How is this possible? I thought S. Korea's economy was developed

How is this possible? I thought S. Korea's economy was developed.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Because samsung is fucking huge and korea is tiny

Sent from my galaxy note 3

Samsung makes literally everything, they even make cars

>I thought S. Korea's economy was developed.
silly American.

That's only because it's a successful company.

At one time Nokia paid 25% of the taxes in Finland.

What would happen to worst korea if samsung went bankrupt? Would the government bail them out before that?

Sent from my Galaxy S III

Of course, One company owning 25% of your cunt activity, It's very healthy, isn't it?

Finland has a fraction of S. Korea's population, though. And Nokia is the only country worth noting from Finland.
Korea on the other hand has Kia, Samsung, LG, and a few others... not to mention 50 million people.
If Samsung goes bankrupt, the whole economy of the country is fucked.

i think it's less surprising if you remember the fact that samsung is a huge conglomerate that makes all kinds of shit, not only phones

They won't let it come to that in the first place. Some poor devils will work overtime until the situation has stabilized.

Oh, misunderstund... Sorry. Anyway, 20% of (SK) economy detained by only one company, It's unhealthy, for the country political balance and local competition.

but holy shit, 20%is 20%

----->

thats the reason they cant have small/medium companies and other new private sectors. samusung and such cartels take over the country, grab the every new economic opportunity out there, and eat em all up alone.
the company is almost practically government managed, aside from the stock holders. the govt cant let them go bankrupt by any means.

What's really unhealthy is that Europe doesn't have a single large company for entertainment electronics.

Technology industry has really moved to East Asia. It all began with Japan,then Taiwan, South Korea, and even China are the largest makers of phones/computers.

Just like Sony. That company is huge.

nokia rirr grow rarger

Samsung is a conglomerate. They have dozens of companies in varying industries under the same name. They do everything from electronics to shipping to cars to retail to IT support to running an amusement park.

The electronics division is simply the most internationally competitive of them, and thus the most visible.

It's still unhealthy tho.
On the contrary. We have many companies who are worldwide spread, but not only *one*.
concurrence is healthy, for everyone; companies and people. When one entity own and/or make a large part of your country GNP, well, you can legitimately ask if this is not a dictatorial state.

I've seem somewhere that it got up to 60%

What Korea is doing with this is intentional. The country is sacrificing domestic competition in order to compete internationally with their huge conglomerates. It is the only way a medium-sized country (by population) can compete in the global market with companies like Apple. It's the only way.

The EU's strict competition laws are one of the main reasons why Europe struggles to produce a "Samsung" or a "Google" or an "Apple". It's better for consumers in the EU of course, but not in international competition

>It's better for consumers in the EU of course, but not in international competition
And what is the more important lad? Hapiness of our citizens, our worldwide competition?

What laws are you referring to?

This.
ASML here in the Netherlands manufactures all the machines for the production of CPU's, RAM, flashdrives and other chips. And sells them to the chinks and Amerifats. There are a lot of tech companies that we just don't see in everyday life.

pic kinda related.
Philips is love

Europe is going to shit, though.
Korea and other countries are making huge strides in technology, whereas Europe has turned into a complete and utter consumer society.

>whereas Europe has turned into a complete and utter consumer society.
I actually agree whith this, but...
>An American/Emirati guy saying this

We can't even compete with your consumerism.

Well, on the bright side when Samsung goes the way of Nokia there'll be even more qt Koreans working at our sushi joints.

>And what is the more important lad? Hapiness of our citizens, our worldwide competition?
It depends what way you look at it. Obviously there is a balance to be struck, but there are positive aspects to both approaches. With the European way the positive is better protection from consumers and lower prices, enabling better quality of life.

With the other way, consumers get fucked over to a greater extent but this huge company generates a lot of tax revenues and the government then spends this revenue on the citizens. I.e. European companies are generating less tax revenue than they could.

The US is another interesting case where it's much less moderate than Korea, but the competition laws are weaker than in Europe. So that's how you get like 3 national phone carriers in the entire US, and 3 or 4 in France and 3 or 4 in Britain (depending on how some mergers go)

Personally I think relying on ONE company too much is a bad idea but I also think maybe Europe has gone too far down the consumer protection route and should make some sacrifices in order to build stronger companies. Otherwise we'll go down the protectionist route because that will be the only defence against US (and Chinese) megacorps. Fight fire with fire imo.

Words should always be more important than the guy saying them.
When has the U.S NOT been consumerist, though?

>What laws are you referring to?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law

Most likely that your phone is connected to Nokia/Alcatel infrastructure.

>better protection from consumers
FOR consumers

>much less moderate than Korea
much MORE moderate than Korea

Sorry guys I've had a lot of alcohol tonight

But user, samsung is the government

>It is the only way a medium-sized country (by population) can compete in the global market with companies
right for the global market but at the same time its fucking domestic markets/demands up. nobody still can answer as to what is right.

>Words should always be more important than the guy saying them.
Ok, Indeed It wasn't a good argument, but please, admit that "Europe is going to shit"; isn't very argumented too.

>When has the U.S NOT been consumerist, though?

Honestly Idk, 100 years ago maybe?

Yeah I explored this here What really helps is a larger domestic market. So larger countries have the raw consumer spending power to sustain a multiple huge companies which can compete with each other. It depends how advanced the economy is but it seems to me that 100 million or higher is ideal. The UK is 65 million and in some sectors it can sustain a few big companies but when Britain wants to take on big global players there's often one "national champion"

A good example of this is BAE Systems. It can only be so high on this list because it's the result of mergers of almost every historical British defence company. BAE was going to merge with EADS/Airbus in order to take the fight to the big American companies harder, but the Germans blocked that merger.

>It's better for consumers in the EU of course, but not in international competition

How exactly is it better for EU consumers when practically every Eurofag owns an Apple/Samsung phone?

>Ok, Indeed It wasn't a good argument, but please, admit that "Europe is going to shit"; isn't very argumented too.

True. I was being facetious t b h. Don't take everything I say 100% literally.

The consumer benefits from the lower price data plans and such because there is more competition. I have already said the European manufacturing companies generate less taxes due to fewer sales and this hurts European citizens as governments have less money to spend

That's why democracy never works in Korea.
The Korean government does anything from legal to illegal to support those big companies for keeping Minjok pride high.

>making huge strides in technology, whereas Europe has turned into a complete and utter consumer society.

Neger, bitte.
Just because we have no huge companies like Samsung does not mean anything. For example Merck, a company that you probably never heard of owns like 70% of the liquid cristals market (litereally what you stare at right now). Sennheiser produces the best headphones in the world. We are #3 weapons producer in the world etc. Could probably go on forever.
Not to forget some of the biggest car companies in the world and connected shitloads of companies that produce for them and car companies in the whole world.

South Korea is still considered developing

There are several companies owned by Finns that you see every day that you don't even realise is Finnish

pic related

>Sennheiser produces the best headphones in the world.

muh B&Ws

>tfw work for Apple
>import prices for higher end electronics here are insane

an iPhone 6s going at a starter price of 650$ in the US, goes for 950$ starter here, which is amusing because the average monthly pay in Croatia is around 470$

Yeah that's another aspect to it, but that's down to something out of control of businesses. The dollar and euro/sterling are diverging because of loose monetary policy and easing in Europe relative to preparation for tightening the money supply in the US

Dollar is getting stronger while Euro gets weaker. This is in large part Europe's fault for fucking up the recovery after the financial crisis

>muh Orpheus

I've read about that monster. But I can't take it on the Tube with me so in the final analysis it's worthless

Na, might be a bit heavy since that station is made from solid carrara marble.

>With the other way, consumers get fucked over to a greater extent but this huge company generates a lot of tax revenues and the government then spends this revenue on the citizens.

This sounds literally like a typical classic straight up Neoliberalist. This was working until 2012 though.
I mean, the problem is, this shit hasnt worked well there anymore because of some problems of their social structures, the decline of the world economy, and CHINA's catch-up.

What most global companies like Sumsung in Korea have been doing is mostly manufacturing, and the weakest part of manufacturing is that literally EVERYONE CAN COPY IT, if only they get the capital investments. Korea had done it once from Japan and gone ahead of it in some economic departments and now China has just done it from Korea.

STAX headphones are the best in the world though.

>stronger companies
our companies fucking run our politics why would you want this.

Korea was literally fascist until the early 90s. You could't buy a foreign car there for any price until the mid 90s. A handful of families basically still control everything.

Phillips used to be high tier. My dad bought an actual Dutch made Phillips CD player in the 80s and it still works. Too bad they started slapping the name on cheap chinese walmart shit.

I'm not saying to focus on manufacturing, I don't think there is anything special about it and you're right there is a race to the bottom with manufacturing when compared to services. Service sector exports tend to have higher value and hold their value for longer.

I think you're missing one important thing about manufacturing which is marketing and branding. That's why Apple is so successful. The marketing and exclusivity means copies are not as desirable

Anyway, Samsung is just an example, when I'm talking about huge companies I mean services or manufacturing.

>our companies fucking run our politics why would you want this.
Not saying we should go full-USA and lobbying problems are a slightly different kettle of fish than looser competition rules. I just think "we" (Europe) are too far down the other end of the scales. Need to be more aggressive.

...

I own a japanese phone. My girlfriend owns an european phone.

Keep in mind that dark blue falls all the way in the range of the likes of Portugal and Saudi Arabia.

You don't really think Argentina, South Korea, and Chile are as developed as say, the Netherlands or Canada, do you?

It doesn't matter if Argentina, South Korea, and Chile are or aren't as developed as the Netherlands or Canada. They're developed countries.

>Saudi Arabia
wtf

Oil money can get you a long way.

ironically imperial japan's economic system (monopoly enjoyed by a few zaibatsu/chaebol) remains in south korea, while it was disbanded in mainland japan by america as part of war machine.

Posting from a Samsung phone, thank me Korean shits

Yeah but don't you have to meet international human rights standards to be considered developed?

Saudi Arabia is the present country presiding over the human rights council kek

I dunno about Saudi Arabia, my point was that South Korea was a developed country.

The definition of "developed" isn't quite solid, and there are several metrics for determining which country is developed and which isn't, but you'll find that Korea passes every one.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country

This is how Samsung plays game in Korea
>Dominate domestic market(s).
>Huge chunk of profits what do we do?
>Oh yeah! let's buy stocks of all the companies in South Korea!
>Now that we own most of the small businesses and Korea is our money generator, let's go to foreign companies and do the same thing!
>Holy shit it worked

yeah, preddy simple

It's not a measure of how many journalists you imprison. It's a measure of how many blackouts you have each month. Hence why Singapore is also quite high.

Not usually.

Well it's not developing or undeveloped, that's for sure.