31–40 of 414 posts
> The letter now reads that the company prohibits "any human trafficked or involuntary labour such as forced, debt bonded, prison, indentured, or slave labour throughout your extended supply chains." Designed by Intel in California™
this is excellent news, as some US states employ prison labor heavily in their manufacturing and agriculture sectors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_Stat...
So is the position of Intel that slave labour in concentration camps is an acceptable means of production?
To what extent are Intel chips designed and manufactured in China? Presumably, they are primarily designed in the USA and manufactured in Taiwan. And Intel is opening chip factories to boost production in the USA [0].
Why would Intel not take a position against Xinjiang slave concentration camps if presumably most of the supply chain does not depend on it? Would it be that much "trouble"? Or has some unrelated "trouble" been created for Intel that was not discussed in the article?
[0] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/news/intel-...
Name and shame. We need to divest our manufacturing from China. Perhaps by exposing such practices and nagging hypocrytical companies we can make divestment happen sooner? Twitter mobs could be used for good once.
Not gonna happen until you get rid of consumerism. People want to buy cheap shit, it gives their lives meaning.
Say what you want about China, but their ability to weaponize capitalism and make multi-billion dollar companies cower and self-censor in ways they would never do for Western governments is remarkable. "When it comes time to hang the capitalists, they will vie with each other for the rope contract".
Where did that quote come from?
Say what you want about China, but their ability to weaponize capitalism and make multi-billion dollar companies cower and self-censor in ways they would never do for Western governments is remarkable. "When it comes time to hang the capitalists, they will vie with each other for the rope contract".
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Are you blaming capitalism for the moral failures of a communist regime? Maybe you're just suggesting capitalism isn't capable of "solving" the wrongdoings of communism? If so I would agree. A society that accepts the evils of communism is a difficult thing to solve externally.
And they are big enough to be able to influence other big countries and foreign corporations to the point that they are now setting directions of where things are going.
Case and point Holywood and self censorship in movies to pander to chinese market
They are not saying comunism is good or bad, just stating reality of what is happening
> It apologised last month for the "trouble" it had caused, saying that its commitment to avoid supply chains from Xinjiang was an expression of compliance with U.S. law, rather than a statement of its position on the issue. So is the position of Intel that slave labour in concentration camps is an acceptable means of production? To what extent are Intel chips designed and manufactured in China? Presumably, they are…
Supply chains are broad and it's not hard to have goods that pass through or originate in those regions even if all your parts are produced outside that and you have no direct partnerships there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or tax incentivize final manufacture of finished goods in the US for high value and strategic goods (semiconductors, electronics, mechanical equipment, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, agricultural equipment, etc.) Make a policy like, """ Companies that onshore will pay the following taxes for the next 25 years if they follow our onshoring program: company profits: 0% tax rate CEO capital gains: 1% tax rate shareholder ca…
This is call a subsidy and will really mess up the internal labour market. Not sure it would be legal WTO rules.
Perhaps a new trade agreement could be made amongst key trading partners? China would probably get mad, but if China is able to keep foreign firms out or put them at a disadvantage, then we should be able to provide benefits to our own domestic firms.
There need to be motivations for companies to do more on our own soil.
Say what you want about China, but their ability to weaponize capitalism and make multi-billion dollar companies cower and self-censor in ways they would never do for Western governments is remarkable. "When it comes time to hang the capitalists, they will vie with each other for the rope contract".
Intel shareholders can now vote to ensure Intel takes a stand against China, if they choose. But it seems those individuals do not want that. So Intel is doing what it is supposed to do -- operate in accordance with wishes of the shareholders.
Too early to conclude this. These tensions present not only a reputational risk for Intel, but financial ones as well, particularly if tensions escalate. Managers might not care, but there is precedence for shareholders taking a longer view [1].
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/09/business/exxon-mobil-engi...
Cowards.
Succinct and accurate. Expecting moral courage from a big corporation is probably an exercise in inevitable disappointment though.
I agree about the fact that it is. But why do we accept that? Corporations are made up of people. We certainly do expect people – even groups of people – to exhibit moral courage. Of course, they do sometimes disappoint us, but the expectations remain reasonable in a good society.