3 ms·
A company like Apple has very little incentive to care about geopolitics, other than by current or future government laws and regulations (a government mandate,
by kccqzy 8mo ago
A company like Apple has very little incentive to care about geopolitics, other than by current or future government laws and regulations (a government mandate, tariffs, etc). In the absence of government intervention, Apple has determined that investing a quarter trillion dollars is the cheap choice; getting the same result in the United States would probably need much much more than a quarter trillion dollars worth of investment. If the United States thought that such investments by Apple would have undesirable geopolitical implications, Congress should have acted a long time ago.
- 827a 8mo agoYour learned helplessness is defeatist and boring. We need not be Moloch's subjects; Apple's business priorities are not the result of some natural and unstoppable force, and their leadership is not exempt from responsibility because of your belief that it is. Someone, sometime, in a surprisingly boring room, wearing a surprisingly boring suit, made decisions like those which opened a factory in China instead of Texas.
- kccqzy 8mo agoI do not have learned helplessness. Nor have I claimed Apple’s business practices are the result of a natural force. Nothing is natural here. I said that Congress could have acted. Is Congress part of the nature now? In contrast you have provided no arguments for why Apple’s leadership bears responsibility rather than Congress.
- montagg 8mo agoTexas would need to train its people. And the people would need to be as hungry as the Chinese were, and are to a certain extent. You should read the book the OT is talking about, it shows how the U.S. didn’t stand a chance in manufacturing, even going back to the 80s. Literally just not getting back to potential clients for two weeks and saying X or Y can’t be done, while Southeast Asian companies were jumping at the chance to build stuff. There’s a giant cultural shift that needs to happen in the U.S. to get that back—not sacrificing labor laws, like China does, but the same idea that X or Y CAN be done, and actually jumping at the chance to build stuff instead of feeling entitled to it. We do have agency, but the agency actually starts in the U.S., in education and culture, and not with a company like Apple.
- shimman 8mo agoAll these things sound like great reasons to force Apple, along with the rest of big tech, to pay to better our society in the form of taxes.
- fragmede 8mo agoIt doesn't seem like money is the only issue. Infinity dollars won't help if the culture is radioactively toxic and shitty. (Arguably if you had infinity dollars you could spend it on therapists and counselors to fix the culture.)
- palmotea 8mo ago> Infinity dollars won't help if the culture is radioactively toxic and shitty. And what's "radioactively toxic and shitty"? Not wanting to slave away for low wages in bad working conditions? Business apologists like to slander American workers, and it's tiring. Most of the "radioactively toxic and shitty" culture is management culture.
- fragmede 8mo agoAs mentioned upthread, if you go to an American machine shop, they'll take two weeks to get back to you, and generally be a PITA to work with, vs China's jumping at the chance to build stuff. https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjEVB5p2/ https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjEVB5p2/
- palmotea 8mo ago> As mentioned upthread, if you go to an American machine shop, they'll take two weeks to get back to you, and generally be a PITA to work with, vs China's jumping at the chance to build stuff. Probably because the Chinese are working 996. I know people who work 996, in China, and they dislike it as much as I would. That's "jumping at the chance."
- 8mo ago
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- junofan 8mo agoDell ate Compaq’s lunch with a BTO model. It’s pretty clear Tim Cook decided to put the factories out of reach after that experience. Putting the supply chain close to major customer markets is cheapest but invites competition.
- Braxton1980 8mo ago> Acompany like Apple has very little incentive to care about geopolitics, other than by current or future government laws and regulations (a government mandate, tariffs, etc). Isn't that massive? You make it seem like it's not important but look at Trump's tariffs that are connected to geopolitics. The US's relation with China could worsen to a point where certain imports are banned.
- edgyquant 8mo agoThe alternative is to do nothing. That you are worried at all is proof we have to take measures to ensure we aren’t dependent on adversaries.