Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

blog.marksweep.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 261 posts

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#251

Post by rbarooah »

olalonde wrote: post #250
rbarooah wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the second time you've failed to comprehend the use of a negative. I suggest you reread what you've written. The rest of the thread doesn't show me attempting to win any argument. I suggest rereading that too. Whichever way my interlocutor responded to my question would neither invalidate his own position, nor 'win' an argument for me. You are mistaking this form of discussion for a straw man because you are s…

> That's the second time you've failed to comprehend the use of a negative. I suggest you reread what you've written. You are right, thanks for correcting me, I'm a bit tired. Luckily, it was just an example and not central to my point. The key point here is that this way of formulating a question attributes an opinion to your opponent that he may or may not have. Fixed it: "Decades of isolationist Maoism didn't have…

The least I can say is that you come across as someone who disagrees with your interlocutor's opinion. If you are not willing to admit that, I will call this conversation over.

I don't think that the relatively emotive statement that the interlocutor made paints a particularly complete picture. That's why I asked the question. I don't know enough of his opinion to disagree with it or not because he didn't answer.

If you reread what my interlocutor wrote you'll see that he introduces a number of different ideas which don't add up to a single coherent argument to agree or disagree with.

Typically when someone presents me with this sort of communication and I find it interesting, I don't consider it an argument. Instead I try to find out more.

You say 'all you can do is to question my intellectual honesty', but if you really thought I tried to win an argument using a strawman, you would be able to point out where I did that and yet you can't.

If you won't acknowledge the possibility that you have perceived an argument in what was actually a discussion, then I have to, in return, question your intellectual honesty.

It's counterproductive to the cause of rooting out fallacies to make drive-by comments out of context.

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#252

Post by mbell »

Retric wrote: post #220
mbell wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The PCBs in cell phones are almost exclusively done by machines. You can't hand solder a BGA, a machine applies solder paste as the last step in the PCB manufacturing process and then a pick and place (robotic arm pulling parts off reels) sets the chips before sending the PCB through a reflow machine (an oven). Even for small batch runs of boards with QFP chips (which you can hand solder) you would machine all this,…

I agree with what you said. By putting boards together I meant something much closer to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTQXGLDXQk8 vs. http://www.ethiotube.net/video/18959/Cell-Phone-Assembly-Pla... where you can see several people using a soldering irons about 2 min 10 seconds into the video. But, it looks like the iPhone uses screws where a lot of companies used blobs of sodder to secure things. http://www.yo…

Both videos are about very different classes of devices from a "modern cell phone". For example you can't blob solder on a data link to a 960 × 640 full color LCD, you'd lose signal integrity.

Intel builds their factories in the US because they are required to by law (export controls on certain high tech). I think they are allowed to build some lower tech stuff outside the US (Israel for instance).

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#253

Post by [deleted] »

rbarooah wrote: post #249
ktizo wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is one of the root causes, both internal and external. Also I think that europe was extraordinarily lucky in retaining its lead once it got it. [edit] and it is very difficult to separate war from protectionism as they are all on a sliding scale of policy.

and it is very difficult to separate war from protectionism as they are all on a sliding scale of policy. Why isn't protectionism just part of the terms that nations negotiate when they trade?

[deleted]

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#254

Post by ktizo »

rbarooah wrote: post #249
ktizo wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that is one of the root causes, both internal and external. Also I think that europe was extraordinarily lucky in retaining its lead once it got it. [edit] and it is very difficult to separate war from protectionism as they are all on a sliding scale of policy.

and it is very difficult to separate war from protectionism as they are all on a sliding scale of policy. Why isn't protectionism just part of the terms that nations negotiate when they trade?

So is war.

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#255

Post by rbarooah »

olalonde wrote: post #203
rbarooah wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think that decades of isolationist Maoism had more influence on the rural poverty in China than US and British protectionism?

Straw man.

Summary: If it there was a straw man, you'd be able to identify the argument that it was being used to win.

You can't, so there is no straw man.

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#256

Post by rbarooah »

ktizo wrote: post #254
rbarooah wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and it is very difficult to separate war from protectionism as they are all on a sliding scale of policy. Why isn't protectionism just part of the terms that nations negotiate when they trade?

So is war.

I'd suggest that war is different because with protectionism one side can choose not to trade if they don't like the terms, whereas one cannot simply choose not to participate in war.

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#257

Post by ktizo »

rbarooah wrote: post #256
ktizo wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is war.

I'd suggest that war is different because with protectionism one side can choose not to trade if they don't like the terms, whereas one cannot simply choose not to participate in war.

With British protectionism, you had no choice but to trade. Thats what the cannon were there for.

And when China tried to ban British Opium, we were very annoyed indeed.

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#258

Post by rbarooah »

ktizo wrote: post #257
rbarooah wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd suggest that war is different because with protectionism one side can choose not to trade if they don't like the terms, whereas one cannot simply choose not to participate in war.

With British protectionism, you had no choice but to trade. Thats what the cannon were there for. And when China tried to ban British Opium, we were very annoyed indeed.

I'd definitely agree that trade at gunpoint is on the same spectrum as war. I can see how you get from there to all protectionism being on that spectrum too.

Short of eliminating national borders, I don't see how this would go away.

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#259

Post by wtvanhest »

philwelch wrote: post #189
wtvanhest wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure everyone of those parts is built in the US. I do not know the location of every FAB, nor battery manufacturer, nor display manufacturer, and neither does anyone else. What we do know is that Intel has a fab in Arizona for example and Corning's headquarters (gorilla glass) are in NY etc. I also don't know for sure what is in each city in China. While it is public information (for the most part), finding a sou…

Backing the author's claim is the fact that Apple has done all the legwork on this, and ended up doing all this stuff in China. Unless you have also figured out how to profitably source manufacturing in the US for consumer electronics at the scale of tens of billions of dollars of revenue per year, the burden of proof is firmly on your shoulders.

You are missing the point.

The author says that the reason Apple can manufacture there more profitably is because of colocation of other industries.

I say that while colocation may be a factor, the real factor is a devalued currency which the author completely overlooks.

Re: The Beer Game -or- Why Apple Can’t Build iPads in the US

#260

Post by ktizo »

rbarooah wrote: post #258
ktizo wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With British protectionism, you had no choice but to trade. Thats what the cannon were there for. And when China tried to ban British Opium, we were very annoyed indeed.

I'd definitely agree that trade at gunpoint is on the same spectrum as war. I can see how you get from there to all protectionism being on that spectrum too. Short of eliminating national borders, I don't see how this would go away.

All trade protectionism by heavily armed players who regularly use force is on that spectrum. It would be almost impossible for the US or the UK to engage in protectionist trade practices that are not backed by some kind of military threat.

The idea that protectionism is a major factor in war has long been around;

Frederic Bastiat - "When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will" (possibly not him, but commonly attributed)

Carl von Clausewitz - "War is a mere continuation of politics by other means"

Henry Kissinger - "if protectionism grows in America or if China comes to be seen as a long-term adversary, a self-fulfilling prophecy may blight the prospects of global order."

Francis Sayre - "The policy of excessive protectionism is like a habit-forming drug. Nations once indulging in it go on from excess to excess; and the appetite increases. But the end of unrestrained indulgence is disaster. Economic nationalism and protectionism spell disaster for the world as well as for the nation...Men will fight before they starve. Uneconomic trade barriers forge the thunderbolts of war."

Sorry for the appeal to authority in using these quotes, but the simple fact is that even if you tried to create a protectionist policy that avoided associations with war wherever possible, the people who implemented it would still see it in military terms as a link between the two has been a fairly common consensus on most sides of the debate for a very long time.

Post reply on HN