Editorial: Uncertainties of a dysfunctional American government likely to hurt Apple's performance

Posted:
in PoliticalOutsider
1.   The only one who criticizes the press as much as Trump is DED.

2. Obama's stimulus act included $8 Billion for high speed Trains but nothing ever came of it.   Trump will definitely build his wall.

3.   Apple is against Trumps immigration policies only because they wanted more H1b visas and Hillary was going to give them to the Tech industry to pay them off for their support.
lukevaxhackerlukevaxhackerMetriacanthosaurus

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 15
    I would appreciate if Daniel Eran Dilger stop making political editorials on technology. I am not interested in his views on what Trump is doing or Clinton would do. Keep it strictly technology.. It does not sound right to have editor mumbling his opinions while others are disable from responding to his editorial. He might be wrong in many parts, but that is not purpose of appleinsider. It is just inappropriate.
    lukevaxhackergatorguyMetriacanthosaurusfreshmaker
  • Reply 2 of 15
    Stop whining Dilger.
    lukevaxhackerSpamSandwich
  • Reply 3 of 15
    chasmchasm Posts: 217member
    A few hopefully constructive thoughts:

    1. Because a lot of people confuse ANY immigration with ILLEGAL immigration, the fact that we are talking here about ONLY legal immigration should probably have been emphasized. And yes, the tech industry covets those H1B visas, but they are even more happy to hire US-based immigrants (less hassle and generally cheaper than imported engineering talent). This is the modern version of attracting "the best and the brightest," and yes it can be abused, but that could (with political will) be fixed.

    2. The "tax holiday" section was, in my view, oversimplified. There are other options apart from "crazy tax holiday for a while" and "no tax holiday at all," but they're not explored here (to be fair, this is already a long piece -- this probably should have been a series rather than a single editorial). Cook endorsed a proposal from Obama that would forget the temporary tax holiday (which, as proposed by Republicans, had no restrictions on what could be done with the money) and replace it with a permanent lowering of the rate to around 25 percent (from 35 percent), but with prohibitions on spending repatriated money for executive bonuses or dividends, and incentives to spend it on R&D, job creation, and infrastructure. Naturally, Congress never considered it. There are other proposals too, and a history of what happened the last time tax holidays were passed (tl;dr -- nothing good), and they certainly could have been examined in more detail and without any clear endorsement of one over the other (so again, this probably should have been a multi-part series of more-impartial looks at one topic at a time).

    3. There's no source for the claim that the HSR money will now be spent on building "rail in the middle of California" (ie away from the major cities). Other than that, this section is well-linked and accurately reflect's Trump and his administration's contradictory words vs. actions.

    4. The piece, particularly near the end, does not acknowledge any possibility that the Obama proposals might have been untenable or had the kind of unintended consequences Trump's proposals clearly do. They're just universally painted as always better, and perhaps they often were/are -- but you're not going to win over any Trump supporters with such a broad brush as "Obama's proposals always good (but stopped by Congress), and Trump's proposals always bad." I'd love it if Trump really followed up on his desire for more high-speed rail, but I doubt the current Congress is capable of passing any such proposal -- and apart from a vague desire, Trump has offered any proposals (and, as pointed out, has hurt one of the best such plans through inaction).
    redgeminipagatorguy
  • Reply 4 of 15
    Is it just me or does it feel like we've been shoved off to a ghetto so DED's article can appear without criticism?

    I'll be honest that I only read some of the top of the article because of my experience of what happens when DED wanders out of technology. When Kaiser cancelled his insurance just before major surgery, he went to the Department of Consumer Affairs and got his insurance back and surgery done. Hope he also went to the Department of Insurance to smack down Kaiser for post claims underwriting. I hope textbook writers will integrate his story since it's such a perfect example.
  • Reply 5 of 15
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 523member
    chasm said:
    A few hopefully constructive thoughts:

    3. There's no source for the claim that the HSR money will now be spent on building "rail in the middle of California" (ie away from the major cities). Other than that, this section is well-linked and accurately reflect's Trump and his administration's contradictory words vs. actions.

    4. The piece, particularly near the end, does not acknowledge any possibility that the Obama proposals might have been untenable or had the kind of unintended consequences Trump's proposals clearly do. They're just universally painted as always better, and perhaps they often were/are -- but you're not going to win over any Trump supporters with such a broad brush as "Obama's proposals always good (but stopped by Congress), and Trump's proposals always bad." I'd love it if Trump really followed up on his desire for more high-speed rail, but I doubt the current Congress is capable of passing any such proposal -- and apart from a vague desire, Trump has offered any proposals (and, as pointed out, has hurt one of the best such plans through inaction).
    What irks me the most about HSR in the U.S. is that the plans they are doing really aren't high speed.   Yes they are faster than current Amtrak trains but not nearly as fast as what they have in Europe and Japan.   They are developing a new train route from Miami to Orlando.    Unfortunately it's no faster than driving your car.   Even though I live in Florida would love for them to develop a Train line running 150 mph - 200 mph anywhere is the US whether LA to SF, LA to Vegas, Dallas to Houston, Dallas to Austin to San Antonio, Boston to NYC, NYC to Washington D.C., or NYC to Chicago.   Anything to get it off the ground and hopefully it will relieve congestion in the air and airports.
  • Reply 6 of 15
    DED just wants to feel like he's part of "The Resistance" and so he posts these screeds on here, but he's also easily triggered so he has to lock out comments so he can feel unopposed. It's pathetic, like most of his articles of late. 
    MetriacanthosaurusSpamSandwich
  • Reply 7 of 15
    I would appreciate if Daniel Eran Dilger stop making political editorials on technology. I am not interested in his views on what Trump is doing or Clinton would do. Keep it strictly technology.. It does not sound right to have editor mumbling his opinions while others are disable from responding to his editorial. He might be wrong in many parts, but that is not purpose of appleinsider. It is just inappropriate.
    It is beyond inappropriate. If it doesn't stop, I'm done with this site.

    Turning off comments is beyond pathetic.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 8 of 15

    DED just wants to feel like he's part of "The Resistance" and so he posts these screeds on here, but he's also easily triggered so he has to lock out comments so he can feel unopposed. It's pathetic, like most of his articles of late. 
    Except his articles that are strict examinations of Apple, competitors, and the tech media are brilliantly spot on. I enjoy those doses of reality thoroughly. Funny how he doesn't bring any of the same level of detail to his anti Trump nonsense.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 9 of 15
    I would appreciate if Daniel Eran Dilger stop making political editorials on technology. I am not interested in his views on what Trump is doing or Clinton would do. Keep it strictly technology.. It does not sound right to have editor mumbling his opinions while others are disable from responding to his editorial. He might be wrong in many parts, but that is not purpose of appleinsider. It is just inappropriate.
    It is beyond inappropriate. If it doesn't stop, I'm done with this site.

    Turning off comments is beyond pathetic.
    I didn't write the editorial. I'm making no comment on the political nature of it, but if you assume that everybody is liberal on staff, you'd be wrong.

    However, be done, if you're so inclined. If you're triggered by not having your own platform on the front page that you pay exactly nothing for, then so be it.

    Comments on politically charged articles on the front page are turned off, because they quickly, and pathetically, devolve into ad hominem attacks on staff and other forum-goers.
    edited February 23 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 10 of 15
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,913member
    chasm said:
    A few hopefully constructive thoughts:

    1. Because a lot of people confuse ANY immigration with ILLEGAL immigration, the fact that we are talking here about ONLY legal immigration should probably have been emphasized. And yes, the tech industry covets those H1B visas, but they are even more happy to hire US-based immigrants (less hassle and generally cheaper than imported engineering talent). This is the modern version of attracting "the best and the brightest," and yes it can be abused, but that could (with political will) be fixed.

    2. The "tax holiday" section was, in my view, oversimplified. There are other options apart from "crazy tax holiday for a while" and "no tax holiday at all," but they're not explored here (to be fair, this is already a long piece -- this probably should have been a series rather than a single editorial). Cook endorsed a proposal from Obama that would forget the temporary tax holiday (which, as proposed by Republicans, had no restrictions on what could be done with the money) and replace it with a permanent lowering of the rate to around 25 percent (from 35 percent), but with prohibitions on spending repatriated money for executive bonuses or dividends, and incentives to spend it on R&D, job creation, and infrastructure. Naturally, Congress never considered it. There are other proposals too, and a history of what happened the last time tax holidays were passed (tl;dr -- nothing good), and they certainly could have been examined in more detail and without any clear endorsement of one over the other (so again, this probably should have been a multi-part series of more-impartial looks at one topic at a time).

    3. There's no source for the claim that the HSR money will now be spent on building "rail in the middle of California" (ie away from the major cities). Other than that, this section is well-linked and accurately reflect's Trump and his administration's contradictory words vs. actions.

    4. The piece, particularly near the end, does not acknowledge any possibility that the Obama proposals might have been untenable or had the kind of unintended consequences Trump's proposals clearly do. They're just universally painted as always better, and perhaps they often were/are -- but you're not going to win over any Trump supporters with such a broad brush as "Obama's proposals always good (but stopped by Congress), and Trump's proposals always bad." I'd love it if Trump really followed up on his desire for more high-speed rail, but I doubt the current Congress is capable of passing any such proposal -- and apart from a vague desire, Trump has offered any proposals (and, as pointed out, has hurt one of the best such plans through inaction).
    To go a bit in reverse here and address the high speed rail proposals.    In a nut shell we don't need high speed rail, the country is too big for ti to really be viable.   What we need instead is more automated, off the streets, urban transportation.   That more than often means slow or slower than a high speed train anyways.   By slow i do mean faster than the average city bus but certainly not 200 MPH trains.   This needs to be new tech that migrates us away from pedestrian and automobile obstructing busses and other urban transportation systems.   We actually need a variety of systems in place to address the varying needs of the public.   One of the best example American cities I can think of is good old las Vegas which has in place many different systems to move people about be it mono rails, moving sidewalks trolley buses or whatever.   If you genuinely want to go where ether need is greatest its in more modern transportation systems for cities and medium sized communities.  Instead many places have fallen into a situation where the current systems are funded even if they aren't always economically sound, good for the environment or good for public safety.   You  would think that people would realize that running empty buses around in circles while pouring ugly diesel pollution into the air just doesn't make sense.  Yet this is what many cities are doing these days.

    For item #3, all the information you might want can be found here: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0554.   The problem is most of this money has nothing to do with high speed rail as it is commonly reared to in other parts of the world.   Most of the money is going to the maintenance and extension of existing trackage.   This isn't exactly a case of our government being honest about where ether high speed rial money is going to.   A lot of money is going to California but not all of it is specifically for """high speed""" rail.   Depending upon how you look at money allocation it does indeed look like a lot of money is going for projects in the middle of California.    Like the many dams in California we can count on half done and under engineered public construction projects.   Id be most happy so see the government fund a maglev train or other high speed solution, between any two cities but unfortunately this is not what we are getting out of our tax dollars.

    As for #2 a tax holiday kinda looks like the government giving into extortion.   On the flip side they simply are taxing off shore earnings by way too much.    I'd rather see a reasonable rate set and then provide for the power to prosecute companies that don't repatriate their earnings.  Frankly this is a situation where both sides are wrong but unfortunately Apple is more wrong then the government here.

    As for #1, most people are definitely not confusing legal immigration with illegal immigration.   We are in fact sick and tired of illegal immigration and the crime and violence it brings to this country.    There is a big difference and sadly your stamens here just blurs the reality of what people are objecting to.   H1B's are a different story as they are in fact being used to lower wages in this country simply by importing people that work at far lower wages than have been paid to domestic workers.   One thing that has become obvious to me is that there isn't lack of skilled people in this country, there is in fact a lack of people that want to give up their lives in exchange for a job.   The IT industry is especially bad here demanding 24/7 support, usually uncompensated because hey "you are a professional" .    This is just one of the horror of working IT.    H1B is all about the "industry" being able to place unrealistic demand upon their work forces.   By the way this isn't to imply that every company with an IT work force is an embarrassment to the community just that several large companies such as Disney have demonstrated clearly how H1B is being exploited.    What surprises me is how many people leave the world of IT because they end up hating it.    In any event I just see any reference to IT needs or demand for employees as being a bit bogus, actually the demands are complete bullshit.
  • Reply 11 of 15
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,913member


    DED just wants to feel like he's part of "The Resistance" and so he posts these screeds on here, but he's also easily triggered so he has to lock out comments so he can feel unopposed. It's pathetic, like most of his articles of late. 
    Except his articles that are strict examinations of Apple, competitors, and the tech media are brilliantly spot on. I enjoy those doses of reality thoroughly. Funny how he doesn't bring any of the same level of detail to his anti Trump nonsense.
    DED has demonstrated complete idiocy with regard to the way he biases his editorial content.   He has never been spot on, but rather crafts a high biased exposé that in most case has no redeeming value at all.   DED is a good example of fake news, he takes a few facts and then blinds people with prose so that they by into what ever he publishes even if a rational examination of the facts involved would lead one to conclude that DED is a complete bullshitter.   

    As for the anti Trump nonsense, this stuff in general just demonstrates how close this country came to a dictatorship if Clinton was elected.    The level of violence being directed against Trump is totally out of proportion to anything he has done in reality.   More so it demonstrates just how highly biased the media has been and frankly it isn't even being hidden anymore.   What people need to realize is that the democrats loss big time this election go around, in stead or resisting these idiots ought to examine why they loss and maybe learn something in the process.   It has a lot to do with where the country  was headed which certainly want the path of freedom.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 12 of 15
    I didn't read the article because I have little interest in the subject matter but this part of your post is pretty much summed up, and very well, what I've always thought:

    "DED has demonstrated complete idiocy with regard to the way he biases his editorial content.   He has never been spot on, but rather crafts a high biased exposé that in most case has no redeeming value at all.   DED is a good example of fake news, he takes a few facts and then blinds people with prose so that they by into what ever he publishes even if a rational examination of the facts involved would lead one to conclude that DED is a complete bullshitter."

    The last tech editorial on 'pundits' was an example. I knew what to expect (bias) before I read it so I read with my filters on full strength, but it was hard going. There were blatant misrepresentations of the facts and other questionable references.

    I tend to be very accommodating with editorial pieces as it's the opinion of the author and clearly marked as such. I really don't have issue with that but feel that such pieces ultimately lead to the author losing credibility.

    That said, I do think that DED has written some good tech articles worth bookmarking.The last one I remembered was on the different types of USB-C cables.

    On this political piece in particular, I would say that editorials in general usually represent, in a broad way, the overall thinking of the publication. If that is not the case, perhaps it would be better not to label it as an editorial and just post it as an opinion piece.

    Having comments turned off is possibly the first reason people show some resentment. It would be better to open a corresponding thread for comments in the appropriate sub forum and moderate in the usual fashion.


  • Reply 13 of 15
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,470member
    I somehow missed this editorial originally.  I can't believe AI would allow such a nakedly partisan and biased piece.  It's unprecedented for this site, which I've been visiting since January of 2000.  A ridiculous, uninformed, hyperventilating hit piece masquerading as a legitimate tech-sector opinion.  
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 14 of 15
    Where's the original highly partisan opinion piece by DED... or am I misinterpreting this post? Is it just a general criticism?
    edited February 24
  • Reply 15 of 15
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,470member
    Where's the original highly partisan opinion piece by DED... or am I misinterpreting this post? Is it just a general criticism?
    Its not here for some reason.  Found it after I found the thread, actually.  Don't feel like looking it up at the moment :)   
Sign In or Register to comment.