Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Apple to Arizona: That's a nice plant we have there. It'd be a shame if you lose it   (tech.fortune.cnn.com) divider line 105
    More: Interesting, Arizona  
•       •       •

4937 clicks; posted to Business » on 25 Feb 2014 at 4:52 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



105 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-25 04:33:30 PM  
So Apple is all good with China, but Arizona freaks them out?!
 
2014-02-25 04:36:41 PM  
Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.
 
2014-02-25 04:44:25 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: So Apple is all good with China, but Arizona freaks them out?!


So, you're saying that if they won't go all Don Quixote on China, then they have no moral standing at effecting what they perceive as positive change where they can?

Good point.
 
2014-02-25 04:47:47 PM  

Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.


I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.

As for the bolded point, yes, it's depressing that business concerns are more important than the moral inclination to not be a dick to others.
 
2014-02-25 04:48:08 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: So Apple is all good with China, but Arizona freaks them out?!


the commies in control of China are not likely to be swayed by any company threatening to pull out of the country, some have already done so due to rising labor costs.
 
2014-02-25 04:50:05 PM  

palladiate: The Stealth Hippopotamus: So Apple is all good with China, but Arizona freaks them out?!

So, you're saying that if they won't go all Don Quixote on China, then they have no moral standing at effecting what they perceive as positive change where they can?

Good point.


By that rationale, Wal Mart is a good company because they have promised to 25 Billion in goods from US manufacturers.  I guess it is OK to exploit workers if they aren't from America.
 
2014-02-25 04:53:14 PM  
Three state senators who voted for the bill are now asking her to veto it. So are Arizona's two U.S. Senators: John McCain and Jeff Flake, both Republicans, have warned that an anti-gay law could be bad for business.

It's both hilarious and sad that they are fine with discriminating against fellow human beings, but f*ck it, if it's gonna hurt business we gotta scrap it. Maybe we can just like mark the gays with a scarlet "G" or something.
 
2014-02-25 05:03:16 PM  
They apparently didn't learn their lesson 'with their immigration laws.

Arizona: doing something stupid twice because they are morons.
 
2014-02-25 05:03:24 PM  
At this point I don't care what Arizona does. Whether this one thing becomes "law" (pending the inevitable immediate lawsuit and injunction renders it null) doesn't change the fact that EVERY BIGOTED STATEWIDE MEASURE THAT HAS EVER COME OUT OF ANY STATE SINCE THE END OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ERA HAS BEEN FROM ARIZONA.
 
2014-02-25 05:03:44 PM  

Serious Black: Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.

I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.


Has the NFL hinted that that is an option?
 
2014-02-25 05:03:58 PM  
Mesa needs that Apple plant. Bad.

Governor Brewer please please do what you have to do to keep manufacturing in Arizona. Even if it means telling bigoted people they can't sucker punch queers, shave the beards off of Amish, slip bacon into the latkes...
 
2014-02-25 05:04:39 PM  

Walker: It's both hilarious and sad that they are fine with discriminating against fellow human beings, but f*ck it, if it's gonna hurt business we gotta scrap it. Maybe we can just like mark the gays with a scarlet "G" or something.


sad but true. that's the point behind sanctions. the fact that arizona might be in the same category as iran and north korea is also pretty sad.
 
2014-02-25 05:04:52 PM  
Arizona, Number One with bigots, racists, and Nazi clansmen!

fc07.deviantart.net
 
2014-02-25 05:05:58 PM  

Serious Black: As for the bolded point, yes, it's depressing that business concerns are more important than the moral inclination to not be a dick to others.


S'truth.
 
2014-02-25 05:06:00 PM  
The only fallout from this would be Sarah Palin running for governor of Arizona if Brewer vetoes this.

Then again could the legislative branch override Brewer's veto with 2/3 majority under the Arizona Constitution?
 
2014-02-25 05:07:30 PM  

GardenWeasel: Serious Black: Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.

I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.

Has the NFL hinted that that is an option?


No. Because the 2015 Super Bowl is being held in Santa Clara, California. The NFL threatened to pull the Super Bowl long ago over Arizona's refusal to recognize MLK Day.
 
2014-02-25 05:07:33 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: So Apple is all good with China, but Arizona freaks them out?!


Apple would be all good with Arizona too if they could get away with paying the workers $1 an hour there.
 
2014-02-25 05:08:05 PM  

GardenWeasel: Serious Black: Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.

I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.

Has the NFL hinted that that is an option?


The NFL moved Super Bowl XXVII from Tempe to Pasadena after the state's residents voted down a referendum to make MLK Day a state holiday, so there's precedent.
 
2014-02-25 05:09:21 PM  

GardenWeasel: Serious Black: Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.

I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.

Has the NFL hinted that that is an option?


Considering they pulled the Superbowl out of Arizona in 1989 (1993 Super Bowl in Pasadena, CA) because AZ shot down recognition of MLK day (losing upwards of $500 million), it's definitely a possibility.
 
2014-02-25 05:09:45 PM  
Thanks, that explains why on Monday, the state senator from Mesa reversed after co-sponsoring the bill.
 
2014-02-25 05:12:11 PM  
Brewer will veto, the tards will primary her to get a "true believer", and Arizona gets a Democratic Governor.
 
2014-02-25 05:14:57 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: GardenWeasel: Serious Black: Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.

I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.

Has the NFL hinted that that is an option?

No. Because the 2015 Super Bowl is being held in Santa Clara, California. The NFL threatened to pull the Super Bowl long ago over Arizona's refusal to recognize MLK Day.


Um, no?

Super Bowl XLIX
Date: Feb. 1st, 2015
University of Phoenix Stadium
Glendale, Az.

Super Bowl L (50th Editon)
Date: 2016
Levi's Stadium
San Francisco, Ca.
 
2014-02-25 05:18:01 PM  
I know we say things like "oh how shameful that corporations make government policy" but when corporations make shiatty policy, dont we always tell people to vote with their dollars and not give money to corporations with shiatty policy? people exercise their influence where they can, we all do, on every level. who can we reasonably ask NOT to press their incredible advantage vis a vis forming policy?
 
2014-02-25 05:19:58 PM  

Serious Black: I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.


that's silly.  Gay people don't watch sports...
 
2014-02-25 05:21:01 PM  

meat0918: Brewer will veto, the tards will primary her to get a "true believer", and Arizona gets a Democratic Governor.


Brewer is term-limited and not running for re-election.
 
2014-02-25 05:21:21 PM  

Walker: It's both hilarious and sad that they are fine with discriminating against fellow human beings, but f*ck it, if it's gonna hurt business we gotta scrap it. Maybe we can just like mark the gays with a scarlet "G" or something.


No, silly. The proper branding for teh gheys is a pink triangle...been around for 80 years.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-02-25 05:21:45 PM  

meat0918: Brewer will veto, the tards will primary her to get a "true believer", and Arizona gets a Democratic Governor.


She's term-limited, so she cannot run for reelection. She doesn't need to worry about being Clubbed For Growth in the primary.

/on the other hand, if she decides to campaign for a not-insane GOP candidate in the primary, the rank-and-file voters might Teabag that candidate purely out of spite for Brewer
//and then the True Believer gets curbstomped in the general election and Arizona gets a Democratic Governor, per your prediction
 
2014-02-25 05:23:01 PM  
 
2014-02-25 05:26:27 PM  
I don't think Arizona cares about sapphires. Now, if Apple had plans to build a turquoise plant, that would be a different matter entirely.
 
2014-02-25 05:26:33 PM  

meat0918: Brewer will veto, the tards will primary her to get a "true believer", and Arizona gets a Democratic Governor.


She's a lame duck, term limits prevent her from running again.
 
2014-02-25 05:26:56 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: So Apple is all good with China, but Arizona freaks them out?!


Economic oppression of foreigners is good and good for business.

Social oppression of Americans is awful. Don't you remember Jim Crow?
 
2014-02-25 05:30:12 PM  
With all of these anti-gay rights laws being passed in the US it makes me laugh about all the recent talk about Russia during the Olympics.  When it comes to gay rights many Americans make Putin look like a saint.  Just like all the talk that we need to remain in Afghanistan to provide equal rights for women.
 
2014-02-25 05:34:18 PM  

Tom_Slick: By that rationale, Wal Mart is a good company because they have promised to 25 Billion in goods from US manufacturers.  I guess it is OK to exploit workers if they aren't from America.


I've re-read my comment and seem to still not see the part where I called Apple a good company. If I do, in fact, think they're a good company, maybe you could point to the Apple products I seem to be unaware of purchasing?

My point, in case it wasn't clear, was that choosing not to directly engage the Chinese government and citizens on various human rights abuses and cultural norms does not leave them with no moral standing. They may have none, but not because of that choice. It's entirely reasonable to think the company made the calculus to do some good in China without being overly disruptive as opposed to refusing to engage the country wholesale to remain absolved of blame. I don't claim to speak for them, nor do I really care why they do business there. But you could then make case that refusal to do business, employ workers, and do a small part to increase standards of living where they could would lead them back to the same criticism.

The bottom line is they are a company. They act and behave as one, for their own reasons. And their actions stand apart, as it would with a person, as positive or negative, good or evil. A serial murderer can rescue stray kittens, it doesn't mean doing so is evil, or make him any less so.
 
2014-02-25 05:36:34 PM  

GardenWeasel: RoyFokker'sGhost: GardenWeasel: Serious Black: Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.

I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.

Has the NFL hinted that that is an option?

No. Because the 2015 Super Bowl is being held in Santa Clara, California. The NFL threatened to pull the Super Bowl long ago over Arizona's refusal to recognize MLK Day.

Um, no?

Super Bowl XLIX
Date: Feb. 1st, 2015
University of Phoenix Stadium
Glendale, Az.

Super Bowl L (50th Editon)
Date: 2016
Levi's Stadium
San Francisco, Ca.


Levi is a Druish name, isn't it?
 
2014-02-25 05:38:19 PM  
It's a stupid law and I hope it gets vetoed.

I can't help wonder though, how does anyone come across a business that hates them and decide the thing to do would be to have the government force that business to take their money.

Wouldn't you rather give your money to a business that appreciates it and watch the bigot go under?
 
2014-02-25 05:40:10 PM  
The law shouldn't be passed for one simple reason--when you open a business you have to serve the entire population.  Imagine if every religious nut wanted special rules.  Want to go to a specialty food store that caters to Muslim preferences and you're a female wearing shorts?  THAT'S A STONING!!11!1!1!

/That being said, banning smoking is bullshiat--if a bar owner wants to cater to old-school smokers, that should be the owner's choice.

//And the Curves exclusion of males is also bullshiat--if chicks want equality, stop biatching about the mean men looking at them.  If you're that weak, shut your stupid pie-hole, fatty.  That tends to drop the weight.
 
2014-02-25 05:45:12 PM  

GardenWeasel: RoyFokker'sGhost: GardenWeasel: Serious Black: Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.

I think the biggest immediate concern is the chance of losing the Super Bowl this coming February.

Has the NFL hinted that that is an option?

No. Because the 2015 Super Bowl is being held in Santa Clara, California. The NFL threatened to pull the Super Bowl long ago over Arizona's refusal to recognize MLK Day.

Um, no?

Super Bowl XLIX
Date: Feb. 1st, 2015
University of Phoenix Stadium
Glendale, Az.

Super Bowl L (50th Editon)
Date: 2016
Levi's Stadium
San Francisco, Ca.


Levi Stadium is the new home of the San Francisco 49ers, but it's in Santa Clara, which is nearly 50 miles south of San Francisco.

/Santa Clara resident
 
2014-02-25 05:49:33 PM  

meat0918: Brewer will veto, the tards will primary her to get a "true believer", and Arizona gets a Democratic Governor.


Give me a minute... need to get kleenex..
 
2014-02-25 05:59:10 PM  

Gig103: Between Apple, American Air, and Marriott, Brewer might wake up and actually veto this. But even though I agree with Apple this time, the whole situation ends up being a sadly accurate portrayal of our government - the corporations are the ones that make the policy.


No, reality makes business sense and plentiful jobs makes politicians.

American companies realize baby boomers are retiring and/or dying off. Ain't enough skilled white, straight men to replace them. So corporations and governments must diversify to include all, including GLBTs.

Sad that that driving equality for all: shortage of skilled workers.

So it goes.
 
2014-02-25 06:01:45 PM  

JesseL: It's a stupid law and I hope it gets vetoed.

I can't help wonder though, how does anyone come across a business that hates them and decide the thing to do would be to have the government force that business to take their money.

Wouldn't you rather give your money to a business that appreciates it and watch the bigot go under?


Sometimes options are limited.

What if there is only one custom picture frame shop in the area, and the shop refuses to sell to people they perceive as gay? The gays just supposed to hang frameless pictures on their walls?

I don't think so.
 
2014-02-25 06:07:00 PM  
I'm starting to think that it was a good thing that this bill passed the Arizona statehouse. The backlash is going to kill it (I'm fairly confident that Brewer will veto it, and several legislators have already signified that they have flipped on the issue, so a veto is very unlikely to be overridden), and it's going to keep most other politicians from even considering any similar bills anytime in the foreseeable future. I think that the people pushing this crap believed that they could slip these bills in under the radar (they tried in several states simultaneously), and by the time the uproar came, they would already be law. Instead, most states rejected them outright, and now Arizona stands alone and is feeling all of the pressure. Instead of a quick victory, they shined a huge spotlight on the issue, making it a political non-starter.

The ironic part is that in most of the states where they tried to ram this through, including Arizona, discriminating against homosexuals is already perfectly legal, making these bills entirely useless. (Maybe they wanted it to be super-duper legal?) By failing to get them passed in the states where they weren't even "needed", they utterly destroyed any tiny chance they may have had at getting them passed in states where it IS illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation. Not that there was ever much chance of getting them passed in those states anyways, but now it's pretty much impossible.
 
2014-02-25 06:08:51 PM  
Thanks for the corrections on Brewer's term limits.
 
2014-02-25 06:09:16 PM  
So Shariah Law is coming to Arizona?
 
2014-02-25 06:11:04 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: They apparently didn't learn their lesson 'with their immigration laws.

Arizona: doing something stupid twice because they are morons.


Twice, hardly. I can think of about 1/2 a dozen right off the top of my head.
 
2014-02-25 06:12:36 PM  

King Something: the rank-and-file voters might Teabag that candidate purely out of spite for Brewer


I know you mean "that" kind of Teabag, but the Apple plant even coming here had a Teabag Party angle....in broad strokes, Mesa is in particular a hotbed of Teabaggerism, and a few city council candidates got elected ont he basis of their Teabagger cred.  "no tax breaks for big business", "fiscal responsibility", "end wasteful spending", the basics of Teabaggerism.

well well well.  Apple starts chirping about this plant, but wants tax breaks and a substantial capital investment to build here.  The Teabaggers were the swing vote.  Ultimately, they voted to bring the plant here, citing the "jobs fer 'Muricans" angle but they pissed off the Orthodox Teabaggers.


I guess Teabagging was cool until you had to vote on it, and then the Teabaggers needed to get teabagged, so they abandoned their Teabagging brethren, and teabagged the Teabaggers, which made the Teabaggers want to teabag to TINOs (that is of course, 'Teabaggers In Name Only'), so they teabagged the entire Teabag movement.  in closing, Teabag.
 
2014-02-25 06:13:16 PM  

mod3072: The ironic part is that in most of the states where they tried to ram this through, including Arizona, discriminating against homosexuals is already perfectly legal,


Besides the gay thing, it would also bring into question the ability of business to not provide services under 0bamacare if the business is religiously opposed to it, like contraception and Catholic organizations.
 
2014-02-25 06:17:47 PM  

sdd2000: Twice, hardly. I can think of about 1/2 a dozen right off the top of my head.



we're just about due for a "all schoolteachers shall carry a firearm at all times during school hours" bill.  About every two years that pops up.
 
2014-02-25 06:18:44 PM  

fickenchucker: /That being said, banning smoking is bullshiat--if a bar owner wants to cater to old-school smokers, that should be the owner's choice.


While I was against the law here (it passed in my city before it went statewide) I do enjoy going to a bar and not stinking of smoke when I get home. The funny thing was the downtown association began biatching about butts on the ground all along college ave.

Up in the Northwoods they still smoke in the bars and taverns.
 
2014-02-25 06:18:57 PM  
Why not sign it into law anyways? Just having the bill make it as far as the Governor's desk in the first place is proof (along with Sheriff Joe) that Arizona is as much a backwards State as any southern state, even Florida.
 
2014-02-25 06:19:04 PM  
Fark's Arizona tag is long overdue.
 
Displayed 50 of 105 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report