Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Hardware

Dell To Leave China For India 352

Posted by timothy
from the in-these-troubled-economic-times dept.
halfEvilTech writes "India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, told the Indian press that Dell chairman Michael Dell assured him that Dell was moving $25 billion in factories from China to India. Original motives were cited for environmental concerns. But later details come up as to Dell wanting a 'safer environment conductive to enterprise.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dell To Leave China For India

Comments Filter:
  • Wrong! (Score:5, Informative)

    by WrongSizeGlass (838941) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:02PM (#31617596)
    Dell spokesperson denied the story this morning. Who's editing today, me?
  • Re:Wrong! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Jeng (926980) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:08PM (#31617684)

    Here is a link regarding Dell's denial.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a5Hyi1uZv05o&pos=6 [bloomberg.com]

  • Re:Wow (Score:4, Informative)

    by MrEricSir (398214) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:12PM (#31617716) Homepage

    Dude, you're not getting a Dell. Many of the internal parts WILL be made in China -- chips, circuit boards, etc. There's simply nowhere else that makes these things but China.

  • Re:Wrong! (Score:5, Informative)

    by dch24 (904899) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:17PM (#31617782) Journal
    The original article about Dell moving is from the Hindustan Times [hindustantimes.com]

    It appears they are moving their computer assembly operations, but will still use the same suppliers (i.e. suppliers in China).
  • Re:doublespeak (Score:3, Informative)

    by bheer (633842) <rbheer&gmail,com> on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:32PM (#31618016)

    > Just wait, in ten years, Chinese firms will be outsourcing there.

    They already are [ft.com] planning to do so (warning: the FT restricts how many pages you can view, even if you register)

    But it's not surprising. After all, pretty much all the Japanese auto manufacturers now actually produce in the US.

  • Re:Wow (Score:3, Informative)

    by TheDarAve (513675) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:34PM (#31618040)

    This is not true. Few of the chips are made in China. Circuit boards are likely to be made in Taiwan.

    You may not realize this, but Taiwan is part of China.

    You may not realize this, but Taiwan is NOT part of China. Taiwan follows the old government that existed prior to the "cultural revolution" that spawned the current Chinese Communist Party government.

  • Re:Wow (Score:4, Informative)

    by Wyatt Earp (1029) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:34PM (#31618042)

    No, Taiwan isn't part of the People's Republic of China.

  • by rubycodez (864176) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:38PM (#31618078)

    those of the lower castes in India would disagree with you, where many are beaten, murdered, systematically denied legal representation, denied justice by government, given jobs in inhumane working conditions, denied educational opportunity.....

    We in the USA should not be taking advantage of the lower prices afforded by a country that practices such things, it is evil.

  • by sjbe (173966) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:40PM (#31618112)

    You may not realize this, but Taiwan is part of China.

    The truth of that statement depends very much on whom you ask [wikipedia.org]. As things stand Taiwan is de-facto an independent country. The People's Republic of China (mainland) maintain that Taiwan is a part of China, whereas the Republic of China (Taiwan) maintains that they are actually the legitimate government of China and that the PROC has no sovereign authority. However Taiwan has had to take great care to not antagonize the PROC due to the threat of invasion.

    In other words, it's complicated.

  • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:45PM (#31618182) Journal

    The big difference is that in India, it is a problem of the society as a whole, and the government 1) recognizes it as a problem, and 2) tries to combat it. In China, political oppression is an official government policy.

  • Re:pandemic? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Shajenko42 (627901) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:51PM (#31618276)
    Yes, but China has shown that it is quite willing to make a deal and break it, stealing whatever they can from companies that move there and giving it to their local competitors. That changes the dynamics a bit.
  • Re:pandemic? (Score:5, Informative)

    by smellsofbikes (890263) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:57PM (#31618370) Journal
    >Wonder how many more US companies are going to pull out of China. First google, then godaddy, now Dell. What happens when all that China has left, is China?

    My company did. We abandoned a brand-new billion dollar semiconductor fabrication facility. Officially it was because we didn't have enough work to fill it along with our several other (non-Chinese) fabs. Rumor says it was at least partly because we were tired of competing with ourselves and our fourth-shift output. However, it certainly wasn't anything to do with fear of nationalization or the unpleasantness surrounding that Australian Rio Tinto executive who was arrested and is currently being tried in China [speroforum.com] for (again, rumor has it) not bribing enough people, although I think that should be at least considered. Since the Rio Tinto trial was front-page Wall Street Journal news yesterday, I'm guessing that today a lot of people who make outsourcing decisions are thinking about it.

  • Re:Wow (Score:3, Informative)

    by Stormwatch (703920) <rodrigogirao@hot[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Thursday March 25, 2010 @06:01PM (#31618416) Homepage
    Taiwan is the legit China. The other, bad one is "Red China".
  • Chinese companies (Score:4, Informative)

    by sjbe (173966) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @06:09PM (#31618522)

    China doesn't sell us anything...

    Lenovo will be very surprised to hear that. So will lots of other Chinese companies that you just aren't familiar with yet.

  • by RajivSLK (398494) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @06:18PM (#31618608)

    The Indian government has instituted a lot of affirmative action policies to address this

    http://www.google.ca/search?q=india+affirmative+action&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a [google.ca]

    The difference between Indian and china is that India is a democracy and the lower castes represent votes. Votes keep the government in power... see where I am going with this?

  • Cultural revolution (Score:5, Informative)

    by sjbe (173966) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @06:33PM (#31618752)

    Taiwan follows the old government that existed prior to the "cultural revolution" that spawned the current Chinese Communist Party government.

    When you say cultural revolution [wikipedia.org] in the context of China, you are actually talking about a fairly specific event that occurred long after the civil war that resulted in the schism between Taiwan and mainland China. The Cultural Revolution occurred in the late 60s whereas the KMT's retreat to Taiwan occurred around 1950. The communist party in China preceded the cultural revolution.

  • Re:How about (Score:3, Informative)

    by bill_mcgonigle (4333) * on Thursday March 25, 2010 @07:15PM (#31619222) Homepage Journal

    The USA, it's safer and conducive to enterprise,

    The US has the second highest corporate tax rates in the world. Some States taxes push their jurisdiction to #1 in the world for highest corporate tax places. The US regulatory regime is among the most onerous for corporations and the one on its citizens keeps wages artificially high (60-70% of wages are passed through in taxation).

  • Re:Wow (Score:2, Informative)

    by 517714 (762276) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @07:33PM (#31619434)
    Taiwan follows the goverment that the US and the West supported. It is not as if that government was somehow more legitimate than the PRC. You do realize that Taiwan's government (KMT) began life as a Soviet backed communist party and that the PRC's roots (CCP) were at least home grown? No I suspect you were not aware of that. The state department will confirm: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/18902.htm

    You of course know that from 1949 until 1992 Taiwan claimed that there was only one China. I don't see what your issue is in substituting one fantasy for another.

  • Re:Wow (Score:5, Informative)

    by stinerman (812158) <nathan.stineNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday March 25, 2010 @09:04PM (#31620438) Homepage

    I could just as easily say that the six counties of Northern Ireland are controlled by Monarchist bandits and that the national capital of Northern Ireland is Dublin.

    Obviously we're talking about who has the monopoly of violence in the case of the ROC v. the PRC. For all intents and purposes they're separate countries, but if you want to play that game the Communists successfully overthrew the Nationalists quite a long time ago. It was a net negative for the people of China, but it is an accurate representation of the facts.

  • Re:Economic warfare (Score:2, Informative)

    by juicegg (1683626) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @09:14PM (#31620528)
    People may not agree to what communist ideals are, but some of those people have the wrong idea while others are right.

    Communism has the word "common" as it's root. It means common ownership of property, which is the same thing as non-existence of property (because property is defined by exclusive ownership). This implies non-existence of money, non-division of people into classes and impossibility of political power like we understand it.

    Neither Soviet Union nor Maoist China had common ownership/non-existence of property - they had state control of property, where all the riches of those countries were managed by the bureaucratic ruling class. This ruling class forced people to work for money. There is absolutely nothing communist about exchanging work for money. Unlike entrepreneurs in free-market capitalism this bureaucratic ruling class managed their property collectively, but that is not so unusual - shareholders and corporations also manage property in common. What matters is that they have exclusive power which left most of people in those countries with little choice but to get a job and try to join the property managing class.

    You might say that China and USSR had "realistic" communism, but this is not true because much more authentic forms of communism have existed in history. Many groups of hunter gatherer people often and share what they managed to find among themselves freely (or according to rules of gifting, not exchange). Diggers during the English Revolution (around 1650's) were a group that set out to work the land in common and share the products freely. The government rightly saw them a s a threat and suppressed them. In the Spanish Civil War in 1930's large parts of the country were controlled by anarchist-communists (several million people) who took "from each according to the ability to each according to need" principle seriously and collectivized factories and land. Their progress was uneven, but mostly it was directed towards greater communism. Their enterprise was prosperous until they were destroyed by the combination of USSR sabotage and fascist attack. There's a movie about it called "Living Utopia" if you care what real communism looks like. Wikipedia is another (very limited) communist project because it creates common wealth owned by no one and build by people who have the ability (and desire) to do this and used freely by anyone who wants to use it for the benefit of all.

    Finally, there is nothing communist about stuff like "collective farms" in USSR because those enterprises were not controlled by their workers in any meaningful sense.

    What these countries call themselves makes absolutely no difference to what they are. They are state capitalist economies because they have states, capital and a powerless working class, while communism is a movement (and not just some ideas in a book) aimed square against all of that. It would be nice to have a new word for people chipping in for common good as you say, but if this chipping in behavior was at all ambitious it would threaten all the existing powers of our world (governments & corporations) and sooner or later it would gain the same notoriety as "communism"

  • Re:Economic warfare (Score:3, Informative)

    by plasticsquirrel (637166) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @09:15PM (#31620540)
    A much better example of communism would be the short-lived anarcho-communist Spain. Real communist states are often short-lived and collapse into oligarchies or dictatorships due to the instability of the country post-revolution. Spain was a working but short-lived example of the closest thing there has been to communism as advocated by Marx and others. George Orwell traveled to Spain and fought alongside the anarchists / communists there, against the fascists.

    Spanish Revolution [wikipedia.org]
    Confederación Nacional del Trabajo [wikipedia.org]

    For all the right-winger paranoids who like to quote Orwell, it might be interesting for them to learn that he was a socialist fighter in Spain, who recorded his experiences there in Homage to Catalonia.
  • Re:How about (Score:4, Informative)

    by koan (80826) on Thursday March 25, 2010 @11:05PM (#31621396)

    Wrong.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/series/tax-gap [guardian.co.uk]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_avoidance_and_tax_evasion [wikipedia.org]

    And a plethora of other results.

    They "pay all their taxes" but thru tax avoidance techniques no where close to what they should be paying.

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce

Working...