Baidu's CEO Declares He Can Beat Google Again
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
As it stands, Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft, ... do not pay adequate tax rates in the EU. If we had local companies, we would not lose billions in tax revenues thanks to tax loopholes created by the US government, to benefit US corporations.
Regarding data management: will that be any worse compared to what the big five are doing? From the cuntry's point of view (and its citizens, one would assume), is it better that your government is spying or you, or that foreign corporations / governments are spying on you?
Put another way: are you more worried (as US citizen I assume) that the NSA / FBI are spying on you, or that the russians / chinese are spying on you?
If the companies were local, it would be much easier. Said another way, none of the big local companies in the EU are using this kind of setups.
Counter-evidence one: Google is #1 in Europe. That's sufficient to squash your point.
But also: You seem to have no idea what China is like. Foreign companies will get government-supported mobs to break into your office and trash the place, during daylight hours for hours, and the police will refuse to show up.
The best you can do is call the police and say "this mob slamming at the doors make me fear for my life. If you don't get me out of here I'll call my embassy and say there's a hostage situation". Suddenly the… no the police doesn't show up… the police tell you that the mob will disappear soon, and you have 5 minutes to leave before they come back.
https://searchengineland.com/did-dalai-lama-award-cause-chin...
Just one of many examples.
what is the american embassy going to do? call in seal team 6 to rescue you? the worst that will come of this is some strong words from the secretary of state.
Apparently America is propping up all its tech companies and it's not allowing European companies to compete, thus is similar to CCP's support of Chinese tech companies; which is of course ridiculous for all the things you just mentioned.
The constant drum beat of "America is morally wrong for not using anti-trust on its tech companies" is just ridiculous. Especially when trying to compare the US government's approach to the free market to China's.
Apple, and Google (and probably more companies), made special deals with Ireland and Luxembourg to pay something like <5% VAT and <5% corporate tax, while everyone else were paying >20% and >20%. And those deals largely isn't available to EU companies because they can't use the favorable US tax laws to do it.
Despite Android being open source Google forced manufacturers to not sell any other versions of it if they also wanted to sell Googles. Which of course would be disastrous for any company.
Enforcement against that is only ridiculous if you don't like competition.
"[...] undistributed foreign earnings, a substantial portion of which was generated by subsidiaries organized in Ireland, for which no U.S. taxes are provided when such earnings are intended to be indefinitely reinvested outside the U.S."
http://investor.apple.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=320193-17-7... http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-2923_en.htm
Uhm, no. This is a deliberate tax loophole that the government is fine with small companies using, but only feign being upset when large companies do it too.
They could just close it, but they don't want to.
Creating local optimizations for marketplaces is what the EU is for*.
Before the digital single market companies paid the rate at the country the were in. Since these companies where headquartered in Luxembourg they have been paying far lower rates over the years. Some of those rates have been to special deals directly with the government. This isn't something that has been available to most companies.
Similarly the "double Irish with a Dutch sandwich" only worked because of US tax law, simplified, lets US companies defer taxation on foreign funds through a loophole. That also isn't anything available to most companies and especially not small ones.
- or when you apply illegal tariffs n steel, cars and whatnot
- when you apply sanctions to a country respecting the commitments it signed
and so forth ...
Consider Google's recent actions on the whole military thing.
I get the impression that the US government doesn't understand or back US tech companies in general. US tech companies seem to succeed in spite of their government.
See DOJ vs Microsoft, city/state laws vs Uber, FBI vs Apple, etc, etc. I'm not denying that some of those actions against many of those companies were good; I would support some of those actions, but not support others. But no, I don't get the impression that the US government has the back of US tech companies vs the world. And certainly don't get the feeling that they have Google's back.
Edit: nuking net neutrality is also in interesting way of "backing" Google.
We tell ourselves that there is a separation of government and private enterprise, but that hasn't been the case since day 1 when george washington's first move was to use tariffs to protect US companies. When our military was used to exterminate the natives to clear the way for railroads. When the US government annexed territory from texas to hawaii for corporate interests. Or when our government toppled latin american regimes so that our corporations could gain access to new markets.
Just like now all modern cities look like american cities ( skyscrapers ) and they have all same companies, all major economies ( especially the asian economies ) modeled themselves after 19th century US economy. China pretty much copied our playbook.
You make it sound like a US invention, but it's way older. I'd be more interested in learning of a counterexample. Which significant government didn't have too-close ties with its industries?
1. Companies in the US have large influence over policy through lobbying. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
2. Laws are enacted or kept that favor these companies. Like the the tax loophole that, combined with intellectual property laws, effectively gives these companies huge tax discounts globally. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tax-checkthebox-insig...
3. The US uses it power to force countries to sign agreements on or enforce e.g. intellectual property that favors US companies. https://www.thelocal.se/20060621/4128
For example, I tried looking up a 生煎包 place nearby for dinner just now:
https://m.baidu.com/from=844b/s?word=%E9%8A%85%E9%91%BC%E7%8...
The first pages results are all irrelevant. Compare to Google's:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%E9%8A%85%E9%91%BC%E7%81%A3+...
The very first result is actually where I would want to go, and there's a map right there to direct me to the place.
Trying https://www.baidu.com/s?wd=%E5%8C%97%E4%BA%AC%E4%B8%9C%E7%9B... instead, I do get a result with a map, although it's not the first and the first result is a different place.
The results just weren't good.
Actually I didn't get a map even with your link. Perhaps it's because I'm not in mainland China?
It shows up like this: https://imgur.com/vCa07JM
My search's Google results look like this: https://imgur.com/di147uj
Note: European; Now I live in Beijing/China, help projects with consultancy for open source, did this for many years for companies... and now work for Red Hat.
Sure. Ask any customs officer. Like it or not, the free markets in the United States created the greatest technological advances of mankind. China has nothing on that. Some lousy chip makers and cheap labour won't be able to compete with anything done in the US.
Also if Baidu was so great, try competing in the US or on neutral ground like Europe.
The ironic thing is the free market in the US seems to be a one way street. There's a push for deregulation whenever it allows corporations to behave with moral ambiguity. However corporations often love legislation if it raises the barrier for entry for new start ups wishing to compete.
But going back to your original point, there have been plenty of great technological advances from China and Europe. Easily more than enough to dismiss your insinuation that the US has a monopoly on technological advancement, let alone the wider point regarding free markets.
However what the size of US corporations does prove is that the American system is better for building dominating businesses. But I'd already said that in my previous post.
That's quite some recency bias you have there.
Actually that's immigration. And sure Ask any customs officer.
>>China has nothing on that.
Very true.
>>Some lousy chip makers and cheap labour won't be able to compete with anything done in the US.
China's trade work in Eurasia and Africa is changing the trade scenario rapidly.
In a sense China is creating a market for local economies in Eurasia and Africa, so that local institutions can grow and work with each other.
Its kind of strange, the US could have had all of that trade empire for 1/10 the cost of wars and invasions in the past decades. China offers an alternate foreign policy framework, and its working to a large extent.
Again the US economy in many ways, is just the economy of a few cities, and immigration matters big time. Not just for the US economy, but if those people chose to stay in their countries its a negative to US as they create competition for the US.
I read that as poesklap!
https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/7/17660364/baidu-ceo-google-...