Political Vids/Images

[runawayjimbo]

I saw a study (can't find it now) that said around 2% of the iPhone's value creation comes from the actual manufacture. But the U.S. retains an overwhelming piece of the iPhone's contribution to the economy by employing people in the design, development, marketing, and retail of the product. Tack on the creation of an entirely new industry created by the App Store and Apple represents an overwhelming success story for the U.S. And that's without even considering the counterfactual of how much an iPhone would cost were it manufactured here.

Oh I know this study, its 2% actual manufacturing, 3% marketing, 5% development, and 90% greed.
There, you don't have to find it now.  That's Myth #2, that the price of Apple products would need to skyrocket.  Bullshit.  That company posted over 50 billion in profit in 2015.  Don't tell me that they can't afford to pay workers a livable wage in good work conditions, right here in the good ol USA and still post healthy profit margins.  Fuck the share holders. Power to the people.

So are you also going to mandate what prices Apple can sell their product for? Because otherwise the increased cost is absloutely passed on to the consumer. That's not greed or my capitalist pigishness speaking; it's day 1 of any Econ class.

no, i'm not mandating what apple or any company can sell their products for, i'm simply pointing out that there is no need to raise their prices as their profit margins are already sky high.
so they as a company could like, i dunno, make less money, and still be pretty set?  maybe like, not use slave labor and like, still be ok?  business ethics?

That's some mighty fine goalpost shifting. First you say it's a "myth" that prices will go up, but then you switch to "they *could* get by on reduced profit margins." And that's true, they certainly could significantly increase their costs without raising prices and remain a fabulously profitable company. But the near certainty that that would NOT happen means you have it exactly backwards: the myth is that they would not adjust prices given a rise in unit labor costs.

It is a myth that I will never bang that Flashdance cat lady from that Kanye video.

See, here's where we part ways:  protectionist trade policy is dangerous and self-defeating and ultimately most harmful to the very people it purports to benefit. Also, issuing threats to private companies is highly unbecoming of the office of the president. Especially when conducted on Twitter FFS.

Lol.  Private companies threaten the government all the time.  "Give us tax breaks or we will move jobs out.  Lower these environmental restrictions or we will move jobs out.  Etc."  Fuck em, we the people make the rules.  It's about time someone let them know.  Want to send american jobs out of the country?  Fuck you pay me when you try and bring the goods back.

The gov't is not entitled to anything that a private citizen or company does. But hey, things are going great in Venezuela, right? RIGHT?!?! (nice Goodfellas reference tho).

Have you never heard of Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution?  Or do you libertarian types block that from your memory like that visit from Uncle Touchy when you were 4.

The one about the Post Office?

Just because Congress has the power to tax does not entitle them to all the fruits of private labor. Especially not as a punitive measure. But you are right, Congress has the power to enact all kinds of stupid shit and their history of doing so is well documented. And threatening private companies with excise taxes and tariffs would certainly fall on that list.

Also, my concern is more that we are becoming more comfortable allowing the president to single out and punish individual, private companies. The relentless intervention and normalization of executive power is something I opposed under Obama and I will continue to do so under this dickbag.

You don't seem to mind the relentless intervention and normalization of the corporate rule over the world. 

Sick burn

well?

Corporations cannot exert their power without the elected officials you hold so near and dear (assuming they have the right letter behind their name). Private companies are the carrot, gov't is the stick. If you are upset about oversized corporate influence (a point, I might add, I agree with to some extent), it's because we have allowed our gov't to enable them to do so. Without the heavy hand of the gov't, it's just a voluntary transaction between individuals/entities.

[mbw]

I saw a study (can't find it now) that said around 2% of the iPhone's value creation comes from the actual manufacture. But the U.S. retains an overwhelming piece of the iPhone's contribution to the economy by employing people in the design, development, marketing, and retail of the product. Tack on the creation of an entirely new industry created by the App Store and Apple represents an overwhelming success story for the U.S. And that's without even considering the counterfactual of how much an iPhone would cost were it manufactured here.

Oh I know this study, its 2% actual manufacturing, 3% marketing, 5% development, and 90% greed.
There, you don't have to find it now.  That's Myth #2, that the price of Apple products would need to skyrocket.  Bullshit.  That company posted over 50 billion in profit in 2015.  Don't tell me that they can't afford to pay workers a livable wage in good work conditions, right here in the good ol USA and still post healthy profit margins.  Fuck the share holders. Power to the people.

So are you also going to mandate what prices Apple can sell their product for? Because otherwise the increased cost is absloutely passed on to the consumer. That's not greed or my capitalist pigishness speaking; it's day 1 of any Econ class.

no, i'm not mandating what apple or any company can sell their products for, i'm simply pointing out that there is no need to raise their prices as their profit margins are already sky high.
so they as a company could like, i dunno, make less money, and still be pretty set?  maybe like, not use slave labor and like, still be ok?  business ethics?

That's some mighty fine goalpost shifting. First you say it's a "myth" that prices will go up, but then you switch to "they *could* get by on reduced profit margins." And that's true, they certainly could significantly increase their costs without raising prices and remain a fabulously profitable company. But the near certainty that that would NOT happen means you have it exactly backwards: the myth is that they would not adjust prices given a rise in unit labor costs.

It is a myth that I will never bang that Flashdance cat lady from that Kanye video.

i did not shift my position on anything.  i said it was a myth that prices would "need" to skyrocket.  in fact, I said that twice.
they wouldnt need to skyrocket.  that would be a decision that company, and I don't just mean to pick on apple, would make.
they could say, "hey lets set an example and be good stewards of the world and pay people a decent wage and not have them work in shit conditions with suicide nets," or they could could say, "fuck em, lets roll around in this money like fucking swine."  the later is what they choose to do.

[PIE-GUY]

[PIE-GUY]

another...

[mbw]

Amazon just announced 100,000 new, full time with benefits/401k jobs rolling out.  Many of which will be un-skilled/un-sexy fulfillment jobs and retail jobs.

This is sure to be disastrous for the economy, and i'm sure the people who get these jobs will take them begrudgingly.

A true nightmare scenario.

[runawayjimbo]

Amazon just announced 100,000 new, full time with benefits/401k jobs rolling out.  Many of which will be un-skilled/un-sexy fulfillment jobs and retail jobs.

This is sure to be disastrous for the economy, and i'm sure the people who get these jobs will take them begrudgingly.

A true nightmare scenario.

And the free market wins again.

[mbw]

Amazon just announced 100,000 new, full time with benefits/401k jobs rolling out.  Many of which will be un-skilled/un-sexy fulfillment jobs and retail jobs.

This is sure to be disastrous for the economy, and i'm sure the people who get these jobs will take them begrudgingly.

A true nightmare scenario.

And the ethical business practices win again.

fyp.

they could have just as easily went with the walmart model of all part time/no benefits, but they chose not to.
i'm sure this will cut into their bottom line, and i'm sure they will be just fine.

[PIE-GUY]

Amazon just announced 100,000 new, full time with benefits/401k jobs rolling out.  Many of which will be un-skilled/un-sexy fulfillment jobs and retail jobs.

This is sure to be disastrous for the economy, and i'm sure the people who get these jobs will take them begrudgingly.

A true nightmare scenario.

And the ethical business practices win again.

fyp.

they could have just as easily went with the walmart model of all part time/no benefits, but they chose not to.
i'm sure this will cut into their bottom line, and i'm sure they will be just fine.

Exactly - good corporate citizenry exists in the world. It does not, however, prove that "the free market is working." There will AWLAYS be Walmarts who will do everything in they can to follow the letter of the law and absolutely not an inch more unless it helps their bottom line.

Case in point, Walmart got all sorts of props for their "green initiatives" around how they provide lighting in their stores, but this was simply a money saving operational decision. Win-win, great!

But they still have a million employees who receive some form of supplemental income from the US government in the form of either food stamps or Medicare/Medicaid. In essence, we, the people of the US, are subsidizing Walmart's human costs so that the richest family in the world can get richer.

We NEED the government to regulate business.

[Hicks]

Wait, Amazon is being held up as an example of business ethics and decency? 

Fucking Amazon?

The place where a guy recently jumped off the roof because it's such a harsh environment?

This company? 

http://nyti.ms/1TFqcOG

New jobs are great and all, but everyone knows they work their people to death. 

[runawayjimbo]

Amazon just announced 100,000 new, full time with benefits/401k jobs rolling out.  Many of which will be un-skilled/un-sexy fulfillment jobs and retail jobs.

This is sure to be disastrous for the economy, and i'm sure the people who get these jobs will take them begrudgingly.

A true nightmare scenario.

And the ethical business practices win again.

fyp.

they could have just as easily went with the walmart model of all part time/no benefits, but they chose not to.
i'm sure this will cut into their bottom line, and i'm sure they will be just fine.

Such ethical. Very wow

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-wrestling-big-ideas-in-a-bruising-workplace.html?_r=0

ETA: and once again Hicks scoops me. This is getting scary, dude. That shiny stent is making you more like me every day. DUH-DUH-DUUUUUUUUUUUUUH

Exactly - good corporate citizenry exists in the world. It does not, however, prove that "the free market is working." There will AWLAYS be Walmarts who will do everything in they can to follow the letter of the law and absolutely not an inch more unless it helps their bottom line.

Case in point, Walmart got all sorts of props for their "green initiatives" around how they provide lighting in their stores, but this was simply a money saving operational decision. Win-win, great!

But they still have a million employees who receive some form of supplemental income from the US government in the form of either food stamps or Medicare/Medicaid. In essence, we, the people of the US, are subsidizing Walmart's human costs so that the richest family in the world can get richer.

We NEED the government to regulate business.

If Amazon was not forced into making this decision (and they were not), than it most certainly is proof of the power of the free market. You seem to be judging corporate actions by the means rather than the ends. Take your Walmart example. They did something good, but you are questioning (or at least are skeptical of) their action because their motives may not have as pure as you would like (I'd say the same goes with Amazon). I would counter with WHO CARES? If Walmart or Amazon or Apple wants to be a good corporate citizen in some (or all) part because they know they'll get great PR out of it, so what, they still did the thing.

Also, you are focusing on the seen - Walmart doesn't pay their employees enough - without accounting for the unseen - their low prices have allowed millions of people to stretch their limited paychecks further than ever (but of course, that's a whole separate rant). And for the record, I am not holding up either Walmart or Amazon as an overwhelming force for good in the world. I do, however, have no doubt that voluntary transactions, both as consumers and employers, have increased living standards and bettered people's lives on an order of magnitude larger than the costs.

[Hicks]

Yeah this is getting creepy dude. 

Also, stents are for pussies, real men go straight for the triple bypass. 

[mbw]

Also, you are focusing on the seen - Walmart doesn't pay their employees enough - without accounting for the unseen - their low prices have allowed millions of people to stretch their limited paychecks further than ever (but of course, that's a whole separate rant). And for the record, I am not holding up either Walmart or Amazon as an overwhelming force for good in the world. I do, however, have no doubt that voluntary transactions, both as consumers and employers, have increased living standards and bettered people's lives on an order of magnitude larger than the costs.

you are still dealing with the myth that if they paid their employees more their prices would have to go up.
how about christy walton might just have to get the medium size spare yacht.

http://fortune.com/2013/11/12/why-wal-mart-can-afford-to-give-its-workers-a-50-raise/

and i'm sorry that some people don't have jobs where they get to dick around on the internet all day, but thems the breaks. (my turn to be a bastard)
at least they get paid a decent wage with benefits.

Also, stents are for pussies, real men go straight for the triple bypass. 

i think they accidentally gave you a transplant with the cold black heart of a bourgeois pig.

[Hicks]

Well that's not very nice, whateves I shared your "but corporations are evil bro!"!worldview too when I was 16.  It turns out the world is a little more complicated than that.

Also lol at guy dicking around on the internet on a Friday calling out other guys dicking around on the internet. 

[mbw]

Well that's not very nice, whateves I shared your "but corporations are evil bro!"!worldview too when I was 16.  It turns out the world is a little more complicated than that.

Also lol at guy dicking around on the internet on a Friday calling out other guys dicking around on the internet.

Jeez man, they removed your humerus  too.
I was well aware i was in the category of people i was referring to.

[ytowndan]

Amazon just announced 100,000 new, full time with benefits/401k jobs rolling out.  Many of which will be un-skilled/un-sexy fulfillment jobs and retail jobs.

This is sure to be disastrous for the economy, and i'm sure the people who get these jobs will take them begrudgingly.

A true nightmare scenario.

And the ethical business practices win again.

fyp.

they could have just as easily went with the walmart model of all part time/no benefits, but they chose not to.
i'm sure this will cut into their bottom line, and i'm sure they will be just fine.

Such ethical. Very wow

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-wrestling-big-ideas-in-a-bruising-workplace.html?_r=0

ETA: and once again Hicks scoops me. This is getting scary, dude. That shiny stent is making you more like me every day. DUH-DUH-DUUUUUUUUUUUUUH

Exactly - good corporate citizenry exists in the world. It does not, however, prove that "the free market is working." There will AWLAYS be Walmarts who will do everything in they can to follow the letter of the law and absolutely not an inch more unless it helps their bottom line.

Case in point, Walmart got all sorts of props for their "green initiatives" around how they provide lighting in their stores, but this was simply a money saving operational decision. Win-win, great!

But they still have a million employees who receive some form of supplemental income from the US government in the form of either food stamps or Medicare/Medicaid. In essence, we, the people of the US, are subsidizing Walmart's human costs so that the richest family in the world can get richer.

We NEED the government to regulate business.

If Amazon was not forced into making this decision (and they were not), than it most certainly is proof of the power of the free market. You seem to be judging corporate actions by the means rather than the ends. Take your Walmart example. They did something good, but you are questioning (or at least are skeptical of) their action because their motives may not have as pure as you would like (I'd say the same goes with Amazon). I would counter with WHO CARES? If Walmart or Amazon or Apple wants to be a good corporate citizen in some (or all) part because they know they'll get great PR out of it, so what, they still did the thing.

Also, you are focusing on the seen - Walmart doesn't pay their employees enough - without accounting for the unseen - their low prices have allowed millions of people to stretch their limited paychecks further than ever (but of course, that's a whole separate rant). And for the record, I am not holding up either Walmart or Amazon as an overwhelming force for good in the world. I do, however, have no doubt that voluntary transactions, both as consumers and employers, have increased living standards and bettered people's lives on an order of magnitude larger than the costs.

As far as increased living standards outweighing costs, don't you think it's rather easy to use that same argument in favor of judicious regulation and organized labor?  After all, it's hard to find any examples of horrible, and now antiquated, business practices which were ended by the "Free Market," and it's pretty easy to find many examples of said practices being ended by the democratic process -- both directly (unions) and indirectly (government).