Today the CEO of Apple, Tim Cook expressed his support for the people of the Ukraine.

Any support for the people of the Ukraine is a positive thing, but stating the sentiment and then carrying on business as usual rings hollow when people are being murdered and maimed.

Tim Cook is in a somewhat unique position, at least as compared to the average citizen.  He can punish China by letting them know he will begin finding elsewhere to build and sell his products.

This is significant as Putin would most likely not be able to carry out his invasion of Ukraine without the backing of China.

China is not only allowing the invasion it is most likely encouraging it as a way to see what the world’s reaction might be when China decides to militarily reclaim Taiwan.

Hollow sympathies from people that are actually helping Putin should be called out.

If Tim Cook was honestly worried about world peace and the fate of his fellow man he would forgo maximizing his shareholders short term profits and build a company that is not reliant on countries that suppress their own populations freedoms and human rights.

No country is perfect, but China and Russia as large first world nations are unique in their absolute disregard for the personal freedoms of their citizens.

Put your money where your mouth is Mr. Cook or shut up.

In his latest video, Rossmann focused on Apple’s latest tactic to make it impossible for independent repair shops to fix Apple products.

Apple has begun to “serialize” various components of their products. What this means is that an individual part is hard coded with a serial number which is then registered to the device it is installed in. Each part is assigned its own unique serial number. So every screen manufactured for a specific cell phone will have a different serial number.  If that part fails and another part is put in with a different serial number Apple’s software will detect that the serial number is now different and refuse to operate.

Independent repair shops often rely on salvaging working parts from non working devices and using those salvaged parts to repair items for their customers. By serializing parts and then programming the devices to only accept a specific serial number for that part to operate Apple has effectively eliminated the ability of independent repair shops to fix Apple products.

When Rossmann made a video explaining how this was bad for consumers an anonymous person representing themselves as an engineer for Apple explained that this was to protect consumers from cheap replica parts.

Rossmann goes on to question this as the true motive behind Apple’s decision. He points out that Apple is one of the few major device manufacturers that makes ordering genuine parts for their products nearly impossible. This he argues drives the black market for parts by creating a false scarcity of parts. If parts were readily and reasonably priced their would be much less incentive for black market parts.

Rossmann also notes that the whole serial number scheme is already leading to black market websites offering to reprogram devices to accept alternative serial numbers, so all Apple is accomplishing is creating another black market.

Finally to illustrate his point, Rossmann points to a particular issue that he has encountered in several MacBook Pros. A charging capacitor shorts out on the charging board rendering the entire device inoperative. The capacitor costs $5 or less, and Rossmann and many other independent repair shops can easily remove the old capacitor and replace it for a relatively inexpensive repair. Apple requires the entire motherboard to be replaced and will not assure users that their data will be on the repaired machine. All of this at a cost of $1,500.00. The capacitor is specific to Apple products and Apple won’t sell it, so independent repair shops have taken to removing the capacitor from other products that have otherwise failed or from a separate charging case Apple sells for certain phones.

If Apple serializes the capacitor (if that is even possible) customers will be left paying $1,500 and risk losing their data for a repair that should cost $5 plus labor.

Rossmann’s point is that if Apple insists on charging customers $1,500 for a $5 capacitor and maybe at the very high end of the scale $200 in labor how does that speak to their corporate ethics? Why should anything they have to say about repairs be interpreted in any other way than Apple trying to screw their customers?

If any of this interests you I highly recommend watching some of Rossmann’s YouTube videos.

https://www.youtube.com/user/rossmanngroup

The animus directed at these public figures has to do with their unethical behavior. Primarily, lying and cheating to get ahead. The level of contempt a person feels towards one them is not based on what they did. But rather what world view the person passing judgement holds.

Trump supporters suggest that he just exaggerates because he just wants to get stuff done. Apparently it’s o.k. to lie to get what you want.

Warren supporters dismiss the fact that she checked off that she is a Native American on several academic applications. Apparently it’s o.k. to lie to get what you want.

Armstong, Loughlin and Huffman all gamed the system to promote their own self interest, or that of their children. In their case most of society decided it was NOT ok to lie to get what you want.

So why is the condemnation of Armstrong, Loughlin and Huffman so much more universal than that of either Trump or Warren? Because what larger world view is helped by defending Armstrong, Loughlin or Huffman? Their unethical acts did little to help anyone but themselves.

Trump and Warren are seen as agents for the kind of change their supporters are looking for. If they lie and cheat to achieve those mutual goals, well it’s just part of the process.

The sad reality is that all of them had similar lapses in moral judgement. They all lied to get ahead. Each time an individual acts in this way they tease at the threads of the fabric that holds society together. When enough people do this society begins to fray at the edges. Whether those lies helped you shouldn’t affect your judgement that the act was immoral.

Ignoring or rationalizing someone’s unethical act unwittingly condones more and more people to act unethically. We set up a society where the prevailing sentiment is, “Well everyone else is cheating, if I don’t I won’t be able to compete.”

Society is best served by condemning anyone that advances their own self interest through lying and cheating.

This concept is known as, “equal justice’. This phrase is normally applied to our judicial system. But our judicial system in large part is a reflection of our society. If we can’t apply equal justice in our own personal viewpoints, how can a jury possibly suddenly be expected to do so in a judicial setting?

If we want to help all of our society we should give no quarter to those that strive to get ahead by gaming the system. In the process we build a better society.

This view may or may not be reflected in reality, but since August of 2019 Uber can can at least tout that they pay their drivers considerably more per mile than Lyft.

In the Phoenix, AZ market Uber pays 61 cents per mile (and 13 cents per minute) to their drivers. Lyft pays a miserly 35 cents per mile and 15 cents per minute. That’s 43% less than Uber.

Lyft’s does pay for the driver to get to the passenger and Uber does not. For the average driver in Phoenix, Lyft’s significantly lower per mile pay for the ride negates what little extra drivers earn on the way to their passengers.

There are some driver oriented blogs that state drivers are purposefully taking long routes to get to passengers to boost their pay.

Lyft Pays Less Than What IRS Says it Costs to Drive a Mile

The IRS calculates the average cost per mile to drive a passenger car every year. For the year 2019 that cost was 58 cents per mile. So by the IRS calculations Lyft drivers are losing 23 cents for every mile they drive.

Lyft is a company that claims a liberal, progressive corporate culture yet pays it’s drivers more like the robber barons of the industrial revolution.

Lyft Drivers Won’t Pay Federal Taxes

The miserable 35 cents per mile that Lyft pays results in NONE of Lyft’s drivers EVER paying federal income taxes.

Why? For every mile put on a driver’s vehicle Lyft pays 35 cents. The IRS then allows that driver to write off 58 cents for expenses. The resulting net income equals a negative 23 cents. What taxes are paid on negative earnings? Zero.

Drivers can also earn tips, and also get paid for time (15 cents per minute) and Incentives but they all amount to a minority of what drivers earn.

Most Passengers Don’t Tip

A recent study of 40 million ride share trips showed that only 16% of trips resulted in a tip.

Pay For Time Adds Little Income

The driver does get paid for their time, but Phoenix is a spread out city with a . Many trips take place on freeways where speeds are 60 to 75mph for the vast majority of the trip, meaning a 13 mile fare may only take 15 minutes to drive. This would result in an increase of $2.25 to the drivers pay from $4.55 (for distance) to a whopping total of $6.80 (distance plus time). The IRS calculates that same trip cost the driver $7.54 in expenses. So the driver lost 74 cents for this fare.

Lyft’s Driver ‘Incentives’ Often Don’t Add Any Income

Lyft’s incentives are often constructed as follows; Provide 30 rides and we guarantee a minimum of $150. If the 30 rides you give don’t add up to the $150, as used in this example, Lyft will kick in the difference. The problem is most of the time the rides meet or exceed what they guarantee so drivers don’t actually gain any extra income.

The ‘incentive’ program is probably designed just to keep a driver from quitting when he or she has a day where they spend 12 hours giving 30 rides, spend $20 on gas add subtract another 200 miles from the life of their car and then see that the rides came out to $112.

Yeah, But Drivers Don’t Have To Drive

The elephant in the room for defenders of ride share companies is always the same. Drivers don’t have to drive.

Drivers don’t have to drive. That’s absolutely true. But Lyft tries to portray itself as more “ethical” than Uber yet their pay structure as instituted in August 2019 seems to defy this narrative.

The reality for drivers is that Lyft is just another corporation trying to make a profit and if that means their drivers are driving their cars into the ground for little or no actual long term profit, well, than Lyft can say, it’s the driver’s fault for driving with us.

True, but not exactly the image Lyft lays claim to.