There's no proof that your catastrophic imaginary scenario would actually happen. Just "if you do what I don't want to it will be the end of the world". Convenient unprovable claim. Financial transactions happen all the time and are plenty cheap, they just don't do any with sanctioned entities.
You're claiming if data protection laws had actual teeth, google would close up shop and everyone would just go home and not do business anymore. That's laughable. Nobody would claim such BS in good faith.
> There's no proof that your catastrophic imaginary scenario would actually happen.
There is, just read TFA.
> Financial transactions happen all the time and are plenty cheap, they just don't do any with sanctioned entities.
And that's exactly the point. They are cheap because people are protected by the corporate veil (as long as they don't explicitly do something highly illegal). Anything where people are suddenly personally liable, they stay far away from. If we apply the same harsh punishments to all financial crime as we do for interacting with sanctioned countries, people will stay far away from interacting with that and those that don't will either demand truck loads of money or also be shady in other ways (most likely both).
> Nobody would claim such BS in good faith.
Someone reading my comment in good faith would have been able to see the point that I was making, which actually is pretty distinct from what you appear to be arguing against.
You're claiming if data protection laws had actual teeth, google would close up shop and everyone would just go home and not do business anymore. That's laughable. Nobody would claim such BS in good faith.