Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Pledges Support to Employees Affected by DACA in New Letter
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I can understand the frustration, but the blame is not on Tim Cook. As a public company, Tim is doing the right thing. iPhones make the most $$$, shareholders like this, so that is where the majority of the resources get funneled to.
Tim would get fired instantly if he told the board "You know the device that only makes 5% of our profit? Well I am devoting most of the money and resources to it".
Maybe if enough people purchased the Mac mini it would get more focus.
[doublepost=1504752165][/doublepost]
I understand the argument. I think the CAUSE needs to be fixed FIRST. There are 800,000 people! Set up a way to get them legal quickly, and fix the damn borders to prevent MORE from coming here.
Spending time getting 800,000 people out, how many will sneak in in that time?
Last edited:
Except, that's not the law. According to our laws you are an American citizen if you are born here regardless of your parents' immigration status and with very limited exceptions which don't apply in this context.
Not only is that what our laws say, it is what is required by our Constitution.
[doublepost=1504804941][/doublepost]
A few things...
(1) The Trump Administration didn't really extend the DACA program for 6 months. The six-month time frame only relates to a small aspect of the DACA policy changes. Most of the changes to DACA were effectively immediately or within a month. (For accuracy's sake, President Obama didn't issue an executive order for the DACA program. The Secretary of the DHS issued a departmental policy memorandum. For these discussions, that distinction doesn't matter much though.)
As of Tuesday, no new initial applications for DACA or employment authorization were to be accepted. Applications which had already been filed would, however, be considered. Renewal applications which had already been filed would also be considered. However, new renewal applications would only be accepted if they were filed by October 5th and only if they were from people whose existing DACA or employment authorization status would expire by March 5th of next year. So even renewal applicants don't have 6 months to apply; they have 1 month. Further, as of Tuesday no more advance parole applications would be approved. No new applications would be accepted and pending applications would be closed. Already approved applications would remain valid.
(2) The original DACA program - that which is at issue here and that which you refer to President Trump extending for 6 months - has not been deemed unconstitutional in part, at least not by our courts. Legal challenges to it have failed on standing grounds.
(3) If you were referring to the DAPA and expanded DACA programs - which you don't seem to be as you referred to what President Trump extend for 6 months and that's not the case with those programs - then even those programs have not been deemed unconstitutional by our courts. They were enjoined because the Fifth Circuit (upholding a federal district court decision) found that the Administrative Procedure Act hadn't been complied with in their enactment. According to that court the Obama Administration should have followed a notice-and-comment process before enacting that program. But that court and the court below explicitly declined to consider the constitutional issue. In other words, those courts didn't decide whether the programs themselves violated the Constitution. A split (4-4) Supreme Court affirmed the Fifth Circuit decision which means that it remains in place but doesn't establish binding precedent for other circuits.
Last edited:
With due respect, I think you're missing a very important difference here...
I presume you're referring to affirmative action, or other policy measures that promote or otherwise advantage underrepresented groups? If so, that's the key difference; underrepresentation amounts to inequality of opportunity. Although I may not have personally discriminated against members of an underrepresented group, the fact remains that those individuals face much greater barriers to earning the life they desire -- and the corollary is also true, that I have enjoyed a socio-economic advantage simply by virtue of being born a heterosexual white male in North America.
Did I do anything to deserve that advantage? No. Did I do anything to deserve being disadvantaged? No. But can I do something, right now, to correct for the systemic discrimination that I'm implicit in? Yes. Affirmative action is a temporary measure to even the playing field, so to speak, and when everyone has a fair shake (i.e., equality of opportunity), then we all benefit from living in a more just and equal society. You can't move forward collectively if you leave some behind; progress is necessarily slow.
With DACA, these individuals are not receiving a free ride at your expense, but the opportunity to earn a living and contribute to the country that has given them safe harbour, so to speak. If these individuals betray that opportunity through crime or other means, they still face deportation. Instead of viewing DACA as a personal punishment, view it as a personal and collective sacrifice for a better and more just society/country.
The thought that immigration necessarily erodes culture or economic prosperity is self-evidently false; borne out of fear, not evidence.
No one should be surprised by this sort of resistance, though. It's difficult to acknowledge when you have received undeserved advantage, and it's even more difficult to willingly accede it. My views have changed over time, and I trust others' will too -- with time, and more importantly, education. Labelling and vilifying the "left" or "right" accomplishes nothing; this isn't team sports, and everyone is in it together.
If Tim Cook really wants to make a difference with our illegal immigration problem, then he should join together with all the US companies that outsource manufacturing overseas and give reason for people to stay in their home countries by giving them better paying jobs which will result in a better way of life for them. This alone would significantly impact the amount of people wanting to cross our borders by any means. And this would significantly reduce the problem of children being brought into our country illegally.
Currently, the minimum wage in Mexico is between $3 and $4 / hr and look at how many have crossed the border illegally over the years looking for a better life. And this is where the majority of the DACA immigrants come from - Mexico and further south where the minimum wage is even less.
The obvious solution to stem the flow of immigration is to provide more jobs and better paying jobs in their home countries. And yet, Apple is content to pay Chinese laborers to hand build $800 iPhones for less than $2 / hr.
Sounds a little hypocritical to me. Support DACA on the one hand but contribute to the primary reason that causes people to leave their home country for a better life in the first place.
I certainly don't have a solution for the current predicament we're in, but I'm truly concerned about the possible precedence we will set. If the world sees us "embrace" the current crop of illegal immigrants, then what's to stop the 500 million+ chinese peasants and cheap labor from finding ways to enter the US by any means? Or the 500 million+ farmers and cheap labor in India?
I don't care how "robust" our economy currently is. I'm quite confident that our current 300+ million population can't absorb 1 billion+ people without severe economic fallout.
Sounding a little far fetched? Ask yourself 20 years ago, would you believe that we would have the multiple millions of hispanics living and working in the US "illegally" today.
This is just round 1. How we handle round 1 will determine if we will have a round 2 and round 3.
So, why am I picking on Tim Cook and his humanitarian stance? Because a recent MacRumor article state that Apple has $1 billion set aside to purchase a studio space in Culver City. $1 Billion. How many people can that support? A second article says Apple is in contention to purchase film/TV content in the $2 billion to $5 billion range.
I'm not against Apple making money and investing that money into growing the company into an even bigger company. I'm all for that and want to see them succeed.
I'm just a little taken aback at Tim Cook's seemingly hypocritical stance on immigration.
On the one hand, he talks about American values and supporting immigration into our country. On the other hand, he has no problem paying foreign laborers much much less than his 250+ DACA employees.
Does he truly not understand that his company and the other US companies are contributing to what is probably the biggest reason why we so many people want to immigrant to the US legally and illegally - low paying jobs in their home country and the desire to find a better job to support a better life for themselves and their families.
Currently, the minimum wage in Mexico is between $3 and $4 / hr and look at how many have crossed the border illegally over the years looking for a better life. And this is where the majority of the DACA immigrants come from - Mexico and further south where the minimum wage is even less.
The obvious solution to stem the flow of immigration is to provide more jobs and better paying jobs in their home countries. And yet, Apple is content to pay Chinese laborers to hand build $800 iPhones for less than $2 / hr.
Sounds a little hypocritical to me. Support DACA on the one hand but contribute to the primary reason that causes people to leave their home country for a better life in the first place.
I certainly don't have a solution for the current predicament we're in, but I'm truly concerned about the possible precedence we will set. If the world sees us "embrace" the current crop of illegal immigrants, then what's to stop the 500 million+ chinese peasants and cheap labor from finding ways to enter the US by any means? Or the 500 million+ farmers and cheap labor in India?
I don't care how "robust" our economy currently is. I'm quite confident that our current 300+ million population can't absorb 1 billion+ people without severe economic fallout.
Sounding a little far fetched? Ask yourself 20 years ago, would you believe that we would have the multiple millions of hispanics living and working in the US "illegally" today.
This is just round 1. How we handle round 1 will determine if we will have a round 2 and round 3.
So, why am I picking on Tim Cook and his humanitarian stance? Because a recent MacRumor article state that Apple has $1 billion set aside to purchase a studio space in Culver City. $1 Billion. How many people can that support? A second article says Apple is in contention to purchase film/TV content in the $2 billion to $5 billion range.
I'm not against Apple making money and investing that money into growing the company into an even bigger company. I'm all for that and want to see them succeed.
I'm just a little taken aback at Tim Cook's seemingly hypocritical stance on immigration.
On the one hand, he talks about American values and supporting immigration into our country. On the other hand, he has no problem paying foreign laborers much much less than his 250+ DACA employees.
Does he truly not understand that his company and the other US companies are contributing to what is probably the biggest reason why we so many people want to immigrant to the US legally and illegally - low paying jobs in their home country and the desire to find a better job to support a better life for themselves and their families.
Gee how bout that. And are you a parent?
Gee...Houston...."we" have a problem....
And... I'd like to add a graphic that shows American companies that STOLE jobs from our workforce by moving those jobs outta this country... only to EXPLOIT IMMIGRANT labor but let's not talk about that little secret shall we? Have a look at this graphic...
Enough said. Blame blame blame.
Not even close. I know someone who is in an a L1. SME in his specialized field. L1 is good for 2 years, renewable once. He likely won't get his GC before the second L1 expires. The process is stupid slow.
They would if the wages went up. Supply and demand.
That would be good for the economy, too.
[doublepost=1505362925][/doublepost]
And republicans are the party of segregation
Can we stop it with the stupid meaningless sayings that don't make real sense now?
Gee...Houston...."we" have a problem....
And... I'd like to add a graphic that shows American companies that STOLE jobs from our workforce by moving those jobs outta this country... only to EXPLOIT IMMIGRANT labor but let's not talk about that little secret shall we? Have a look at this graphic...
Enough said. Blame blame blame.
Several of these companies aren't American companies or used to be American before being bought up by foreign companies. If an American company exports jobs out of the US, which they have the right to do, they're not exploiting immigration as you suggest. If they set up shop in another country and use that country's population as a labor force, they're not using immigrant labor.
In relation to that graphic, the following are foreign owned.
VW, Sabritas, Motorola, GE Appliances, Nestle, GSK, Nissan, LG, Philips, Bayer, Sony, NEC, Siemens, Ericsson, Nokia, Unilever, BASF, Ciba, Olivetti, Schneider Electric, Nemak.
Ciba was bought by BASF and integrated with them. EDS was bought by HP a decade ago and axed. I find it more interesting you didn't post the biggest sellout, Chrysler. Which is now owned by the Italians.