Dell To Leave China For India

halfEvilTech writes "India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, told the Indian press that Dell chairman Michael Dell assured him that Dell was moving $25 billion in factories from China to India. Original motives were cited for environmental concerns. But later details come up as to Dell wanting a 'safer environment conductive to enterprise.'"

Comments

Wow

[FlyingBishop]

If Dell can guarantee their parts are made in India and not China, I just might be getting a Dell next year.

Re:Wow

[MrEricSir]

Dude, you're not getting a Dell. Many of the internal parts WILL be made in China -- chips, circuit boards, etc. There's simply nowhere else that makes these things but China.

Re:Wow

[LWATCDR]

Wouldn't it be even better if it was built in Twin Falls Idaho or Austin TX?

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

or Tennessee where they have 2 facilities, pay a happy meal an hour and a higher turnover rate than the front line of a civil war battle

Re:Wow

[bigmattana]

This is not true. Few of the chips are made in China. Circuit boards are likely to be made in Taiwan. Individual components on the boards besides chips are made in lots of countries. Dell used to assemble many of their machines in Austin, TX until recently.

As with a car, most complex machines do have parts from all over the world. We are only stuck with no other option than China if we continue the current trend of giving all manufacturing to China. This can be reversed if you look at where the items you are buying are made.

Re:Wow

[Applekid]

There's simply nowhere else that makes these things cheaply but China.

There are still fab houses, PCB construction & assembly, etc in the West.

Re:Wow

[SomeJoel]

This is not true. Few of the chips are made in China. Circuit boards are likely to be made in Taiwan.

You may not realize this, but Taiwan is part of China.

Re:Wow

[Darkinspiration]

Only if the chinese really decide to invade.

Re:Wow

[C0vardeAn0nim0]

taiwan is an autonomous, rebel, province of china. they don't answer to beijing. the only reason most conuntries don't recognize taiwan as independent is to avoid diplomatic tensions with beijing.

if you hate mainland china's abuses, buy from taiwan. that's money that doesn't go to beijing spend in censorship.

Re:Wow

[Bearhouse]

Well, that's almost Flamebait..like saying 'Canada is part of the USA' IMHO

Without rehashing all the history, the modern reality is that the (current) Taiwanese population would not consider themselves part of the Chinese Socio-Political system any more than the Tibetans would.

Re:Wow

[TheDarAve]

This is not true. Few of the chips are made in China. Circuit boards are likely to be made in Taiwan.

You may not realize this, but Taiwan is part of China.

You may not realize this, but Taiwan is NOT part of China. Taiwan follows the old government that existed prior to the "cultural revolution" that spawned the current Chinese Communist Party government.

Re:Wow

[Wyatt Earp]

No, Taiwan isn't part of the People's Republic of China.

Re:Wow

[braytonak]

Wouldn't it be even better if it was built in Twin Falls Idaho or Austin TX?

No, because they wouldn't pay very well. American companies can't afford to pay the wages and benefits that Americans demand. That's why they have so many jobs in other countries where such expectations are lower. They also avoid different kinds of taxes and restrictions on what they can do and where.

Re:Wow

[TheDarAve]

Well, that's almost Flamebait..like saying 'Canada is part of the USA' IMHO

Its not? O_O So that's why they started asking for a passport this year...

Re:Wow

[fliptout]

He didn't forget- they are not one country.

Re:Wow

[rtfa-troll]

Wrong way round. It's like saying that "the USA is a rebel part of Canada". The only difference is that when you re-submit to Her Majesty's imperial rule your governance will actually improve.

(Scotty: engage asbestos shields; divert all power from the main engine)

Re:Wow

[barberousse]

Slight correction: the United States started requiring a passport this year. Canada only did it in response to the US.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

American companies can't afford to pay the wages and benefits that Americans demand.

They can, but they don't.

Re:Wow

[the linux geek]

No, the mainland is an autonomous, rebel area controlled by Communist bandits. Taiwan is the seat of the Chinese government.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Says who? China didn't take an interest in the island until the late 1600's, and by then had to compete with the Japanese, Ryukyuans, Dutch, Spanish, French, as well as of course the very much non-Chinese aboriginal inhabitants. China even disavowed control over the aboriginal inhabitants in 1871! Following the First Sino-Japanese war of 1894-95, China ceded Taiwan to the Japanese. The Japanese took a much greater interest in Taiwan and ruled until 1945. Then without asking the Taiwanese, the Allies gave Taiwan to the ROC. Had they asked, the Taiwanese more likely would have declared independence or remained part of Japan. They even rose up in revolt against the ROC in the 228 incident in 1947. So in all of recorded history China has governed the whole island and all of its inhabitants for perhaps as little as four years--from the surrender of the Japanese stationed there in 1945 up until the defeat of the ROC in 1949. It's been 60 years since the end of the revolution. How much longer is the rest of the world supposed to take this ridiculous claim of Chinese sovereignty seriously?

Re:Wow

[Stormwatch]

Taiwan is the legit China. The other, bad one is "Red China".

Re:Wow

[MMC Monster]

They could, except they would go out of business since no one would buy their more expensive products.

Re:Wow

[RajivSLK]

Canada had to do this in response to the US. The US required everyone entering to have a passport. If Canada didn't do the same they'd be stuck with a bunch Americans who came over the border with their drivers licenses and couldn't easily pass back into the US for lack of the required passport.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Err... Taiwan originally followed the Kuomintang (nationalist party) after those forces fled from mainland at the close of the Chinese Civil War. The 'Cultural Revolution' was later and really a purge of the communist party itself.

Re:Wow

[KiloByte]

Actually, it's not Taiwan being a rebel province of China, it's the mainland who are rebels, who managed to hold almost all of the country.

Re:Wow

[517714]

A lot, possibly the majority, of items marked "Made in Taiwan" are simply transshipped from the mainland.

Re:Wow

[Hognoxious]

You may not realize this, but Taiwan is part of China.

You might consider it to be so, but only if you're [Han|mainland] Chinese. But then if you are you probably think everywhere is part of China - or at least, ought to be.

Re:Wow

[Dogtanian]

There are still fab houses

And groovy apartments!

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Fail and history 101 a thousand times.

In OP 'safer environment conductive to enterprise', if quoted correctly, actually means 'cheaper environment...' with untouchables.

Re:Wow

[Dave Emami]

Well, that's almost Flamebait..like saying 'Canada is part of the USA' IMHO

Actually that's almost precisely equivalent to what they're saying.

1. A power (the British crown/nationalist Chinese) controls an area of land (British territories in North America/mainland China plus outlying islands).
2. That power is overthrown in that area, resulting in the rebels (pro-independence colonists/Maoists) controlling part of that territory (the 13 colonies/mainland China)
3. ... while those loyal to the old regime (pro-crown colonists/nationalist Chinese) relocate to a portion of the old territory still under the former power's control (Canada/Taiwan).

So, yes, saying that Taiwan belongs to the PRC is almost precisely like the US claiming to own Canada. The only difference is the relative size of the territory held by the loyalists vs. revolutionaries after the war.

On a tangent to this, the PRC's position that Taiwan belongs to them contradicts their claims that democracy is counter to Chinese culture. If Taiwan is part of the PRC, then they can't claim that democracy is un-Chinese, because it works just fine in Taiwan. So, either the PRC has to start holding democratic elections, or they have to renounce their claim on Taiwan. (The other excuse sometimes given is that democracy won't work for a population the size of China, but India is a democracy and is only somewhat smaller).

Re:Wow

[anarche]

Nope, Taiwan is the traditional ruler of China. China only ruled Taiwan for approx. 8 years before ceding it in perpetuity to Japan in 1895.

Japan was stripped of Taiwan after WWII and the Chinese were asked to manage it until the UN could help implement independence, which ended after 2 years when Kai-Shek invaded after being kicked out of China.

http://www.taiwandc.org/history.htm

Re:Wow

[Khyber]

You DO realize Tennessee was a major front line in our own civil war, yes? So what nonsense are you spewing?

Re:Wow

[javabsp]

["cultural revolution" that spawned the current Chinese Communist Party government] gets rated informative?

Re:Wow

[johncadengo]

First Google, then GoDaddy. Now Dell? Or is all this just huff and puff?

I find it funny that the Prime Minister of India would announce this. The gap between rich and poor in India is so abysmal, I wonder if politicians have come under the spell of potential riches.

Re:Wow

[Captain Splendid]

Yeah, it was a huge deal up here in Canada, eh? People on teevee, crying and screaming into the camera WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE AMERICANS? And then they showed a bunch of confused Americans milling aboot in front of Immigration, stuck with nothing to do like a bunch of hosers.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

If Dell can guarantee their parts are made in India and not China, I just might be getting a Dell next year.

I'd rather the parts be made in the US...

Re:Wow

[nutshell42]

And America became a democracy when the Indians overthrew their king Hitler because he freed the slaves.

You take a couple of events and turn them into a jumbled mass of fail.

Re:Wow

[M8e]

A higher manufacturing cost does not directly translates to a higher price on the end product. They could sell them at the same price and get lower profits(and smaller dividends) and/or they could do some cutbacks on stuff like PR, support, lawyers, bonuses etc.

Re:Wow

[amasiancrasian]

I thought it was interesting that it was only last year that the Republic of China (Taiwan) Legislative Yuan changed the official capital from Nanjing to Taipei. The reasoning was quite sound, given that ROC doesn't of yet have much a chance of winning Nanjing back, so the provisional capital might as well become the permanent capital.

Re:Wow

[amasiancrasian]

Taiwan is a part of the Republic of China. Theoretically, there are two Chinas (PRC and ROC). KMT and DPP have been wrangling on renaming ROC to just Taiwan, but the threat of missiles being deployed to Taiwan upon renaming has all but stopped the debate.

Re:Wow

[onefriedrice]

Well, that's almost Flamebait..like saying 'Canada is part of the USA' IMHO.

It isn't?

Re:Wow

[ScrewMaster]

They could, except they would go out of business since no one would buy their more expensive products.

Not if they made the proper investment in automation, if they had continued the progress we made in manufacturing efficiency in the past fifty or sixty years. Unions thoroughly screwed themselves when they did the Luddite routine, fighting automation because they were afraid they would lose their jobs. Well, they lost them anyway, and now they aren't even in the same country.

Re:Wow

[Cassius Corodes]

What about ROC? it has been ruling the island since 45, and it considers itself china, so its been under Chinese control for a while.

Re:Wow

[517714]

Taiwan follows the goverment that the US and the West supported. It is not as if that government was somehow more legitimate than the PRC. You do realize that Taiwan's government (KMT) began life as a Soviet backed communist party and that the PRC's roots (CCP) were at least home grown? No I suspect you were not aware of that. The state department will confirm: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/18902.htm

You of course know that from 1949 until 1992 Taiwan claimed that there was only one China. I don't see what your issue is in substituting one fantasy for another.

Re:Wow

[Jurily]

Exactly.

Re:Wow

[jcr]

There's simply nowhere else that makes these things but China.

The USA, Mexico, Canada, Germany, Poland, India, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, France, the UK, all of Scandinavia, Israel, Ireland, Romania, Hungary, Czech, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Australia are "simply nowhere" in your view?

(I'm sure I haven't named all of the countries with an electronics industry capable of making semiconductors and PCBs. These are just the first few that spring to mind.)

-jcr

Re:Wow

[zz_fish]

Only if the chinese really decide to invade.

Only if Taiwan really decide not part of China.

Re:Wow

[zz_fish]

You may not realize this, Communit Party is not China, China has existed a little longer than the party (something like more or less than 10k years).

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

mass of fail.

You take a perfectly good argument and ruin it with a cliched meme that we are all tired of already.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell that to the Taiwanese people then, because they don't consider themselves a part of China.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

China has only really existed about 3000 years (and was less than 1/4 its current size back then). Even legend grows thin at 4000 years back, and that's the history backed by the current government. It's the most favorable possible interpretation and isn't quite backed up by the archaeological record.

10 kiloyears back was before even agriculture had been invented yet; claiming that as being somehow part of "China" is silly.

Re:Wow

[stinerman]

I could just as easily say that the six counties of Northern Ireland are controlled by Monarchist bandits and that the national capital of Northern Ireland is Dublin.

Obviously we're talking about who has the monopoly of violence in the case of the ROC v. the PRC. For all intents and purposes they're separate countries, but if you want to play that game the Communists successfully overthrew the Nationalists quite a long time ago. It was a net negative for the people of China, but it is an accurate representation of the facts.

Re:Wow

[evilWurst]

I'm sure the semiconductor fabs in the US, EU, Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan would be fascinated by this new claim of their non-existence.

Re:Wow

[mjwx]

Dude, you're not getting a Dell. Many of the internal parts WILL be made in China -- chips, circuit boards, etc. There's simply nowhere else that makes these things but China.

Except Thailand, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore and Israel (tech is one of Israel's biggest exports, seeing as they have no natural resources) and that's just the ones I can name of the top of my head. Most of your HDD's are made in Thailand (certainly all WD HDD's) AsusTek boards are made in Taiwan, AMD Proc's are Fab'ed in Germany and Assembled in Malaysia, I believe Intel chips are assembled there as well. You RAM likely comes from South Korea.

Whilst it is likely that some part somewhere comes from China (a capacitor, battery cell or some such) that cant be avoided really, it's like trying to ban anything that contains Australian iron. Due to the way these goods are sold on the open market chances are any steel product has a bit of Australian iron in it.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Revisionist.

Re:Wow

[geminidomino]

Tell that to the Taiwanese people then, because they don't consider themselves a part of China.

Of course, they could just be using Texan logic. ;)

Re:Wow

[hellop2]

Have you ever asked a Taiwanese person, "Do you consider yourself Chinese?" I have, and the answer was always yes.

Re:Wow

[EspressoFreak]

China is actually a part of Taiwan..

Re:Wow

[Hal_Porter]

From the perspective of the Republic of China, the mainland is just a rebel held area, albeit a large one.

Re:Wow

[DocHoncho]

You're the one spewing nonsense, bub.

When the OP referred to the Civil War he was using what we call an analogy. That is, he was comparing the turnover at the Dell plants in Tennessee to the rate at which soldiers died during the Civil War.

I don't know where you got the idea that he was somehow referring to Tennessee's involvement in the Civil War itself.

Re:Wow

[Hal_Porter]

I said this further up. And, if you look at the Republic of China constitution, that's the way it is. Mind you I don't see the Republic of China ever ending up governing all of China, even if the People's Republic of China were to collapse USSR style because most Taiwanese people don't want anything to do with the mainland. If that happened it's much more likely that the Republic of China would rename itself the Republic of Taiwan and renounce its claims to China. In fact when Taiwan democratized there was a move to do exactly that which was only stopped by China threatening to invade if it happened.

Re:Wow

[osu-neko]

You may not realize this, but Taiwan is part of China.

Only in the same sense that the Falkland Islands are part of Argentina.

Re:Wow

[Jedi Alec]

Now all we need is for a chinese policeman to shoot a priest in the face when there are camera's present and we're all set for a Chinese invasion of Russia.

Not sure how well Obama would do playing the part of Jack Ryan though. President Palin might have been more suitable for her job, in light of her extensive experience with russia.

Re:Wow

[xilmaril]

A lot, possibly the majority, of items marked "Made in Taiwan" are simply transshipped from the mainland.

Not that this would surprise me, but... how can you tell? citation please?

No really, anybody, if this is true I'd like to know.

Re:Wow

[xilmaril]

Have you ever asked a Taiwanese person, "Do you consider yourself Chinese?"

I have, and the answer was always yes.

My Taiwanese roommate violently disagrees with you. YMMV.

Re:Wow

[xilmaril]

Fail and history 101 a thousand times.

In OP 'safer environment conductive to enterprise', if quoted correctly, actually means 'cheaper environment...' with untouchables.

Not to be depressing up our thread, but... they won't let untouchables have important jobs like chip manufacturing. The untouchables are several ranks too low in Indian society to allow that.

Luckily, due largely to the outlawing of the caste system some time ago, the harsh treatment of untouchables seems to be waning, at least in urban centers, so this might not even be a sensical distinction between potential employees in high tech industries in India anymore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalit#Social_status_of_Dalits

Re:Wow

[gtall]

You are confusing culture with citizenship.

Re:Wow

[Daengbo]

If you live in N. America, S. America, Europe, Russia, India, or Australia, the ROC and the PRC are considered to be two legitimate governments, the "One China" policy (mostly of the PRC at this point) not withstanding.

Re:Wow

[RockDoctor]

If Canada didn't do the same they'd be stuck with a bunch Americans who came over the border with their drivers licenses and couldn't easily pass back into the US for lack of the required passport.

Isn't that what the concept of "refugee camp" was invented for? It'd be quite amusing to watch a few thousand Americans starving and in rags.
Oh, wait a minute - isn't that what America promotes homelessness for - public entertainment?

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

"like saying 'Canada is part of the USA'" Valid, but their jackass Prime Minister would *LOVE* it to be. Well, would love it to be part of Shrubya's United States of Christian Fundamentalist Theocratic Dictatorship for sure.

But what would I know, I'm probably an evil communist with decent healthcare...

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Um. He's saying that people in the front line of the US Civil War died quickly, and thus had to be replaced. Note that bit about "a higher turnover rate than" preceding the civil war reference?

Reading comprehension, it's not just 'for fags'.

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

Or Nashville or Lebanon TN

Re:Wow

[spitzig]

Did you separate racially Chinese and nationally Chinese(as in, living under the PRC's government)? I live in Taiwan, and most people consider the two places to be different countries.

Re:Wow

[spitzig]

I've never been to Tibet, so I can't say for sure. But, China has ruled Tibet for a while. China claims to currently rule Taiwan, but Taiwan does what it wants. According to China, Taiwan's just a "wayward child", or something similar. So, I'd expect the Taiwanese to consider themselves LESS part China, though I'm sure many Tibetans don't want to be part of that system.

Also, complicating the situation is that apparently, China has been moving a lot of non-Tibetan Chinese into Tibet. They have had kids. If you are born in Tibet, that means you are at least SOMEWHAT Tibetan-so your opinion regarding China ruling Tibet matters at least some from a Tibetan standpoint.

Re:Wow

[arekusu_ou]

It's hardly rebels holding onto the country at this point, they ARE the country.

The unseated government in Taiwan is just that, a failed experiment, a change in CEO, unwanted people who cling to some sort of entitlement.

It's like if Obama isn't re-elected in the next election and his party cries foul and that they are the true legit and refuse to move, but the people's will is otherwise. Doesn't make the people rebellious, they just want something different, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Re:Wow

[arekusu_ou]

The difference here is US did not assert their rule over CND in the beginning, so they forgo claim by now, they were happy with their own independence.

China however assert their rule over Taiwan and Tibet, and aren't willing to let either succeed from the country.

When parts of Georgia tried to succeed (and seek friendly relation with Russia) the Western world stepped in and tried to stop them from succeeding. There's a double standard here and it boils down to the irrational fear of Communism.

If the Native American community want their land back, and want the US to stop bothering them, do you think the US should then be obliged to obey?

If the South wants to succeed from the North (which I think they should with such drastic differing dogmas) don't you think they should?

You can't think other countries breaking up into smaller countries is good, but the US should retain their large empire. I'm sure the non-American native Hawaii would love to become independent, they're not even close to the US.

Re:Wow

[KiloByte]

parts of Georgia tried to succeed (and seek friendly relation with Russia)

What the FUCK??? Mister 5 Mao (-> your other posts), you are not really deserving your pay, you are supposed to troll in a semi-believable way. If you call officers of FSB ordering a group of crooks shell an independent country "seeking friendly relations", you'd better concentrate on posting on domestic forums. People in China will of course ignore you, but at least they're used to such outrageous name calling.

Re:Wow

[Phoenixlol]

My Dell was assembled in Malaysia (last year).

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

(Scotty: engage asbestos shields; divert all power from the main engine)

That's not fair! If in a fight with the USA Canada gets the late James Doohan they have to take back William Shatner too!

Re:Wow

[joeoettinger]

This is true, but in the things over which you have control, you can buy items made in Taiwan, India, etc. And in relation to Google's vs Microsoft's stance on Chinese censorship, you can use Google software instead of Microsoft software. This is not to deprecate the Chinese people. They seem bright and industrious. But they deserve a better government, less censoship and better wages.

Re:Wow

[countertrolling]

Dell? Austin? Never happen..

Re:Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

http://taiwanauj.nat.gov.tw/fp.asp?xItem=19024&ctNode=122 "Currently, processing is restricted to a value-added increase of no more than 35 percent. The government decided to abandon this limit and allow companies to turn mainland-made products into made-in-Taiwan commodities by conducting advanced processing. Some manufacturers estimate that exporters will be able to set price levels of Taiwan-made products 10 percent to 20 percent higher than the same products processed in the mainland."

http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/business/chinese-trans-shipping-to-evade-dumping-duties/357636

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/us-manufacturers-report-compelling-evidence-of-evasion-of-antidumping-duties-on-imported-steel-wire-products-83255507.html

Re:Wow

[arekusu_ou]

Uhm, I live in Massachusetts, Mister 5 Mao? Huh?

Name calling? When did I name call, or Troll. Parts of Georgia trying to succeed and Russia encouraging them and the US led Western trying to stop it really did happen in recent years.

Re:Wow

[rdnetto]

Canada had to do this in response to the US. The US required everyone entering to have a passport. If Canada didn't do the same they'd be stuck with a bunch Americans who came over the border with their drivers licenses and couldn't easily pass back into the US for lack of the required passport.

Sounds like a pretty good way to get the law reversed, actually.

Wrong!

[WrongSizeGlass]

Dell spokesperson denied the story this morning. Who's editing today, me?

Re:Wrong!

[WrongSizeGlass]

"There was no discussion concerning any change in how or from where Dell will source component parts for the computers it manufactures in Asia"

Re:Wrong!

[Jeng]

Here is a link regarding Dell's denial.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a5Hyi1uZv05o&pos=6

Re:Wrong!

[dch24]

The original article about Dell moving is from the Hindustan Times

It appears they are moving their computer assembly operations, but will still use the same suppliers (i.e. suppliers in China).

Re:Wrong!

[BlueBoxSW.com]

If I had 25 billion invested in china and was going to move it to India in phases, I would deny it, too.

Re:Wrong!

[Anonymous Coward]

One of Mr. Singh, Mr. Dell or the spokesman must have lied.

Re:Wrong!

[Anonymous Coward]

I would doubt the whole article at this point. It got pulled completely off their site.

Re:Wrong!

[Anonymous Coward]

Dell has no choice but to deny this. They cannot afford to upset the Chinese government. Yet.
India should know better than to put out statements like this that put Dell in an awkward position.
After all, even the mention of a war between India and China will send all the Indian diplomats running out of the room.

Re:Wrong!

[Austerity Empowers]

I find it far more likely that Dell will also source parts of its operations in India. They've been using India for software/phone support for a long time, it's possible that there's some back-room backscratching to get India into hardware & assembly, in exchange for more cheap labor and a lever to pull against china.

"Moving out of China" sounds insanely difficult to do for hardware companies, it's taken decades to build that up.

Re:Wrong!

[kcelery]

It is possible that the Indians want Dell to move over. But after they found out how much Dell was paying the Chinese, they began to think it was not a good idea.

Re:Wrong!

[jandersen]

Why is that? There is nothing odious about a company choosing to move their production to the place they feel is most conductive to their main purpose: making money. The Chinese are, contrary to common misconceptions on slashdot, "idiots who are out to get you" - they are sensible people, certainly when it comes to business, and it may be a useful tactic to talk about moving one's production because something isn't as comfortable where you are. Governments are normally willing to accomodate you if they can and if what you ask for is not unreasonable.

The big problem with moving 25 G$ of investments is that most of it simply can't be moved that easily - buildings, expert employees, agreements with suppliers and partners etc etc - it makes no difference whether this is in China or the US. I can't really see Dell suddenly getting moral and ideals to the extent that they will leave it all behind, not to mention the huge cost of establishing themselves in another place.

Re:Wrong!

[Anonymous Coward]

Dell spokesperson denied the story this morning. Who's editing today, me?

How about Dell use a little innovation, clean up its a manufacturing processes, and move back to the USA.

Re:Wrong!

[T.E.D.]

Why is that? There is nothing odious about a company choosing to move their production to the place they feel

In a normal country, that logic would make perfect sense. However, China has no Rule of Law. If the government woke up tomorrow and decided they didn't want that $25 billion leaving the country, they are perfectly free to just take it for themselves. So publicising that you are removing assets from their country, presumably never to return, would not be a smart move.

Re:Wrong!

[BlueBoxSW.com]

In business, you pick to release information when it is most advantageous to you.

Even if there are plans to move this stuff, there's NO advantage to having it released now, so deny it.

The Indian PM was out of line mentioning it to the press.

Economic warfare

[Citizen of Earth]

If you declare war against the people who are trying to make you rich, you suffer the consequences.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

That statement surely applies to both sides of this one.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

If you declare war against the people who are trying to make you rich, you suffer the consequences.
I'm really not sure whether you're referring to the Chinese or Dell

Re:Economic warfare

[santax]

I hope you understand who is on the receiving end of this one and who is making whom rich. China doesn't need anyone. But everyone needs China.

Re:Economic warfare

[Lord Ender]

Who is declaring the metaphorical war against whom? Are you saying China declared war on the multi-national corporations by hacking them?

I think they're just recognizing that a communist government is a bad environment for a corporation, despite extremely low wages. China will enforce its laws only when they suit China. If you build something there, don't expect them to shut down factories producing knock-offs of your designs. And if the shit ever hits the fan, ALL your investments in China will become the sole property of China.

That was never an ideal business environment. China was an interesting experiment, but any big corp is wise to limit its ties to the ironically-named Peoples' Republic.

Re:Economic warfare

[bsDaemon]

We don't need China. It's just nice to have cheap stuff, and they make stuff cheap. If no one was buying, they couldn't sell. Its kind of like economic mutally-assured destruction. Despite what the Reaganites may want us to believe, demand still has just as much power as supply.

Re:Economic warfare

[Minion of Eris]

When since the death of Mao and the rise of the "Gang of Seven" has anyone thought China was Communist? That is like calling the old Soviet Empire a Communist state. They are a totalitarian dictatorship. Just 'cause they call themselves commies, that doesn't mean they are. To quote I-don't-remember-who (maybe Hunter Thompson?) "Communism has not been tried and failed, Communism has not been tried."

Re:Economic warfare

[santax]

Do you have any understanding of the population of China? I think they will sell those good just fine without the USA, the EU or Africa for that matter.

Re:Economic warfare

[farble1670]

communism really has nothing to do with low wages or anything else you mention. in fact, communism is contrary to those things. china isn't anything close to communist, except in it's internally directed rhetoric.

Re:Economic warfare

[Zephyr14z]

Almost every single item i own and use was produced within 50 miles of where I live. We don't need china. Many people simply prefer to save a few dollars, even when the real cost(environmental impact, human rights abuses, etc.) may be higher.

Re:Economic warfare

[bsDaemon]

Yes, they can sell to themselves, which is a closed population, which has demographic policies which ensure that they're going to have more old people than anything else in the mid-term, and those old people aren't really going to be productive. The only way capitalism works is if it can keep growing, which means that they have to start expanding into new markets, if possible -- otherwise, the system chokes on itself. It doesn't work closed in, just the same as Communism -- it wouldn't really work in just one country. In the 19th century, this brought us imperialism. In the 20th century, it brought us two world wars, followed by the cold war. If the rest of the world just stopped buying China's crap and kept trading with each other, freezing them out, we'd do a whole lot better than they would.

Re:Economic warfare

[TheDarAve]

Possibly, but without the foreign sales, unemployment there will put Michigan to shame.

Re:Economic warfare

[TheDarAve]

Mao would have been Totalitarian, "Gang of Seven" is an Oligarchy.

Re:Economic warfare

[WidgetGuy]

Hear that, American corporations? Stick to doing business in only those countries where you can buy the government. Like, say, the U.S.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

China doesn't sell us anything, big giant corporations make/buy things in China and sell them to us, so they can have cheap, and possibly slave, labor, along with avoiding environmental laws here.

Re:Economic warfare

[dunezone]

Do you have any understanding of the population of China? I think they will sell those good just fine without the USA, the EU or Africa for that matter.

No they wont. The high end products they produce cheaply cant be purchased by their own people because their own people don't have the wealth to pay for a high end good such as an iPod, tv, computer. This is why they have a ton of cyber cafes everywhere.

Also they might have a large population but a good portion of it is in the country where they live on farms and don't have a use for a high end product such as a TV or iPod because they don't have the infrastructure to support it.

The only reason China has been doing so well is because they cut corners everywhere. Cheap labor, cheap resources, disregard for implementing proper environmental laws, anywhere they could cut a corner they would. Compare a Chinese built automobile to a US / Japanese / European. The Chinese car will be extremely cheap compare to other countries but would disregard any safety or environmental standards.

Re:Economic warfare

[HeckRuler]

Well what's communism then if not Soviet communism?

Intellectually, in the ivory tower, and in the history books, sure I know that Soviet Russia wasn't ideally communistic. It didn't adhere to communist ideals. But I didn't think that anyone agreed what those ideals were. Given that Soviet Russia is the primary example of communism, and that everyone associates the two together, I'd argue that here in the real world, they have defined what communism is.

If you want to take another stab at everyone chipping in for the common good, feel free, but get yourself a different name.

And companies aren't leaving China because the people have cast off their classist ideas about money and pay, it's because of the controlling and backstabbing government. Which is why it's fitting to call China a communist government.

Re:Economic warfare

[Arancaytar]

To be more accurate, no corporation has ever tried to make anyone else rich. That the corporations boost the Chinese economy is a side effect they couldn't care less about; their aim is to produce something for the lowest cost possible and sell it for the highest price possible. China's ironically utterly capitalist approach to worker's rights and environmental protection means the cost is lowest there. That made it attractive to corporations.

But there are hidden costs from industrial espionage, arbitrary unpredictable actions by the government, poor safety guidelines (thus bad quality control) and the consumer backlash for exploiting lax pollution&employment laws. If these hidden costs grow too great, corporations will pack up and go elsewhere.

Re:Economic warfare

[santax]

That is absolutely true. But employment rates and living-standards in China already make Michigan look like a paradise. I just can't see them care when another couple million people live in horrific circumstances.

Re:Economic warfare

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

"Totalitarian dictatorship" doesn't really capture the aspects that have changed(and significantly). You can be a "totalitarian dictatorship" on top of virtually any economic system(other than the ones that are too unproductive to support any sort of central government with real power). You can run a practically free market with surprisingly little political freedom, and some totalitarian dictatorships have. To run a serious command economy, you practically have to be a totalitarian dictatorship, so most planned economies are.

China has been substantially authoritarian for pretty much its entire modern history. The interesting change is the shift from being an actually-substantially-communist economy to being a de-facto-capitalist economy, with substantial elements of state ownership and cronyism(the former in a variety of locations, especially those deemed strategic, the latter particularly notable at the local level). The multinational corporations who flock to China to build stuff on the cheap would Not be welcome in an actual communism, and are only getting cold feet now because they are learning the costs of dealing with cronyism and weak rule of law.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

The question isn't whether they need selling to you more than you need buying from them. The question is who can buy more resources. If China has what the countries want where they buy raw materials and you don't, then you'll end up starved for resources. This is why America goes to war: When strategic resources are under your control (directly or by proxy), the economic power of other countries isn't as much of a threat.

Re:Economic warfare

[santax]

You have a point there, but that last part, about cars. As a European I can say the same thing to any American... In the end, it depends on your own standard. And no way china will stop exporting. So many countries depend on them... Look at what they are doing with Africa, instead of just donating money, they create jobs... Generate income for the people there... and then sell them their services and goods. No if I would have to put my money on 1 country to come out as the next World-Dominator it will be China on the short run and India as a close second, maybe even the leader in about 40 years. I definitely would not put my money on the US or EU cause well... we both are practically bankrupt. lol.

Re:Economic warfare

[KiloByte]

Communism _is_ a totalitarian dictatorship, even if it tells you fairy tales about being "for the good of the workers".

If every single time communism was tried it instantly showed its true colours, doesn't this mean there's something wrong with its core idea? There were over fourty implementations of communism so far, so you can't call that a fluke.

Re:Economic warfare

[mirix]

What about the computer you posted that on?

There are some things you can't get domestically.

Re:Economic warfare

[mirix]

Soviet union was totalitarian socialism, it's supposed to be a stage on the way to communism. Never made it there.

Re:Economic warfare

[the-empty-string]

To quote I-don't-remember-who (maybe Hunter Thompson?) "Communism has not been tried and failed, Communism has not been tried."

That's like saying true perpetuum mobile machines have never been tried, only bad implementations have been.

Ok, then: countries tried to try it, and failed. Every single time, soon after embarking on the road towards it, it always devolved into dictatorship. True communism cannot properly be tried on a society scale, because it's fundamentally against human nature.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

I can call you an idiot. Refer to the above alleged-Thompson quote for the why.

Of seven comments, two show a degree of comprehension. That's actually progress, dear USAdians ('cause Canadians and Mexicans are Americans too, and you can't has the name). I wonder how many decades must pass before Communism stops being scary to you all heh.

(What if none of those were USAdians? Oh well.)

Re:Economic warfare

[chowdahhead]

Who else will buy our debt then?

Re:Economic warfare

[Zephyr14z]

While true, it is not necessarily true. We could (and do) produce a lot of electronic components domestically.

Re:Economic warfare

[Dogtanian]

If I had mod points, I'd mod you up for the Africa reference. IMHO China's activity in Africa has been generally unreported in the West, but it's going to become more obviously significant sooner or later as China exerts its influence (and goes after its interests) beyond the obvious areas in east and southeast Asia.

Re:Economic warfare

[russotto]

You can be a "totalitarian dictatorship" on top of virtually any economic system(other than the ones that are too unproductive to support any sort of central government with real power).

INCLUDING those; look at Haiti under the Duvaliers.

Of course, the Wikipedia article makes it all the USs fault...

Re:Economic warfare

[Dogtanian]

When since the death of Mao and the rise of the "Gang of Seven" has anyone thought China was Communist?

Someone called present-day China something like "the world's first mature fascist state", by which I assume they meant something akin to Mussolini's original definition where the interests of the state and of business were closely associated and effectively one and the same thing.

It has also been said that China went straight from being a traditional society to being a corporatist one without going through the transitional democratic phase. At any rate, those in power in the West thought that encouraging capitalism in China would inherently result in greater democracy over the longer term and in them moving closer to the West. Both of which are now very questionable if not downright wrong.

Assuming they meant that of course, and it wasn't just them exploiting the "capitalism == democracy" sentiment in the West (particularly America) to justify the cheap labour and potentially huge market they were salivating over, and damn the long-term consequences, which- blinded by dollar signs- they probably assumed would be in their favour anyway.

Re:Economic warfare

[anarche]

Funny, my money is on the US (still the largest economy in the world). If the EU successfully transforms into a genuine free-economic zone they'll threaten the US for dominance. China has a history of revolutions, and India a bureaucratic mess.

Say what you like about economies, as long as you spend half of the world military spending in one army, you'll remain on top.

Watch Brazil tho'.

Re:Economic warfare

[bill_mcgonigle]

We don't need China. It's just nice to have cheap stuff, and they make stuff cheap.

The US Government needs China. US wage problems, taxation, and inflation would be much more apparent without their artificial (from a 'human rights' perspective) -ly low prices.

Re:Economic warfare

[santax]

I would not test that army on Chinese soil. You will get hurt. China has by far the largest army in the world. And what's more, those people don't fight for money, they fight for their believes and honor... Not to get a chance to get out of the ghetto. Big difference... China's army maybe cheaper due to low wages, but it is certainly a whole lot bigger than what the most expensive army in the world (ours) has to offer... Do not underestimate the power of numbers.

Re:Economic warfare

[mirix]

True, but it's not like the old days where you could pick up a TV, made in the US, with every single component inside also made in the US.

Re:Economic warfare

[ScrewMaster]

ok at what they are doing with Africa, instead of just donating money, they create jobs

Maybe ... but they are also using cheap goods to extract as much wealth out of Africa as they can (just like they're doing with everyone else.) My girlfriend is Nigerian, and she tells me there's a huge market for Chinese-made high-tech products there: China wants their slice of all that oil money, and rich Nigerians like their toys as much as anyone else. So don't give China too much credit for philanthropy here.

Re:Economic warfare

[ScrewMaster]

ironically-named Peoples' Republic

More like hypocritically-named. Any country which has the word "republic" in its name generally isn't. A republic, that is.

Re:Economic warfare

[ScrewMaster]

"Communism has not been tried and failed, Communism has not been tried."

Neither has true democracy, not on a significant scale. That's because both break down at a certain point. America is not, has never been, and hopefully never will be a democracy (in spite of metric fucktons of political rhetoric to the contrary) It is a republic, a fact which regularly escapes our leaders when they open their mouths on TV. Our Founders knew perfectly well that "democracy" is roughly synonymous with "mob rule", and that the popular will is often an idiot. Consequently, We the People require limits on our power to screw things up just as much as the government does.

Re:Economic warfare

[houghi]

People do indeed not need China. However people like stuff more then their principles. So they will buy more and buy cheaper so they can buy more. And that is where (now) China comes in.

The moment you can buy more stuff at a cheaper price from another country, that is where you will get it. It could even be that that country is the USofA.

Re:Economic warfare

[ScrewMaster]

Soviet union was totalitarian socialism, it's supposed to be a stage on the way to communism. Never made it there.

Human nature being what it is, I would argue that no "communist" government will ever reach that point.

Re:Economic warfare

[santax]

Yes, but let's be honest here... they won't get any diamonds cause we already have those. We didn't create jobs in return, we reinforced slavery (yeah we don't call it that, but getting shot in the head for refusing to work 19 hours a day for a dollar a week kind of is the same) and sure China wants to make a profit, but they are doing it a whole lot nicer than the western world ever did in Africa.

Re:Economic warfare

[jcr]

without the foreign sales, unemployment there will put Michigan to shame.

Unless they figure out that they can consume most of their own production.

-jcr

Re:Economic warfare

[Z34107]

Any particular reason capitalism "chokes on itself" if it can't expand?

That was the logic behind our "containment" policy with regards to the communism during the cold war and slavery prior to the civil war.

Re:Economic warfare

[superdave80]

"The only way capitalism works is if it can keep growing"

Completely untrue, and I have no idea why I keep hearing this repeated from time to time. One guy even went so far as to put a specific number (3% growth needed for capitalism to work). Capitalism is simply the exchange of goods/money/services in an open market. Markets LIKE growth, but it is by no means a requirement for a successful market.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

"Totalitarian capitalist" can be reduced to "fascist". I wonder why everyone avoiding the term, is it political correctness?

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

Well what's communism then if not Soviet communism?

Intellectually, in the ivory tower, and in the history books, sure I know that Soviet Russia wasn't ideally communistic. It didn't adhere to communist ideals. But I didn't think that anyone agreed what those ideals were. Given that Soviet Russia is the primary example of communism, and that everyone associates the two together, I'd argue that here in the real world, they have defined what communism is.

If you want to take another stab at everyone chipping in for the common good, feel free, but get yourself a different name.

And companies aren't leaving China because the people have cast off their classist ideas about money and pay, it's because of the controlling and backstabbing government. Which is why it's fitting to call China a communist government.

Actually, Soviet Russia wasn't ever more than socialist. I understand your point, which is that most people conflate the ideas of 20th century Russia and communism, but one is a real country and one is a socio-economic concept.

The equivalent, I suppose, would be saying that the USA is not only an example of capitalism, but the definition of capitalism.

Re:Economic warfare

[sourcerror]

If you look at the population of the world as a closed system, then we're selling goods to ourselves.

Re:Economic warfare

[moonbender]

You're seeing it repeated from time to time because it follows from the analysis of capitalism done by Marx.

Re:Economic warfare

[juicegg]

People may not agree to what communist ideals are, but some of those people have the wrong idea while others are right.

Communism has the word "common" as it's root. It means common ownership of property, which is the same thing as non-existence of property (because property is defined by exclusive ownership). This implies non-existence of money, non-division of people into classes and impossibility of political power like we understand it.

Neither Soviet Union nor Maoist China had common ownership/non-existence of property - they had state control of property, where all the riches of those countries were managed by the bureaucratic ruling class. This ruling class forced people to work for money. There is absolutely nothing communist about exchanging work for money. Unlike entrepreneurs in free-market capitalism this bureaucratic ruling class managed their property collectively, but that is not so unusual - shareholders and corporations also manage property in common. What matters is that they have exclusive power which left most of people in those countries with little choice but to get a job and try to join the property managing class.

You might say that China and USSR had "realistic" communism, but this is not true because much more authentic forms of communism have existed in history. Many groups of hunter gatherer people often and share what they managed to find among themselves freely (or according to rules of gifting, not exchange). Diggers during the English Revolution (around 1650's) were a group that set out to work the land in common and share the products freely. The government rightly saw them a s a threat and suppressed them. In the Spanish Civil War in 1930's large parts of the country were controlled by anarchist-communists (several million people) who took "from each according to the ability to each according to need" principle seriously and collectivized factories and land. Their progress was uneven, but mostly it was directed towards greater communism. Their enterprise was prosperous until they were destroyed by the combination of USSR sabotage and fascist attack. There's a movie about it called "Living Utopia" if you care what real communism looks like. Wikipedia is another (very limited) communist project because it creates common wealth owned by no one and build by people who have the ability (and desire) to do this and used freely by anyone who wants to use it for the benefit of all.

Finally, there is nothing communist about stuff like "collective farms" in USSR because those enterprises were not controlled by their workers in any meaningful sense.

What these countries call themselves makes absolutely no difference to what they are. They are state capitalist economies because they have states, capital and a powerless working class, while communism is a movement (and not just some ideas in a book) aimed square against all of that. It would be nice to have a new word for people chipping in for common good as you say, but if this chipping in behavior was at all ambitious it would threaten all the existing powers of our world (governments & corporations) and sooner or later it would gain the same notoriety as "communism"

Re:Economic warfare

[plasticsquirrel]

A much better example of communism would be the short-lived anarcho-communist Spain. Real communist states are often short-lived and collapse into oligarchies or dictatorships due to the instability of the country post-revolution. Spain was a working but short-lived example of the closest thing there has been to communism as advocated by Marx and others. George Orwell traveled to Spain and fought alongside the anarchists / communists there, against the fascists.

Spanish Revolution
Confederación Nacional del Trabajo

For all the right-winger paranoids who like to quote Orwell, it might be interesting for them to learn that he was a socialist fighter in Spain, who recorded his experiences there in Homage to Catalonia.

Re:Economic warfare

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I can't speak for "everyone"; but I'm not using the term because "fascism" also has a number of salient and distinctive cultural features that distinguish it from other flavors of authoritarian or totalitarian and capitalist society.

Fascism, while annoyingly mutable and difficult to pin down, is more specific than Totalitarianism, which is itself more specific than Authoritarianism. The three are(roughly speaking) visualizable as a set of concentric circles, with fascism in the middle, totalitarianism around it, a little ways out, and authoritarianism outside that, again a way further out. Each time you go in one ring, you exclude certain forms of political organization. Just to make things hairier, neither Fascism, nor Totalitarianism, nor Authoritarianism have neat links to specific economic models. There are some implications and exclusions(for instance, you cannot run a command economy on a national scale without a political system that is Totalitarian in character, you cannot run a Totalitarian or Fascist political system without an economic system and technological base capable of sustaining centralization, and self-identified "fascists" will oppose self-identified "communists" and vice versa); but no neat one-to-one correspondences.

Consider, for example, a Fascist Totalitarian Capitalism vs. a non-Fascist Totalitarian capitalism: let's say Fascist Germany vs. one of the hard-right "banana republics" established by US interests in South America. In both cases, "communism" and "communists" will be explicitly rejected and violently suppressed. In both cases, a form of capitalism will be the economic mode, albeit(because of the totalitarianism being rather corrosive to rule of law) with certain amounts of cronyism creeping in. Look at the differences, though: In a fascist state, the espoused aim of the crony capitalism will be restoration of national greatness in the face of perceived degradation, humiliation, or decay(seen as brought on by some combination of liberalism and external forces plotting along with internal enemies). In the banana republic case, the aim of the crony capitalism will be the enrichment of a foreign corporation or corporations, who in turn kick back a slice of the money to the local strongmen who keep riots to a minimum and the proles in line.

In the Fascist arrangement, the cronyism is seen as a bargain, mediated by the totalitarian state, between the power of industry and the "People"(in an ethnic nationalist sense, not a communist "proletariat" sense). In order to restore the glory and (military) power of the nation, strategic industries will be favored, and any leftist labor movements that inconvenience them will be intimidated, beaten, or sent to the showers; but the bargain is seen as a populist one: the favored industries enjoy substantial perks; but are supposed to be bound to the national interest, not to profit maximization. Layoffs to please Wall Street would not fly in a Fascist state.

In the "banana republic" arrangement, the cronyism is an bargain, more or less explicit, between an external corporation and the local elites. The bargain is, the local elites keep order, protect the property of the crony entity by force, and crush any labor movements that are seen as threatening. In exchange, they get a cut of the profits(without having to possess any technical capacity themselves) and all the usual perks and pleasures of power. Not only is this arrangement not about "national glory", it is exactly the sort of humiliation that can make (depending on conditions) either fascist or communist economic populism compelling. If the local elites feel sufficiently mistreated by the outside entity, and have some sort of cultural mythology to draw on, you may see a fascist reaction. If the local elites are too weak or lack any useful cultural mythology, and the lumpen proles are too bitter about their obvious economic oppression, an attempt at commuunism may occur.

Given that China does have a strong cultural mythos to draw on,

Re:Economic warfare

[okooolo]

actually I suspect the reason why some people think capitalism needs growth to survive is because of a fellow called Thomas Robert Malthus He predicted that due to increasing population and decreasing marginal returns of food we will all end up starving: thus the need for growth, to outpace population growth. These days most economists do not agree .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus

Re:Economic warfare

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Yes and no.

It simply isn't possible to be "Totalitarian" unless you can, in fact, centralize the levers of power in a political unit into the hands of a Supreme Leader(and, in practice, his cronies and right-hand men). Otherwise, you might have a sort of autocratic feudalism, where the King can do whatever he wants; but he has to ride right over to where he wants to do it, with his sword and his cousins, and wherever he isn't, some nobleman holds sway; but you won't have a "Totalitarianism". To do this requires substantial resources. Bureaucracy, guns, mass communications, transport assets, etc. If you don't have those, you can't have "Totalitarianism".

On the other hand(and this is where Papa and Baby Doc, and the poor bastards in Haiti come in); because of globalization and trade, you don't have to be able to generate those resources internally as long as you have some means of buying them. In the case of Haiti, a mixture of exploiting US/Soviet tensions for handouts, misappropriating aid money, and selling off timber concessions, provided those means. This is how, while Haiti itself didn't really have an economic system productive enough to support much of anything, there was a sufficiently productive economic system feeding the Duvaliers.

Nations with natural resources that are either trivial to extract, or easy enough to extract with foreign technical assistance, are commonly vulnerable to this pattern. Anybody who can gain power(usually a charismatic populist who wins the last real election, or an ambitious soldier with some guts and a lot of luck) can then bankroll a Totalitarian regime by strip mining, or selling the rights to strip mine, the place and buying the materiel he needs from outside, and the support he needs from inside.

Perversely, this often leaves such nations worse of, even compared to other repressive regimes. Trujillo, say, just next door in the Dominican Republic, was every bit the Totalitarian bastard that Duvalier was, if not worse; but the DR is way less fucked today than Haiti is, in no small part because Trujillo spent much of his reign building wealth(and then concentrating it in his own hands, of course). While Duvalier sold the place off to pay for his regime, Trujillo had soldiers gunning down the poor people who attempted to enter "his" forests to try to make a living. Serious dick move; but one of the reasons that the DR hasn't had all its topsoil wash into the sea.

This is sort of the mean, ugly, step-child of the idea that free trade and globalization will spread political freedom to go with the economic freedom:

Traditionally, a dictator's ability to run the place into the ground was limited. If you don't pay the soldiers, they'll have your head on a pike. If you can't afford to arm them, the starving mob will drive them off, and then have your head on a pike. If your infrastructure rots, you'll find yourself ruling an area of about a week's march from your palace, and nowhere else. To succeed as dictator, you pretty much had to keep at least the economy going(doesn't mean you can't torture lots of people, or disappear your opponents, or have your pick of children delivered to your palace pleasure-pits daily); but does require that society function to a degree, that there be some amount of rule of law(even if it only applies to petty criminals, not to grand ones like you), and so forth.

In a global economy, by contrast, these requirements only hold if your country has literally nothing worth mining, or selling off, or otherwise exploiting. If you do have something, you can always find somebody willing to hold their nose and do business with you. If your resource is merely valuable(diamonds or teak, or cocaine, say) you may have to deal with various more or less shady characters. Criminal syndicates, scruffy ex-easter-bloc arms dealers, that sort of thing. Not a crippling problem, "Pecunia non olet" and Kalashnikovs work just fine once you brush the dust off. But if your resources are strategic, boy, you are golden. Run a virulently repressive theocratic monarchy? If you will sell oil, the US will be your best buddy, sale of advanced weapons included, no problem.

Re:Economic warfare

[okooolo]

well, not like western governments are that much better to deal with ... for every action there is an equal or opposite government program

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't possibly have a dictatorship in communism, just like it's impossible in anarchism. The "dictatorship of the proletariat" can only happen in socialism, which is a stepping stone to communism.
Could be worse, though. Nobody's mentioned Hitler's National Socialist Party yet.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

A free market cannot exist when government controls it or the people participating in it. In that sense "Free Market" and "Totalitarian Dictatorship" are mutually exclusive, because one is about total freedom to do whatever and be whatever provided you allow others the same freedom, and the other is about total control of everything everyone does at any moment.

Going along with your statement about planned economies, the US is a planned economy. Anyone who doubts that need only look at the statements made by our political leaders about the creation of jobs, the buoying of American companies, the subsidies given to various economic activities, et. al..

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

" ... To quote I-don't-remember-who (maybe Hunter Thompson?) "Communism has not been tried and failed, Communism has not been tried." ..."

Mostly true; few actual communist states really were communist in the original sense, but Cuba does come pretty close.

Re:Economic warfare

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

You cannot create a totally free market under a Totalitarian Dictatorship, it is true; but that isn't really of much economic relevance. "True Free Markets" are about as common as "Real Implementations of Communism". They aren't creatures of the real world. However, there are some real-world structures that substantially approximate, and reap many of the benefits predicted for, "free markets". Unfortunately, it is possible to create those while also enjoying a substantial degree of political control. If you aren't a klutz about it, you can have your nigh-absolute power while leaving most markets mostly undistorted, most of the time, and thus enjoying most of the benefits.

Slightly less free market; but probably even more dangerous to freedom generally, is the fact that you can strategically distort the market such that obeying and supporting your power is a rational profit-seeking act for most market entrants. That is where the old command-and-control guys missed an opportunity and(unfortunately), the contemporary authoritarians don't seem to be making the same mistake.

Re:Economic warfare

[Ninth Marion]

Ditto for "capitalism". Idealism is always foiled by human nature. The best systems I've seen are a mix of elements.

Re:Economic warfare

[geminidomino]

Our Founders knew perfectly well that "democracy" is roughly synonymous with "mob rule", and that the popular will is often an idiot.

Unfortunately, they seem to have missed that "elected official" is just as often an idiot, too.

Re:Economic warfare

[Hognoxious]

The high end products they produce cheaply cant be purchased by their own people because their own people don't have the wealth to pay for a high end good such as an iPod, tv, computer.

Without the transportation costs and layers of middlemen each adding a markup it's unlikely the goods would cost the same there as in the US or Europe.

As for wealth, one form of wealth is the things they produce. There's nothing to stop them keeping the stuff in the country rather than shipping it abroad in exchange for what are essentially IOUs. Even if money didn't exist their iPod workers could barter with their shoemakers while we sit around thinking of ways to sue each other.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

reagan proved that deficits don't matter.

Re:Economic warfare

[jesset77]

Unless they figure out that they can consume most of their own production.

-jcr

Um... no?

China drops the bottom line of production by exploiting the workforce. How many exploited workers (read: sweatshop laborers) do you suppose can afford a Dell?

Let me put this in a different perspective:

If McDonalds was globally limited to only serving food to the people who work there..

... yea, I don't have to finish that thought, now do I? Oh yeah, and they still get their discounts. ;P

Re:Economic warfare

[jandersen]

When since the death of Mao and the rise of the "Gang of Seven" has anyone thought China was Communist?

I think you are misrepresenting the facts.

First of all, I don't think you can call China a totalitarian dictatorship. What is true is that their leaders are not elected in a process similar to Western democracies, but that does not in itself imply that it is unreasonable to call the country democratic - it could be that our idea about democracy is too narrow. Please note the fine distinction: I am not claiming that China is democratic, only that I am not convinced that they are not.

Secondly, what right do we have to tell the Chinese how to run their country? We like our way, but maybe they don't like it - in my own experience, the Chinese in general want none of our kind of freedom or democracy. They want accountability and equality under the law, so rich people can't pay their way out of punishment while the poor suffer random injustice.

As for the Communism part - does the idea of communism have to be static, forever frozen in a time that is rapidly getting more and more distant? Karl Marx would never himself have claimed any such thing, I'm sure, and of course it has to evolve to remain relevant. There is no such thing as "The One True Communism", only a number of attempts at implementing the idea. The Soviet way failed to the relief of most, I would say, but the Chinese have managed to keep up with the changing reality. As far as I can see, their way could well continue to be successful for a long time.

Re:Economic warfare

[Minion of Eris]

the classic definition is "from each according to thier ability, to each according to thier need"

Re:Economic warfare

[HeckRuler]

I I hadn't already posted here, this would get a mod point. Way WAY too many people think their system will work for all of society. But any society is vast, varied, and full of special exceptions that don't work within the presumptions.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

actually I suspect the reason why some people think capitalism needs growth to survive is because of a fellow called Thomas Robert Malthus

He predicted that due to increasing population and decreasing marginal returns of food we will all end up starving: thus the need for growth, to outpace population growth. These days most economists do not agree ..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus

The reason most economists don't agree with his conclusions today is because technology has greatly improved the efficiency and effectiveness in almost all aspects of agricultural production since Malthus's time. On the other hand, I seriously doubt any reputable modern economist would contend the earth could support several billion people using only late 18th century to early 19th century technology! I don't think it's fair to demonize a man's analysis simply because he calculated using the facts as they were when he was actually alive, while failing to foresee events over 150 years past his death.

IMHO, there still is a troublesome aspect to the Malthusian calculations though, a good deal of the technology used to over-come them is either a direct or indirect result of cheap fossil-fuels. Regardless of if it ever actually runs-out, some day petroleum will be much costlier to extract and refine because each year the easy to reach sources are depleted and there are fewer unexplored areas that might add to the know but untapped deposits. Unless we sufficiently develop and deploy alternative energy sources Malthus will have the last laugh (although I think even he would consider it gallows humor, at best), possibly as soon as the end of the 21st Century.

Re:Economic warfare

[Anonymous Coward]

The US Government needs China. US wage problems, taxation, and inflation would be much more apparent without their Everyday low prices.

Better?

Re:Economic warfare

[jcr]

What a fascinatingly oversimplified view you have of China. I guess it escaped your attention that they have the fastests-growing middle class in the world.

-jcr

Re:Economic warfare

[jesset77]

What a fascinatingly oversimplified view you have of China. I guess it escaped your attention that they have the fastests-growing middle class in the world.

Is there something bad about boiling a subject down to it's essence?

Also, please provide a citation for your claim. I tried googling "fastests-growing middle class" and only got two sketchy articles mentioning that China's middle class was growing.. none of them giving any superlative comparisons.

When I do searches related to Chinese income however, I learn that average per capita income has only recently passed the $3k USD watermark, and the Urban-rural income gap is the widest it's been in 30 years.

I re-iterate. China can make more cheap electronic goods because of bargain basement labor costs. There is no magic involved. If people are being paid less for their labor, then they have critically less money with which to buy gadgets.. especially since their need to eat and put a roof over their head is not mitigated.

You get what you pay for, and the Chinese economy pays among the lowest margins in the world to it's staggering population. If their government really believes they can live without the global community or basic Internet Access, then let them buy their own computers with no money and enjoy their national 403 page.

Re:Economic warfare

[jcr]

>Is there something bad about boiling a subject down to it's essence?

When it makes your position stupid and trivial, yes there is.

-jcr

doublespeak

[guyfawkes-11-5]

a 'safer environment conductive to enterprise'
Read as "safer from industrial espionage and nationalization"

Re:doublespeak

[MightyMartian]

People had been predicting all of this for some time. Where can you manufacture cheaper and with less bureaucratic impediments than China? Why, India. Just wait, in ten years, Chinese firms will be outsourcing there.

The old adage Live by the sword, die by the sword seems to apply here.

Re:doublespeak

[Bluesman]

Conductive doesn't sound safe to me...

Re:doublespeak

[MonsterTrimble]

I'm just waiting for the day (in about 20 years) when Africa has become the new China and China has become like Britain - they know what they're doing, but it's too darn expensive.

Re:doublespeak

[bheer]

> Just wait, in ten years, Chinese firms will be outsourcing there.

They already are planning to do so (warning: the FT restricts how many pages you can view, even if you register)

But it's not surprising. After all, pretty much all the Japanese auto manufacturers now actually produce in the US.

Re:doublespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's an open version of your link: http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001031357/en

Re:doublespeak

[mirix]

You're going to be waiting a lot longer than that.

Re:doublespeak

[hey!]

China's version of capitalism is the caricature of capitalism they painted in the pre-Deng era; capitalism as unrestrained rapacity. There's an element of truth in that, but capitalism can't be unrestrained in a democratic country with a free press. American capitalism would be everything China said it was, except for business ethics, which would not exist if it were not for fear of shame and public retaliation.

Re:doublespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

thankyouplaseverymuch

Re:doublespeak

[tsotha]

I doubt you'll have to wait that long for China. The only reason things aren't already more expensive is the massive currency manipulation in which they've been engaged. They won't be able to do it for more than another year or two, so look for the RMB to go significantly higher against the dollar. Then presto! Too darn expensive to make things in China. We went through the same thing with Japan in the '80s.

Re:doublespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

not really, the Chinese are, ironically, bringing that day faster and faster with their attempts to buy everything in Africa. However, the tribal culture in Africa is very resistant to that in the long term.h

Re:doublespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

Japan will be the new Britain, and it's former colony China, will be the new America.

Re:doublespeak

[MightyMartian]

Since China seems to feel that they were run over during the first Age of Colonization, let them get in thick with the tyrannical whack jobs running large portions of Africa now. If they can find a way to access Africa's resources without soiling their hands and ultimately making the average African loathe them, all the power to them.

Re:doublespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed they are. You think the Chinese use Chinese made-stuff? To some degree yes, but most non-electronics I buy here (Shenzhen) comes from Vietnam, Bangladesh, India and so on.

It's naive to think that China is just about low-cost. Big reasons for companies to buy Chinese are infrastructure, political stability and (interestingly) enforceable human rights. That's a lazy western attitude though, because the Chinese care shit about this themselves and buy elsewhere.

You want better stuff for a lower price? Drop those cheesy morals and enslave the countries which are now being enslaved by-proxy through China.

Re:doublespeak

[milkasing]

Mod Parent down. India has way more red tape and labour is more expensive than China. Any comparative article e.g. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_34/b3948401.htm talks of India's red tape and labour (union) protection making things difficult for manufacturers (just google economy India China red tape). Dell could be moving because of any of a thousand reasons from threat of losing information espionage to just not wanting to keep all eggs in one basket, but the parent's reasons are just ludicrous.

Re:doublespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

The Japanese make their cars in the US to avoid the Import Tariffs.

Re:doublespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

safe until the latest suicide bomber from Pakistan decides to attack you.

Reliable source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Having a hard time finding one.

Yow!

[Un pobre guey]

If this is true, it is a decison vastly more consequential than anything Google has done.

Re:Yow!

[Un pobre guey]

It is apparently not true, however.

if its on slashdot its probably not true

[Anonymous Coward]

yes we are the new generation of digital technology.

we dont know if we got the basic facts right, but damn, we had a lot of ad impressions

Re:if its on slashdot its probably not true

[Un pobre guey]

And we did it really really fast.

It's a lose lose

[jollyreaper]

So instead of American jobs being outsourced to one dirt-poor foreign country they'll be outsourced to another. Total significance to the American worker and the American customer -- nothing.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, someday America will be the dirt-poor foreign country that everyone else will be outsourcing their jobs to...

Re:It's a lose lose

[Seor Jojoba]

India is a democracy with a much better record of treating its citizens as free human beings. It also doesn't seem to have the taste for global imperialism that China does. In China, you can disappear for protesting on the street. In China, you put in an application if you'd like to move to another city. In China, the internet is filtered. India should be a great friend of the United States. Americans have a lot in common with them, and in that part of the world, America could use more friends.

Re:It's a lose lose

[_Shad0w_]

You know, Dell trades in countries besides the US. No matter where they manufacture the damn things they're probably going to be shipping them abroad to a large proportion of their customers anyway.

I suspect it's only the base systems that are manufactured over there anyway, final configuration still takes place at the local level, I believe. At least I can't see Dell building a system to my spec in India or China and then shipping it over to me in the UK.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong. Current chips coming from China have hardware backdoors in them - of a truth. No lie.

To be honest, a lot manufacturing places have chips with backdoors in them.

Re:It's a lose lose

[acnicklas]

I ordered a new ThinkPad a couple of months back - Lenovo actually built it to my specs in China then DHL'd it to me in NY.

Re:It's a lose lose

[rubycodez]

those of the lower castes in India would disagree with you, where many are beaten, murdered, systematically denied legal representation, denied justice by government, given jobs in inhumane working conditions, denied educational opportunity.....

We in the USA should not be taking advantage of the lower prices afforded by a country that practices such things, it is evil.

Re:It's a lose lose

[ed.han]

because the plight of the american worker is the only metric by which one should evaluate anything?

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't need an application to move to another city, learn what you're talking about dicksucker.

Re:It's a lose lose

[beef curtains]

Same thing with my Macbook Pro and my wife's Macbook. According to the shipping labels & package tracking, they came directly from China (both from Guangzhou, if I recall correctly), customizations & all. Mine even took a while, as it was held up in customs in Memphis.

Re:It's a lose lose

[shutdown -p now]

The big difference is that in India, it is a problem of the society as a whole, and the government 1) recognizes it as a problem, and 2) tries to combat it. In China, political oppression is an official government policy.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

India is a democracy with a much better record of treating its citizens as free human beings.

ha aha ha ha ha haaaaa haaaa hhaahaha ahhaa haaa.

I'm sorry, you were dreaming? oops, saying?

Re:It's a lose lose

[Threni]

The lower castes (classes, whatever) in the US/UK etc have much the same to say.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

We in the USA should not be taking advantage of the lower prices afforded by a country that practices such things, it is evil.

Just because it is advantageous for us does not mean that it cannot be beneficial to the workers in poor countries. A job that looks bad relative to jobs in the US may be a godsend to the workers there. Generally speaking, more job opportunities are better and put upward pressure on working conditions by giving workers more choices.

Re:It's a lose lose

[iammani]

LOL, lower castes? In which century are you in? Of course I am not claiming everyone in India receives the same opportunities and rights. The rich can always maneuver themselves out of courts/police, keep themselves safe from murderers, have their children well educated, get their children and themselves jobs. But it happens in every country, not just India.

Re:It's a lose lose

[RajivSLK]

The Indian government has instituted a lot of affirmative action policies to address this

http://www.google.ca/search?q=india+affirmative+action&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

The difference between Indian and china is that India is a democracy and the lower castes represent votes. Votes keep the government in power... see where I am going with this?

Re:It's a lose lose

[outsider007]

So your solution is to take away their job opportunities too?

Re:It's a lose lose

[Cryacin]

Don't worry, someday America will be the dirt-poor foreign country that everyone else will be outsourcing their jobs to...

The dirt farmers of Elbonia.

Re:It's a lose lose

[hooeezit]

Sorry sir, but upper castes can also be beaten, murdered, extorted, systematically denied legal representation, et al. What matters is how well-connected you are. And that factor is as important pretty much anywhere in the world. Take the example of blacks and hispanics in the US, Uighurs and Tibetans in China, Romas in Europe, ethnic Africans (as opposed to ethnic Arabs) in Sudan, etc etc. I'm from a part of India where upper castes lived in fear of 'lower' castes for close to 15 years until 4 years ago when a change of government equalized power and brought back balance. Now, that province (Bihar) is making international headlines with fastest economic growth in India. Yours seems to be an intentionally under-informed opinion based on xenophobia. Most people around the world are good. Most people in positions of power are not. Do not treat one as the other.

Re:It's a lose lose

[MartinSchou]

those of the lower castes in India would disagree with you, where many are beaten, murdered, systematically denied legal representation, denied justice by government, given jobs in inhumane working conditions, denied educational opportunity.....

Give it time. India has been a democracy for 60 (or 63) years.

63 years into the life of the US (1839) the US also had a lower caste - slaves. Not in all of the US, but the 13th amendment wasn't adopted until 1865 - 89 years into its life. And I'm pretty sure we can find similar bad stories about every western democracy. Just look at women's suffrage. Or have a look at how we treat homeless people or ex convicts.

But for some reason we in the west seem to believe, that we can just copy the social 'equality' that we have grown into over a long period of time, onto countries that are not only very inexperienced in democracy, but also have a completely different cultural history. That's just not going to work.

Re:It's a lose lose

[bertramwooster]

Give India a break, it *is* a democracy and it is only 60 years since it has gained independence from Britain which left it in not-the-greatest shape. It is true that there are problems of the lower castes, etc, but something is being done, albeit slowly, in terms of reservation in education and government jobs for the lower-castes. Why it was only 50 years ago that afro-americans in the US were second-class citizens.

Re:It's a lose lose

[pcermomb]

How exactly is this comment informative? Having agreed that caste system is still a problem mostly in rural parts of India, I must say you have very little genuine information. Caste system is a social problem, not state sponsored. The fact is that, India has proven itself to be a responsible democracy. You hear incidents related to oppression of lower caste people because press in India could freely report them. How often do you hear specific details of human rights violations in China? What proof do you have to say that India is systematically denying legal representation and denying justice justice to lower caste people? India is even implementing reservations in all higher educational institutions and in public sector jobs since it's Independence, for people who were traditionally denied justice. And, inhumane working conditions have nothing to do with caste. Comments such as above prove that westerners should be a bit more informed about the east.

Re:It's a lose lose

[MozeeToby]

You missed the keyword of his post, even though it was repeated several times for emphasis. American. Apparently it doesn't matter (to him) if people get fed 24 hour propaganda, dissapeared off the street, tortured, executed, and harvested for organs; as long as it doesn't hurt Americans. A sentiment all too common in my country I'm afraid.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

those of the lower castes in India would disagree with you, where many are beaten, murdered, systematically denied legal representation, denied justice by government, given jobs in inhumane working conditions, denied educational opportunity.....

And this is a different from China how?

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny/Troll? Make up your minds mods

Re:It's a lose lose

[anarche]

Countries don't (and shouldn't) have friends.

Friends put other friends feeling and needs before their own. If a Government ever did this they would be failing at their job.

Aussie speaking, very happy to have the USA as allies.

Re:It's a lose lose

[CODiNE]

Caste system is a social problem

Actually caste is a religious problem not a social problem. After all, the lowest castes were made from the foot, and the highest from the arms and head. I respect hinduism but not the habit of denying it's part of the religion.

Re:It's a lose lose

[moonbender]

Votes keep the government in power... fresh?

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when was China dirt poor? It's the world's second largest economy and the government holds trillions of dollars in cash reserves. The US on the other hand has a $11.4trillion national debt and close to a $1trillion trade deficit. If I was a nation I think I'd rather be "dirt poor" China than the US.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

So instead of American jobs being outsourced to one dirt-poor foreign country they'll be outsourced to another. Total significance to the American worker and the American customer -- nothing.

Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

You can disappear in india for criticizing any number of politicians, movie stars, religious leaders.
The government may not have a hand in it (unless the politician is the incumbent), but the effects are the same nevertheless.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

You could say the same thing about the USA.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

You can thank the Brits for civilizing those people.

Re:It's a lose lose

[stefanPryor]

In the usa being above the law costs much more than in india

from what I have observed anecdotally in india... law goes to the highest bidder with very low barrier to entry for bidding

in usa perhaps the same is true, although the barrier to bidding is much higher, lowering the amount of leverage provided by small economic disparity.

of course capital is much more scarce in india, so perhaps in a normalized view the difference between the two would look much more like one of degree than kind

but in america we tend to feel protected by law from our peers, for the most part. We are more apt to think of our legal system as "just"

just my 2 cents

Re:It's a lose lose

[Hognoxious]

Since when was China dirt poor? It's the world's second largest economy and the government holds trillions of dollars in cash reserves.

Two words: per capita.

Re:It's a lose lose

[morgen_m]

those of the lower castes in India would disagree with you

Like the chief justice of India or a former President of India?

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh still happens a ton. And worse people bring their fucking shitty attitudes to other societies, like North America.

Being of Indian descent, and marrying my (white) Canadian fiancee meant I basically had to abandon most of my family ties. And I can't even describe the attitudes towards other castes/religions - some extreme judgementalism going on there.

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

So instead of American jobs being outsourced to one dirt-poor foreign country they'll be outsourced to another. Total significance to the American worker and the American customer -- nothing.

China and India are in no way dirt poor

and they are building factories to make money by selling there, has nothing to with american job, if anything it will increase american jobs

Re:It's a lose lose

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude - the caste system is alive and well in India...
If you're of a lower caste, there are practically institutional barriers to progressing within the society...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India

The funny thing is

[Anonymous Coward]

that China has already stolen all that they can. Now Dell is going to send it to India. If Dell was smart, they would at least split the work between America and India.

Re:The funny thing is

[dfgchgfxrjtdhgh.jjhv]

Aren't they allowed to use your prison slave labour system, like other US manufacturers?

Ahh, yes

[wampus]

Nexus404, known far and wide as a...?

Didn't they already do this?

[Khan]

Oh wait, that was their Customer Service department. I wonder how that experiment went ;-)

Conductive?

[ShadowRangerRIT]

Sure that wasn't "conducive"? I know Dell is an electronics manufacturer, but the company itself is likely non-conductive in the first place.

Re:Conductive?

[Sponge Bath]

The only way to know for sure is to test with Michael Dell, a diesel generator, and some industrial sized electrodes.

Re:Conductive?

[ShadowRangerRIT]

Just a note: TFA actually uses the correct word. Is it so hard for submitters to actually copy and paste the correct words when they are directly quoting in the first place?

Re:Conductive?

[TheDarAve]

Thomas Edison, is that you?

Re:Conductive?

[HTH NE1]

Actually, the TFA uses both:

Dell has reportedly said that they were leaving China in search of a "safer environment with [a] climate conducive to enterprise." [...]

[...] Between the strict censorship on Google, and now Dell implying that China isn't conductive for business, it seems that some western companies are getting fed up with the cost of doing business in China.

So saying one country is conducive implies the other isn't conductive?

I would like them move to US

[CSHARP123]

I know they would not do that citing cost and other crap. But I certainly would support any company moving production base from communist country to a democratic country. I know there are people here criticizing US, India and other democratic countries about certain draconian laws but these countries are much better than China.

Re:I would like them move to US

[codepunk]

The US govt is way to hostile to manufacturing operations and as of the health care bill signing yesterday it is going to get much worse. Manufacturing in the US will not exist very shortly.

Re:I would like them move to US

[moonbender]

Well, yes, being "hostile to manufacturing" as in having some environmental standards (if pathetic) and having effective modern health care for your population ARE reasons why shit is being manufactured in countries like China, which don't have either. Ideally, we'd get them to adopt those, too, instead of fucking up things back home.

Companies "deny" things all the time...

[thesandbender]

For any number of reasons, especially when it comes to deals like this. Saying "Honey, I wasn't sleeping with her in our bed." doesn't mean you weren't cheating.

pandemic?

[bl8n8r]

Wonder how many more US companies are going to pull out of China. First google, then godaddy, now Dell. What happens when all that China has left, is China?

Re:pandemic?

[Anonymous Coward]

When Lenovo moves out, then China needs to worry.

Dell was going to move out anyway. They're just jumping on the bandwagon for cheap PR points - assuming the story is true.

Re:pandemic?

[RobVB]

What happens when all that China has left, is China?

Then they'll have North Korea.

Re:pandemic?

[Anonymous Coward]

NO NO NO

FFS Dell is not leaving China.

How can people believe this shit without reading into it? Seems like any breaking news could just set people off...

Re:pandemic?

[farble1670]

never happen. china has an infinite supply of workers ready to grind themselves into the ground to put $ on the pockets of execs back in the US. that's just too sweet a deal for US corporations to pass up.

google and friends are pulling out for no other reason than it's costing them more to do business there than they are saving. don't kid yourself into thinking that they took some sort of moral high ground.

Re:pandemic?

[Anonymous Coward]

They'll have their thriving lead paint and melamine industries.

Re:pandemic?

[Shajenko42]

Yes, but China has shown that it is quite willing to make a deal and break it, stealing whatever they can from companies that move there and giving it to their local competitors. That changes the dynamics a bit.

Re:pandemic?

[TheDarAve]

Farmers with no electricity? I don't see this as being a target audience for China. Ever. Besides, Kim Jong-Il prefers to keep the populace dumb and unsophisticated to prevent them from realizing that they really don't have it better than the rest of the world. The country only has a 99% literacy rate because its easier to disseminate your propaganda via leaflets. Cultural indoctrination starts in Kindergarten and expands to half the curriculum by high school.

Re:pandemic?

[smellsofbikes]

>Wonder how many more US companies are going to pull out of China. First google, then godaddy, now Dell. What happens when all that China has left, is China?

My company did. We abandoned a brand-new billion dollar semiconductor fabrication facility. Officially it was because we didn't have enough work to fill it along with our several other (non-Chinese) fabs. Rumor says it was at least partly because we were tired of competing with ourselves and our fourth-shift output. However, it certainly wasn't anything to do with fear of nationalization or the unpleasantness surrounding that Australian Rio Tinto executive who was arrested and is currently being tried in China for (again, rumor has it) not bribing enough people, although I think that should be at least considered. Since the Rio Tinto trial was front-page Wall Street Journal news yesterday, I'm guessing that today a lot of people who make outsourcing decisions are thinking about it.

Re:pandemic?

[Anonymous Coward]

What happens when all that China has left, is China?

The Chinese will toss China against the wall and all the China will be smashed into little pieces in China.

Re:pandemic?

[hackingbear]

What happens when all that China has left, is China?

That's not likely to happen. But let's say it does. Then all we will do is to target our complaints to whichever third-world country picking up the businesses of making cheap crap products on cheap labors while at the same time polluting the environment. Those who think these are caused by the particular politics or government in China are just naive and have not really visited a third-world country.

Also those businesses are not going to move back to the developed world, not until we make ourself third0world country by allowing people flooding in from Mexico and other third countries.

Re:pandemic?

[RajivSLK]

What happens when all that China has left, is China?
 
... and Wal-mart. I don't think Wal-mart can stop selling Chinese made goods without largely destroying itself.

Re:pandemic?

[SpazmodeusG]

Just so people know, the arrest of that Rio Tinto executive happened days after the Chinese government company Baosteel failed in a bid to take over the Australian Rio Tinto company.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/dec/04/riotinto.china
Essentially the message is, if you move your company to China you agree to everything they want, takeover offers, cheaper pricing etc. Otherwise you will be arrested.

Re:pandemic?

[anarche]

never happen. china has an infinite supply of workers ready to grind themselves into the ground to put $ on the pockets of execs back in the US. that's just too sweet a deal for US corporations to pass up.

Bullshit, China has a labour shortage http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/business/global/27yuan.html

Re:pandemic?

[eulernet]

They have labour shortage because the wages are too low, and the work conditions are terrible (no mask when manipulating plastic or metal).

Nobody would accept low wages if they can't live with it, and I think that a lot of rural workers have been disillusioned by the 'miracles' of the city.

Re:pandemic?

[ScrewMaster]

Wonder how many more US companies are going to pull out of China.

When that happens, a frustrated China will not be available for comment.

Re:pandemic?

[farble1670]

read your article. the problem isn't that there aren't enough people to do the jobs, it's that the people aren't where the jobs are. in other words, an infrastructure problem, not a shortage.

china can always build thousands of crappy apts to bring more workers from the provinces in to do their telemarketing jobs every day. not a problem.

Re:pandemic?

[Anonymous Coward]

They probably dump their dollar and euro reserves and laugh manically while watching the world burn being reassured that them being so big and all, still have enough poor regions which produce enough food that can feed the rest of them.

Re:pandemic?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lenovo?

Re:pandemic?

[KlomDark]

Yah, that guy from the Tonight Show. His name's Jay, I think.

Sell dell now!

[Anonymous Coward]

25 billion move? Shorting dell stocks immediately. Someone have to go to jail if this is not true.

India safer? Define safer.

[Anonymous Coward]

India safer? In some ways I suppose but it depends on what you are talking about. The Indian government is less draconian and less likely to try to compete with you. Expropriation is probably less of a concern in India. The rupee has somewhat better convertibility than the yuan and currency flows are less stringently controlled. Plus there is a much larger contingent of English speakers than in China. India's legal system is slightly less hostile to foreigners than China's though both are to be avoided if possible. Freedom of speech is obviously better in India though China doesn't have quite the death grip on speech everyone here seems to think they do.

On the other hand, India's infrastructure is badly trailing that of China, there is less foreign capital to improve things, corruption is a huge issue in India, business regulations are as bad if not worse than China, and transport costs are somewhat worse. Despite the number of engineers, India has less experience with certain types of manufacturing. India is a democracy (which is good) but that doesn't always make doing business there easier - in fact it often makes it harder due to populist policies.

There has been something of a "gotta be in China" attitude but China isn't always the best place to make things. There are places with cheaper labor (Vietnam for instance) and places with better logistics (Singapore) and places with expertise silos (Japan) that might make better choices. Plus betting everything on China is risky by itself. Doing business in China is hard, risky, requires constant oversight, and a long term perspective. Anyone thinking they can just produce stuff cheaply in China with little difficulty is going to lose a lot of money very quickly.

I've done global sourcing in both countries - it's difficult no matter which way you go. I've personally been in a factory in Chengdu where parts for Dell computers were being assembled. Moving production from China to India might be a good idea from a diversification standpoint (bad idea to do everything in China) but it's only marginally safer in my opinion depending on exactly what one means by safer.

Sadly just wishful thinking I'm affraid!

[Anonymous Coward]

Or some form of self promotion for the author? I have a post on Slashdot: touch me now...

India is not known for its workmanship....

[madhatter256]

Look at how bad the call service for their tech-support is.... what's to say that hardware manufacturing will be any better?

The domestic market for Indian cars is very small and many of the big corporations there import many of their equipment.

Remember that you should stay away from writable dvd/cd media made in India....

Also, India has sweatshops, too, hundreds of them and a lax government crackdown on them....

Re:India is not known for its workmanship....

[Jeng]

All it takes is some plugging of cords and tighten a couple screws then toss it into the burn rack.

Building a computer isn't exactly rocket science, its closer to putting together a snap together model.

Re:India is not known for its workmanship....

[Xveers]

And what, twenty years ago you could say the same thing about China, probably even moreso. India has massive problems, yes. But they are problems that can be addressed, even better, dealt with in a manner far more farmilliar to western firms than in China. Twenty years ago, Chinese goods were invariably described as crap. Nowadays, the description varies from "meh, it's alright" to "they made that in China?". It all depends on which company is doing the manufacturing and how closely they watch their suppliers.

As for sweatshops, a large reason you've seen them dissapear to an extent in China and other countries is not government crackdowns (any country that has large amounts of sweatshops is invariably one that will not do more than token raids and legal pressure) but from the companies employing said labor because the public outcry about using said labor can be business-killing.

Give India the same capital and time that China got, and I'm certian that we'll see the at the least the same selection of quality. But with far more positive social benefits for India.

China ain't going to be happy

[gamecrusader]

wonder if this would drive them to go to war just wondering, after all the U.S. coperations are moving alot of their assests out of China, and China isn't going to be as powerful as it use to be, it would tick of many because of this.

Re:China ain't going to be happy

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

Taiwan political status

[sjbe]

You may not realize this, but Taiwan is part of China.

The truth of that statement depends very much on whom you ask. As things stand Taiwan is de-facto an independent country. The People's Republic of China (mainland) maintain that Taiwan is a part of China, whereas the Republic of China (Taiwan) maintains that they are actually the legitimate government of China and that the PROC has no sovereign authority. However Taiwan has had to take great care to not antagonize the PROC due to the threat of invasion.

In other words, it's complicated.

Re:Taiwan political status

[BlueBoxSW.com]

It's not complicated.

Taiwan is it's own country by all measures except that China still thinks it has a right to it.

No one outside China thinks Taiwan is part of China.

Try reading something other that Chinese source-free propaganda posted to Wikipedia.

Re:Taiwan political status

[sjbe]

It's not complicated.

Apparently you are uninformed about the situation. It's extremely complicated.

Taiwan is it's own country by all measures except that China still thinks it has a right to it.

Which is precisely what makes it complicated. When one of the most powerful countries on earth thinks they own your land, life gets interesting and not in the good way.

No one outside China thinks Taiwan is part of China.

Taiwan does not have a seat in the UN. Almost no countries on earth have recognized Taiwan as an independent country including the US. Despite Taiwan being de-facto independent, there are many even within Taiwan who think the two should reunite.

Try reading something other that Chinese source-free propaganda posted to Wikipedia.

Try going there like I have. I've been to China and spoken with both mainlanders and Taiwanese about this issue. It's not simple and anyone familiar with the situation will think you an idiot for calling it simple. A shooting war in the Taiwan straight is a small but very real possibility and would be a global problem. Peaceful reunification is also a possibility. Continuation of the status-quo is likely for the immediate future but no one knows long term.

Re:Taiwan political status

[Anonymous Coward]

>The truth of that statement depends very much on whom you ask

Hmmm... thats funny, I can't seem to find any reference to the great PEOPLES ARMY _ever_ over throwing the Taiwanese government and asserting communist rule there.... can you cite a source for this?

Re:Taiwan political status

[Dhalka226]

Almost no countries on earth have recognized Taiwan as an independent country including the US.

That's not entirely true. The United States recognized Taiwan not only as an independent country, but as China, as did many other nations of the world. It leads to some awfully confusing shit when the world calls China something different than China calls China.

In any event, we apparently decided along the way that cheap stuff was fun and ended up reversing ourselves, with much of the rest of the world following suit. However, Taiwan maintains its own diplomatic relations with a handful of countries. Also, Western "support" of the "One China" policy is couched in so much political double-speak that it becomes apparent to an observer that we approve of Taiwanese independence, but just want to avoid pissing off China. (Did I mention that cheap stuff was fun?) I mean really. Our position boils down to this statement from the Shanghai Communique: "the United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position." So yeah, we don't challenge what you think. Sound basis for foreign policy, really.

So while we DON'T officially recognize Taiwan as an independent nation, we DID. We also have laws requiring that we arm the Taiwanese in the event that China gets uppity, which also makes things interesting fast.

All that said, however, I very much agree with you. It is most certainly not a simple issue.

Re:Taiwan political status

[jcr]

The People's Republic of China (mainland) maintain that Taiwan is a part of China, whereas the Republic of China (Taiwan) maintains that they are actually the legitimate government of China and that the PROC has no sovereign authority

I'd say that until and unless there was an open and fair election throughout China, without restrictions on who could seek office, neither of them has any legitimate claim to power over the Chinese mainland.

-jcr

Re:Taiwan political status

[BlueBoxSW.com]

One of the most powerful countries?

Meh. China discovered the industrial revolution 150 years after everyone else did, and they think they invented it.

The average income is about $100, and most of the country is poor. That's not a superpower.

The US not only recognizes Taiwan, it has created a legal obligation to protect it. It recently sold billions in arms to Taiwan (NOT China), in fact China was opposed to the sale. It has it's own flag, sends people to the Olympics. It makes it's own laws. China has no say it Taiwain's internal or international diplomacy. To get from Taiwan to China, you need a Visa, and you couldn't fly (until recently) or ferry directly. Taiwan has it's own military. The CIA World Factbook classifies Taiwan as it's own country.

Just because China keeps repeating a lie, and some are hesitant to correct them every single time they say it, doesn't make it the truth.

Taiwan != China

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tw.html

You have yet to give me a good reason why it is complicated. It is really simple. Perhaps uncomfortable for some. But simple.

Re:Taiwan political status

[geminidomino]

By that reasoning (NB: I am not sure I entirely disagree with it), it would seem that no government has any legitimate claim over their governments.

Re:Taiwan political status

[gtall]

The U.S. also has a treaty to defend Taiwan. In my book, that makes Taiwan a country regardless about the Bejing thugacracy thinking that the world will think they have bigger dicks if they steal Taiwan.

How can I help you today?

[hoggoth]

It is my pleasure to be helping you today. I understand you are trying to move your factories from China to India. Just a moment and I will bring up your account. Ok I will look up moving your factories from China to India in our knowledge-base. Have you tried plugging in your factories?

Re:How can I help you today?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate all Indian people. The adults smell bad and are useless, the kids drive lowered Honda's and still smell bad (thanks to tons of cologne to cover curry). Though they're food is ok...

Re:How can I help you today?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello. You are extremely unoriginal. How about purchasing a bucket of humor from the nearest Walmart?

Re:How can I help you today?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shut up, paki.

Re:How can I help you today?

[Anonymous Coward]

Please do the needful.

Stuff can be made elsewhere - and is

[sjbe]

There's simply nowhere else that makes these things but China.

Nowhere? As someone who has sourced items from numerous countries I can say with authority that you are quite mistaken. China is an excellent (if difficult) place to source things cheaply but it is hardly the only place to make things. There are places with cheaper labor (Vietnam), better engineering (Japan/Germany), comparable/better logistics (Singapore), and the list goes on. China is an important option but not even close to the only option.

Remember too that the US has a $2.7 TRILLION manufacturing sector. The US manufacturing sector is larger than the GDP of all but 5 other countries on earth. Lots of stuff is made here - just not the labor intensive stuff. The notion that manufacturing in the US is dead is laughably wrong.

Re:Stuff can be made elsewhere - and is

[MrEricSir]

Sure, but you're sort of missing my point, I think. That a circuit board was "made" in let's say Canada doesn't mean that ever single part on it was made in Canada. I think you'd be hard-pressed to pinpoint the origin of every part and every material that was used.

Whether or not this matters (or was the intent of the original poster) is another discussion, and perhaps an interesting one.

Re:India safer? Define safer.

[beef curtains]

You should have signed in before submitting this comment...it's worthy of some +1 mods, in my opinion.

Re:Why not Libya?

[Anonymous Coward]

If Dell were to move to the middle-east they would move to Israel, not to an Arabic country.

You should already know why.

Re:It's a lose lose {{citation needed}}

[rtfa-troll]

{{citation needed}}

Re:alias, no government spies and lies

[sortius_nod]

Wow, surprised we can all hear you from way back there in the 1800's...

Slight correction

[aztektum]

They can't afford to pay the wages/benefits and ALSO pay their C*O's assloads of money.

Do you hear that?

[Anonymous Coward]

... it's the sound of shit hitting the fan.

Woohoo! Support will improve

[Anonymous Coward]

now that reps will be factory-based!!!

How about

[koan]

The USA, it's safer and conducive to enterprise, and with the economy in the pits a great time to negotiate with state governments, not to mention the karma factor Mr Dell.

Re:How about

[Anonymous Coward]

Depending on the state... since most states are hellbent on raising taxes to cover their budget shortfalls.

Re:How about

[bill_mcgonigle]

The USA, it's safer and conducive to enterprise,

The US has the second highest corporate tax rates in the world. Some States taxes push their jurisdiction to #1 in the world for highest corporate tax places. The US regulatory regime is among the most onerous for corporations and the one on its citizens keeps wages artificially high (60-70% of wages are passed through in taxation).

Re:How about

[koan]

But in this climate they can negotiate for lower taxes, besides how many corps actually pay their taxes? That's what the Cayman Islands are for.

Re:How about

[yeshuawatso]

In Arkansas, we don't have budge shortfalls. The benefit of a balanced constitution.

Re:How about

[John Hasler]

> ...how many corps actually pay their taxes?

All of them.

> That's what the Cayman Islands are for.

Complicated offshore deals that slightly reduce taxes and may or may not be worth more than they are trouble. Most businesses don't bother with them.

Re:How about

[koan]

Wrong.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/series/tax-gap

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_avoidance_and_tax_evasion

And a plethora of other results.

They "pay all their taxes" but thru tax avoidance techniques no where close to what they should be paying.

Re:How about

[Anonymous Coward]

Corporations do not pay taxes. Customers (aka you and me) pay those taxes in the form of higher prices. Just another reason to avoid "made in the USA", unfortunately. Off to Walmart.

Re:How about

[Agripa]

They "pay all their taxes" but thru tax avoidance techniques no where close to what they should be paying.

Endemic rent seeking is not a positive endorsement.

Chinese companies

[sjbe]

China doesn't sell us anything...

Lenovo will be very surprised to hear that. So will lots of other Chinese companies that you just aren't familiar with yet.

Re:India safer? Define safer.

[sjbe]

Thanks! Thought I was signed in but oh well...

The score

[vikingpower]

is 2 - 1 in the game "corporate America vs. the Chinese government" @see "CommonWealth" by Hardt and Negri, neo-Marxist doctrine. They point this out, and predict it, quite nicely...

no, cheaper

[SuperBanana]

Read as "safer from industrial espionage and nationalization"

Read as "we think it will save us money", but the story is supposedly bogus (or Dell wasn't ready to admit it yet, or leaked it to scare their Chinese vendors, etc.)

Dont worry China Microsoft will stay

[yossarianuk]

Even though Google, Domain registrar GoDaddy and now Dell seem to be pulling out of China (in Google's case its pretty certain) there's one Company that has no qualms about staying.

Good oldie Microsoft has said they have no problem following the countries laws.

This is strange considering Ballmer's obvious aversion to communism
MS' Ballmer: Linux is communism (although I would argue that china is not nor ever has been a true communist state)
Lucky China...

Cultural revolution

[sjbe]

Taiwan follows the old government that existed prior to the "cultural revolution" that spawned the current Chinese Communist Party government.

When you say cultural revolution in the context of China, you are actually talking about a fairly specific event that occurred long after the civil war that resulted in the schism between Taiwan and mainland China. The Cultural Revolution occurred in the late 60s whereas the KMT's retreat to Taiwan occurred around 1950. The communist party in China preceded the cultural revolution.

Re:Cultural revolution

[amasiancrasian]

He is correct. When China was celebrating its 60th anniversary, it was a sore point for many in Taiwan (Republic of China). 1949 was the year that the Communists moved the capital of China back to Beijing (closer to Mao's power base). Nanjing was the capital of Taiwan (Republic of China) until last year (2009, hence PRC's 60th anniversary).

Re:Cultural revolution

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Consider it a pre-echo of the cultural revolution.

Hey!

[Anachragnome]

It appears that this article has been debunked.

Why no main-page correction to the article, or are we simply going for sensationalism now?

Editors?

and that means it's false because why, exactly?

[SuperBanana]

Dell spokesperson denied the story this morning

Protip: spokespersons spend 90% of their time "denying" things which 2 weeks later turn out to be true.

It could have been Dell was, or still is- they just don't want to admit it yet.

Currency War

[EEPROMS]

I think Dells move to diversify it's manufacturing is a smart move especially with a currency war with China v EU,USA in the offing. You can bet that wont be good and Chinese made goods will be facing down the barrel of a 25-40% tariff slapped on them. Any US or EU company with all their manufacturing based in China are placing their long term viability on risky ground if they don't diversify their manufacturing starting now.

Re:alias, no government spies and lies

[Dogtanian]

there is the little issue of China having electricity and India not

Yeah, it's impressive that like half the world's CD-Rs and DVD-Rs are made there in steam-powered plants. Actually, I heard that in some plants they do it by hand!

No, really.

This probably explains why I'm having trouble getting them for under 10p each.

Re:Off-shore devs ruined India's reputation.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nowadays nobody seems to be developing original code any more. When code developed for one purpose is put together for another, it's surely a pile of crap. I am currently maintaining such code developed by Americans so I would say this is something unique to Indians.

BTW, I am neither American or Indian.

Re:India safer? Define safer.

[anarche]

Mind if I ask what you were sourcing?

My family business (metal manufacturing in Oz) sources from India; and get decent-quality raw steel casting, but every time we try and get steel products from China they send us sh*t that fails safety standards.

Go ahead - drop China

[sjbe]

We don't need China

OK, how are you planning to isolate China and who do you think can replace 1/5 of the worlds population as a work force?

It's just nice to have cheap stuff, and they make stuff cheap.

It goes well beyond "nice". People don't shop at Walmart because it's "nice". All those thing you buy have a labor component to them and if you spend more on labor you have less to spend elsewhere. That's called an opportunity cost. You can spend more if you want to and I'm sure someone will take your money. Spend more at the local hardware store, you have less to spend in the local bookstore. And both will probably go out of business anyway because artificially propping them up is an inefficient use of capital.

If no one was buying, they couldn't sell.

That's exactly the predicament the US economy is currently in. We have more supply than demand.

Re:Go ahead - drop China

[jesset77]

Spend more at the local record store, you have less to spend in the bookstore. And both will probably go out of business anyway because artificially propping them up is an inefficient use of capital.

My solution, isolate China and then abolish copyright.

Perhaps we could live on less or stretch our dollar farther if we could experience the last century of words, sounds and images without having our wallets maimed for the "privilege".

Besides, if the Chinese are so well off, then why in hell am I supposed to finish this broccoli? ;P

Re:It's a lose lose - Mod parent down

[guanxi]

The parent is simply wrong. The caste system is falling apart; it's illegal under the Indian Constitution, they have a massive affirmative action programs for the lower castes, and there was a Dalit (lowest caste) President in India 10 years before there was a black one in the U.S.

Is there still discrimination? Of course. There's probably discrimination in your neighborhood too. But your characterization does not reflect reality. If anyone wants to know more, here's a decent resource:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India

Re:India safer? Define safer.

[sjbe]

I was sourcing components for alternators. Looked into doing some valves and a few other items. Spent a lot of time in Mexico and a few weeks in China and southeast Asia. One of my associates was from India and he looked there for the same components.

Getting metal from China is always a crapshoot and you have to test everything you get. They can produce good stuff but you are just as likely to get some alloy completely different from what you ordered. My father-in-law owns a wire weaving business and he's always complaining about stuff sourced from China.

Re:India safer? Define safer.

[ScrewMaster]

You should have signed in before submitting this comment...it's worthy of some +1 mods, in my opinion.

I agree ... one of the most reasoned opinions I've yet heard on the subject.

last time I checked everybody wants to go to China

[Anonymous Coward]

I know the mods fell asleep at the switch on this story, but it would not have made much sense regardless.

Nobody is clambering to set up shop in India for good reasons that many have enumerated (never mind China, there are more comprehensive ventures in Malaysia or Singapore than in vaporware India).

At the end of the day, Dell won't be going anywhere else unless there are simple economic advantages (environmental issues would only figure as equivalent monetary conversion of good PR mileage).

Bad conduct

[Panoptes]

Conductive? Conducive!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re: Re:It's a lose lose - Mod parent down

[rubycodez]

wrong, caste system alive and well, especially in northern India. U.N. Human Rights Council declared it a human rights abuse at end of last year.

What about the Rio Tinto factor?

[WeirdJohn]

I have to wonder if the Stern Hu case is a factor in this. For those not in the know, Stern Hu is an Australian who is currently on trial in China for accepting bribes and industrial espionage. Mr Hu works for Rio Tinto, the iron ore giant that China failed to buy last year.

Everyone knows that bribery is a large part of doing business in China. Stern has been in court for 3 days now. Even consulate officials have been denied presence at the trial, relying on state reports of what went on each day. Stern has admitted he took bribes, although he challenges the amount claimed. He will be sentenced on Monday - the trial started last Monday.

In the article, Michael Dell talks about how he wants to do business in "places with a legal system". I think that the Hu case, Rio Tinto's experience, and the events with Google would be making any enterprise re-evaluate the cost and risk of dealing with China.

I wouldn't call Chiang Kai-shek "goverment".

[Anonymous Coward]

He's just another bandit, ok fascist bandit to be precise.

My Taiwanese girlfriend says...

[tpz]

Mod parent up! :)

Re:My Taiwanese girlfriend says...

[jorgevillalobos]

This thread is useless without pics ;)

Damn right. I hate USA. Send them back to Brittain

[Anonymous Coward]

and burn that fucking Constitution they use against me all the time, violating my property rites with their complexity of fraud concealed by their interpretive Due Process pool of court dictators that rend everyone other than theirselves to be subject to limited liability and regulations that none would accept with disclosure.

Soap opera, anyone?

[Mantis8]

Sounds like a relationship issue to me...

I hope VA Linux moves to China. Call it VA-China

[Anonymous Coward]

Yo dawg! *bro-fists self* (not a goatse bro-fist, fellas)

I heard you like VA China! So I got two VA China and VA Linux in Virginia.
This so when the call centers call eachother,
Vaginias and VA China can come together in the meatcurtin room and
discuss all that re/b/el technolo/g/ so 4Chan can be re-taken over by D/U/RPA!

Re:Off-shore devs ruined India's reputation.

[Anonymous Coward]

In the U.S., most sneakers are manufactured in China and many dress shoes are now manufactured in India. I noticed this phenomenon when I recently visited a DSW (Discount Shoe Warehouse) in Houston, Texas. Needless to say, the shoe quality was garbage.

When it comes to general product quality, if you think Chinese products are crap (they are), you haven't seen anything yet until you've seen Indian products.

Needless to say, I now go way out of my way to avoid products made in countries that are hotbeds of off-shored labor. I have no problems with buying non-American goods (products made in Canada, Germany, and Japan have generally satisfied me.) However, I absolutely, positively am not going to pay first-world prices for third-world garbage.

FWIW, I am an American (natural-born) born to Chinese (Taiwan) immigrants so I don't think my opinion is the result of xenophobia or racism. Crap is crap and I'm sick to death of having my money wasted.

US Economy

[Anonymous Coward]

US Businesses have the goal \ requirement \ mission of making profit. Developing countries have SO MUCH untapped potential for making that profit. US Businesses will go there.
In the meantime, US Businesses DO NOT have obligations to be in the US . . . especially if not making profit. In fact, if not making profit, some one's job will be on the line.
what is the future bringing to the US ?

Thinking, Dude . . .

Re:Off-shore devs ruined India's reputation.

[Anonymous Coward]

hmm, kids who grew up in first-world must have first-world standards on quality. I am from mainland China and now lives in California. Although I sometimes joke about cheap labor in China, from my own experience, I don't perceive a quality discrepancy in products made in China and those from elsewhere. Anyway, they are all better than what I used before in China.

Dell Changes Name

[KingKaneOfNod]

Now to be known as 'Delhi'.

Re:Dell Changes Name

[Max_W]

And Google as Guru

A guru (Sanskrit: ) is one who is regarded as having great knowledge, wisdom and authority in a certain area, and who uses it to guide others (teacher).In sanskrit gu means darkness & ru means light. As a principle for the development of consciousness it leads the creation from unreality to reality, from the darkness of ignorance to the light of knowledge. In its purest form this principle manifests on earth as a divine incarnation (saint), a person with supreme knowledge about God and all creation.[1] Other forms of manifestation of this principle also include parents, school teachers [1], non-human objects (books) and even one's own intellectual discipline.

Smells ACTA

[unity100]

i would venture far to say that china is taking an opposing stance in acta negotiations, and american companies are repositioning themselves, also being tools for the acta negotiators to pressure china to agreement and also therefore threatening other countries. if china doesnt agree with acta, it basically fails. they have 1/7th of world population.

Corruption

[Anonymous Bullard]

Regarding corruption, I just recently came across a study comparing corruption in countries like China, Russia and India. It was noted that in India corruption patterns resemble a pyramid: lighter at the top but heavier at lower levels; in China where the (only nominally) Communist Party controls all aspects of power, corruption was heaviest at the more powerful levels of the machinery (also taking into account the rampant cronyism prevalent at the very top through family connections) while the less powerful lower levels weren't as corrupt (upside down pyramid).

In Russia corruption was prevalent at all levels.

Of course the less tangible moral corruption (e.g. of criminal policies of the state/government/Party) wasn't being taken into account...

What this means for foreign investors is that in India companies (dealing largely with higher levels of the government) are less likely to be exposed to the large scale corruption at business levels present in China, while Indian consumers are also more likely to purchase foreign or indian-made foreign goods than the nationalistic Chinese (thanks to systematic "anti-colonial" propaganda). While India has moved towards less protectionism (import duties) since the 1990s, there also remain tax incentives for manufacturing goods domestically in India, something that can add up considering the size of the market.

Re:Corruption

[Max_W]

Try to open a casino in Las Vegas. 1 billion has to change hands. It is probably more than all corruption money in those countries put together.

Or what about that Russian Federation asked the NATO command to destroy the vast heroin fields in Afghanistan, provided detailed locations and photos from space, and got a refusal?

"Why worry about a speck in your friend's eye when you have a log in your own?" Matthew 7:3

False dichotomy - you fail

[Hognoxious]

America is not, has never been, and hopefully never will be a democracy (in spite of metric fucktons of political rhetoric to the contrary) It is a republic

Why is it not a democracy? Because the people don't vote directly on every issue, but rather vote for people who then decide?

Well that's how the UK works, but the UK isn't a republic.

Taiwan does not have a seat in the UN.

[Oxford_Comma_Lover]

> Taiwan does not have a seat in the UN.

Lacking a seat in the UN is not a good indication of the legitimacy of your claim to statehood when you assert your independence from one of the countries with a veto power on the security council.

Claims to statehood, under international law, require (1) a defined (or fairly well-defined) territory, (2) a people, (3) a government, and (4) the capacity to enter into relations with other states. (This was originally based on the Montevideo convention of 1933.)

Taiwan has all four. It is a state, de facto and de jure.

Google Should do this Too

[T.E.D.]

I honestly don't understand why every company doesn't do this. What's with the jones everybody has for China? Sure, they have a lot of people, but India will have more in a few years, and is on a much better course.

China has no Rule of Law, so anything useful any company builds there will just be taken someday by the government (or one of their cronies). They have already been arbirarily arresting foriegn businessmen. Why anybody would want to try to do business there is beyond me.

India has the same (or better) upside growth potential, will have a larger population, and actually has Rule of Law.

Re: Re:It's a lose lose - Mod parent down

[guanxi]

The UN HCR is not what you think it is.

Planning to solve the free rider problem?

[sjbe]

My solution, isolate China and then abolish copyright.

Ignoring for a moment whether that is a good idea or not, explain how you plan to do that. How are you going to isolate 1/5 of the world's population and one of largest economies on earth? How are you going to do it without causing a global economic meltdown and possibly a shooting war in the process? Seriously, I'd love to hear you come up with an answer to that one.

(for the record I think your suggestion to isolate China is both impossible and pointless)

Perhaps we could live on less or stretch our dollar farther if we could experience the last century of words, sounds and images without having our wallets maimed for the "privilege".

I'm sure we could if you have some solution to the free rider problem. Copyright and patents exist specifically because of that problem. Solve it and there is no need for copyright to exist. But I'm pretty sure you have no solution and just want to get stuff for free.

Don't be absurd

[Benfea]

The Soviets weren't communist any more than Republicans are libertarian. Communism was nothing more than rhetoric they used to whip up and manipulate the masses, but when you look at their actual actions, they're pretty much doing the exact opposite of what the rhetoric leads you to expect.

Hell, communists are more radical than libertarians (anarchy-wise). Libertarians believe in small national governments; communists want no national governments.