91–100 of 414 posts
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.
Quoted post unavailable.
> 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…
Not an english speaker, so is Is "slave" correctly used here or is more like a "metaphor"?, In my mind a slave is someone you own, you can sell or kill. Someone you keep in prison is called different and people kept in prison for political reasons have also different label, religions/race imprisonment might also have a different label.
> 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...
I bet if you gave most prisoners a choice, they would rather work too.
> 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…
The US casts a blanket assumption that ALL products from the region are produced by slave labor unless proven otherwise. That’s backwards.
And meanwhile US government and corporations have no problem buying products produced by US prison slave labor, or overseas child labor.
> 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…
>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"? Why would they? Corporations have two choices now. Bend the knee and stay in the good graces of a government that controls access to the largest consumer market in the world, or take a moral stance and win meaningless social brownie points. Ther…
Look at e.g. Google. Yes, they've had some trouble sticking to their decision over the years, but they have so far. Corporations staying out do exist.
> 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…
>slave labour in concentration camps Not an english speaker, so is Is "slave" correctly used here or is more like a "metaphor"?, In my mind a slave is someone you own, you can sell or kill. Someone you keep in prison is called different and people kept in prison for political reasons have also different label, religions/race imprisonment might also have a different label.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what he is saying is that chinese gov adopted capitalism but state is actually controlling it them - semi indirectly. 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…
The Chinese gov't adopted capitalism? I'm not sure I can believe that anyone believes that, much less agree with it. This is a very direct example of a communist government controlling the messaging of a company, which is antithetical to capitalism. As I understand it, this is happening because Chinese corporations are coerced by the communist regime such that Intel would lose business if they didn't follow the rules…
You can believe in whatever you like, it doesn't change the reality and facts.
Its not my opinion, china is a capitalist country run by communist (with Xi totalitarian) government.
The companies adhere to market laws/regulations and operate like any other capitalist western corporations.
Of note is the fact that as corporation gets to certain size their board must hire certain number of party official who will oversee the business operations.
Those people ensure the company is heading in the broad direction set by the party. If they dont, party will bring out the knives and it doesnt matter if you are jack ma or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those shareholders are going to sell to shareholders that have other priorities. Fun in theory but too bad only Americans tolerate those PE multiples. So, look out below!
Which again goes to my point. People who care about Intel taking a stand against China should actually buy shares from the existing investors and make them. If no one wants to do that then what is all these kvetch about "capitalism" and "greed" corrupting companies and our values when it is the people who do not care. Certainly not enough to pay up for the shares.
in my case I was waiting for disgruntled shareholders to sell because an aggregate stance was not taken by management or other shareholders, and then when sold it goes to people more or less apathetic.
in your case you want people to buy the shares at any price but likely a premium, in order to exercise a goal, which I frankly think is absurd.
so guess the market has priced everything in well enough, as an aggregate opinion on its own.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, their party has communist in its name and socially they portray (Authoritarian!-)Communist ideals. But calling their economy communist is really not the whole truth.
Which parts of the Chinese economy are not subject to a complete hostile takeover from their government, including but not limited to disappearing the companies leaders? Just because state officials aren't directly managing day to day operations does not mean that company isn't owned by the state, because in China, that company is always owned by the state. What is this nuance you seem to be referencing but not expla…
> 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…
> So is the position of Intel that slave labour in concentration camps is an acceptable means of production? Maybe their position is that they have not established as a fact that there is slave labour in concentration camps in Xinjiang? Have you considered that as an alternative possibility? From the article: > The letter now reads that the company prohibits "any human trafficked or involuntary labour such as forced,…