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 Donating $1 Million to Trump's Inaugural Fund

Dutch60 said:
Thank you, but now you are only comparing; I don’t see any “proof” of your “framed in such an inflammatory way that it is probably separated from the facts”. Facts are different?
The definition of “murder” as I read it, is: “the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another”
Healthcare CEO’s who know customers are dying because of not granting access to care, for reasons of profit.
Profit over lives.
Same with oil company execs who know results of their business (beside profits). (direct) profit over (longterm) lives.
Technically (according to definition), this is not murder, because it’s legal (!). And I think that’s the problem. It’s all officially legal (so not “unlawful”). And there, political leadership could step in and change things. But that doesn’t happen. On the contrary, and that’s the biggest problem.
Click to expand...
Good, so we agree. The poster made some obtuse reference to some puff piece prior to Covid, that speculated on even bigger social programs by the DEMs.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: BugeyeSTI and rmadsen3
I7guy said:
There are estimates in EV circles that if we went green we would save xxx thousands life per year from cancer and what not due to pollution. We'd reduce our medical bills as well.

Does that mean oil company execs are murdering people? That's exactly how that post was stupidly framed.
Click to expand...
I can't believe MR has let this thread continue so long, haha.

Anyway, no it doesn't mean the execs are murdering people. What it does mean is there are external costs not being borne by the fossil fuel producers and consumers. In a pure capitalistic society those costs would be perfectly attributed to both the producers and consumers. Instead, it's another type of social bailout for companies that scream capitalism when times are good and socialism when they want to spread their losses around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 01cowherd, Dutch60 and I7guy
Evangelion said:
But that’s the thing: your taxes are not being spent on this. Like most MAGA-folks, you are misinformed. You relish in ignorance because it fits your worldview.
Click to expand...
Ok, one last time here. Answer this very simple question for me:

When the US Government "forgives" the debt or "buys the debt for pennies on the dollar", where does the money to buy that debt come from?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matz, BugeyeSTI and Stratus Fear
Naraxus said:
Ok, one last time here. Answer this very simple question for me:

When the US Government "forgives" the debt or "buys the debt for pennies on the dollar", where does the money to buy that debt come from?
Click to expand...
I'm glad someone else wants to reply, because I ultimately don't enjoy the back and forth in threads like this. But I'll just add to what you're saying here that the debt doesn't just disappear like magic. There are a few ways, some obvious some not, that debt forgiveness will have consequences, and which one plays out depends on how the government handles cancelling the debt. But I'll let folks answer your question instead.
 
I7guy said:
Good, so we agree. The poster made some obtuse reference to some puff piece prior to Covid, that speculated on even bigger social programs by the DEMs.
Click to expand...
Yes, we agree to a certain point I think (technically not murder, because their actions are legal by law and that's a big problem). I’m glad, you agree that a new government could change all this.
But then, do we also agree that the new Trump administration will make these matters worse (health care and climate control), if it will put money where its mouth is? Drill, drill, drill…doesn’t sound like the best starting point. As canceling Obama care doesn’t.
Do we also agree that's the biggest problem of all?

With some diseases, you can only stay put, hope for the best and wait until it’s over.
 
Last edited:
Now this is what a banana republic looks like. I'm completely sure that none of that money will find its way into Trump's personal accounts. And that Rep. Comer will will spend the next four years trying to verify that this is the case. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dutch60 and bbeagle
Naraxus said:
Ok, one last time here. Answer this very simple question for me:

When the US Government "forgives" the debt or "buys the debt for pennies on the dollar", where does the money to buy that debt come from?
Click to expand...
Forgiving debt is the same as if I lend you $100 and then decide that you don't need to pay me back. If, for example, we are talking about student loans, the money was already sent to the college for the tuition/books/etc. when the student registered. The money could have been borrowed by the US Govt via the Fed, or it could be from tax receipts, or a combination of both; it would be very difficult (impossible?) to track a specific expense back to its income source. Since money is fungible, you would have no way of knowing if I borrowed the $100 I loaned you, or if it came from my paycheck, or savings, or anywhere else. Assuming the money for the student loan was borrowed by the US Govt, it would mean that that $40,000 which was forgiven would not be repaid, and would eventually need to be paid for by future tax receipts, or refinanced in additional borrowing.
Paying 'pennies on the dollar' would just mean that the US Govt would accept (for example) $5,000 of the $40,000 loan, and forgive the rest (see above).
In both cases, the money was spent when the college tuition was paid, not when it is forgiven.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
mdatwood said:
I can't believe MR has let this thread continue so long, haha.

Anyway, no it doesn't mean the execs are murdering people. What it does mean is there are external costs not being borne by the fossil fuel producers and consumers. In a pure capitalistic society those costs would be perfectly attributed to both the producers and consumers. Instead, it's another type of social bailout for companies that scream capitalism when times are good and socialism when they want to spread their losses around.
Click to expand...
Very well-stated. Socialize the costs and privatize the profits. Not the way capitalism is supposed to work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dutch60
"socialize the costs and privatize the profits".....very well said! And that's exactly what's happening.
I suppose that's a natural course of things, when only profits / power and ego's rule society. I'm afraid we'll see much more of this! Trump seems to have it all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsimcon
vantelimus said:
There is no law that requires maximizing profits per se. However, courts commonly apply the rule of shareholder primacy, which holds that directors and executives should prioritize the interests of shareholders over those of other stakeholders. This principle has been used to infer a duty to provide a return to shareholders, as the court ruled in the eBay Domestic Holdings, Inc. v. Newmark that I cited. But, since there is no law specifically requiring a return, courts do allow directors to act on the concerns of other stakeholders as long as the actions can be shown to be in the long-term interests of the corporation.

In the Craigslist case, the court didn't rule that Craigslist founders breached their fiduciary responsibility by failing to maximize profits. It ruled they were in error for refusal to pursue profits.

A court is unlikely to hold directors liable for failing to maximize profit, provided the directors can demonstrate they acted reasonably in pursuing shareholder interests. Courts grant boards of directors and executives broad discretion in making business decisions and typically avoid second-guessing errors in judgment or subjective opinions. This discretion is protected by a legal principle known as the business judgment rule. Under this rule, courts will side with the directors as long as their decisions were made in good faith, based on sufficient information and rational analysis, and with the genuine belief that they were acting in the best interests of the company.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the clarification - it is very helpful since I am no lawyer. Still, my basic statement stands - there is no law mandating maximising profits per se, yet this seems to be a universal lay interpretation that seems to border on an urban myth. This interpretation can be used to justify immoral behaviours or short-term behaviours that wind up damaging shareholders (and the rest of us) in the long run (e.g., through the costs of climate change).

In all honesty I would like to see laws (or state/federal constitutional amendments) that would forced boards to consider consumers/customers, workers, the environment, and shareholders on equal footings, but that's just me. Anyway, it seems a sad state of affairs that the US has been reduced to country of de facto bribery. This has got to stop before the country becomes utterly dominated by the super-rich.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dutch60
KPOM said:
Biden was senile the day he took office. The press covered up for him all the way until that disastrous debate performance in June.
Click to expand...
Biden obviously aged out of public speaking, but he made perfect sense during the debate and he has been, by a wide margin, the best US president of the 21st century. Meanwhile Trump's cognitive decline has been less obvious because he was never particularly bright, but there are strong signs that he could have dementia. It's kind of funny how MAGAs love to pretend Biden wasn't running the White House, but unlike Biden you will never see Trump convey a complete thought unless it was written on a teleprompter for him. So who is running Trump's white house?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Wow
Reactions: Matz, BugeyeSTI, definitive and 5 others
Enlightened Doggo said:
Biden obviously aged out of public speaking, but he made perfect sense during the debate and he has been, by a wide margin, the best US president of the 21st century. Meanwhile Trump's cognitive decline has been less obvious because he was never particularly bright, but there are strong signs that he could have dementia. It's kind of funny how MAGAs love to pretend Biden wasn't running the White House, but unlike Biden you will never see Trump convey a complete thought unless it was written on a teleprompter for him. So who is running Trump's white house?
Click to expand...
Trump has been senile since 2015.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jon9091, Chuckeee and Dutch60
MacAddict1978 said:
It's called paying for vaseline so you don't get screwed without it when he imposes Tariffs - because Trump can also impose Tariff's with exemptions for a specific company or product type.

Way to get on your knees Tim. How are those core values Apple claims to have looking these days?
Click to expand...

The sad part is these corporate sellouts actually believe these bribes donations will buy them favor/protection from Trump, but if they really believe that then they haven't been paying attention.
 
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