Slashdot Mirror
Trump Says He'd Make Apple Build Computers In the US (businessinsider.com)
mrspoonsi writes with Business Insider's report that presidential candidate Donald Trump says he'd like to make Apple "start building their damn computers and things in this country instead of other countries."
From the article: Trump's ultimatum to the most valuable company in the world was made towards the end of a 45-minute speech he gave at Liberty University in Virginia on Monday. The most popular candidate in the Republican party said he would impose a 35% business tax on American businesses manufacturing outside of the United States. Apple has manufactured its Mac Pro at a factory in Texas since 2013, but the vast majority of its products (including the iPhone) are largely made and assembled in China. How Trump would force Apple's supply chain, which relies heavily on a vast network of suppliers and large factories throughout Asia, to be brought stateside remains unknown. Apple CEO Tim Cook recently called the U.S. tax code "awful for America." If Trump (or anyone) thinks this is a good idea, why start or stop with Apple?
How Trump would force Apple's supply chain, which relies heavily on a vast network of suppliers and large factories throughout Asia, to be brought stateside remains unknown
How about TFS be consistent with itself? It isn't unknown, it's by taxing them:
The most popular candidate in the Republican party said he would impose a 35% business tax on American businesses manufacturing outside of the United States.
Trump said he would 'get' Apple to make their products in America, not 'make' Apple. There's a difference. He's not going to force Apple to come to America but convince them. He's going to improve the business tax codes which Tim Cooke has said is a driving force for Apple to make their products overseas. Trump's statement is not so outlandish as some world make it to be.
Here's what he actually said...
"We have such amazing people in this country: smart, sharp, energetic, they're amazing," Trump said. "I was saying make America great again, and I actually think we can say now, and I really believe this, we're gonna get things coming... we're gonna get Apple to start building their damn computers and things in this country, instead of in other countries."
Donald Trump says he'd like to make Apple "start building their damn computers and things in this country instead of other countries."
He can like whatever he wants but it's not possible for a lot of reasons.
1) Labor costs are too high in the US to be competitive on assembly work of that scale. I know this because I run a company that does contract assembly of electric products. Even Apple's profit margins aren't fat enough to make that possible.
2) The supply chain for all the components does not exist in the US. That business left the US a looong time ago.
3) Apple is actually a software company. If you put Android on their gear, nobody is going to pay a premium for it. The margins on their product are decidedly not in building the computer and Apple has no particular manufacturing expertise.
4) Apple doesn't build their computers. They hire other companies to do it. Same with Dell, HP, etc. The companies that actually build these things aren't US companies.
5) The president doesn't have the authority to do that and even if he did it would be a REALLY stupid idea. The only thing he would accomplish is to make it difficult for those companies to compete. Samsung isn't going to start building their machines in the US. Manufacturing goes where the costs are lowest and frequently that is not in the US thanks to high labor costs and in some cases regulations.
If Trump (or anyone) thinks this is a good idea, why start or stop with Apple?
It isn't a good idea and Trump is pandering. He knows perfectly well that it isn't possible, practical or a good idea. But he's more than happy to lie to people too dumb or ignorant to understand supply chain economics.
I think the trick to this is getting both sides to really do their part, meaning I'll lower the tax rate but we have to close these other loopholes. Lowering the rate is the easy part since that's what people cheer. Closing loopholes always gets angry responses from whoever just lost a loophole. That's why loopholes tend to stay put or, if closed, are matched by a new loophole. It's not unlike amnesty programs for illegal aliens. I think a lot of people would be fine letting them stay in exchange for no more illegal immigration. Reagan tried that back in 1986 and gave amnesty in exchange for tougher border controls to stop the flow. The amnesty happened but of course millions more illegals came. Getting both sides to follow through is the hard part. A simpler tax process would also increase transparency, which in general is a good thing.
At least four of his businesses have gone under, but somehow he's managed to get out unscathed.
Trump was on the hook for his first business bankruptcy because of a personal guarantee on a loan or property. After that scared him straight, he never put up his personal guarantee again. He was once quoted that having a business in bankruptcy didn't concern him since he had 30+ other businesses that were doing just fine.
It's amazing how many people love to conflate Socialism and Communism. Part of the blame can be placed on the USSR and China. When the biggest two communist examples people can think of bill themselves as Socialist Republics, it is an understandable mistake. The fact that it's automatically associated with EVIL and ANTI-AMERICAN, is a different matter altogether. You would think that the Red Scare of the 40s and 50s was relegated to the past, but I guess it's as alive and well as racism.
Socialism is something practiced already in this country. We have Social Security, interstate highways, public libraries and parks, Medicaid, just to name a few programs that most people are pretty OK with. In fact, most of the people who are anti-socialism would shout to the heavens if you tried to take away any of these benefits.
Socialism can coexist with nearly any type of political system. Communism is (at least by definition) a direct rule by the people (although this has never been fully realized in practice). Socialism allows for personal property, modified capitalism, religious practice; Communism does not. Communism requires centralized economic controls; Socialism does not.
My personal favorite are the RWNJs who further conflate Socialism and Communism with Fascism. Then they throw a "Liberal" in there, because that makes seven kinds of no sense. I guess serving two 4-year terms and peacefully stepping down from office is totally the way a fascist dictator would behave.