And if Democrats take control of the Federal government again, they will join the EUTards again in this economic destruction. Xi is smiling at their idiocy.
What a ridiculous article. The author seems to be making a convoluted argument that US businesses should have an untrammeled right to do business in the EU without having to follow any of the EU laws that have been crafted over decades to make its economy more environmentally sustainable and to allow workers and families to have the social supports necessary to ensure they can benefit from the wealth of their societies. Should European businesses have the same right to operate in the US without following our laws?
It's well known that all European workers have affordable health care, unlike tens of millions of US workers. They also have access to affordable childcare, retirement, higher education, public transportation, job training/reskilling and much much more. And, by the way, contrary to conventional wisdom they actually don't pay more in taxes for these essential services, because in the US we actually have to pay more out of pocket PLUS our taxes in order to afford a European-style standard of living.
In actual fact, the US should adopt many of the EU laws, including institutions like co-determination and works councils, in which workers in the largest of corporations in Germany, Sweden and other countries elect 50% of the members of the boards of directors, and have "consultation rights" beyond what most Americans could even imagine. If the US used this, half the board of directors for a corporation like McDonald's would be elected by all those minimum wage fast food workers. Imagine that. Of course, this is so outside the realm of how American workers are treated that it seems unfathomable.
But it shouldn't seem strange to readers of Commonplace, because Oren Cass has praised co-determination and works councils in a number of his articles, and Project 2025 also touted its advantages. See Oren's advice at this link:
What is ridiculous is that the EU thinks it is entitled to make laws for the rest of the world, even as it is destroying its own economy and military capability.
At several billion per leader eliminated, you’d better hope Iran runs out of candidates soon. No sign of that so far. Compare to 1 million plus Russian casualties inflicted by the decadent Europeans.
Largest group of Iranian fatalities so far by US-Israel is schoolchildren, adding to the tens of thousands murdered in Gaza.
The last I checked the Iranian regime is still in power and it now controls 20% of the world’s oil trade and it has closed the strait of Hormuz to America and its friends.
> The last I checked the Iranian regime is still in power
Well Putin is still alive.
> has closed the strait of Hormuz to America and its friends.
Well, American shipping doesn't go through the strait of Hormuz, but out of concern for out allies we'll will probably get around to reopening it eventually. In the mean time Europe can send its navies to open it sooner, if they had any navies worth talking about, that is.
That's really a gross misunderstanding of reality. The EU, and its 27 member states, make laws that they think are good for the EU and its member states. And if companies from non-EU states or countries want to start businesses there, then OF COURSE they have to follow EU laws. That's just common sense. Doesn't the US require companies from foreign countries to follow US laws? If US companies don't want to follow EU laws, there is an easy solution -- don't start a business there! That also works the same way in the US. And BTW, for the average person, the EU economy is doing BETTER than the US economy is for the average person.
> The EU, and its 27 member states, make laws that they think are good for the EU and its member states.
Frankly, these laws aren't good for the EU member states either. But in any case, I assume you have no complaint about Trump conducting foreign policy in a way that's good for the US. If the EU doesn't like it, they can peruse their own independent foreign policy and become responsible for their own defense.
> And BTW, for the average person, the EU economy is doing BETTER than the US economy is for the average person.
I see, now you are such an expert that you can tell the 450 million people of the EU, and all their leaders, policy experts and historians, that their laws are not good for them? Obviously you are a Trumper, since Trump likes to tell everyone in the world what's good for them, and now he's bogged down in Iran, with another Vietnam creeping up on him, and he's begging the Europeans to bail him out for his stupid blunder! Hoisted by his own petard.
> I see, now you are such an expert that you can tell the 450 million people of the EU, and all their leaders, policy experts and historians, that their laws are not good for them?
Yes, amazing. Doesn't say good things about the quality of the European elite now does it.
> he's begging the Europeans to bail him out for his stupid blunder!
No he's not. He was mocking the fact that Europe has no navy to speak of and thus they can't do anything to help open the strait even though their shipping is being affected much more seriously than America's.
> Here's something for you to read and learn from:
I looked at your articles. "Yes, if you look at the basic statistics Europe's economy is doing rather poorly, but if we apply enough statistical magic to them, we can make Europe not look as bad."
This is a curiously old school republican conservative article that seems to be libertarian in outlook and reactionary in response. The author's presumptions of Regulation, Bad! Environmentalism, Bad! are antithetical to the direction Oren is trying to move conservatism.
The article evades nuance like the plague. Even the invocation of the "Brussels Effect" seems to imply it's author, Anu Bradford, thinks it's a bad thing. I've not read the book but I took a few minutes to read reviews and the upshot is: "While navigating the complexities of varied national interests and avoiding any perception of regulatory neocolonialism is vital, the EU’s capacity to export values (such as human rights, rule of law, democracy and human-centered regulations) and elevate global norms through regulation remains a significant positive force. By continually pushing for higher standards in critical areas like the digital economy, the European Union not only strengthens its internal market but also provides a beacon for a more responsible, rights-respecting, and competitive global digital future. Its influence, though sometimes challenging to implement and measure, is undeniably a powerful and often beneficial force for global good."
An annotated first two paragraphs follows. "But the most expensive European import is neither a good nor a service. It is European regulation, perhaps more aptly labeled a “bad” (as I said above) or a “disservice,” and it’s about to become even pricier for America’s largest and most successful corporations." (Boo Hoo for America's largest and most successful corporations? Really? What about American workers and average citizens? Whose interests does the author represent here?)
"By my estimates, hundreds or even thousands (a wide range in his estimation) of U.S. businesses are set to fall under a tangled web of new obligations from the European Union (fevered rhetoric here, bearing in mind participation is voluntary and it's either worth it or not. There's no Force compelling these "obligations".) These regulations will severely (hyperbole) affect how those businesses operate—and cost billions or even trillions (Three orders of magnitude range in his "estimate"!) of dollars—even though not a single American voter was consulted about them. (as though American voters are consulted about corporate regulation and behavior here! And as though European voters are consulted about American corporate rules! That's an absolutely farcical statement.)
Nearly every paragraph is ultimately against the well-being of individual average citizens. For example: "Of course, failure to comply with CS3D can lead to substantial damages. Any individuals harmed have a right of private action, and under Article 29, “Member States shall ensure that those persons have a right to full compensation.” Separately, under Article 27, Member States may impose penalties of up to 3% of a company’s global revenue for failure to comply." It is fundamental to liberty that individuals harmed by corporations are able to obtain justice. No harm, no foul. But the author seems to suggest that justice for individuals damaged by corporate entities is a bad thing.
Or this: "Perhaps even worse, any large business that must report under CSRD and CS3D can ask sensitive questions of those that don’t, including about environmental damages or human rights. The smaller American firm need not provide this information, but if they refuse they may have difficulty doing business with those larger counterparts. This is the Brussels Effect in action." So hiding environmental damage and human rights abuses seems to be the author's presumption about the "Rights" of Big Business. He is clearly Not interested in citizens' well-being.
He then goes on to do some anti-logical hand waving about how costly this will be for American workers and consumers. The presumption here is Americans must rely on environmental degradation and human rights abuses to afford the goods they want and need from "some of America's largest and most successful corporations."
Honestly, I am baffled as to why this article was included in Commonplace unless it was meant as a contrarian offering illustrating what is wrong with old school republican/libertarian ideology. Commonplace seems to be pushing alternately really good articles and really bad ones. This was the latter. For a diversity of viewpoints? Better luck next time.
Many U.S. companies comply with EU regulations voluntarily because access to the European Union’s large and affluent market is commercially valuable, making the rules a condition of market entry rather than an imposed “import.”
• Environmental and human-rights standards like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive can reduce long-term risks such as supply-chain disruptions, litigation, and reputational damage, potentially saving companies money rather than simply imposing costs.
• The so-called Brussels Effect often benefits multinational firms by creating unified global standards that reduce the need to comply with dozens of different national regulatory systems.
• Large corporations already gather much of the data required for sustainability reporting because investors increasingly demand environmental and governance disclosures.
• Many American firms support consistent sustainability rules because they level the playing field and prevent competitors from gaining advantage through environmentally harmful or exploitative practices.
• Claims of “trillions of dollars” in compliance costs are speculative and often ignore the economic value of improved transparency, efficiency, and innovation driven by sustainability requirements.
• The argument that these rules undermine democratic accountability overlooks the fact that companies operating in foreign jurisdictions routinely comply with local laws without voting in those countries.
• Stronger environmental standards can spur technological innovation, much as past regulations accelerated advances in pollution control, energy efficiency, and clean manufacturing.
• The economic stagnation narrative about Europe oversimplifies complex factors such as demographics, monetary policy, and global trade dynamics, which cannot be attributed primarily to environmental regulation.
• Addressing climate and supply-chain impacts through regulation may impose short-term compliance costs but can prevent far greater long-term economic damage from climate change, resource depletion, and human-rights abuses.
it might cost for a while but the EU population in each country will leave or simply they will run out of others peoples money especially when Shari law is imposed. it is a losing proposition either way
Do these terrible regulations include the EU's airline regulation? I have been a victim of Brussels on this. When my flight from Europe to the US was cancelled, potentially creating mayhem in my life, they offered me a hotel, meal voucher, local transportation and 600 euros for the hassle. Since the re-booked flight only had a First Class seat available, I was forced to upgrade from economy. All of this denied me the glory of the de-regulated US market where the customer often gets nothing, sits on-board planes for hours that never depart, and, if they there is some compensation for their failure to deliver what I purchased, they sneakily try to buy customers off with a voucher for future travel.
Companies here should find a way to just self verify that they meet all obligations and site corporate secrecy if anyone wishes to enquire deeper.
The big new industry will be consultants who can teach companies how to skirt these regulations with shell companies and other methods. Compliance is not an option. The US government can help with sensitive industries not needing to comply for national security reasons.
And if Democrats take control of the Federal government again, they will join the EUTards again in this economic destruction. Xi is smiling at their idiocy.
What a ridiculous article. The author seems to be making a convoluted argument that US businesses should have an untrammeled right to do business in the EU without having to follow any of the EU laws that have been crafted over decades to make its economy more environmentally sustainable and to allow workers and families to have the social supports necessary to ensure they can benefit from the wealth of their societies. Should European businesses have the same right to operate in the US without following our laws?
It's well known that all European workers have affordable health care, unlike tens of millions of US workers. They also have access to affordable childcare, retirement, higher education, public transportation, job training/reskilling and much much more. And, by the way, contrary to conventional wisdom they actually don't pay more in taxes for these essential services, because in the US we actually have to pay more out of pocket PLUS our taxes in order to afford a European-style standard of living.
In actual fact, the US should adopt many of the EU laws, including institutions like co-determination and works councils, in which workers in the largest of corporations in Germany, Sweden and other countries elect 50% of the members of the boards of directors, and have "consultation rights" beyond what most Americans could even imagine. If the US used this, half the board of directors for a corporation like McDonald's would be elected by all those minimum wage fast food workers. Imagine that. Of course, this is so outside the realm of how American workers are treated that it seems unfathomable.
But it shouldn't seem strange to readers of Commonplace, because Oren Cass has praised co-determination and works councils in a number of his articles, and Project 2025 also touted its advantages. See Oren's advice at this link:
https://americancompass.org/constraining-the-corporation/#:~:text=Workers%20are%20particularly,management%20is%20accountable.
What is ridiculous is that the EU thinks it is entitled to make laws for the rest of the world, even as it is destroying its own economy and military capability.
Umm, the EU+Ukraine doing a lot better militarily against a great power (Russia) than US+Israel vs a third-rate dictatorship.
Last I checked a third of Ukraine is still occupied, and meanwhile the leadership of Iran has been eliminated.
At several billion per leader eliminated, you’d better hope Iran runs out of candidates soon. No sign of that so far. Compare to 1 million plus Russian casualties inflicted by the decadent Europeans.
Largest group of Iranian fatalities so far by US-Israel is schoolchildren, adding to the tens of thousands murdered in Gaza.
> At several billion per leader eliminated,
Jealous you don't have that kind of money to spend on your militaries?
> Largest group of Iranian fatalities so far by US-Israel is schoolchildren, adding to the tens of thousands murdered in Gaza.
Ok, you have no idea what you're talking about. Good to know.
The last I checked the Iranian regime is still in power and it now controls 20% of the world’s oil trade and it has closed the strait of Hormuz to America and its friends.
> The last I checked the Iranian regime is still in power
Well Putin is still alive.
> has closed the strait of Hormuz to America and its friends.
Well, American shipping doesn't go through the strait of Hormuz, but out of concern for out allies we'll will probably get around to reopening it eventually. In the mean time Europe can send its navies to open it sooner, if they had any navies worth talking about, that is.
That's really a gross misunderstanding of reality. The EU, and its 27 member states, make laws that they think are good for the EU and its member states. And if companies from non-EU states or countries want to start businesses there, then OF COURSE they have to follow EU laws. That's just common sense. Doesn't the US require companies from foreign countries to follow US laws? If US companies don't want to follow EU laws, there is an easy solution -- don't start a business there! That also works the same way in the US. And BTW, for the average person, the EU economy is doing BETTER than the US economy is for the average person.
> The EU, and its 27 member states, make laws that they think are good for the EU and its member states.
Frankly, these laws aren't good for the EU member states either. But in any case, I assume you have no complaint about Trump conducting foreign policy in a way that's good for the US. If the EU doesn't like it, they can peruse their own independent foreign policy and become responsible for their own defense.
> And BTW, for the average person, the EU economy is doing BETTER than the US economy is for the average person.
Keep telling yourself that.
I see, now you are such an expert that you can tell the 450 million people of the EU, and all their leaders, policy experts and historians, that their laws are not good for them? Obviously you are a Trumper, since Trump likes to tell everyone in the world what's good for them, and now he's bogged down in Iran, with another Vietnam creeping up on him, and he's begging the Europeans to bail him out for his stupid blunder! Hoisted by his own petard.
Here's something for you to read and learn from:
https://sethackerman.substack.com/p/europes-productivity-keeps-outpacing
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/europe-v-america-whos-really-winning
> I see, now you are such an expert that you can tell the 450 million people of the EU, and all their leaders, policy experts and historians, that their laws are not good for them?
Yes, amazing. Doesn't say good things about the quality of the European elite now does it.
> he's begging the Europeans to bail him out for his stupid blunder!
No he's not. He was mocking the fact that Europe has no navy to speak of and thus they can't do anything to help open the strait even though their shipping is being affected much more seriously than America's.
> Here's something for you to read and learn from:
I looked at your articles. "Yes, if you look at the basic statistics Europe's economy is doing rather poorly, but if we apply enough statistical magic to them, we can make Europe not look as bad."
This is a curiously old school republican conservative article that seems to be libertarian in outlook and reactionary in response. The author's presumptions of Regulation, Bad! Environmentalism, Bad! are antithetical to the direction Oren is trying to move conservatism.
The article evades nuance like the plague. Even the invocation of the "Brussels Effect" seems to imply it's author, Anu Bradford, thinks it's a bad thing. I've not read the book but I took a few minutes to read reviews and the upshot is: "While navigating the complexities of varied national interests and avoiding any perception of regulatory neocolonialism is vital, the EU’s capacity to export values (such as human rights, rule of law, democracy and human-centered regulations) and elevate global norms through regulation remains a significant positive force. By continually pushing for higher standards in critical areas like the digital economy, the European Union not only strengthens its internal market but also provides a beacon for a more responsible, rights-respecting, and competitive global digital future. Its influence, though sometimes challenging to implement and measure, is undeniably a powerful and often beneficial force for global good."
An annotated first two paragraphs follows. "But the most expensive European import is neither a good nor a service. It is European regulation, perhaps more aptly labeled a “bad” (as I said above) or a “disservice,” and it’s about to become even pricier for America’s largest and most successful corporations." (Boo Hoo for America's largest and most successful corporations? Really? What about American workers and average citizens? Whose interests does the author represent here?)
"By my estimates, hundreds or even thousands (a wide range in his estimation) of U.S. businesses are set to fall under a tangled web of new obligations from the European Union (fevered rhetoric here, bearing in mind participation is voluntary and it's either worth it or not. There's no Force compelling these "obligations".) These regulations will severely (hyperbole) affect how those businesses operate—and cost billions or even trillions (Three orders of magnitude range in his "estimate"!) of dollars—even though not a single American voter was consulted about them. (as though American voters are consulted about corporate regulation and behavior here! And as though European voters are consulted about American corporate rules! That's an absolutely farcical statement.)
Nearly every paragraph is ultimately against the well-being of individual average citizens. For example: "Of course, failure to comply with CS3D can lead to substantial damages. Any individuals harmed have a right of private action, and under Article 29, “Member States shall ensure that those persons have a right to full compensation.” Separately, under Article 27, Member States may impose penalties of up to 3% of a company’s global revenue for failure to comply." It is fundamental to liberty that individuals harmed by corporations are able to obtain justice. No harm, no foul. But the author seems to suggest that justice for individuals damaged by corporate entities is a bad thing.
Or this: "Perhaps even worse, any large business that must report under CSRD and CS3D can ask sensitive questions of those that don’t, including about environmental damages or human rights. The smaller American firm need not provide this information, but if they refuse they may have difficulty doing business with those larger counterparts. This is the Brussels Effect in action." So hiding environmental damage and human rights abuses seems to be the author's presumption about the "Rights" of Big Business. He is clearly Not interested in citizens' well-being.
He then goes on to do some anti-logical hand waving about how costly this will be for American workers and consumers. The presumption here is Americans must rely on environmental degradation and human rights abuses to afford the goods they want and need from "some of America's largest and most successful corporations."
Honestly, I am baffled as to why this article was included in Commonplace unless it was meant as a contrarian offering illustrating what is wrong with old school republican/libertarian ideology. Commonplace seems to be pushing alternately really good articles and really bad ones. This was the latter. For a diversity of viewpoints? Better luck next time.
Many U.S. companies comply with EU regulations voluntarily because access to the European Union’s large and affluent market is commercially valuable, making the rules a condition of market entry rather than an imposed “import.”
• Environmental and human-rights standards like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive can reduce long-term risks such as supply-chain disruptions, litigation, and reputational damage, potentially saving companies money rather than simply imposing costs.
• The so-called Brussels Effect often benefits multinational firms by creating unified global standards that reduce the need to comply with dozens of different national regulatory systems.
• Large corporations already gather much of the data required for sustainability reporting because investors increasingly demand environmental and governance disclosures.
• Many American firms support consistent sustainability rules because they level the playing field and prevent competitors from gaining advantage through environmentally harmful or exploitative practices.
• Claims of “trillions of dollars” in compliance costs are speculative and often ignore the economic value of improved transparency, efficiency, and innovation driven by sustainability requirements.
• The argument that these rules undermine democratic accountability overlooks the fact that companies operating in foreign jurisdictions routinely comply with local laws without voting in those countries.
• Stronger environmental standards can spur technological innovation, much as past regulations accelerated advances in pollution control, energy efficiency, and clean manufacturing.
• The economic stagnation narrative about Europe oversimplifies complex factors such as demographics, monetary policy, and global trade dynamics, which cannot be attributed primarily to environmental regulation.
• Addressing climate and supply-chain impacts through regulation may impose short-term compliance costs but can prevent far greater long-term economic damage from climate change, resource depletion, and human-rights abuses.
What AI did you use?
Your mom’s.
That’s what I thought.
That’s what your mom thought too.
Mike, AI Agents. Welcome to this new world. And they will keep getting better and better.
Nope. Human being who copies and pastes so ill educated folks can get a glimpse of counter factual information.
Sooooo...I take it from this item that the EU will be cutting off all trade with China?
“identifying and assessing actual or potential adverse [environmental and human rights] impacts,”
I was wondering about that.
Europe has an economic death wish. Good luck with that.
it might cost for a while but the EU population in each country will leave or simply they will run out of others peoples money especially when Shari law is imposed. it is a losing proposition either way
Shari Law?!? Oh no!. Will Lambchop be the Justice Minister?????
Do these terrible regulations include the EU's airline regulation? I have been a victim of Brussels on this. When my flight from Europe to the US was cancelled, potentially creating mayhem in my life, they offered me a hotel, meal voucher, local transportation and 600 euros for the hassle. Since the re-booked flight only had a First Class seat available, I was forced to upgrade from economy. All of this denied me the glory of the de-regulated US market where the customer often gets nothing, sits on-board planes for hours that never depart, and, if they there is some compensation for their failure to deliver what I purchased, they sneakily try to buy customers off with a voucher for future travel.
Sanctions are needed.
And as these two articles point out the claim that Europe is getting poorer than the US is a statistical fiction: https://sethackerman.substack.com/p/europes-productivity-keeps-outpacing?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1qxc0fhttps://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/europe-v-america-whos-really-winning?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1qxc0f
https://thejunglechaosco.substack.com/p/eu-deforestation-regulation-and-how?r=6xmz51
wow crazy reg's $$$
What's your point? The EU is in a trade war with Trump's US.
Companies here should find a way to just self verify that they meet all obligations and site corporate secrecy if anyone wishes to enquire deeper.
The big new industry will be consultants who can teach companies how to skirt these regulations with shell companies and other methods. Compliance is not an option. The US government can help with sensitive industries not needing to comply for national security reasons.