> set the right free market conditions for real competition to happen

Just as a curiosity, what exactly are those "right free market conditions" and where have those been successfully implemented before? Because I think most of us (Europeans) are desperately trying to avoid replicating the American experiment, so if that's the "right free market conditions" I think we're trying to avoid those on purpose.

But maybe you're thinking of some other place, then I'm eager ears to hear what worked elsewhere :)

▲

ada0000 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If the size of state and bureaucratisation are the main issues, one wonders how China got so far :-)

▲

creddit an hour ago | parent | next [-]

No one wonders that if they have any actual knowledge. Chinese government spending as a % of GDP is much less than say France. :-)

https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/exp@FPP/USA/FRA/JPN/...

Bureaucratisation in the realm of business is much smaller in most relevant ways for most enterprises in China as well.

▲

stefanfisk 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In what sense is china bureaucratic when it comes to business?

▲

ada0000 an hour ago | parent [-]

Tax breaks, operations of state owned industry, other incentives etc are guided by five year plans implemented by a party bureaucracy.

	▲	dmurray 34 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		"You can't do X" is a much different experience from "you can do X, but you need to spend a year and thousands of man-hours of paperwork applying for permission to do it". In China, if the five-year plan prioritizes something, businesses will be up and running in months. In France, if the French parliament enacts a law prioritizing something, businesses still have to fight individual departments or local governments that have their own ideas about how they should regulate it. Don't confuse bureaucracy for authoritarianism.

▲

hartator 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Contradictory regulations is one of the symptoms of overregulation.

I.e., complying to GDPR means you can’t comply to cybersecurity laws.

US has less of those.

▲

stevesimmons an hour ago | parent | next [-]

How exactly does GDPR prevent you from complying with cybersecurity laws?

For instance, one of GDPR's 6 lawful bases for processing data is in order to comply with legal obligations.

If you're going to make strong claims like that, the onus really is on you to give specific examples.

	▲	closewith an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I wonder is the GP is referring to the CLOUD Act, as it is true that US companies cannot be compliant with both the GDPR and the CLOUD Act, but it doesn't weaken the case for European tech sovereignty.

▲

embedding-shape an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sounds like a broad blanket statement, have any specifics about this?

GDPR and cybersecurity laws are designed to be compatible, not mutually exclusive, but I'm sure there are edge-cases. Still, what exact situation did you find yourself in here in order to believe they're mutually exclusive?

▲

victorbjorklund an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

All US companies selling to European customers have to comply with GDPR. European companies selling only to non-European customers don’t have to comply with GDPR. It’s all about who your users are. Not where your company is registered.