[curt]

Even if Apple wanted to the regulations surrounding manufacturing, especially on a large scale are crazy. Can't tell you how many operations are moving overseas not because of the labor costs but because of the bureaucracy, paperwork, EPA, and regulations in the US.

[diogenescynic]

An interesting hypothetical scenario is one where Apple had all iPhones assembled in the US. Assuming that the wage of American workers is ten times as high as those of their Chinese counterparts, the total assembly cost would rise to $68 and total manufacturing cost would be pushed to approximately $240. Selling iPhones assembled by American workers at $500 per unit would still leave a 50% profit margin for Apple. In this hypothetical scenario, the iPhone could contribute to US exports and reduce the US trade deficit, not only with China, but also with the rest of world. More importantly, Apple would create jobs for US low-skilled workers: http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/6335

[sneak]

Except that in the USA it's probably illegal to fire workers who won't work 16 hour days and it's also illegal to expose workers to toxic solvents.

OSHA and the associated regulations legislated us right out of the market.

[diogenescynic]

>Except that in the USA it's probably illegal to fire workers who won't work 16 hour days and it's also illegal to expose workers to toxic solvents.

Wait, you think this is bad?

Do you really think America can only compete on being the lowest cost manufacturer?

And the scenario shows, the iPhone could be manufactured in the US and still be profitable (50% margin).

[cageface]

The endgame of all this could be that no country anywhere can enforce any environmental or labor laws because corporations will just move somewhere more desperate for jobs.

[temphn]

The thing is that there's an optimal amount of such laws. Not too little, not too much. If businesses couldn't move, there'd be no pressure to junk bad laws. Also, the fact that a business can move from a community is a good thing, as otherwise people forget that regulations and taxes can only be increased to a certain point before killing the golden goose.

Finally, there aren't a finite number of businesses; those who think the EPA's regulations are reasonable should have no problem starting a US business to demonstrate the point.

[curt]

It's not the laws themselves (with some exceptions) but the paperwork required to comply. For example Singapore has many of the same laws as the US but they really focus on streamlining the bureaucracy so it's not as heavy a burden.

[cageface]

How specifically do they go about this? Bureaucracy is notoriously resistant to streamlining. Does having a more authoritarian government make this easier?

[curt]

No, they hire the best and brightest to work for the government and hold them accountable. Something western governments refuse to do with government workers usually because of union/civil service work rules.

But what ends up happening then is that Singapore for example actively works to import entrepreneurs because their best and brightest went into government.