

If a European company would sell such products, it would immediately be shut down.
If a European company would sell such products, it would immediately be shut down.
Among the worst examples McGrath came across were baby soothers with beads that fall off easily, which pose a choking hazard because they did not have the regulation size hole to enable a baby who did swallow one accidentally to continue to get air.
… children’s raincoats with toxic chemicals, sunglasses with no UV filter and kids shorts with draw strings longer than regulation length that cause a trip hazard.
… cosmetics containing butylphenyl methylpropional, also known as Lillal, which is listed as a chemical of “very high concern” by the EU and has been banned since 2022 over concerns that it affects fertility and fetal development. Last year, the UK government told consumers to dispose of any products containing the ingredient.
Why haven’t these platforms been long banned and those responsible brought to a court?
This is a big issue, but this ‘PPC Land’ publishes AI generated content only, and the sole source for this is a French document. I don’t say this is wrong, but I am cautious as I couldn’t find an alternative reliable source and my French is by far not good enough.
Your entire behaviour and line of argumentation in this thread is almost hilarious. You are frequently relativizing and sometimes completely retracting your own arguments after they have proven wrong, and now you are posting a document to ‘refer to Germany’s stance’. What a waste of time.
I see you do not like how the world works
?
I wouldn’t expect the EU and other countries and blocks to absorb China’s overcapacities for too long in case the US business breaks down for Chinese companies. The rest will (and must) react accordingly to protect their industries. That aside, the US market is too large and too important for China. You can’t simply pivot all products to other markets.
This is what tariffs always do, but China would undoubtedly hurt most if this tariff conundrum continues. Just look at the trade stats.
Russia will attack the next country. (If this country falls, guess what?)
Russia will attack the next country. (If this country falls, guess what?)
A quick reminder that 1.5 percentage points of the Nato countries’ 5% GDP military spending target is earmarked for areas beyond traditional military defense such as arson attacks, cyber attacks, and the like.
Completely failing is too much imo. But China and Russia are interfering heavily, especially with the far-right and far-left in Europe, and that is a constant threat.
This website (which appears to have been created less than three weeks ago) consists of exclusively sensationalist headlines followed by very brief texts that all predict the apocalypse and are accompanied by AI generated images.
In other news, five German MAN e-buses coming in Bavaria, Germany, in April 2025, Italy’s Iveco Bus provides 13 in France, and so it goes on.
Market leaders in Germany are eCitaro (by Germany’s Daimer), followed by Germny’s MAN, and the two Dutch companies Ebusco and VDL. Similar to the EV market, BYD has only a very small fraction of the market, but the propaganda goes on.
Back in June, several media reported that Teresa Ribera is refusing to exempt any sort of operational cost when it comes to solar panel, wind turbine, and battery producers from the bloc’s strict state aid regime.
One such article is here, saying, amongst others:
The powerful competition directorate of the European Commission is indeed going ahead and blocking a push that would enable the governments to subsidize their production costs when it comes to clean energy technologies, thereby flaring-up the tensions between the EU officials who are enforcing the state-aid rules and the ones who are working on the industry … This internal battle underscores the EU’s executive struggle in order to navigate the barriers of supporting the emerging technologies in the global race between Europe and China as well as the US, but at the same time also holding firm to its traditional free market approaches when it comes to subsidies.
This is a low-quality post to say the least, and by that I don’t even refer to the source which is (even explicitly) a tankie propaganda outlet.
Chair of the Fire Committee Zack Polanski AM wrote to the Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan to share ‘deep concern’ about a ‘sustained increase’ in arson incidents over the last three years.
why would they put a stamp on it? And why is that one half Cyrillic half Latin?
If something originates from China it originates from China, if even there were stamps 'half Cyrillic and half Latin", to use your fabricated quotation.
It’s somewhat similar to Russia’s shadow fleet, don’t rely on the flags under which the ships sail …
Technological progression will make the Taiwanese want to join China. Only a war could prevent this …
Do yourself a favour and stay away from wherever you get such stuff.
When Chinese leader Xi Jinping visited Russia in May 2025 to celebrate victory day in Moscow, Chinese state-controlled media outlet South China Morning Post reported that China’s Xi Jinping kicked off his state visit by thanking Moscow for supporting Taiwan’s reunification with mainland China.
In a signed article in Russia’s state-run Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper … [Xi Jinping wrote that Taiwan’s] unification [with China] must be upheld as part of the post-war international order … Celebrating the “enduring friendship” between Moscow and Beijing, he said the two countries had supported each other since World War II …
The war in Ukraine and China’s aggression against Taiwan are apparently closely linked, at least from China’s point of view. There may or may not be a threat of a U.S.-China war, but here this is just a red herring.
Such disinformation campaigns come, among others, by malicious state actors, namely Russia and China, and are heavily backed by propagandists across the web, including the so-called ‘tankies’ here on Lemmy. I am wondering what they think about that. And how they feel.
As an addition, a quick reminder that 1.5 percentage points of the Nato countries’ 5% GDP military spending target is earmarked for areas beyond traditional military defense such as fighting disinformation campaigns, arson attacks, cyber attacks, and things like that.