為什么蘋果（暫時(shí)）離不開中國？

@allensu9363
9:05 it’s also interesting how Apple times its launches. Most crops are planted in the spring and harvested in the fall, so migrant workers can start churning out iPhones right after their harvest keeping them fully employed

9:05 有趣的是蘋果如何安排它的產(chǎn)品發(fā)布時(shí)間。大多數(shù)農(nóng)作物在春天種植，秋天收獲，所以農(nóng)民工在秋收后能立刻投入到iPhone的生產(chǎn)線上，保持全年無休的就業(yè)狀態(tài)！

@Houxiang
Agricultural mechanization has become very popular, in the countryside, in a certain season, the government will organize mechanization service teams to go to the countryside, and the old people who stay in the countryside only need to spend very little money to hire them to work. Much less money than working in the city.

農(nóng)業(yè)機(jī)械化在農(nóng)村已經(jīng)非常普及了，在特定的季節(jié)，政府會(huì)組織機(jī)械化服務(wù)隊(duì)下鄉(xiāng)，留在農(nóng)村的老人們只需花很少的錢就能雇他們干活。這比進(jìn)城打工的成本低得多！

@jameslight4391
the restriction are being (may already be) reduce so this won't last long or is being weakened

這些限制正在（可能已經(jīng)）逐步減少，所以這種情況不會(huì)持續(xù)太久，影響力也在減弱！

@nomulahemanth3109
As You Released your Video, Apple Doubled its India iPhone share to 15% in Just an Year, As per Tim Cook, Made-in-India iPhones are now the Majority iPhones Sold in The US overtaking Chinese-Made, So yes It is HARD to Replace China BHR POSSIBLE

就在你發(fā)布這個(gè)視頻的時(shí)候，蘋果在短短一年內(nèi)將印度的iPhone生產(chǎn)份額翻倍到15%。據(jù)蒂姆·庫克說，印度制造的iPhone現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)超過中國，成為美國市場銷售的主力。所以，沒錯(cuò)，取代中國確實(shí)很難，但并非完全不可能！

@dewensun4332

Just some corrections. The migrant workers do receive health care social services at where they work. They also pay for social securities at the municipality of employment. This is one of the big incentive for the host city to接收 the workers. This “Gig” economy type of mass immigration is not driven solely by Apple, though apple is one of the largest. It works in China because there is an abundance of assembly “seasons” throughout the year from all the other manufacturers of xiaomi, Huawei, etc. The product releases of different brands are often timed around each other to accommodate this. So the workers usually transfer immediately to the assembly of another brand.
糾正幾點(diǎn)。農(nóng)民工在工作地確實(shí)能享受醫(yī)療和社會(huì)服務(wù)，他們還在就業(yè)城市繳納社保，這是接收城市歡迎這些工人的一個(gè)重要的激勵(lì)因素。這種“零工經(jīng)濟(jì)”式的大規(guī)模勞動(dòng)力流動(dòng)不只是蘋果推動(dòng)的，盡管蘋果是最大的玩家之一。這在中國行得通，因?yàn)槿甓加写罅縼碜孕∶?、華為等其他制造商的組裝“旺季”。不同品牌的產(chǎn)品發(fā)布時(shí)間通常會(huì)相互協(xié)調(diào)以適應(yīng)這種模式，所以工人通常會(huì)立即轉(zhuǎn)到另一個(gè)品牌的組裝線上！

@danielch6662
I wouldn't be surprised if the employers are talking to each other and cooperating.

如果這些雇主之間互相溝通、協(xié)同合作，我一點(diǎn)也不會(huì)感到驚訝！

@nothisispatrick6528
Certain people will watch this a believe the solution is to create a similar under class in the US

有些人看了這個(gè)視頻會(huì)覺得解決辦法是在美國也制造一個(gè)類似的底層勞工階層！

@themainuchiwa
There is a big lie here, migrant workers are entitled to basic benefits when they are working in the same province, but not their family unless they have the national "passport"

這里有個(gè)大誤解，農(nóng)民工在同一個(gè)省份工作時(shí)確實(shí)有權(quán)享受基本的福利，但他們的家人不行，除非他們持有全國性的“戶口通行證”！

@thewhitewolf58
In an era of ceos saying "I have a responsibility to maximize shareholder profits." We have a low chance of getting back factory jobs for Americans. Apple is the type of company to stop selling a red iPhone because it had a deal to donate a small part of the profits to charity, which was seen as an expense to be cut.

在這個(gè)CEO們高喊'我有責(zé)任為股東實(shí)現(xiàn)利潤最大化'的時(shí)代，美國人想要拿回制造業(yè)崗位的希望渺茫。蘋果就是那種僅僅因?yàn)閰f(xié)議要將一小部分利潤捐給慈善機(jī)構(gòu)就會(huì)停售紅色iPhone的公司——這點(diǎn)支出在他們眼里就成了該砍掉的成本。

@Chinesesparrows
Yet many brands have left China for production, e.g. samsung for phone production years ago (although some of their RAM is still made there)

然而，很多品牌已經(jīng)離開中國去別處生產(chǎn)，比如三星多年前就把手機(jī)生產(chǎn)轉(zhuǎn)移了（盡管他們的部分內(nèi)存還在中國生產(chǎn)）！

@TheKeeperofChaos
@Chinesesparrows yeah but Samsung left China for places that it sees as cheaper and safer from trade wars/politics. Mostly Vietnam and India. The point is the same: the CEOs only care about maximizing profit via cheap af production, whether its China or SEA.

@Chinesesparrows 是的，但三星離開中國是去了它認(rèn)為更便宜、更能避開貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)和政治風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的地方，主要是越南和印度。核心問題一樣：CEO們只在乎通過超級便宜的生產(chǎn)最大化利潤，而不管是在中國還是東南亞！

@Chinesesparrows
@TheKeeperofChaos because thats what consumers care about. look at the tons of near immediate landfill sold through temu just because low prices

@TheKeeperofChaos 因?yàn)橄M(fèi)者只在乎價(jià)格低?？纯碩emu賣的那些幾乎會(huì)立刻變垃圾的貨就知道了，就因?yàn)閮r(jià)格便宜！

@muathtezeghdenti1963
Real reasons not mentioned in your video:
1: China is Apple's biggest market
2: Rare Earth Minerals
3: No similar logistics and manufacturing flexibility worldwide
4: No similar number of STEM graduates available in other countries.
5: Government subsidies for export-driven economy.

視頻里沒有提到的真正原因：
1：中國是蘋果最大的市場。
2：稀土礦資源。
3：全球范圍內(nèi)沒有類似的中國物流和制造靈活性。
4：其他國家沒有如此多的理工科畢業(yè)生。
5：政府對出口導(dǎo)向經(jīng)濟(jì)的補(bǔ)貼政策。

@AndorranStairway
For those who think China is paying a "slave labor" wage in China, just take a look at the USD RMB exchange rate. China is a largely export economy, so goods in China are considerably cheaper, and many in China can get by just fine on Apple's wages.
The salary may be below par in the tier 1 cities, but for those from the rural areas of China, it is actually pretty attractive.

那些覺得中國付的是“n隸工資”的人，看看美元對人民幣的匯率吧。中國是個(gè)以出口為導(dǎo)向的大型經(jīng)濟(jì)體，其國內(nèi)商品的價(jià)格低得多，很多人靠蘋果的工資完全能過得不錯(cuò)。
在一線城市的工資可能不算高，但對來自中國農(nóng)村的人來說，這個(gè)薪水其實(shí)相當(dāng)有吸引力！

@wl6020
Its not $146 more per iPhone, in china, workers do 60 hour workweeks, while in america anything over 40 hours is overtime pay. Plus the parts cost will be higher due to supply chains in china having cheaper labor, transportation. It will be 200+ more per phone if everything is factored in.

每部iPhone的成本增加不只是146美元，在中國，工人每周工作60小時(shí)，而在美國，超過40小時(shí)就得算加班費(fèi)。加上中國供應(yīng)鏈的勞動(dòng)力、運(yùn)輸成本更低，綜合考慮，每部手機(jī)的成本會(huì)增加200美元以上！

@Praisethesunson
Rare earth chemistry(the stuff technology needs to exist) programs are offered in 39 universities across the country [in China], while the United States has no similar programs.
The USA does rent seeking not development.

中國全國有39所大學(xué)開設(shè)了稀土化學(xué)（科技必需的學(xué)科）課程，而美國沒有類似的課程。
美國搞的是租金尋租而不是發(fā)展！

@randomnobody8770
They're seeking rent on everything they developed. Its profit, not rent. Getting out competed is the primary risk.

他們對自己開發(fā)的一切都在尋求租金。那是利潤，不是租金。被競爭對手超越才是主要的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)！

@mariusvanc
Why study mining rare earths when no rare earth mines will be allowed to open anyways? Where will you take your American mining degree, to China?

既然根本不允許開采稀土礦，為什么還要學(xué)稀土開采？你的美國礦業(yè)學(xué)位能拿去哪兒用？去中國嗎？

@keks-69
There are more than ten universities in the USA offering or developing programs directly related to rare earth(mining, processing, analyzing, sustainability,...)

美國有十多所大學(xué)正在提供或開發(fā)與稀土相關(guān)的課程（開采、加工、分析、可持續(xù)性等等……）

@vivekra
2:30 "Only 7% of iphones are made in India"
This seems to be incorrect. In FY25, 40 million iphones were made in India which is 20% of the total and an increase of 60% over the previous year.

2:30“只有7%的iPhone在印度生產(chǎn)”。
這似乎不正確。在2025財(cái)年，印度生產(chǎn)了4000萬部iPhone，占總量的20%，比上一年增長了60%！

@Point-blank-01
20% iPhones are assembled in India, primarily they are made in China.
Latest releases are made in China and after sometime new releases arrive the same release which used to be the latest is now old and this is manufactured in India with the goal for Indian consumers and yet most of the components are made in China.

20%的iPhone在印度組裝，但主要還是在中國制造。
最新款的iPhone在中國生產(chǎn)，過一段時(shí)間新款出來后，原來的最新款就成了舊款，這些舊款會(huì)在印度生產(chǎn)，目標(biāo)是印度消費(fèi)者，但大部分零件還是中國制造的！

@MarioMariaMario
Polymatter condescending tone on China is growing bigger video after video. The Hukou system isn't as strict as it is for cities like Shanghai/Beijing/Shenzhen. A factory worker in Zhenzhou can easily resettle there if employed for long enough

Polymatter對中國的傲慢語氣在視頻里越來越明顯。戶口制度在像上海、北京、深圳這樣的城市確實(shí)嚴(yán)格，但在鄭州的工廠工人如果工作時(shí)間夠長，重新落戶其實(shí)挺容易的！

@Ian-wq3vg
plus the whole point of the policy isn't to trap poor people in rural areas like he makes it sound, it's to develop the rural areas and avoid informal urban growth and the creation of slums

而且，這個(gè)政策的重點(diǎn)根本不是像他說的那樣把窮人困在農(nóng)村，而是為了發(fā)展農(nóng)村地區(qū)，避免城市非正規(guī)擴(kuò)張和形成貧民窟！

@harnoorsingh8520
But still, I think its unfair, every citizen should have the right to live wherever they want.

但我還是覺得這不公平，每個(gè)公民都應(yīng)該有權(quán)利生活在他們想生活的地方！

@pan-z4m
I am a rural resident myself and have no intention of migrating to any city. Under the long-term demonization by the West, China's household registration (hukou) system appears to be completely misunderstood. Do you think that if someone's hukou is registered in one place, they can only live there? In reality, that's not the case.
Hukou signifies your registered address and determines the local social benefits you can access (including priority school enrollment, medical subsidies, home-purchasing eligibility - as some local governments implemented purchase restrictions during overheated real estate markets - public housing applications, and car license plate lottery eligibility (Beijing/Shanghai have car purchase restrictions requiring lottery draws)...). However, you can also choose to live in another city and become its resident (by transferring your hukou there) through various means: purchasing property in that city/holding certain degrees/paying X months of social insurance in that city/possessing certified skills/renting for X months, etc... Except for Beijing/Shanghai/Shenzhen which have relatively strict requirements, other cities have very lenient policies, some even with no barriers to hukou transfer.
Alternatively, you can choose to live in another city without becoming its official resident. By simply paying local social insurance, you can still enjoy most local welfare policies (though some benefits may be slightly inferior compared to local residents).
In China, rural land is collectively owned by all villagers of a community. Therefore, as long as you are a registered villager, you will have your own land and housing construction rights. Urban life is crowded, noisy, and stressful - nowadays, living in rural areas is actually a good option with open views, fresh air, and anything needed can be purchased online. Cities are just a short drive away. In the past, many were eager to abandon their rural hukou to become urban residents, but now many rural residents (including young people who mostly own urban properties) are unwilling to relinquish their rural hukou even while living primarily in cities. Moreover, for suburban farmers whose land gets acquired, it can mean striking it rich - in some affluent cities, villagers may receive over 10 million yuan per capita in compensation.
The hukou system was indeed initially designed to control disorderly population movement and prevent megacity slums, which did create an urban-rural dual structure with better urban welfare and poorer rural conditions - this aspect certainly deserves criticism. The squeaky wheel gets the grease; those closer to power receive more in resource allocation, while farmers, being farthest from power, indeed get the least. I truly feel sorrow for Chinese farmers. Simultaneously, deliberately suppressing rural benefits might have aimed to push rural residents toward cities to boost urbanization rates and prop up urban real estate markets.
However, ultimately, hukou has largely lost significant meaning in contemporary China (except in Beijing/Shanghai/Shenzhen). You can live in any city you choose - as long as you pay local social insurance, you can access local welfare (with some potential variations in specific benefits).

我就是農(nóng)村戶口，但是我不打算遷移到任何城市。
我覺得在西方的長期妖魔化之下，中國的戶口制度似乎完全被曲解了。你們覺得某個(gè)人的戶口在某地，他就只能在某地居住生活嗎？事實(shí)上不是這樣的。
戶口意味著你的身份的登記地址，你可以享受當(dāng)?shù)氐纳鐣?huì)福利（包括優(yōu)先入學(xué)，就醫(yī)補(bǔ)貼，擁有購房資格（因?yàn)樵诜康禺a(chǎn)過熱的時(shí)候，有些地方政府會(huì)出臺(tái)限購政策），申請公租房，汽車搖號資格（北京/上海汽車限購，需要搖號）...）。但你同樣可以去其他城市生活并成為其他城市的居民（將你的戶口遷移到該城市），途徑包括：在該城市買房/擁有相應(yīng)的學(xué)位/在該城市繳納X個(gè)月社保/擁有某些認(rèn)證過的技能/租房滿X個(gè)月，等等...除了北京/上海/深圳要求相對嚴(yán)格之外，其他城市都很寬松，甚至無落戶門檻。
同樣，你可以選擇去其他城市生活，但不成為該城市的居民。只需在當(dāng)?shù)乩U納社保，你同樣可以享受當(dāng)?shù)氐母＠撸承└＠吆彤?dāng)?shù)鼐用裣啾瓤赡芤钜恍?br /> 在中國，農(nóng)村的土地歸村莊所有村民集體所有，因此只要你是該村莊的村民，你就會(huì)擁有自己的土地和建房用地。城市的生活擁擠，嘈雜，壓力巨大，現(xiàn)在反而生活在農(nóng)村是一種不錯(cuò)的選擇，視野開闊，空氣清新，任何需要的東西都可以在網(wǎng)上購買，想去城市開車很快就能到。以前很多人十分愿意放棄自己的農(nóng)村戶口，期望成為城市居民，但現(xiàn)在很多農(nóng)村居民（包括年輕人，大多數(shù)年輕人都在城市購買了自己的住房）不愿意放棄自己的農(nóng)村戶口，即便他們平時(shí)都生活在城市，也不想成為該城市的居民。另外，如果是城市郊區(qū)的農(nóng)民，遇到土地被收購，那可是發(fā)一筆橫財(cái)?shù)臅r(shí)候，在某些富裕的城市，其村民可能在土地收購中得到人均超過千萬的資產(chǎn)補(bǔ)償。
戶口制度一開始確實(shí)是為了控制人口的無序流動(dòng)，避免形成超大城市和貧民窟，這的確造成了城鄉(xiāng)二元結(jié)構(gòu)，城市居民福利好，農(nóng)村居民福利差，這一點(diǎn)確實(shí)值得批評。會(huì)哭的孩子有奶吃，離權(quán)力越近，在社會(huì)資源分配中拿到的就越多，而農(nóng)民離權(quán)力最遠(yuǎn)，確實(shí)是得到最少的一批人，我確實(shí)為中國的農(nóng)民感到悲哀。同時(shí)故意壓低農(nóng)村待遇，也可能有迫使農(nóng)村居民遷往城市，提高城市化率以及為城市房地產(chǎn)業(yè)接盤的目的。
但總之，戶口如今在中國已經(jīng)沒有太大的意義（除了北京/上海/深圳），你可以在你任何想居住的城市生活，只要繳納當(dāng)?shù)氐纳绫＃憔涂梢韵硎墚?dāng)?shù)氐母＠ň唧w的可能會(huì)有差別）。

@qrzone8167
@harnoorsingh8520
You can live wherever you want, you just cant use the government services unless you apply for a residence permit.
You can think of each province like a country, you can only be a citizen of one but a resident of many. You can become a citizen of another province, but you need to prove yourself, have a job, education, stay there for a long time.
Its mainly because rich regions of china simply cant support millions of opportunity migrants. So they say, you can live here but you are on your own until you contribute here enough

你想住哪兒就住哪兒，只是除非你申請了居住許可，否則不能享受政府服務(wù)。
你可以把每個(gè)省想象成一個(gè)國家，你只能是一個(gè)省的公民，但可以是多個(gè)省的居民。你可以成為另一個(gè)省的公民，但得證明自己，有工作、教育背景，還得在那兒待夠長時(shí)間。
這主要是因?yàn)橹袊母辉５貐^(qū)實(shí)在支撐不了數(shù)百萬機(jī)會(huì)移民。所以他們說，你可以住這兒，但得靠自己，直到你為這里貢獻(xiàn)夠多！

@generalinfo3598
The labor price assumption is extremely flawed. A factory does not only consists of shop floor operators. There's line leaders, supervisors, managers, etc. Not to mention workers from other departments like finance, logistics, warehouse and IT.

勞動(dòng)力價(jià)格的假設(shè)極其錯(cuò)誤。工廠不只有流水線上的工人，還有線長、主管、經(jīng)理等等。更別提還有財(cái)務(wù)、物流、倉庫和IT等其他部門的員工！

@FreedomVLOG
In my opinion this video was made by someone who has never had his own company. I've turned it off after a few minutes. Comparing just an hourly wage between China, India and US makes no sense from a business point of view. An hourly wage of a person who assemblies the iPhone is just a small fraction of the entire cost. What about the materials that iPhone is made of? Their avialability and cost depending on the country of production (China has plenty of rare earth elements which are critical in modern electronics), the cost of managing the factory and other employees (like technicians, engineers, managers, cleaning personel, accountants, lawyers and so on), all the production equipment, electricity cost, access to educated work force, tax policies, R&D, marketing, HR etc.? Apple's net profit margin is averagely around 25%, so if you include all of the above costs, you need to invest around $750 for a single iPhone.

在我看來，這個(gè)視頻的制作者從沒自己開過公司，我看了幾分鐘就關(guān)了。單純比較中國、印度和美國的小時(shí)工資從商業(yè)角度看毫無意義。組裝iPhone的工人工資只是總成本的一小部分。iPhone的材料成本呢？它們在不同生產(chǎn)國的可用性和價(jià)格如何（中國有豐富的稀土元素，對現(xiàn)代電子產(chǎn)品至關(guān)重要）？還有管理工廠和其他員工（像技術(shù)員、工程師、經(jīng)理、清潔工、會(huì)計(jì)、律師等等）的成本，生產(chǎn)設(shè)備、電力成本、受教育勞動(dòng)力的獲取、稅收政策、研發(fā)、市場營銷、人力資源等等呢？蘋果的平均凈利潤率在25%左右，所以把以上所有成本算進(jìn)去，一部iPhone得投入大約750美元！

@NoobsDeSroobs
It is not that it will become more expensive, it is that you would pay the actual price.
Right now the stuff is cheap because someone else pays most of the price through either being exploited, through blood, or through environmental damage.

我不是說會(huì)變得更貴，而是你得付真正的價(jià)格。
現(xiàn)在東西便宜，是因?yàn)橛腥送ㄟ^被剝削、流血或環(huán)境破壞承擔(dān)了大部分成本！

@LudosErgoSum
Outsourcing has destroyed strategic manufacturing for the sake of extremely short-term profit whereas investment incentives such as China has done is a strategic decision to usurp it’s competition and become the new superpower. It played on Western greed to win even more in a long-term plan for dominance; the biggest technological transfer in history has taken place, mostly voluntarily at the expense of our jobs and salaries just so the shareholder could make another buck. Say what you will, but China has been and forever after will be the hegemon of the world. There is only one way we should treat rich oligarchs, and that is the Kennedy/Lincoln way.

外包為了極短期的利潤摧毀了戰(zhàn)略制造業(yè)，而中國那樣的投資激勵(lì)措施則是為了超越競爭對手、成為新超級大國的戰(zhàn)略決策。它利用了西方的貪婪，在長期主導(dǎo)計(jì)劃中獲勝；歷史上最大的技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移已經(jīng)發(fā)生，基本是自愿的，犧牲了我們的工作和薪水，只為股東多賺一美元。隨便你怎么說，中國已經(jīng)并將永遠(yuǎn)是世界霸主。我們對待富有寡頭的唯一方式就是肯尼迪/林肯的方式！