# A sad state of affairs....



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

You know, I was coming back from lunch and got caught by a train. Seems the jerk who drives it waits until I get there everyday to slowly putt across the track (but I have not been able to prove it yet). He smiles and waves hi to me, I wave back and tell him he is Number one. Anyways, every day, it is the same thing:

China shipping conainer, china shipping container, china shipping container.

Nothing against CHina or another country... but Holy Crap! It is no wonder our defecit is out the freaking roof! I wonder what other countries import basically everything. I bet you don't see USA Shipping running across the lines in China.

Want to know the extreme? Go to WalMart (You know, the Made in the USA Store). Buy an American Flag. Fly it proudly in your front yard, but don't look too closely at the little white tag on the bottom. It says:

Made in China.

Now what does that tell ya?


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Dad, haven't you been following the news? China is a wholly owned subsidiary of Walmart!


----------



## TrueBlue (Oct 11, 2004)

Even scarier than that, where do you think all those sterile glass containers In Vitro Fertilization labs use come from? Just think, these American parents are unaware that even their babies are "made" in China products.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Nah, I think Walmart is a wholly owned subsidiary of China. Now they are entering the Americas Cup. The boat might be painted nice but the electical wont be worth a crap and the Stainless will be rusty!!

Sorry for the jab. No offense to anyone. Just joking.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Or......look into who runs the Panama Canal since we gave it away.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

WalMart hasn't said much about "Made in USA" (Usa being a small town in Japan) since Sam W. died. If you follow the business press, his heirs are not at all unanimous about the change. But, WalMart offers what the American people want: the illusion of cheap. And even then, they admit it is often the *illusion*, much of their stock is competitive but not cheaper, some of it is even higher than the competition. 

I don't blame WalMart, I blame Washington, and I hold the hoi-polloi that fall for the same nonsense from every politician responsible for THEM. What was Walt Kelly's line? "We have met the enemy, and they is us!"

Granted, China is a developing nation and that will always be an advantage if played properly. But...the US could have played differently. We could have paid attention to our educational system. To our crimes and prison system. To many points, all of which we keep ignoring. And if anyone tries to FIX the system? Oh, no, we can't do that here. It costs too much. (sigh)

First, shoot all the lobbyists. No, wait a minute, guns are evil, so let's just CLUB 'em all to death. There are something like 32,000 registered lobbyists now, versus some 50 in the 1950's.

Then we ban "corporate entities" from making any political contributions at all, and stop treating Big Business like it had voting rights.

Won't help much, but it's a start.

Just remember one thing, with all the money we "spend" to China? There's only one way that money can be used, it has to be SPENT on something from the US in order to be ultimately used. If they can't spend it here, the joke is on *them*.


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

Apart from the fact that they can use the dollars to stockpile oil and commodities, and buy the wells etc. Any left they can spend in the USA buying stock, banks, property etc, real assets before the dollar declines in value.


----------



## canoeman256 (Aug 30, 2006)

Aw, let 'em buy all they want. In fact, sell them the whole country. Then we can nationalize the whole shebang and bankrupt 'em all. Then we loan 'em the money to pay off the debt...wait, that's where we are now, isn't it?


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"Apart from the fact that they can use the dollars to stockpile"
Can they? Only if someone else thinks they in turn can redeem the dollars back in the US. Either way, the buck still has to come back and be spent here to be redeemed. If the dollars are overvalued, it's a game of musical chairs and someone--not the US--will get caught without a seat.
We wouldn't be the first country to devalue currency and say "Haha, you lose."
But that, in the meantime, still does not address the issues at hand. It only speaks to the question of whether those issues can damage us--or not. Remember all the big money the Japanese spent on US real estate before values boomed and tanked? The money all came home, their loss not ours.

The real fun starts in 15-20 more years, when a new Chinese middle class starts looking for wives. And discovers, the millions of Chinese girl babies who were sold into adoption in the US (and the Chinese government makes a nice buck off that). Wives? Yes, they are in America. With some very different cultural values. Hmmm...Could be interesting.<G>

Of course, we could do the same thing that MANY of these countries already do. "Yessir, you want to set up an auto plant in the US? Why, sure you can. But you can only own 49% of it, you'll have to find a US citizen or corporation to own 51% of it." Shoe sure fits on the other foot, doesn't it?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Canoeman:
*Then we can nationalize the whole shebang and bankrupt 'em all.

Why that would be......communistic!
*


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

Everything is coming from China nowadays. China produces more steel than the US and Japan combined. In my industry (Doors and Hardware) a lot of the US manufactureres are actually getting most of thier materials from overseas and from Mexico.

The problem is the lack of standards thay have over there. They don't worry about pollution and the envoirnment like we do. In 10 - 20 years maybe that will catch up with them and they will improve thier standards. Than some other company, possibly some poor country somewhere in Africa will take over and than we can all start complaining about them.


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

In the name of free trade (if your country subscribes to the GATT and all those other _un-free_ trading requirements) the industrial power of this nation is being plundered by our most likely future adversary.

In many cases, the "trading partner" in question is the Peoples Liberation Army and, I suspect, the revenue goes straight into weapons that will be aimed our way in the future.

Witness the new Chinese submarine that recently tailed the Kitty Hawk battle group _without being detected _.

But don't worry, we will all have great jobs in the "service sector".


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Knuckleheads: Listen up. Poor People like PBZeer can go to K-Mart of Walmart and load up on the same crap that rich people buy. The difference is that rich people buy the same product and afford to pay more because it is made in America. There is nothing wrong with cheap goods.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Hey surf...are you using Chinese fittings on that project boat in the picture?
There's nothing wrong with cheap goods! I can get you a good deal on some Lewmal winches!! <grin>


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

And there's a big difference between cheap goods and inexpensive goods. The stuff you get at Wal-Mart is for the most part cheap goods. And yes, I do shop there. But there's a lot that I won't buy there. Disposable goods I buy there for the savings. Stuff that I need to last, I pay extra for quality, and shop around for inexpensive quality. And sometimes, there's no inexpensive quality. Remember, you get what you pay for.

Charlie


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

About those rich folks.

Anyone been to Brooks Brothers lately?

Most of the store is "Made in China" but no apparent break in prices.

Maybe we need to cut WalMart some slack. They carry as much American made stuff as anyone.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

GNB...You're right. It's not Wal-Mart's problem...it's the governments for letting our trade agreements get so one sided and ALLOWING trade with a brutal and uncaring regime that will be a significant enemy one day soon using our own money and our secrets! 
I have no problem buying low priced stuff from say...India or Malaysia as long as it is a 2 way street and the competition is fair. I DO have a problem with American companies who outsource jobs so the CEO's can earn 600 times what the average worker makes rather than just 300 times. (While telling us it is so they can be globally competitive!)


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

My (worth $.02" theory:

Most CEOs in large businesses don't have any idea what makes their business run at the operational level. They have been taught by the business schools that a "good manager" can run any business and that the details can be handled by subordinates less talented than they.

All they know how to do is play with the numbers. If the business isn't making enough money, they blindly reduce costs. Since they haven't the foggiest idea how to implement better, lower cost methods, they simply move production offshore.

Fortunately, a few "uneducated" guys who started their smaller manufacturing businesses from scratch don't know about the business school baloney and are using more efficient methods to compete with China successfully. May their tribe increase.


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

The stock analysts probably went to the B school too!


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

How can it be reported that a sub....any sub, tailed a carrier group, if it were undetected in the act?


----------



## yotphix (Aug 18, 2006)

Well one way would be if it were reported by the sub! Just because you cover your eyes doesn't mean we can't see you. (pretty much the definition of egocentricity)


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Hellosailor, You make great sense, in this case economic, as usual. The fact that those shipping containers may contain American goods being exported and that shipping companies, regardless of nationality, pool and use each other's containers should not intrude on the perennial xenophobic topic.

A cursory purview of the late Milton Friedman's "Free to Choose" should acquaint one with the nature of capitalism as practised in modern times. Mr Friedman, a Nobel prize winner, is widely thought to be the most influential economist of the twentieth century, surpassing his friend John Maynard Keynes. Due to his longevity, he may well end up being regarded as the greatest economist of the twenty-first century as well.

Uncle Milty was fond of the pencil illustration. I will try to get it right. A mine in Bolivia produces graphite. A saw mill in Oregon produces pine lumber. A plantation in Malaysia produces gum rubber. A steel mill in Korea produces steel. Taconite ore is mined for steel and iron production in Minnesota. Paint is produced in France. Machining tools are produced in Germany. The oil to run those tools is produced in Iran. The oil is delivered to the saw mill via British tanker. Etc...
And I go down to the store and buy a pencil. The pencil was produced by people speaking different languages, with different governments, with different religions, with different skin colors, some of the governments are at war with some of the other governments, some of the people involved are college educated while some are illiterate, and some of the people involved hate and fear some of the other people involved in the production of the pencil. None of the people involved have ever met, nor ever will meet, the other people involved.
I need a pencil. How can I organize the mess described above to produce a pencil? Realistically, I can't. The market can and does. I don't know how all of this actually works, but Mr. Friedman did. All I know is I have a pencil and if I need another one I don't have to go far, spend a lot of money, worry about not finding one, or even know how to make a pencil. I also have a car. Would you like me to tell you about it..........


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

BTW, submarines much like sailboats, can be very difficult to detect by surface warfare ships or ships in general, for that matter.


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

Hi Sailaway:

When a submarine can approach to within weapons range of a carrier battle group _and then surfaces without prior detection_ by the group's submarine defenses, it is said to have made the approach undetected. This is what happened to the Kitty Hawk and her escorts recently.

More ominously, it indicates that Chinese submarine capability, at least with respect to silently attacking a major naval formation at sea, has overtaken our airborne, surface, or sub-surface submarine defenses. Who knows how much of that capability is based on compromised U. S. designs.


----------



## morganmike (Oct 31, 2006)

Actually, the way we knew the Chinese submarine was IN THE VICINITY of the battle group is that they surfaced _about 3 miles away_. While that distance is close enough to launch a missile, it's far enough away that a torpedo could be detected and outrun in time. The Soviets used to pull that crap all the time. If they'd come much closer, they likely would have been detected. Normally, there are at least two attack subs on patrol with the battle group. The part of the story that you'll never hear is whether those subs had the Chinese boat on their sonar screens the whole time and were simply observing HIS capabilities, knowing that he wasn't a real threat. In peacetime, the game is much different than it is when we're actually at war.

While it is widely believed that the Chinese are stealing every secret they can get their hands on, the truth is that their nuclear submarines are using, at best, 1950s technology. Like the Russians, they look good on paper, but just having the gear doesn't mean you can be effective with it. If you're really worried, vote for those Congessmen that support the US Naval Submarine Program - 'cause the only effective weapon against a submarine is another submarine - and I'll put my boats up against anyone in the world. Toe to toe, I'd lay long odds that we sink their entire fleet before they could do more than moderate damage to ours - that first Chinese sneak attack had better be a doozy.

Now, as to the problem of goods made in China for sale at Wal-Mart: you have no one to blame but yourselves. Americans are unwilling to work dirty, dangerous, low-paying manufacturing jobs for wages that will keep goods competetive, therefore there are no manufacturing jobs in the US anymore. We couldn't supply those goods even if we wanted to. We'd much rather help the Chinese count and invest their money.

The hoarding of US currency is not a danger for China, it's a danger for the US. The US is never going to intentionally devalue the dollar in order to undercut Chinese economic strength. But the Chinese could easily start a run on the dollar by dumping their holdings into other curencies or commodities. It wouldn't take much; they hold so much of our currency that even the perception that they were starting to get out of the dollar would have serious impact on its value. I'm of the position that the Chinese are stockpiling dollars as a potential hedge against future conflict with the US - "If you don't stay out of the way while we invade Taiwan, we'll dump our dollars and crush your economy." And that's a far more powerful weapon than even a nuclear submarine.


----------



## morganmike (Oct 31, 2006)

And by the way, dollars don't have to return to the US to be "redeemed." They're pretty much good anywhere. In fact, the Treasury has determined that a large portion of the minted currency out there circulates outside the US without ever coming back into the country.


----------



## Pamlicotraveler (Aug 13, 2006)

Would any of us be better off if China was weaker economically? Free trade has already made us a wealthier nation - the insecurity is because of the free-flow of jobs (manufacturing jobs to lower labor cost structures), and the idea that we aren't the only world power with economic clout. 

Over the next 10+ years China will create a huge middle class, with enormous spending power. The government there has always said it needs social stability to develop its economy, and Beijing claims to value economic and social rights more than political rights. That makes it a dictatorship of sorts, but I think we are better off economically with a strong and growing economy in China. And the world is safer in the long run if they have a large middle class like is developing there now. 

People with big sailboats(!), Big Screen TVs and fancy cars are not going to want to destroy that standard of living by attacking others.


----------



## BADG (Dec 24, 2001)

morganmike said:


> Americans are unwilling to work dirty, dangerous, low-paying manufacturing jobs for wages that will keep goods competetive, therefore there are no manufacturing jobs in the US anymore.


Why would Americans do these jobs when they don't have to? Can you say welfare? If you don't work in this country you can still live and I don't mean survive, I mean live w/ shelter and clothing and food and gadgets. I've seen people at the grocery store in front of me with those nifty new cards with their pictures on them that pay for overloaded carts of groceries with every treat imaginable in them. If Mom and Dad can get paid to sit on the couch and watch Jerry Springer why would they ever want to head down in a hole to mine Taconite in Minnesota? And guess what little Johnny, Susie and LaShonda are going to grow up to be?


----------



## kennya (Jul 10, 2006)

Here in my part of the country there is a big push, radio, TV adds to shop with the local merchants, That does not include Wal Mart or Target etc. there talking the Mom and Pop shops. While we are talking about Wal Mart I am getting very put out with there store attitude. One they try to dictate what time of year you can purchases goods calling it seasonal and two if you purchase something that requires supplies once they stop selling the item there go your supplies. So I for one support our Mom and Pop shops.


----------



## kennya (Jul 10, 2006)

Sorry I got off the subject of subs. Got [email protected]#%ed before I read the full thread


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Sailaway...that pencil analogy is great in a perfect world where all countries let the market operate. It doesn't work so well when I want to buy a Florida orange in Japan at ANY price and find I can't because it turns out that there are Japanese orange growers who don't want their work to be outsourced to America!! 

Pam..."that makes it a dictatorship of sorts" is not how I would classify the Chinese government. We are digging our own grave with them. About 10 years ago when I was in the electronics business NOTHING was being produced in Red China. The good stuff came from Japan and Malaysia, Korea and Taiwan made plenty of cheap stuff and no one complained about prices in electronics going up!! We did not HAVE to let China in on the action...our enlightened leaders and big biz CHOSE to and we could choose not to again and still enjoy our big screens without supporting slave labor...but I'm not holding my breath!


----------



## morganmike (Oct 31, 2006)

Here is an interesting debate between a couple of smart guys regarding the growth of capitalism under an authoritarian regime in China:

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=8174

They spend more effort than you might expect calling each other names, but there are some cogent points regarding the need (or lack thereof) for Western Civ values in a successful capitalist economy.


----------



## Allen Lofland (Jun 27, 2006)

Great discusion about the cost of goods from over seas, what I cannt seem to understand is the high cost at West Marine  they used to be discounters, now their manopolist with two stores on every corner and the highest prices I've ever seen. Of cource its a free country, for the present, so I can go to ??????? anybody have a China connection for Yacht Gear


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Buchanan, Patrick J.; The Great Betrayal: How American Sovereignty and Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed to the Gods of the Global Economy; Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1998. [ISBN 0-316-11518-5]

Uncle Milty's the dude who kicked the outhouse off the cliff with us in it.


----------



## morganmike (Oct 31, 2006)

Now THAT's sure to be an amusing read.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Allen Lofland said:


> Great discusion about the cost of goods from over seas, what I cannt seem to understand is the high cost at West Marine  they used to be discounters, now their manopolist with two stores on every corner and the highest prices I've ever seen. Of cource its a free country, for the present, so I can go to ??????? anybody have a China connection for Yacht Gear


We could start our own wholesale purchasing club. I personally would love to find someone to go in with me on a spool of 600' 7/16 sta set rope. And a spool of 1/4 SS 7/19 wire rigging. We could sort of start our own costco, all we need is a DBA, oh already have one... so all we need is a need... oh have that too... oh maybe some cash. Yeah more cash for more yacht gear. damn I'm addicted.

Here is a link to a whole sale rigging company. 
http://www.peaktrading.com/categories/default.aspx?IndustryFilter=none&CategoryID=121


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Mike...thanks for that link...a very interesting read.


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

morganmike: Thanks, that's exactly the point I was angling towards regarding the carrier group escort subs, etc. 
Also, approaching in ones baffles is pretty much the only way to approach with any chance of escaping detection....which goes back to why the groups have escort subs in the first place. It doesn't indicate any particular technological advances on the part of the Chinese. It just shows they've been watching "The Hunt For Red October". They're just cloaked in prop wash.


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

I hope that Morganmike is right about the U. S. submarine capability. We underestimated the Japanese rather badly in WWII, as for example the capability of their "long lance" torpedo which sank U. S warships at ranges out to 15 miles or so.

As for "free" trade making us a prosperous nation, how exactly does that happen? Historically, aside from sale of natural resources, the only effective means for creating wealth has been manufacturing. The nation that does not make things is dependent on the rest of the world for all its needs.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Cam's concerns about the market only working in a perfect world are ill founded. We live in a demonstrably imperfect world and yet the market does work. The Chicoms did not embrace capitalism because they wanted to, they did it because they had to. The authoritarian regime hurdle has already been seen to be no obstacle, or a limited one at best; Chile. Take a look see at their social security plan and tell me who is more progressive. What will not work is totalitarian control such as the former USSR and present day Cuba. Also keep an eye on Venezula. A country with a lot going for it has fallen into totalitarian control and I predict you will see economic chaos there within 5-10 years. You read it here first. There are, for the record, more manufacturing jobs in the US than there were 10 years ago. You can look it up. Of course things look different than they did ten or twenty years ago. when have they not? For one, I'm not driving that pinnacle of automotive engineering, the Ford Pinto, anymore. 20 years ago, the gloom and doomers were all worried that the Japs were buying up the entire country from Pebble Beach Golf Club to Rockefeller Center and that Japan, Inc. would be dominating the world. As Japan enters it's second decade of malaise it is not inappropriate to recall the misery index of the seventies and early eighties, where inflation and unemployment ran at 20% combined. It was Ronald Reagan, implementing the ideals of Milton Friedman, that ended the slide and touched off the largest and longest peace-time expansion in the history of the nation. That expansion, with only a couple of very minor recessions, continues today.
I was at the stereo store today and was amazed to find that I could buy a middle range receiver or mid-range speakers for approximaterly the same price that I had in the early eighties-which means they have actually dropped in price over that time period. With an average inflation rate of just 2-3% they should have doubled in the last 25 years. While Pat Buchannon has some good ideas, in some areas, if you look in the dictionary under xenophobe you'll see Pat's photo. American know-how and can-do is still keeping us on top; our productivity continues to lead the world. Also, Americans lead the world in number of hours worked-not because they have to, but because they want to. What other country comes close to us in per-capita boat ownership? It's us and everyone else is second. I'll bet anyone who cares to that US productivity will lead the world 5 years from now and 10 years, 15 years, pick your time frame.
The same people who were worried about our unproven troops and weapons going up against the 5th largest standing army in the world, a battle hardened army with proven Soviet supplied technology, in the form of Iraq in the Persian Gulf war, are now worried about Chinese submarines. Their tears of anxiety had not even dried by the time Stormin' Norman had the whole group wrapped up or running for home. The US Navy is far and away the most dominant maritime force ever assembled. The Royal Navy, in it's heyday, cannot rival the force globally projected today by our fleet. The dominant position is such that no adversarial nation is even attempting to build a fleet to challenge American seapower. The last nation to try has it's efforts rusting at the docks of Murmansk and Vladivostok.
Rest easy pollyanna, the US economy (and the US Navy) are in better shape than at any time since WWII.


----------



## stlcat22 (Nov 19, 2006)

Heh, heh. Two of my favorite things, sailing and Milton Freeman.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Sailaway... I agree with everything you said above especially about market capitalism trumping authoritarianism over time. My point is that like Reagan...we should be doing what we can as a nation to hasten that time and putting pressure on such regimes. In my view:
1. We should not make one-way (or any) trade deals that prop up dictators. WHY ARE WE TRADING WITH CHINA when the ONLY benefit to our country is lower prices AND we could have almost as low prices by dealing with other "3rd world" economies while FORCING the Chinese to deal with the bankruptcy of their idealogy. It is solely about money at the expense of our expressed ideals and our security and our environment.
2. We as a society need to think about the kind of country we are becoming and the compact that exists between business and society as a whole. Some would argue that a corporations only duty is to its shareholders. There was an older view that the corporation exists because the larger society allows it to and that there is some responsibility there too. Greed is good as a motivating factor for capitalism...but unchecked greed on a personal level that comes at the expense of society as a whole needs to be reigned in if we are to sustain our democracy. 
3. The danger for us is that, since we are a democracy...if people no longer feel hope for a better life...they will vote themselves one and we already have plenty of examples of that. Meanwhile...they have Paris Hilton to entertain themselves with. Can you say "bread and circuses"??

Gee...and I was feeling so upbeat this morning! <grin>


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

Hi Sailaway:

I sincerely hope you are right that Reagan's ideas still control, that world trade is actually free, that all those totalitarian regimes out there are choosing capitalism, and that nobody is building military hardware to challenge the USA.

It sounds comforting.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Don't forget, the biggest business in the world is the US Government. Too bad it isn't run with the same sense of accountablity that a private business is.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

John..."Accountability"??? Why would they want to even consider that after the voters of Louisiana just RE-ELECTED the congressman that was videotaped discussing a bribe AND found with $96 grand in his freezer??? ...and they want us to send more money to LA!! 
My guess is that (though smaller)...your friends in Ottowa ain't much more efficient eh? <grin>

Ooops...read "Ontario" and didn't look at the flag! <grin> Oh well...there's a comment for our Canadian friends anyway!


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Actually, Ottawa is the capital of Canada. But government, is inherently ineffiecent (witness the fiasco in New Orleans) in part because the only real accountability is at the ballot box, and very few people vote intelligently instead of emotionally. Add in the factor that most pols have decieded the best avenue to re-election is to bring home as much bacon (needed or not) as possible, and you have the reciepe for the current political situation (which by the way is not limited to either party).

We are faced with a multitude of problems that are being "solved" by people whose only real interest is staying in office (power). In other words, the only compelling national interest that is being served, is the growth and power of the government over the individual.


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

PBzeer said:


> We are faced with a multitude of problems that are being "solved" by people whose only real interest is staying in office (power). In other words, the only compelling national interest that is being served, is the growth and power of the government over the individual.


Eloquently stated.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

John...what I meant was that I read "Ontario" your boat brand...and mistakenly thought you were posting from Canada...hence the Ottowa comment! 
Anyway...your point is Exactly on the money!


----------



## ebs001 (May 8, 2006)

Cam, I'm from Ottawa, Ontario and we spell inefficiency the same way G-O-V-E-R-N-M-E-N-T


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Quite so, Cam. I would differ, as did Reagan and Jeanne Kirkpatrick, between totalitarian regimes and authoritarian regimes. Coincidently, capitalism is impossible in the former with out losing power, ie... the means of production. In the latter, the trend over time is toward more and more liberalization of constraint on the citizenry and eventually no more dictatorship. Witness Chile. The Chicoms are done. It's just a matter of how slow and soft a landing they pick. Once they started down the road to economic liberty they signed their retirement papers. Political liberty always follows economic liberty.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Don't you guys think this entire line of discussion belongs in THE FIGHT CLUB?


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

TXS-ALAMO said:


> Don't you guys think this entire line of discussion belongs in THE FIGHT CLUB?


Well, actually, no. Now, if it were a bunch of bickering and name-calling, you would be right, but since it's not, no, it doesn't belong there. What is needed is an off topic forum, which would be the proper place for this type of discussion.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

As far as I'm concerned, if it's maritime related it should be ok. As a good number of us are world travelers these issues are going to come up. Would you be complaining if the topic centered around the relatively complacency of semi-naked Finnish blonds on the beaches of Palma de Majorca versus the more tempermental Danish version?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*new forum*



PBzeer said:


> Well, actually, no. Now, if it were a bunch of bickering and name-calling, you would be right, but since it's not, no, it doesn't belong there. What is needed is an off topic forum, which would be the proper place for this type of discussion.


That's a great idea!


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Sailaway,

I find your optimism refreshing. Your insight into international politics far exceeds mine. In the end, however, I have always been more impressed by Voltaire than Rousseau. I see too many things that discourage me. What I suppose I mean in my statements here is that I believe our individual positions are refractory, much like Crane Brinton described religion: "For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, none is possible." In short, I am not interested in debate. I would, however, like to add some commentary, which I did not do with my offering of Buchanan's book for reference.

The book in essence is a history of tariffs in this country. I found it to be very valuable as such since my knowledge was limited to that taught in high schools. As you know, before running for president in 1996, Buchanan had been a presidential advisor for several administrations. During those times, as he relates in the book, he was, and necessarily so, an advocate of free trade. It was when he ran for president, during the campaign, that he was able to see first hand the effects of free trade on our economy, how it affected our country's citizens. Your label of "xenophobe" I believe is a little harsh. My dictionary's definition is, "fear and hatred of things foreign." I would expect that is not exactly the sentiment that you wished to convey.

I see a real failing in our understanding of economics. It is not necessary to read Milton, or Schumpeter, or any other modern economist (the text I studied was by Paul Volcker) if you want the fundamentals. Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations is something everyone should read, and no one does. Its principles are as current today as when it was written and should be understood by anyone having an education. It is interesting that the Japanese thought economic education so important that it published "comic books" for adult consumption that told stories of business to demonstrate economics to the Japanese people. My local public library had one these on its shelves many years ago. If we better understood economics, the gyrations of our political leadership would be less well tolerated.

I had the privilege about fifteen years ago to know a man who was the head of the Advanced Technology Center at Georgia Tech. I introduced him as a speaker to a technology interest group to which I belonged. His name is Michael Kelly. His bio started with Professor of Electrical Engineering at Stanford University, went to manager of IBM's technology development center in Boca Raton, FL, and then to the head of DARPA, a government agency dedicated to military technology development, under Reagan. He resigned this latter post because of his strong conviction for the need of an industrial policy. He saw pitfalls in free trade, and advocated tariffs. I believe he is right. Something that greatly impressed me about this man was his humbleness. Before the scheduled date for his visit to our group, he called me and asked my permission for him to postpone the engagement; his brother was receiving an honorary doctorate degree for some philanthropic work he had done, and Dr. Kelly wanted to be present. This latter is an aside, but I have to contrast him to the guy who asked to speak to our group, then wanted to be paid, asked for gas money, and then didn't show up. Back to tariffs: when Peter Drucker warned of the necessity to "protect our borders," he wasn't addressing immigration issues.

Productivity calculations are based on dollars, not on tangible output. They are bolstered by profit maximization efforts in generally non-productive sectors. Further, it is very hard to put much credence in the government's published figures. (Don't argue with me here; go and find out for yourself.) We are in a lot of trouble; "when" the dollar crashes depends on when the _housing bubble_, created by low interest rates, pops. Remember Monica? Greenspan let the economy overheat at that time so that the Dem's wouldn't be hurt in the 2000 election.

There is another Freedman whose insights are very interesting. This one is Benjamin H. Opened my eyes.

Bob


----------



## morganmike (Oct 31, 2006)

It's not quite true that nobody is building the weapons to challenge our military superiority.

I wish I could find the recent (spring 2006) report on China's military development. Turns out China is really the only country that is attempting to match US military power. The report indicated that overtly, heavy spending on weapons programs, hardware and troops has built the Chinese a professional, well-equipped armed force. In addition, the report speculates (with some cause) that the Chinese are covertly spending as much as twice what they're admitting to. (That's where much of those vaunted savings are going, apparently.) They are attempting to build a viable nuclear submarine force, and their space program is really the development platform for their ballistic missle program. So, yeah, the Chinese could give us some trouble, and most analysts think it will come at some point over Taiwan.

HOWEVER, as has been mentioned, the superiority of the US Navy over any other fleet in the world is orders of magnitude in difference. You don't build a tool like the US Navy overnight. It takes trillions of dollars of investment and generations of dedicated technology development. The report called for some brief period on the order of weeks for us to sink every Chinese Naval vessel currently in commission, and it would be done almost entirely with attack submarines. Nobody can get away from our boats when they're on the prowl.

Now I'm obliged to reveal my bias: I work for Electric Boat and I build subs for a living. When I was a reactor plant systems engineer, I also built aircraft carriers. I have been onboard every new submarine to be commissioned in the last decade and I can state with great authority and technical expertise that they impress the hell out of me.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Back to crashes and other calamities. Hellosailor attempted to explain the nature of the perceived problem and was doing a heck of a lot better than I. If you are China, and you have a dollar, what do you have? We're not on the gold standard anymore so it doesn't translate in to x amount of gold from Fort Knox. In that case you would have had a tangible commodity that your dollar entitled you to, based on the promise of the US government. Today you have whatever the US government says you have. If there is a world-wide calamity and the government decides to print a gazzillion more dollars you may have a small section of wallpaper. The dollar represents the US economy and it's inherent strengths, that's why it is so popular to foreign investors. It is perceived, rightly or wrongly, that after the Netherlands slips back into the ocean, Europe is run by anarchists, the Far East is immolated by nuclear war, then and maybe not then the dollar will not be the most stable unit of monetary exchange. Me, I preferred the gold standard but the rest of the world pegs it's market and currency to the dollar on the idea that it is the most stable.
The US economy is today so diverse that very little rattles it in a long term sense. We had a major market correction in 1985-black monday and we did not go into a recession. The dot-com run up tanked and what happened-a brief slow down. Most recently, gas prices doubled during a fairly large warm and what happened? Nada. The only serious worry is that the Federal government will raise taxes and try to balance the budget in short order and tank the continuing expansion of the economy.
From my memory, Pat Buchannon has been a isolationist long predating his presidential run, and it is those views that have distanced him from the conservatives and made him a populist of necessity.
To the best of my knowledge, Milton Friedman has never held a government job and all of his influence has been through academia, writing, and his successful TV series, "Free to Choose".
You can skew the productivity numbers for a year or to by maximizing profits, but you can't skew them for over twenty years. At some point you have to produce something. A task that has been much easier without the industrial policy favored by Robert Reich and, briefly by Bill Clinton. Which brings us full circle. The US economy for some mystical reason seems to rumble along quite nicely, meeting our and the world's needs, via the unseen hand of the market (Mr. A. Smith meet Mr. M. Friedman), and the only serious threat to it is US government policy. Congress, not currently being in session, puts me in a rather jovial holiday spirit with pleasant hopes for the new year. Let 'em have the whole of '07 off-would you miss them?


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Quite pleased to see mike's comments on the subs. Let me get this straight here. China is working feverishly to modernize her military. The country she is trying to catch up to is the USA. The only aircraft China has, missile or fixed wing, that can reach the US are commercial jets produced in the US and Europe. Aside from it's missiles, the US has aircraft that can reach China in a matter of hours, with a large payload, and those aircraft were built in the 1950's (B-52). I'm not sure where the "competition" is.


----------



## poorfatjames (Dec 11, 2006)

btrayfors said:


> Dad, haven't you been following the news? China is a wholly owned subsidiary of Walmart!


+1

lol

best answer


----------



## morganmike (Oct 31, 2006)

Sailaway - yeah, pretty much. I would add that in addition to the market corrections you mentioned, we've also weathered a failure of the Savings & Loan industry and the Asian banking collapse. There is real value in the US economy, true enough. However, I'm not sure I agree about the fuel price issue not becoming a problem. The reason we didn't stall the economy this summer was twofold: first, the price we pay for gasoline doesn't necessarily reflect the true cost of the product. Therefore, while prices went up, they didn't rise to a point where they were unbearable and it didn't go on for long. Consumers and industry were able to defer some portion of the added costs until the price returned to more normal levels. In addition, we routinely protect our supply with various military and political activities, which cost is not necessarily reflected in price at the pump. This country runs on cheap oil, and if we ever stop spending billions on military adventurism and political appeasement to maintain our supply, a protracted oil crisis ala the 70s could indeed put a major damper on the economy. One winter without heating oil would be a catastrophe.

Regarding your second comment about China's military - yeah, pretty much. Like I said, you can't build the tool overnight, no matter how much money you spend. Just look at the Soviets, who were nearly able to match us in spending, and oh-by-the-way, were stealing secrets at a rate to make the most prolific Chinese spy have fits of jealousy. They STILL couldn't produce a military with the same capabilities as the US. The US "military-industrial complex" is a self-propagating, multi-dimensional construction. Taken as a whole, it is unmatched in the history of human endeavor, and is buoyed by a few things the Chinese just don't have, in particular a robust and intelligent university system paired with motivated research & development organizations in the commercial world. In addition to American productivity, we continuously demonstrate the ability to out-innovate just about everyone. That's what keeps us so far ahead.

And OK, ridiculous amounts of money help, too.


----------



## ebs001 (May 8, 2006)

I do not trust China at all. While the Soviet Union was spending all their money on military build up in an attempt to keep up with the US, their economy was in ruins and virtually bankrupt. The Chinese on the other hand have a booming economy growing each year at a tremendous rate. The focus of the Chinese at this point is to continue to build up their economy to a level where they will be able to compete dollar for dollar with the American Industrial Complex and challenge the US for world supremacy. The communist government in Bejiing is just lying in the weeds biding their time and the worst possible thing is for the US to be complacent about China's military development. Once they decide to move there are a billion (1,000,000,000) more Chinese than Americans and their government is willing and ready to sacrifice them all. I beleive it's a silly game were playing not controlling the growth in the Chinese economy and it's just a matter of time before it bites us in the ass both ecinomically and militarily. Where ever possible do not buy products made in China might be a start.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

ebs001 - you make a very good and relevant point. The one thing you left out is that the Chinese have a mindset that is even harder for the average American to grasp than that of the jihadists. Time is almost a meaningless concept to them, in so far as how long it takes to accomplish something. They don't have the "instant gratification" urge so prevelant in the US and other parts of the Western world. They also are much less worried about the MAD scenerio that was in place with the USSR and US. They figure there's enough of them, they'll still prevail.

That said though, the only real way to foster change there is through economic measures, as has been pointed out. But as long as our politicans only worry about the short term, and how it affects their personal power, it's hard to put together a workable strategy on the economic front.

Anybody who takes China lightly, or expects some magically conversion to peaceful co-existance with them, is only deluding themselves.


----------



## slocum2 (Jul 4, 2003)

Want to send a message? What if no one went to WalMart next saturday? One day, just one day one.

Of course then you'd have to buy your imports at Target!


----------



## ebs001 (May 8, 2006)

"Anybody who takes China lightly, or expects some magically conversion to peaceful co-existance with them, is only deluding themselves"
Amen to that John


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

Regarding the comments to the effect that the U. S. armed forces are superior to any other in the world, remember that Varus, Augustus, and the rest of the Romans were of a similar mind about their legions until the battle of the Teutoburg forest.


----------



## tommyt (Sep 21, 2002)

This is an interesting thread. Lots of socio-economic data and certainly a lot of fear of China. What always surprises me is that Walmart always seems to become one of the scapegoats in this conversation. Half of the Senate and House (the newly dominant half) seems to be Walmart bashers. Although I am not a big fan of Walmart stores I do not understand the principle here.

Walmart was elected, by the US and now international consumer, as the largest retailer in the world. We in the US may like to buy American, but we are not willing to pay for "bought in America". Walmart uses Chinese product because that is what the US consumer is voting on with their wallet every day. One statistic that I saw said that the average Walmart consumers family saves over $2,000 a year by shopping there. Should Walmart pull out of China to make the Walmart China bashers happy at the expense of their consumers and their business?

Makes a lot of sense to me to bash the #1 private employer in the US. That will do a lot of good for our economy and standard of living. Oh, and before someone gets on the bandwagon about Walmart being a low cost employer...well DUH!!!! That is also what keeps the prices down and the consumer voting for them. Also, a new Walmart opened in a Chicago suburb in the last year or so. 35,000 people showed up for about 450 jobs. Walmart must not be that poor of and employer compared to the other options these people must have had. 

At the same time the city of Chicago is attempting to tell big box retailers (read that as Walmart) the minimum wage that they can pay within their city. That number is somewhere above $10.00 an hour. I predict that you will see many new Walmart stores ringing the city of Chicago, and few in the city servicing that consumer base economically. Why would a retailer want to put themselves on an unequal footing with its competition just because it is the big guy in town? City government, read that as city consumers, will lose in this situation.

I totally agree that we as a country have some serious trade problems brought on by poor negotiations of trade agreements. However, I don't think we need to use a company working within the parameters of those agreements as a scapegoat.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

TommyT...ditto. The problem is what our government lets all companies do. It's like blaming someone for growing tobacco when the law says it is OK to smoke!


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Excellent point about Wal-Mart. It's also quite indicative of the point I made about thinking short term and for political purposes.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Morganmike-hear hear! Tommyt, well said also.
When buying Chinese made goods I am reminded of two anecdotes. The first involves a conversation between a college senior and a freshman, circa 1978. Carly Simon's "Tapestry" is the best selling album of all time says the senior. No way, says our freshman, and names 5 other albums he likes better. Yes, you may like those albums better, says our senior, but do you own "Tapestry"? Well, yeah I do. So does everybody else, concludes the senior.
The 55 mile an hour speed limit was in effect, courtesy of Gerald Ford's "WIN" program and the anti-destination league. Conversation with a woman approximately my mother's age. I allowed as how I usually drive at eighty miles an hour when on the interstate in good conditions. After trying various arguments, that didn't hold up, on safety, etc...she said, "well it's against the law". I asked her what speed she drove. She replied, 62 mph (just fast enough to not get a ticket!). I replied that we were both breaking the law and our only argument was to what degree.
I believe that both of these anecdotes are relavent because they point out areas of cognitive dissonance in our lives. That is to say; we say one thing and do another without realizing our hypocrisy. We will decry others buying Chinese goods and yet a cursory look around our own house reveals myriad goods made in China. The immediate response is, yeah-but I don't like it, I have to because I can't afford not to. Can't afford-or won't afford? Either way, the market has once again supplied you with a good, at a price, that you otherwise wouldn't have. Remember when VCRs first came out? They were one thousand dollars. I remember thinking, as a kid, we'll NEVER have one of those, we don't even have cable TV. Hand-held calculators came out about the same time. $110 bought you a calculator that added,sub'd,mult,divd, and squared. Within two years, a japanese company had one on top of a wrist watch that would do that for $25 and the $100 hand-held did every math function under the sun with about 5 different memories. Today, the packaging material costs more than the calculator and they all come from overseas.
My father-in-law is as buy american as you can get, and very proud of his new John Deere tractor, until I pointed out the Yanmar diesel in it. I consoled him by mentioning that his old one, the gasser, had pistons made by Mahle, a German company.
Go ahead and buy the American made product, and good on you for doing so, but be under no illusions that your purchase is going to do much to keep certain jobs, industries, and our economy healthy or slow down the influx of goods from China. The very company you are buying that product from is already looking at Chinese components to replace higher cost ones. They have to do this to stay in business. And the hidden hand of the market does it all.
Is gas for your car one of your largest regular expenditures? Do you buy American gas? How do you know?
I believe that with the influx of capitalism China will become a strong economic player in the world, but find that it is not in their interest to be a dominant military player. Issues like pollution, which come with economic success, will dominate their time. BTW, pollution becomes an issue with economic success not because it didn't exist before, but because only with economic success can countries afford to limit and control it as we do in the US. The thinking back in the seventies and eighties was that the Soviets could compete with us because they did not have to spend as much on social programs as the western world and could therefore devote more GDP to military matters. No matter. We still out spent them and invented Viagra in our spare time.
Our angst over China reminds me of the French position on, well everything. French agriculture policy pre-dates the great depression and is it any wonder that there are few French goods that compete well in the world market without massive subsidies? Closing our shores to foreign goods is futile and will lower the standard of living of every American, save the wealthy few.

Walmart. Since when did every job, or company, have to be capable of a career path? The joke about McJobs is that no one envisions them as a career path. We don't expect McDonald's to even have a retirement plan, although I'm sure they do. Nobody is saying, shut down McDonalds. What is being said is, you better study hard or you're going to be working at McDonalds the rest of your life! No job is for life anymore and Walmart apparently provides needed jobs since they never seem to lack for employees. The point that the jobs don't provide certain things is exactly the point of Walmart. They are providing products as cheaply as they possibly can, to the betterment of the majority of consumers. Do we think the dollar store across the street, locally owned, provides any more to their employees? And GM may be paying a fork-truck driver 5x the money that Walmart pays for the same job. If I'm a Walmart fork-truck driver I'd like the GM money, but I'm also not sure what company is going to be around twenty years from now. The truth of the situation must lie somewhere in between. The Walmart fork-truck driver will either move up to a higher skill/pay job or move on to the one elsewhere having used the Walmart job as a stepping stone. And GM is no doubt thinking long and hard about how they ended up paying so much for relatively low skill jobs. BTW, Toyota is helping them to stay focused. I don't know the answer in detail, and I suspect that anyone who purports to, is selling something they don't have. But, in the end, the hidden hand of the market will have it's say.
I expect that 25 years from now we will look back at the American economy and America's position in the world and recall Mark Twain's famous line, "The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated".
I also expect that 25 years from now the Chinese consumer will be a force in the retail sail-boat market and the Chinese government will little resemble what it looks like now, regardless of what it calls itself. And the only thing we'll know for sure is that the hidden hand of the market had something to do with it.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Well said. While this thread may not be strictly sail related, it is interesting and thought provoking.


----------



## tommyt (Sep 21, 2002)

At the risk of turning this too political I heard an antedote not to long ago that made a point to a few friends. Now, I am a conservative, but not Rep or Dem. In the last election I voted for a few of each and definetely crossed lines on issues in Michigan.

A young lady came home from her Freshman year at a Eastern school. Her education was paid for by a fairly well off and conservative father and mother. Over the course of her freshman year she had become influenced by some very liberal instructors and friends and was very disenchanted with her family. She felt that the distribution of wealth was not fair, that her father should be happy to pay more taxes to help distribute that wealth, and that she was ashamed of him for not supporting that theory. She told him just that in her first week home for the summer.

Her father did not want to get into a political argument with his very much loved daughter so he changed the subject as soon as possible. He asked how she had done for the year and she proudly told him that she was on the deans list, was taking advanced courses wherever possible, and although the work was long and hard she felt that she would finish in under four years. He was very pleased and congratulated her. 

Next, he asked how her friend Mandy, one of her closest friends for years, had done in school. She replied that Mandy was not doing so well. She was taking easy classes, not studying hard at all, party was her middle name, and that she was in jeopardy of flunking out of school. They both thought that it was a shame that Mandy, who entered school on an equal footing with her friend, was having such a problem.

The father suggested that it was a shame that his daughter, who was doing so well, could not help her friend. Possibly a grade sharing program where she could use some of her A's to offset Mandy's D's. To this the daughter reacted very strongly. Why should she, who was working her ass off, offset Mandy because she decided to not study, party all the time, and not work for the grades she was capable of! Where was the fairness in that?

To which her father said, " I think you just became a conservative".


Now, the shame is, that the conservatives in our capital are not acting conservative.


----------



## ebs001 (May 8, 2006)

I am not bashing WalmartWhile I agree that the Walmart mentality is everywhere, I do not think we should just throw up our hands and say there's nothing I can do about it. My point before was avoid buying products made in China where ever possible. As long as we buy everything Chinese we fuel their economy to the detriment of our own. That $2000 that we save today will end up costing you and me allot more in the future. The Chinese are intent on world economic domination and after that the military build-up. As long as we are on it lets also remember that the Chinese do not play fair: they do not allow many North American products into their country creating a huge trade deficit in their favour.
I am not bashing Walmart - they are giving us what we asked for. I'm bashing me for not asking for the right thing.


----------



## morganmike (Oct 31, 2006)

> And GM is no doubt thinking long and hard about how they ended up paying so much for relatively low skill jobs.


Two words: Unions. Pensions. (Not necessarily in that order.)


----------



## ughmo2000 (Feb 12, 2003)

The next superpower nation.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

BTW,
Some interesting related items on business and politics. Business is often viewed as a republican strong-hold. This may be true for small business, which creates 90% of the new jobs, but is not true of large corporations. Those corporations tend to support each party equally, shifting only with the political winds. With this in mind, who would benefit most by a re-emergence of 'Hillary-care', otherwise known as socialized medecine? You betcha! Expect the left side of the democrat party to get a warm welcome in Detroit from the automakers and the UAW. Were the government, read you and me, to pick up their medical obligations well--can you say instant profitability. Just a thought on how reasonably intelligent businessmen get in to a bind and are more than willing to have the government bail them out. Come to think of it, viewing the Gulf coast, the whole country may be infected. Of course, a government supplied vaccine will....


----------



## OldSarg (Dec 19, 2006)

Let them buy the stocks, save our dollars and become part of the world community. In the long run it will profit all Americans. As far as Walmart goes the only people who complain either don't shop there or work there.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

The situation doesn't begin or end with WalMart; it's just the mascot. When the publishers of the business school text books tout the virtues of Target and Home Depot and decry the failings of IBM, I'd say that there is a movement afoot.


----------



## Artwerke (Nov 25, 2005)

I kinda forgot what this thread was started for, but as it twists along,my thoughts on the Chinese sub, could it be like the Russian Bear Bombers that Buzzed us constantly during NATO war games, or refueling ops, Flying along about 800-1000 ft with an F-4 at 5:00 High and 7:00 low? As for Chinese goods at Walmart, I remember when toy cars from Japan still had American labels on the insides, when BMW made cars with motorcycle engines, and no one made a car that could go 100,000 miles without breaking down, or changing nothing more than tires & oil,Soon the Chinese would be afraid to attack us for fear of damaging too much of their own property, and chasing away their best customers. But if we can trade with the Chinese, Vietnamise, Why the Hell can't I sail down to Cuba? Art.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Having just finished this thread from front to back, I must say that I am very impressed with the knowledge, insight and well argued positions of those that posted... further, though not everyone agrees with each other, the debate has been civil, even cordial... that is not something you see often on many message boards...

This just reinforces my belief that people who sail are a tad more intelligent and have a little more life experience than the general population at large... and did I say more humble...  

By way of introduction, I am a newbie to the sailnet community and to sailing. Started serious sailing about 3 years ago, picked up my ASA certifications last year, did my first bareboat charter in the BVI's last November and am in the process of purchasing my first sailboat, a 1989 Catalina 30 TRBS. I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the various posts on innumerable threads, all topics of great interest to a beginning sailor. Where else can you gain access to the accumulated experience and wisdom of so many sailing practitioners? 

I leave you with this comment from P.J. O'Rourke...

"China is manufacturing so many products for America and selling them to us so cheaply and helping us pay for them. Why? Maybe it is a plot to harm America. Maybe China will be more successful than Japan was at making us poor by giving us things. Maybe the entire Asian economic boom is a wily Oriental sneak attack on America. But if bombarding America with clothing, housewares, CD players, HDTVs, play stations, and PDAs is an Oriental sneak attack on America, it's certainly an improvement over Pearl Harbor."


Fair winds and following seas...

BytheNbrs
SSV Dreamcatcher
Lake Norman, NC


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

A nation that cannot manufacture what it needs and thus becomes dependent on others that can will be easily overcome and displaced on the world stage.

Let's all keep whistling,


----------



## soul searcher (Jun 28, 2006)

Reminds me of a line from a movie. A Japaneese guy telling an American,
"You won the war but we won the peace"

matt


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

To summarise.
It seems the US should not trade freely with people who do not think like and act like us. 
We all think alike.
We can keep printing money at 10% pa so any dollars they get won't be worth much in a while.
Any economic downturn is best avoided by printing more money.
We should be afraid of them.
But it doesn't matter because we could still bomb the hell out of them.
That fixes things.


----------



## cardiacpaul (Jun 20, 2006)

While shopping at the newest teen fashion icon, "American Eagle Outfitters" I noticed not one single item "Made in USA". 75.00 "distressed" jeans from malaysia & mexico, 40.00 tee shirts from the republic of vietnam, 40.00 skirts from indoneisia, 40.00 hats from cambodia. 

Other baubles, trinkets and otherwise useless items came from mexico, the dominican republic, ecuador and other far flung corners of the world. 

After much foot stamping and whining, we left, and her assignment was to look up the labor practices in these countries. 
I have never seen a 13 year old shocked before.. She said "but it says right here, american eagle"... imagine her su-prise when she found that kids her age worked from 6 am to 6 pm for about 3.00 a day. 
quote "geez, that sucks". 

Then we looked up the other fashion plate of gotta haves... Nike.

Its opened her eyes, a little. 


in 1997, American Eagle stated tht 78% of their line was from overseas, in 2005, 98% is.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Goodnews...Don't forget that today...knowledge is a product as well and we still do pretty well at manufacturing that...though our school scores would suggest that we are on the downward slope there as well.


----------



## ccam (Dec 17, 2006)

Goodnewsboy said:



> In the name of free trade (if your country subscribes to the GATT and all those other _un-free_ trading requirements) the industrial power of this nation is being plundered by our most likely future adversary.
> 
> In many cases, the "trading partner" in question is the Peoples Liberation Army and, I suspect, the revenue goes straight into weapons that will be aimed our way in the future.
> 
> ...


At the rate china is going they will be manufacturing all of our military hardware in 10 yrs. All the US will do is push paper. Hmm, maybe it was the 100,000/ yr janitor we hired


----------



## EscapadeCaliber40LRC (Sep 25, 2006)

Chris - your comments sounds a little bit anti-xenophobic. I don't blame you. 

To fear the economic development of China is foolish, but worthy of some considered thought. I know from a lifetime of work in tech that most all tech in this country has long since been heavily influenced by people of Chinese descent. One issue that I recall from that experience comes from my good friend who chose the name Belleza as her Westernized first name. Many times she would ponder whether she was American, having lived in America her entire adult life (about 20 years a home owner in Saratoga), or Taiwanese having grown up in Taiwan, or Chinese because of her anscestral Hun heritage. I submit that she is all three. Most people don't fully understand how intertwined the US is with China. I acknowledge that the bulk of all US technology comes from not only the factories in China, but from the brains of people of Chinese heritage living the US and working as engineers and managers in the mainstream of US tech. The rise of China as a world power is an unstoppable fact of this era, we need to deal with it as such. It will be accommodated. The opportunity is that Chinese people seem on the whole to be so enterprising as natural born pragmatic capitalists. For the rest of our lives, the US will need a strong and successful China and China will need a strong and successful US.


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

camaraderie said:


> Goodnews...Don't forget that today...knowledge is a product as well and we still do pretty well at manufacturing that...though our school scores would suggest that we are on the downward slope there as well.


Having been on the campus of a leading private engineering school within the past two weeks, I am impressed that the students are being fed a full course of political opinions, but precious little engineering and scientific material.

Remember how readily our best and brightest bought into the Y2K hoax?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

*The rise of China as a world power is an unstoppable fact of this era, we need to deal with it as such. It will be accommodated. The opportunity is that Chinese people seem on the whole to be so enterprising as natural born pragmatic capitalists. For the rest of our lives, the US will need a strong and successful China and China will need a strong and successful US.

*Yup...The only problem is that the Chinese gov't likes to run over those pragmatic capitalists with tanks or put them to work for "free". Little things like stealing our missle secrets tends to make us see them as something less than friendly competitors. 
The good news is that as China grows economically, the internal tensions in the society come under increasing pressure. The question is if they will be resolved in a manner that is favorable to continued development or by force. 
My instincts say that making it easy for the gov't to "export" its' problems with unfair trade balances and currency manipulation is the wrong thing for us to do. To the extent possible, I think Americans should vote with their $$'s wherever possible and for politicians who are sympathetic to the real meaning of "fair trade".


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

Don't be fixated on China alone. You would be surprised how much critical military electronics is sourced in Europe. That may be a Muslim country very soon and therefore inimical to supplying the infidel.


----------



## chrondi (Mar 24, 2004)

Just days before ... China was the origin of problems. Now it seems that it shifted to Europe (becoming muslim!). I imagine that next it's India's turn. It is surprising how mankind has not yet learned that *evil* lies in ... ourselves and not the others, any others.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"The rise of China as a world power is an unstoppable fact of this era"
Is it? Or, as stresses rise in China, might it not fall apart as the USSR did?

Remember that "China" is a warlord's accumulation of different nation-states, and there are internal stresses in it. Along with more than some conflict caused by government policies forcing traditional peasant farmers to starve. Forcing the sales of infants (good business, about $50k to sell each girl baby to the US adopters plus at least two tourist visits by the couple to China). Seizing and killing dogs, instead of giving them rabies vaccine.

Now, all they need is for the great new dam to collapse.

Empires have fallen in China before, it is not unthinkable that this firmly entrenched one may fall off the tight wire yet. Which could be even worse.


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

This thread started by talking about all the chinese imports. How many on this board crap all over the idea of buying a Hunter sailboat? They're made in the USA by a lot of skilled US labor. But many extoll the virtue of various foriegn boats to the detriment of US options. 
We make choices and are stuck with the consequences of those choices.

Someone already made mention of large corps getting in bed with politicians who support gov't healthcare. That is coming. GM WILL get relief from it's giant health care problem soon, from the fed gov't. The unions will get to keep their golden health care and we'll all get stuck with the bill. This has been festering for 30 years and isn't going away for another 20 or more. GM & their unions created a giant ponzy scheme but we are going to get stuck with the costs.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

chrondi said:


> Just days before ... China was the origin of problems. Now it seems that it shifted to Europe (becoming muslim!). I imagine that next it's India's turn. It is surprising how mankind has not yet learned that *evil* lies in ... ourselves and not the others, any others.


Yup! India is breeding faster than China, so at the present rate there will be more Indians than Chiness by 2050. Their economy is booming too, but more on the software side than manufacturing at the moment. 
It kinda puts it in perspective when one see that the US population is about as big as the rounding error in the population estimates of those two countries.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"so at the present rate there will be more Indians than Chiness by 2050. Their economy is booming too, "
Don't believe everything you read in the papers. Indians who work in companies that are outsourcing jobs from the US, are complaining because Chinese and other sources are replacing them--at 1/4 of their cost. Large sections of India, like Pakistan (what difference is there really) are not under government control. India can't build electric grids because local warlords tear them down to sell the scrap copper and aluminum. Groundwater supplies have been sold to private firms, and farmers aren't allowed to pump drinking water. And the Ganges is still both the sewer and water supply for large areas. India may very well collapse in the next 10-20 years. Despite a number of remarkable programs, they've exceeded their supplies and they're reaching all sorts of limits--now.


----------



## rtbates (Jan 30, 2007)

*pretty ironic isn't it*



Cruisingdad said:


> You know, I was coming back from lunch and got caught by a train. Seems the jerk who drives it waits until I get there everyday to slowly putt across the track (but I have not been able to prove it yet). He smiles and waves hi to me, I wave back and tell him he is Number one. Anyways, every day, it is the same thing:
> 
> China shipping conainer, china shipping container, china shipping container.
> 
> ...


It's the free market system at work. Everyone wants their stuff as cheap as possible and China provides the cheap price. End of story. A country run by a dictator rules the free market in the western democratic world! Ain't that irony for you How many Americans would be willing to pay 10-20% more for goods to buy American? How many times have I read a thread by someone with a $100-250K sailboat asking, "where can I get the cheapest .......". My favorite is "where can I get the cheapest anchor!!!" I've read em, many times.


----------



## Denr (Feb 7, 2001)

I've heard that they plan to manufacture MacGregor sailboats in China as well, seems as if the Chinese can't get enough of them, can you blame them?


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

CD-
"Go to WalMart (You know, the Made in the USA Store)."
You're dating yourself. It hasn't been that since Old Man Sam died. The kids are very frank, they are supplying what the customers want--the illusion cheap goods. They are not in the business of supporting anything else, and they also will openly admit that they are NOT always the cheapest place to shop. Their marketing strategy uses low priced specials to get people in--but then, they shear the sheep.


----------



## Waymar83 (Jun 5, 2006)

I just spent an hour reading the entire thread... really interesting reading.

Living in Canada, we know what "free trade" is. Alot of protected manufacturing jobs were lost to NAFTA. But alot more were created in other areas to compensate. The upside is that efficiency went up and so overall the economy became more competitive globally. Although there was considerable apprehension early on, most recognise that it was win-win.

To my American friends: I don't think you have to worry. As long as the macro-economic framework remains stable (what is it with the Bush deficits?). You have a very creative and resourceful entrepreneurial spirit I have not seen elsewhere. You guys will always make money and invent "goods" and "services" other will need or want. It's cultural. Proof is your standard of living keeps going up faster than most other countries and you keep inventing things others need and want.

Living in Canada, we have even less "made in Canada" than you do down south. We live with it. On top of that most of our companies are foreign owned. And then, the remaining Canadian ones primarily export components or raw materials to the US. 

I have 4 kids. I would buy at the best price - had to. As my income went up, I would buy better quality. Only once I had what I needed, would I look at "where" things would come from. Not before. 

Now that I do have more "disposable" income, my spending decision include aspects such as "fair trade" and "organic", but these are luxury decisions.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Now that's the most sense I've heard out of a canuck in I don't remember. Kudos.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

hellosailor said:


> "so at the present rate there will be more Indians than Chiness by 2050. Their economy is booming too, "
> Don't believe everything you read in the papers.


Not in the papers, it on your government's population statistics web site.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

Denr said:


> I've heard that they plan to manufacture MacGregor sailboats in China as well, seems as if the Chinese can't get enough of them, can you blame them?


I am told that most sail makers now source sails from China too.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

The British started insisting on "Made in England" marking on goods. Now every country uses the system to identify country of origin. So the way to slow the Chinese economy, and improve that of the US, is to only buy things made in the USA.


----------



## Pamlicotraveler (Aug 13, 2006)

Idiens said:


> So the way to slow the Chinese economy, and improve that of the US, is to only buy things made in the USA.


You won't have much.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Idiens said:


> The British started insisting on "Made in England" marking on goods. Now every country uses the system to identify country of origin. So the way to slow the Chinese economy, and improve that of the US, is to only buy things made in the USA.


Unfortunatly it's not that easy. I work in an industry that is moving into outsourcing much of its production (formerly all done locally) to India, China, and others. All of these products start in a US based company that then forwards to China for production then sends it back for QC and final shippment to customer. While most of the production is done in China, it begins and ends in US. Where is it made??? Most of the customers don't know where it really was produced.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Idiens said:


> Not in the papers, it on your government's population statistics web site.


Idiens, I find that language too informal and colloquial to believe it came from any formal US government web site. Do you have a URL for that?


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"So the way to slow the Chinese economy, and improve that of the US, is to only buy things made in the USA."
As T34C suggests, it is not that easy. In the global economy there are many hands on one product. And, simply not buying "Chinese" would not necessarily accomplish that goal--unless China and the US were the only two players. 
On the other hand, buying massive amounts of Chinese goods may actually be the best thing for America. By priming capitalism, which is anti-government insurgency in China, we may contribute to throwing down their government. We may also export pollution sources and literally help kill the Chinese, again destroying their government. And, we may just force the US to consider taking other steps forward.
At the same time, every dollar that gets sent to China, can only be ultimately redeemd in the US. Got lots of US dollars and don't want to spend them on anything made in the US? OK, fine. Eat them. That won't hurt us at all.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

HS...that is pretty naive on the export of $$'s. Other countires take us$$'s too. I can pay for oil or centrifuges from france if I want. If countries have more dollars than they want...then the value of the dollar falls and everything gets more expensive here since we don't make much anymore. Ultimately they CAN only be redeemed in the US and if countries don't WANT more dollars than they already hold...it will be a disaster for us here.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Cam-
Not naive just bottom line. No matter where or how a dollar travels, no matter who is using it for what purpose, as I said it ULTIMATELY must return to the US to be redeemed. And since we are no longer on a gold/silver standard and the money is just promissory notes...Either you spend it on something you buy from the US, or you can eat it.
Sure, the global economics can get more complex along the way. But as a dear old geology professor once remarked econmics is "one of those damned pseudosciences!" where you very rarely see lab experiments with replicable results, isn't it? If economists were such good scientists, they'd have answers rather than excuses for corrections, wouldn't they?

And as the late Milton Friedman, Nobel prize winning economist, said, one thing every economist would agree on is that illegal drugs must be legalized. It is the *only* way to remove the criminal profits and end the crime. Yet, no one in any government will listen to economists even when they all agree.

So...what you call naive I just call intentionally ignoring collateral issues. You got a dollar? Great. If someone outside the US has faith and trust in it, and offers value for it, great. Matter of fact, that's how currency traders make money gambling with currency exchanges, isn't it? But when all is said and done, it is just a piece of pretty green cloth/paper, worth as much as any other colored paper if you can't redeem it here back at the source. And if the US does what nations have long done, i.e devalue it by 1/2? Or upvalue it by 2x? What happens then? Right, the value changes the way *we* change it.

Collateral damges and profits or losses of currency traders to the side.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Back to Chinese submarines. My reading in the U.S Naval Institute "Proceedings" and the Navy League "Seapower" gave me the impression that the super low frequency sonar emmissions were designed to detect these diesel-electric super quiet submarines. Unfortunately, some environmental groups have have used the Federal Courts to stop these sonar experiments to protect the whales; all this based on dubious science. I suppose that the life of a whale is much more important than the lives of thousands of American sailors, and perhaps our own.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

T34C said:


> Where is it made??? Most of the customers don't know where it really was produced.


I take you point. A lot of an American made car can be components made outside the USA. Or closer to home, I am still looking at AIS Class B receivers and discovered that although designed and marketed by European companies, they are made in China.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

hellosailor said:


> Idiens, I find that language too informal and colloquial to believe it came from any formal US government web site. Do you have a URL for that?


Try: http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/world.html


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

hellosailor said:


> As T34C suggests, it is not that easy.


You are right. Life is never simple and the time of the Chinese is coming (again).


----------



## Pamlicotraveler (Aug 13, 2006)

hellosailor said:


> No matter where or how a dollar travels, no matter who is using it for what purpose, as I said it ULTIMATELY must return to the US to be redeemed.


Gotta agree with hs on this one. The dollar is the currency we spend (when we are here), so that is what counts for us.

And about the worst thing that could happen to our economy right now would be a Chinese economic plunge. A much slower China economy would take a percentage point or two off our economic growth, which will probably be 3-4% this year. China growth is pushing the demand for commodities, and helping cyclical industries like technology, transportation, shipping, and trucking.

We want China to grow. We just want to go to war with them (or have them shoot down our GPS satellites)

Cam even has a Chinese sailboat....(actually Taiwanese..."Republic of China")


----------



## Headingsouth (Jun 26, 2006)

seabreeze_97 said:


> How can it be reported that a sub....any sub, tailed a carrier group, if it were undetected in the act?


 Isn't that similar to certain lights that have been "positively identified" as a UFO?


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Alamo, there are very few folks who would say they actually want to STOP the Navy's sonar research. The problem, as you well know, if that the USN considers whale kills to be acceptable collateral damage and they won't switch to a more expensive test protocol until or unless they are forced to do so.

The US military has a long and extensively documented history, as do many other countries, of conducting experiments in a manner which create massive collateral damage or involve direct fraud. Forcing an issue into the courts is just the Navy's way of saying "Hey look, we need a bigger budget and we don't mind throwing a fit until we get it."


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

Some of those comments by hellosailor are extraordinary. It is true that capitalism may lead to political changes in China. Pollution is also a problem. While they produce less CO2 than the USA which produces around 20% + of world output, are you aware that already China is estimated to contribute 25% of California's air particulates?
Bring down the government, kill them, or "force the US government to take other steps forward", namely?
Yes you can devalue your currency as you have. Because it has been a reserve currency it has been propped up by China amongst others, but that is slowly changing. Only a fool would want to end up with worthless paper, so the obvious step is to change it for hard assets. Have you noticed how many oil and commodity deals China has been setting up? Have you considered the effect of hyperinflation on the USA or do you think making dollars worthless has no effect?
If you think you can double the value as you wish, sure hike your base interest rates to 10-12% and see what effect that has on business, and homeowners let alone stocks and house prices etc.
Like it or not things are changing, and countries are interdependent. Adapt.


----------



## poopdeckpappy (Jul 25, 2006)

hellosailor said:


> Alamo, there are very few folks who would say they actually want to STOP the Navy's sonar research. "


The DOD has given the Navy the go ahead ( as of 2/8/07 ) to continue Sonar testing, basicly telling enviro groups to go pound sand for the next 2-3 yrs


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Chris, you rashly assume that I'm _advocating _what is merely among the wide range of possibilities. I'm not advocating, I'm just saying many paths are possible, many outcomes are possible, and the talk confusing balance of payments with the sky is falling, is simply confusion fomented by pseudoscientists who really have very little idea of what they are dealing with.

The US balance of trade with China, and indeed the world, is regulated by tariffs and treaties made by the US government. Which in turn is made by the US people. Can't balme it on the Chinese, the President, or on Congress. The blame lies fully on "We The People" and you really have to ask, did the founders ever intend to give the vote to every moron who could find their way to a voting both.

Of course it could be worse, I'm told that in Oz if you are a registered voter and you fail to vote, you'll get a summons in the mail fining you for that.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

hellosailor said:


> Chris, you rashly assume that I'm _advocating _what is merely among the wide range of possibilities. I'm not advocating, I'm just saying many paths are possible, many outcomes are possible, and the talk confusing balance of payments with the sky is falling, is simply confusion fomented by pseudoscientists who really have very little idea of what they are dealing with.
> 
> The US balance of trade with China, and indeed the world, is regulated by tariffs and treaties made by the US government. Which in turn is made by the US people. Can't balme it on the Chinese, the President, or on Congress. The blame lies fully on "We The People" and you really have to ask, did the founders ever intend to give the vote to every moron who could find their way to a voting both.
> 
> Of course it could be worse, I'm told that in Oz if you are a registered voter and you fail to vote, you'll get a summons in the mail fining you for that.


Actually if you are eligible to vote and you fail to register you can also be fined. Some may consider this somewhat draconian but it's actually not a bad system. The fine itself is not great that anyone who makes a conscious decision not to vote should have a problem paying it, while it encourages people to vote who might not otherwise do so. We generally get something in the order of 95% of eligible voters doing so and it usually takes close to or in excess of 50% of the votes cast to see a government elected, unlike in the US where you get less than 50% of eligible voters actually bothering to do so. We also have a preferential voting system which encourages the formation and continuing existence of new political parties without effecting the final result. (within reason). Not perfect , but then what political system is ,and to my mind a better system than I've seen elsewhere. The biggest failing of the Australian (well British really, we nicked it from them) political system is that political assasination is still illegal under Australian law. Personally I think it should be encouraged. 

As to the issue of morons having the right to vote....it appears that being a moron is no hindrance to becoming a national leader so why should you stop the morons from voting for one of their own ? I know I would !!


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Chris...right. That was my point but you made it better. 
Actually, I have no problem with imports and free trade as long as the terms are FAIR. I think we in the US have some really bad trade policies where we get to buy all we want but there are barriers (formal and informal) to our own goods and services or we are competing against subsidized labor. Often we trade political goals for damage to our economy...i.e. China most favored nation status.


----------



## tommyt (Sep 21, 2002)

tdw,

A question for you on the expectation, and incentive, to vote. Does it result in people being more inofrmed on their vote as a result? This is just an informational question for my data bank on your system. 

The idea of incenting people to vote in the US has been floated before. I cannot ever see it happening here based on our freedoms. However, my biggest concern would be the attitude of those that were forced to vote. Not being informed, not caring!

Thanks,


Tom


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

tommyt said:


> tdw,
> 
> A question for you on the expectation, and incentive, to vote. Does it result in people being more inofrmed on their vote as a result? This is just an informational question for my data bank on your system.
> 
> ...


Tom,
Because this system has been with us for over a hundred years most Australians are quite used to it and is doesn't appear to be viewed with any resentment. Harsh reality is , of course , that most voters cast their vote for one particular party , have always done so and will always do so. It's that bloc of maybe 05 - 10 % of voters who swing (no not talking about apes or the kind of party I sadly don't get invited to) that will decide every election. Generally speaking the swinging voters in this country do appear to be relatively well informed albeit with a heavy bias one way or the other depending on which maniacal talk back radio wanker they listen to or based on whether or not the newspaper they read is owned by the Dirty Digger or not.
In defence of the system , it has to be said that except for one memorable occasion (dismissed by all and sundry as sour grapes) the result of any election down here is unlikely to be questioned re vote rigging. We have had a few instances where electoral boundaries have been so distorted as to virtually guarantee victory for one of the parties but even that is pretty much sorted due to an independent electoral commission that now exists. Sadly for some a sheeps vote is not what it once was.
Final point , Australian elections are always held on a Saturday. Given that Saturday is not, for most of us a work day, very few people have to take time off of work to go and vote and there is postal voting available for those who cannot make it to the polling booth. Perhaps this is also the way it works for the US , I don't know.

Regards

TD

ps - sadly all of the above does not save us from having a pretenious little ****head who wouldn't know how to lie straight in bed , elected to be Prime Minister four times since 1996. Next election is later this year and there is a 50 - 50 chance he will be re elected again. AHHHHH !!! 
Bitter ? Me ? No a bit of it.  
The wankers name is Howard, I believe he might have made some impression in the US media this week.


----------



## tommyt (Sep 21, 2002)

TD,

You are right about Howard stepping in it here this week. We have enough of our stepping in it, so it will not be noticed or commented on for long.

As to the the Saturday vote...no such luck. We make certain that we vote on a Tuesday and it is not a holiday. You can go before and after work at your convenience. We would make it a national holiday, except that under 50% vote anyway and we don't want to penalize the business world for only half the people. Hey, there is a way to raise our percentage. Everybody that gets there ticket stamped gets a paid day off! Nope, they still would not vote.

Thanks for the input on the turnout. We have a great percentage that vote party line only as well. The undecideds, your 5-10%, make the difference.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Chris-
If you consider that in the US we have probably expanded the franchise to vote to about 3x or 4x the number of people who were originally allowed to vote, even if half our voters stay at home, that means oddly enough about the same percent of people are voting as originally did 200 years ago. Hmmm.

And there's a marvelous book about old style party politics in the US, very well written and quite a good read, called "Speaker of the House" by Tip O'Neill. That was his position in Congress. His reminiscences of old time party politics in Boston (a Democratic party hotbed) may give many folks both here and elsewhere a new insight into all the bitching and moaning that the Democratic Party here has had about elections being stolen, dimpled chads, and other Republican Party "crimes". For instance, before Boston forced all bars to be closed on election day, the Democratic Party ward leaders used to buy everyone a drink. If you were a Democrat--your drinks got bought after you voted. If you were a Republican, you could drink for free all day as the Democratic ward leaders tried to get you so drunk you couldn't go down and vote against them. (Needless to say, both parties played the same game, the same way they play other games today.)

An excellent book for an insider's perspective on American party politics, the way it really has been played. Always played, by all parties.


----------



## SimonV (Jul 6, 2006)

TD
"You are right about Howard stepping in it here this week."

I have to disagree. He has the right to make comment and was right to do so. Pulling the troops out in one go would be a disaster onb a grand scale.

Anacke would break out in Iraq and all the good work would be undone.

I slow withdrawl of troops over a period of time would force the rulling parties to take control of thier own country.

Just my thoughts.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

SimonV said:


> TD
> "You are right about Howard stepping in it here this week."
> 
> I have to disagree. He has the right to make comment and was right to do so. Pulling the troops out in one go would be a disaster onb a grand scale.
> ...


Simon,
It's a simple fact that it is out of order for a foreign politician to comment on the internal politics of another country, particularly in the lead up to an election. Howard of course knows all to well that if Barrak Obama does ( and it is a long shot at this stage) become President then it won't be until 2008 and Howard will have retired before that. Nonetheless, he was well out of order. Quite frankly, in much the same way as Latham was out of order criticising Bush in 2004. Remember that Australia is an ally of the USA and not simply the Republican Party in general and Bush in particular.
TD


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*Chinese girls rule!*

I have a good friend that adoped a chinese girl. I have often thought that when all the chinese have their baby boys the girls would become a very valuable commodity--seems like that is the case now or will be soon. Kathy


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

An interesting point. I guess he was saying if you are fighting for a principle you don't walk away. Is oil a principle?
The other side is Americans wage their own elections and vote or not accordingly. Certainly one should not try to influence the "people's" choice, at least as a foreign politician, or perhaps more correctly should respect their choice.
Since the issues have wider implications perhaps there might be reason to debate them, even if views differ. As a Prime Minister one has to hold the line.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

chris_gee said:


> An interesting point. I guess he was saying if you are fighting for a principle you don't walk away. Is oil a principle?
> The other side is Americans wage their own elections and vote or not accordingly. Certainly one should not try to influence the "people's" choice, at least as a foreign politician, or perhaps more correctly should respect their choice.
> Since the issues have wider implications perhaps there might be reason to debate them, even if views differ. As a Prime Minister one has to hold the line.


I don't think it's really to do with influencing the way people in the US vote. Look at the situation now. If Obama wins next year (and I admit it's a long shot) and Howard is still PM how on earth can he have any meaningful dialogue with the incoming President ? A similar situation arose way back in 1972 when the Whitlam government was elected. So strong had the Labor Party's criticism of the then US government been that the alliance itself was in major jeopardy. So bad was the ill feeling that many people believed then that the US actually undermined the Aust Govt in order to see a return to life under the conservatives.

It is one thing to criticise aspects of an allies foreign policy it is quite another to take sides over who should be the next leader of that ally. As such, the criticism of Howard by both Democrats and Republicans shows how unacceptable was Howard's comment.


----------



## tommyt (Sep 21, 2002)

Simon,

TD is correct on my context on Howard. Certainly he can weigh in on our foreign policy...everyone does that. Look at the lenght of this thread to see how much. My reference was to his political party stance, and specifically the Obama comments. They might have been correct comments, but not for a PM to make about our political process. John Kerry tried to use the fact that leaders of of countries had thrown their support behind him in 2004. They may have behind closed doors, but JK got into trouble when he had to prove their backing and nobody stood up. 

Based on our field of candidates of both parties this is going to be one hell of a primary season and election. With Clinton, Obama, and a field of also rans on the Democratic ticket the dems are already making statements that they hope the Republicans will not make this an election about race or genetalia. Interesting from a party that has always tried to split the population into sectors as part of their political process. I think that the Democratic primaries will see some of the roughest mud slinging in the last 50 years.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Hello sailor,
Quite nice explanation of the economics, one can rarely go too far wrong with Milton Friedman along side. I would add that the Great Depression would be a perfect example of the potential situation you cite. Free and open trade are always the best policies-every time we try otherwise we eventually get bit in the ass. And, as previously cited, the market has a wonderful way of allowing for every man's highest concerns to be addressed, sometimes not exactly as his government might have envisioned.

Have not read the specific gaffe that Mr. Howard is to have committed but if my friend tdw is exercised I'll probably find that I am pleased by it!<G>
This voting thing is vastly over-rated. Or should I say, the desire to get more people to vote is over-rated. One must admit that when viewing MTV and their "rocking the vote" a certain quesiness occurs at the prospect of all those drones casting a vote. If anything, it should perhaps be made harder to vote thereby weeding out those serious about their democracy from those who thought Burger King had opened up another register. Just a thought.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> Hello sailor,
> 
> Have not read the specific gaffe that Mr. Howard is to have committed but if my friend tdw is exercised I'll probably find that I am pleased by it!<G>
> If anything, it should perhaps be made harder to vote thereby weeding out those serious about their democracy from those who thought Burger King had opened up another register. Just a thought.


Hey man, even an old reactionary like you would probably have been unimpressed except that he was slaggin a Democrat.  

BTW, don't suppose you (or anyone else) caught Colbert last evening ? Love that program. (Maybe we get it late, it was the show about China)

All very well and good to make it harder to vote but your encumbant would be disenfranchised. 

Cheers

TD


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Quite the contrary my friend, he would have then won in a landslide.

Not familiar with the show you cite.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> Quite the contrary my friend, he would have then won in a landslide.
> 
> Not familiar with the show you cite.


The Colbert Report is one of my two favourite US TV programs, the other being the Daily Show. No surprises there I guess.  Whatcha expect from a bleedin' 'art liberal.

cheers mate, avagoodweegend.

(You know sometimes these debates become quite heated and perhaps a tad personal. I've been guilty of that myself, I admit, but it shouldn't be so. Underneath it all we are here cos we love sailing, boats and the sea. We should always remember that despite the disagreements we do in fact share a common bond. It's nice therefore to throw a 'cheers mate' at "t'other side". Perhaps it sounds somewhat hypocritical but I hope not.I don't know about the rest of you but I have as many conservative friends as liberals. Well, in truth he's a schizophrenic.  )

Now, where were we you old reactionary you.........

Friday Evening in Sydney Town and it's way past beer o'clock. Time for me to sink a few.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

And here's to you, mate. I always try to remember that William F. Buckley and John Kenneth Galbraith agreed on precisely nothing of a political, or even economic, nature and yet were life-long friends. Mild mockery, a few good-natured jabs, are acceptable if the more important virtues of camaraderie and companionship are pre-eminent. I have read, and hopefully written, nothing that would be seen otherwise.

I look forward to your publication of, "A Communist Sailor's Manifesto". <VBG>


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

sailaway21 said:


> And here's to you, mate. I always try to remember that William F. Buckley and John Kenneth Galbraith agreed on precisely nothing of a political, or even economic, nature and yet were life-long friends. Mild mockery, a few good-natured jabs, are acceptable if the more important virtues of camaraderie and companionship are pre-eminent. I have read, and hopefully written, nothing that would be seen otherwise.
> 
> I look forward to your publication of, "A Communist Sailor's Manifesto". <VBG>


Red Sails in the Sunset ?


----------



## sailingforever (Mar 4, 2006)

I see that sailnet is still as crazy as ever...


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

No...now that you have returned from your hibernation...NOW we are as crazy as ever! <g> Welcome back!


----------



## TrueBlue (Oct 11, 2004)

sailingforever,
Fred, a 9 year old Optimist sailor from Portugal, posted a thread recently, looking for others who may share his obcession. Perhaps you can post a greeting:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion/29300-hello-my-name-fred.html


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

TDW, I never heard of the Colbert Report. It's in what medium? What network?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Oops, sorry. I just found out that the Colbert Report is only part of a comedy show, on a network I don't receive.


----------

