You can tell he added "tone" to the end of "skin colour" because he knew just skin colour would be too ridiculous, yet he still wanted it there to make the connection to discrimination.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Because corporations care, man! Really though, what other choice would they have if they were forced to make phones in the US? They would have to pay higher wages or no one would do the job. And you can only price a phone so high, or so I would have thought....$500 seems silly to me, yet people pay well over $1000 so I could be wrong on that.
You can, but that's the kind of protectionism that leads to trade wars and massively rising inflation. Pretty soon clothes, food, electronics, etc all cost more. Guess what happens next?
You can, but that's the kind of protectionism that leads to trade wars and massively rising inflation. Pretty soon clothes, food, electronics, etc all cost more. Guess what happens next?
Wages increase to support the consumer economy of high-priced goods?
You can, but that's the kind of protectionism that leads to trade wars and massively rising inflation. Pretty soon clothes, food, electronics, etc all cost more. Guess what happens next?
Oh, sorry I'm not saying it is a good idea, just imagining what would happen if Trump imposes protectionist policies.
Some, yes. But they are also hoarding yuuuge amounts of cash(lover $200 billion). The point is, they could afford to pay workers more, and choose not to.
I agree but too often corporate profits are vilified as excess when really they are the dividends/ underlying stock value that supports everyone's retirement.
Moving manufacturing to the US or increasing oversees Labour would have an impact on shareholder value. Presuming they can't increase the price more manufacturing all iPhones in the US would cost about 7.2 billion more (100 *72million). Apple makes about 50 billion a year so you are looking at losing about 15% of profits. So their value would drop by roughly the same amount.
Can they afford it? Yes, is there an impact to every pension fund? Yes.
If Tim Cook wanted to build all iPhones in America, pay everyone a great wage, and have it cut into Apple profits...he would be removed as CEO immediately by the shareholders via the board. Curiously we always have a ton of blaming the CEOs because they make too much money, not much about shareholders continuously demanding better profits, which is course what leads to outsourcing and other cost cutting measures.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
If Tim Cook wanted to build all iPhones in America, pay everyone a great wage, and have it cut into Apple profits...he would be removed as CEO immediately by the shareholders via the board. Curiously we always have a ton of blaming the CEOs because they make too much money, not much about shareholders continuously demanding better profits, which is course what leads to outsourcing and other cost cutting measures.
Which is also indirectly driven by consumers demanding ever lower prices. It's a capitalism issue we want to blame people for
I did not expect to see the first person of ginger in the White House within my life time.
That ain't natural. We'll set aside the roller coaster of a comb-over for a second and focus on that crazy mix of hair dye and spray tan he uses on his thinning balding locks. The man had dark almost blondish hair when he was younger, now it's a golden pee(hehe) coloured mess.
Referring that to ginger is an affront to our gingered posters.
But don't forget apples profits actually means people's retirement funds.
What would it truly cost to manufacture in North America or Europe? $2 billion less in profit per year? I mean Foxconn is automating its factories and getting rid of human labor. If that is the way of the future why can't we have that factory in North America?
I agree but too often corporate profits are vilified as excess when really they are the dividends/ underlying stock value that supports everyone's retirement.
Moving manufacturing to the US or increasing oversees Labour would have an impact on shareholder value. Presuming they can't increase the price more manufacturing all iPhones in the US would cost about 7.2 billion more (100 *72million). Apple makes about 50 billion a year so you are looking at losing about 15% of profits. So their value would drop by roughly the same amount.
Can they afford it? Yes, is there an impact to every pension fund? Yes.
And the market would correct itself and life would go on.
If Apple would use that $200 billion to innovate and create something new they wouldn't have an issue increasing market value of the company. Because we all know market value is not at all tied to how obscene your profits are each year.
Not disagreeing with you that this is what a lot of the Trump supporters see/want. They are basically asking for handouts, which is interesting because all you ever hear on the broadcasts that appeal to them is about hard work and creating opportunity and not just giving out handouts. They want their handouts too.
The only difference is the Syrian refugee lived under legitimate dictatorships, extremism, economic hardship, possibly death of loved ones and destroyed families, displacement from their home, coming to a new land where they don't understand anything. They actually probably need a bit of a hand to get going in their new society.
Yet the Trump supporter worried about losing jobs to them grew up in a democratic country, with access to at least a basic American education, relative security, social familiarity, opportunity to pursue whatever they want, and probably some basic level of social assistance if required (which they rail against regardless).
Yet somehow a Syrian refugee getting language training is suddenly a major threat to their existence. Do these people want English language training too?
During this election you saw a lot of rust belters and unionized workers switch from (D) to (R) to support Trump - I'm sure there are some that don't want handouts like welfare or EI and some that do. They voted D for most of their life and it got them to this point, so they were frustrated.
For some, I think it is more along the lines of "the money could be better spend elsewhere", like that roads project or trying to re-open my factory. I'm sure lots of people are sympathetic to refugees, but they want their government to focus on America first when Americans are hurting. I think there is also some nationalist undertones that resent them for fleeing as well and that Americans didn't run away from their civil war (again, we can debate the legitimacy of this, but that is a common feeling).
Does that make them a bunch of racists for thinking that way? I don't think so. I just think continuing to label the entire group of them as such is only going to be counter productive.
