Intel and Apple Vow to Not Use Conflict Minerals

[eklipz330]

what a retarded move. humans war, its what we do best. fund the war, let them slaughter themselves thinking they are different from eachother

if they realize otherwise, good for them! it won't ever make me feel bad, they will war regardless

 

[hoofhearted]

Guess it all boils down to his Kenyan roots. If it has to do with Africa, then it is important.

 

[Guest]

Taking stand on this issue is paramount. To knowingly support these corrupt operations and the bloodshed they create is unacceptable. Additionally, many mines are vast, open-pit operations that use tons of sodium cyanide to extract metals and have been known to release millions of gallons of mining waste and effluent into the environment. This waste is thick with sulfuric acid, arsenic, and heavy metals that when spilled, results in long-term environmental disaster. Examples include Summitville, Zortmann-Landusky, Brewer Mine, Guyana's Omai Gold Mine, and Aurul Baia-Mare, which decimated 200 miles of the Danube River. Can these companies also commit to qualifying that their metals come from envionmentally safe operations?

 

[COLGeek]

Well, this is a largely symbolic gesture as the purchase of these commodities is largely based on the global market, where the origin of the raw materials get lost as middle men bring stuff to market. Once refined, there is no way (meaningful anyway) to identify where something came from.

Next.

 

[billj214]

Maybe we should stop buying oil from Afghanistan and Iran as well?

 

[itchyisvegeta]

Hello price increase.

 

[BulkZerker]

@ billj214

Afghanistan gives us cocaine not oil. And we have the cia to thank for that one since thay trained al queida during the cold war. We didn't give those people a fish, we thaught thrm how to fish. Now we gotta live with them pissing in our lake.

Back to this conflict mijnerals bullshit. All it does is make the upper middle fclass that feel bad about being sucessful feel like thye are doing something good. Though this in the long term could reduce the price for the minerals. No war, no need for a security company to escourt. He worlers and materials around.

 

[popatim]

Yet another devastating blow to our economy. TYVM Obama bin laden...

 

[Yoder54]

[citation][nom]BulkZerker[/nom]@ billj214Afghanistan gives us cocaine not oil..[/citation]

Say what? Afghanistan does not produce cocaine...that is a South American product. Afghanistan in noted for it's high-quality pot, kief, hashish, and opium.

 

[BulkZerker]

Either way illegal substances. And not anything honestly of worth

 

[LordConrad]

[citation][nom]kinggraves[/nom]I'm sure most Americans want their goods to be American made, but are you willing to pay the price hikes caused by less efficient business practices like "regular breaks" and "sick days"? [/citation]
I'm sure most Americans want their goods to be American made, but are you willing to pay the price hikes caused by Out of control labor unions?

Fixed it for you.

 

[Bristecom]

You are confused. American corporations move overseas because they can hire for pennies on the dollar--it does cost more here in the US than in China or India. Overseas they are not required to provide health care, pay US taxes, etc. Exxon had over $3 billion in profits last year, and paid 0 in taxes. This holds true for many big corporations, and to blame it on the government is to deny the facts.

How is government not to blame? You just admitted that it costs more here in the US because of the taxes, health care requirements, regulations, etc. These things are all forced on by the governemnt. So of course companies are going to look elsewhere to make their products.

If we had little to no taxes and regulations and a debt-free currency, companies would manufacture here and we'd all be better off. Employees wouldn't be so desperate for jobs so they'd have a lot more room to negotiate higher wages and better working conditions. Private health care would be very cheap and readily available and not linked to a job. And the products would still be affordable for consumers.

Let them move overseas, and they can take their CEO's with them. They want the good life, but don't want to pay their fair share. Let's see how much they would enjoy living in China or India.

They aren't afraid to move. I'm sure they'd prefer to stay in the US but in order to strive as a company, it may become an obvious logical decision. Just remember why people from all around the world moved to the US in the first place. It was because we had small government - low taxes, minimal regulations, low risks. It was easy for people to start and grow their businesses. They didn't have to constantly fear the government anymore.

Please brush up on the facts before telling others what they can or cannot say.

I didn't tell him what he could or couldn't say. I just suggested he think a little before making statements like "I think the government should penalize companies for shipping jobs overseas."

 

[Yoder54]

Study your economics and learn what really drives the cost of commodities: R&D, production costs, and supply and demand--not federal regulation and taxes. Taxes provide the infrastructure that allow for production, and fed regulation in the business sector exists to protect employees and consumers. I would not trust any corporation to produce safe products under their own volition.

No taxes? Yea, that would work great. How would we support our infrastructure, education, military, etc. As an American citizen you have tacitly agreed to pay taxes to the government...embrace it. Be realistic.

People moved to the US to escape oppression and for the opportunities that exists solely because of our government. It is naive to say they moved here because we had small government, low taxes, and minimal regulations. Where do you get your information? How many of those who relocated here started their own business? Sorry, but your facts are definitely flawed here.

Penalize companies that outsource? Yea, that would be a good idea but I would suggest it be done by taxation.

 

[Bristecom]

Study your economics and learn what really drives the cost of commodities: R&D, production costs, and supply and demand--not federal regulation and taxes. Taxes provide the infrastructure that allow for production, and fed regulation in the business sector exists to protect employees and consumers. I would not trust any corporation to produce safe products under their own volition.

What do you think would happen if companies made unsafe or crappy products? People wouldn't buy them! News would get out so fast, especially in this day of internet. The company would go under in no time. Now maybe you were just referring to trace elements of lead and such. And I'm not totally against regulatory bodies. But again, the market can and does create standards all the time. Meeting a standard can be a great selling point and in many cases is needed to provide a consistent quality of products. But again, this can be better achieved outside of government by well-respected organizations. You're a lot more likely to get corruption in a government run monopolized bureaucracy than an organization that depends on its credibility.

No taxes? Yea, that would work great. How would we support our infrastructure, education, military, etc. As an American citizen you have tacitly agreed to pay taxes to the government...embrace it. Be realistic.

The same way we did it before government got involved. Education is run better privately. The more money we pour into our public schools, the worse results we get. They are failing. Infrastructure can be handled in ways privately better than government as well. National defense... yeah, you would probably want some kind of navy or defense agency to provide for the nation. But that could just be a small fee for companies or possibly citizens.

And BTW, I never agreed to pay income tax, social security, medicare/medicaid, etc. I was just born here and live here. But if I don't pay those things, I will be put in prison or likely robbed of everything I have. The government is forcing this upon me at gunpoint essentially... that's why I pay for them. Not because I think I'm going to get anything out of it. Which begs the question, does the government own you and all of your land/possessions, or do you own yourself and your property? Hmm...

People moved to the US to escape oppression and for the opportunities that exists solely because of our government. It is naive to say they moved here because we had small government, low taxes, and minimal regulations. Where do you get your information? How many of those who relocated here started their own business? Sorry, but your facts are definitely flawed here.

Penalize companies that outsource? Yea, that would be a good idea but I would suggest it be done by taxation.

Well I don't know about you but I know quite a few foreigners who moved here to start a business and escape their burdensome government and a highly inflated currency. I'm actually kind of shocked you don't think that's a reason they moved here. But the funny thing is, they're about ready to move somewhere else now. I know an Asian guy who shut down his restaurant he had running for 30 years! And he's heading back to China. I remember he'd always complain about the price of rice and his food going up (inflation). But anyway, those opportunities were not provided by our government or socialist programs; they were there because of the lack of government!

Government is not a business; it cannot create wealth. In fact, any dollar it spends; it takes from the productive private industry. And that includes creating money as it lowers the value of the currency. In general, the less government; the more productivity and wealth.

However, today in America we have something called corporatism. Large corporations in bed with our government! This is a terrible system because it does not allow the free market to operate. We have the government and the Federal Reserve that creates bad loans and mal-investments to prop up certain industries which inevitably always ends up in a crash because they aren't properly meeting market demands. But the corporations have nothing to lose because they know the government/Fed will always bail them out! Large corporations also work with government to create new regulations which make it harder for companies to compete with them. So the tax payers and small businesses always lose and the large corporations, bankers, and politicians, always win. Disgusting...

This is why we need a strictly bound constitutional government with debt free or competing currencies and a return to true free market principles (something we haven't had since at least 1912).

 

[gomi]

How about only buying components from companies that treat their workers better than foxconn?

 

[cookoy]

another government regulation on american businesses

 

[COLGeek]

@ billj214

Afghanistan gives us cocaine not oil. And we have the cia to thank for that one since thay trained al queida during the cold war. We didn't give those people a fish, we thaught thrm how to fish. Now we gotta live with them pissing in our lake.

Back to this conflict mijnerals bullshit. All it does is make the upper middle fclass that feel bad about being sucessful feel like thye are doing something good. Though this in the long term could reduce the price for the minerals. No war, no need for a security company to escourt. He worlers and materials around.

Actually, heroin comes from the poppies harvested in Afghanistan, not cocaine.

For the others commodity discussed, namely oil, same goes for it in terms of losing its national origin once put on the open market. Raw resources are purchased by middle-men and eventually by refineries and manufacturers. Once it arrives at the facility, where it came from is irrelevant and unknown.

 

[eddieroolz]

Though I agree that it's a good initiative, sadly with only the US on board this won't be very effective. The whole world needs to join this initiative for it to produce any meaningful results.