Apple and Nike?

[gwangung]

Oh, I think I can add more fuel to the fire....

Certainly, there's an awful lot of oversimplification going on here. Yes, what they pay factory workers overseas sounds like a pittance....but how much does that pittance buy over there? If it's enough to bring the workers up to a lower middle class standard, then it's obviously not quite as bad as at first glance; a friend of mine constantly says that his entry level blue collar job would enable him to "live like a king" back home. Then there's the other factor that the one thing THird WOrld countries can offer is cheap labor--that gives them foreign currency which is not a bad thing in and of itself. And if the country is resource poor, that may be the only thing that allows them to get participate in trade [and is ultimately less corrosive to them than always accepting charity].

On the other hand, it is certainly right to hold Nike's and other companies' feet to the fire and make sure they're not mistreating workers. They can get their sweat, but not their blood and tears.....

 

[johnpg]

If you truly think that boycotting Nike will improve the conditions in the countries containing their sweatshops, then I support your decision to boycott them. I disagree, but I don't think you're idiots. I am sorry if that boycott forces you to buy PCs instead of Macs.

I wish you'd respect that fact that not everyone agrees with you, and they aren't idiots because they believe differently. You act like this is clear-cut. It isn't.

Thank you for the common sense. I just wanted to lend my support. There are FAR better ways to deal with this issue than boycotting Nike. That won't do anyone any good. It clearly hasn't so far.

Any partnership with Apple and Nike (or other large hip companies) is a good idea. Now, if it turns out to be beneficial for Apple is still up in the air. The Pepsi cap debacle in LA has me wondering.

Cheers,
John

 

[swingdog]

But Nike is basically THE symbol of sweatshop labor. Everyone knows it, even if they buy Nike shoes anyway (which I never have and never will, btw). So this promotion says that Apple is willing to be associated with a company notorious for making poor little children slave away for next to nothing.

I don't buy from companies that I know force children to work. I can't guarantee that nothing I buy came from child labor, but I avoid any companies that I know are involved in such horrible things. I hope I don't have to add Apple to the list...

Ignoring children's livelihood for a moment, I also don't see what Apple gets out of this specific deal. Maybe Steve just gets a kick out of giant corporations wanting to be associated with Apple now. Maybe just he wanted free shoes for his kids?

I can't believe the ignorance of this post and other similar anti-Nike posts here...yes I guess ignorance really is bliss...and easy. I have worked in corporate responsibility (CR) for many years and I know Nike and their CR programs quite well. Nike is a poster child of proactive labor involvement, stakeholder engagement and community support. I only wish that more international companies followed their lead. A few facts: Nike's age standard is above the Fair Labor Association's child labor requirements (Nike imposes an age limit of 18 years in shoe manufacturing and 16 in apparel...not all factory operators like this higher standard position). Nike gives 3% of pretax profits to charity (over $30 million in 2003), much to international education and community-based programs (how much do you give?). Nike does not own any factories. They outsource to over 900 factories in over 50 countries (with 3rd party monitoring) with over 680,000 workers (workers that otherwise might not have access to any job opportunities). Nike has also sponsored over 15,000 micro lending loans around the world to stimulate local economic development. Nike's proactive initiatives are too numerous to list here. Spend some time at www.nikeresponsibility.com or third-party sites like www.fairlabor.org or www.bsr.org or www.theglobalalliance.org and try to learn something about the complex issues of foreign government oversight, import/export treaties, global supply chains, labor standards, poverty, educational opportunity, etc. Sure, there is still along ways to go and there are a lot of issues yet to be resolved, but you are thinking in the past and thereby making yourself part of the problem, not the solution. Go on Apple, with Nike you are partnering with a leader in corporate responsibility and accountability.

 

[gelbin]

soup kitchen

i started with soup kitchens.....there is hope for you after all.....

I suppose now I need to stop eating meat and start taking the homeless out to dinner. Actually, I volunteer at a soup kitchen/homeless shelter, so I guess that counts.

 

[TEG]

I do. I lived in one of them for 24 years. And I agree 100% with what TEG said. It's very easy to say "Nike is terrible because they employ child labor and don't pay by US standards", but people don't think about the fact that this child most of the time is bringing more money (proportionally to the country standards) than any teenager here in the US working at the local McDonalds. Take that away from them and they will starve and die. Or will you go and feed them?

Thank You Dashund, you made my point better than I did, or could have.

I'm not pro-sweatshop, but I think it is unfair for people to judge working conditions based on 1st and 2nd world working conditions. In reality most working arangments in 3rd and 4th world "sweat shops" are luxurious compared to other places of employment. Also, the few places whith acinine rules (like the one where the woman blead to death because she could not take a brake) ARE evil, they are also the responsibility of the company in charge of the location, not the bigger company buying parts from that "sweatshop". Nike is only a customer of another company, if the second company want to change a policy, Nike has no control over it. My own company has parts built in a 3rd world country, but the company, our suplier can do what ever they want, and we can't complain unless it dammages our product. Our only other alternative is to switch to another company, but the market is tough.

Another thing... Many of the companies in 3rd and 4th world countries that are connected with compaines like Nike, may not pay worker a lot compared to Western wages, but they do give most of them full health benefits, something we don't even have here (In the US).

BTW.. The TEGIAN defination of Economic Worlds on Earth;

1st World - Free Countries, with semi-liberal governments, many/most social services, and growing economies. Also, many people in 1st World counties complain when Unemployment is at 5-7%, which is below the "Natural" Unemployment Rate, or complain even the the economy is shrinking even when the country's growth is still positive.
Examples: United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan.

2nd World - Semi-Free Countries, with semi to extreme liberal governments, many/most social services, and stagnent economies.
Examples: Canada, France, Italy, The Netherlands.

3rd World - Semi-Free Countries, with moderate to semi-conservative countries, few social services, and stagnent to declining economies.
Examples: Russia, Tiawan(sp)/DRC, Mexico, Argentina, Iraq.

4th World - Dictatorial Counties (i.e. Not Free), semi-conservative to extreme conservative countries, no social services, declining economies.
Examples: Cuba, People's Republic of China, Zimbabwe (sp).

5th World - Countries in civil war, or Anarchy (sp).
Examples: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, Haiti.

Please don't flame me, I'm just calling how I see it. If you are from any of the countries, I apologized in advance if I have offended you, I'm just attempting to relate my views of the world to you. Also, Canadians (or Canadiens) I am half Canadian, and enjoy Canada, but you and I both know I was being generious.

TEG

 

[gelbin]

nope

again. nikewages.org.

they lived on the wage.
or should i say, starved on the wage.
it is not about simply lower costs of living...i think you are the one oversimplifying.

wrong. simply wrong. they had to choose to eat or have a jug of heating oil. no lower middle class nothing.

Oh, I think I can add more fuel to the fire....

Certainly, there's an awful lot of oversimplification going on here. Yes, what they pay factory workers overseas sounds like a pittance....but how much does that pittance buy over there? If it's enough to bring the workers up to a lower middle class standard, then it's obviously not quite as bad as at first glance; a friend of mine constantly says that his entry level blue collar job would enable him to "live like a king" back home. Then there's the other factor that the one thing THird WOrld countries can offer is cheap labor--that gives them foreign currency which is not a bad thing in and of itself. And if the country is resource poor, that may be the only thing that allows them to get participate in trade [and is ultimately less corrosive to them than always accepting charity].

On the other hand, it is certainly right to hold Nike's and other companies' feet to the fire and make sure they're not mistreating workers. They can get their sweat, but not their blood and tears.....

 

[Kagetenshi]

Didn't Second World refer to USSR and allies until its demise? Canada most emphatically does not qualify, nor does France.

~J

 

[gelbin]

ha ha ha #5

they contract to the factories that hire and abuse children and adults.
they are responsible no matter how the contract is written....

I can't believe the ignorance of this post and other similar anti-Nike posts here...yes I guess ignorance really is bliss...and easy. I have worked in corporate responsibility (CR) for many years and I know Nike and their CR programs quite well. Nike is a poster child of proactive labor involvement, stakeholder engagement and community support. I only wish that more international companies followed their lead. A few facts: Nike's age standard is above the Fair Labor Association's child labor requirements (Nike imposes an age limit of 18 years in shoe manufacturing and 16 in apparel...not all factory operators like this higher standard position). Nike gives 3% of pretax profits to charity (over $30 million in 2003), much to international education and community-based programs (how much do you give?). Nike does not own any factories. They outsource to over 900 factories in over 50 countries (with 3rd party monitoring) with over 680,000 workers (workers that otherwise might not have access to any job opportunities). Nike has also sponsored over 15,000 micro lending loans around the world to stimulate local economic development. Nike's proactive initiatives are too numerous to list here. Spend some time at www.nikeresponsibility.com or third-party sites like www.fairlabor.org or www.bsr.org or www.theglobalalliance.org and try to learn something about the complex issues of foreign government oversight, import/export treaties, global supply chains, labor standards, poverty, educational opportunity, etc. Sure, there is still along ways to go and there are a lot of issues yet to be resolved, but you are thinking in the past and thereby making yourself part of the problem, not the solution. Go on Apple, with Nike you are partnering with a leader in corporate responsibility and accountability.

 

[martman]

Well, hopefully at least some of the students actually think about what they're objecting to and realize that it's not as terrible or as clear-cut as they believe. They either have to boycott virtually everything (and, of course, they're still stuck with knowing that their homes are likely on what used to be Indian territory until it was stolen by the government...), or they have to get on with life. Life isn't fair. If they're that concerned about injustice, they should join the Peace Corps. Presumably, they already realize that not buying Nike shoes means someone in Indonesia (or wherever) loses a job. Yeah, that's sound reasoning.

Look, I think it's terrible that the average worldwide standard of living is so bad. But not buying Nike shoes isn't going to help it at all. Buying non-sweatshop shoes just keeps the money in the developed countries, which actually worsens things.

So, I guess, the more sweatshop-based stuff you buy, the more you help the third world.

So, then, cheers to Apple for choosing Nike.

This logic is flawed!
Buying things from corporations that rip off the poor is NOT benificial to the poor. This kind of thinking would lead to even more explotation of the underprivilaged classes. It takes verry little inteligence to see why these ridiculous rationalisations are being used by people like us who live in the first world. You want your cheap prices at any cost.
Sweat shops rob children of their childhood and expose people to unsafe working conditions. I find it extremely sick that anyone would advocate sweatshops as benificial to anyone but the rich.
What a horrible self-serving attitude.

If this rumor is true shame on Apple and shame on me for having just bought a new G5!



As for the notion that one must boycot everything, it is true that there is a lot of injustice on the planet and it would be hard to boycot everything that is wrong at once. This is why we chose our battles one at a time.
F*ck Nike and its horrible buisness practices.

 

[Kagetenshi]

Ok, I did some looking up, and you are completely wrong. (@TEG)

The First World refers to the industrialized capitalist nations of the world. France, Canada, the US, and every other nation listed in your Second World definition falls under that.

The Second World is the developed Communist countries; the USSR while it was alive, China.

The Third World is the less-developed nations, and the Fourth World (turns out there really is such a thing, you were right about that) is the least-developed nations. Third World is middle-east style or India-style, fourth is Congo-style and such.

There is no Fifth World, never was, and probably never will be.

~J

 

[billyboy]

it is not about helping the poor people (directly) either. it is about not supporting the evil that nike is responsible for, and all of those that give them money and support their efforts are responsible for. the people still have to prostitute themselves because they can't feed their families. what more, they are raped at work by their NIKE bosses. i agree, not all sweatshops are equal, and not all low wage labor is a bad thing, but this is nike, and this is a story of rape and abuse of people.

if you looked at the link i posted, nikewages.org is about helping the people, about educating, and about making a change. they have approached phil knight, they offered to work in a sweatshop, they also went and lived witht he poor villagers doing nike's dirty work....so yeah, i am a part of that.

get off my ass - i love it. you make me laugh too. ha ha ha. i laugh. comfy back yards, ha ha ha. i will continue to despite nike. and will do what i can to work for justice. and then laugh because you make me.

Er, excuse me, my post with no reference to anyone and with no quote just happened to appear under yours. I certainly was not talking to you. If you actually got off your ass good for you. Its quite hard to bring down a big corporation though that was no doubt doing its own style of profiteering way before it ever became public knowledge. But if you are into tilting at windmills like the majority of well meaning activists hard pushed to balance their beliefs against a backdrop of a comfy existence, I wont laugh at you.

btw if you can tell me something even more naive than offering to go work in the place of the employees of a sweatshop in the name of improving the job opportunities for the local people, I would love to hear. Send your plane fare to someone local so they can set up something constructive.

 

[TEG]

Ok, I did some looking up, and you are completely wrong. (@TEG)

The First World refers to the industrialized capitalist nations of the world. France, Canada, the US, and every other nation listed in your Second World definition falls under that.

The Second World is the developed Communist countries; the USSR while it was alive, China.

The Third World is the less-developed nations, and the Fourth World (turns out there really is such a thing, you were right about that) is the least-developed nations. Third World is middle-east style or India-style, fourth is Congo-style and such.

There is no Fifth World, never was, and probably never will be.

~J

It is my view of the world. NOT some scientific setup. I AM intitled to my opinion, am I not? My view of the world breaks down some of the sterotypes when it comes to economic classes. I invented the 5th World, and I fear, that if we continue this bickering there will develop a 6th world... The Internet.

TEG

 

[vpalvarez]

Sounds like free pub for Nike. What's in it for Apple?

Besides the brand association...probably not much, but that may be enough. Nike might have agreed to use Apple technology

 

[rdowns]

I don't know...Apple and Nike? Is this really a good thing?

I don't see why not.

Upgrade your damn aging, old technology based lineup. Just do it!

 

[ITR 81]

I think this is all so funny

The reason why?

We as a nation(US) buy the cheapest products we can buy. How do we get these cheap products? We outsource to cheap labour countries...and then we complain about it. How typical..

Where was my PB made?? China. How much do they get paid probably less then few bucks. Does this bother me?? No.

I buy what I like...and I'm not going to stop buying what I like just because someone tells me it's a bad company.

Would I want some kid making a few bucks a day or whoring him or herself out on the streets and get some STD?? Not much of a choice but working is the best choice. In Korea if your poor and can't get a low paying job you have to start turning tricks on the street or get some GI to buy you from your handler. It's pretty common around the DMZ. $2k will buy a girl or boy their freedom and their passport.

Would this make me stop buying Korean products? No, I'd probably buy more to help Korean's like myself.

 

[jaykk]

How is Apple involved with this Nike iD thing at all...

And what's in it for Apple...

I'M SO CONFUSED - AGGH

Apple just want to increase their foot traffic to their stores. The concerts have the same purpos- to get more people visit the store.

 

[rdowns]

Man, where are the mods? This thread is out of control.

Maybe this isn't the best time to inform you all that Kathy Lee Gifford will be starring in the next Apple switcher TV ad campaign. It breaks next Tuesday.

 

[jsw]

Man, where are the mods? This thread is out of control.

Maybe this isn't the best time to inform you all that Kathy Lee Gifford will be starring in the next Apple switcher TV ad campaign. It breaks next Tuesday.

I wondered where the moderators were myself! Perhaps out buying Nike shoes.

And man, it was dangerous to mention Kathy Lee....

In any event, at least it shows people care. Given the subject and the flow of the thread, it didn't even got too out of control. I'm sure all will be fine tomorrow. With this thread. Not, of course, with the downtrodden. By that, I mean those poor people waiting for the next G5 announcement.

 

[gwangung]

again. nikewages.org.

they lived on the wage.
or should i say, starved on the wage.
it is not about simply lower costs of living...i think you are the one oversimplifying.

wrong. simply wrong. they had to choose to eat or have a jug of heating oil. no lower middle class nothing.

I question this. It's easy to say wrong, wrong, wrong from over here. In order to force that choice between working in a factory and starvation, there has to be no other choice for work. What kind of conditions generate this? Conditions similar to England and the US during the Industrial Revolutions. And those conditions were eased from within, not from without. Conditions that outside corporations and other countries find highly resistant to change from without. I wonder if external methods are the best way to go about this.

 

[croasmun]

First/Second/Third World Terminology

Just a quick, hopefully helpful note on first, second, third world terminology. The terminology dates from the Cold War era in which U.S. foreign policy viewed nations in the world in one of two camps:

1) "free" nations of the world--Western democracies, essentially--comprised the First World. U.S. and their allies.
2) Communist nations, U.S.S.R., China, and satellite nations.

In the eyes of American policy-makers, they were engaged in a worldwide battle between the good 1st World and the bad 2nd World. The problem was that--largely because of nuclear weapons--the 1st and 2nd worlds did not dare do battle directly. Instead, they fought for influence in as-yet unalligned nations--Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, etc. The theatre for Cold War flare-ups was the Third World, nations who were commited neither to the ideals of western Democracy nor to Communism. The fact most or at least many of these nations were not yet industrialized during the Cold War brought about our colloquial use of "Third World," meaning underdevloped, poor, etc., but, really, in the beginning, it was just a political designation.

 

[jnasato]

Man, I built the ugliest shoe on the Nike ID site...

I like the idea of customizing one's shoe, and I hope that this all benefits Apple somehow.

 

[vpalvarez]

How is Apple advertising a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with the #1 shoemaker a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with any number of MAJOR corporations in any way a bad thing?

People, the only way for Apple to ever climb out of the cellar is for more then 25 million people to know about macs. It's more of today's youth to know about macs and that there is an alternative to that grey/beige box their parents bought at Costco. We need to be mainstream, to have mainstream appeal. To do that, we need to join the mainstream crowd and McDonalds, Pepsi, Nike all represent that.

How is that a bad thing? The more Apple does this, the greater then improve their odds of surviving long enough to maybe make some leaps forward in terms of market share. The iPod is their trendy appliance, but what else? Computer sales have sucked and still suck, they need more people interested in their machines. You do that by getting into the public eye, looking like a mainstream alternative, a better alternative. How is that a bad thing?

I will definitely second that

 

[vpalvarez]

Agreed. Many Mac users/Apple fans I know hate what NIKE does.

Good point about the "think different -- think for yourself" crowd. It seems to me that such a partnership would be a terrible idea. I think many Apple users would be turned off by this. I know I am.

No Apple fan will stop using acs becasue Apple has a relationship with Nike, this can only help there will be no harm from this endeavor at all

 

[?Hater]

Nike-Apple workout mp3 mini-ipod?

How is it that no one has brought up Nike mp3 players yet? Couldn't this suggest a future Nike mp3 player by Apple? Here's the current one, I don't see why they don't pull an HP and make the mini a workout branded Nike Model. Change the material, band, put a swoosh on it and put it in Niketowns.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...cs/102-2415304-3960900?v=glance&s=electronics

 

[gelbin]

wonder

I question this. It's easy to say wrong, wrong, wrong from over here. In order to force that choice between working in a factory and starvation, there has to be no other choice for work. What kind of conditions generate this? Conditions similar to England and the US during the Industrial Revolutions. And those conditions were eased from within, not from without. Conditions that outside corporations and other countries find highly resistant to change from without. I wonder if external methods are the best way to go about this.

i agree, it is somethign to think about. the problem though is that this is not the US industrial revolution. these are not Thai companies taking avantage of their own people, waiting for a labor revolution and the formation of unions, to triumph over the company so that both prosper in the end. this is US (foreign) companies coming in and taking the majority of the wealth out of their country, giving the governments a cut for the kind treatment, and keeping them from forming unions or organizing in opposition to work/labor policies. i am not saying it is wrong for them to develop, i think it is wrong for them to 'develop' under the fist of american companies that do not have a stake in their long term development and will pull up stakes as soon as another country is proven to be a cheaper whore (read: i.e. jamaica to mexico).