7 ms·

Is Apple really that important though? Sure, consumers love their Apple products but there are certainly plenty of alternatives for just about everything they m

Is Apple really that important though? Sure, consumers love their Apple products but there are certainly plenty of alternatives for just about everything they make. If the US lost China as a trade partner, the entire consumer electronics industry would be in big trouble.

arberx 4y ago
> Is Apple really that important though? Yes, this is not even arguable. A national security concern as well.
- svnpenn 4y ago
  It is arguable. I would be fine if Apple crashed and burned. I don't use any Apple products. My company does, but Apple folded, I'm sure we would just move to Android or something. Apple is the only company I have ever seen, that doesn't give business discounts. We pay the same as any Joe off the street. Even Microsoft doesn't do that. Fuck Apple.
  - pb7 4y ago
    It sounds like you have a personal beef with Apple because you don't get special treatment. This has nothing to do with its importance to the US, which is extremely high.
  - gjsman-1000 4y ago
    You seem to forget that literally almost every Android phone is also made in China and would be immediately hit with the same sanctions. Every Android phone also has parts made in Taiwan, just like the iPhone, an area that would almost certainly be blockaded in the event of a conflict. As for your complaints about business discounts... I see it as a win for the consumer that they don't have to be a "business" to artificially pay less. Fuck that.
    - newaccount2021 4y ago
      huh? Samsung is the Android market...made in Vietnam afaik they exited China manufacturing completely in 2019
      - gjsman-1000 4y ago
        If there was a skirmish, Vietnam is just south of China, is communist just like China, and would likely find themselves quickly aligned with China over the US. So much so they may as well be the same level of risk.
        skhr0680 4y ago
        Vietnam is one of the most anti-China countries
        gjsman-1000 4y ago
        Citation needed. Also my point remains unchanged that Vietnam would probably get in line in a skirmish, regardless of how they feel.
        Lio 4y ago
        China and Vietnam fought a war in 1979 and several border skirmishes during the 1980s. Right now China is claiming control of some of Vietnam's coastal waters including the sinking of Vietnamese fishing vessels, so there are ongoing disputes between the two countries. Previously Vietnam partnered with the USSR against China. Now that Putin is Xi's closest ally (or wants to be seen that way) Vietnam could well be looking for new allies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Vietnam_relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Vietnam_relation...
        dirtyid 4y ago
        Vietnam has "Three No's" defense policy that will preclude any substantial anti-PRC alignment. There's some wiggle room to posture / hedge with US for theatre in new white paper, but nothing major because the "Three No's" were specifically drafted in 98 after normalizing relations with PRC with appeasement in mind. The war and subsequent border skirmishes thoroughly deindustrialized North manufacturing and set back VN development for decades. VN could have gotten on the export-driven gravy train much earlier, instead it went to PRC. There's very little chance VN will embrace western alliances on tier of PRC/RU "comprehensive strategic partnership" because PRC build up a lot of leverage over the years, including funding (frequently owning) a lot of the supply chains in VN, and via control of hydropower/water/agri resources by influencing upper Mekong Laos. Both Trump/Biden admin have tried to court Vietnam somewhat informed by spurious sentiment that "Vietnamese public hate Chinese, therefore they must be onboard", but went nowhere. TLDR is PRC has a lot of existential leverage over VN, which provides leverage over SKR ontop of existing SKR economic leverage.
  - ascendantlogic 4y ago
    Apple not giving you business discounts doesn't affect how critical it is to the US from economic and security standpoints.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    Apple gives business discounts. https://www.apple.com/retail/business/ https://www.apple.com/retail/business/
  - mikestew 4y ago
    Your personal beef with a company is not a basis for making it "arguable". And Apple gave even my teensy little company (when it was running) discounts. They have (or at least had) a business program which required some proof of business license (DUN, or summat?), and enjoy your discount. I'd look it up, but parent isn't going to, so I won't bother.
- amelius 4y ago
  Nationalize it then.
  - pb7 4y ago
    How would that help anything?
    - amelius 4y ago
      It would solve the problem that if Apple decides to do anything that goes against national interest (they are free to do so) then the government/voters would be able to do something against it.
      - pb7 4y ago
        Your solution to protecting ourselves from being dependent on an authoritarian government is by being authoritarian to our own first? How would nationalizing it help one bit if China decided to block exports?
        herbst 4y ago
        If the US would have any say in apples politics they wouldnt fully depend on China at this point. It was obvious for years that this will lead to issues and both countries make a huge point in hating on each other.
- orangepurple 4y ago
  Friendly reminder that Apple is the largest component of SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY). Most stocks are under 2% representation except Apple and a handful of others. Top 10 Holdings (27.37% of Total Assets) Name Symbol % Assets Apple Inc AAPL 5.90% Microsoft Corp MSFT 5.60% Amazon.com Inc AMZN 4.05% Facebook Inc A FB 2.29% Alphabet Inc A GOOGL 2.02% Alphabet Inc Class C GOOG 1.96% Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B BRK.B 1.45% Tesla Inc TSLA 1.44% NVIDIA Corp NVDA 1.37% JPMorgan Chase & Co JPM 1.29% https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SPY/holdings/ https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SPY/holdings/
- Bloating 4y ago
  So says Jim Jones (Drink the Apple flavored Kool-Aid)
JohnJamesRambo 4y ago
AAPL is 7.3% or so of the SP500.
vineyardmike 4y ago
Haha yes? Everything is replaceable but it is a major business. Huge ramifications in America if they had a major supply disruption. It’s not about the availability of glass boxes with fruit logos on the back. The iPhone and other products obviously brings in a lot of money and supports a lot of jobs, indirectly too like through case design and apps and stuff. But China uses apple as an example of how they work with America - so much so that Tim Cook gets meetings with presidents and diplomats. And its supply chain is one of chinas major employers, so it would come at a steep cost to China. A loss of apple would likely impact other businesses soon after. China wouldn’t kill the golden goose without slaughtering the others first, or using them as an example of what’s to come. Even beyond the iPhone as a product directly, MANY people (especially rich important influential ones) are major shareholders. So are pension funds and retirement funds and index funds. If apple had an “oops no iPhone for a year” moment that would rock the financial world way beyond their actual direct market value. They’re so big that their crash would likely slash the entire tech sector and with it the S&P 500 and with it all the index funds and with it everyone’s retirement accounts (you can see how that ripple would continue to everyone’s detriment). The US government has an interest in keeping them safe for that alone. They can lose market share and be replaced over time, but a geopolitical shock like China closing their ports to apple would be a major event the government has an interest in avoiding.
- herbst 4y ago
  So the US is kinda forced to keep questionable business practice alive so pension funds are safe? I don't know why this sounds so dystopian
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    No. They’re forced to keep businesses safe from outside destruction, not market forces. Basically the same as individuals. The gov also maintains a military for similar reasons. I said this in the reply. They don’t want a foreign gov to torpedo an important business for politics but they don’t need to protect against market forces. There’s no market risk to apple disappearing overnight. If it’s over a long time scale, pension funds can self manage. It won’t implode the market.
sfeqcq 4y ago
> If the US lost China as a trade partner Let's not forget what happened to the world's supply chains when the Port of Shanghai slowed down due to China's zero-Covid policy. "Shanghai lockdown exposes global supply chain strains" https://www.ft.com/content/9318db50-e0c3-4a27-9230-55ff59bcc46e https://www.ft.com/content/9318db50-e0c3-4a27-9230-55ff59bcc... If it just stopped... Yipe.
autoexec 4y ago
No doubt that if apple suddenly and without warning closed shop tomorrow, never made another ianything, and pulled the plug on every last one of their services the world would keep on turning and neither the US or China would collapse. It wouldn't be pretty, a lot of people would lose money, but we'd survive and move on.

arberx 4y ago

> Is Apple really that important though? Yes, this is not even arguable. A national security concern as well.

svnpenn 4y ago
It is arguable. I would be fine if Apple crashed and burned. I don't use any Apple products. My company does, but Apple folded, I'm sure we would just move to Android or something. Apple is the only company I have ever seen, that doesn't give business discounts. We pay the same as any Joe off the street. Even Microsoft doesn't do that. Fuck Apple.
- pb7 4y ago
  It sounds like you have a personal beef with Apple because you don't get special treatment. This has nothing to do with its importance to the US, which is extremely high.
- gjsman-1000 4y ago
  You seem to forget that literally almost every Android phone is also made in China and would be immediately hit with the same sanctions. Every Android phone also has parts made in Taiwan, just like the iPhone, an area that would almost certainly be blockaded in the event of a conflict. As for your complaints about business discounts... I see it as a win for the consumer that they don't have to be a "business" to artificially pay less. Fuck that.
  - newaccount2021 4y ago
    huh? Samsung is the Android market...made in Vietnam afaik they exited China manufacturing completely in 2019
    - gjsman-1000 4y ago
      If there was a skirmish, Vietnam is just south of China, is communist just like China, and would likely find themselves quickly aligned with China over the US. So much so they may as well be the same level of risk.
      - skhr0680 4y ago
        Vietnam is one of the most anti-China countries
        gjsman-1000 4y ago
        Citation needed. Also my point remains unchanged that Vietnam would probably get in line in a skirmish, regardless of how they feel.
        Lio 4y ago
        China and Vietnam fought a war in 1979 and several border skirmishes during the 1980s. Right now China is claiming control of some of Vietnam's coastal waters including the sinking of Vietnamese fishing vessels, so there are ongoing disputes between the two countries. Previously Vietnam partnered with the USSR against China. Now that Putin is Xi's closest ally (or wants to be seen that way) Vietnam could well be looking for new allies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Vietnam_relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Vietnam_relation...
        dirtyid 4y ago
        Vietnam has "Three No's" defense policy that will preclude any substantial anti-PRC alignment. There's some wiggle room to posture / hedge with US for theatre in new white paper, but nothing major because the "Three No's" were specifically drafted in 98 after normalizing relations with PRC with appeasement in mind. The war and subsequent border skirmishes thoroughly deindustrialized North manufacturing and set back VN development for decades. VN could have gotten on the export-driven gravy train much earlier, instead it went to PRC. There's very little chance VN will embrace western alliances on tier of PRC/RU "comprehensive strategic partnership" because PRC build up a lot of leverage over the years, including funding (frequently owning) a lot of the supply chains in VN, and via control of hydropower/water/agri resources by influencing upper Mekong Laos. Both Trump/Biden admin have tried to court Vietnam somewhat informed by spurious sentiment that "Vietnamese public hate Chinese, therefore they must be onboard", but went nowhere. TLDR is PRC has a lot of existential leverage over VN, which provides leverage over SKR ontop of existing SKR economic leverage.
- ascendantlogic 4y ago
  Apple not giving you business discounts doesn't affect how critical it is to the US from economic and security standpoints.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  Apple gives business discounts. https://www.apple.com/retail/business/ https://www.apple.com/retail/business/
- mikestew 4y ago
  Your personal beef with a company is not a basis for making it "arguable". And Apple gave even my teensy little company (when it was running) discounts. They have (or at least had) a business program which required some proof of business license (DUN, or summat?), and enjoy your discount. I'd look it up, but parent isn't going to, so I won't bother.
amelius 4y ago
Nationalize it then.
- pb7 4y ago
  How would that help anything?
  - amelius 4y ago
    It would solve the problem that if Apple decides to do anything that goes against national interest (they are free to do so) then the government/voters would be able to do something against it.
    - pb7 4y ago
      Your solution to protecting ourselves from being dependent on an authoritarian government is by being authoritarian to our own first? How would nationalizing it help one bit if China decided to block exports?
      - herbst 4y ago
        If the US would have any say in apples politics they wouldnt fully depend on China at this point. It was obvious for years that this will lead to issues and both countries make a huge point in hating on each other.
orangepurple 4y ago
Friendly reminder that Apple is the largest component of SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY). Most stocks are under 2% representation except Apple and a handful of others. Top 10 Holdings (27.37% of Total Assets) Name Symbol % Assets Apple Inc AAPL 5.90% Microsoft Corp MSFT 5.60% Amazon.com Inc AMZN 4.05% Facebook Inc A FB 2.29% Alphabet Inc A GOOGL 2.02% Alphabet Inc Class C GOOG 1.96% Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B BRK.B 1.45% Tesla Inc TSLA 1.44% NVIDIA Corp NVDA 1.37% JPMorgan Chase & Co JPM 1.29% https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SPY/holdings/ https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SPY/holdings/
Bloating 4y ago
So says Jim Jones (Drink the Apple flavored Kool-Aid)

JohnJamesRambo 4y ago

AAPL is 7.3% or so of the SP500.

vineyardmike 4y ago

Haha yes? Everything is replaceable but it is a major business. Huge ramifications in America if they had a major supply disruption. It’s not about the availability of glass boxes with fruit logos on the back. The iPhone and other products obviously brings in a lot of money and supports a lot of jobs, indirectly too like through case design and apps and stuff. But China uses apple as an example of how they work with America - so much so that Tim Cook gets meetings with presidents and diplomats. And its supply chain is one of chinas major employers, so it would come at a steep cost to China. A loss of apple would likely impact other businesses soon after. China wouldn’t kill the golden goose without slaughtering the others first, or using them as an example of what’s to come. Even beyond the iPhone as a product directly, MANY people (especially rich important influential ones) are major shareholders. So are pension funds and retirement funds and index funds. If apple had an “oops no iPhone for a year” moment that would rock the financial world way beyond their actual direct market value. They’re so big that their crash would likely slash the entire tech sector and with it the S&P 500 and with it all the index funds and with it everyone’s retirement accounts (you can see how that ripple would continue to everyone’s detriment). The US government has an interest in keeping them safe for that alone. They can lose market share and be replaced over time, but a geopolitical shock like China closing their ports to apple would be a major event the government has an interest in avoiding.

herbst 4y ago
So the US is kinda forced to keep questionable business practice alive so pension funds are safe? I don't know why this sounds so dystopian
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  No. They’re forced to keep businesses safe from outside destruction, not market forces. Basically the same as individuals. The gov also maintains a military for similar reasons. I said this in the reply. They don’t want a foreign gov to torpedo an important business for politics but they don’t need to protect against market forces. There’s no market risk to apple disappearing overnight. If it’s over a long time scale, pension funds can self manage. It won’t implode the market.

sfeqcq 4y ago

> If the US lost China as a trade partner Let's not forget what happened to the world's supply chains when the Port of Shanghai slowed down due to China's zero-Covid policy. "Shanghai lockdown exposes global supply chain strains" https://www.ft.com/content/9318db50-e0c3-4a27-9230-55ff59bcc46e https://www.ft.com/content/9318db50-e0c3-4a27-9230-55ff59bcc... If it just stopped... Yipe.

autoexec 4y ago

No doubt that if apple suddenly and without warning closed shop tomorrow, never made another ianything, and pulled the plug on every last one of their services the world would keep on turning and neither the US or China would collapse. It wouldn't be pretty, a lot of people would lose money, but we'd survive and move on.