• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

Corrupt Politicians & Extortion Money

SG854

Hail Mary
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
5,215
Trophies
1
Location
N/A
XP
8,104
Country
Congo, Republic of the
real talk: This is probably one the most bi-partisan things that will ever be said by someone in this forum. congrats.


I’m actually rooting for a Democrat next election. Maybe Yang or Bernie. Tulsi Gabbard looks interesting too. I like trying different ideas. I don’t really choose sides. I like ideas rather then parties. All I want is to find the best solutions to problems that is all. I’m still young in my 20’s just trying to figure things out.

And posting stuff on here is a good place for me to learn, since I still don’t know much, and people push back a lot on what I say. I gets me to think in a different perspective and research things that I didn’t think about that never crossed my mind.


I think conservatives and democrats act as a balancing force so that the 2 won’t go wild. I don’t hate neither parties.
 
Last edited by SG854,
  • Like
Reactions: Xzi

petethepug

PUG
Member
Joined
May 2, 2016
Messages
1,504
Trophies
0
Age
23
Location
COMPUTER
XP
1,261
Country
United States
To most of them its money
By the time they lose more money. There's no point to the value of money.
Its what a lot of people forget about it. Early. Especially when marketing of... goes on sale or happens. And I mean that in almost the sincerest way possible. Losing money from extortion or distorition without also frauding in some mischievous way... .




Otherwise. This story would probably be a lot different for the ""wars"" that happen around or across the globe. (took this off topic.) but war is a meaningful way to economically ruin distortion without paying or spending money. For the effort of lives or the environment.
 

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
How political power works, from "americas biographer in chief" Robert Caro:
(Pulitzer price winning)




Have fun. :)
 
Last edited by notimp,

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
Chance find: Book review "Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right. By Jane Mayer.": The Economist 30.01 - 05.03. 2016
Code:
Political influence in America

A network of wealthy donors has a mission to push politics to the right

The avengers In 1972 W. Clement Stone, a wealthy businessman, gave $2m
to Richard Nixon’s presidential campaign. The cheque, worth $11.4m
today, provoked outrage and led to calls for campaign-finance reform.
How quaint history seems when compared with the momentous present. In
2016 a group of rich conservative donors will spend nearly $900m to
influence the presidential and congressional elections. They avoid
public scrutiny by funnelling money into a labyrinthine collection of
foundations and anonymous political groups.

This secret system is the subject of “Dark Money”, an ambitious new book
by Jane Mayer of the New Yorker. David and Charles Koch (pronounced
“coke”), who inherited an industrial conglomerate based in Wichita,
Kansas, which is the second-largest private company in America, are at
the heart of the book. Although the company is diverse, with interests
in energy, chemicals, commodities and consumer goods, its owners focus
on advancing their conservative political agenda. The Kochs deny climate
change and oppose government regulation, welfare and taxes. They view
the rise of the Democrats and Barack Obama’s election in 2008 in
apocalyptic terms, and the counterinsurgency they have funded has
changed the face of politics in America. They have exerted their
strongest influence at state level, where a lot of business regulation
is written.

Ms Mayer, whose sympathies are with the left and who is a critic of
Republican values and motives, does not go so far as to call the source
of the Kochs’ fortune “blood money”, but she does claim that it is
tainted. This is not the first book to look at their business interests
(“Sons of Wichita”, by Daniel Schulman, came out in 2014), but it is the
first to allege that the patriarch Fred Koch made part of his early
wealth by helping build oil refineries in Soviet Russia and Nazi
Germany. The company has faced plenty of public controversy in America,
including environmental fines and lawsuits. There have also been family
conflicts. There are four Koch brothers, not just Charles and David who
are well known. Along with their brother Bill, they allegedly tried in
the 1960s to blackmail a fourth sibling, Frederick, to sell his shares
in the company. The brothers had concluded that he was gay (which he has
denied) and, Ms Mayer suggests, they threatened to expose him to their
father, which caused a permanent rift.

It is the political panorama beyond the Kochs, however, that makes Ms
Mayer’s book more than just another feisty corporate critique. Rich
conservatives, Ms Mayer argues, set up private foundations, which allow
them quietly to divert money to their favourite political causes free of
tax. These foundations-including those set up by the Kochs, Richard
Mellon Scaife and Harry Bradley—are not subject to much disclosure or
oversight. Since foundations were first used by the robber barons as a
way to avoid taxes while appearing philanthropic, they have ballooned.
In 2013 there were over 100,000 of them, with assets of around $800
billion. Some of these do good for the world’s poor, but their structure
also enables them to push money secretly into partisan think-tanks like
the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise
Institute and the Hoover Institution. In other words, the wealthy have
always used charitable foundations to influence politics at the expense
of taxpayers.

“Dark Money” tracks other attempts to alter public discourse without
leaving a trace. The Kochs and other conservatives support academic
research that is allied to their political ideologies. They want to take
“the liberal out of liberal arts”, as Ms Mayer puts it. For example, the
John M. Olin Foundation backed a professor at the University of Chicago,
John Lott, to write a book, “More Guns, Less Crime”, calling for
concealed weapons to be legalised. The Kochs have regularly held summits
to share their free-market, anti-taxation views. Among those invited are
federal judges, 185 of whom have attended seminars sponsored by
conservative interests, including the Koch Foundation.

Ms Mayer’s book seethes with distaste for her subjects. The Koch
brothers denied to be interviewed for “Dark Money”, and purportedly
tried to smear Ms Mayer’s reputation by accusing her of plagiarism after
she published a critical article about them in the New Yorker in 2010.

An author can dislike her subjects. However, the book would have been
stronger had Ms Mayer expanded the scope of her scorn. She acknowledges
in passing that Democratic donors, including two hedge-fund
billionaires, George Soros and Tom Steyer, have funnelled money into
their own political causes. But she never dissects whether the left has
embraced the deceptive funding mechanisms that she so assiduously has
traced for the right. The fact that she does not cast a critical eye
across the whole system prevents “Dark Money” from being a comprehensive
analysis of how America’s campaign finances are distorted. But it offers
a valuable contribution to a subject that requires far greater scrutiny
in this election year.
Codebox can be scrolled.

Have fun. :)
 
Last edited by notimp,
  • Like
Reactions: IncredulousP

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
Roßmann redet mal wieder.


This one is in german only - no subtitles, sorry. :)
And its really a shame - because it gives allegories for everything. (Politics, economic power, constitutional law, media and overreach.)
 
Last edited by notimp,

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
Oh dang it - the Rossman interview is down... :)

Well - we'll have to do it in article form then... :)

Germanys rich:
The life of German tycoons

The reticent rich


BERLIN

Inside the secretive world of Germany's business barons

If they think their ranking on rich lists is too low, American tycoons fume. German ones kick up a fuss when theirs looks suspiciously high, explains Heinz Dürr. When a magazine called him a billionaire a fewyears ago, Mr Dürr rang the editor to remonstrate. The reporters had double-counted his ownership of Homag, a maker of wood-processing machines that Dürr, his family’s mechanical-engineering firm, bought in 2014- Plutocrats have reached the top of politics in America and Italy, while in Asia the super-rich often display their wealth in ostentatious style. Germany’s magnates love to shun the limelight.

The country is hardly short of super-rich people. It has the most of any country after America and China. In February Forbes, a magazine which tracks such things, counted 114 German dollar billionaires, more than double the number in Britain (see chart later in article). This equates to one for every 727,000 Germans, not a world away from America's tally of one for every 539,000 (though it has 607 in total). The German Institute for Economic Research, a think-tank, estimates that the combined assets of the richest 45 Germans are roughly the same as those of the entire poorer half of the country.

That such figures are a surprise to many is testament to the persistence of attitudes outlined by Mr Dürr. German business barons have guarded their privacy more jealously than those from elsewhere. Almost everyone knows what Jeff Bezos, the boss of Amazon, looks like. Most French people will recognise Bernard Arnault, the luxury-goods magnate who is France's richest man. Neither the German nor English Wikipedia page for Dieter Schwarz, who controls Lidl and Kaufland, two supermarket chains, shows his photograph. And good luck with finding a snap of the Albrechts, owners of Aldi, a discount grocer, or the Reiman ns, a super-rich clan that controls jab, a privately held conglomerate that owns Krispy Kreme, Panera Bread and a host of other consumer-goods brands.

“We do not want to get noticed,’’ says Nicola Leibinger-Kammüller, boss of Trumpf, one of the world’s biggest makers of machine tools, which her father, Berthold Leibinger, bought from its heirless founder, Christian Trumpf. A devout Lutheran, Ms Leibinger-Kammüller, her father and her two siblings worked out a family code of conduct that members of the third generation sign when they turn 16. It covers succession and the sale of shares in the firm, but also guidelines for religious tolerance, modesty and respect for others.

A third of German entrepreneurial families have similar rules, according to a study by the WHU Otto Beisheim School of Management and PWC, a consultancy. The constitution of the Reimanns enshrines secrecy, reportedly obliging family members to sign a charter at the age of 18 whereby they pledge to stay away from day-to-day workings of the family business, shun social media, avoid being photographed in public and turn down interviews.

Several factors account for this anonymity. One is the nature of the tycoons' businesses. In America many vast fortunes have been made in finance or technology. Many rich Germans owe their success to staid businesses where progress happens not through headline-grabbing disruptive leaps but unremarkable incremental tinkering. Over half the riches of the country’s billionaires comes from dull endeavours such as retailing, manufacturing and construction. The ten wealthiest German families make cars BMW and Volkswagen), brakes (Knorr-Bremse) and car parts (Schaeffler), or run supermarkets (Mr Schwarz and the Albrechts). Many of Germany's “hidden champions", which lead the world in niche endeavours like mechanical engineering, are tucked away in the countryside.

Culture, too, plays a part. Dirk Ross-mann, the founder of an eponymous chain of pharmacies, says that fellow rich Germans are shy because they worry about making fools of themselves, not least in light of a national disposition towards Sozialneid (envy of those better off), and fear for their safety—especially in the wake of the tragic kidnap and murder in 2002 of Jakob von Metzler, an 11-year-old boy from a banking dynasty.

As in other countries, many German journalists are left-leaning and display instinctive hostility towards plutocrats. In March Stem, a weekly magazine, published a cover story about the "Shamelessly rich", illustrated with a gold spoon and arguing that Germany's wealthiest 5% try to protect themselves against a redistributive welfare state by lobbying for lower taxes and hiding their wealth offshore. In May Die Zeit, a news weekly, published a series of articles about "the responsibility of the rich", and backed a wealth tax and higher inheritance taxes. "A billionaire cannot win in the German media," says Tobias Prestel of Prestel & Partner, who organises conferences for the family offices of the super-wealthy.

Chequered history is another reason to keep heads down. Most German billionaires are not self-made but scions of industrial dynasties. Their forebears were neither particularly private nor parochial. All that changed after the second world war, during which some had prospered under the Third Reich.


A few years ago the Reimanns, whose fortune dates back to a chemicals business founded in 1823 by Johann Adam Benckiser (hence jab), asked Paul Erker, a historian at Munich University, to look into the family’s behaviour under the Nazi regime. Mr Erker discovered that the then patriarch, Albert, and his son were early and ardent supporters of Adolf Hitler. They permitted the brutal abuse of forced labourers in their business and their own home.

Werner Bahlsen, the current head of the Bahlsen biscuit empire, said the family will hire a well-known historian to examine their Nazi pastafter Verena, his 26-year-old daughter, recently blurted in response to a question about Bahlsen's exploitation of forced workers that they were treated well. (Ms Bahlsen has since apologised for her “thoughtless” remark.)

The Quandts (BMW), Krupps (steel), Porsches and others have grappled with similarly tainted legacies. In 2000, 4,760 German companies including Siemens, Daimler, Deutsche Bank and Volkswagen, created a foundation that, along with the German state, raised more than Csbn ($4.8bn) for survivors of Nazi atrocities and slave labour. The Reimanns chipped in C5m at the time. After the first results of Mr Erker's study became public, the family announced it would donate an extra Ciom to charity (though did not specify which).

Unsavoury pasts and secrecy may partly explain why Germans dislike the rich. In a survey last year by the Allensbach Institute, commissioned for a study by Rainer Zittelmann, a historian, the foremost qualities associated with the rich were selfishness (62%), materialism (56%), recklessness (50%), greed (49%) and arrogance (43%). Only 2% admitted that it was “very important”, and 20% that it was “important”, for them to become rich. Ipsos mori asked similar questions of Americans and found that 39% of young respondents, who tend to be more critical of wealth than older ones, said it was important or very important for them to become rich.

Germans are also likelier than Americans to blame the world's ills on the wealthy, according Mr Zittelmann. One in two Germans thinks that they caused the financial crisis or humanitarian disasters, compared with one in four Americans. Surveys also show that Germans are likelier than Americans, Britons or French to experience Schadenfreude when wealthy businessfolk lose their shirts in risky deals.

Such attitudes explain why German business barons have kept a low profile. Mr Rossmann lives an unassuming life by any measure. He does not own a smartphone or a fancy watch, has lived with his wife in the same relatively modest house for 35 years and buys a new Mercedes car every eight years. If he or others like him exert influence, it is typically close to home, often in an obscure small town. Ms Leibinger-Kammüller's generosity to her local parish led a leftist paper to christen her “the Madonna from Swabia” in an admiring profile last year. Families like hers may also maintain close relations with local politicians, who in turn make their voices heard in Berlin.

They have learned to keep those voices low. In 2006 the Stiftung Familienuntemehmen, a foundation for family firms, lobbied so hard and loudly for lower inheritance taxes that its efforts backfired and the entire reform collapsed. A decade later their main national lobbies—the BDI (association of German industry), the BDA (association of German employers) and the foundation itself—put the case more subtly and managed to get easier rules that let heirs avoid paying inheritance tax provided they keep their business running for at least seven years and protect jobs and wages.

As the German rich mingle with plutocrats elsewhere and their companies have globalised, they are starting to become a little less diffident. This is not always to their advantage. Before Ms Bahlsen's tone-deaf comments about forced labour, she reacted to a proposal of a youth chief of the Social Democrats to collectivise big firms by saying, “I'm a capitalist. I own a quarter of Bahlsen, that’s great. I want to buy a sailing yacht and stuff like that." But Mr Ross-mann, who does not shy away from the press, thinks that Germany’s rich should be more active in politics, which lacks a spirit of enterprise. Few have so far tried and none has succeeded.

Mr Dürr has raised his profile, too. After building his family’s firm into a global leader and listing it on the stock exchange, he moved to the public sector as boss of Deutsche Bahn, the state-owned railways, which he merged with eastern Germany's Reichsbahn and in 1994 transformed into a privately run joint-stock company. Like Mr Rossmann, Mr Dürr does not hide from the public eye. He even briefly considered running for political office, though ultimately demurred. Old habits die hard.
src: The Economist 15 06 2019
 

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
Another story - same issue. This time I'm not posting it in full.

Basically states, that the state taxing companies that can not threaten to leave and thereby gaining investment capital, had been used to boost middle class economies, when the need arises (they want progress). Because thats not happening anymore in recent years (see: Mariana Mazzucato) - the middle classes now - march. :)

Middlemarch

Quibble with the details, but the overarching story—immobile companies giving governments a degree of sovereignty, which they self-interestedly use to boost the middle classes—seems a plausible account of the stability of advanced capitalist democracies. It leaves plenty to be concerned about, however. It hinges on the middle classes feeling confident about the economy. A sharp slowdown in growth in real median incomes, as in America and Britain in recent years, might not send voters rushing to the barricades, ...
...but could strengthen the appeal of movements that threaten to disturb the status quo.
Governments, too, are becoming less responsive to middle-class priorities. America's is too dysfunctional, and Britain’s too distracted by Brexit, to focus on improving education, infrastructure and the competitiveness of markets.
Demographic change might also take a toll: older and whiter generations may not much care whether a would-be middle class that does not look like them has opportunities to advance or not. Then, too, the authors may have underestimated the corrosive effect of inequality. Threatening to leave is not the only way the rich can wield power. They control mass media, fund think-thanks and spend on or become political candidates. Proud democracies may well survive this period of turmoil. But it would be a mistake to assume survival is foreordained.
"Free Exchange, Votes of confidence" in The Economist 2019 06 15

Ah. Clear text. :)
 
Last edited by notimp,

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
How corruption works:
https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/21/guatemala_presidential_election_thelma_aldana_corruption

(Video starts at the correct time stamp.)

This is a good example of how institutionalized political corruption works. Its good because its a little removed from our (western) sensibilities, so its possible not to immediately take sides with certain political fractions. The video tells the story from the left progressives point of view - but is detailed enough, and includes the right actors - so you can gage how the process of political corruption works in principal.

I'd recommend you watch this video with a mindset that hasn't you automatically side with the "progressives running on a platform of diversity and economic justice" in the end. Because thats what the video suggests. :) It might not be wrong (know too little about the country) - but its at least political. (As is the entire rest. ;) ) If you can - look more at the process... :)

edit: Country that has to serve as an example here is Guatemala.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

How corruption works in western societies:
https://www.arte.tv/de/videos/043387-000-A/who-am-tropf-der-geldgeber/

(Sadly only in german and french again.)

This is - without kidding - the single best investigative documentary I've seen in ten years. Not because about what it set out to prove (title of the documentary), but because of what it lays bare of the institutional process. This is how western societies work. As a blueprint.

(Video in german on youtube:
)
 
Last edited by notimp,
  • Like
Reactions: IncredulousP

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
Ah, finally a reason to link 'Born Rich' again.

Reason:
Johnson & Johnson faces multibillion opioids lawsuit that could upend big pharma
As the state of Oklahoma’s multibillion-dollar lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson has unfolded over the past month, the company has struggled to explain marketing strategies its accusers say dangerously misrepresented the risk of opioid addiction to doctors, manipulated medical research, and helped drive an epidemic that has claimed 400,000 lives over the past two decades.
Johnson & Johnson profited further as demand for opioids surged by buying poppy growing companies in Australia to supply the raw narcotic for its own medicines and other American drug makers.

One expert witness at the forefront of combatting the epidemic, Dr Andrew Kolodny, told the court he had little idea about Johnson & Johnson’s role until he saw the evidence in the case.
src: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...d-johnson-opioids-crisis-lawsuit-latest-trial

Born Rich (Documentary filmed by one of the Johnson & Johnson heirs.):


If you watch after reading, dont take this one too hard. The irony here is the sweet part.. ;)
 
Last edited by notimp,

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
1/2 OT - but I think I can place it here.

I'll translate on the fly.

The rich in the west have moved towards private investment vehicles and away from banks.
Rebecca Gooch estimates, that there are currently 7300 Single-Family-Offices that work for single families, 38 percent more than two years ago. Those are managing combined assets of 5,9 trillion US dollars. This is twice as much as Hedge Fonds are stepping into the ring with.

The spread is enormous – from a single person unit, which is responsible for 50 million USD, to investment organizations with dozens of billions of wealth. An investment vehicle like Waypoint owned by the genevan family Bertarelli with its 200 staff members looks like a smaller version of Private Equity firms like KKR. Heartland of Family Offices would be the USA, followed by Great Britain and then Switzerland and Germany says Memminger, an adviser that worked with over 20 of them. Asia is currently only at the beginning stages of this development.

Family Offices have cost conventional banks a lot of business in the past couple of years, even though some of them – like the two swiss giants UBS and Credit Suisse – have created their business model around the needs of the super rich. The industry leader UBS counts more than half of all billionaires amongst its customers.
src:
https://diepresse.com/home/wirtscha...-Reiche-haben-eigenes-Family-Office-fuer-sich (german)

English news sources should be able to be sourced by googling for the two people named in this article.
 
Last edited by notimp,

Smoker1

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2015
Messages
5,054
Trophies
1
Location
California
XP
6,101
Country
United States
In America, how it is supposed to be: A Country of the People, by the People, for the People.
How it seems to be in recent Decades: A Country of the Wealthy, by the Wealthy, for the Wealthy.
Notice how there are Laws in place where if the People do it, it is Illegal. But if the Wealthy or big Business does it, it is Politics/Business. Not to mention, the Wealthy get all the Tax Breaks, while the People end up flipping the Bill for it.
Also, the People Pay into SSI, Medicare, and other items. But you always hear the guy who looks like Cecil Turtle from Looney Tunes, talking about Cutting SSI, Medicare, and anything else that helps the People, Elderly, Disabled, and Vets.
I love how when Bush was in Office, the idiots in Office took Money from SSI, and it has yet to be returned.

I swear, these idiots in Office need to be reminded that they are supposed to be Representing the PEOPLE! Not just the Wealthy, their Bank Accounts, or themselves. Also thought Trump was going to go for getting Term Limits????????
Finally, the Wealthy also need to know, that the PEOPLE keep this Country going. If the People suddenly stopped coming into Work for a few Days, how much would the Wealthy lose?????
 

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
A country of the people by the people? You know that this all just meant, that you'd go with free democratic elections, and that if non-constitutional power (handed on through institutions for generations) would have been established, that people could and were supposed to overthrow it by attaining to the streets.

Well this ship has sailed long ago. Trust in politics is at a constant low for generations. Democracy doesnt matter anymore (gerrymandering, open talk about stolen elections, superpacks, only a two party system - none of which has an actual program - they just pick up what ever soundpieces are popular at the time - and those are almost never directional decision, that have an impact on peoples lives programmatically). Again - I believe, that Colin Crouch' Post-Democracy concept is very much correct. (Oligopolies, are what you are dealing with, if you are lucky.)

People only hold real power, when they are in mobs, on the streets - thereby tanking economies. Because thats so bad for economies, we took that feeling and attached to election processes - which isnt bad, those are rituals that remind everyone of something that isn't real (power of the people) - but feals so good. But then we minimized everything that elections could mean. We stabalised outcomes, we lost all political direction, we dumbed down public decision processes to a point where they really dont matter at all.

I mean - you've got to see it this way - in the US you can now decide between "getting universal health care" as compensation for the impending digitalisation and automation age - something the rest of the world has managed to already get ages ago.

And if and how you want to damage your economy out of you own volition, because of a higher conceptional goal (climate).

If you look at that as someone that comes from a 'working' society, you cry tears. You've all but proven, that the president is really just a figuerehead, and is needed for nothing, nothing at all. And that congress seems to 'function' properly if it is in a 10 year deathlock on all issues - except, when you need to buy out the rich, and spread financial crises around the world.

You've shown multiple times, that symbol politics works, that you can rule people with a boogieman thats not real (terrorism).

You've handed over political decision making to an advertising company ('I get me news from facebook - oh look, an ad'). But now you've seen the faults of your ways and switched to the instagram.

And you are on the verge of loosing half of your power as citizens, at the point when you simply will not be needed from a productivity pov. You've tasted a little bit of that already through globalisation.

No one believes, that more power to the people would be a solution for anything. You consume netflix, and you are happy. Keep it that way.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

This is your bible for the following five decades:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ative-neoliberalism-still-understands-markets

And none of 'the people' ever thought to protest for that.

'But we have to show more, of what the founding fathers meant, when they...' Oh for fucks sake.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Also - here is what reducing economic activity within societies does. It cements in the status quo (spread of economical differences). It basically produces the reverse american dream.

You are all fine with that, right? No? Go watch netflix.

I mean - you cant be politically interested, intelligent and dumb enough not to see all of that happening.
 
Last edited by notimp,

supersonicwaffle

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2018
Messages
262
Trophies
0
Age
37
XP
458
Country
Germany
I wouldn't call apple a monopoly because Samsung exists, and other competitors exist. The moment they slip up and sell a horribly bad product they will be over run. They have to keep improving their iphone yearly to compete.

For what it's worth the argument that Apple is a monopoly usually revolves around them being the only way to obtain apps on the iOS platform that doesn't involve jailbreaking and losing warranty. Google allows installing third party app stores like Amazon's or F-Droid without root access.
Their monopoly on app stores is a particular problem since Apple is willing to employ means they have banned in their ToS for other developers to promote their services. Third party developers for example are not allowed to promote their services through push notifications but Apple does exactly that for their own services.

EDIT: If you want a specific example I think Spotify is currenlty in a legal battle with Apple because Apple promoted their Apple Music service with push notifications.

Fair enough. So you're saying perhaps they were closer to a monopoly than I give them credit for? Or that they are now?

Sorry for not getting back to this at the time. It's hard to discuss Microsoft without diving into the plethora of products and services they offer and with some of them, yes they absolutely have the market cornered.
Microsoft Exchange Server (Groupware, Mail/Contacts/Calendar) for example is particularly devoid of good alternatives. Calendar and Contacts will not work with standard protocols and are only really usable in Outlook. With their recent push towards cloud services they raised the minimum requirements from 8GB RAM for Exchange 2016 to 128GB RAM for Exchange 2019. The way it works is that you won't get help if you call their support hotline unless you meet the minimum requirements. They have removed Exchange server from their self hosted small business products.
With Office they made a push to get an ISO certification for their document format Office Open XML (docx, xlsx, etc.) in 2008 but have since only released "transitional" versions of their document format that contain a lot of undocumented (read non-standardized) specs. On top of that the default font for Microsoft office is licensed with Microsoft office, so using the default font will mess with formatting when you open the document in a different office suite on a system that doesn't have these fonts installed.
 
Last edited by supersonicwaffle,
  • Like
Reactions: Xzi

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
For all we know more power to the people means, have fun in your gig economy jobs. They so self empowering. Just on a level, where you'll matter less over all.

Now go watch more Netflix.
 
Last edited by notimp,

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
It also doesnt help much, that part of the left is CONSTANTLY thinking about how they can reframe "20-40 years of absolutely no net gain of incomes" and "0% interest economy (so saving up isn't viable anymore for the vast majority of people)".

into something extremely wonderful - like

- Look, you havent even noticed, you were so happy, before someone told you

or

- But we have higher employment rates, isn't that great?

or

- But the world is so much better now.

or

- But you dont want to be better off economically - do you? You just want to be more happy!

or

- Look, its much more beautiful outside of cities, somewhere in the woods, where you'll not matter at all.


See:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jun/13/moving-away-from-gdp-as-a-measure-of-success

No? Still no one biting? Still just how societies should develop "normally". And now new in their portfolio: Could you suffer a little more, so that your grandchildren will suffer less? Promised?

I mean, you dont even feel it - with all your netflix watching and stuff.

Again - those people - hit them in the mouth for me, if you ever see them. Do it for me.
 
Last edited by notimp,

supersonicwaffle

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2018
Messages
262
Trophies
0
Age
37
XP
458
Country
Germany
An example of them not having complete control would be in 2003 the City Governement of Munich switched from using Windows that they used in 14,000 of their computers to using Linux.

Accenture was the "independent" consultant, that ADVISED the city of munich to get out out Linux - and even made them a handy step by step plan to switch over to Windows. At the cost of a few million.
src: https://www.heise.de/newsticker/mel...len-Ausstieg-aus-LiMux-auf-Raten-3463100.html (german)

Fast forward to 2019: Accenture and Microsoft are founding a new business group to help wealthy businesses do "digitalisation with azure cloud products" yay!
src: https://www.information-age.com/accenture-microsoft-avanade-business-group-123478888/

This - is corruption.

Have a like each for mentioning LiMux.
I will say however that the project was too ambitious for its own good and introduced a lot of unnecessary overhead that held it back and lead to low user acceptance.
Basically they opted to maintain their own Linux distro based on Ubuntu, which is known to not be particularly fast to adopt current versions of the applications they're shipping and the LiMux team has basically been behind one full 2 year release cycle when rolling it out on top of that.
The LiMux desktop OS 5.0 was rolled out in 2014 and was based on Ubuntu 12.04 while 14.04 was recently released.
As a matter of fact I'm typing this out on a Ubuntu 18.04 machine right now and am annoyed with features missing from my mail client because it's way behind and I will probably switch distributions on that machine in the near future.
 
Last edited by supersonicwaffle,

notimp

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
5,779
Trophies
1
XP
4,420
Country
Laos
For a mail client? ;)

Regardless, the point I wanted to make was, that Accenture got their payback in terms of an exclusive business venture with Microsoft to "advise" more companies in the private sector to bet exclusively on MS infrastructure.

Then they were sued for 32 Million USD by Herz, for a website project they cashed 32 Million USD in on. For a website project. Worth maybe 20k, heck - I'm generous today, make it 200k. They cached 32 Million for it. And delivered next to nothing.

I mean if your business is all based on selling people on monopoly power (closed format), then being bought out as an 'independant consultants', and then sell or help sell all information on the customer (https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/microsoft-office-365-banned-from-german-schools/), and then hope not to get sued by your former clients - at which point is it polite to say that you suck?

I mean I'm all for opportunity in capitalism, but this is a little bit much.
 
Last edited by notimp,

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    Well hmm got that Eeros 6+ router working so no need for a new one for now lol
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    Scratch!!! In broad daylight!!!
  • BakerMan @ BakerMan:
    guys, is it truly discrimination if you dislike everyone equally? like, if i dislike everyone, then am i racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist, etc., or am i just a hater?
    +1
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    All of the above...
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    You gotta be on Psis level and hate your own people
    +2
  • BakerMan @ BakerMan:
    i meant everyone, even my own people, and myself
  • BigOnYa @ BigOnYa:
    Oh, well thats ok then
  • BakerMan @ BakerMan:
    (i don't dislike people, it's just a hypothe- aaaaaand i'm banned aren't i?)
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    Good good let your hate flow through you!!!
    +2
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    Emperor Palpetine reveals that he is trans Jewish pro abortion and drives a Prius!
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    Unlimited Power!!!
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Hate fuels your cybertruck
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    Yeah this Eero router is way better than the one my ISP gave me, still might need to buy one but until then this one is better lol
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    The one Comcast provided is apparently powered by a comadore 64 chip lol
  • Psionic Roshambo @ Psionic Roshambo:
    What's weird is that they both have about the same speed in bandwidth but the Comcast one feels laggy like click something and it takes a second to load, the Eero one is just instant lol
  • Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty:
    why do i see some little songs at @shaunj66 's profile page?
  • Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty:
    sonics*
  • fluff663 @ fluff663:
    hello
  • K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2:
    Maybe he likes sonic
  • rvtr @ rvtr:
    Hey all.
    rvtr @ rvtr: Hey all.