Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 30th Jun 2016 10:14 UTC
In the News

[US senator Elizabeth] Warren had different beefs with Google, Apple and Amazon, but the common thread was that she accused each one of using its powerful platform to "lock out smaller guys and newer guys," including some that compete with Google, Apple and Amazon.

Google, she said, uses "its dominant search engine to harm rivals of its Google Plus user review feature;" Apple "has placed conditions on its rivals that make it difficult for them to offer competitive streaming services" that compete with Apple Music; and Amazon "uses its position as the dominant bookseller to steer consumers to books published by Amazon to the detriment of other publishers."

"Google, Apple and Amazon have created disruptive technologies that changed the world, and ... they deserve to be highly profitable and successful," Warren said. "But the opportunity to compete must remain open for new entrants and smaller competitors that want their chance to change the world again."

Before we start, I strongly urge you to watch Warren's actual speech, instead of just reading the linked article. Warren explains clearly why the extreme consolidation and monopolisation in all manner of sectors in America is absolutely terrible for consumers, killing competition, dampening innovation, and maintaining high prices.

Obviously, this entire speech is music to my ears. Warren is the obvious - and effectively inevitable - VP pick for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, meaning that if she were to beat the Republican nominee come November, the United States will have a Europe-style democratic socialist as vice-president. Obviously, this has the monopolistic US companies and their corporate cheerleaders shaking in their boots.

Thanks to the unexpectedly successful Sanders campaign, Clinton is effectively forced to pick Sanders' friend and ideological compeer as her VP, directly threatening the free ride these companies have been getting for decades since the Reagan years, perpetuated by both Republicans and Democrats ever since. It won't be immediate - the VP position is more of a mindshare podium than one of policy-making - but it represents a huge shift in how the United States government and its politics treat the business world.

There's a reason Tim Cook is raising money for Paul Ryan.

Thread beginning with comment 631151
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not a great VP pick
by ezraz on Thu 30th Jun 2016 12:05 UTC
ezraz
Member since:
2012-06-20

Liz Warren outshines Hillary Clinton in a lot of ways. She's more likeable and trustworthy. Therefore I don't think she's the VP pick.

She makes a great attack dog though, someone to take Trump's insults and throw them back at him. Hillary doesn't insult well, she cackles too much. She's better taking the high road and getting someone else to do her dirty work, like Bush did.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Not a great VP pick
by bosco_bearbank on Thu 30th Jun 2016 12:26 in reply to "Not a great VP pick"
bosco_bearbank Member since:
2005-10-12

But being the attack dog is one now-traditional role for a VP candidate. Think Spiro Agnew.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Not a great VP pick
by Flatland_Spider on Thu 30th Jun 2016 14:22 in reply to "Not a great VP pick"
Flatland_Spider Member since:
2006-09-01

Hillary is awful.

People have noticed that people have a high opinion of Hillary until she starts talking, and then it tanks. Watching her campaign is like watching someone with Aspberger's at a social function.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Not a great VP pick
by darknexus on Thu 30th Jun 2016 14:38 in reply to "RE: Not a great VP pick"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Yeah, but that's pretty much true of everyone in office at this point. It's going to be worse with her though because, since she is a woman, we'll have a repeat of Obama's situation where by if you disagree in the slightest with something she does, you'll be immediately jumped on. The only difference is you'll be an "evil sexist" instead of an "evil racist".

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Not a great VP pick
by sergio on Fri 1st Jul 2016 22:04 in reply to "RE: Not a great VP pick"
sergio Member since:
2005-07-06

Hillary is awful.

People have noticed that people have a high opinion of Hillary until she starts talking, and then it tanks. Watching her campaign is like watching someone with Aspberger's at a social function.


Hillary is so awful that someone like Trump has a chance to win.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Not a great VP pick
by dionicio on Thu 30th Jun 2016 16:26 in reply to "Not a great VP pick"
dionicio Member since:
2006-07-12

A sharp discursive mind doesn't necessarily carries an executive one.

Reply Parent Score: 2