The answer is for people to stop trying to dictate working conditions in other countries. If they were consistent about that, they'd criticize the US for not giving a year of paid maternity leave (like Canada) or for not giving as much vacation and the short work week of European countries.
How do small businesses handle this? Your employee leaves for one year, so you have to hire someone else and pay for their training to replace them. Then a year later the first employee returns, what does the small business do to the temporary worker who has been there for a year? I understand that the Employment Insurance pays for the maternity leave but how is the business owner and the temporary worker compensated?
Actually, we kind of do know what we're doing. There is such a thing as repetitive stress injury (RSI) that will occur if these people continue to work assembly lines 60+ hours/week. If you want your iPhone so cheap that you want workers in another country maimed for life, you are sub-human. There is nothing whatsoever stupid about cutting their time to 49 hours a week. Oh, and by the way, 49 hours/week is the law there. So your objection about westerners not knowing about eastern cultures falls badly flat. Grow up and learn something.
We all need to grow up and learn that we cannot think for ourselves and that big government and the elitists will take care of us, right?
Have you ever worked in China? Ever visited there? Ever seen how iPhones are assembled?
If Foxconn would give all of its workers a hoodie with an Apple logo on it, then they will quickly get over this stupid idea that working hard will allow them and their families to live a better life.
Perfect. Ignorant and arrogant westerners trying to tell the rest of the world how they should live. It is truly amazing how little we know and understand about other countries and cultures. Stupidity abounds. Oh, but it's for their own good don't you know.
The complaint raised now is that the workers won't make enough money if their hours are cut so this leads to the following:
Problem 1: workers are overworked because they are underpaid
Solution 1: workers have their working time cut
Problem 2: workers might not make enough money because they are still underpaid
Solution 2: the workers are paid more
As discussed many times, Apple alone could double the salary of each low-level worker by charging a mere $5 on top of the price of just the iPad or Apple could absorb that cost into their margins. Just because Chinese workers accept that they have no rights to demand higher pay doesn't mean that we should accept that too when have more than enough resources of our own to ensure it happens.
The complaint raised now is that the workers won't make enough money if their hours are cut so this leads to the following:
Problem 1: workers are overworked because they are underpaid
Solution 1: workers have their working time cut
Problem 2: workers might not make enough money because they are still underpaid
Solution 2: the workers are paid more
As discussed many times, Apple alone could double the salary of each low-level worker by charging a mere $5 on top of the price of just the iPad or Apple could absorb that cost into their margins. Just because Chinese workers accept that they have no rights to demand higher pay doesn't mean that we should accept that too when have more than enough resources of our own to ensure it happens.
Why don't you just say that FreeRange is right, instead of demonstrating it!
Heard about capital costs, investments, technology obsolescence etc etc ?
Do you have a comprehension problem?
I am simply talking about the wages... get it wages?
Do you think that people working overtime don't use their prorated share of "....capital, investments, technology obsolescence.... " (I think you mean "depreciation", but whatever).
Or hourly. Yes, that works too for what I want saying.
Essentially, I meant "wages" as variable costs (which could be a function of the amount of time worked or the amount produced, although the two are highly correlated).
I am simply talking about the wages... get it wages?
Do you think that people working overtime don't use their prorated share of "....capital, investments, technology obsolescence.... " (I think you mean "depreciation", but whatever).
Lots of things I do not comprehend, but the difference between wages, total cost, and for that matter price is not one of them.
It doesn't work like that. Overtime is considerably cheaper than hiring/training/benefits/etc. for an additional employee.
It does work like that for Apple.
Apple only pays Foxconn for the direct labor in the product.
For Foxconn, it may or may not be the case that the $1.75/hour includes some amortization of fixed costs of the type you're mentioning, although I'd bet it does.
In any event, as I said, it is only true if overtime work costs more per hour than regular work.
We must be careful to not think that our view of what's fair is not subject to question.
Where we see 'harsh working conditions' others see hope for a better life.
Remember, people line up to work at these factories like we line up to buy the products.
P.S. Are we considering Apple's supply chain working conditions relative to those of Samsung and others? Or are people just trying to gain some fame by riding Apple's coattails.
Here's a likely outcome: Apple's costs may actually fall, since there is less overtime (which is usually paid at >1x of standard wages)!
Ah, the irony.
The unintended consequences that do-gooders leave behind never ceases to amaze me....
I think the wages in China issue will fade because of the planned increase of robotic assembly and those remaining high wage labor issues will be diffused thanks to planned use of non-China labor. See... problem solved. When labor became the sticking point, Foxconn will now simply use less labor.
one thing... one BILLION seconds in 32 years.. 15 TRILLION dollars debt (15 million million). that is not counting the deficit...
so lets make the 1% percenters pay!... only approx 312,500 dollars a year, for 32 years by 1.5 MILLION people. (and that is not counting the interest rate which will most likely double the debt, meaning that will only pay off half of it).
just beware the 1% percenters do not have the means to pay off the debt or deficit... meaning the government coming after you... collectting 2.5 TRILLION dollars a year in taxes, when you need 4 TRILLION just to balance the budget or pay off the debt via cuts to spending. IMO
so this is not a government problem it is YOUR PROBLEM, the money comes from you... if the median salary is about 25366 a year (half make more, and half make less) where are the taxes coming from?... from a tax system similiar to canada... at least 8 percent federal sales tax, and greater business taxes and or federal taxes... does not matter where it is coming from you will pay more for less services.
TL;DR... i do not know the solution, but it is impossible for taxes NOT to increase in the USA... (in Canada they are already quite high..)
The US has already one of the most progressive tax system in the world. The top 1% pay something like 40% of all federal income taxes; the top 10% pay close to 70% while the bottom 50% pay almost nothing - but receive the majority of social welfare benefits (excluding interstate roads). So your class warfare rhetoric has no basis. Sure, the gov't welfare (for the banking, agri, special interests) is a major contributing factor to the wealth inequality; but that's what you get when you have a big gov't.
so can we please let it go? It's not China or Foxconn's (or even Apple's) fault that US is so screwed up.
If the tax revenue goes up, the gov't will spend it just as fast - likewise, the national debt hasn't decreased since 1957.
Apple only pays Foxconn for the direct labor in the product.
For Foxconn, it may or may not be the case that the $1.75/hour includes some amortization of fixed costs of the type you're mentioning, although I'd bet it does.
In any event, as I said, it is only true if overtime work costs more per hour than regular work.
Overtime salary in my experience is always higher than regular work (and should be), but will reduce the gross hourly rate because most other expenses do not increase or increases less as working hours (from a fixed amount of workers) increase. This would probably to a greater extent be true in China than in US because the Chinese wage level is low, but still Chinese industry has to pay international prices for production equipment.
No, it's the truth. First we got Reagan's record setting deficits that damaged the economy for years. Then Bush Jr. Comes along and almost destroys the economy with his, and a war that we never should have had. No matter what we do, it will take 20 years to work ourselves out of that one.
Interestingly, it's a voter issue, not a political party issue. Both Republicans and Democrats have looted the taxpayers as they have traded power for decades, but the reason is that politicians gain power by making unrealistic promises, then forcing powerless groups of people to pay for the undeserved wants and needs of other people. That's politics. That's government. Both parties are an illusion. The end result is that taxpayers get soaked because of competing interests.
They lied about Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction and chemical agents. All lies. Had we known the truth we would not have gone along with that cluster fk of a war. As soon as we pull out of those countries they will return to exactly what they were before if not worse. The US should learn to stay out of other countries and keep other countries' citizens from residing here or studying in our universities.
ok, but the moderator's point is that the decision to go after Iraq had backing of both liberals and conservatives. Contrary to popular belief, most liberals aren't even anti-war. Folks like Sanders, Grayson, Paul are fringe figures in their own party.
Overtime salary in my experience is always higher than regular work (and should be), but will reduce the gross hourly rate because most other expenses do not increase or increases less as working hours increase. This would probably to a greater extent be true in China than in US because the Chinese wage level is low, but still Chinese industry has to pay international prices for production equipment.
I think you're still evading my question.
Maybe I was not stating it well. So I'll ask it differently.
Assume that 3 hours of labor and 2 units of initial capital (e.g., time on a machine tool) are required to produce 1 widget. Assume that 'standard' labor costs $5/hour, overtime labor (which, you agree, should generally cost more) costs $6/hour, and one unit of capital costs $10.
Total cost of producing 1 widget if standard labor is used? 3*5 + 2*10 = $35.
Total cost of producing 1 widget if 2 hours of standard labor and one hour overtime is used? 2* 5 + 1*6 + 2*10 = $36.
The complaint raised now is that the workers won't make enough money if their hours are cut so this leads to the following:
Problem 1: workers are overworked because they are underpaid
Solution 1: workers have their working time cut
Problem 2: workers might not make enough money because they are still underpaid
Solution 2: the workers are paid more
As discussed many times, Apple alone could double the salary of each low-level worker by charging a mere $5 on top of the price of just the iPad or Apple could absorb that cost into their margins. Just because Chinese workers accept that they have no rights to demand higher pay doesn't mean that we should accept that too when have more than enough resources of our own to ensure it happens.
Workers are paid a competitive wage based on market conditions, unless wages are inflated due to regulations or government interference.
ok, but the moderator's point is that the decision to go after Iraq had backing of both liberals and conservatives. Contrary to popular belief, most liberals aren't even anti-war. Folks like Sanders, Grayson, Paul are fringe figures in their own party.
The decision to invade Afghanistan was bipartisan, I don't remember the Iraq invasion being completely supported by both "sides".
Comments
The answer is for people to stop trying to dictate working conditions in other countries. If they were consistent about that, they'd criticize the US for not giving a year of paid maternity leave (like Canada) or for not giving as much vacation and the short work week of European countries.
How do small businesses handle this? Your employee leaves for one year, so you have to hire someone else and pay for their training to replace them. Then a year later the first employee returns, what does the small business do to the temporary worker who has been there for a year? I understand that the Employment Insurance pays for the maternity leave but how is the business owner and the temporary worker compensated?
Actually, we kind of do know what we're doing. There is such a thing as repetitive stress injury (RSI) that will occur if these people continue to work assembly lines 60+ hours/week. If you want your iPhone so cheap that you want workers in another country maimed for life, you are sub-human. There is nothing whatsoever stupid about cutting their time to 49 hours a week. Oh, and by the way, 49 hours/week is the law there. So your objection about westerners not knowing about eastern cultures falls badly flat. Grow up and learn something.
We all need to grow up and learn that we cannot think for ourselves and that big government and the elitists will take care of us, right?
Have you ever worked in China? Ever visited there? Ever seen how iPhones are assembled?
If Foxconn would give all of its workers a hoodie with an Apple logo on it, then they will quickly get over this stupid idea that working hard will allow them and their families to live a better life.
Thanks so much for setting us all straight.
Perfect. Ignorant and arrogant westerners trying to tell the rest of the world how they should live. It is truly amazing how little we know and understand about other countries and cultures. Stupidity abounds. Oh, but it's for their own good don't you know.
The complaint raised now is that the workers won't make enough money if their hours are cut so this leads to the following:
Problem 1: workers are overworked because they are underpaid
Solution 1: workers have their working time cut
Problem 2: workers might not make enough money because they are still underpaid
Solution 2: the workers are paid more
As discussed many times, Apple alone could double the salary of each low-level worker by charging a mere $5 on top of the price of just the iPad or Apple could absorb that cost into their margins. Just because Chinese workers accept that they have no rights to demand higher pay doesn't mean that we should accept that too when have more than enough resources of our own to ensure it happens.
The complaint raised now is that the workers won't make enough money if their hours are cut so this leads to the following:
Problem 1: workers are overworked because they are underpaid
Solution 1: workers have their working time cut
Problem 2: workers might not make enough money because they are still underpaid
Solution 2: the workers are paid more
As discussed many times, Apple alone could double the salary of each low-level worker by charging a mere $5 on top of the price of just the iPad or Apple could absorb that cost into their margins. Just because Chinese workers accept that they have no rights to demand higher pay doesn't mean that we should accept that too when have more than enough resources of our own to ensure it happens.
Why don't you just say that FreeRange is right, instead of demonstrating it!
Heard about capital costs, investments, technology obsolescence etc etc ?
Do you have a comprehension problem?
I am simply talking about the wages... get it wages?
Do you think that people working overtime don't use their prorated share of "....capital, investments, technology obsolescence.... " (I think you mean "depreciation", but whatever).
It's hourly wages.
Or hourly. Yes, that works too for what I want saying.
Essentially, I meant "wages" as variable costs (which could be a function of the amount of time worked or the amount produced, although the two are highly correlated).
Do you have a comprehension problem?
I am simply talking about the wages... get it wages?
Do you think that people working overtime don't use their prorated share of "....capital, investments, technology obsolescence.... " (I think you mean "depreciation", but whatever).
Lots of things I do not comprehend, but the difference between wages, total cost, and for that matter price is not one of them.
It doesn't work like that. Overtime is considerably cheaper than hiring/training/benefits/etc. for an additional employee.
It does work like that for Apple.
Apple only pays Foxconn for the direct labor in the product.
For Foxconn, it may or may not be the case that the $1.75/hour includes some amortization of fixed costs of the type you're mentioning, although I'd bet it does.
In any event, as I said, it is only true if overtime work costs more per hour than regular work.
Lots of things I do not comprehend, but the difference between wages, total cost, and for that matter price is not one of them.
Then explain how regular wages can involve a "capital charge" but overtime wages would not?
Simply asserting something something because you say you "....comprehend... the difference between wages, total cost..." is not an argument.
amen! why don't we just raise prices on all goods manufactured outside U.S. so those idiots concerned about working conditions abroad are happy.
...or NOT.
Where we see 'harsh working conditions' others see hope for a better life.
Remember, people line up to work at these factories like we line up to buy the products.
P.S. Are we considering Apple's supply chain working conditions relative to those of Samsung and others? Or are people just trying to gain some fame by riding Apple's coattails.
Here's a likely outcome: Apple's costs may actually fall, since there is less overtime (which is usually paid at >1x of standard wages)!
Ah, the irony.
The unintended consequences that do-gooders leave behind never ceases to amaze me....
I think the wages in China issue will fade because of the planned increase of robotic assembly and those remaining high wage labor issues will be diffused thanks to planned use of non-China labor. See... problem solved.
one thing... one BILLION seconds in 32 years.. 15 TRILLION dollars debt (15 million million). that is not counting the deficit...
so lets make the 1% percenters pay!... only approx 312,500 dollars a year, for 32 years by 1.5 MILLION people. (and that is not counting the interest rate which will most likely double the debt, meaning that will only pay off half of it).
just beware the 1% percenters do not have the means to pay off the debt or deficit... meaning the government coming after you... collectting 2.5 TRILLION dollars a year in taxes, when you need 4 TRILLION just to balance the budget or pay off the debt via cuts to spending. IMO
so this is not a government problem it is YOUR PROBLEM, the money comes from you... if the median salary is about 25366 a year (half make more, and half make less) where are the taxes coming from?... from a tax system similiar to canada... at least 8 percent federal sales tax, and greater business taxes and or federal taxes... does not matter where it is coming from you will pay more for less services.
TL;DR... i do not know the solution, but it is impossible for taxes NOT to increase in the USA... (in Canada they are already quite high..)
The US has already one of the most progressive tax system in the world. The top 1% pay something like 40% of all federal income taxes; the top 10% pay close to 70% while the bottom 50% pay almost nothing - but receive the majority of social welfare benefits (excluding interstate roads). So your class warfare rhetoric has no basis. Sure, the gov't welfare (for the banking, agri, special interests) is a major contributing factor to the wealth inequality; but that's what you get when you have a big gov't.
so can we please let it go? It's not China or Foxconn's (or even Apple's) fault that US is so screwed up.
If the tax revenue goes up, the gov't will spend it just as fast - likewise, the national debt hasn't decreased since 1957.
It does work like that for Apple.
Apple only pays Foxconn for the direct labor in the product.
For Foxconn, it may or may not be the case that the $1.75/hour includes some amortization of fixed costs of the type you're mentioning, although I'd bet it does.
In any event, as I said, it is only true if overtime work costs more per hour than regular work.
Overtime salary in my experience is always higher than regular work (and should be), but will reduce the gross hourly rate because most other expenses do not increase or increases less as working hours (from a fixed amount of workers) increase. This would probably to a greater extent be true in China than in US because the Chinese wage level is low, but still Chinese industry has to pay international prices for production equipment.
No, it's the truth. First we got Reagan's record setting deficits that damaged the economy for years. Then Bush Jr. Comes along and almost destroys the economy with his, and a war that we never should have had. No matter what we do, it will take 20 years to work ourselves out of that one.
Interestingly, it's a voter issue, not a political party issue. Both Republicans and Democrats have looted the taxpayers as they have traded power for decades, but the reason is that politicians gain power by making unrealistic promises, then forcing powerless groups of people to pay for the undeserved wants and needs of other people. That's politics. That's government. Both parties are an illusion. The end result is that taxpayers get soaked because of competing interests.
They lied about Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction and chemical agents. All lies. Had we known the truth we would not have gone along with that cluster fk of a war. As soon as we pull out of those countries they will return to exactly what they were before if not worse. The US should learn to stay out of other countries and keep other countries' citizens from residing here or studying in our universities.
ok, but the moderator's point is that the decision to go after Iraq had backing of both liberals and conservatives. Contrary to popular belief, most liberals aren't even anti-war. Folks like Sanders, Grayson, Paul are fringe figures in their own party.
Overtime salary in my experience is always higher than regular work (and should be), but will reduce the gross hourly rate because most other expenses do not increase or increases less as working hours increase. This would probably to a greater extent be true in China than in US because the Chinese wage level is low, but still Chinese industry has to pay international prices for production equipment.
I think you're still evading my question.
Maybe I was not stating it well. So I'll ask it differently.
Assume that 3 hours of labor and 2 units of initial capital (e.g., time on a machine tool) are required to produce 1 widget. Assume that 'standard' labor costs $5/hour, overtime labor (which, you agree, should generally cost more) costs $6/hour, and one unit of capital costs $10.
Total cost of producing 1 widget if standard labor is used? 3*5 + 2*10 = $35.
Total cost of producing 1 widget if 2 hours of standard labor and one hour overtime is used? 2* 5 + 1*6 + 2*10 = $36.
Explain your argument?
The complaint raised now is that the workers won't make enough money if their hours are cut so this leads to the following:
Problem 1: workers are overworked because they are underpaid
Solution 1: workers have their working time cut
Problem 2: workers might not make enough money because they are still underpaid
Solution 2: the workers are paid more
As discussed many times, Apple alone could double the salary of each low-level worker by charging a mere $5 on top of the price of just the iPad or Apple could absorb that cost into their margins. Just because Chinese workers accept that they have no rights to demand higher pay doesn't mean that we should accept that too when have more than enough resources of our own to ensure it happens.
Workers are paid a competitive wage based on market conditions, unless wages are inflated due to regulations or government interference.
ok, but the moderator's point is that the decision to go after Iraq had backing of both liberals and conservatives. Contrary to popular belief, most liberals aren't even anti-war. Folks like Sanders, Grayson, Paul are fringe figures in their own party.
The decision to invade Afghanistan was bipartisan, I don't remember the Iraq invasion being completely supported by both "sides".
The decision to invade Afghanistan was bipartisan, I don't remember the Iraq invasion being completely supported by both "sides".
Yes, it was. And it was done without the Congress ever formally "declaring war" (which, under the US Constitution, they are required to do).