would it also be ok for Chinese companies to be held by chinese laws?
would you really like to be eating in plates made to chinese spec?
do you want your kids to play with toys made by chinese standards?
or would you rather they are held by US laws and not put lead in their paint for the toys
up to you
Once they export their products then the products must meet the standards of the importing country so your logic doesn't hold.
As far as the patent issue is concerned if it is a valid patent in China but infringes on a US patent then they can't export to the US. The product could only be used domestically. That is an issue for Apple though, as China is a huge market that they will have to compete in perhaps even against what we would call knock-offs.
well if it wasn't for china lending money to the US, and bankrolling its economy
the US might be very different than what you see around you now
Only if you ignore the real issues. China has billions to invest because they've manipulated foreign trade and artificially adjusted their currency exchange rate - causing their products to be far less expensive overseas and our products to be horrendously expensive there. Had they engaged in free trade, they wouldn't have the billions of dollars that they stole from us to buy back U.S. Treasury Bonds.
And that doesn't even factor in the differences in wage rates, health and safety laws, and environmental rules that they are not forced to comply with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist
Don't blame China for taking money from all the countries and corporations that use them.
blame the corporations that have sold out for bigger profit margins....
Simplistic and misleading. See above. As a business executive, you are forced to do what's best for your company. If you continued to produce a commodity product in the U.S. while your competitors imported theirs from China, you'd be out of business in no time.
It is possible to produce goods in the U.S., but it is becoming increasingly difficult due to compete.
The problem lies not with business but with a gutless U.S. government in the 1990s and early part of this century. 15 years ago, we could have forced the Chinese to play fair. Today, it's going to be much, much harder.
Around 1990-1995, the U.S. government should have insisted on floating currency and should have demanded reasonable working conditions and environmental rules - or a tariff to make up for the damage that China was doing to the environment and to level the playing field. If we had done that, we'd have several million more jobs in the U.S. today.
Only if you ignore the real issues. China has billions to invest because they've manipulated foreign trade and artificially adjusted their currency exchange rate - causing their products to be far less expensive overseas and our products to be horrendously expensive there. Had they engaged in free trade, they wouldn't have the billions of dollars that they stole from us to buy back U.S. Treasury Bonds.
And that doesn't even factor in the differences in wage rates, health and safety laws, and environmental rules that they are not forced to comply with.
Simplistic and misleading. See above. As a business executive, you are forced to do what's best for your company. If you continued to produce a commodity product in the U.S. while your competitors imported theirs from China, you'd be out of business in no time.
It is possible to produce goods in the U.S., but it is becoming increasingly difficult due to compete.
The problem lies not with business but with a gutless U.S. government in the 1990s and early part of this century. 15 years ago, we could have forced the Chinese to play fair. Today, it's going to be much, much harder.
Around 1990-1995, the U.S. government should have insisted on floating currency and should have demanded reasonable working conditions and environmental rules - or a tariff to make up for the damage that China was doing to the environment and to level the playing field. If we had done that, we'd have several million more jobs in the U.S. today.
It's not an either/or it's a combination of both though we lazily tend to place the blame in one place and only offer one possible solution.
There are many problems with the government, including giving breaks to companies that move jobs overseas and not raising tariffs on imported products.
There are just as many problems with the private sector and the greed that exists. The spread of wealth from top to bottom has grown by leaps and bounds to the point where the overwhelming majority of US households couldn't afford products if they were made in the US.
Only if you ignore the real issues. China has billions to invest because they've manipulated foreign trade and artificially adjusted their currency exchange rate - causing their products to be far less expensive overseas and our products to be horrendously expensive there. Had they engaged in free trade, they wouldn't have the billions of dollars that they stole from us to buy back U.S. Treasury Bonds.
And that doesn't even factor in the differences in wage rates, health and safety laws, and environmental rules that they are not forced to comply with.
Simplistic and misleading. See above. As a business executive, you are forced to do what's best for your company. If you continued to produce a commodity product in the U.S. while your competitors imported theirs from China, you'd be out of business in no time.
It is possible to produce goods in the U.S., but it is becoming increasingly difficult due to compete.
The problem lies not with business but with a gutless U.S. government in the 1990s and early part of this century. 15 years ago, we could have forced the Chinese to play fair. Today, it's going to be much, much harder.
Around 1990-1995, the U.S. government should have insisted on floating currency and should have demanded reasonable working conditions and environmental rules - or a tariff to make up for the damage that China was doing to the environment and to level the playing field. If we had done that, we'd have several million more jobs in the U.S. today.
you are very naive. who do you think pulls the governments strings? corporation money.
This case is just a further example of how the Chinese government is overstepping its boundaries once again. Apple is an American company and therefore should be able to produce by American laws.
Nothing easier than that. They just have to produce in the US. There they can do so under US legislation...
You my friend have NAILED it! Apple has no one to blame but itself for manufacturing their products in China.
The Chinese don't have many original ideas, they simply take what they learn from the global corporations that manufacture there and end up producing knock-offs.
It will only stop when the corporate greed does...
and become a world player in their own right.
Let's visit business 101: for a company to be profitable it must take in more than it spends to produce product. The cost of producing also includes staffing, management and the ability to attract highly qualified and talented people to be competitive with business competitors. From line workers to upper management. Now factor in the market. The market demand for your product determines your production rate and how many factories you need to build to produce. In this case, your factories are subject to local, state, and federal guidelines for everything from construction to operating conditions and waste output.
Then you must factor in labor overhead. Labor overhead is all costs other than wages and compensation that are related to labor. So when your union bargaining unit goes into your newly minted workplace, and tell your management that your laborers need one-hour of meal time and two quarter-hour breaks per scheduled eight hour shift, your productivity drops by 19% as a result - only 6.5 hours are actually used to produce product. If you are required to provide smoking access - the average smoker spending ten minutes of every working hour aside from the programmed breaks smoking, that increases the loss down to 5.5 hours of available work-time to produce. The bargaining unit also sets lower wage limits, and other compensation for its members - artificially raising the unit compensation without providing addition production capacity.
Once you have factored in all of these costs to produce in the US, which arguably has among the highest standards of living in the world by the way, factor in the impact of going public, or offering stock in the company. Your management is now longer in the business solely of making product, it is in the business of also making profits for it's shareholders. So the ability to make a competitive product at a price that the market will embrace and seek to buy a lot of your product, is hampered by the cost to produce said product together with enough profitability to satisfy shareholders who have invested their money in your company and want to see a return on investment.
So compare a US-based company trying to produce a competitively priced widget into a market but having to meet the obligations of regulation: labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, plus labor representation requirements, plus higher costs due to this same impact across transportation, utility, construction and waste management companies. Add in much higher competitive wages due to higher cost of living in order to attract highly motivated and talented people to manage the company. Then add in the impact of being publicly traded and having to generate enough profit to satisfy shareholders.
Compare that same US-based company to one based in another country - lower standard of living (significantly so in many cases), lower wage base, no collective bargaining units for laborers, lower or non-existent regulation for labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, and so on. Or better yet compare it to a US-based company that has off-shored all of its key labor requirements for manufacturing.
There are few effective ways to compete against such a competitor in the market at a price point that will ensure market attraction AND profitability. That's your corporate greed meme.
Let's visit business 101: for a company to be profitable it must take in more than it spends to produce product. The cost of producing also includes staffing, management and the ability to attract highly qualified and talented people to be competitive with business competitors. From line workers to upper management. Now factor in the market. The market demand for your product determines your production rate and how many factories you need to build to produce. In this case, your factories are subject to local, state, and federal guidelines for everything from construction to operating conditions and waste output.
Then you must factor in labor overhead. Labor overhead is all costs other than wages and compensation that are related to labor. So when your union bargaining unit goes into your newly minted workplace, and tell your management that your laborers need one-hour of meal time and two quarter-hour breaks per scheduled eight hour shift, your productivity drops by 19% as a result - only 6.5 hours are actually used to produce product. If you are required to provide smoking access - the average smoker spending ten minutes of every working hour aside from the programmed breaks smoking, that increases the loss down to 5.5 hours of available work-time to produce. The bargaining unit also sets lower wage limits, and other compensation for its members - artificially raising the unit compensation without providing addition production capacity.
Once you have factored in all of these costs to produce in the US, which arguably has among the highest standards of living in the world by the way, factor in the impact of going public, or offering stock in the company. Your management is now longer in the business solely of making product, it is in the business of also making profits for it's shareholders. So the ability to make a competitive product at a price that the market will embrace and seek to buy a lot of your product, is hampered by the cost to produce said product together with enough profitability to satisfy shareholders who have invested their money in your company and want to see a return on investment.
So compare a US-based company trying to produce a competitively priced widget into a market but having to meet the obligations of regulation: labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, plus labor representation requirements, plus higher costs due to this same impact across transportation, utility, construction and waste management companies. Add in much higher competitive wages due to higher cost of living in order to attract highly motivated and talented people to manage the company. Then add in the impact of being publicly traded and having to generate enough profit to satisfy shareholders.
Compare that same US-based company to one based in another country - lower standard of living (significantly so in many cases), lower wage base, no collective bargaining units for laborers, lower or non-existent regulation for labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, and so on. Or better yet compare it to a US-based company that has off-shored all of its key labor requirements for manufacturing.
There are few effective ways to compete against such a competitor in the market at a price point that will ensure market attraction AND profitability. That's your corporate greed meme.
Don't blame the unions and other costs of labor when your top executives are earning 300x what the bulk of the workforce is...
It used to be an average of 30x CEO to entry level...it's now 300x...what's wrong with that picture...
It's true, a Chinese military general invented the iPhone. He also invented 100s of movies and 1,000s CDs, which are produced in China under his license.
Luckily for you, Greece is in worse shape than Ireland.
Careful! From poverty & oppression terrorism is coerced. Now, who can we convince their being oppressed? (At least this century's terrorists have tans!)
Back on topic, are we really just talking about the enclosure? What about software? Surely there's a case for saying you purchase the device when switched off so the 'look' counts?
It seems almost futile to try to patent design anymore. You try to quantify the "look and feel" of the iPhone by describing its essential elements: rounded corners, etc., only to have tons of phones both in the U.S. and China blatantly created as virtual look-alikes. Instead of getting more technical by quantifying the radius of the rounded corners and their proportion to other dimensions, perhaps patent law should rely on the same standard the Supreme Court used years ago in defining pornography: you know it when you see it.
A panel of neutral parties can certainly look at an iPhone side by side with any number of virtual clones and say, "Yep, that's copying"--an intent to make a product that looks so much like another that a casual, non-expert viewer would easily mistake one for the other.
Comments
I would say China is already the worlds biggest problem.
Actually, I would rate the US the worlds number one problem followed by radical Islamic fundamentalism followed by China.
would it also be ok for Chinese companies to be held by chinese laws?
would you really like to be eating in plates made to chinese spec?
do you want your kids to play with toys made by chinese standards?
or would you rather they are held by US laws and not put lead in their paint for the toys
up to you
Once they export their products then the products must meet the standards of the importing country so your logic doesn't hold.
As far as the patent issue is concerned if it is a valid patent in China but infringes on a US patent then they can't export to the US. The product could only be used domestically. That is an issue for Apple though, as China is a huge market that they will have to compete in perhaps even against what we would call knock-offs.
well if it wasn't for china lending money to the US, and bankrolling its economy
the US might be very different than what you see around you now
Only if you ignore the real issues. China has billions to invest because they've manipulated foreign trade and artificially adjusted their currency exchange rate - causing their products to be far less expensive overseas and our products to be horrendously expensive there. Had they engaged in free trade, they wouldn't have the billions of dollars that they stole from us to buy back U.S. Treasury Bonds.
And that doesn't even factor in the differences in wage rates, health and safety laws, and environmental rules that they are not forced to comply with.
Don't blame China for taking money from all the countries and corporations that use them.
blame the corporations that have sold out for bigger profit margins....
Simplistic and misleading. See above. As a business executive, you are forced to do what's best for your company. If you continued to produce a commodity product in the U.S. while your competitors imported theirs from China, you'd be out of business in no time.
It is possible to produce goods in the U.S., but it is becoming increasingly difficult due to compete.
The problem lies not with business but with a gutless U.S. government in the 1990s and early part of this century. 15 years ago, we could have forced the Chinese to play fair. Today, it's going to be much, much harder.
Around 1990-1995, the U.S. government should have insisted on floating currency and should have demanded reasonable working conditions and environmental rules - or a tariff to make up for the damage that China was doing to the environment and to level the playing field. If we had done that, we'd have several million more jobs in the U.S. today.
Only if you ignore the real issues. China has billions to invest because they've manipulated foreign trade and artificially adjusted their currency exchange rate - causing their products to be far less expensive overseas and our products to be horrendously expensive there. Had they engaged in free trade, they wouldn't have the billions of dollars that they stole from us to buy back U.S. Treasury Bonds.
And that doesn't even factor in the differences in wage rates, health and safety laws, and environmental rules that they are not forced to comply with.
Simplistic and misleading. See above. As a business executive, you are forced to do what's best for your company. If you continued to produce a commodity product in the U.S. while your competitors imported theirs from China, you'd be out of business in no time.
It is possible to produce goods in the U.S., but it is becoming increasingly difficult due to compete.
The problem lies not with business but with a gutless U.S. government in the 1990s and early part of this century. 15 years ago, we could have forced the Chinese to play fair. Today, it's going to be much, much harder.
Around 1990-1995, the U.S. government should have insisted on floating currency and should have demanded reasonable working conditions and environmental rules - or a tariff to make up for the damage that China was doing to the environment and to level the playing field. If we had done that, we'd have several million more jobs in the U.S. today.
It's not an either/or it's a combination of both though we lazily tend to place the blame in one place and only offer one possible solution.
There are many problems with the government, including giving breaks to companies that move jobs overseas and not raising tariffs on imported products.
There are just as many problems with the private sector and the greed that exists. The spread of wealth from top to bottom has grown by leaps and bounds to the point where the overwhelming majority of US households couldn't afford products if they were made in the US.
Only if you ignore the real issues. China has billions to invest because they've manipulated foreign trade and artificially adjusted their currency exchange rate - causing their products to be far less expensive overseas and our products to be horrendously expensive there. Had they engaged in free trade, they wouldn't have the billions of dollars that they stole from us to buy back U.S. Treasury Bonds.
And that doesn't even factor in the differences in wage rates, health and safety laws, and environmental rules that they are not forced to comply with.
Simplistic and misleading. See above. As a business executive, you are forced to do what's best for your company. If you continued to produce a commodity product in the U.S. while your competitors imported theirs from China, you'd be out of business in no time.
It is possible to produce goods in the U.S., but it is becoming increasingly difficult due to compete.
The problem lies not with business but with a gutless U.S. government in the 1990s and early part of this century. 15 years ago, we could have forced the Chinese to play fair. Today, it's going to be much, much harder.
Around 1990-1995, the U.S. government should have insisted on floating currency and should have demanded reasonable working conditions and environmental rules - or a tariff to make up for the damage that China was doing to the environment and to level the playing field. If we had done that, we'd have several million more jobs in the U.S. today.
you are very naive. who do you think pulls the governments strings? corporation money.
This case is just a further example of how the Chinese government is overstepping its boundaries once again. Apple is an American company and therefore should be able to produce by American laws.
Nothing easier than that. They just have to produce in the US. There they can do so under US legislation...
Time to switch all manufacturing of all Apple products to India I think. Surely Apple has enough money to build the requisite factories.
If you're going to build factories you are best off in the US as a means of getting tax incentives like the Big Oil Companies to do so.
Time to switch all manufacturing of all Apple products to India I think. Surely Apple has enough money to build the requisite factories.
Oh god no. Don't even think that.
You my friend have NAILED it! Apple has no one to blame but itself for manufacturing their products in China.
The Chinese don't have many original ideas, they simply take what they learn from the global corporations that manufacture there and end up producing knock-offs.
It will only stop when the corporate greed does...
and become a world player in their own right.
Let's visit business 101: for a company to be profitable it must take in more than it spends to produce product. The cost of producing also includes staffing, management and the ability to attract highly qualified and talented people to be competitive with business competitors. From line workers to upper management. Now factor in the market. The market demand for your product determines your production rate and how many factories you need to build to produce. In this case, your factories are subject to local, state, and federal guidelines for everything from construction to operating conditions and waste output.
Then you must factor in labor overhead. Labor overhead is all costs other than wages and compensation that are related to labor. So when your union bargaining unit goes into your newly minted workplace, and tell your management that your laborers need one-hour of meal time and two quarter-hour breaks per scheduled eight hour shift, your productivity drops by 19% as a result - only 6.5 hours are actually used to produce product. If you are required to provide smoking access - the average smoker spending ten minutes of every working hour aside from the programmed breaks smoking, that increases the loss down to 5.5 hours of available work-time to produce. The bargaining unit also sets lower wage limits, and other compensation for its members - artificially raising the unit compensation without providing addition production capacity.
Once you have factored in all of these costs to produce in the US, which arguably has among the highest standards of living in the world by the way, factor in the impact of going public, or offering stock in the company. Your management is now longer in the business solely of making product, it is in the business of also making profits for it's shareholders. So the ability to make a competitive product at a price that the market will embrace and seek to buy a lot of your product, is hampered by the cost to produce said product together with enough profitability to satisfy shareholders who have invested their money in your company and want to see a return on investment.
So compare a US-based company trying to produce a competitively priced widget into a market but having to meet the obligations of regulation: labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, plus labor representation requirements, plus higher costs due to this same impact across transportation, utility, construction and waste management companies. Add in much higher competitive wages due to higher cost of living in order to attract highly motivated and talented people to manage the company. Then add in the impact of being publicly traded and having to generate enough profit to satisfy shareholders.
Compare that same US-based company to one based in another country - lower standard of living (significantly so in many cases), lower wage base, no collective bargaining units for laborers, lower or non-existent regulation for labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, and so on. Or better yet compare it to a US-based company that has off-shored all of its key labor requirements for manufacturing.
There are few effective ways to compete against such a competitor in the market at a price point that will ensure market attraction AND profitability. That's your corporate greed meme.
and become a world player in their own right.
Let's visit business 101: for a company to be profitable it must take in more than it spends to produce product. The cost of producing also includes staffing, management and the ability to attract highly qualified and talented people to be competitive with business competitors. From line workers to upper management. Now factor in the market. The market demand for your product determines your production rate and how many factories you need to build to produce. In this case, your factories are subject to local, state, and federal guidelines for everything from construction to operating conditions and waste output.
Then you must factor in labor overhead. Labor overhead is all costs other than wages and compensation that are related to labor. So when your union bargaining unit goes into your newly minted workplace, and tell your management that your laborers need one-hour of meal time and two quarter-hour breaks per scheduled eight hour shift, your productivity drops by 19% as a result - only 6.5 hours are actually used to produce product. If you are required to provide smoking access - the average smoker spending ten minutes of every working hour aside from the programmed breaks smoking, that increases the loss down to 5.5 hours of available work-time to produce. The bargaining unit also sets lower wage limits, and other compensation for its members - artificially raising the unit compensation without providing addition production capacity.
Once you have factored in all of these costs to produce in the US, which arguably has among the highest standards of living in the world by the way, factor in the impact of going public, or offering stock in the company. Your management is now longer in the business solely of making product, it is in the business of also making profits for it's shareholders. So the ability to make a competitive product at a price that the market will embrace and seek to buy a lot of your product, is hampered by the cost to produce said product together with enough profitability to satisfy shareholders who have invested their money in your company and want to see a return on investment.
So compare a US-based company trying to produce a competitively priced widget into a market but having to meet the obligations of regulation: labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, plus labor representation requirements, plus higher costs due to this same impact across transportation, utility, construction and waste management companies. Add in much higher competitive wages due to higher cost of living in order to attract highly motivated and talented people to manage the company. Then add in the impact of being publicly traded and having to generate enough profit to satisfy shareholders.
Compare that same US-based company to one based in another country - lower standard of living (significantly so in many cases), lower wage base, no collective bargaining units for laborers, lower or non-existent regulation for labor, construction, waste management, working conditions, and so on. Or better yet compare it to a US-based company that has off-shored all of its key labor requirements for manufacturing.
There are few effective ways to compete against such a competitor in the market at a price point that will ensure market attraction AND profitability. That's your corporate greed meme.
Don't blame the unions and other costs of labor when your top executives are earning 300x what the bulk of the workforce is...
It used to be an average of 30x CEO to entry level...it's now 300x...what's wrong with that picture...
Actually, I would rate the US the worlds number one problem followed by radical Islamic fundamentalism followed by China.
Luckily for you, Greece is in worse shape than Ireland.
Luckily for you, Greece is in worse shape than Ireland.
I can't tell you how comforting that is to hear. Hark! is that Johnny Nash singing "I can see clearly now" I hear?
Damn it was just another commercial offering cut price one-way air fares.
Luckily for you, Greece is in worse shape than Ireland.
Careful! From poverty & oppression terrorism is coerced. Now, who can we convince their being oppressed? (At least this century's terrorists have tans!)
Back on topic, are we really just talking about the enclosure? What about software? Surely there's a case for saying you purchase the device when switched off so the 'look' counts?
McD
A panel of neutral parties can certainly look at an iPhone side by side with any number of virtual clones and say, "Yep, that's copying"--an intent to make a product that looks so much like another that a casual, non-expert viewer would easily mistake one for the other.
Careful! From poverty & oppression terrorism is coerced.
But there also seem to be an awful lot of engineering students, doctors, and other privileged folk among the current crop of fanatics.
Time to switch all manufacturing of all Apple products to India I think. Surely Apple has enough money to build the requisite factories.
i would say, time to switc all manufacturing of all Apple product to the US, i think.
Surely Apple has enough money to build the requisite factories.