[paganel]

> This bizarre claim that FDIC insurance is funded by taxpayers is becoming more prevalent.

Because it is correct. In today's world you're pretty much forced to have a bank account open if you want to have a "normal" life, i.e. a life where you own a house (most probably via a mortgage), where you pay your bills (most probably online) and where you receive your salary (most probably via a bank account).

As such, the great majority of tax-payers are also bank customers, and this was not based on their own choosing (meaning they couldn't "afford" to avoid being bank clients). As such, banking customers bailing out failing banks de facto means tax-payers bailing out failing banks.

[nindalf]

In today's world you're pretty much forced to own a smartphone if you want to have a “normal” life.

And half of all US taxpayers pay Apple for this privilege. That still doesn’t mean Apple is taxpayer funded.

Hear me out, this may sound crazy, but maybe we should call something taxpayer funded if … it’s actually funded by taxes. Not if it is simply used by a person who may or may not pay taxes.

[paganel]

> And half of all US taxpayers pay Apple for this privilege. That still doesn’t mean Apple is taxpayer funded.

That's what's coming next, hopefully. For all its many faults the EU is going down that path in regards to the mobile phone industry and the related ecosystem. It's telling that the one article bashing Apple the company that is now on the HN home page has first been published by a French magazine.

Also, let's leave the "hear me out" thing to reddit.

[nindalf]

Curious you didn’t respond to the part right after “hear me out”. You know, the actual substance of my comment.

Could we leave that behaviour in reddit too?