True story, though in the 1930's the US was not the global hegemony it is today nor did it control the global reserve currency. Back then the British empire held that crown. The US of today is a different beast than in the 1930s.
What makes you think his comment is based on the article?
I have read the article and I found it very thin on the details regarding any specifics on what exactly "tariffing big tech" would be, especially that StarLink mentioned in the article is not really "big tech" in EU, but more of a niche ISP.
Which is why I believe he didn't read it, plus the general trend of HN users to rush to comment without reading the articles that's a meme at this point, which only results in low quality emotionally charged rants being upvoted to the top even though they have little to do with the article in the topic.
And the actual big-tech would be more difficult to tariff since their products don't cross any customs like star link, but are all sold by companies registered in the EU, same how example Fords are also manufactured in the EU to get around tariffs.
Kinda-sorta agree with your point, it's the HN headline that has been editorialized. The actual article mentions services as a whole, not big tech specifically, which makes it seem that the GP focused more on the headline, but even their comment is talking about services as a whole.
In terms of your comment, they didn't say Starlink is big tech. The paragraph in question separates them with the word "another example":
> A fightback could include restrictions on the intellectual property of Big Tech companies. Another example would be banning Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite network from winning government contracts.
As for big tech examples examples, the article did mention revoking of patents, or obstructing revenues on software updates and streaming. But yeah, the article is otherwise thin on details wrt big tech, primarily because it's not focusing on that topic specifically.
Excuse me for wanting to know the full context of the topic and do critical thinking before commenting on it, instead of opening my mouth to parrot the "Orange Man Evil" party line to farm upvotes.
Your arguments aren't in conflict with jurmous, though. The article can be thin on details and jurmous could be correct that the EU needs to be tough. I get the sense no one is really sure what you're taking umbrage at. It doesn't help that you mix in flame bait accusations about other posters' motivations.
>and jurmous could be correct that the EU needs to be tough
Then you also admit I was right that people make emotionally charged comments/rants that have little to do with the details of the article.
Should I be sorry for pointing it out instead of jumping on the "US/Trump bad" bandwagon without any arguments like jurmous did whose comment is just vague demagogy("EU needs to be tough") without comments on the specifics of the article?
When everyone just posts vague emotional demagogy comments, then the quality of the discussion goes to shit. Sorry, I'm here for more technical argumented discussions, not "US-bad EU-strong" comments.
Well, you could have pulled jurmous up for digressing without accusing them of not reading the article. You're also free to criticise their comment for being emotionally charged, although in this case I would disagree with you.
Two things here can't be true at the same time: You either believe that a guy who went bankrupt six times running casinos, and thinks tariffs are paid by the export country...Is an economic genius, OR you believe Warren Buffet and every other US and European analyst that says this is going to be one of the few artificially induced recessions.
Which one of them is going to be?
And now is pressuring car manufacturers not to follow normal corporate financial management...
"...In fact, based on a survey we conducted earlier this month in conjunction with Ipsos, consumers are spending less due to increased concerns about inflation and the economy. This is manifesting itself into slower traffic across the industry in the U.S. in Quarter 1, which we are experiencing in our business as well..."
