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?
Who cares? Really, I can see why some think what he is saying is pretty out there, but I am always a little shocked when the media that loves to pine on about how many jobs are leaving the US take issue with someone's plan to bring back or keep jobs in the US, most certainly manufacturing jobs. As far as the treaties go, do you really think the countries we have those with are following them to a T? A lot of them don't even follow world treaties and then go on and on about how they are champions of the terms of those treaties then later we find out they have been bullshitting everyone all along.
provides the logic most often used to justify offshoring and "free" international trade. However, the theory (logical as it is) is founded on a number of premises. A number of these premises held centuries ago but not so much any more. There is, notably, the premise that "factors of production" (e.g., factories and resources) cannot easily be moved. And money and credit were supposedly not conjurable at whim from nothing but government dictat. GIGO, even if the machine can run for some time on garbage and momentum.
This is practically boring by Trump standards. It's not even insane- it's protectionism. This has a long history, and in some industries is generally tolerated or even desired (by more than just fringe groups), in some amount. What Trump is describing isn't of the normal sort, of course- it's extreme and would cause havok in a number of industries.
Like much of Trump's rhetoric, it assumes powers that presidents don't have. Trump presumably knows this, and is undeterred, because he wants to be elected, and his track is populist screed, so off he goes.
The only thing he says on this that has some merit is his brief rant about Boeing. A Boeing plant will give China access to seriously new tools and methods that they currently haven't been able to copy from the shortsighted companies that make factories in China and have them duplicated by a Chinese company a few years later. I don't know if this is worth some federal action, however, and certainly a president isn't the one to make the call.
To answer the question, if you listen to Trump, he wouldn't stop with Apple, he'd go on a rampage of magically teleporting factories around and tossing out tariffs that are likely banned by treaty for decades.
It's not surprising for a populist to promise protectionism, and it's the least scary thing on his agenda. Destroying a few dozen industries is nothing compared to what he's promised internationally or for civil rights lol
I'll bite. I'm far from a Sanders supporter, but he's better than Hillary on the Democrat's side. He's not a communist, he's an avowed European-style socialist. Now, I'm not in agreement with him that European socialism is the way to go - I think that well-regulated capitalism means more economic growth. With that said, the difference is small - we're talking a percentage point of growth per year or something on that order. That's significant in a mature economy, but not worth demonizing the guy. He's not exactly "dangerous" economically - not one of his socialist policies is going to be taken up in congress.
He has his positives, too. For a Democrat, he has a very reasonable attitude towards guns. He also has a strong sense of civil liberties, which lack in all of the other candidates on both sides except for Paul.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
He is not actually going to build that wall on the Mexican border, and whatnot.
It's more than that. He won't be allowed to do much of what he's saying.
I live in California. Remember when Schwarzenegger was 'governator'? It was a disaster. He thought he could just bully everyone into doing what he wanted them to do, which of course wasn't going to work. He was blocked at every turn. That's how it would go with Trump as POTUS. You think Congress is hostile to Obama? It would be like a teddy-bear tea-party in comparison to how Congress would respond to Trump. He's an outsider, he's extreme, he's a blowhard, and he'd be blocked at every turn. He seems to think that he can just say 'jump!' and everyone will say 'how high, Sir?' because that's what he's used to, but it won't work that way. Trump as POTUS would probably be the least productive and positive Presidency this country has ever seen, assuming he didn't get impeached.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
The biggest business expense isn't taxes (for the most part since they're variable), it's labor. Not just the labor to assemble parts and what not but on the supplier side too. That's where the US has the biggest issues, not to mention unions, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for jobs coming back to the US and am an employer myself for a small company of 30 people. We get *slammed* for taxes (37.5 percent is what plan for all in state/feds on all "profit") even using a competent and well-respected accounting firm. Even "profit" is a lie, we keep all the "profit" in the company. So when we have a not so great year that "profit" is gone even though we've paid taxes on it and we can't spread out the loses like the big guys. So I get stuck with a $100K tax bill every year and only have a $170K salary. Sucks balls.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
Perfect is the enemy of good.