[MaxPock]

The reason why they don't amount to anything is because there is usually no follow-up and accountability. In China,after such an announcement ,a CCP official(whose promotion hinges on successful implementation of the investment)would have been assigned to Apple to see to it that the project is completed

[bamboozled]

Because it’s an authoritarian dictatorship that forces people to do things to achieve its goals ?

[mayama]

> Because it’s an authoritarian dictatorship that forces people to do things to achieve its goals ?

That's just part of the puzzle. What makes CPC different from most dictatorships is like NK or SU is that most of ruling elite of CPC is made up of engineers. Along with mandatory CPC ideology leaning, they also have notion that a developed nation is one that builds things. Bankers and Lawyers are ranked way down on power rankings.

On the other hand, most of American ruling elite are lawyers or bankers. So their worldview is mostly rule lawyering, interest earning, hedge fund etc.. Power brokers in these fields make the rules. Builders and engineers rank pretty low in power totem pole.

[sswezey]

Do you have more information about this engineering culture of CPC?

[MaxPock]

https://archive.md/DrquB

[benterix]

Looking at the chart it seems like it's a relatively new phenomenon though.

[rayiner]

According to the chart it started under Deng, and that’s also around when China’s current phase of development started.

We forget these days that Chinese communism was a tire fire for the first half century. In 1990 China had the same per capita GDP (PPP) as India. Now China is 4x India.

[mbs159]

Them being forced to do things due to the dictatorship is not a compelling argument, as people are forced to do things in Western societies too, via other external factors like risk of poverty and hunger.

[ulfw]

What does this have to do with Apple or manufacturing investment pledges? Who is going hungry?

[analognoise]

About 17.9% of households with kids under 18: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo...

[ulfw]

And that is because of Apple Inc.?

[darthoctopus]

that is the point --- precisely because the usual mechanisms of enforcement do not apply, there will be no accountability for Apple.

[pjc50]

Accountability of what and to whom? Which law are they supposedly breaking?

[nxobject]

I think we're so far down the discussion thread, that we've forgotten that we're skeptical about whether Apple will be held accountable to their American investment promises...

[tekno45]

didn't our president say they'd be a dictator on day one?

[bamboozled]

Yup, and all this needing to appease behavior is part of the shtick

[Buttons840]

He doesn't pay enough attention to see past the headline though.

[rayiner]

grep -C 5 “I’ll be a dictator on day one.”

[estearum]

For anyone curious, the context here is that he said he'd be a dictator only on day one.

First, even one day of dictatorship is in direct violation of the Constitution.

Second, we're coming up on day 200 and the Trump administration continues to assert an expansive view of executive power far beyond any historical precedent and to degrade the systems designed to check that power, following a 100% run of the mill authoritarian playbook.

[rayiner]

> For anyone curious, the context here is that he said he'd be a dictator only on day one.

Still not correct.

[felixgallo]

https://youtu.be/dQkrWL7YuGk?t=26

[FranzFerdiNaN]

It’s an authoritarian president that forces Apple to make these promises, even though they will most likely never fulfil them. It’s all just one big play to appease to Trumps love for big numbers.

[MaxPock]

project management and accountability are communist ideals .

[pjc50]

Well, yes, because it's a "state capitalism" hybrid regime. If your position is that US companies should have a shadow board member who gets to dictate company policy over the wishes of and at the expense of investors, people might reasonably call that .. communism.

[benterix]

They may call it that, but to be precise it would be just an aspect of a planned economy[0]. NB democracies use a similar mechanism but only via companies where the state has the majority of shares which is completely different.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_economy

[Eddy_Viscosity2]

> have a shadow board member who gets to dictate company policy

This will happen sooner than you think if the US continues on its current path. Already Trump is asking for something similar for universities. He can use the same hammer for companies as well; deny them all government funding/contracts until they 'voluntarily' give in.

The 'c' word for this is not communism, but corruption. The special thing about corruption is that it can happen in any political 'ism'.

[rayiner]

Going after universities using government contracts as leverage was literally on Trump’s platform: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform. People voted the guy who promised to do that to be CEO of the branch of government that manages government contracts.

I don’t even know what to call someone who thinks the government should give private parties discretionary grants and contracts, but shouldn’t be able to use those to influence private actors. I’d call it libertarianism, but the principled libertarian would say we should abolish all funding to private universities.

[jhp123]

> I don’t even know what to call someone who thinks the government should give private parties discretionary grants and contracts, but shouldn’t be able to use those to influence private actors.

The idea that the sovereign should be limited to follow law, due process, and the advice of experts in the administration of grants goes back at least to the magna carta and is so widespread that you would use a more specific term — a "constitutional monarchist", "republican", "democrat", or "democratic socialist", etc., would all agree on this point. The opposite point of view however, has a name — authoritarian — so you could call such a person "anti-authoritarian".

[rayiner]

> The idea that the sovereign should be limited to follow law, due process

Due process protects rights and entitlements. Nobody has a right to receive discretionary government contracts or grants. To the extent we’re taking about preexisting contracts, the universities can sue to enforce whatever contractual rights they have. We have a robust system for recovering from the government for breaches of contract.

> and the advice of experts in the administration of grants

The “expert” stuff is the legacy of a scientific racist who didn’t trust democracy. It’s antithetical to democracy to suggest that the public should be forced to give discretionary grants and contracts to particular entities based on what “experts” think. Those experts are often themselves closely intertwined with the entities receiving the funding! They’re alums of Harvard, they met their spouse during grad school at Columbia, etc. They’ve got deep conflicts of interest.

[presentation]

Communism is a more specific term than that