Starmer Refuses to Leave

SB

I am amazed about what happens as to spending of financial and financial management in existence. The leftists believe that spending sprees and just print money and that in a few years leads to endless inflation and short supply of items Gross incompetence is the order of the day

And do you want to do with the 954 billionaires in the USA. After reading your comments on site do you really believe to arrest them and their families and deport them to Teheran

So give us your solution to the problems leading to improvement of the lives of people.

@DumbMike, you dumb fool. I did not expect you to be able to read the explanation. Ha, Ha.

Even AI said that I am independent - not left-wing or right-wing.

The old unrealized capital gains aren’t taxed until exercised argument. In other words we should tax wealth vs income. There are many arguments about this …..but if fully implemented it would wipe out 24% of most retirees savings, and thus their whole life style. Many would have to sell their much appreciated homes

People have planned their lives based on existing laws which are working fine. As for fairness every mega wealthy person pays many times what the average person pays in tax, just based on income tax. And uses way less government resources. That’s not fair? We have to somehow punish that person by shifting the goal posts.

Also if you tax capital differently, there won’t be as much capital. That could affect the cost of every new capital project, especially the kind of high risk projects going into Tech. Every year you could be paying in up to and beyond 10% of your original investment, just to retain it….way before profits emerge.

The other victims of this kind of policy change would be the people who work for the punished, who sell to the punished and the charities that rely almost exclusively on this group to fund their activities,

If it’s not broken, don’t try to fix it.

BS. This system was working - or at least much better than it currently is. Most Americans would attest to that, as would most Europeans.

ChatGPT defines capitalism.

Notice how there is emphasis on free markets with "LOTS" of competition.

Prompt: Define Capitalism

Response:

Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production (like factories, land, and businesses) are owned and controlled by private individuals or companies, rather than by the government. In capitalism, decisions about what to produce, how to produce it, and at what price are mainly determined by market forces—especially supply and demand. (This is why high competition is essential; otherwise, it is just an oligarchy).

Key features of capitalism include:

1. Private property: Individuals and businesses can own assets and resources.
2. Profit motive: People and companies aim to make money (profit).
3. Free markets: Prices and production are guided by competition and consumer choice.
4. Limited government involvement: The state usually plays a smaller role compared to other systems.

The ideas behind capitalism were famously developed by Adam Smith, especially in his book The Wealth of Nations, where he described how self-interest and competition can benefit society through what he called the “invisible hand.”

In practice, most modern countries use mixed economies, combining capitalism with some government regulation and social programs..

"Microsoft acquired Activision. The first thing they did was to fire 10% of its staff, mostly in the US, and then they increased the price of the Xbox. Then they had another round of redundancies."

You state something and then make an argument based entirely on your uninformed interpretation of why it occurred.

"The sky is blue(yes) because Pappa Smurf Painted it that colour(no)."

Why Microsoft get rid of a percentage of staff?

How do you know that it was not part of an effort to prevent Activision going the way of Ubisoft?

You're pretending that run of the mill business decisions are somehow nefarious and out to get you.

Here is some sanity for you to chew on. If a product is good enough, it is almost impossible to prevent the company owning it from becoming a monopoly. What you are advocating for is an unfairly discriminating against the winner. So perhaps just come out and admit that you're a closet communist because you can't stand losing.

As soon as you do that, I'll Brasso your medal for competing and pop it in the mail.

Completed 3 steps

The claim is partly true but overstated. Microsoft did lay off about 1,900 employees in its gaming division shortly after closing the Activision Blizzard acquisition in early 2024, and that was roughly 8%–9% of Microsoft Gaming, not 10% exactly. Microsoft also raised Xbox prices in May 2025, but that increase affected consoles and accessories globally, and later in 2025 it raised U.S. console prices again. There was also another layoff round in September 2024 cutting about 650 gaming jobs, followed by much larger Microsoft-wide cuts in July 2025 that hit Xbox as part of broader restructuring.

What is accurate

1. Microsoft completed its Activision Blizzard acquisition in October 2023, and the first major post-deal gaming layoffs came in January 2024.
2. Those January cuts were about 1,900 roles in Microsoft Gaming, which is close to 9% of that division’s workforce, not a clean 10%.
3. Microsoft did raise Xbox prices in 2025, including consoles and accessories, and announced higher prices for some first-party games later that year.

What is misleading

1. “Mostly in the US” is not well supported by the reporting I found; the January 2024 cuts were described as affecting Activision Blizzard and Xbox staff, with the majority at Activision Blizzard, but I did not find a reliable source saying they were mostly in the US.
2. “Then they increased the price of the Xbox” compresses different events into one timeline; the major documented price hikes came in May 2025, with another U.S.-only increase later in 2025.
3. “Then they had another round of redundancies” is true, because Microsoft Gaming had another layoff round in September 2024 cutting about 650 roles.

Clean verdict

A fairer version would be: Microsoft cut about 1,900 gaming jobs soon after the Activision Blizzard deal, then later raised Xbox prices, and later still made additional layoffs in its gaming division.

ButtPlug, your arguments are weak. This acquisition exercise was simply about increasing the share value of Microsoft and increasing the Xbox price and sales.

Free open markets with lots of competition is what made America a Great country.

They are now deviating from that, with a pretext of beating China at all costs. However, China is increasing competition, not reducing it.

Reduced competition just leads to corruption because power becomes centralised - like a traditional communist economy.

P.s. We saw on the Stav AI thread that AI sees you as a joker, not someone to be taken seriously, merely entertainment value. AI respects me; it sees me as a superior form of life. A bit like a God, a creator.

"AI respects me; it sees me as a superior form of life. A bit like a God, a creator."

I'm glad somebody/something, respects you.

So, are you gonna dissect Microsoft's acquisition of Activision for us or are you gonna insist that we rely solely on your opinion?

You're all about AI, so enter this query;

Microsoft fired a bunch of Activision staff and studios post acquisition, why?

Notice the response states "Microsoft said". Would you trust a bunch of lobbyists and the shareholder board? The acquisition playbook is always to fire lots of staff because of duplicate functions. However, this was previously a natural market situation to have duplicate functions as determined by competition.

Completed 2 steps

Microsoft’s post-acquisition cuts were mainly about eliminating overlap, lowering costs, and reorganizing the combined gaming business after buying Activision Blizzard for about $69 billion. Phil Spencer said the layoffs were part of an “execution plan” with a “sustainable cost structure” that identified “areas of overlap.”

Why it happened

The basic logic was that when Microsoft absorbed Activision Blizzard and King, it inherited duplicate roles in corporate, support, and some publishing functions, so some jobs were cut to streamline the combined organization. Microsoft also said the restructuring was meant to support “future growth,” not just immediate savings.

Why studios were hit

Some studio teams were affected because consolidation often means closing projects that are expensive, underperforming, or redundant in a new org chart, even if the company says no games or studios are being targeted in a specific round. In January 2024, the cuts affected staff across Blizzard, Activision, Infinity Ward, Sledgehammer, and Xbox-related teams, and Microsoft later made additional cuts in gaming as it kept adjusting the post-merger structure.

The controversy

The FTC argued the layoffs undercut Microsoft’s merger-era claim that Activision and Microsoft would operate independently after the deal. Microsoft pushed back by saying some reductions were also tied to Activision’s own pre-existing plans and that the layoffs were not solely a merger effect. (Does anyone believe this?)

The short version

So the answer is: Microsoft bought Activision, then trimmed the combined headcount to remove redundancy and protect margins. The public justification was “overlap” and “sustainable cost structure,” while critics saw it as evidence that the merger was about consolidation as much as growth.

--------------------

Was Activision profitable?

Completed 2 steps

Yes — Activision Blizzard was profitable before Microsoft bought it, and it had been generating substantial profits for years. A 2023 Fortune profile showed about $7.5 billion in revenue and $1.5 billion in profit, with profit margin around 20%.

What that means

So the layoffs were not mainly because Activision was an unprofitable company that Microsoft needed to rescue. The more likely reason was consolidation, margin management, and reorganizing duplicated functions after the merger.

Almost every merger and I have managed through 2 major ones, create opportunities to cut overheads, consolidate plants and sales forces. That raises profits and cash for capital expenditures. Jobs are lost certainly, but your argument is to keep jobs by not merging, even if that means a much less efficient company, which in the global arena will become uncompetitive and vulnerable

Capitalism tolerates no emotional weaknesses.

And BS to you, the system has never worked better than it is today. Your agonizing about US Tech companies is critical of the equivalent of the Industrial Revolution. Get with the times.

Trump has the lowest poll ratings of any US president on the economy - ever.

So the Democratic majority do not believe the system has never worked better. Even Fox and Friends, the gospel of the American right wing concurs this fact.

Even Biden had better poll ratings on the economy, and he had to deal with post Covid inflation that was unavoidable. He was still managing the same corrupt system, with politicians as major shareholders. Lobbyist pretending to be politicians.

The economy is a means to an end, so cutting jobs to boost shareholder profits is not helping people as a whole. Reduced competition is just about boosting shareholder profits, and the expense of majority.

Well the USA is the offending system that leans capitalist….Europe is the system doing what you want to do, protecting jobs that aren’t productive. Here are the results:

The widely cited World Bank comparison for 2008?2023 gives:

1. U.S.: +$87%
2. EU: +$13.5%

Socialism just doesn’t work. Men like Musk who invented Tesla and SpaceX improve the world, men like Bernie Sanders live off those achievements.

Your argument has never worked. As for Trump he could have declared victory after the first strike on Iran. He wasn’t satisfied the job had been done and put himself at political risk to make sure it was. People don’t like it because they have to pay a bit more for gas. The West isn’t big on sacrifice, it’s not like Trump didn’t know there was a much easier political road.

So, increasing competition is now socialist/communist? Utter BS.

Europe's GDP has dropped, but that, to some extent, is down to the rise of China and Big Tech in the US.

The problems started after America caused the 2008 global financial crisis. The UK had become too dependent on financial services, and they have lost global reach in this area.

I believe in a protectionist Europe, with exemptions for our close trade partners like Canada. Countries that commit to traditional capitalism, not pirate monopolists.

I would like to remove China from the supply chain where possible and move all high-end manufacturing jobs to the EU. The low-end manufacturing jobs can be moved to places with weaker currencies in the East, outside of China.

China cheats the global trade system with its X2 currencies. They want to access a global free trade market, while blocking other countries from accessing their own markets.

"Get with the times"

Exactly.

I doubt anyone here actually uses Google to its full potential. Let me tell you, there is a reason they are so far ahead of everybody else.

You can create a website on Google Sites. You can then create contact and info forms linked directly to Google sheets, share docs via Google Drive, manage Calendars, collaborate on Whiteboard, store data...on and on. And that is all from one account on one site.

They are not the market leader because they got in early. They got in early and then they built a product that is simply superb.

To the point where, if they closed up shop, I would need to have numerous subs and accounts on different sites that Google does for me under one roof.

Again, we haven't spoken about their developer tools and analytics yet either.

One of their big cash cows would not be where it is today had they not acquired it. YouTube was not profitable when it was purchased. If you can imagine, and I know this because a friend was working on it at Google, it took plenty of innovation and investment to turn it into the biggest video platform in the world. Should they feel bad about it? They took the risk, they innovated to turn it profitable and today it's unmatched.

...and because they are refuse to rest on their laurels, they continue pushing the envelope with Ai and computing.

Apparently this is all bad.

I pay something like R180 a month for my Google account and I could not be happier with what I get for that pittance. I'd have to pay ten or twenty times that if not for Google.

@ButtPlug, I recall you frequently saying you do not use Google Search, and instead use DuckDuckGo, because of Google tracking you. Do you recall saying this?

It is very simple: if other search engines had the same user-tracking data as Google, there would be intense competition. If there were a standardised open source tracking technology that did not reveal who people were, and just provided aggregate data of numbers, it would be a massive win for user data privacy while creating a level playing field for competition.

If website A gets 100 clicks for a search term and gets 5 sales. Then website B gets 4 sales for every 100 clicks for the same search term, and website C gets 3 sales, and so on - it is obvious what the rankings must be for that search term. This is not difficult, but only one company has the data.

Then just show ads above the organic results.

Google just harvest the internet, and you would be amazed at how much data they have about you. For example, Google can see everything that you buy online. They know your address, your spending habits, and so much more.

Google never made a profit until it copied a company that invented paid ads. Nearly all of Google's profit is from ads, with something 90% profit. Why should only one company have access to all of this user data, and why should they be able to identify individuals building long-term databases of people?

Google Search is organic, natural. That means users themselves decide the rankings (e.g.,

Instagram and YouTube were both acquired long before 2016, the mobile revolution that made the whole internet more profitable. They just needed decent ad platforms, which could have been created by 3rd parties in a free market with competition, assuming they could not do this themselves.

"@ButtPlug, I recall you frequently saying you do not use Google Search, and instead use DuckDuckGo, because of Google tracking you. Do you recall saying this?"

On my phone.

My work accounts are Google.

"Google never made a profit until it copied a company that invented paid ads. Nearly all of Google's profit is from ads, with something 90% profit. Why should only one company have access to all of this user data, and why should they be able to identify individuals building long-term databases of people?"

It's called being the market leader.

Next you'll be asking why Apple and Samsung should dominate the device market.

And the answer remains the same.

Google match up various ID's to identify users across different devices, accounts, browsers etc.

Then they keep a long-term database of you. So that is a futile attempt to preserve your privacy.

It used to be about cookies, nowadays Google have dozens of different ways of tracking you. So for example if you go to a website, and reject the cookie banner - Google still tracks you.

If their is an open source tracking script that replaces Googles methods, that is the end of Google's monopoly. It is much harder to create an Apple or Samsung device, than to dominate a search market if all the players have a level playing field.

SB

@DumbMike, you dumb fool. I did not expect you to be able to read the explanation. Ha, Ha.

Even AI said that I am independent - not left-wing or right-wing.

I wrote the above because you, are really incredibly idiotic. You have no idea about taxation issues and knows nothing about Governance,

First of all you wrote about people in the US A earning $5 000 a month and paying 20% to 30% taxation on that income to cover Federal and State tax. Nobody bar in California and other corrupt states pay that kind of tax on that kind of income,

So lets get to the taxation issue, Some items like Home ownership is important, People bought homes decades ago and a a result of fleeting of millions of people from States like California, New York IIlinois and Minnesota moved to States like Florida, Texas and South Carolina causing home shortages in the latter States and rise in home prices, Then there is added to that inflation caused by the idea that the Government can print money on unlimited level causing inflation. So if a owner bought a house 15 years ago fo $300 000 and now sell it for $1 5 million you support the idea he should pay the Government in taxation $120 000.

I can give you another example, Take farms for instance - the major farmers will be considered by you as ultrarich - so the Democrats you, so admire wants to charge 20% death duty on all famers, It wiil mean that most farmers would have to pay massive taxation in death duties running into tens of millions in dollars destroying agriculture in he USA since most commercial farmers have no ability to pay the state to inherit the farms and will go out of business destroying agriculture in the USA.

Increase taxes caused increased production costs and that is routinely passed in increases in living costs, So your solutions are basically based on issues without any relation to economical realities,

The main problem in he USA, the UK and EU relate to a totally deranged administrative incapacity and incompetence as well as bribery and corruption involving federal and state Governance, Allow me to give you a few examples:-

1. Since 2021 94% of the Federal Public Servants never went to their offices once and how was he work actually done. In critical Departments like he IRS the 87 000 employees were paid h ir full salaries and the actual work was contracted out to private sector institutions,
2. The number of Federal Government employees increased from 1 946 000 in 2019 to 3 240 000 in the 2023 and 2024 financial years, None of them ever went to their offices - but thy were paid every month without the need to do any work.
3. In California the idea was to built a fast train system between San Francisco and Los Angeles to be extended to San Diego and Phoenix - Arizona, The budget for the construction component was set at $75 billion - but after $150 billion was spent on completion fo about 40% of he work. So the lines that were built ae just anothe sitee for wast disposal.
4. In Minnesotqa corruption by Government ost the State $9.8 billion vanished into thin air,
5. In 2019 he US Government approved that fundng be provided annually for the construction of 2 new nuclear powered and armed submarines per year and for servicing of the then existing submarine wen out of use due to non-servicing. Four submarines were built in 2019 and 2020 - after which under Biden in four years only 2 and not 8 submarines were built - while 20 of the 60 such submarines was not in operation due to non-existing servicing, Nobody could account as to what happened to the funds.

So the question should be asked - is increase of taxation a source for incompetent and corrupt Government operations? The answer is simple - NO - the US and other governments in Europe must clean up their mess, For instance the EU has circa 80 000 employees.

With weak political control by the political leadership leads to destruction of democracy replacing it with bureaucratic government, That is one thing you obviously you do not know and that s that -

1. Communism is based on total bureaucratic governance by dictatorial means;
2. China is defintiely not a Communist Regime - .t is n fact a Facsist regime - ie an alliance between the Regime dictatorship and the over 600 bilionaires from China and Hong Kong, The Hitlerite regime was based on a similar alliance between the Nazis and the rich and aristocrats
3. Under Biden political control by Congress was deliberately undermined by the Leftist component of the Democratic Party, The system was more aligned to Communism than democracy.

So my advice to you is start thinking of something real and not stick to your obsession of taxing the billionaires - which would have serious consequences for every inhabitant in the USA , the UK and the EU

,

. .

Visser, Snowden exposed all of this stuff almost twenty years ago.

Whatever you think Google is doing, it's probably worse than that. And the same goes for all Big Tech. The Chinese aren't any better. Neither are the Japanese. How much of your data is captured though your car comms, tv mic...

If any device has the ability to capture data about you and that data provides a competitive edge, then you can rest assured that device is capturing data. And in many cases the only way to stop that happening is to totally depower the device.

I use DDG on my phone because it's the device I interact with the most and it blocks pop-ups, doesn't store any data and has a bunch of other features that make being on the internet a more pleasant experience. That doesn't mean that I think Google hasn't already stored my fingerprints and genetic code for electronic Jesus to have access to.

But that's the world we live in.

That is why I say all private tracking should be banned. Instead. An open source alternative should be created that protects individual users, while still providing the benefit of aggregated data (numerical averages totally removed from individual IDs.

SB

The following is a result of tax ideas you espouse is implemented:-

Saka previously welcomed Wilson after she defeated incumbent Bruce Harrell, saying in a statement, "The voters have spoken, calling for change and a renewed focus on affordability, community, and fighting back against a resurgent Trump agenda."

He praised the "energy she brings to leadership," and said he was "look[ing] forward to partnering with her to build a thriving, inclusive Seattle that uplifts working families, expands universal preschool for all, ends food deserts, and creates safer, more connected neighborhoods across our city."

Starbucks recently announced it will shift 2,000 corporate jobs, primarily in IT and supply chain management, to a new regional headquarters in Nashville. Last week, KOMO News reported Starbucks laid off an additional 61 employees as part of a reorganization of its technology department at its corporate headquarters.

State leaders in Washington have also faced criticism for recently passing the "millionaires tax," which Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson signed on March 30. The measure has been described as the state's first-ever income tax, backed by progressives and socialists and opposed by conservatives.

The new tax will impose a 9.9% income tax on households earning more than $1 million each year.

Starbucks is not the only business impacted by the state’s economic policies. The Columbia Tower Club, an iconic business club atop Seattle’s tallest skyscraper, closed last month after more than four decades. Long considered a hub for executives, developers and civic leaders, the club cited declining office traffic and downtown business activity tied to remote work and high vacancy rates. Critics quickly pointed to the closure as another sign of weakening business confidence in Seattle.

On Monday, the Washington State Republican Party ripped into both Wilson and the city council, posting on X, "Marxist @MayorofSeattle Katie Wilson is more concerned about toilet ribbon-cutting photo opps than massive capital flight in downtown #Seattle all the while @SeattleCouncil stands idle as a once iconic city crumbles."

The jab refers to a recent Wilson event promoting new downtown public restrooms, which critics mocked amid concerns about Seattle’s economy and business climate.

Though Wilson’s now-infamous "like, bye" line drew laughs and applause from her audience, it immediately sparked backlash on social media from conservatives criticizing her economic policy.

"Seattle's Socialist Mayor responds to exodus of wealth from Washington State by saying ‘BYE’... then laughing. We're doomed," wrote Brandi Kruse.

This Mayor by the name of Wilson never had a job in her life and lived off her parents, As stupid as the bitch is as ugly she is too,

Those wicked Democrats again! Someone should really do something about them . . . or at least tell the world how evil they are.

I believe in a protectionist Europe, with exemptions for our close trade partners like Canada. Countries that commit to traditional capitalism, not pirate monopolists

So you are happy to quote the dusty old economist theories about competition…..but also happy to ignore their positions on protectionism.

It seems you are happy to believe the bits that coincide with your beliefs and announce them as truths, but ignore the rest.

Very convenient.

America uses protectionism when it suits them, but they want to access a global free trade market. Ditto for China. The global free trade system is dead due to this type of abuse.

Throw in Trump's sanctions and promises to support far-right-wing parties who will support the EU's end, we need to remove them from our supply chain. Trade will still occur, but it will be less.

Data products need to be European for security. E.g. Email etc. Our search engines need the same type of data as Google, then we can throw Google out of Europe.

So you are happy to quote the dusty old economist theories about competition….

What are they? And what are the other newer economist theories about competition?

As for Trump he could have declared victory after the first strike on Iran. He wasn’t satisfied the job had been done and put himself at political risk to make sure it was. People don’t like it because they have to pay a bit more for gas. The West isn’t big on sacrifice, it’s not like Trump didn’t know there was a much easier political road.

A lot of words to mean nothing.

Men like Musk who invented Tesla and SpaceX improve the world,

It is very funny how liberals equate the world with themselves exclusively. The US have nothing to trade with the vast majority of humanity. China has a lot to trade on the other side.

Trump is acting on this observation: as he can not go directly against China, he is going against the rest of the world to turn it away from deals with China.

Remember, peeps, liberals are en route to kill hundreds of millions people.

The fact they keep equate the world with themselves is a big sign. It is the same path everytime. When people deny reality so often and so perversely, they have no other choice than to work to match reality with their claims. They do not adapt, they strive to adapt reality to their claims.

"The US have nothing to trade with the vast majority of humanity. China has a lot to trade on the other side."

The largest nothing ever. Lol

It is very funny. Because liberals are regularly betrayed by their so called servants.

Donald Trump has been acting in a way that confirms the US have nothing to trade with a vast majority of humanity.

The US have been forcing a certain number of countries out of trade deals for so many things that only liberals can maintain that the US trade offer exists.

If the US had anything to trade with a vast majority of the rest of the world, they would not be forced to act that way. They would put their trade offer on the table and let people choose.

They can not afford the move. The US can not let people choose.

It is very funny because liberals probably do not even realise their own behaviour. They are failing at self perception. They can not look at themselves and see themselves as they are.

See, they claim they promote freedom around the world and the US have been forcing deals on countries.

In a liberal mind, people are free when they are forced by the US.

And this is the situation: backing up the statement that the US have nothing to trade is very straightforward. And Trump has done a lot to make it easy.

On the other hand, liberals who claim that the US have something to trade can not do that.

All they can do is to deny.

This is how they must establish a monopoly on speech. So they can force their narrative on people.

But Peeps still no comments on the performance of your team in South Africa. Give them a grade. An A, B, C, D or F will do nicely.

Very funny.

What team in South Africa? What team is South Africa part of?

It is hard to figure out where liberals on this board got their political education but remember, peeps, voting requires to be politically educated. At least, this is what liberals said.

Data products need to be European for security. E.g. Email etc. Our search engines need the same type of data as Google, then we can throw Google out of Europe.

Oh that will work beautifully:

The U.S. goods trade deficit with European Union was $218.8 billion in 2025, a 7.3 percent decrease ($17.1 billion) over 2024.

U.S. total services trade (exports plus imports) with European Union totaled an estimated $500.9 billion in 2024. U.S. services exports to European Union in 2024 were $294.7 billion, up 12.3 percent ($32.2 billion) from 2023. U.S. services imports from European Union in 2024 were $206.1 billion, up 8.9 percent ($16.9 billion) from 2023. The U.S. services trade surplus with European Union was $88.6 billion in 2024, a 20.9 percent increase ($15.3 billion) over 2023.

So adding up the trade surplus in goods and subtracting the deficit in services we get a net benefit to Europe of $130 billion from trade. Sure let’s eliminate that….far easier for the US to replace the goods than Europe to catch up and eliminate the services.

But there’s more…..the $50 billion US spends directly on European defense and the next $50 billion it spends indirectly on Europe. And of course there is the massive remaining US defense budget of $1 trillion that Europe benefits from ….the umbrella they have enjoyed. Call that another $50 billion they might have to spend to feel safe on the Eastern boundary ….but that number is probably much larger.

So with that great policy of kicking out the USA, it seems you might have to find another $280 billion in taxes and of course deal with the implosion of export industries.

In the meantime European businesses and consumers will suffer for years using inferior tech tools, while you catch a ride on a moving train.

So no grade Trad….need something beyond F?

South Africa grade: ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...

And that is on Team South Africa.

Which team is that again?

Very funny.

Again, liberals can not answer questions. They demand their questions to be answered though.

Liberals are en route to kill hundreds of millions people.

You simply have no answer Peeps….but your best tactic is to blame the ANC. They got what they wanted, the one economically successful country in Africa … with no guardrails. Give them an F for heaven sake, try to be just a tiny bit intellectually honest.

Is it supposed to mean anything except being a pitiful attempt to try to maintain control over the situation?

South Africa grade: ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...

It could be read as much worse than F.

See, peeps, liberals can not accept answers. They must twist them to avoid facing they can not answer questions.

A lot of questions have been asked and they are still unanswered.

Because liberals can not answer.

So you are happy to quote the dusty old economist theories about competition….

What are they? And what are the other newer economist theories about competition?

They can not.

So they demand answers to their own questions. When the answers are provided, they claim the questions are not answered. Rinse and repeat.

Because they want to hide they can not answer questions.

Liberals are en route to kill hundreds of millions people.

...very funny...LMGA!!!

Read the string that contains the quoteTrad, you will see exactly how the new internet economy is destroying the traditional concepts of competition. It’s all there for you in black and while, your favorite colors.

But I take it from the Z grade, which I assume is the worst on your scale, that you feel Africa has been destroyed by the successors to the Liberals?

Internet is just about user data. If the EU government ever realise that, they will ban all tracking companies technologies and turn it into an open source solution which will create competition and improve privacy.

If one government pulls it off, the others around the world will do the same.