Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple CEO Tim Cook: Trump's Decision to Withdraw From Paris Accord 'Was Wrong for Our Planet'

LizKat said:
As for Tim Cook, good on him for trying to persuade Trump, and for speaking out against the decision when Trump abandoned the Paris agreement. We need more people to be that outspoken so that in the international arena, it remains clear that yes there's Trump, but then there are still plenty of influential people who will do their level best to innovate for mitigation of climate change and who will keep that a priority. Presidents are transients. Environmental stewardship is a constant requirement and opportunity.
Click to expand...

Tim really pushed hard. A letter posted on the internet? Wow. He should have pulled out the big guns: pretty please with the sugar on top.

In all likelyhood Timmy and the other Apple execs had a plan for getting their hooks into a piece of this tax payer funded pie. I guess he will just have to settle for the billions they will make on the new $1000 iPhone coming out in September.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spinnyd, You are the One, DrewDaHilp1 and 2 others
mozumder said:
Since when is "not spending money" better for the economy?

You DO know that the economy revolves around spending money, right?
Click to expand...
Public education and common core have not worked as shown. 20 trillion in debt & borrowing to fund wars puts the economy in danger. Throwing 100's of billions in aid to others does the same No thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jamesnajera, spinnyd, You are the One and 3 others
ibookg409 said:
How is a foreigner like you going to tax my state? Please tell me?
Click to expand...

We have places like California ban products from your state until you pay for global warming.

What are you going to do? Stop selling to California? :D
[doublepost=1496372103][/doublepost]
JRobinsonJr said:
We'll agree to disagree on the short-term outcome. The real issue - and one that Trump clearly articulated - is not one of ignoring climate change. It's an issue of "Should the US be saddled with paying for everyone?" On that he is absolutely correct. The American Taxpayer is obligated to support climate initiatives, but so is every other resident of this planet. Sadly, many countries will never be willing to shoulder ANY of that burden. Trump just told them to kiss off. He never EVER said that the US was bailing on all climate initiatives.
Click to expand...

Yes. It is clear that the US should be saddled with paying for everyone.

It's because the US made this mess.
 
oneMadRssn said:
Article VI of the US Constitution says otherwise: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;"
Click to expand...

You are correct. But... the constitution also has that pesky requirement that TREATIES be ratified by congress... something that was not done for the Paris Accord. So, given that it was strictly a presidential decision, another president can make the opposite decision. If congress - Democrat, Republican or otherwise - wants to have this fully enforced without the possibility of Trump pulling out they should get off their butts and formalize it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sflomenb, jamesnajera, spinnyd and 3 others
jkcerda said:
Public education and common core have not worked as shown. 20 trillion in debt & borrowing to fund wars puts the economy in danger. Throwing 100's of billions in aid to others does the same No thanks.
Click to expand...

Public education has worked fine. If your state doesn't have proper education, maybe you should pay more for it until it becomes better?

What? Did you think public education came for free?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wildhope and yukonsnow
JRobinsonJr said:
You are correct. But... the constitution also has that pesky requirement that TREATIES be ratified by congress... something that was not done for the Paris Accord. So, given that it was strictly a presidential decision, another president can make the opposite decision. If congress - Democrat, Republican or otherwise - wants to have this fully enforced without the possibility of Trump pulling out they should get off their butts and formalize it.
Click to expand...
Fat chance. They work like 12 days a year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrewDaHilp1
JRobinsonJr said:
You are correct. But... the constitution also has that pesky requirement that TREATIES be ratified by congress... something that was not done for the Paris Accord. So, given that it was strictly a presidential decision, another president can make the opposite decision. If congress - Democrat, Republican or otherwise - wants to have this fully enforced without the possibility of Trump pulling out they should get off their butts and formalize it.
Click to expand...
Unfortunuately that was not possible at the time as Republicans controlled the Senate. Until Democrats can regain control, the party of science-deniers will rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redbeard331
mozumder said:
You need far more things from California than you know.

Half the food you buy is from California.

All of your tech is designed there.

In the end, California has leverage over you. You have no choice.
Click to expand...

None of the food I buy is from California. We use only local organic foods.

Most of my tech is designed in Japan.

California has no leverage over me

Finally, you don't know me, and have zero clue what you're talking about when you discuss my needs. ZERO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spinnyd, GSDLVR123, MistrSynistr and 4 others
zaphon said:
A CEO communicating to his employees about the business is one thing. Using it as a soapbox to push your political agenda down their throats is completely different. And before you say they can disagree, we all know how well disagreeing with the CEO of your company does for your career path.

I agree with others, businesses need to stay out of Politics (and so do singers, etc. Ask the Dixie Chicks how well it worked out for them)? If Tim Cook wants to host a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton on his own dime and time, so be it. But blur the line between Business and Personal, that's where there is a problem. It's clear Tim can separate Business from Personal, as he still sells Apple products in countries that openly execute gays.
Click to expand...
So speaking of blurring the line, Apple has consistently preached their commitment to renewable energy, which is one of the very things the Paris Accords stands for. [1][2][3]

And speaking of Hillary, considering that their business (like many others in the tech industry) involves attracting diverse groups of talent, would promoting his support to Hillary not also follow that same logic? Yes, there may be backlash, as you suggested in your examples, but "staying out of politics" has its own consequences. [4]

And lastly, Tim's beliefs (according to his public statements) are that by entering the countries that oppresses gays, while antithetical to his own status, he can, for example, improve the working conditions for gay employees. [5] Whether or not that'll lead to success I have no idea, but that certainly sounds like a business strategy to me.

[1]https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/13/apple-suppliers-renewable-energy-commitment/
[2]https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/18/apple-earth-day-green-shirts-april-20/
[3]https://www.macrumors.com/2016/04/22/apple-imessage-ad-renewable-energy/
[4]https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-silicon-valley-so-awful-to-women/517788/
[5]http://investor.apple.com/secfiling...2528&cik=320193#D79474DDEF14A_HTM_TOC79474_37
 
Last edited:
mozumder said:
We have places like California ban products from your state until you pay for global warming.

What are you going to do? Stop selling to California? :D
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: spinnyd, DrewDaHilp1, jkcerda and 1 other person
ibookg409 said:
None of the food I buy is from California. We use only local organic foods.

Most of my tech is designed in Japan.

California has no leverage over me

Finally, you don't know me, and have zero clue what you're talking about when you discuss my needs. ZERO.
Click to expand...

I'm sure someone will miss your posts on this site for a company from California
 
ibookg409 said:
None of the food I buy is from California. We use only local organic foods.

Most of my tech is designed in Japan.

California has no leverage over me

Finally, you don't know me, and have zero clue what you're talking about when you discuss my needs. ZERO.
Click to expand...

The funny part is I know more about you than you know yourself. Sorry, but that's how advertisers operate. You're in a bucket of personality types that are fully known.

California has control over you, including forcing companies in far-away states to comply with their regulations, causing you in third-party states to pay for it as well.

You're using products designed in California right now.
 
Works4Me said:
While I may not disagree with Cook's take on the Paris Accord, I do think he's being hypocritical by making computers that get harder and harder to repair and are impossible to upgrade (and thus extend their useful life), but criticizing others for not being green. And yes, I know about all of Apple's green initiatives....
Click to expand...
If another computer is produced that is 5% more efficient it's better than a few hundred thousand units before being repaired...right?!
 
smallcoffee said:
You're confusing ability with current practice.
Click to expand...
True to some extent. Think how many cargo, cruise ships we would need to produce. Not one of them registered or built in the US. Could not complete one car without foreign parts. The list is endless. Understand we owe everybody, if they wanted to punish us, no money to build all the stuff necessary to become self-sufficient. Then add a very long list of natural resources we depend on foreign countries, like Canada. Reality vs dream of being self-sufficient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redbeard331
The nations should agree to reduce harmful emissions, but I see no reason why paying out >$400B is necessary. Now, I can't say whether the U.S. should have exited the agreement because I haven't read it and am not going to pretend like I did.

BTW, the way Apple and other tech companies who are complaining produce their products in China are NOT in line with what they say about our commitment to protecting the environment. I want to see everyone get behind this effort and without anyone being a b**** about it (see: pretentious hipsters) or merely pretending to care for personal profit (see: tech companies).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sflomenb, Ajones330, You are the One and 2 others
sudo1996 said:
The nations should agree to protect the environment by reducing emissions, but I see no reason why paying out >$400B is necessary. Now, I can't say whether the U.S. should have exited the agreement because I haven't read it and am not going to pretend like I did.

BTW, the way Apple (and other tech companies who are complaining) produce their products in China are NOT in line with what they say about protecting the environment.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Nice post
 
  • Like
Reactions: jamesnajera, spinnyd, DrewDaHilp1 and 2 others
mozumder said:
The funny part is I know more about you than you know yourself. Sorry, but that's how advertisers operate. You're in a bucket of personality types that are fully known.

California has control over you, including forcing companies in far-away states to comply with their regulations, causing you in third-party states to pay for it as well.

You're using products designed in California right now.
Click to expand...
I am using an old iPhone. And when it breaks that's it. I'm not shelling out $1000 for tech that was innovative 4 years ago in Samsung products.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spinnyd, ThaRuler, TechGeek76 and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back