There's that, of course. You have also to remember that Intel sells its chips all over the world. Trade barriers erected by the US will cause similar trade barriers erected around the world, and will hurt all multinational corporations, most of which are American.
Setting shop overseas keeps costs low, allowing Intel to make $$ and add to its bottom line. That bottom line shows up as dividends on wall street, where most, if not all of Intel stock is listed. America and americans probably make more money overall by allowing Intel to have higher operating margins by manufacturing outside the US (no data to back this up, but it's possible, and likely). All the profits are channeled back into the US economy.
America and its corporations didn't push for globalization for the greater common good of humanity. While that may well be the byproduct of this, the immediate interest was, and still is $$. There's a lot of money to be made for Intel/MS/Apple in emerging markets where PC penetration is low to non-existent. Opening up the US market and promoting other countries to open up theirs can potentially result in net gains for the US, which is why the US promoted it so. Of course, it's not going to be a one-way street. The question is if the US is competitive enough to be net positive.
Discussion on:
Message 5 of 1
IBM Sponsored Resources
Resources from our Sponsor
- Oracle Exadata vs IBM: Netezza Compared
- Forrester TEI Report
- CIA Whitepaper
- Harnessing the Power of Advanced Analytics
- Tapping into Unleashed Business Potential with Advanced Analytics
- Unlock Analytic Performance with Revolution R for Enterprise and IBM: Netezza Data Warehouse Appliance
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
