Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Pledges $1 Billion Toward Creating Manufacturing Jobs In US (cnbc.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the cause-and-effect dept.

Apple announced today plans to create a $1 billion fund to promote creation of advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S. Cook told CNBC in an interview that Apple will announce the first investment later in May. CNBC reports: "By doing that, we can be the ripple in the pond. Because if we can create many manufacturing jobs around, those manufacturing jobs create more jobs around them because you have a service industry that builds up around them," the CEO said. Apple has already created two million jobs in the United States, and Cook showed no signs of shrinking the tech giant's reach. "A lot of people ask me, 'Do you think it's a company's job to create jobs?' and my response is [that] a company should have values because a company is a collection of people. And people should have values, so by extension, a company should. And one of the things you do is give back," Cook said. "So how do you give back? We give back through our work in the environment, in running the company on renewable energy. We give back in job creation."

143 of 285 comments (clear)

  1. See Qualcomm story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Apple is talking to us like we're stupid, nothing new here. Those $Bs of jobs will go poof as soon as the Qualcomm battle is over.

    1. Re:See Qualcomm story by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Those $Bs of jobs will go poof as soon as the Qualcomm battle is over.

      The Qualcomm battle will drag on for years and years. Most assembly is done with robots, and it doesn't matter much where those robots are parked. The days of cheap labor in China are ending. The Chinese leadership knows this, and they are trying to shift their economy more toward services and domestic consumption, and away from exporting labor intensive goods.

    2. Re:See Qualcomm story by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 2

      I wonder how many dozens of American manufacturing workers are required to operate a $1 billion automated factory.

    3. Re:See Qualcomm story by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "Most assembly is done with robots, and it doesn't matter much where those robots are parked."

      Yes, it will be done with robots, but it does matter where they are. We want the development and service jobs that the robots will require.

    4. Re:See Qualcomm story by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      So how long have you been working for the airlines?

    5. Re:See Qualcomm story by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder how many dozens of American manufacturing workers are required to operate a $1 billion automated factory.

      Not as many as people think they might. When John Deere opened a new factory, they had 10,000 applications for 800 positions.

    6. Re:See Qualcomm story by lucm · · Score: 1

      10,000 applications for 800 positions

      Sounds better than a "cute girl on Tinder" ratio

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    7. Re:See Qualcomm story by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Why? You're really that interested in getting more H1Bs into your area?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:See Qualcomm story by lucm · · Score: 2

      everyone can wonder why American corporations keep getting their asses handed to them by more pragmatic approaches made by foreign companies

      Like Volkswagen? BP? Toshiba? FIFA? Olympus? Tesco? MG Rover? Parmalat? Barclays?

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    9. Re:See Qualcomm story by religionofpeas · · Score: 2

      It's impossible to compete with someone that will work 80+ hours a week for peanuts

      Sure it's possible. Just work 90+ hours for peanuts.

    10. Re:See Qualcomm story by DuckDodgers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have nothing against people from other countries trying to get a better job in the US than they can get in their native land. That makes complete sense to me.

      But to me the fundamental problem is that while the means has that nice side effect - using foreign labor that gives non-US citizens better economic options - the end goal by the companies using H1B is to decrease industry-wide labor costs. Instead of a $60,000 annual cost job opening being filled by a $60,000 annual cost American or alternately by hiring a $45,000 annual cost American and training him or her until they can do the $60,000 job and collect the $60,000 pay, the companies can use a $45,000 imported worker.

      Or to put it in more snarky terms: supply and demand is wonderful when it works in favor of the executives and majority shareholders. When supply and demand works in favor of the workers, it's a terrible problem and lawmakers need to be bribed until they create a fix.

    11. Re:See Qualcomm story by rfengr · · Score: 1

      There was a well over $1B steel rolling plant built recently in the US that employs 28 workers over 3 shifts.

    12. Re:See Qualcomm story by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      The problem comes when you have $3.20/hr labor versus $21/hr labor--although the worldwide data suggests a manufacturing job in the United States actually carries a cost of $78/hr.

      I use pants as a model. Given the number of pants imported, their price at import, their price at retail (average $14.56), and the price of shipping (40-foot shipping container from China imports for under $1,300 with 20,000 pairs of pants, or 6.5 cents per pair), I came up with some numbers.

      Those numbers start with $6.12 for the pants when they land in an American port; $6.055 of Chinese labor at $3.20/hr; and 1.89 hours of Chinese labor from the cotton farming and dying to the construction of the pants themselves, assuming 100% of all of that is done in China (frequently, it's Indian cotton).

      From there, you can run some numbers. Benefits are said to be 25%-40%, but I used 18%; payroll taxes are 6.4% (6.2% OASDI, 0.2% medicaid). Let's assume Americans build the same product, as building a different product would change the cost and the economics--a shoddier product would cost less and replace more-frequently, while a sturdier product would cost more and replace less-frequently; either of these could ultimately cost less or more in total, e.g. a sturdier product could last 1.5x as long and cost 2x as more, thus is a loss, or it could cost 1.5x as much and last 2x as long, thus is a gain. Mind you, a sturdier product could also be built in China for cheaper, and would result in the same direct comparison model as below.

      At $8.25/hr minimum wage using American-grown, American-woven, American-died cotton, you're looking at $10.36/hr, or pants that cost $27.02 more per pair--that $14.56 becomes $41.58. That means the minimum-wage worker must work 5.04 hours instead of 1.76 hours--an extra 3.28 hours of work--to afford a pair of pants. The median $54,000/year household must work 1.54 hours instead of 0.54 hours--an extra 1 hour. Pants retail for roughly 2.86 times the price, hence why people have to work 2.86x as long to earn wages to buy a pair.

      Note that this means the factory workers themselves are less-capable of buying pants. If we use a direct model of people simply buying fewer pairs of pants, we lose retail, shipping, and other service and support jobs; and we create jobs in manufacture of pants.

      At minimum-wage with 18% benefits overhead and a total cost of $10.36/hr, Americans can afford to purchase 68,632,996 pairs of pants rather than 196,000,000. Long story short, by producing all Chinese pants in the United States, you create 59,898 American factory jobs and lose 53,910 shipping, retail, and other supporting jobs. That's a net creation of 5,988 American jobs.

      As you can imagine, the break-even point is rather low. It's somewhere around $20/hr of total cost, or an $18/hr wage. Net-zero job creation. Above that, you lose jobs.

      Imagine what it looks like at $78/hr, the actual average cost of manufacturing in America. (That number shocked me, because I thought it was ~$21/hr wage, plus taxes and benefits.)

      At $78/hr, you're looking at an increase in the price of trousers from $14.56/pair to $155.86. A minimum-wage worker must now work 18.9 hours and spend nearly half a week's pre-tax income on a pair of pants; the median American income provides this in only 5.77 hours of work. Pants cost 10.7x as much.

      So we import about 196,000,000 pairs of trousers at a cost of $1,197,391,000. They retail for $2,853,760,000. At $155.86 per pair, Americans can afford to purchase 18,309,765 pairs of trousers or 9.3% as many using their same income. The total theoretical new jobs are 171,056 out of 320,000,000 Americans, or 0.053%; there is no economic argument that "the money stays in America" or that "the manufacturer workers will make up the difference".

      Because literally 99.94% of the country is buying less, fewer things are sold, and less shipping and retailing goes on, and jobs go away; plus those people ca

      --
      Support my political activism on Patreon.
    13. Re:See Qualcomm story by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many dozens of American manufacturing workers are required to operate a $1 billion automated factory.

      More than if that factory was in another country.

    14. Re:See Qualcomm story by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      Weak. Mark probably keeps eyesight.

      Go for high molar sulpheric acid or something similar that will leave a lasting impression.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
    15. Re:See Qualcomm story by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      Actually the number of cloned parts you can buy in China that are direct copies of Apples own designs and given Apple's legendary control of their products it makes sense that they would now want to bring the manufacturing under tighter control by putting it in their backyard. Plus the $258 Billion in cash they are sitting on helps too...

    16. Re:See Qualcomm story by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      " the companies can use a $45,000 imported worker. "

      If the going rate is $60,000 by law they cannot pay an H-1B $45,000. So the first step is to enforce the law as it already stands, not to enact a new law that will also not be enforced.

    17. Re: See Qualcomm story by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Until the US switches to the metric system there will be no meaningfulà increase in manufacturing jobs in the US.

      After my father cracked the engine block on his flatbed truck in 1988, he took it into the repair shop. A year later he had to fix the throwout bearing and discovered that the grease monkeys replaced all the standard nuts and bolts with metric nuts and bolts. That pissed him off like nothing else, especially since he didn't own a metric tool set. We spent a long weekend finding and replacing every metric part with standard parts.

    18. Re: See Qualcomm story by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      ...not to mention how many anti-suicide nets they'll need.

    19. Re: See Qualcomm story by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Metric parts are standard parts.

      Here in the UK we get similar bothers when we try to work on some relic from the dark ages and find our standard metric tools don't fit. That's why I have an adjustable wrench. Given that just about every country in the world now has gone metric with the exception of the US, I think it's about time you rejoined modern civilisation.

    20. Re:See Qualcomm story by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Not as many as people think they might. When John Deere opened a new factory, they had 10,000 applications for 800 positions.

      The problem such as it is, is that some of the powers that be are living in 1950. Automation is ascendant now, and the idea that we are going to somehow employ more people is unrealistic.

      Its really quite simple in Q&A format

      Q. Why did manufacturing jobs leave the US in the first place?

      A. Because the manufacturer could make more money using less expensive labor

      Q. Since China is losing jobs to automation, http://www.chicagotribune.com/... will the same people who exported jobs to China reinstall the same conditions that caused them to export them?

      A. Oh, you guys crack me up. Sorry, but no.

      When the country you exported jobs to eliminates the jobs you exported for robots, you ain't bringing them back. That's not how Capitalism works. The jobs are gone from here, and soon gone from China.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re:See Qualcomm story by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      10,000 applications for 800 positions

      Sounds better than a " on Tinder" ratio

      FTFY 8^)

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    22. Re: See Qualcomm story by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Given that just about every country in the world now has gone metric with the exception of the US, I think it's about time you rejoined modern civilisation.

      When my father passed away five years, I was surprised that he had mostly metric tools in his toolboxes.

    23. Re: See Qualcomm story by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Until the US switches to the metric system there will be no meaningfulâ increase in manufacturing jobs in the US. Making the machines that make the products is where the money lies, and if you need a completelyâ different set of tools to perform routine maintenance then why would you buy it?

      That meme is kinda old. My 2013 Jeep is all metric except for the lug nuts on the tires, which happen to still be the same size as others worldwide.

      The idea that the world is marching lockstep into a superior and apparently Deity blessed metric future while the "murricans sit in their caves bashing rocks together to make their non-standard parts is pretty funny, but not accurate.

      We can and do make and use both systems.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    24. Re: See Qualcomm story by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      After my father cracked the engine block on his flatbed truck in 1988, he took it into the repair shop. A year later he had to fix the throwout bearing and discovered that the grease monkeys replaced all the standard nuts and bolts with metric nuts and bolts.

      According to the posters above, the grease monkeys had to send it out of the country, because us 'murricans don't have and don't know how to use metric stuff.

      And that's sarcasm, and directed at them, not you.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    25. Re:See Qualcomm story by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that the most recent third-party examination of H-1Bs uncovered that most are not paid as well as Americans.

      But even if they are, it's still contributing to the same problem. If you have a $60,000 job opening that is currently going unfilled, the ethical way to fill it is to make it a $65,000 job opening. If that doesn't work, make it a $70,000 job opening. And so forth - sooner or later the position will become attractive enough to get qualified applicants. So even if the H1B workers are paid the same as an American, they are still driving down labor costs industry-wide.

      I don't want to be a wacky politician that just proposes a solution that's simple, easy to understand, and has some ridiculously terrible side effect (see for examples "No Child Left Behind"). But maybe the workable solution is to just demand that H1B workers get paid 40% more than market rate. That would undoubtedly still anger Americans - why am I making $60,000 when she's making $84,000? But it would prevent the H1Bs from having a bad impact on middle class mean and median earnings.

    26. Re:See Qualcomm story by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many dozens of American manufacturing workers are required to operate a $1 billion automated factory.

      More than if that factory was in another country.

      Sure, no doubt, and the absolute truth.

      But just like fracking Gas field jobs, that is not how this is sold to the public. It will be sold to the public as jerbs, Jerbs, JERBS!

      Some of these automated plants won't employ the whole Duggar Family. Certainly the gasfield jobs don't.

      So yes, the 1 billion dollar plant comes in, provides some short term jobs during the construction phase - noting that many of those jobs are now gone as well - and then employs a few people.

      But it is in no way going to put even a remote dent in the number of people displaced by the automation in the first place. If a thousand jobs are replaced by 10, it isn't actually a success as far as creating jobs go.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    27. Re:See Qualcomm story by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Even if all these new jobs did, who cares? It's still a net economic gain for the area, as even H1Bs need to eat, a place to sleep and miscellaneous material items, such as clothes.

      I'll bet you can make an argument about how 2 people can sit in a locked closet and make money while selling their hats to each other.

      Wherever the labor comes from, the goal here is to replace as many of the expensive human workers with less expensive automated construction. At every step of the way. So from another country, or from America, the goal is not met unless there are less people employed.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  2. Credit for this great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Slashdot readers will do everything possible to avoid giving credit to President Trump for getting Apple to do this. Whenever a business pledges to bring jobs back to the United States, just about everyone here spins, deflects, and posts fake news to avoid admitting that President Trump won yet again. It's really quite pathetic how partisan the left has become. Undoubtedly, I'll get modded down to -1 for pointing out these facts by leftists who want to avoid the truth. President Trump is winning yet again and this is excellent news for all of us.

    - snruter rotsac

    1. Re:Credit for this great news by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      That's a lot of words with zero anything to show for this having anything to do with Trump.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    2. Re: Credit for this great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Trump said he would make Apple build iPhones in the US. Now Apple is pledging to do just that. Clearly Trump has kept his promise and has won yet again. You liberals just can't accept that Trump keeps winning and making America great again. It's more of the usual spin and deflection from the left. Typical.

      - snruter rotsac

    3. Re: Credit for this great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is no indication this has anything to do with Trump.

      As mentioned in the comments above yours, it's likely automation in some areas is at a point that it negates the benefit of cheaper labor costs in China and they get to avoid the complications of setting up there and pretend they're heroes (as Trump and his supporters do whenever a single new job is announced in the US, unlike when they complained constantly when the same was happening to a far greater extent during Obama's administration).

    4. Re:Credit for this great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Trump is wielding out sized influence in clear abuse of power, and bragging about modest gains. While failing to govern. Trump is a complete failure.

    5. Re:Credit for this great news by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      blah sorry too early to click correctly...

    6. Re:Credit for this great news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, Trump said he'd repeal and replace Obamacare in no time and a few weeks into his term he comes out saying "No one ever knew health care could be so complicated." He said he'd bring the prices of pharmaceutical drugs way down and after a two hour meeting with pharma executives he backed down. He said he'd build a wall and make Mexico pay for it, when we all know that isn't going to happen. And the list goes on...

      And yet, when something he mentioned happens, it's clearly because he pressured someone into action. Get real!

    7. Re:Credit for this great news by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      How about rewriting the headline? "Company with 250 billion in cash assets decides to invest 0.4% in an automated manufacturing facility."

      Big. fucking. deal.

      Don't get me wrong. I'm glad Apple is doing this. But as a proportion of Apple's resources, this is so small that it's like Walmart announcing that they're opening another store. It's not notable or praiseworthy, and further I'm 99.44% sure the decision has nothing to do with which pinhead is in the White House.

    8. Re:Credit for this great news by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      How about rewriting the headline? "Company with 250 billion in cash assets decides to invest 0.4% in an automated manufacturing facility."

      Big. fucking. deal.

      Don't get me wrong. I'm glad Apple is doing this. But as a proportion of Apple's resources, this is so small that it's like Walmart announcing that they're opening another store. It's not notable or praiseworthy, and further I'm 99.44% sure the decision has nothing to do with which pinhead is in the White House.

      Just look at it as an experiment. A toe in the water. In that regard, it's enough to make a reasonable go at it. If it doesn't pan-out, then the money lost is low enough that the shareholders won't want to lynch upper management. If it does work, then they can always "up" the investment.

  3. Funny they mention the environment by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 2

    Most Apple products are the most difficult to recycle. By design.

    Not to mention the wasteful packaging...

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    1. Re:Funny they mention the environment by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Most Apple products are the most difficult to recycle. By design.

      Who cares? The volume of Apple products in landfills is totally negligible. More disposable baby diapers go to landfills everyday than all the iPhones ever made.

      You need to get some perspective. America consumes 20 million barrels of oil everyday. Don't you think we should focus on that, instead of worrying about what happens to a few iPhones? You remind me of my idiot neighbor who drives ten miles to the recycling center in her gas-guzzling SUV to drop of a dozen grocery bags that collectively weigh less than a gram, and thinks she is an "environmentalist".

    2. Re:Funny they mention the environment by Luthair · · Score: 4, Informative

      They actually require that all their hardware be shredded, no extraction of parts. https://motherboard.vice.com/e...

    3. Re:Funny they mention the environment by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Not to mention non-upgradable...

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:Funny they mention the environment by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Does Apple make baby diapers? Is it Apple's fault that the USA consumes 20 million barrels of oil per day?

      We're simply pointing out that while Apple keeps talking about the environment, they're making non-upgradable, hard-to-repair devices thus putting profits before the environment - and that makes them hypocrites.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    5. Re:Funny they mention the environment by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We're simply pointing out ...

      ... and I am pointing out that you should be pointing at something that matters. Apple products consume a negligible amount of resources. Their employees' daily commute has more impact on the environment than their products.

      ... and that makes them hypocrites.

      Can you blame them? Many environmentalist, like you, focus on "environmental theater", so they put on a act. If you really gave a crap about the environment, you would be complaining about Exxon's refineries, Ford's SUVs, or Cargill's feedlots, and not focusing on silly trivialities like iPhones. They don't matter.

    6. Re:Funny they mention the environment by bangkokstayz · · Score: 1

      yes

    7. Re:Funny they mention the environment by lucm · · Score: 1

      ... and that makes them hypocrites.

      Can you blame them?

      Yes, because Apple makes $400 on every iPhone they sell. Instead of adding every single one of those $400 to the pile of 200 billions idle dollars they have hidden in foreign countries, they could do things properly.

      They have no problem building a $5 billion head office that they will tout as "green" but they can't be bothered with the environmental impact of their products. They are repugnant in a way that even greedy banksters will never approach.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    8. Re:Funny they mention the environment by bongey · · Score: 1

      Last time I check pampers doesn't contain significant amounts of rare-earth metals.

    9. Re:Funny they mention the environment by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      Half of the time I notice that you wrote a post I do agree with it. This is one of those times. Good job.

    10. Re:Funny they mention the environment by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      You are demanding the worst form of environmental theater. Let's say it would cost Apple $5 to make their phone more recyclable. For $5 they could buy carbon credits to eliminate 800 kg of CO2. Yet you are whining about them not spending the same amount to recycle the 2 ounces of plastic in an iPhone.

      If Apple spent money on environmentalism, spending that money money on "recycling iPhones" would be about the least effective possible way to do it.

      So why don't they spend it on things that make more sense? They do.

    11. Re:Funny they mention the environment by someoneOtherThanMe · · Score: 1

      Depends on how many iPhones the baby has eaten.

    12. Re:Funny they mention the environment by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Last time I check pampers doesn't contain significant amounts of rare-earth metals.

      An iPhone contains very small amounts of tantalum, neodymium, and europium, but not enough to make recovery cost effective. None of these are a health hazard in landfills, and certainly not in the milligram amounts in a cell-phone.

      If you made a list of a million things we could do to help the environment, and ordered them by importance, this wouldn't be on the list.

    13. Re:Funny they mention the environment by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      This same excuse is used by everyone for not acting. There is always someone worse.

      iPhones, like all phones, do use some materials that are well worth recycling. Do you know where most of the lithium and rare earth metals come from?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Funny they mention the environment by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Who cares? The volume of Apple products in landfills is totally negligible. More disposable baby diapers go to landfills everyday than all the iPhones ever made.

      You need to get some perspective.

      Anyone with some basic common sense should care, because baby diapers are indeed a much lesser issue, than iPhones. First of all, diapers are made from cotton and a very tiny amount of sodium polyacrylate (which then absorbs the baby pee and expands to about three orders of magnitude of its original volume). Neither cotton, nor the tiny amount of sodium polyacrylate, are a serious concern to the environment, unlike the inert polymers and metallic alloys in a smartphone, not to mention the horrible shit that is added to Lithium-ion batteries to increase their capacity (includes cobalt salts).

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    15. Re:Funny they mention the environment by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Recycling the materials in a phone doesn't require Apple to do anything. Just turn the used phone in at the store, or a recycling station for used electronics.

    16. Re:Funny they mention the environment by olau · · Score: 1

      Why do you put baby diapers in landfills instead of burning them for energy?

    17. Re:Funny they mention the environment by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      WTF? Apple has built these little robots that take iPhones apart into little recyclable pieces... Except that any iPhone you buy today will not be recycled any time soon, it will first be handed down to another member of the family, then it goes to eBay, and years later it goes to the Apple Store because you get a bit of rebate towards your next iPhone - making sure that iPhones are actually recycled and not thrown in the dump like other phones.

      And excuse me, have you actually ever seen the packaging for any Apple products? An iPad has less packaging than the average box of chocolates.

    18. Re:Funny they mention the environment by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You are demanding the worst form of environmental theater. Let's say it would cost Apple $5 to make their phone more recyclable. For $5 they could buy carbon credits to eliminate 800 kg of CO2. Yet you are whining about them not spending the same amount to recycle the 2 ounces of plastic in an iPhone.

      You are being a child. They can reasonably be held accountable for both, and if they can't operate under such a scheme then they should fuck off and let someone who can take their place.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:Funny they mention the environment by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's not the plastic, it's the stuff they have to mine to get at. The rare earths, nickle, cobalt, lithium. The batteries in particular are highly recyclable, and the cost to do so is below the cost of building new. Even at phone scale... So long as opening the damn thing isn't too difficult.

      The other issue is that landfill is itself a problem. Again, burying large numbers of LiPo batteries that have not been fully discharged is turning out to be not such a great idea in the long run.

      This isn't theatre, it's partly staving off shortages of materials that are getting increasingly hard to mine, partly avoiding damaging mining, and partly avoiding underground landfill fires / gassing.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    20. Re:Funny they mention the environment by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Agree 100%.

      Another question: How many people throw their old iPhone in the trash when they get a new one?

      I've had 4 or 5 iPhones over the years, my wife about the same. Every single time we upgraded, we either sold the old phone back to Apple or gave the old one to a family member. (Same thing with previous non-Apple phones, by the way.)

      Why should I care how recyclable an old iPhone is? I haven't recycled a phone ever.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
  4. So, caring for robots by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    Pay some folks 20-30k a year to maintain robots. Some lucky folks in management get to make 100k.

    That's a lot of robots, but nothing compared to what they're doing in China.

    1. Re:So, caring for robots by coofercat · · Score: 1

      I guess it's possible Apple is going to 'in-source' the final steps of the product build. It might help them out in lots of interesting ways (not least, it obfuscates the import bans on their products). Doubtless this is a PR-play to appear to be reacting to Trumps calls for such things. I suspect Apple will only do half what it says it will, and will cite 'changing economic circumstances' or some such as the reason.

      It's also possible Apple will build it's own chip fabs. I doubt it though, because for a fab to be profitable it has to run at 100% capacity 24x7, and it has to be pretty big too. Apple could conceivably fill a small fab with just their demands, but then they'd need to get into the business of selling fab capacity to other companies, which would be a huge distraction for them.

      I suspect equally likely would be a case manufacturing plant. It takes a load of aluminium in one end and out comes milled cases ready for iphone and mac components to go inside. It would be a big bet on aluminium as the case of the future, but I guess right now it looks like that's how things are going to be across the market for quite a while. I'd wonder why bother making the cases locally if you're not also assembling the product locally, so again, final assembly looks like the most likely 'manufacturing' that will go on in Apple plants.

  5. Trump fear by manu0601 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1 billion USD is a large sum. Is it because they fear president Trump's wrath? Or is it part of a deal that involves bringing back tax-free some cash from offshore?

    1. Re:Trump fear by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed. Donny has proven more of a barker than a biter. But the Bully Pulpit of the Prez can embarrass companies into at least token action, kind of like the F35 price "cuts".

      It reminds me of an old Soviet proverb: "We pretend to work and the gov't pretends to pay us."

      So Trump fakes pressure and co's fake reaction, and it all makes for glorious Fake News.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re: Trump fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Then you learn the environmental price of extracting that coal, and that China plans to use it to build warships to threaten US interests in the Asia-Pacific region, while having their own local energy reserves untouched.

      I'm not sure if they're planning to burn it so the prevailing winds carry it in the right direction to pollute Japan, but maybe.

      Plus, they're underpaying for it, compared to market value, which means we the tax payer is getting screwed.

    3. Re:Trump fear by Kohath · · Score: 1

      They said why: as a gesture to Americans, to share some of their success with people who want manufacturing jobs in the US.

    4. Re:Trump fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple has over $200 billion USD in cold hard cash overseas.

      A mere 2% tax cut on repatriating that cash would MORE than cover that 1 billion USD.

      Democrats endlessly beat the "corporations are too damned rich" drum for a reason.

    5. Re:Trump fear by quantaman · · Score: 1

      1 billion USD is a large sum. Is it because they fear president Trump's wrath? Or is it part of a deal that involves bringing back tax-free some cash from offshore?

      c) It could have nothing to do with Trump.

      Now here's the real question, regardless of the reason do you give Trump credit?

      Giving Trump some jobs to crow about should protect you from regulatory action, and maybe even result in a favourable ruling thrown your way.

      But Apple has a very progressive target demographic, one that is unlikely to look kindly on giving Trump political favours.

      Such is life under crony capitalism.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    6. Re:Trump fear by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Democrats also love to raise taxes, which is what causes corporations to hoard cash. So, whatever.

    7. Re:Trump fear by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      They have spoken to Trump... Presumably he offered them something, tax breaks or other favorable terms.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Trump fear by advocate_one · · Score: 1

      a billion dollars is peanuts compared to their offshore stashed cash mountain...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    9. Re:Trump fear by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      So the solution to corporations hoarding cash is to give them more cash by lowering taxes?

      Yes. Right now, Apple has a hoard of cash in other countries. Lower taxes, and they would move their cash back the US, and spend the money there.

    10. Re:Trump fear by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      And why would that be better than when they spend the money in the countries where they earned it?

      It would be better for the US, which would be the place were taxes were lowered. And of course, other countries don't have Silicon Valley.

    11. Re:Trump fear by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      It's better for the US, but worse for those countries. I don't see the net benefit.

      People in fiscal heavens do not benefit from the huge sums lying at their countries' banks. It is even a curse if a financial crash happen and their government want the to refund their banks

  6. I smell BS by gravewax · · Score: 4, Interesting

    2 million jobs? So apple is claiming to be responsible for almost 1.5% of US employment? sounds like bullshit marketing speak to me

    1. Re:I smell BS by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      2 million jobs? So apple is claiming to be responsible for almost 1.5% of US employment? sounds like bullshit marketing speak to me

      According to Wikipedia, Apple has 115,000 employees. I have no idea how Tim came up with "2 million".

    2. Re:I smell BS by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they mean indirectly, if you count up people working in their supply chain.

    3. Re:I smell BS by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they mean indirectly, if you count up people working in their supply chain.

      I don't think so. Tim said two million jobs "in America". Nearly their entire supply chain is in Asia. The screens are made in Korea, the CPUs in Taiwan, etc.

    4. Re:I smell BS by gravewax · · Score: 1

      directly or indirectly he is completely full of shit claiming such numbers.

    5. Re:I smell BS by Kohath · · Score: 1

      About half the semiconductor industry works with them on some part for some product. They have a large number of products. Add glass, metal, chemicals, transportation, real estate, banking, etc. I could see an argument for getting to a phony number like 2 million.

      But it's probably a spreadsheet function that says $x expenditure leads to the employment of roughly n people, where n turns out to be 2.6 million or something, and then you safely say 2 million.

    6. Re:I smell BS by pointybits · · Score: 3, Informative

      This figure is itemised on the Apple site . Basically they're claiming every job that touches Apple in some way, e.g. the workers at Caterpillar that make the generators used in Apple's data centers. 1.5 million of them are "jobs created and supported by the App store", which is sourced from a report that uses a really broad definition of an App Economy worker and includes support workers and "spillover" jobs.

    7. Re:I smell BS by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      I think they include "app developers" in their numbers.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    8. Re:I smell BS by gravewax · · Score: 1

      So basically a pack of lies and gross exaggerations

  7. Not sure how this'll work by TWX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Part of what has made Apple successful in Asian manufacturing has been low wages coupled with conditions that favor the employer. Workers do not have overtime, do not have a lot of other protections. Some workers seem to essentially be prisoner to the company town, living on company grounds in company dormitories, shopping in company stores, eating in company cafeterias. That sort of thing is generally unacceptable in the United States.

    American wages, even wages for manufacturing, are probably too high if the products are still priced roughly where they are now combined with the amount of manual labor used to individually assemble devices like phones and tablets. This means the alternative to all of this is automating as much manufacturing as possible. It may mean paying a manufacturing engineer a couple hundred thousand a year to work with designers to adapt designs to machine-manufacturable products, such that humans barely if at all touch the actual products being built- humans will be more likely to work on the factory itself, reconfiguring for new products or maintaining the machinery so that it keeps on producing units.

    The effects of manufacturing will not be as strongly felt as they used to be. Sure some workers will still be employed at the factory, and arguably those employees might even be higher paid due to the technical work of maintaining the machinery, but the total number of workers won't be enough to support whole communities like it used to, and due to the technical nature of what work there is, the jobs are more likely to go to existing urban areas rather than rejuvenating rural towns. If the manufacturing was labor-intensive and unskilled then of course it would make sense to consider towns where wages could be lower, but that won't be as much a factor in this era.

    Nevertheless I would like to see manufacturing come back; some jobs are better than no jobs, and higher paying jobs are good when the wages are fair for the kind of abilities the work requires.

    We'll just have to see what happens.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Not sure how this'll work by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

      Workers do not have overtime, do not have a lot of other protections.

      Workers in China have a right to overtime pay. It isn't always enforced, but it is certainly enforced in the export factories in Shenzhen. Chinese workers in non-SOE companies also have a right to strike. Chinese workplace health and safety regulations are not as strict as OSHA, but they are reasonable, and they are enforced in Shenzhen.

      Some workers seem to essentially be prisoner to the company town

      Bullcrap. Some factories have dormitories, but living in them is optional, and most workers do not live there. This isn't the 1990s.

      shopping in company stores

      More bullcrap. I have never seen a "company store" in Shenzhen. It is a bustling metropolis with plenty of options for shopping, and there are no restrictions on how or where people can spend their money.

      Have you ever been to China?

    2. Re:Not sure how this'll work by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Wages across the world are equalizing to a point where it no longer makes sense to do manufacturing abroad and shipping things all over. The wages in the US on the other hand aren't raising nearly as quickly as they do in China or India. I think this is just a bet on manufacturing jobs becoming cheaper in the Americas again, the people that invest now and if/when the economy supports it, they'll make a huge profit.

      Another line of thought, just like they started designing their own chips, they may want to shift manufacturing from Foxconn-type factories that are just stealing their ideas, patents and IP to a line of Apple-manufacturers they can tightly control with US courts on their side. Imagine a US-based electronic chip manufacturer the size of Apple, Apple could easily eclipse all current small US-based chipmakers (they do exist primarily for companies involved with military contracts) and with a bit of lobbying pretty much every government and military contract would be required to use Apple factories for every single system just on the back of a single "rogue Chinese chip" threat.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    3. Re:Not sure how this'll work by Camembert · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I currently live in Hong Kong and my job regularly brings me to Shenzhen and Guangzhou, which are just next door.
      I agree with ShanghaiBill's observations. Not to say that it is a worker's paradise over there but far from as bad as naive and outdated opinions allude to.
      I would like to add that the professional expertise of my customers over there is excellent.

    4. Re:Not sure how this'll work by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

      I've been to Shenzhen numerous times, most recently about 3 months ago. He's largely correct.

      I'd rather live in Guangzhou, though--it's much cleaner, the people are much nicer, and there's lots of local culture.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    5. Re:Not sure how this'll work by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I think you're going by old news stories about Foxconn. China still has much progress to make (remember Tiannamen Square) but it's going overboard to describe today's China as a labor colony. Like India, there is a middle class larger than ours who live quite well. Indeed, in some ways they make the US look backward.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    6. Re:Not sure how this'll work by aberglas · · Score: 1

      Maybe we could just send those excess kids to China? Rent therm out.

    7. Re:Not sure how this'll work by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Apple's profit margins are huge. They can afford to pay better wages, and doubtless extracted a tax break when they met Trump too. I'm sure they have done the sums on minimum wage factory jobs.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re: Not sure how this'll work by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Outside the Louvre in Paris, there's a sign in Mandarin which tells visitors not to defecate in the surrounding grounds.

      Bullcrap. This is an internet-myth. There is no such sign. Feel free to prove my wrong providing a citation to something other than a rumor in a blog ... none of which have a photo of the sign.

      I lived in China for many years. I never, not once, saw anyone defecate in public.

      Also, there is no such thing as a "sign in Mandarin". Mandarin is a spoken language, not a written language.

    9. Re:Not sure how this'll work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I spend about 90 days per year in Shenzhen.

      I agree with ShanghaiBill.

      I would like to add that companies which do not offer the workers overtime have a hard time getting employees. Workers tend to work 1 or 2 years and then use that money to finance studies or whatever they would like to do afterwards when they move back to home town.

    10. Re:Not sure how this'll work by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      Move to much cheaper workers Laos, Indonesia, Cambodia.
      Hire token workers in the USA to accept the product lines in a shipping box from Asia.
      Workers in the USA unbox the bulk imported products. Assemble high tech part A with part B.
      Place into a really pretty box with Made in the USA on it for each consumer.
      Profit and PR win.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    11. Re:Not sure how this'll work by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Some workers seem to essentially be prisoner to the company town, living on company grounds in company dormitories, shopping in company stores, eating in company cafeterias. That sort of thing is generally unacceptable in the United States.

      You are confusing Foxconn with Samsung's plants in Malaysia. At Samsung's plants, people have taken their passports away, own recruitment agencies tons of money and can't leave until that money is paid back. At Foxconn, in large part due to pressure from Apple, the company has to pay back any money that an employee paid to recruiters. They can leave any time they want to leave.

      Company dormitories and company food keep the cost of living down - which is exactly what young people want who come from a tiny village, make what is to them tons of money, spend the least amount possible, and return back home in two years time becoming the richest man in the village. And I suggest that you made up the bit about "shopping in company stores".

    12. Re:Not sure how this'll work by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I agree with ShanghaiBill's observations.

      But you seem like a shill. I visited your posting history and you said nice things about lords of the back door, Xiaomi, you plug HMT, and you repeatedly fellate Apple.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:Not sure how this'll work by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Like India, there is a middle class larger than ours who live quite well.

      And like India, there is a massive peasant class shitting in the water and burning plastic trash. And it's larger than our entire population. The relative size of the middle class is far from the most relevant statistic. They have three to four times our population, they should have three to four times as many middle-class citizens, right?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:Not sure how this'll work by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

      I hear you. I don't think it's quite so bad where you are, but the peasant population is quite evident here. Mostly they use the sidewalk.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    15. Re:Not sure how this'll work by Camembert · · Score: 1

      I had indeed a good experience with 2 xiaomi products. I am happy that you also seem to know about the quaint and charming mechanical HMT watches (sadly bankrupt since a good year), and I do like most of the Apple products I own or have owned, except for iTunes. What is exactly the problem?

  8. Tax breaks on horizon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With $250B of Apple's cash offshore, Apple may be hoping this 'initiative' will prompt Trump to give companies like Apple a tax amnesty/cut on the offshore cash?

    The savings could be in billions for Apple at expense of taxpayers. To put it in an another perspective, if they paid tax normally, the tax would have been $87.5B (@ 35%). You can see how $1B is a small investment to saving $87.5B.

    1. Re:Tax breaks on horizon? by guruevi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They did pay the taxes they were obligated to pay (sales taxes, wage taxes etc). Why would you want to pay an extra 35% if you don't have to? You don't take the standard $9-12k deduction on your Federal taxes?

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    2. Re:Tax breaks on horizon? by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Giving a tax break to bring money to the US is not actually at the expense of the taxpayers. This is because the alternative is not seeing the money at all, and it isn't seeing the money and taxing it all. If Apple brings the money to the US, it's going to spend it in the US. Even if Apple doesn't pay anything to the government directly, the money will end up there as Apple spends it.

      There are only upsides to the US economy for a tax amnesty.

    3. Re:Tax breaks on horizon? by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      Except for the lesson it teaches other tax-shy firms - make profits, hide revenues, evade taxes. That dismantles the public for private gain. That isn't American. That's Fascist giving firms power replacing the state in the end, which only puts people at the mercy of balance sheets with arbitrary accruals.

    4. Re:Tax breaks on horizon? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They did pay the taxes they were obligated to pay (sales taxes, wage taxes etc).

      They are a member of a class that actively works against paying their fair share. They actively work to reduce that obligation. They don't get a gold star for meeting it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Tax breaks on horizon? by houghi · · Score: 1

      I am sure that the investment will be exempt for X years of paying taxes. Just by saying 'I will create jobs' your taxes will go down. Mind you, this is not just a US thing. It is usable worldwide. The political climate inn the US now might just be that the deductions go a longer way.
      Because what politicians want to be able to say is "Look how much jobs I created" and not look at the cost.
      Build the factories in the right place and you can extend these exeptions, or close the factory. Start to fire large number of people just before elections and it will work.

      They are just shopping for the cheapest price and are less loyal than their customers who swear by the brand. No, this is not only about Apple. This is about any company. I have seen it on a local level at a smaller scale.

      If you want to know: read on:
      The company was asked to pay city taxes of X amount. They said that if that where the case they would go to the next city where the taxes where lower. They received they tax cut. The company had around 40-50 people working for them.
      I talked to the CEO and he clearly stated that if they would not have gotten the tax cut, they would have done absolutely nothing. It was just a bluff and it paid off.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    6. Re:Tax breaks on horizon? by guruevi · · Score: 1

      And I'm sure you don't use an accountant to review your taxes every year so you get a better return?

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  9. Just pay their taxes by Archfeld · · Score: 2

    If Apple would just pay their taxes and stop hiding money in foreign countries, this would be a moot point. They are of course not alone or entirely at fault for taking advantage of loopholes bought and paid for by corporations, but the point remains.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:Just pay their taxes by bongey · · Score: 1

      "Hiding" , you mean by telling the public exactly what they do is "hiding". You expect a corporation to pay more than they are legally required to do is absolutely nuts.

  10. Tim Cook wants to give back? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How about giving back an actual pro laptop with something truly innovative, instead of that silly touch bar? How about giving back the MagSafe power adapter? How about giving back a laptop with a variety of useful ports?

    How about giving back an honest-to-goodness pro desktop?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Tim Cook wants to give back? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Ah the magsafe power adapter that falls out if you don't use your laptop at a desk.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:Tim Cook wants to give back? by Camembert · · Score: 1

      I don't have the current Macbook Pro but when playing with it in the shop I thought that the adapting touch bar was a useful innovation, very nice to scroll through photos, do video edits etc. I fail to see why I should pour hate on it, after all you can set it to standard F keys if I am not mistaken.
      Yes, the MagSafe adapter is a loss. It saved my Macbook Air once. Also agree about the ports. Apple is usually ahead of the curve in removing old ports and adopting new ones, but here they went too quickly. Not fun to have to bring an adapter hub.

  11. One billion dallars to ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... promote.

    Part of the campaign strategy is to have people change their Facebook Profile picture to a silver ribbon with the Apple logo on it for promoting "Advanced Manufacturing Jobs in the U.S. Awareness Month."

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  12. I have a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How about Apple starts paying its fucking taxes instead of offshoring 99% of it to avoid giving back to the country that made it what it is.

    1. Re:I have a better idea by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      Can't keep the bullshit tag lines straight anymore can you? Trick is to learn how accounting and tax actually works globally, but then you'll understand that echo chamber bullshit for what it is and stop parroting it everywhere. Gain for all parties...

  13. I wonder how they'll weasel out of this. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    If it's just going to more Silicon Valley types, that means next to nothing.

    If it's going to the Rest of Us, then that would be news.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  14. Sure he does. by Petfish · · Score: 1

    "Apple announced today plans to create a $1 billion fund to promote creation of advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S. "

    And I have plans to create a fund to promote creation of a plan to believe them, too.

  15. How very magnanimous of them... by gweilo8888 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...to offer to bring back a tiny, tiny fraction of the vast sum they've avoided paying a cent in taxes on so they can get some good PR and hope we ignore the rest of the money they've stolen from the US public. (And make no mistake, tax evasion is just another form of theft, with the victim being society.)

    1. Re:How very magnanimous of them... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      If one is not legally bound to pay, then not paying cannot be called theft. Unless you're a greedy, shit-wad who deserves to be tortured.

    2. Re:How very magnanimous of them... by kenh · · Score: 1

      the vast sum they've avoided paying a cent in taxes on

      No, they paid taxes on the money - in the countries where the earnings were booked. The US gov't is not owed taxes on earnings in England on devices manufactured in Asia (for example), England and Asia are.

      --
      Ken
    3. Re:How very magnanimous of them... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Apple is legally bound to pay. See Italy, and every single other country apart where Apple has sales.

      Yep, and Apple does pay taxes in those countries. Then the US wants to tax what's left -- which is a rather weird thing to do, actually. The United States and Eritrea are the only countries in the world that do this.

      This excludes only the USA due to cheap corruption.

      Umm, it's simply not an issue for companies in any other first-world country, because other countries don't try to tax foreign profits. They leave that to the countries where those profits are earned.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  16. Yes 20 human workers and $5 billion of robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Stupid. Apple will build a near fully automated factory and employ 20 people.

    1. Re:Yes 20 human workers and $5 billion of robots by DuckDodgers · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yup. Or restate the headline this way: "Company with 250 billion in cash assets decides to invest 0.4% in domestic economy!"

    2. Re:Yes 20 human workers and $5 billion of robots by saider · · Score: 1

      Nudge to lawmakers : "Lower the corporate tax rate and we'll make it $2 billion"

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
  17. How about Apple's own manufacturing! by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    Apple does most of its own manufacturing in Asia. If they really want to create manufacturing jobs in the US, how about just bringing some of their own manufacturing back to the US!

  18. It's a continuation of what they already did by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    1 billion USD is a large sum. Is it because they fear president Trump's wrath?

    It's because Apple has been trying out doing more manufacturing in the U.S. - as with the Mac Pro - and they would like to see more of this being possible.

    If you want to think of Apple's reasons as being purely selfish (and many Slashdot Apple Haters can only think that way), then imagine they simply want a manufacturing environment were they have much better control over leaks.

    Or a last way to look at it is, Johnny Ive has decided to redesign an entire state from scratch and needs somewhere he can drive to in his Aston Martin DB9 to oversee progress. Can't do that between California and China. Look out Nevada!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  19. Re:One of the things you do is give back by lucm · · Score: 1

    Why don't they give some of their iPhones to poor black children?

    They already have iPhones. In many poor communities the smartphone is the only way to access internet, and it comes bundled with the carrier contract.

    According to a study by the Pew research institute, when it comes to internet access, "12 percent of African-Americans and 13 percent of Latinos are smartphone-reliant, compared with 4 percent of whites."

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  20. Re:Given 250 billion in savings, isn't 1 billion.. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    Shut the fuck up about taxes already.

  21. Re:Your politics are irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes, the OP should know full well that you are only allowed to turn stories into politicized tar pits when it portrays Trump in a bad light.

  22. Company tax doesn't work like that by monkeyxpress · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...to offer to bring back a tiny, tiny fraction of the vast sum they've avoided paying a cent in taxes on so they can get some good PR and hope we ignore the rest of the money they've stolen from the US public. (And make no mistake, tax evasion is just another form of theft, with the victim being society.)

    I'm no fan of our current global tax system and the wealth distortions it has created. But going around trying to label companies/people legally minimising their tax 'thieves' is not much different from the RIAA moral police style anti-piracy campaigns. It's childish, and discredits serious arguments.

    Firstly, almost every western country's tax system is based on self declaration. We don't have tax inspectors hovering over every transaction you make, with the big eye in the sky then sending you a bill at the end of the year. You go about your business, and at the end of the year, you report to the government what tax you think you owe. In the vast majority of cases, the government does not challenge your assessment. It is an honesty based system (albeit with stiff penalties if you abuse it) and it tends to work pretty well. By claiming that all these billions or dollars are being stolen, you are insinuating that the integrity of the system has broken down. This is dangerous, because the next step then is to crack down on these phantom tax cheats, by doing things like banning cash, and having your bank account data fed directly to the IRS. Obviously this would have no impact on what Apple and Google etc are doing, because the IRS already knows what they are doing. All you have done is given the government a populous excuse to invade our lives further.

    Secondly, company tax is nowhere near as big a moral issue as you think it is. Fiduciary duty means that a company is limited in its ability to live it up on income like an individual can (and perks like staff parties, corporate jets, are generally deductible anyway, so company tax is irrelevant). Net profits must ultimately be either distributed to shareholders or re-invested in productive activities. Saving them just delays this, but unless you save them forever, the company must ultimately 'consume' the profits by distribution to shareholders or investment.

    If it re-invests the profits, then almost always it can claim the tax back over time through depreciation. In other words, it might earn $10000 of profit, pay $2000 of tax, spend the resulting $8000 to buy a machine, but over the next five years claim back $2000/5 in tax credits due to the depreciation of the capital asset. Ultimately the taxman gets no tax on the profits, but the company has to lend the taxman the tax for five years. For small and medium sized businesses trying to grow off cashflow, this is really stupid. If the machine they wanted cost $10000, then they would have to borrow $2000 to lend onward to the taxman for five years. Indeed, many small businesses have to do just this, which is why most countries have generous capital allowances to prevent such pointless cashflow disruption.

    Alternately, if it distributes the profits to shareholders, the shareholders pay tax on the dividends against their individual income. You might notice a potential issue with this - distributed profits get taxed twice. A company could make the $10000 of profit, pay $2000 of tax, and then pays $8000 to a shareholder. The shareholder might then pay $2500 of tax on that, resulting in a net dividend of $5500 arriving in the shareholder's account. Of the $10000 the company made from a profit on selling widgets, barely half gets to the owners. People in partnerships (as opposed to limited companies) don't have this problem, which puts companies at a big disadvantage (even if you think such a punitive effective tax rate is okay). This is why almost every country has various tax credit systems or lower dividend tax rates to prevent this issue.

    Now where I agree with you there is a problem is in the loopholes that develop when you start tryin

    1. Re:Company tax doesn't work like that by swillden · · Score: 1

      If there were a sensible separation between those megacorps and policymakers, I'd agree with you. But since it's possible for the very rich to buy/extort their laws, no.

      Then why hasn't Apple changed the law to allow them to bring their big pile of cash back to the US, rather than having to keep it parked uselessly offshore?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  23. Re:Trump Ties - Made in China, Owned by Putin by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

    you know that whole putin thing is really getting old. arent you guys tired of grasping at straws now?

  24. Welcome your Chinese robot overlords! by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
    Most assembly is done with robots, and it doesn't matter much where those robots are parked.

    And who makes those robots?

    Chinese-owned companies!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  25. Uh huh by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    Out of the 250 billion we have stashed away out of reach of not only the US government but also our shareholders, we will magnanimously allow you to see 1/250th of it.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  26. Citizens United by kenh · · Score: 2

    "A lot of people ask me, 'Do you think it's a company's job to create jobs?' and my response is [that] a company should have values because a company is a collection of people. And people should have values, so by extension, a company should. And one of the things you do is give back,"

    Wasn't that same argument the basis of the infamous "Citizens United" decision, that corporations are collections of people, and that corporations have the same rights as individuals in many respects?

    Interesting.

    --
    Ken
  27. Better 800 jobs than none by zerofoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't mind if manufacturing comes back to the US in the form of automated factories.

    Those factories still need bodies to keep them going. Someone has to build the factory, network it, install the machines, and keep them going.

    Also, someone is delivering raw materials to the factory, and someone is shipping finished goods away from the factory.

    Those factories are also tax ratables that help offset the cost of police, fire, and public education.

    If automation is an unavoidable trend, I'd rather it be here than there.

    1. Re:Better 800 jobs than none by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      I don't mind if manufacturing comes back to the US in the form of automated factories.

      Those factories still need bodies to keep them going. Someone has to build the factory, network it, install the machines, and keep them going.

      Also, someone is delivering raw materials to the factory, and someone is shipping finished goods away from the factory.

      Those factories are also tax ratables that help offset the cost of police, fire, and public education.

      If automation is an unavoidable trend, I'd rather it be here than there.

      PRECISELY!

    2. Re:Better 800 jobs than none by chihowa · · Score: 1

      We have laws against poisonous effluent (and China is starting to also). I'd rather there was less poisonous effluent anywhere and that the manufacturing was located in the place more likely to enforce laws against it.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    3. Re:Better 800 jobs than none by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I don't mind if manufacturing comes back to the US in the form of automated factories.

      Those factories still need bodies to keep them going. Someone has to build the factory, network it, install the machines, and keep them going.

      Yes, but remember that the effort doesn't work unless there are less jobs overall. If more jobs are created, the automation effort is a failure.

      Also, someone is delivering raw materials to the factory, and someone is shipping finished goods away from the factory.

      Prime automation targets in both cases.

      Those factories are also tax ratables that help offset the cost of police, fire, and public education.

      Unless of course, the corporation that builds the factory gets a tax exemption. In my area we have a number of companies that don't pay any local taxes. Any tax monies come from employees.

      If automation is an unavoidable trend, I'd rather it be here than there.

      I can't disagree at all with that statement. One of my old points to ponder was to ask if when we got into a war with China, would they build our tanks for us?

      But seriously, the automation game is here, and since companies can temporarily make more money by eliminating jobs, it is unstoppable.

      I suspect there will come a tipping point when they find out that there is no one left to buy the stuff they are making.

      Perhaps then some enterprising outfit will discover that in order for people to buy your stuff, you have to have people that have money to buy your stuff.

      It's interesting to draw up scenarios re this. Will the future be an actual emancipation of humanity from working, allowing them to pursue better lives, will we descend into a Soylent green banana republic existence as the weath trickles up, or will we have a general depop either through World War 3, or something more organized?

      Fascinating stuff, with a few happy outcomes, and many not so happy ones.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  28. Apple products have a long usable life by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    In our school's experience, Apple products have a very long useful life - far greater than other manufacturers of technology.

    Most of our current fleet of iPads is over 5 years old. We also have around 4 MacBooks that are at the 7-8 year mark - and still going.

    We are easily getting 30% longer life out of Apple products than we do other technology vendors.

    That results in less stuff in the landfill - and that fact is frequently ignored by Apple's detractors.

    1. Re:Apple products have a long usable life by zerofoo · · Score: 1

      Sorry - I meant to say 40 Macbooks.

    2. Re:Apple products have a long usable life by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      My workplace has a Dell contract so all our PCs have removeable memory. In my many years here I have seen precisely zero cases of memory being upgraded out of many thousands of computers. I've seen dozens of cases where trouble was caused by memory and re-seating it cleared the trouble.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  29. Still trying to get that tax break by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    on $250 Billion dollars in cash you are hoarding...http://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-to-report-on-Tuesday-that-it-currently-holds-250-billion-in-cash_id93610

  30. Word Salad by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    Oh, this is just fucking dandy. It's not enough that the US voted a rambling side show carnival barker for a president, but now apparently his word-salad speeches have becoming in vogue and everyone else is starting to copy that style. When I tried to read the summary I thought I was having a stroke cause that quote bordered on nonsensical (and a perfect pattern copy of a typical Trump speech).

    Not that I'm really all that surprised, since Trump has proven that bullshit word salad speeches actually work more effectively than honest communication.

    Nice going America. I hope you're happy.

  31. Y'know how else to give back? by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

    Pay your fucking taxes and stop hiding money in offshore tax havens.

  32. Re:Trump Ties - Made in China, Owned by Putin by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

    Well when it starts at 0 truth there's not much further it can go. Not a single person on this site in the 50 times I've asked has been able to show any proof.. Just that stuff you guys call "fake news"