wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:49:27 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


I suppose if we make the penalties against the western economies strong
enough (and crash them) the resulting nuclear war will reverse the
warming trend and cut way back on that pesky population growth.
That is really the issue - it's another attempt to redistribute income
only on an internationlist scale.

If that really is the issue, you are looking to blame the wrong people.
It isn't the environmentalists, it's the capitalists. If we are buying
all the out-sourced, pollution intensive products of the eastern
economies, who's pollution is it really? The Chinese, or ours? Part of
the "attractiveness" of out-sourcing is, in addition to the dollar a day
wages, companies don't have to put up with our pesky pollution laws.


Or safety laws, or labor laws, or product integrity laws, or much of
anything else. I know it won't happen in my lifetime, but there will be
a serious revolution in the future, not to impose communism, but to
round up and slaughter all the multi-national "corporationists," and
those who believe in returning to the middle ages of serfdom.

Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:49:27 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


That is really the issue - it's another attempt to redistribute income
only on an internationlist scale.
If that really is the issue, you are looking to blame the wrong people.
It isn't the environmentalists, it's the capitalists. If we are buying
all the out-sourced, pollution intensive products of the eastern
economies, who's pollution is it really? The Chinese, or ours? Part of
the "attractiveness" of out-sourcing is, in addition to the dollar a day
wages, companies don't have to put up with our pesky pollution laws.


If you really get down to it, it's not the environmentalists nor the
capitalists. It's the consumer ... looking for the lowest prices for
products and the highest return on their stock market investments.

Eisboch



\

Biting their noses to spite their faces.

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:49:27 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


That is really the issue - it's another attempt to redistribute income
only on an internationlist scale.
If that really is the issue, you are looking to blame the wrong people.
It isn't the environmentalists, it's the capitalists. If we are buying
all the out-sourced, pollution intensive products of the eastern
economies, who's pollution is it really? The Chinese, or ours? Part of
the "attractiveness" of out-sourcing is, in addition to the dollar a day
wages, companies don't have to put up with our pesky pollution laws.


If you really get down to it, it's not the environmentalists nor the
capitalists. It's the consumer ... looking for the lowest prices for
products and the highest return on their stock market investments.

Eisboch



\

Biting their noses to spite their faces.


Yup. It's a catch 22. I suppose you could impose high tariffs on imported
products but that opens up another can of worms. Meanwhile, the Chinese
factory worker is delighting in his and his country's newfound economic
success, very happy to be working for compensation and in conditions that we
consider slavery.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Biting their noses to spite their faces.


Yup. It's a catch 22. I suppose you could impose high tariffs on
imported products but that opens up another can of worms. Meanwhile, the
Chinese factory worker is delighting in his and his country's newfound
economic success, very happy to be working for compensation and in
conditions that we consider slavery.

Eisboch


Harry .... just thought of something that would keep you busy for a couple
of decades.

Go unionize China.

Eisboch

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 07:49:47 -0500, Eisboch wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 11:49:27 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:



That is really the issue - it's another attempt to redistribute income
only on an internationlist scale.

If that really is the issue, you are looking to blame the wrong people.
It isn't the environmentalists, it's the capitalists. If we are buying
all the out-sourced, pollution intensive products of the eastern
economies, who's pollution is it really? The Chinese, or ours? Part
of the "attractiveness" of out-sourcing is, in addition to the dollar a
day wages, companies don't have to put up with our pesky pollution
laws.


If you really get down to it, it's not the environmentalists nor the
capitalists. It's the consumer ... looking for the lowest prices for
products and the highest return on their stock market investments.

Eisboch

Ultimately, yes, but it seems to me quite shortsighted. We are still the
world's marketplace, but how long can that last, when all the jobs are
overseas? I still don't understand, how all those dollar a day workers,
are going to buy our products.

Eisboch wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Biting their noses to spite their faces.

Yup. It's a catch 22. I suppose you could impose high tariffs on
imported products but that opens up another can of worms. Meanwhile, the
Chinese factory worker is delighting in his and his country's newfound
economic success, very happy to be working for compensation and in
conditions that we consider slavery.

Eisboch


Harry .... just thought of something that would keep you busy for a couple
of decades.

Go unionize China.

Eisboch




It would be more fun to see all the multi-national corporationists and
Wall Streeters rounded up and shot.

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 08:00:32 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


Harry .... just thought of something that would keep you busy for a
couple of decades.

Go unionize China.

I believe China already is unionized, but the union is controlled by the
ruling communist party. Hell, even Walmart is unionized over there.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Nov30.html

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 08:00:32 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Biting their noses to spite their faces.

Yup. It's a catch 22. I suppose you could impose high tariffs on
imported products but that opens up another can of worms. Meanwhile, the
Chinese factory worker is delighting in his and his country's newfound
economic success, very happy to be working for compensation and in
conditions that we consider slavery.

Harry .... just thought of something that would keep you busy for a couple
of decades.

Go unionize China.

Speaking of which...

http://www.pww.org/article/view/5718/1/230/

wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 08:00:32 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


Harry .... just thought of something that would keep you busy for a
couple of decades.

Go unionize China.

I believe China already is unionized, but the union is controlled by the
ruling communist party. Hell, even Walmart is unionized over there.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Nov30.html


The Chinese are taking advantage of our unbridled greed.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 07:49:47 -0500, Eisboch wrote:



If you really get down to it, it's not the environmentalists nor the
capitalists. It's the consumer ... looking for the lowest prices for
products and the highest return on their stock market investments.

Eisboch

Ultimately, yes, but it seems to me quite shortsighted. We are still the
world's marketplace, but how long can that last, when all the jobs are
overseas? I still don't understand, how all those dollar a day workers,
are going to buy our products.


They won't .... at least not for many, many years.

I visited China back in the mid-80' when the Chinese economic/industrial
revolution was still an "experiment" in some remote providences. These
experiments were sanctioned and controlled by the Chinese government but
hidden from major population centers to keep the concept of "capitalism"
under control. Representatives of companies from foreign countries -
particularly those involved in "high tech" were invited to participate and
somehow I was invited.

It quickly became very clear that there was little or no interest in
acquiring technology for products intended for internal consumption within
China. They were more interested in developing external markets for
products produced with equipment supplied by others, primarily the USA,
Canada, Great Britain and, to a degree, Germany. They wanted the technology
but also wanted "joint venture" agreements whereby the company supplying the
equipment would also set up distribution for the products in these high
consumer demand countries.

Eisboch