Derek Copeland
June 14th 06, 01:36 PM
Don't you find it even a little bit worrying 309, that
you can visit almost any country in the World and see
the same makes and types of aeroplanes, cars, motorcycles
and almost any other manufactured goods. Cars are sometimes
re-badged to pander to local markets, e.g. General
Motors cars are Chryslers in the US, Opels in Europe,
Vauxhalls in the UK and Holdens in Australia, but they
are still basically the same vehicle. Gives you an
illusion of choice I suppose!
In the UK it is getting quite difficult to buy goods
that are NOT made in China or Eastern Europe. Maybe
Germany, the US and Japan if they are a bit more upmarket.
Isn't there an argument that workers are also consumers
and that consumers earn the money to consume by working.
We will all disappear up our own exhaust pipes if we
go on the way we are.
Hope you get soon good soaring this year 309.
Del Copeland
At 14:24 13 June 2006, 309 wrote:
>
>Derek Copeland wrote:
>> The US seems to play Monopoly with the whole
>> World, not helped by corrupt and on-the-make politicians
>> and stock market investors after a quick buck. Take-overs
>> and mergers often provide that quick buck.
>>
>Hmm, the US does? One of the companies that I used
>to work for (in the
>US) was gobbled up by a small (corrupt?) company from
>'England,'
>perhaps you've heard of a US Company named Tracor?
> Or a 'UK' company
>named BAe? Look in the mirror.
>>
>> I think that we need to reform our political and financial
>> institutions so they are less weighted towards the
>> big multi-national corporations, and more towards
>>small
>> companies and genuine entrepreneurs.
>>
>What of small companies lile Columbia (Lancair), Van's
>RV aircraft, and
>such? One needs to remember that when a small company
>becomes
>successful, really successful, it becomes a large corporation
>-- which
>can still be an entepreneurial endeavor, say Broadcom,
>Microsoft (once
>upon a time) are examples. Your logic might pull these
>successful
>companies into pieces...despite the good they do...and
>then the
>incentive to be enteprenuerial is now gone...
>
>> By the way, I understand that the USA donates less
>> in charity as a percentage of its GNP than many smaller
>> and less rich countries.
>>
>What data is that??? Please let me know -- I'll be
>happy to be less
>charitible to the thankless globe so I can apply my
>good graces to tow
>and winch costs. If you're referring only to the charity
>doled out by
>the US government, let's not forget the charitable
>donations from
>private citizens, corporations, churches, rotary clubs...
> I happen to
>work for that 'subsidized' tiny little company called
>Boeing (by way of
>merger and aquisition). As one would expect from a
>large company, its
>employees fund the largest corporate employee charity
>source, and for
>the tsunami victims gave over $3 million.
>
>Another fine Canadian put it quite aptly, you'll miss
>US, if we're not
>around. It's so easy to pick on the big guy -- even
>if he's nice to
>you.
>
>Enough from me. Back to Soaring...or at least thinking
>about it.
>
>
you can visit almost any country in the World and see
the same makes and types of aeroplanes, cars, motorcycles
and almost any other manufactured goods. Cars are sometimes
re-badged to pander to local markets, e.g. General
Motors cars are Chryslers in the US, Opels in Europe,
Vauxhalls in the UK and Holdens in Australia, but they
are still basically the same vehicle. Gives you an
illusion of choice I suppose!
In the UK it is getting quite difficult to buy goods
that are NOT made in China or Eastern Europe. Maybe
Germany, the US and Japan if they are a bit more upmarket.
Isn't there an argument that workers are also consumers
and that consumers earn the money to consume by working.
We will all disappear up our own exhaust pipes if we
go on the way we are.
Hope you get soon good soaring this year 309.
Del Copeland
At 14:24 13 June 2006, 309 wrote:
>
>Derek Copeland wrote:
>> The US seems to play Monopoly with the whole
>> World, not helped by corrupt and on-the-make politicians
>> and stock market investors after a quick buck. Take-overs
>> and mergers often provide that quick buck.
>>
>Hmm, the US does? One of the companies that I used
>to work for (in the
>US) was gobbled up by a small (corrupt?) company from
>'England,'
>perhaps you've heard of a US Company named Tracor?
> Or a 'UK' company
>named BAe? Look in the mirror.
>>
>> I think that we need to reform our political and financial
>> institutions so they are less weighted towards the
>> big multi-national corporations, and more towards
>>small
>> companies and genuine entrepreneurs.
>>
>What of small companies lile Columbia (Lancair), Van's
>RV aircraft, and
>such? One needs to remember that when a small company
>becomes
>successful, really successful, it becomes a large corporation
>-- which
>can still be an entepreneurial endeavor, say Broadcom,
>Microsoft (once
>upon a time) are examples. Your logic might pull these
>successful
>companies into pieces...despite the good they do...and
>then the
>incentive to be enteprenuerial is now gone...
>
>> By the way, I understand that the USA donates less
>> in charity as a percentage of its GNP than many smaller
>> and less rich countries.
>>
>What data is that??? Please let me know -- I'll be
>happy to be less
>charitible to the thankless globe so I can apply my
>good graces to tow
>and winch costs. If you're referring only to the charity
>doled out by
>the US government, let's not forget the charitable
>donations from
>private citizens, corporations, churches, rotary clubs...
> I happen to
>work for that 'subsidized' tiny little company called
>Boeing (by way of
>merger and aquisition). As one would expect from a
>large company, its
>employees fund the largest corporate employee charity
>source, and for
>the tsunami victims gave over $3 million.
>
>Another fine Canadian put it quite aptly, you'll miss
>US, if we're not
>around. It's so easy to pick on the big guy -- even
>if he's nice to
>you.
>
>Enough from me. Back to Soaring...or at least thinking
>about it.
>
>