Triple was hyperbole, for sure, but for these convenience items like thermal paste, charging cables, headphones, extension cords, and such, where people go to local stores because they want it immediately, the upcharge is abhorrent, at least in Germany. For other products it’s not as bad.

No, it does step towards a circular European Economy. If you actually read into the proposed legislature instead of just assuming what it says based on the headline you would see that.

There is no reason for local stores to be more capable of this than online stores.

Point two the added requirements of staff and logistics = things are more exponentially more expensive is a false dichotomy perpetuated by American corporate interest in order to demoralise and discourage competition, thus increasing their market share and their stranglehold on retail as a whole.

Nobody talks about “exponential”, but the simple reality is that it’s more expensive due to more staff, more redundancy, more overhead, all of it costs money, there’s no way around it.

Point three, you emphasise that the store upcharges you for convenience and then change the argument to be in order to pay people a fair wage.

I never mentioned fair wages, what are you talking about? Local stores have to pay more people for the same volume, massive centralized warehouses are just more efficient.

Notice how you subconsciously demonise the intention of the local retailer?

I do no such thing, your comment is the one dripping with moralizing. I have no problem with local retailers, for a lot of products they are great, especially for the kind that are bigger purchases where people consider them longer or when you might want personal consultation. I have a local whisky store that’s absolutely great, great service, great recommendations, they let you taste the product before you buy, you pay like 30% - 40% more, but it’s worth it. What I was specifically reffering to were impulse purchases like the thermal paste like the above commenter mentioned, or headphones, charging cables, extension cords and such, where people go to local stores because they want it immediately. You’re upcharged like hell on those things, often double the price or even more than for the same product online, borderline rip-offs.

Even though amazon is literally the reason for the accelerated global warming. I would argue the increase in price is directly caused by the decrease in traffic created by amazon and global online retail as a whole.

Well, you’d be wrong. How do you think product arrives at a local store, do you think it’s by brought by a stork? Then in addition to that, people drive into town with their inefficient cars, how in the world is that better for the environment than to have it get delivered straight to your home?

Counterargument, removing the “cheap alternative” will 1) Drive additional traffic to stores, allowing people to shop locally again and re level the playing field in terms of competitive pricing.

There already is heavy competition, how do you not get this? There’s no magic competition barrier between online and local. That’s why so many local stores folded, they were outcompeted. There is no reason to believe local prices would drop if online disappeared, if anything, they would increase because they have inherently, due to geography, less competition.

2. Allow more retail businesses to open up and meet newly available niche requirements created by the absence of these retailers.

I don’t see how that is an inherent good. Just more moralizing.

3. Create a whole new argument for the increase of income to a liveable minimum wage, benefiting literally everybody but the 1%

What’s the argument, man? There is no argument for why we can’t force higher wages among warehouse workers and delivery drivers. None.

Nothing about this makes it a circular economy. The e-trash you buy locally is likely the same you get online and it’s going to end up in the same landfill. The only difference is you paying double or even more because, one, the local store up-charges you for the convenience of getting the product immediately, and two, all the added cost of having physical locations, extra wages, storage, insurance, etc. none of which will magically go down with “increased competition”. They already are under heavy pressure from online stores, that’s why so many physical stores closed down in the last two decades in the first place, if they could lower prices without going out of business, they’d have done it already.

Civilization gibt es dort auf jeden Fall nicht. GOG hat nicht einmal im Ansatz die gleiche Auswahl wie Steam.

Check out No Sudden Move (2021)

And pay triple of what I’d pay online. Living the dream

The threshold was renegotiated to 1.5% by the Greens

In the US average ticket price has actually stayed in line with inflation

Of the top 10 box office movies last year 9 were sequels, prequels or remakes. The exception was Wicked, as an adaptation of a very established IP.

Yes we do. Finland has ordered David’s Sling for example.

You know perfectly well that purchasing power per dollar is much lower in Switzerland than any other European country

Swiss military budget is 0.7% of GDP. Probably the smallest in Europe, except for Iceland and the micro-states.

Uses US engine

Europe doesn’t even want to ratify CETA and Canada would have to ditch USMCA to join the customs union. Makes no economic sense, never gonna happen.

NBC is not owned by GE

Again, English would make so much more sense as a common language than Arabic. There are more English speakers in Egypt alone than there are Arabic speakers in the whole EU.

What exactly is the point? Most people in Europe speak at least a little English, a ton of people in India speak English, Arabic is completely alien to Europe. There is no advantage to Arabic over English.

Nobody in Europe wants Iran or India to join.

Also, most Iranians apeak Persian, not Arabic.

I think a black or gay Bond could work but a female Bond would need to be changed too much to be effective.

Neither Scott’s nor Coppola’s last film was over 2 1/2 hours long