Apple Considers Expanding Manufacturing Base to Indonesia

[bousozoku]

Tim Cook has spoken in the past about the fact that the cost of labour is a small portion of the cost of their products. The issue is skills and volume of workers needed to do the work, these don't exist outside of Asia.

That's probably because they categorize external labor not as labor but as assembly services. Parts, labor, and research and development are always expensive.

There are plenty of people in the U.S.A. who aren't working but could be. However, finding reliable people to do the job is another matter. There is a saying that is older than I am: "Don't buy a car that was built on a Monday or a Friday." Someone probably wasn't paying attention.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Are you sure? As I say quite a lot, I can show you several closed General Motors facilities along SR 4 in Ohio where the people didn't want to work, despite their making incredibly good pay.

If the money is right? Of course they’ll do the job. The idea that there are jobs Americans won’t do is ridiculous. There are no jobs Americans won’t do if the money is right.

 

[bousozoku]

If the money is right? Of course they’ll do the job. The idea that there are jobs Americans won’t do is ridiculous. There are no jobs Americans won’t do if the money is right.

If you have to pay some greedy, lazy person too much to get them off the sofa to go to work, then the money is wrong.

 

[ender78]

The biggest expense behind ANY product is the labor. It’s impossible to get past.

Let's break careful how we frame this. We're talking about a small sliver of the actual cost, aka the cost of assembly. The suggestion that others made in the thread that an iPhone assembled in the US would cost $5000 is proposterous.

 

[ender78]

Lots of companies have tried for decades but it hasn't really worked out well for them. The US educational system is far superior to countries like India and China.

Based on what metrics? Are you talking post secondary, elementary, post graduate ?

 

[victorvictoria]

You’re confused if you think equities carry no risk. Suggesting otherwise is strange to say the least. The rest of your post fails to rebut anything I said.

Each time you reply you ignore the phrase, "long term." That's the hole in your logic.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Each time you reply you ignore the phrase, "long term." That's the hole in your logic.

No, I didn’t ignore that at all. I directly addressed unrealized gains and losses when I pointed out that your claim is only valid if you both enter and exit the markets at the right moment. In fact you can NOT expect the markets to produce a consistent return on your investment. Even over a long time horizon you can lose significant money if you end up exiting the markets at the wrong moment. And AGAIN, it is not always possible to sell stock at the most optimal time. Just ask all the people who lost their life savings in the housing market crash in the early 2000s. Equities collapsed and the markets dropped so low that it took years to recover.

Claiming that the markets carry no significant risk over a long time horizon is WRONG. Simple as that. There is no guaranteed return on stocks and equities.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Based on what metrics? Are you talking post secondary, elementary, post graduate ?

Yeah, I’m curious about that claim too, because looking at various data suggests that the US public school system SERIOUSLY lags the rest of the developed world in student outcomes.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Let's break careful how we frame this. We're talking about a small sliver of the actual cost, aka the cost of assembly. The suggestion that others made in the thread that an iPhone assembled in the US would cost $5000 is proposterous.

Again, labor is the most expensive element of ANY product. Additionally, when people talk about making iPhones in the US they’re talking about actually manufacturing at least some of the components. The chips specifically. So it’s about a lot more than just assembly.

 

[Surf Monkey]

If you have to pay some greedy, lazy person too much to get them off the sofa to go to work, then the money is wrong.

For management, yes. For the employee, no. And it’s a little disingenuous to frame it as though the problem is laziness. It isn’t. The problem is cost of living. People won’t take jobs that don’t pay them enough to get by. That’s what we’re actually talking about here. Americans will do any job if the wages are right.

 

[bousozoku]

For management, yes. For the employee, no. And it’s a little disingenuous to frame it as though the problem is laziness. It isn’t. The problem is cost of living. People won’t take jobs that don’t pay them enough to get by. That’s what we’re actually talking about here. Americans will do any job if the wages are right.

I've worked in a lot of industries at many levels. Americans, especially those from 18-40 years old, are typically lazy now. They don't want to do their best and they laugh at people who do. They act as if they're owed something for showing up to work.

I'd like to see typical Americans harvesting crops without harvesting machines. I can't imagine how much they'd have to be paid, but imagine going to the store to buy that produce. You'd probably need to get a loan.

 

[victorvictoria]

No, I didn’t ignore that at all. I directly addressed unrealized gains and losses when I pointed out that your claim is only valid if you both enter and exit the markets at the right moment. In fact you can NOT expect the markets to produce a consistent return on your investment. Even over a long time horizon you can lose significant money if you end up exiting the markets at the wrong moment. And AGAIN, it is not always possible to sell stock at the most optimal time. Just ask all the people who lost their life savings in the housing market crash in the early 2000s. Equities collapsed and the markets dropped so low that it took years to recover.

Claiming that the markets carry no significant risk over a long time horizon is WRONG. Simple as that. There is no guaranteed return on stocks and equities.

Well, once again you ignored not only "long term," but also the advice to keep 6 months of emergency funds in cash. If a young person follows that advice, and doesn't take on excessive debt for things like European luxury cars, there would be no inherent risk. One does not have to buy at the bottom, or sell at the top to beat inflation.

But you keep yours in cash instruments, and I'll go on investing in equities. And "that's all I have to say about that."

 

[Surf Monkey]

Well, once again you ignored not only "long term,"

No I didn’t.

but also the advice to keep 6 months of emergency funds in cash.

So you’re adding qualifications to your argument now?

If a young person follows that advice, and doesn't take on excessive debt for things like European luxury cars, there would be no inherent risk. One does not have to buy at the bottom, or sell at the top to beat inflation.

There would still be risk in that situation. The long term averages are only that. Averages. People taking your advice still can and do lose their shirts.

But you keep yours in cash instruments,

When did I ever make that assertion? Never.

and I'll go on investing in equities. And "that's all I have to say about that."

Equities have a place in any diversified portfolio. Back in the housing crash of 2008 I divested myself of most equities and didn’t buy back into them until the real estate markets stabilized. Meanwhile I watched countless people have their portfolios routed exactly because they believed equities to be unassailable.

But really, why would anyone be giving out investment advice on a board like this? Seems weird, especially when the advice is also so weird.

 

[victorvictoria]

No I didn’t.



So you’re adding qualifications to your argument now?



There would still be risk in that situation. The long term averages are only that. Averages. People taking your advice still can and do lose their shirts.



When did I ever make that assertion? Never.


Equities have a place in any diversified portfolio. Back in the housing crash of 2008 I divested myself of most equities and didn’t buy back into them until the real estate markets stabilized. Meanwhile I watched countless people have their portfolios routed exactly because they believed equities to be unassailable.

But really, why would anyone be giving out investment advice on a board like this? Seems weird, especially when the advice is also so weird.

Well, if it's your belief that long term investment in equites and keeping 6 months of cash on hand for unforseen circumstances is "weird," there's no point in further discussion.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Well, if it's your belief that long term investment in equites and keeping 6 months of cash on hand for unforseen circumstances is "weird," there's no point in further discussion.

The weird part is your insistence that equities carry no risk.

 

[victorvictoria]

The weird part is your insistence that equities carry no risk.

Well, all other investments are indeed no risk. You're guaranteed to lose value after inflation. Period.

 

[ChrisA]

That's always very misleading.

Adding up the cost of all the shares of any company does not tell us much other than the gamblers who play with equities are making long plays.

Yes, this is 100% true. The best example is Bitcoin. In total, it is many billions of dolors of value but it is zero assets and it worth nothing. The market is like that. What you pay is not directly rated to value.

 

[mozumder]

Based on what metrics? Are you talking post secondary, elementary, post graduate ?

Colleges and Universities.

They're the reason the US economy is so resilient.

It's why America is always creating new businesses, because of the new ideas generated in our colleges and universities.

 

[ChrisA]

While the US has a large GDP, it is not shared equality. 1% of the US population owns 50% of the GDP. This means that 99% of us are only half as rich as the GDP number would indicate.

It gets even worse, half of us collectively own somthjing like 25% of the GDP. If money were spread around evenly a near majority of us would be 4X richer.

Saying people in the US are well off is the same as if you put 100 homeless bums in a room with Elon Musk and then say "On average everyone in the room is a billionaire." It would be true.

in the US 3/4 of a million people are living in tents on sidewalks and under bridges.

Look at other modern 1st world countries, especially Japan. Income is more evenly distributed and people live much better than their GDP would indicate.