4 ms·

People thought the iPhone was good value for money even though there were widespread reports of workers killing themselves by jumping out of factory windows due

People thought the iPhone was good value for money even though there were widespread reports of workers killing themselves by jumping out of factory windows due to horrible working conditions. I'm not singling them out, just providing a point of reference. [1] > If it's too expensive to create employers, there's no competition for workers. Employees working in a manufacturing facilities in e.g. China and Europe aren't competing for the same jobs. There's one set of standards for employees there, and there's another set of standards for employees here. We can't compete with that because we've decided that workers shouldn't be driven to suicide while they don't always share the same reservations and deem waivers, "safety netting", company-provided help hotlines, prayer sessions and "no-suicide pledges", to be an acceptable solution to the problem. [1] What can we do other than add protectionist rules? > Only regulations can solve this. Agreed. And if EU enforces such regulations while China doesn't, for example, we need protectionist rules in place to ensure that they can't undercut us by killing our planet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn_suicides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn_suicides

robertlagrant 3y ago
> We can't compete with that because we've decided that workers shouldn't be driven to suicide while they don't always share the same reservations and deem waivers, "safety netting", company-provided help hotlines, prayer sessions and "no-suicide pledges", to be an acceptable solution to the problem. I think you're excluding the middle[0] here. If you think the EU can't compete, you can't just say it's due to worker protections. There are lots of reasons. E.g. there's load more investment capital available in the US; that's not due to Chinese labour laws. > What can we do other than add protectionist rules? Worker protection isn't the same as protectionism. > And if EU enforces such regulations while China doesn't, for example, we need protectionist rules in place to ensure that they can't undercut us by killing our planet Much tighter, more specific rules though. Not "free markets bad so protectionism". Making sure specific environment-related rules are followed for certain products coming in is much smaller than just a ban. [0] https://www.siue.edu/~gdondan/bdkit.html https://www.siue.edu/~gdondan/bdkit.html
- dns_snek 3y ago
  I never said that we're uncompetitive solely because of environmental and labor laws, but those factors make such a significant difference that any other factors become irrelevant. We could have all the cheap capital in the world but it would still be cheaper to manufacture in China, Taiwan or other parts of Asia where people work 50,60+ hour weeks for lower pay and no benefits or vacation. > Making sure specific environment-related rules are followed for certain products coming in is much smaller than just a ban. And how do you propose we enforce that against untrustworthy or even hostile governments that have a history of covering things up and a vested interest to do it again?
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > We could have all the cheap capital in the world but it would still be cheaper to manufacture in China, Taiwan or other parts of Asia where people work 50,60+ hour weeks for lower pay and no benefits or vacation. What about the US? If 75% of Intel's fabbing is done in the US, that should show us something. An EU-based company that sent 25% of its fabbing off to China would also be much better than protectionist laws. Why can't it be made?
    - dns_snek 3y ago
      What are you talking about? I don't know where they currently stand but Intel used to produce the vast majority of their chips in Asia. US government had to introduce very similar incentives and decided to just hand out dozens of billions of dollars to get them to move production back home, which is arguably worse than what you're criticizing the EU for.
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        > What are you talking about? I'm talking about Intel doing manufacturing in the US. > I don't know where they currently stand but Intel used to produce the vast majority of their chips in Asia. Can you cite this? E.g. Intel seems to have said something quite different in this press report[0]. > US government had to introduce very similar incentives and decided to just hand out dozens of billions of dollars to get them to move production back home Can you cite this? > which is arguably worse than what you're criticizing the EU for Anything is arguable. It's also arguable it's better. I think it's better, personally. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20110302101731/http://newsroom.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/1882-25-3841/US_Manufacturing.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20110302101731/http://newsroom.i...

robertlagrant 3y ago

> We can't compete with that because we've decided that workers shouldn't be driven to suicide while they don't always share the same reservations and deem waivers, "safety netting", company-provided help hotlines, prayer sessions and "no-suicide pledges", to be an acceptable solution to the problem. I think you're excluding the middle[0] here. If you think the EU can't compete, you can't just say it's due to worker protections. There are lots of reasons. E.g. there's load more investment capital available in the US; that's not due to Chinese labour laws. > What can we do other than add protectionist rules? Worker protection isn't the same as protectionism. > And if EU enforces such regulations while China doesn't, for example, we need protectionist rules in place to ensure that they can't undercut us by killing our planet Much tighter, more specific rules though. Not "free markets bad so protectionism". Making sure specific environment-related rules are followed for certain products coming in is much smaller than just a ban. [0] https://www.siue.edu/~gdondan/bdkit.html https://www.siue.edu/~gdondan/bdkit.html

dns_snek 3y ago
I never said that we're uncompetitive solely because of environmental and labor laws, but those factors make such a significant difference that any other factors become irrelevant. We could have all the cheap capital in the world but it would still be cheaper to manufacture in China, Taiwan or other parts of Asia where people work 50,60+ hour weeks for lower pay and no benefits or vacation. > Making sure specific environment-related rules are followed for certain products coming in is much smaller than just a ban. And how do you propose we enforce that against untrustworthy or even hostile governments that have a history of covering things up and a vested interest to do it again?
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > We could have all the cheap capital in the world but it would still be cheaper to manufacture in China, Taiwan or other parts of Asia where people work 50,60+ hour weeks for lower pay and no benefits or vacation. What about the US? If 75% of Intel's fabbing is done in the US, that should show us something. An EU-based company that sent 25% of its fabbing off to China would also be much better than protectionist laws. Why can't it be made?
  - dns_snek 3y ago
    What are you talking about? I don't know where they currently stand but Intel used to produce the vast majority of their chips in Asia. US government had to introduce very similar incentives and decided to just hand out dozens of billions of dollars to get them to move production back home, which is arguably worse than what you're criticizing the EU for.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      > What are you talking about? I'm talking about Intel doing manufacturing in the US. > I don't know where they currently stand but Intel used to produce the vast majority of their chips in Asia. Can you cite this? E.g. Intel seems to have said something quite different in this press report[0]. > US government had to introduce very similar incentives and decided to just hand out dozens of billions of dollars to get them to move production back home Can you cite this? > which is arguably worse than what you're criticizing the EU for Anything is arguable. It's also arguable it's better. I think it's better, personally. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20110302101731/http://newsroom.intel.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/1882-25-3841/US_Manufacturing.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20110302101731/http://newsroom.i...