Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Apple Shareholders, One In Particular, Needs A Reality Check, Apple Needs To Be More Green Like Google


First, let me say that I am a conservative on many issues, most fiscal.  Some issues more important to me than others.  And that my conservatism doesn’t extend to trying to get others to go along with me.  I have my values, I try to live by them.  So, it befuddles me when these self-proclaimed conservatives attack others in very arrogant manners.  So yeah, I can see just how conservatives as just as arrogant as liberals.  

What got me going on this topic is this post from a likely conservative Apple shareholder pissed off about Apple’s green plans for the company and attacked the seemingly liberal policies.  Here’s the thing, the liberals in charge over at Cupertino has made Apple the most valuable company in the world.  As a conservative, you want Apple to succeed and to keep on doing what they are doing.  It’s capitalism, right?   So, when I read this article attacking the liberals over at Apple for making decisions that is good for the company, I just don’t get why.

The claim in the article that $60 million in green effort by Apple, which may be a PR effort, it does lead the way that an American company should.  Energy independence.  And if the $44 million leads to another $10 billion in sales for Apple because of the good PR, how is that bad?

And what of Google?  Google actually has a green fund that helps with green tech development.  As far as I’m concerned, it’s Google that has been leading the green corporate effort. Do you hear any of their shareholders bitching about it?

If anything, American companies needs to look at what Google is doing when it comes to green and conservation tech and follow their example.  It’s good for the country and it’s good for the companies.  If anything, I would say that Apple hasn’t done enough.

Maybe it’s not the liberals over at Apple that are arrogant but it’s a minority of Apple shareholders need to check their egos.

Source:  MacDailyNews.

No comments: