finland was invaded by the Soviets, who stole the Karelian Isthmus and other bits of its territory, and similarly did nothing when Norway and Denmark were invaded and occupied by Nazi Germany.
Yes, there is no point in trying to make Europeans happy. They are impossible to please. You can see our favorability in Europe was barely net positive then.
By May of last year (before the Greenland drama--I'm against that of course), more Europeans liked China better than the US. Maybe we should start shipping materials for weapons to Russia, like China does, to see if that improves our popularity with Europe.
"Soft power" is an absurd talking point. Doing nice things for Europe has brought us nothing but anger and contempt. Just scroll through this thread, there's plenty of proof. They are a very entitled and condescending people.
> what these people thought of us before Trump
Last I checked, Trump was elected in 2016.
In 2021 he tried an autogolpe and by the time this survey was done in 2024, he was not in prison for treason but instead again running for president as nominee of one of only two major parties. What sort of opinion should one have of such a country?
> allowed Sweden to join NATO
What sort of absurd argument is this? Now that Sweden changed their mind and want to enter treaty obligations to help defend e.g. the Baltics, we should refuse them?
Also, I can't begin to comprehend how Sweden would militarily defend Finland, who entered WW2 as an ally of Nazi Germany after being invaded by USSR, and simultaneously fight against Nazi Germany.