[htk]

Terrible article, as expected from Matt Stoller.

"With this position, Apple uses its outsized buying power to squeeze the margins of its suppliers such as Foxconn, leading to poor pay and terrible working conditions in Chinese factories."

So Foxconn is either choosing to not do business with Apple's competitors who would pay more (??), or the competitors can't place orders of the magnitude that Apple can and Foxconn workforce would just be smaller with a lot less people being employed.

The intellectual dishonesty in the argumentation is so bad that I'm pretty sure I'll skip future Matt Stoller articles.

[necovek]

The article is certainly somewhat incoherent.

But there's a hint of dishonesty in your retort too: obviously, there are competitors who would pay more (and they are paying more elsewhere, since their margins are so much smaller than Apple's), but for much smaller quantities of production. A supplier like Foxconn can't afford to lose a customer like Apple because they were already selling their services cheap with low margins. Apple is basically squeezing them ever more — instead of growing business needs leading to improved conditions for employees, Foxconn is forced to provide more for less because Apple can demand that "or else".

I am not saying this is true, but this line of thinking is still obvious just from the short quote you posted.