Apple's new iPad constrained by Retina display supply, 'sound labor practices'

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 64
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrstep View Post


    Giving a tractor - it's a fantastic thing to do. Crap, did we forget fuel, parts, technicians, training, and land use practices to go with it?



    Anyway, my biggest concern here is that iPad supply constraints leave the door wide open for ChromeOS to take over.



    No doubt made in the Chinese factories that no-one gives a damn about, giving the very quiet (on this particular subject) companies a bit of a competitive edge over Apple..
  • Reply 22 of 64
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,597member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Eideard

    ...ivory tower investigators ...paper whiners



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JollyPaul View Post


    You are against workplace regulation. We get it.



    No. He's agains moronic policies generated by a bunch of ignorant and arrogant Americans. Are you even aware that there are NO LEGAL RESTRICTIONS on hours worked in the US? And NO restrictions on MANDATORY overtime in the US? What a bunch of hypocrites we are. The overwhelming majority of Americans have absolutely no clue what work conditions are like at Foxconn, what the social and economic needs are of Chinese workers, or even what a factory job is like in the US. I've worked in an auto plant and a steel mill - while I was at the auto plant for several months we had MANDATORY 7 day work weeks with 10 hour days! And my job at the steel mills was working on top of the ovens, a far worse and more dangerous job than what these workers are experiencing - and I would even work double shifts at the mills (16 hours straight) to make extra money. Shame on these Chinese workers for wanting to work overtime! But oh yeah, we know what's best for them don't we... To hell with their need to make extra money to support their mostly poor rural families back home, and for trying to improve their lives at factories that already pay ABOVE prevailing wages.
  • Reply 23 of 64
    tooltalktooltalk Posts: 766member
    What? I thought Apple can pick and choose any supplier for their retina display. After all, Samsung is like Foxconn that leverages unskilled workers to assemble displays *created* & *engineered* by Apple, though their manufactring process is somewhat more automated.
  • Reply 24 of 64
    jollypauljollypaul Posts: 328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    You sound like you shoud be familiar with that.



    If you live in an industrialized democracy you enjoy protections hard won by people like those you demonize. No amount of baseless personal attacks on me will change those facts.



    But why all the rage? Apple made clear they support worker protections. I don't see anyone screaming to give up their own protections. Why does it anger you so much that someone else may gain what you already have?
  • Reply 25 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JollyPaul View Post


    But why all the rage? Apple made clear they support worker protections. I don't see anyone screaming to give up their own protections. Why does it anger you so much that someone else may gain what you already have?



    What proportion of your paycheck do you send to Foxconn workers?



    If it's zero -- I am going to go out on a limb, and guess it is -- I humbly submit that you're a hypocrite.
  • Reply 26 of 64
    tooltalktooltalk Posts: 766member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Granmastak View Post


    Nice! Shows that those elitists claiming to care about the poor and disenfranchised have no clue and don't even ask those who they are supposed to be protecting what is actually good for them.



    That's why top-down socialism never works. Those elites in the top starve the bottom 99.99% in the name of fairness and equality. That's precisely what happened to Mao's China almost three generations ago.
  • Reply 27 of 64
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,755member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    Brilliant! Have them sign it at the entrance to the workplace! Or, better yet, have them sign it together with their job contract. Such a simple solution, why didn't anyone think of this before!







    Sure, you go first.



    Sarcasm as a position is a bore. Wake me when you have a real argument.
  • Reply 28 of 64
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Booga View Post


    Anything that puts China on the same footing as the US in terms of workplace regulation, living wages, safety, etc., is a good thing as it reduces the incentive to offshore manufacturing. I'd put the productivity of a US worker up against any other country in the world, except that they are willing to turn their environment into a cesspool and work their workers to death to make quotas and therefore they're cheaper. Put us on the same playing field and the jobs will come back to America.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JollyPaul View Post


    If you live in an industrialized democracy you enjoy protections hard won by people like those you demonize. No amount of baseless personal attacks on me will change those facts.



    But why all the rage? Apple made clear they support worker protections. I don't see anyone screaming to give up their own protections. Why does it anger you so much that someone else may gain what you already have?



    Amen!



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    What proportion of your paycheck do you send to Foxconn workers?



    If it's zero -- I am going to go out on a limb, and guess it is -- I humbly submit that you're a hypocrite.



    So instead of gaining rights, Foxconn workers should rely on charity?
  • Reply 29 of 64
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    This might be more interesting if the 'prediction' were coming from someone who had a history of getting things right. As it is, Wu has one of the worst records of any of the analysts who follow Apple.



    You do have to wonder what photographs he has to maintain his standing as an analyst.
  • Reply 30 of 64
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,755member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Granmastak View Post


    Or just have western tree-huggers stop imposing their limited view of the world on to other cultures.



    Also have those who've only ever lived off of inherited trust funds and investments stop blaming said tree-huggers for the world's economic problems. The rhetoric from both sides has grown tiresome.
  • Reply 31 of 64
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JollyPaul View Post


    You are against workplace regulation. We get it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    What proportion of your paycheck do you send to Foxconn workers?



    If it's zero -- I am going to go out on a limb, and guess it is -- I humbly submit that you're a hypocrite.



    JP may well be a hypocrite, but his contributions to compensation of Foxconn workers, or lack thereof, is not direct evidence one way or the other.
  • Reply 32 of 64
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by auxio View Post


    Sarcasm as a position is a bore. Wake me when you have a real argument.



    What you suggested in your previous post would not be instrumental in creating an uncontroversial solution, because it would be too easy for the employers to obtain said signatures. Your suggestion was naive. That's my argument.
  • Reply 33 of 64
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by auxio View Post


    Also have those who've only ever lived off of inherited trust funds and investments stop blaming said tree-huggers for the world's economic problems. The rhetoric from both sides has grown tiresome.



    Such rhetoric, and related others, is one of the strongest drivers of the economy today.
  • Reply 34 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Booga View Post


    Anything that puts China on the same footing as the US in terms of workplace regulation, living wages, safety, etc., is a good thing as it reduces the incentive to offshore manufacturing. I'd put the productivity of a US worker up against any other country in the world, except that they are willing to turn their environment into a cesspool and work their workers to death to make quotas and therefore they're cheaper. Put us on the same playing field and the jobs will come back to America.



    I have heard that while labor costs re cheaper in third world hellholes, other costs, such as energy, are higher than they are here in the US. I have heard that companies are bringing back production to the US due to overall favorable economics.



    if true, the problem may fix itself. What if it became true that the US was the very best place to manufacture, despite the need to pay workers a somewhat larger amount?



    What other factors would need to be in place? Keep in mind that labor economics, while important, are only one piece of the puzzle.
  • Reply 35 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    So instead of gaining rights, Foxconn workers should rely on charity?



    Nothing against their gaining rights (if, indeed, that's what it is). In fact, I think it's wonderful, if all else could be equal



    But if this implies -- as this article indicates -- reduced supply, which, in turn, leads to higher prices, falling sales, workers being laid off and production being moved elsewhere, what would you propose?



    You would be naive to suggest that there isn't a trade-off here.
  • Reply 36 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


    JP may well be a hypocrite, but his contributions to compensation of Foxconn workers, or lack thereof, is not direct evidence one way or the other.



    Uh....please don't quote just the beginning and the end of a conversation. What you quoted for me was not my response to the post of his that you quoted.
  • Reply 37 of 64
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,755member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    What you suggested in your previous post would not be instrumental in creating an uncontroversial solution, because it would be too easy for the employers to obtain said signatures. Your suggestion was naive. That's my argument.



    And there it is. I agree - the people who mindlessly cry workers' rights abuse would definitely claim that signatures were obtained at gunpoint (or similar). So take it one step further and have a 3rd party which, verifiably, has no economic interest either way collect the voluntary signatures. And make it so that workers can retract the clause at any time.



    This allows for a good mix of workers who prefer to work themselves to the bone for whatever reason, and workers who prefer a work/life balance for whatever reason. Plus allows people to change their minds as their life situation changes. Throw in a 2-4 week changeover wait time for the person who has to do the work scheduling, and I think you'd have a system which works for everyone.
  • Reply 38 of 64
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Nothing against their gaining rights (if, indeed, that's what it is). In fact, I think it's wonderful, if all else could be equal



    But if this implies -- as this article indicates -- reduced supply, which, in turn, leads to higher prices, falling sales, workers being laid off and production being moved elsewhere, what would you propose?



    You would be naive to suggest that there isn't a trade-off here.



    I would propose hiring more people to work shorter shifts -- it has been indicated previously that there is no shortage of labor. There won't be any reduction in supply, problem solved.
  • Reply 39 of 64
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    But if this implies -- as this article indicates -- reduced supply, which, in turn, leads to higher prices, falling sales, workers being laid off and production being moved elsewhere, what would you propose?



    You would be naive to suggest that there isn't a trade-off here.



    If there is reduced supply due to labor shortages, how will reduced supply lead to workers being laid off?
  • Reply 40 of 64
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by auxio View Post


    And there it is. I agree - the people who mindlessly cry worker's rights abuse would definitely claim that signatures were obtained at gunpoint (or similar). So take it one step further and have a 3rd party which, verifiably, has no economic interest either way collect the voluntary signatures.



    I believe that workers will in fact sign up voluntarily. I don't think they should be allowed to.
Sign In or Register to comment.