Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is one of the only countries that taxs worldwide income.
It's way more complicated than that. Tons of countries tax worldwide income.
[deleted]
Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
241–250 of 265 posts
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not really sure what you're arguing, I didn't say "infinite inflation" is good lol. Monetary appreciation only helps the buying power of people who already have money. A deflationary environment explicitly benefits creditors. It would be very difficult for a newcomer to get buying power, leveraged or otherwise, in your proposed monetary environment. Much like it's difficult for newcomers to buy large amounts of b…
Not that my above comment was perfect, but let me attempt to be more succint. > Monetary appreciation only helps Appreciation of an asset only helps the holders of said asset. But "appreciation" is always an exchange rate. Appreciated relative to what? > A deflationary environment explicitly benefits creditors. And this is where my contention lies. This dogmatic condemnation of deflation ever being allowed to happen.…
[deleted]
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
Appreciation due to contracting supply. In a fractional reserve system, if monetary velocity is low enough the total supply naturally shrinks. This is the "pro-savings, deflation-allowable" economy I am responding to. Money can appreciate in the sense that there is literally less of it to be spent on things, in aggregate. It's a pretty basic econ 101 supply and demand problem. Aggregate demand and supply is very much…
> The dollar depreciates and appreciates against commodities and other currencies all the time. Bingo! But, I do not see anyone complaining about this "only benefiting the creditors". > econ 101 To be fair, I find a reference to very weakly approximating models of reality, taught to ignorant and naïve students for the sake of starting them off somewhere, to be slightly disingenuous. > Appreciation due to contracting…
Money isn't a natural phenomenon. You say it's unnatural for a central bank or government to intervene, but it's their currency. Its existence is inherently political, and serves an interest or policy goal. Be it capital accumulation to boomers or whatever else. They can also pick losers, if they really wanted. Look at Lehman Brothers.
The dollar, and its associated monetary policy, isn't something that has been perverted by evil external forces. I'm arguing the 'status quo' because thats how it was intentionally designed and thats how it intentionally works. Not wasting my time describing some fanciful alternative perfect system
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you not see the similarities between "give rich people low taxes and they will create economies around them," and "give rich corporations low taxes and they will create economies around them?" Companies will seek the lowest taxes in an area that suits them. If they're building in America, it's because it behooves them to build in America. There are lots of places they can go to lower taxes, but they're not competi…
Good reasoning. So just stay poor, and don't let the big companies make money, this sounds like a great advice to local communities.
You've done nothing to convince me that allowing big companies to exploit the local economy and infrastructure for free actually ends up in a net benefit for anyone other than the company.
You don't get rich by giving things away (unless if you've figured out how to make this possible—in which case, please ready a room for me :-))
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, all tech companies have seen the writing on the wall for overconcentrating their operations in California. People in general have become more and more hesitant to move there for a wide platitude of reasons from absurd cost of living to issues such as mass wildfires. They've realized that perhaps, just perhaps, they could afford to have more than one large corporate campus at their scale of fuck you money. Which…
Comments like these greatly downplay the role of industry clusters. The hot take of the day is that California is a hellhole to be escaped as soon as possible. Industry Clusters are often historical, so it always strikes me as strange when I see comments like this one that make a case for how misguided it was for tech companies to cluster in Silicon Valley and tolerate the high cost of living. That line of thinking m…
The big difference is Texas isn't ran by morons who make it impossible to build homes.
The anti building laws of California are by far the biggest reasons housing is so expensive. Even if Austin gets pricey, you can always drive into the city.
As someone who left California, I will say no one in their right mind should live there. No matter how much you earn, you'll never realistically out earn the cost of living. I found myself quickly deep in credit card debt trying to be cool in California. It's just a horrible place to live, I had to estrange myself from my family to move, and it was absolutely worth it. Anyone who tries to make you live in such a horrible place does not care about you at all.
People are also phenomenally nicer in other cities, I was shocked at how easy it was to meet my girlfriend once I got to Chicago. It's as if Chicago's this amazing City where people understand you need to work to get things you want instead of thinking you're entitled to everything.
Anyway, with remote work now being seen as viable I can see the idea of having expensive big offices becoming antiquated.
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#246>Apple’s $430 billion in contributions to the US economy include direct spend with American suppliers, data center investments, capital expenditures in the US, and other domestic spend — including dozens of Apple TV+ productions across 20 states, creating thousands of jobs and supporting the creative industry. I dont like how Apple spin this as investment in the headline, when it is clearly contribution . If you buy…
[deleted]
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#247Let’s run through the possible reasons Apple announced this, with various degrees of cynicism. 1. Getting some good press before Congress decides to do something in regards to the app store model. 2. Apple is reading the winds, seeing that Chinese supply chains may be politically constrained, and preparing for that future. 3. Apple is reading the winds, seeing that Chinese supply chains may be politically constrained…
If I was Apple getting out of the Chinese supply chain would be a priority - if only to have some leverage with a second option. It seems like a pretty high risk situation for them and has chilling effects elsewhere (content restrictions on Apple TV). It also damages their brand ethos around privacy. CCP pressure on Taiwan and TSMC is also a concern I'd be thinking about if I was them.
TSMC is the scariest thing in my mind.
I wish Apple or govt would fund similar fab/s in the US - hell just build it with stimi or huge tax breaks and TSMC can still hold the IP and profit, just have enough onshore knowledge to run it in isolation if needed.
CCP hitting TSMC in their first strike would be a hell of a whammy, even if mutually destructive.
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#248I don't care why they are doing this, but it should have happened a long time ago. The cynism here is disappointing. If companies start investing their money domestically then excess savings will fall, deflationary pressures will be gone and the economy will start growing quickly again and that means wages will grow too.
>but it should have happened a long time ago. The cynism here is disappointing. The cynism here is disappointing.
Precisely because it did happen a long time ago. None of what is pointed out is new. It is basically celebrating Apple is an US business.
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you need a concrete example of why deflation is crushingly terrible for an economy look no further than Japan after the asset bubble burst in the 90s. Deflationary thinking meant everyone expects prices to be lower tomorrow, so no one spent money on needed items and simply waited to make purchases to save money. This slowed down the economy into a death spiral that they still are climbing out of. Mortgages became…
But inflation is also no good if salaries don't rise with it. The way inflation is calculated is quite flawed from my understanding (they don't include rent/mortgage payments or college tuition - prices of which have exploded in the past two decades).
But if salaries actually rose with inflation then there would be no inflation.
You are fundamentally misunderstanding the purpose of the modern central banking nonsense that the parrots you are replying to merely repeat without any understanding whatsoever of how absolutely devastating it is to the economic stability of the middle class.
Re: Apple commits $430B in US investments over five years
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
My money SHOULD be worth more tomorrow than it is today. Tomorrow the economy is just a tad bit more productive, so my dollar should go further... Why is deflation a curse word nowadays? I feel one of governments only role is to ensure that the dollar is not being debased and slowly losing value of time or atleast at a rate that is known. When the FED prints an unlimited supply of money, it breaks down the social con…
deflation is bad for the economy because it discourages spending. Just for illustration, imagine if you know that you can buy 2 rolls of toilet papers 2 months later for the price of 1 toilet paper today, and you don't have an immediate need for toilet paper, then most likely you'd wait. Spendings is what drives the economy and it's the circulation and liquidity that help the economy becomes more productive.
> you can buy 2 rolls of toilet papers 2 months later for the price of 1 toilet paper today,
This is called a sale and happens all the time in consumer spending. It is a well known phenomenon that many people (not all) will wait to purchase when they have more purchasing power. But it is also well known that a subset of the population will not wait.
I am not sure how you perceive your arguments as being a rigorous support of your position or a rigorous critique against the opposing position. It is truly mysterious.