On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:05:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 05/01/2010 1:47 PM, Harry wrote:

Does the private sector create wealth anymore?

What is left of it does. It is an Obamanation, everybody works for the
government, banks and corporations like GM now.

Speaking of GM (and Chrysler and Ford), it looks like Ford is going
strong at the expense of the other two - again.

http://tinyurl.com/y8qhvv8

Backlash, anyone?

Canuck57 wrote:
On 05/01/2010 1:47 PM, Harry wrote:

Does the private sector create wealth anymore?

What is left of it does. It is an Obamanation, everybody works for the
government, banks and corporations like GM now.

The next President is going to have his work cut out for him trying to
straighten out the mess we're in.

John H wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:05:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 05/01/2010 1:47 PM, Harry wrote:

Does the private sector create wealth anymore?
What is left of it does. It is an Obamanation, everybody works for the
government, banks and corporations like GM now.

Speaking of GM (and Chrysler and Ford), it looks like Ford is going
strong at the expense of the other two - again.

http://tinyurl.com/y8qhvv8

Backlash, anyone?

What's wrong with us? The government is trying to practically give us
cars and we are turning them away. Is this a rebellion against big
government? Is government the "big business" that Krausie was warning us
about. Are high government officials the "super rich" that Krausie says
we should scorn?

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:49:59 -0500, Jim wrote:

John H wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:05:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 05/01/2010 1:47 PM, Harry wrote:

Does the private sector create wealth anymore?
What is left of it does. It is an Obamanation, everybody works for the
government, banks and corporations like GM now.

Speaking of GM (and Chrysler and Ford), it looks like Ford is going
strong at the expense of the other two - again.

http://tinyurl.com/y8qhvv8

Backlash, anyone?

What's wrong with us? The government is trying to practically give us
cars and we are turning them away. Is this a rebellion against big
government? Is government the "big business" that Krausie was warning us
about. Are high government officials the "super rich" that Krausie says
we should scorn?

Who, in the USSR, a socialist state, was rich? Either the politicians
or the mafia, take your pick.

I'll guarantee you the poor, downtrodden, inner-city dwellers didn't
win in that environment.

I think it was a Democrat who said, "If we want to keep winning, we
just have to keep them fat, dumb, and pregnant."

John H wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:49:59 -0500, Jim wrote:

John H wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:05:30 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 05/01/2010 1:47 PM, Harry wrote:

Does the private sector create wealth anymore?
What is left of it does. It is an Obamanation, everybody works for the
government, banks and corporations like GM now.
Speaking of GM (and Chrysler and Ford), it looks like Ford is going
strong at the expense of the other two - again.

http://tinyurl.com/y8qhvv8

Backlash, anyone?
What's wrong with us? The government is trying to practically give us
cars and we are turning them away. Is this a rebellion against big
government? Is government the "big business" that Krausie was warning us
about. Are high government officials the "super rich" that Krausie says
we should scorn?

Who, in the USSR, a socialist state, was rich? Either the politicians
or the mafia, take your pick.

I'll guarantee you the poor, downtrodden, inner-city dwellers didn't
win in that environment.

I think it was a Democrat who said, "If we want to keep winning, we
just have to keep them fat, dumb, and pregnant."


Actually, isn't that the motto of your church?

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 19:53:57 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:

bpuharic wrote:


i dunno that there is. i used to work for bell labs. they don't exist
any more. i used to work for texas instruments. they laid off all
their researchers and decided to buy what they need from the chinese.


Bell Labs exists under different names. I also used to work for the Labs.

so does kentucky fried chicken....a bit of a difference

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:09:38 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 05/01/2010 5:17 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:35:34 -0500, wrote:


i dunno that there is. i used to work for bell labs. they don't exist
any more. i used to work for texas instruments. they laid off all
their researchers and decided to buy what they need from the chinese.

And the Chinese are ramping up their R & D as are the Indians.

American moves statist left and the economy tanks.

actually the US is moving mercantilist right. the big companies...AIG,
BoA have transferred taxpayer dollars to the richest americans while
screwing the middle class

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:27:54 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 19:17:59 -0500, bpuharic wrote:


i dunno that there is. i used to work for bell labs. they don't exist
any more. i used to work for texas instruments. they laid off all
their researchers and decided to buy what they need from the chinese.

The breakup of Ma Bell was probably the biggest advance for innovation
in the history of the country

disputable. what other company, besides IBM, has won as many nobel
prizes?

.. Bell Labs invented a lot of good stuff
but the marketing model of Ma Bell made sure that there was not much
money made by anyone but Ma Bell

and now most computer chips are made overseas...along with the
technology to develop these

.. We wouldn't have a real PC/Internet
business if you needed to rent your modem from Ma and only got the
speeds they thought you needed.

now THAT may be true. but the business model hasn't died. most of the
'baby bells' have consolidated back to big companies that rivaled the
old ATT

They had lots of money tied up in old
"plant" and they had little interest in making that stuff obsolete.
All you have to do is look at the innovation we got from the end of
WWII until they were broken up. We got phones in a color other than
black, touch tone and a phone with a light in it. AT&T had a lot of
technology but management chose to sit on it. If you talked to their
management at the time they would say it was because of government
regulation.

i used to travel to europe in the 80's and 90's. our phone system
wasn't that bad compared to many other countries.


IBM suffered from the same problems but they "unbundled" themselves
and you see what happened to the PC business. This was because they
opted to sell "open architecture" machines as opposed to the way the
mainframe business and Apple did business. They did screw up by not
being more aggressive in the home PC arena but they managed the office
environment in a way that allowed them to survive.

yep. IBM embraced competition in a way that apple did not. i remember
when apple and IBM both had about equal market share. not that way
today

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 23:55:06 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:30:47 -0800, jps wrote:


So, even with a profit motive, those breakthroughs (as well as
regrowing hair) remain elusive. That does argue against enterprise
being the better of the research arms. If profit isn't within reach,
an enterprise may choose to curtail development whereas a government
funded research effort is more likely to be driven by academic
acheivement and treat products as a by-product.

I agree and that is why a lot of things that the government backed
research came up with have very little commercial application.

like the PC and the internet? and, given the failure of the free
market in the last year or 2, it seems the free market isn't all that
good at innovating either, except for creating financial instruments
that lead to disaster

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 22:13:27 -0500, wrote:

I am not sure how the government had anything to do with the PC
itself. That was really started by a couple guys in an Albuquerque who
made a kit computer (Altair) that pretty much just blinked lights.
Everything else built up from that with very little from the
government at all.

The Altair and the Z-80 bus machines were out there for a while but no
one in big business really took notice until the Apple II came along
and Visicalc spreadsheet software started showing people the real
potential for personal computing. That's what brought IBM into the
game after their sales people started running into Apples at true blue
customer sites.