Except what are these mythical 'benefits'? China gets to produce, but not to consume what they produce, they can't afford it, because their gov't is destroying their currency, making their own products too expensive for their own citizens, while giving a huge discount to their products to people from other countries. This is the worst thing governments can do - steal from their own people via the inflation tax.
Thanks to shale oil, the very concept of "peak oil" has been debunked.
- yeah, like the concept of gravity has been debunked thanks to the hot air balloons.
The simple fact is that as long as people can get their discount crap at the local stores, they really don't give a damn about the poor and starving in any nation. It's not racism. It's indifference and self-centeredness.
Keynesian ideas to economics are what foreskin is to a Hasidic Jew.
However I am very well versed in relative value of things - did you know that in gold and silver oil prices are not only staying steady, but are falling somewhat? All that while paper currencies of the world are being destroyed, I might add.
Obviously. People still do not understand what 'free market' means, it literally means free from government intervention, they don't understand it, they think it's 'free of any regulations', which is not the case. Free of government regulations - yes. Free of all regulations - no. The real regulations can never be removed. Real market setting real prices on real things, real money - this always exists. Governments can push these underground, into grey and black markets, but they can't win against real markets, real markets always win, that's what recession is - real market, fighting excesses created by fake government economics.
Tell that to Marxists. As far as they are concerned, everything that is put into business owner/investor's pocket is 'stolen' from the labourer hired at a wage.
I am not their accountant, but they definitely hold plenty of their own stock, and for now that looks fine, it won't be fine when they are hit with 'windfall taxes' by US gov't, and then their stock will go down. They need to start looking at buying parts of businesses in other countries and in other types of industries.
Also there is always another reason to diversify out of your own stock - it's better not to hold all eggs in one basket, so Apple should diversify out of their own stock and invest into other businesses in other industries, the best being mining and agriculture.
Yeah, I didn't say that the cash was in USA, I said that the cash was likely in US denominated assets (say dollars or US bonds or even APPLE BONDS!) Why is it important for Apple to diversify out of Apple bonds? Well, because under the system, US gov't is liable for all of the debt, but WHO is really liable? Who is government going to tax, to pay that debt (and obviously nobody will be paying that debt, it will be inflated away). Well, all of the US people and companies are liable for that debt. Under inflation scenario, it's just anybody holding US dollar denominated assets.
Apple is doing the right thing by not bringing the money into US, they need to make sure not to hold USD denominated assets if they truly want to be in the clear.
I am talking about real inflation, the real money printing that causes it and the increase of prices that is coming to USA due to it, though it was able to severely delay that by exporting all of that inflation (specifically because the printed money leaves the country to buy foreign goods, where it is accumulated).
Real inflation, the kind of inflation that should have been used as deflater to the fake GDP numbers (GDP has been shrinking in USA for over 20 years, not growing, and in all cases, GDP is 70% spending of imported goods, and there are bail outs and military spending there too). Real inflation, which is the real tax on everybody holding US denominated assets.
Real inflation, the way it was calculated during Nixon, when simple 4% was enough for the gov't to set wage and price controls (misguidedly, as all economic and fiscal things gov'ts do). It was calculated without substitutions and hedonics, without reverse engineering the numbers to fit the narrative.
Or real inflation as calculated from rise of commodity prices (and no, it's not 'speculation', that's a cop out for the gov't inflating its money, buying its own debt, there are always 2 people in each transaction - one buy, one selling).
Real inflation, which does not need to see increase in wages, that's Keynesian nonsense. Wages don't increase because there is nothing manufactured.
Trickle down economics are fine and dandy, they just don't help those, who consume and don't produce. You see, 'trickle down economics' is working in China, where this stuff is produced, not in USA, where none of it is.
As a society we should as much as possible keep the big picture in mind
- yes we should.
If Apple practices can be popularly considered unethical, then the consumer market might punish them out of a sense of guilt (misplaced or otherwise).
- so buying all those Apple products that they have to think of ways of getting rid of all that cash in smart ways is how the market punishes Apple? I wouldn't mind that sort of 'punishment'.
You are talking about perception of what Apple is doing in manufacturing their devices, yet you are completely disregarding the actual facts. Fact: Apple created products millions of people are buying (terrible, I know). Fact: Apple hires hundreds of thousands of people, who otherwise wouldn't have these jobs (disgusting.) Fact: the wealth that is created by Apple is not something that anybody had to tax anybody for, it's all actual original wealth, created by actual entrepreneurs, it's not wealth extracted out of somebody and distributed in any way, it's real products that people consider to be wealth. It increases total wealth in the system, it allows huge earnings for the investors, it provides jobs to millions of people around the world (including manufacturing, shipping, sales, apps., whatever).
The wealth that Apple is creating is real, unlike anything any government has ever done, because gov't has to steal wealth created by people and companies to run whatever projects gov't wants. So AFAIC comparing Apple and any gov't on the planet in terms of improving conditions of all people and creating real wealth - Apple wins, no contest.
i dont understand why people who believe in the free market keep looking to China as some kind of model on a hill. China is run by the Communist Party, and the corporations over there are part owned by the same party.
- it is very easy to understand if you simply compare the actual effective policies. Yes, China has a 'communist party' running the political system, so there is always a risk associated with what that political system can bring out in the future, but as to their actual effective policies.
Try and find equivalents of these in China: EPA, SS, Medicare, FDIC, F&F, FHA, HUD, and all the various things that other countries are doing. It's just no comparison. They lately are looking at introducing some 'minimum wage', (which is obviously a stupid idea, as always, any price fixing is), and it's done because Chinese are following the suicidal path that USA and the others are on (inflating their money supply). BUT as opposed to everybody else who is destroying their currencies, China has all the manufacturing and they are accruing real money quickly, so when currencies fail, China will be fine. They will lose the debt money they are holding of other countries, but I think they already understand that they will never get that money back in any meaningful way, so they are trying to move slowly out of gov't bonds into various company bonds, commodities.
They need to stop printing their currency and then their standard of living will start rising quickly, as there currency value will grow and they'll have more and more of the internal market, while everybody else will be able to afford less and less of all the Chinese products. But that's to benefit of all - finally people will have to do something about their debts and restart their manufacturing again.
There are no labor unions, there are no workers rights laws, there are no environmental laws. There are mines and factories that are run on prison labor - 'criminals' being people who speak things the government doesnt like. Criminals being people who mention forming a union. That is not a 'free market' upon which wages were decided. That is a captive market, not a free competitive market.
- you are mistaken. Labour unions destroy competition. I am not against labour unions per se, but not when they have any form of gov't support.
Now try and answer this question: why is it that in USA and Europe they are supposedly anti-monopoly, but they are allowing a huge monopoly where it comes to the labour force? Why is it legal for people to fix price on labour by using gov't supported unions? After all, if monopolies are bad, so are monopolies on labour.
As to prison labour, etc., that's not what we are talking about. Sure, they have this problem in China, but they also do in US.
Environmental laws shouldn't exist anyway. Wealthy nations take care of their environment naturally, nobody wants to live in polluted environment, but you can't build an industrial society powered by butterfly farts, you have to have something to produce tools necessary to move to better and cleaner technologies. It takes time and resources to do that and nobody can just pull clean technologies out of their ass. First capital has to be built, tools, education, all this requires wealth created by the market, and eventually environmental concerns are addressed.
You can't move a person to think about cleaner environment if the person is hungry.
In case you have forgotten, slavery was what the Republican Party was founded to eliminate from the face of the Earth. Not to make a profit off of it by claiming it was 'fair'.
- that's a non-starter with me. There can be no elimination of slavery and there can be nothing good until there is sufficient wealth in the system and there is a social mindset change. No amount of laws can stop a person from doing drugs, same with this.
No, they don't know how to do that. Yes, paying a dividend out is a perfectly fine, totally reasonable idea (and in fact that's what investing is about - getting some cash flow). But they are not go8ing to do more than 25% payment on an earned dollar (that's rare), the real distributed tax in US is HUGE, it's 64% (of-course Apple isn't paying all of that, it's has enough accountants and lawyers to make sure), if the money isn't paid out though, it can be reinvested, and it doesn't have to be Apple's people, they can diversify by buying shares in mining companies, agriculture, etc., they don't need to know how to run those, they just need to evaluate the potential investment and always keep eyes on them.
Does it make sense? Well, one thing is for sure - Apple is not going to be on top of this hardware game forever. Saudi Arabia is diversifying out of their oil business, because they know oil won't last forever, so they build infrastructure, new islands, buildings, parks, whatever they do - it's aimed at long term preservation of cash flow.
That's retarded. They already covered their costs, Apple is not a charity, they bought labour at fair wages (market value, as opposed to what you want obviously). Companies EXIST to make money for their INVESTORS, nobody else. All the wealth (products, services) and all the wages and taxes they pay are completely incidental to their goal (which is why free market the best tool for creating wealth in the first place).
They need to do one thing for sure though - diversify out US denominated assets (though they already have their production capacity in Asia and other places), but they need to look at moving money out of US dollars and probably into other businesses, unrelated to tech - energy, mining, agriculture, whatever - just not in socialist 'paradise'. Paying out dividends to their investors is a completely reasonable suggestion, in fact they should do that too.
Apple has too many US DOLLARS, that's its problem. With 15% inflation it is insane to keep savings in that currency, they need to come up with a diversification strategy. However paying dividends to shareholders is also a very reasonable suggestion.
Too many eggs in one basket, I'd look at completely different businesses (agriculture, mining, but obviously not in US, it's too dangerous, there will be more nationalisation and more taxes and more inflation and other types of theft by government).
They definitely need to diversify out of their own bonds, which are dollar denominated though. Again - buying up some mining businesses, joint venture into energy, metals, agriculture.
Oh, and by the way, my conclusion out of all of this is similar to the age old belief, that women come into relationships hoping to change the partner more often (and I believe men come into relationship hoping that the women don't change over time), and both get screwed.
Slashdot Mirror
Except what are these mythical 'benefits'? China gets to produce, but not to consume what they produce, they can't afford it, because their gov't is destroying their currency, making their own products too expensive for their own citizens, while giving a huge discount to their products to people from other countries. This is the worst thing governments can do - steal from their own people via the inflation tax.
Thanks to shale oil, the very concept of "peak oil" has been debunked.
- yeah, like the concept of gravity has been debunked thanks to the hot air balloons.
The simple fact is that as long as people can get their discount crap at the local stores, they really don't give a damn about the poor and starving in any nation.
It's not racism.
It's indifference and self-centeredness.
- it's called pragmatism and life.
and you have an option to read something else and to keep your trap shut, don't you?
In fact, why not help get rid of it? Send any paper currencies you have my way. I'll er... dispose of them for you. I'll even do it for free!
- I have only a few notes, no paper, it's not worth the postage to send it.
Keynesian ideas to economics are what foreskin is to a Hasidic Jew.
However I am very well versed in relative value of things - did you know that in gold and silver oil prices are not only staying steady, but are falling somewhat? All that while paper currencies of the world are being destroyed, I might add.
Obviously. People still do not understand what 'free market' means, it literally means free from government intervention, they don't understand it, they think it's 'free of any regulations', which is not the case. Free of government regulations - yes. Free of all regulations - no. The real regulations can never be removed. Real market setting real prices on real things, real money - this always exists. Governments can push these underground, into grey and black markets, but they can't win against real markets, real markets always win, that's what recession is - real market, fighting excesses created by fake government economics.
It's 64% (minute 43 to 50)
Tell that to Marxists. As far as they are concerned, everything that is put into business owner/investor's pocket is 'stolen' from the labourer hired at a wage.
I am not their accountant, but they definitely hold plenty of their own stock, and for now that looks fine, it won't be fine when they are hit with 'windfall taxes' by US gov't, and then their stock will go down. They need to start looking at buying parts of businesses in other countries and in other types of industries.
I didn't say currency, AFAIC all paper is only good for one purpose, and they make better toilet paper for that.
Also there is always another reason to diversify out of your own stock - it's better not to hold all eggs in one basket, so Apple should diversify out of their own stock and invest into other businesses in other industries, the best being mining and agriculture.
Yeah, I didn't say that the cash was in USA, I said that the cash was likely in US denominated assets (say dollars or US bonds or even APPLE BONDS!) Why is it important for Apple to diversify out of Apple bonds? Well, because under the system, US gov't is liable for all of the debt, but WHO is really liable? Who is government going to tax, to pay that debt (and obviously nobody will be paying that debt, it will be inflated away). Well, all of the US people and companies are liable for that debt. Under inflation scenario, it's just anybody holding US dollar denominated assets.
Apple is doing the right thing by not bringing the money into US, they need to make sure not to hold USD denominated assets if they truly want to be in the clear.
Minute 43 till about 50, if you have 10 minutes to spare listen to it.
I am talking about real inflation, the real money printing that causes it and the increase of prices that is coming to USA due to it, though it was able to severely delay that by exporting all of that inflation (specifically because the printed money leaves the country to buy foreign goods, where it is accumulated).
Real inflation, the kind of inflation that should have been used as deflater to the fake GDP numbers (GDP has been shrinking in USA for over 20 years, not growing, and in all cases, GDP is 70% spending of imported goods, and there are bail outs and military spending there too). Real inflation, which is the real tax on everybody holding US denominated assets.
Real inflation, the way it was calculated during Nixon, when simple 4% was enough for the gov't to set wage and price controls (misguidedly, as all economic and fiscal things gov'ts do). It was calculated without substitutions and hedonics, without reverse engineering the numbers to fit the narrative.
Or real inflation as calculated from rise of commodity prices (and no, it's not 'speculation', that's a cop out for the gov't inflating its money, buying its own debt, there are always 2 people in each transaction - one buy, one selling).
Real inflation, which does not need to see increase in wages, that's Keynesian nonsense. Wages don't increase because there is nothing manufactured.
Trickle down economics are fine and dandy, they just don't help those, who consume and don't produce. You see, 'trickle down economics' is working in China, where this stuff is produced, not in USA, where none of it is.
Actually distributed taxes (including corporate, dividend, payroll) are 64% in USA now. Actual calculation at minute 43 to about 50 of this 28MB audio
It's not retarded.
- yes it is.
As a society we should as much as possible keep the big picture in mind
- yes we should.
If Apple practices can be popularly considered unethical, then the consumer market might punish them out of a sense of guilt (misplaced or otherwise).
- so buying all those Apple products that they have to think of ways of getting rid of all that cash in smart ways is how the market punishes Apple? I wouldn't mind that sort of 'punishment'.
You are talking about perception of what Apple is doing in manufacturing their devices, yet you are completely disregarding the actual facts. Fact: Apple created products millions of people are buying (terrible, I know). Fact: Apple hires hundreds of thousands of people, who otherwise wouldn't have these jobs (disgusting.) Fact: the wealth that is created by Apple is not something that anybody had to tax anybody for, it's all actual original wealth, created by actual entrepreneurs, it's not wealth extracted out of somebody and distributed in any way, it's real products that people consider to be wealth. It increases total wealth in the system, it allows huge earnings for the investors, it provides jobs to millions of people around the world (including manufacturing, shipping, sales, apps., whatever).
The wealth that Apple is creating is real, unlike anything any government has ever done, because gov't has to steal wealth created by people and companies to run whatever projects gov't wants. So AFAIC comparing Apple and any gov't on the planet in terms of improving conditions of all people and creating real wealth - Apple wins, no contest.
i dont understand why people who believe in the free market keep looking to China as some kind of model on a hill. China is run by the Communist Party, and the corporations over there are part owned by the same party.
- it is very easy to understand if you simply compare the actual effective policies. Yes, China has a 'communist party' running the political system, so there is always a risk associated with what that political system can bring out in the future, but as to their actual effective policies.
Try and find equivalents of these in China: EPA, SS, Medicare, FDIC, F&F, FHA, HUD, and all the various things that other countries are doing. It's just no comparison. They lately are looking at introducing some 'minimum wage', (which is obviously a stupid idea, as always, any price fixing is), and it's done because Chinese are following the suicidal path that USA and the others are on (inflating their money supply). BUT as opposed to everybody else who is destroying their currencies, China has all the manufacturing and they are accruing real money quickly, so when currencies fail, China will be fine. They will lose the debt money they are holding of other countries, but I think they already understand that they will never get that money back in any meaningful way, so they are trying to move slowly out of gov't bonds into various company bonds, commodities.
They need to stop printing their currency and then their standard of living will start rising quickly, as there currency value will grow and they'll have more and more of the internal market, while everybody else will be able to afford less and less of all the Chinese products. But that's to benefit of all - finally people will have to do something about their debts and restart their manufacturing again.
There are no labor unions, there are no workers rights laws, there are no environmental laws. There are mines and factories that are run on prison labor - 'criminals' being people who speak things the government doesnt like. Criminals being people who mention forming a union. That is not a 'free market' upon which wages were decided. That is a captive market, not a free competitive market.
- you are mistaken. Labour unions destroy competition. I am not against labour unions per se, but not when they have any form of gov't support.
Now try and answer this question: why is it that in USA and Europe they are supposedly anti-monopoly, but they are allowing a huge monopoly where it comes to the labour force? Why is it legal for people to fix price on labour by using gov't supported unions? After all, if monopolies are bad, so are monopolies on labour.
As to prison labour, etc., that's not what we are talking about. Sure, they have this problem in China, but they also do in US.
Environmental laws shouldn't exist anyway. Wealthy nations take care of their environment naturally, nobody wants to live in polluted environment, but you can't build an industrial society powered by butterfly farts, you have to have something to produce tools necessary to move to better and cleaner technologies. It takes time and resources to do that and nobody can just pull clean technologies out of their ass. First capital has to be built, tools, education, all this requires wealth created by the market, and eventually environmental concerns are addressed.
You can't move a person to think about cleaner environment if the person is hungry.
In case you have forgotten, slavery was what the Republican Party was founded to eliminate from the face of the Earth. Not to make a profit off of it by claiming it was 'fair'.
- that's a non-starter with me. There can be no elimination of slavery and there can be nothing good until there is sufficient wealth in the system and there is a social mindset change. No amount of laws can stop a person from doing drugs, same with this.
The idea that someone should not have to inha
No, they don't know how to do that. Yes, paying a dividend out is a perfectly fine, totally reasonable idea (and in fact that's what investing is about - getting some cash flow). But they are not go8ing to do more than 25% payment on an earned dollar (that's rare), the real distributed tax in US is HUGE, it's 64% (of-course Apple isn't paying all of that, it's has enough accountants and lawyers to make sure), if the money isn't paid out though, it can be reinvested, and it doesn't have to be Apple's people, they can diversify by buying shares in mining companies, agriculture, etc., they don't need to know how to run those, they just need to evaluate the potential investment and always keep eyes on them.
Does it make sense? Well, one thing is for sure - Apple is not going to be on top of this hardware game forever. Saudi Arabia is diversifying out of their oil business, because they know oil won't last forever, so they build infrastructure, new islands, buildings, parks, whatever they do - it's aimed at long term preservation of cash flow.
That's retarded. They already covered their costs, Apple is not a charity, they bought labour at fair wages (market value, as opposed to what you want obviously). Companies EXIST to make money for their INVESTORS, nobody else. All the wealth (products, services) and all the wages and taxes they pay are completely incidental to their goal (which is why free market the best tool for creating wealth in the first place).
They need to do one thing for sure though - diversify out US denominated assets (though they already have their production capacity in Asia and other places), but they need to look at moving money out of US dollars and probably into other businesses, unrelated to tech - energy, mining, agriculture, whatever - just not in socialist 'paradise'. Paying out dividends to their investors is a completely reasonable suggestion, in fact they should do that too.
Apple has too many US DOLLARS, that's its problem. With 15% inflation it is insane to keep savings in that currency, they need to come up with a diversification strategy. However paying dividends to shareholders is also a very reasonable suggestion.
Too many eggs in one basket, I'd look at completely different businesses (agriculture, mining, but obviously not in US, it's too dangerous, there will be more nationalisation and more taxes and more inflation and other types of theft by government).
They definitely need to diversify out of their own bonds, which are dollar denominated though. Again - buying up some mining businesses, joint venture into energy, metals, agriculture.
Oh, and by the way, my conclusion out of all of this is similar to the age old belief, that women come into relationships hoping to change the partner more often (and I believe men come into relationship hoping that the women don't change over time), and both get screwed.
What about divorce?
Sources say that women are initiating divorce in 66% of cases.
I never troll, always serious.
Don't steal. Government doesn't like the competition.
NK is not counterfeiting US dollars, because US dollars are already fake, you can't counterfeit the counterfeit.
Hey, dog, I heard you like to counterfeit? So we put a counterfeit in your counterfeit, so you can counterfeit while you counterfeit.