This comes to mind first: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

We are all witnessing, with Iran, what happens when a country does not "want to help" the US. This is the mob making an example so that everyone else in the neighbourhood knows whose side they should be on. Remind me, why do the US need to have a military presence in that region of the world again?

In your idea, is the minimum wage a living wage? If yes, how do you define living wage and ensure that the minimum wage does indeed meet that standard over time? How does your idea work in countries without a minimum wage?

You are implying that "investors" make mostly good decisions. Citation needed.

You are replying to an AC troll who will find any small thing to discredit the whole, because somehow they have an agenda to discredit the EFF, which should be a big red flag to anyone here. Btw it's bullshit, the EFF has not defended that person as a person, they have only said that disclosing the AT&T vulnerability was valid and not irresponsible.

This distinction might only exist in your head. Apple as a company either rewards this behaviour or it doesn't. The company's actions is the sum of the actions taken by individuals while representing the company.

Just to be clear, in that context, Meta is the one trying to extend their authority over EU citizens, with manipulative patterns. Right-wing content has been mass-"suggested" by Meta, unsolicited, following Trump's election.

It's worse than that. I remember buying a jacket in the US and the employees were unable to tell me the actual price (after taxes). So not only is the price incorrect, you also can't get the correct price before having to pay. Sure you can always change your mind at that stage, but that's beside the point. Give me the price so I can decide if I want to buy it.

Only if we let the free market sort out healthcare. Which we really shouldn't.

It's a nice way to look at it. Another is that laissez-faire capitalism fosters and rewards dishonesty.

I think because the USA culture is pathological in generally letting people fend for themselves rather than helping them, at least at the level of government. In this case, individuals like you and me supposedly have freedom of choice against the economic far west dominated by big companies, who by the way are also allowed to "lobby" lawmakers. I think this absolutism about freedom of choice, which in practice is largely illusory, is deeply ingrained in the culture. Therefore it's ok if companies are dishonest, they're just using their freedom of expression. It's really stupid, it's also a foundation of right-wing thinking all over the world. It's almost inextricable from the American Dream.

"if you disregard all the data points that inconvenience me, what I say actually seems to make sense"

Europe is not anomalously low. The US is anomalously high for a developed country, and for a western country.

Stop using "political" when what you really mean is "partisan". The topic at hand is very much political, since it concerns the public good.

Most civilised countries consider that a number of things, including electricity, are a public service and therefore heavily regulated to avoid this kind of issue. Letting the market sort it out is only great if you don't care about the common good.

If that were true, copy protection would not exist and software companies would not care about software piracy or about the right to do a personal backup. Your statement is too simplistic for this discussion.