Comment by TigerofTao

Comment by TigerofTao 2 days ago

7 replies

This is troubling news, as we could soon be paying $2,500 for an iPhone within the next three years. The original reason for outsourcing was to keep costs down, and now, with this trade war, it's clear consumers will bear the burden.

While some may see the return of manufacturing to the U.S. as a win for national pride, the reality is more complex. The high cost of U.S. labor, combined with excessive bureaucracy, leads to higher production costs, which ultimately get passed on to consumers. There's nothing inherently beneficial about manufacturing in the U.S. other than symbolic gestures tied to identity politics.

Most consumers want affordable, high-quality products, not overpriced goods that may be touted as "Made in America" but offer no real value beyond that label. Instead of focusing on where products are made, the priority should be on ensuring that they are durable and not part of a system of planned obsolescence. We want iPhones that last longer, not cost more, yet U.S. manufacturing may drive up prices without offering real improvements in quality or longevity.

Unfortunately, the consumer is losing in this scenario—stuck paying for rising costs while receiving little in return. We need to reassess the real benefits of domestic manufacturing and whether they justify the inevitable price hikes. It’s clear that without a shift in strategy, we're moving toward a future where innovation is stifled by political posturing and unnecessary cost inflation.

negativeonehalf 2 days ago

Chip manufacturing is critical for national security, which is to say world security, if you like the Pax Americana (and you should). This is not some trade war thing. My only actual concern about this is that it may make the US less willing to intervene if the CCP invades Taiwan, and we absolutely should intervene if that happens.

  • can16358p 2 days ago

    I get the national security part, but not sure about world security part.

    Why should I, as an example, who is neither a US citizen nor Taiwanese nor Chinese, should trust a chip being manufactured in the US vs. somewhere else?

    I'd say it is neutral in regards to world security, not better.

    • kelnos 2 days ago

      I suppose it depends on where you are from and your politics, but I think many people outside the US would feel safer with chip production in the US than under Chinese control. I don't think most would really jump at the chance to buy the same chip from a US manufacturing plant vs. a Taiwanese one, but if China were to make a move on Taiwan, I'm not sure the world's computing resources would be particularly safe. (Not to mention, I wouldn't be surprised if the secret back-room plan was to raze Taiwan's chip manufacturing capability to the ground if it looked like China was going to win a takeover of the island.)

      Even ignoring the specific players, having critical advanced technology manufactured in more than one place increases world security. What if, say, a catastrophic earthquake were to significantly damage Taiwan's chip manufacturing? Having expertise and working, active manufacturing elsewhere is a good thing.

    • negativeonehalf 2 days ago

      I mean that the world is best off if the US continues to maintain the global maritime order, and this means there being no credible way of cutting off the US military from being able to mass produce weapons.

      Sure, this costs US taxpayers a lot, but whatever, it's worth it.

cbg0 2 days ago

Fortunately iPhones are not essential items you need to buy, so there's nothing forcing you to drop a hypothetical $2500 for one.

kelnos 2 days ago

> and now, with this trade war, it's clear consumers will bear the burden.

"Now"? The trade war has been on since what, 2017?

> There's nothing inherently beneficial about manufacturing in the U.S. other than symbolic gestures tied to identity politics.

While I think that argument can be made in general, if you consider certain sectors and certain products, the calculus changes. Onshoring chip production is a matter of national security. Not necessarily in the "big bad China will take over Taiwan and put backdoors in our chips" sense (though that's certainly a concern), but in the sense of not being dependent upon an adversarial state for fundamental advanced technology.

> Most consumers want affordable, high-quality products

Sure, but that's not sustainable. You end up playing "chase the country with the worst worker protections". This isn't the case of chips (yet?), but there are quite a few things where China used to be the go-to for manufacturing, but production has moved elsewhere because costs went up, and it's cheaper to stop doing it in China. The long-term end result of all this is that everywhere has labor costs that have gone up enough that offshoring doesn't really buy you all that much.

Of course you can say, "okay, maybe that's true, but at least I can get my cheap iPhone now, and moving production to the US hurts that now, rather than decades from now". And I'm somewhat sympathetic to that. But ultimately Apple may just have to change how it prices things if it costs more to make iPhones. They already make solid profit on each unit, and perhaps they'll just have to make do with less of a markup.

> Instead of focusing on where products are made, the priority should be on ensuring that they are durable and not part of a system of planned obsolescence

I feel like Apple is a pretty bad example for you to use here. I had to replace my perfectly-functional, four-year-old Pixel 4 last year because it stopped getting software updates after three and a half years. Meanwhile my wife has a six-year-old iPhone that will update to the latest major version of iOS tonight, and it will likely keep getting updates for a couple more years. My new Pixel 8 will supposedly get major OS updates for seven years. If I break the screen on my phone or the battery gets bad, I can get them replaced fairly affordably. These are improvements!

Apple's repair situation is worse, but that's a choice Apple has made. If they wanted to focus on repairability, next year's iPhone would be the most repairable phone on the market. But they don't want to do that. Moving manufacturing around is orthogonal to all that.