4 ms·

The largest American company is completely dependent on China. How this was allowed to happen is beyond me.

by arberx 5y ago

m0llusk 5y ago
Apple tried very hard to manufacture their products in the US and nearly went broke. They transitioned to manufacturing overseas because they needed to be competitive to survive. Right now this means China but with the cost of doing business there going up most of this production is likely to move to Vietnam.
- rs999gti 5y ago
  Broke in terms of labor or material costs? Or could Americans just not manufacture Apple products?
  - m0llusk 5y ago
    Consumers demand low prices. Even with lots of automation manufacture in the US made both Apple Macs and NeXT cubes impractically expensive.
karamanolev 5y ago
Try largest company in the world (AFAIK)...
- arberx 5y ago
  Saudi Aramco at >$8T
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    Saudi Aramco is not notable because it is simply a consequence of clerical designation. There is no innovation, or large scale coordination comparable to another company, not even Exxon or Shell.
    - umeshunni 5y ago
      > large scale coordination I agree with the innovation part (for some narrow definition of innovation at least), but not sure why you think drilling and shipping billions of tons of products requires no large scale coordination. Just looking at their wiki page, they operate hundreds of oil fields.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        I guess negotiated business relationships would be a better word than cooperation? They have half of their equation (all their inventory) gifted to them by the king of their country.
  - simulate-me 5y ago
    That’s 8T Saudi riyals, which is a little over 2T USD. Apple is bigger at 2.7T.
naoqj 5y ago
"allowed to happen"? Do you think the government should tell companies where they can manufacture?
- arberx 5y ago
  If it's a national security concern -- absolutely. Apple isn't just a company.
- atlasunshrugged 5y ago
  Just dropped this in another comment but sharing here too. Some people apparently do (and actually have for a long time for national security stuff, but with the increasing dual-use nature of tech I think the idea of what should be considered critical or not is expanding). The bill below is probably the best articulation of some political thoughts on the subject of outsourcing supply chains. https://www.casey.senate.gov/news/releases/casey-and-cornyn-release-a-joint-statement-on-national-critical-capabilities-defense-act https://www.casey.senate.gov/news/releases/casey-and-cornyn-...
- option 5y ago
  Depending on goods and services they provide. In case of high tech manufacturing- absolutely. Furniture is an example where we should care much less.
- nukemaster 5y ago
  Our law and freedom ends where the border begins.
- reaperducer 5y ago
  "allowed to happen"? Do you think the government should tell companies where they can manufacture? Even without government intervention, a good CEO should know better than to put all of his company's eggs in one basket, whether that's an individual nation, or a single parts supplier. Apple's massive growth in services would somewhat insulate it from a locked-out-of-China scenario. At least long enough to establish diverse manufacturing elsewhere. As an Apple shareholder, for years I've been repeatedly disappointed with Mr. Cook's swooning and fawning over China. Not just for political and social reasons, but because he put the company and its future in jeopardy chasing Chinese manufacturing trends for short-term dollars. I want a CEO with long-term vision, who makes the company resilient so it'll keep producing revenue longer than the next three months.
sharken 5y ago
Seems simple enough when the mantra is Profit before risk. If companies such as Apple would also consider softer things like Human Rights, a lot would be different. But companies will always do what brings in the most profit, such as the creative Latvian blend by Shell: https://frontierindia.com/shell-to-buy-russian-oil-blend-latvian-to-circumvent-sanctions-stares-at-5-billion-loss/ https://frontierindia.com/shell-to-buy-russian-oil-blend-lat...
- fibers 5y ago
  If companies actually gave a shit about climate risks down the line and developed significantly different ways on how to reduce co2 emissions this would not be an issue. As it stands, the world is forced to import and consume an insane amount of oil to keep the lights on. As far as I can tell no one says anything about what's happening in Nigeria regarding human rights violations so I guess who is to say about the victims who happen to not have fair skin.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    I look around and see lots of people buying pickup trucks and SUVs with 4L+ engines for casual use, 3k+ sq ft houses for 3 or 4 people, and flying to Hawaii for vacation. None of it seems forced. The world rewards the companies that give them what the world wants.
  - nradov 5y ago
    Most places don't import and consume much oil to keep the lights on. Worldwide only a small fraction of electricity production comes from burning petroleum products.
  - sharken 5y ago
    Now that you bring up Nigeria, i am not sure skin color is the number one issue. According to [1] and [2] there are problems in the south-east and to some degree also south-west. Nigeria is right now divided into 50% Muslim and 50% Christian and it looks like the Christian part of the country in the South is unhappy with that. I could very well be wrong here, but it seems to be too much of a coincidence. [1] https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/467985-nigeria-suffering-from-human-rights-violations-despite-democratic-progress-nhrc.html https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/467985-nigeria... [2] https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/nigeria https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/niger...
rootusrootus 5y ago
> How this was allowed to happen is beyond me. America does not have the same interest in industrial manufacturing that China does, simple as that. If we wanted to shift 100% of iPhone production to the US, how long would it take to spin up that kind of capacity? Is it even possible?
- dwighttk 5y ago
  And how much would they cost?
- silisili 5y ago
  > Is it even possible? The fact that this is even a question (that I also don't know the answer to) is indicative to me that we should find out. Being wholly reliant on a foreign nation for something as ubiquitous as chips should be seen as a potential security risk. Not in a handwavy 'privacy' context, but in one that it severely limits options should there be a disagreement.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  >Is it even possible? Of course it is possible. It would take some time and money, but if Apple wanted to do it they could. There are plenty of places that could use good jobs and have manufacturing experience like the Appalachia region.
- rs999gti 5y ago
  US defense industry does a lot of in house, domestic electronics manufacturing. I think something else is up with Apple not wanting to do production in the Americas
  - kube-system 5y ago
    You can absolutely build electronics in the US. China just does it cheaper, quicker, and in higher volume. Apple cares more about these things and less about where manufacturing happens. The military cares less about these things and more about where it happens.
  - 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
MangoCoffee 5y ago
>The largest American company is completely dependent on China uh. that's is not correct. if you watch any Apple tear down. there are a lot of components that's not made in China for example the chip are made by TSMC, screen is made by Samsung...etc.
eunos 5y ago
Strong economic coupling prevents war. Hurrah for ultra globalized economy! Having said that it is quite amusing that now American in general and even HN in particular starts hating globalization when as late as a few years ago they couldn't stopped ramming globalization into everybody's mouth. Now when some of them starts getting their foot in the system you got Trump and MAGAs.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Strong economic coupling prevents war. Hurrah for ultra globalized economy! This is why the whole history of, say, Europe involves almost no wars between neighbors with large amounts of trade just before the war, right?
  - eunos 5y ago
    Not strong enough, they don't put their moneyed folks and multinational CEOs as the stakeholder in the state. I'm sure they will be more level headed than some jaded Junkers. Pretty sure they would understand that it's a waste of wealth and time to cater some commotion in the Balkan.

The largest American company is completely dependent on China. How this was allowed to happen is beyond me.

by arberx 5y ago

The largest American company is completely dependent on China. How this was allowed to happen is beyond me.

Apple tried very hard to manufacture their products in the US and nearly went broke. They transitioned to manufacturing overseas because they needed to be competitive to survive. Right now this means China but with the cost of doing business there going up most of this production is likely to move to Vietnam.

rs999gti 5y ago
Broke in terms of labor or material costs? Or could Americans just not manufacture Apple products?
- m0llusk 5y ago
  Consumers demand low prices. Even with lots of automation manufacture in the US made both Apple Macs and NeXT cubes impractically expensive.

karamanolev 5y ago

Try largest company in the world (AFAIK)...

arberx 5y ago
Saudi Aramco at >$8T
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  Saudi Aramco is not notable because it is simply a consequence of clerical designation. There is no innovation, or large scale coordination comparable to another company, not even Exxon or Shell.
  - umeshunni 5y ago
    > large scale coordination I agree with the innovation part (for some narrow definition of innovation at least), but not sure why you think drilling and shipping billions of tons of products requires no large scale coordination. Just looking at their wiki page, they operate hundreds of oil fields.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      I guess negotiated business relationships would be a better word than cooperation? They have half of their equation (all their inventory) gifted to them by the king of their country.
- simulate-me 5y ago
  That’s 8T Saudi riyals, which is a little over 2T USD. Apple is bigger at 2.7T.

naoqj 5y ago

"allowed to happen"? Do you think the government should tell companies where they can manufacture?

arberx 5y ago
If it's a national security concern -- absolutely. Apple isn't just a company.
atlasunshrugged 5y ago
Just dropped this in another comment but sharing here too. Some people apparently do (and actually have for a long time for national security stuff, but with the increasing dual-use nature of tech I think the idea of what should be considered critical or not is expanding). The bill below is probably the best articulation of some political thoughts on the subject of outsourcing supply chains. https://www.casey.senate.gov/news/releases/casey-and-cornyn-release-a-joint-statement-on-national-critical-capabilities-defense-act https://www.casey.senate.gov/news/releases/casey-and-cornyn-...
option 5y ago
Depending on goods and services they provide. In case of high tech manufacturing- absolutely. Furniture is an example where we should care much less.
nukemaster 5y ago
Our law and freedom ends where the border begins.
reaperducer 5y ago
"allowed to happen"? Do you think the government should tell companies where they can manufacture? Even without government intervention, a good CEO should know better than to put all of his company's eggs in one basket, whether that's an individual nation, or a single parts supplier. Apple's massive growth in services would somewhat insulate it from a locked-out-of-China scenario. At least long enough to establish diverse manufacturing elsewhere. As an Apple shareholder, for years I've been repeatedly disappointed with Mr. Cook's swooning and fawning over China. Not just for political and social reasons, but because he put the company and its future in jeopardy chasing Chinese manufacturing trends for short-term dollars. I want a CEO with long-term vision, who makes the company resilient so it'll keep producing revenue longer than the next three months.

sharken 5y ago

Seems simple enough when the mantra is Profit before risk. If companies such as Apple would also consider softer things like Human Rights, a lot would be different. But companies will always do what brings in the most profit, such as the creative Latvian blend by Shell: https://frontierindia.com/shell-to-buy-russian-oil-blend-latvian-to-circumvent-sanctions-stares-at-5-billion-loss/ https://frontierindia.com/shell-to-buy-russian-oil-blend-lat...

fibers 5y ago
If companies actually gave a shit about climate risks down the line and developed significantly different ways on how to reduce co2 emissions this would not be an issue. As it stands, the world is forced to import and consume an insane amount of oil to keep the lights on. As far as I can tell no one says anything about what's happening in Nigeria regarding human rights violations so I guess who is to say about the victims who happen to not have fair skin.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  I look around and see lots of people buying pickup trucks and SUVs with 4L+ engines for casual use, 3k+ sq ft houses for 3 or 4 people, and flying to Hawaii for vacation. None of it seems forced. The world rewards the companies that give them what the world wants.
- nradov 5y ago
  Most places don't import and consume much oil to keep the lights on. Worldwide only a small fraction of electricity production comes from burning petroleum products.
- sharken 5y ago
  Now that you bring up Nigeria, i am not sure skin color is the number one issue. According to [1] and [2] there are problems in the south-east and to some degree also south-west. Nigeria is right now divided into 50% Muslim and 50% Christian and it looks like the Christian part of the country in the South is unhappy with that. I could very well be wrong here, but it seems to be too much of a coincidence. [1] https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/467985-nigeria-suffering-from-human-rights-violations-despite-democratic-progress-nhrc.html https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/467985-nigeria... [2] https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/nigeria https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2022/country-chapters/niger...

rootusrootus 5y ago

> How this was allowed to happen is beyond me. America does not have the same interest in industrial manufacturing that China does, simple as that. If we wanted to shift 100% of iPhone production to the US, how long would it take to spin up that kind of capacity? Is it even possible?

dwighttk 5y ago
And how much would they cost?
silisili 5y ago
> Is it even possible? The fact that this is even a question (that I also don't know the answer to) is indicative to me that we should find out. Being wholly reliant on a foreign nation for something as ubiquitous as chips should be seen as a potential security risk. Not in a handwavy 'privacy' context, but in one that it severely limits options should there be a disagreement.
_-david-_ 5y ago
>Is it even possible? Of course it is possible. It would take some time and money, but if Apple wanted to do it they could. There are plenty of places that could use good jobs and have manufacturing experience like the Appalachia region.
rs999gti 5y ago
US defense industry does a lot of in house, domestic electronics manufacturing. I think something else is up with Apple not wanting to do production in the Americas
- kube-system 5y ago
  You can absolutely build electronics in the US. China just does it cheaper, quicker, and in higher volume. Apple cares more about these things and less about where manufacturing happens. The military cares less about these things and more about where it happens.
- 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

MangoCoffee 5y ago

>The largest American company is completely dependent on China uh. that's is not correct. if you watch any Apple tear down. there are a lot of components that's not made in China for example the chip are made by TSMC, screen is made by Samsung...etc.

eunos 5y ago

Strong economic coupling prevents war. Hurrah for ultra globalized economy! Having said that it is quite amusing that now American in general and even HN in particular starts hating globalization when as late as a few years ago they couldn't stopped ramming globalization into everybody's mouth. Now when some of them starts getting their foot in the system you got Trump and MAGAs.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> Strong economic coupling prevents war. Hurrah for ultra globalized economy! This is why the whole history of, say, Europe involves almost no wars between neighbors with large amounts of trade just before the war, right?
- eunos 5y ago
  Not strong enough, they don't put their moneyed folks and multinational CEOs as the stakeholder in the state. I'm sure they will be more level headed than some jaded Junkers. Pretty sure they would understand that it's a waste of wealth and time to cater some commotion in the Balkan.