- A Concerned Woodworker -
Well, just to let you guys know, I have been made aware of a very
unfortunate piece of information. Paslode has decided to have their
major internal components for the cordless nail gun group, to be
manufactured and machined in China. This may not sound like much, but
this amounts to 95 % of the internal workings of the gun. This will
include all framers as well as trimmers. This will more than likely
lead to more failures in the field, and God knows when we pay as much
for these tools as we do, we expect them to work ! Oh well, another
quality tool down the crapper !!!

- Nehmo –
Quality of a product doesn’t necessarily suffer when the manufacturing
operations are moved from the US to China. The company can use same
quality control procedures at the new location. But I suspect your
objection to Paslode’s decision comes from protectionism rather than a
concern for quality. If that’s so, then you need to find a better issue
than quality. The US isn’t known for top quality anymore.

Probably for legal and economic reasons, Paslode decided it was more
efficient to manufacture these components in China. The other elements
of the Paslode’s business, design, marketing, and the remaining
manufacturing processes, still take place in the US.
http://www.paslode.com/jobs/plantloc.html . That’s how the economy of
manufacturing works. You have something done where it is cheapest,
legally possible, or most convenient to have it done.

Anyway, where did you learn about this? I welcome the news myself. Maybe
because of this I’ll be able to afford one of their
(currently-overpriced) guns someday.

--
*********************
* Nehmo Sergheyev *
*********************

Suffice it to say, I have first hand knowledge. And the quality
problem will be in the materials used, and the expertise (or lack
thereof) in their skilled labor.

Nehmo,

I'm sure you've heard of the trade deficit... Enjoy the
outrageously cheap merchandise while you can. I'm no expert on
gloabalization, but it seems pretty obvious the current situation can't
go on forever. I'd be the worlds biggest hypocrite to say I've never
bought anything made overseas, but each time it's with a twinge of
guilt and the sinking feeling that I'm somehow contributing to the
decline of our great nation. Eventually the hens will come home to
roost.

**If** the cheaper price actually gets passed on to the consumer,
then I suppose this could be viewed as an upside for the general
population. On the flipside, it's probably safe to say this
development is bad news for the US workers who used to manufacture
those parts...or the stores they spent their paychecks at...or the guy
next door to the plant who sold them lunch...or the contractor who was
going to build them a house...etc...etc...

Richard Johnson PE
Camano Island, WA

Rich-out-West wrote:
Nehmo,

I'm sure you've heard of the trade deficit... Enjoy the
outrageously cheap merchandise while you can. I'm no expert on
gloabalization, but it seems pretty obvious the current situation
can't
go on forever. I'd be the worlds biggest hypocrite to say I've never
bought anything made overseas, but each time it's with a twinge of
guilt and the sinking feeling that I'm somehow contributing to the
decline of our great nation. Eventually the hens will come home to
roost.

**If** the cheaper price actually gets passed on to the
consumer,
then I suppose this could be viewed as an upside for the general
population. On the flipside, it's probably safe to say this
development is bad news for the US workers who used to manufacture
those parts...or the stores they spent their paychecks at...or the
guy
next door to the plant who sold them lunch...or the contractor who
was
going to build them a house...etc...etc...

About right. The only guys that're getting rich are the CEOs and
decision makers (BTW 99% are your fellow WASP homeboys) who cut cost at
the expense of the workers and pat themselves on the back with "cost
cutting bonus".

Not even China gets all that much benefits out of it. First of all
China doesn't trade with US only. China's overall trade is par or
deficit (China runs trade deficit with a lot of countries.) And the
factory is probably owned by Paslode, yet another concern for China's
economic fragility - large foreign ownership of domestic production.

Time to kick some y'all's benedict arnold homeboy CEO's asses, instead
of scapegoating China.


Richard Johnson PE
Camano Island, WA

It's actually starting to decrease, the trade deficit with China due to
increased construction, requiring more imports from other countries, US
included.

The real problem lies in their currency, pegged to the U.S. dollar.
They need to let their currency free-float on the market before things
can really even out.

Supposedly the Chinese gov't are gearing up for this, or they're just
paying lip service to the U.S. Congress, nobody really knows except for
Beijing.

Congress won't do anything but pass unenforcable puffery legislation
out of fear of the backlash from U.S. business interests and Chinese
relations.

A tangled web, indeed

"Rich-out-West" wrote in message

**If** the cheaper price actually gets passed on to the consumer,
then I suppose this could be viewed as an upside for the general
population. On the flipside, it's probably safe to say this
development is bad news for the US workers who used to manufacture
those parts...or the stores they spent their paychecks at...or the guy
next door to the plant who sold them lunch...or the contractor who was
going to build them a house...etc...etc...

Sometimes the prices do get passed on because of competition. I recall
buying a new shirt for $5 about 40 years ago. I can find them at about that
price today in the discount stores. Stereo components, cameras, TV, etc are
all made cheaply overseas today and prices are far better than 10 years ago.
Some is better technology, some is cheaper labor in Korea, then China. As
consumers, we are demanding the lower prices. We are demanding higher wages
also and since management can't or won't pay it, they take production
overseas.

I'm no expert, but I have to wonder what our economy is going to be in 10 or
30 years as we lose manufacturing base but add casinos and the low pay
service wages they pay.

Unless you've been at the Paslode factory in China, you have NO first hand
knowledge!!

I give Paslode credit for doing their homework before making such a
decision...they're not paid to put the company out of business. But of
course, you could wind up being right and sales will suffer. Welcome to
the free marketplace.


A Concerned Woodworker wrote in message
...
Suffice it to say, I have first hand knowledge. And the quality
problem will be in the materials used, and the expertise (or lack
thereof) in their skilled labor.

If there is a way to lower cost, people will find it and do it. If you
find the way but don't do it, others will and you end up losing the
business and your job anyway.

My take of outsourcing and manufacturing relocation has always been if
another guy tens of thousands of miles away can do what you do for one
tenths of your salary, then perhaps you do not deserve the high pay and
the life style that goes along with it.

The reason we enjoy the life style for the past 50 or 100 years is
precisely because we do things other people can't and we name the price
in the market place. The only way to keep it going is to keep
innovating.

I commend those ceo's for doing their job. They are at least saving
some jobs in the domestic sector rather than giving the business away
to the competitor.

"curmudgeon" wrote in message
...
Unless you've been at the Paslode factory in China, you have NO first hand
knowledge!!

I give Paslode credit for doing their homework before making such a
decision...they're not paid to put the company out of business. But of
course, you could wind up being right and sales will suffer. Welcome to
the free marketplace.


There was no mention about them doing their homework. I have personally seen
too many cases where the bean counters made the decision to go off shore and
didn't know what to do when the containers of incorrectly made parts
arrived.




A Concerned Woodworker wrote in message
...
Suffice it to say, I have first hand knowledge. And the quality
problem will be in the materials used, and the expertise (or lack
thereof) in their skilled labor.

050428 1110 - Nehmo Sergheyev posted:

- A Concerned Woodworker -
Well, just to let you guys know, I have been made aware of a very
unfortunate piece of information. Paslode has decided to have their
major internal components for the cordless nail gun group, to be
manufactured and machined in China. This may not sound like much, but
this amounts to 95 % of the internal workings of the gun. This will
include all framers as well as trimmers. This will more than likely
lead to more failures in the field, and God knows when we pay as much
for these tools as we do, we expect them to work ! Oh well, another
quality tool down the crapper !!!

- Nehmo *
Quality of a product doesn¹t necessarily suffer when the manufacturing
operations are moved from the US to China. The company can use same
quality control procedures at the new location. But I suspect your
objection to Paslode¹s decision comes from protectionism rather than a
concern for quality. If that¹s so, then you need to find a better issue
than quality. The US isn¹t known for top quality anymore.

Probably for legal and economic reasons, Paslode decided it was more
efficient to manufacture these components in China. The other elements
of the Paslode¹s business, design, marketing, and the remaining
manufacturing processes, still take place in the US.
http://www.paslode.com/jobs/plantloc.html . That¹s how the economy of
manufacturing works. You have something done where it is cheapest,
legally possible, or most convenient to have it done.

Anyway, where did you learn about this? I welcome the news myself. Maybe
because of this I¹ll be able to afford one of their
(currently-overpriced) guns someday.

And so, the race to the bottom...

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

I'm no expert, but I have to wonder what our economy is going to be
in 10 or 30 years as we lose manufacturing base but add casinos and
the low pay service wages they pay.

The largest business in the US is a business that doesn't manufacture
anything (Wal-Mart). Our country is moving out of the manufacturing and
merchantile era into the information age.

I'm sure there were people, just like you, who lamented the rise of cities
and manufacturing while the agrarian and feudal society languished. There
are parts of the world that haven't even made it to the agricultural phase
yet.

We don't need to manufacture our own shirts or mine our own Bauxite to make
aluminium - not if we can get these things cheaper elsewhere. Adam Smith
settled this hash once and for all in the late 18th century.

People really need to keep up.

yaofeng wrote:
I commend those ceo's for doing their job. They are at least saving
some jobs in the domestic sector rather than giving the business away
to the competitor.

Read about Lou Dobbs' "Exporting America : Why Corporate Greed Is
Shipping American Jobs Overseas":

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...492029-5010206

On a personal note, I've had sales rep bragging how much money he can
save me by getting consultants from overseas on L-1 visa loophole, and
stuff them four to an extend-stay suite. As far as I can tell, these
poor souls are getting paid couple dollare more than Wal-mart employee.

Do you think that's commendable?

"HeyBub" wrote in message

The largest business in the US is a business that doesn't manufacture
anything (Wal-Mart). Our country is moving out of the manufacturing and
merchantile era into the information age.

Is that a good thing? Are we all going to work at Wal Mar for $8 and hour
with minimal benefits?


I'm sure there were people, just like you, who lamented the rise of cities
and manufacturing while the agrarian and feudal society languished. There
are parts of the world that haven't even made it to the agricultural phase
yet.

We still feed our own country and assist in the feeding of others that have
not made it to the agricultural phase. Some never will as they do not have
the proper land to grow a decent crop. That does assure our farmers future
employment. Gone is the family farm, here is the large coporate farms with
much more efficiency. We have not yet, and probably never will, lose the
agrarian society unless man evolves so far that he no longer eats food.



We don't need to manufacture our own shirts or mine our own Bauxite to
make aluminium - not if we can get these things cheaper elsewhere. Adam
Smith settled this hash once and for all in the late 18th century.

People really need to keep up.

But we still have to create wealth of some sort to buy the goods from the
people that do make our shirts and mine our bauxite. As we go into the
information age, we are farming out some of that work to India. Did you see
60 Minutes last week? We are now farming out some of out major medical
procedures also.

In the "information" age you tout, Electric Boat laid off thousands of
skilled workers making $12 to $20+ per hour. Casinos opened up and took
many of those people and gave them jobs at $8 per hour. People liked them
so much they took two How will they afford to buy those shirts in the
future?

People don't need to keep up, they need to look to the future.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

yaofeng wrote:
If there is a way to lower cost, people will find it and do it. If
you
find the way but don't do it, others will and you end up losing the
business and your job anyway.

My take of outsourcing and manufacturing relocation has always been
if
another guy tens of thousands of miles away can do what you do for
one
tenths of your salary, then perhaps you do not deserve the high pay
and
the life style that goes along with it.

The reason we enjoy the life style for the past 50 or 100 years is
precisely because we do things other people can't and we name the
price
in the market place. The only way to keep it going is to keep
innovating.

Under the condition that others dont steal ur idea for free. Dont
forget people in China steal from their own compatriots on ideas.

wrote:
yaofeng wrote:
I commend those ceo's for doing their job. They are at least
saving
some jobs in the domestic sector rather than giving the business
away
to the competitor.

Read about Lou Dobbs' "Exporting America : Why Corporate Greed Is
Shipping American Jobs Overseas":

Sounds like he and charles liu think corporate is supposed to do
beneficial job rather than making/saving money.


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...492029-5010206

On a personal note, I've had sales rep bragging how much money he can
save me by getting consultants from overseas on L-1 visa loophole,
and
stuff them four to an extend-stay suite. As far as I can tell, these
poor souls are getting paid couple dollare more than Wal-mart
employee.

Do you think that's commendable?

I think charles liu might wanna tell all others his reaction. Maybe he
hire these poor souls to save money and his job?

wrote:
It's actually starting to decrease, the trade deficit with China due
to
increased construction, requiring more imports from other countries,
US
included.

The real problem lies in their currency, pegged to the U.S. dollar.
They need to let their currency free-float on the market before
things
can really even out.

You might want to read up on how we are scapegoating China's currency
for our deficit problem. Here's an article from LA Times just couple
weeks ago:

http://www.latimes.com/news/op=ADini...873=AD82.story


***April 16, 2005***

"The escalating China-bashing in Congress on other fronts is
threatening
to create a far greater economic problem than any we face currently.
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) is threatening to hold up the confirmation of
the Bush administration's nominee for trade representative, Rep. Rob
Portman (R-Ohio), unless the Senate considers his bill aimed at
stemming China trade. Another bill would slap hefty tariffs unless
Beijing stops pegging its currency, the yuan, to the dollar.

The currency issue is a convenient scapegoat.

Unless you live on the other side of the Pacific, it's far better to
blame an undervalued yuan for all our supposed ills than it is to blame

federal budget deficits or the Federal Reserve's role in artificially
inflating consumer spending. Nor is it convenient for members of
Congress to dwell on the fact that Washington has often advised other
nations to peg their currencies to the dollar as a means of encouraging

stability, and that as recently as the East Asian financial crisis of
the late 1990s the U.S. was grateful that China didn't devalue the
yuan."

And this trend of China bashing goes way back, as the exact same issue
also came up couple years ago:

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/dis=AD=AD...icle?id=3D2814

"The Fine Art of China-Bashing

As the Bush administration pushes even harder on China to revalue the
yuan, the real motivations behind the "China-bashing" by US officials
remain shady. Is the administration's rhetoric really meant to "help
U=2ES. manufacturers compete against Chinese companies", ask the authors,

"or just help U.S. politicians score points with anxious voters"? When
the US Treasury Department found China innocent of manipulating the
yuan in its recent report, members of the US Congress attacked the
agency as weak-willed and are choosing to ignore the study's
conclusions."


Supposedly the Chinese gov't are gearing up for this, or they're just
paying lip service to the U.S. Congress, nobody really knows except
for
Beijing.

Congress won't do anything but pass unenforcable puffery legislation
out of fear of the backlash from U.S. business interests and Chinese
relations.
=20
A tangled web, indeed

Richard:



Not even China gets all that much benefits out of it. First of all
China doesn't trade with US only. China's overall trade is par or
deficit (China runs trade deficit with a lot of countries.) And the
factory is probably owned by Paslode, yet another concern for China's
economic fragility - large foreign ownership of domestic production.

Time to kick some y'all's benedict arnold homeboy CEO's asses, instead
of scapegoating China.


Richard Johnson PE
Camano Island, WA






The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate, buildings,
houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some collectives), equipment,
machine tools, and all means of production are the property of the state.
The document is available on the website of the PRC.

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Foreign owners of businesses may own those legal entities as ideas,
however, the state does not recognize the private ownership of the physical
assets or physical means of production.

The supposed "capitalism" is only a phenomenon that exists in the realm of
personal property and cash. The production assets of firms, that exist only
by permission in the PRC, are all owned by the PRC.

Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the individual
has no rights whatsoever.

It is terribly unfortunate that American business pragmatists have not
dropped their pragmatism and affinity for tyrannical socialism and decided
to do business with free-enterprise firms and countries in the free world.

Ralph Hertle

Ralph Hertle wrote:
Richard:



Not even China gets all that much benefits out of it. First of all
China doesn't trade with US only. China's overall trade is par or
deficit (China runs trade deficit with a lot of countries.) And the
factory is probably owned by Paslode, yet another concern for
China's
economic fragility - large foreign ownership of domestic
production.

Time to kick some y'all's benedict arnold homeboy CEO's asses,
instead
of scapegoating China.


Richard Johnson PE
Camano Island, WA






The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate,
buildings,
houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some collectives),
equipment,
machine tools, and all means of production are the property of the
state.
The document is available on the website of the PRC.

Could you cite the source?

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal
property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Care to explain to us how it works in Hawaii?

Foreign owners of businesses may own those legal entities as ideas,
however, the state does not recognize the private ownership of the
physical
assets or physical means of production.

The supposed "capitalism" is only a phenomenon that exists in the
realm of
personal property and cash. The production assets of firms, that
exist only
by permission in the PRC, are all owned by the PRC.

Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the
individual
has no rights whatsoever.

Have you actually been to China? My guess is you haven't.

It is terribly unfortunate that American business pragmatists have
not
dropped their pragmatism and affinity for tyrannical socialism and
decided
to do business with free-enterprise firms and countries in the free
world.

Ralph Hertle

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
....
...Gone is the family farm, here is the large coporate farms with
much more efficiency. ...

That is not true...the family farm is now larger and more mechanized,
but it is still just as much the family farm as ever, even if it is
organized as an LLC or other form because of the prevailing tax law...

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 08:09:01 -0500, Don Carpenter
scribbled this interesting note:

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:57:25 +0000, Edwin Pawlowski wrote:


Is that a good thing? Are we all going to work at Wal Mar for $8 and hour
with minimal benefits?




**** - you're making $8/hr at Walmart?? Where do I sign up??????

You can do better than that at In-n-Out Burger in California!:~)


--
John Willis
(Remove the Primes before e-mailing me)

wrote:
Ralph Hertle wrote:
The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate,
buildings,
houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some collectives),
equipment,
machine tools, and all means of production are the property of the
state.
The document is available on the website of the PRC.

Could you cite the source?

Can u give a counter example?

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal
property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Care to explain to us how it works in Hawaii?

Care to explain how to buy a house in Hawaii?

Foreign owners of businesses may own those legal entities as ideas,
however, the state does not recognize the private ownership of the
physical
assets or physical means of production.

The supposed "capitalism" is only a phenomenon that exists in the
realm of
personal property and cash. The production assets of firms, that
exist only
by permission in the PRC, are all owned by the PRC.

Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the
individual
has no rights whatsoever.

Have you actually been to China? My guess is you haven't.

How bout u? U think having play golf in Shenzhen makes u know more than
others bout China?

wrote:
wrote:
It's actually starting to decrease, the trade deficit with China
due
to
increased construction, requiring more imports from other
countries,
US
included.

The real problem lies in their currency, pegged to the U.S. dollar.
They need to let their currency free-float on the market before
things
can really even out.

You might want to read up on how we are scapegoating China's currency
for our deficit problem. Here's an article from LA Times just couple
weeks ago:

Oh common, charles liu has been tooting this URL for weeks in
soc.culture.china and he think now the home repair and building
construction NGs need a new shot of CCP propaganda.


http://www.latimes.com/news/op=ADini...873=AD82.story


***April 16, 2005***

"The escalating China-bashing in Congress on other fronts is
threatening
to create a far greater economic problem than any we face currently.
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) is threatening to hold up the confirmation of
the Bush administration's nominee for trade representative, Rep. Rob
Portman (R-Ohio), unless the Senate considers his bill aimed at
stemming China trade. Another bill would slap hefty tariffs unless
Beijing stops pegging its currency, the yuan, to the dollar.

The currency issue is a convenient scapegoat.

Unless you live on the other side of the Pacific, it's far better to
blame an undervalued yuan for all our supposed ills than it is to
blame

federal budget deficits or the Federal Reserve's role in artificially
inflating consumer spending. Nor is it convenient for members of
Congress to dwell on the fact that Washington has often advised other
nations to peg their currencies to the dollar as a means of
encouraging

stability, and that as recently as the East Asian financial crisis of
the late 1990s the U.S. was grateful that China didn't devalue the
yuan."

Maybe charles liu wanna explain why Central bank of PRC governor said
in Boao meeting that RMB has to reevaluate under international
pressure?

And this trend of China bashing goes way back, as the exact same
issue
also came up couple years ago:

And charles liu has been told many many times that the article "the
fine art of China-bashing" is in October 2003 and he gotta find
something new for his propaganda purpose in soc.culture.china.

http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/dis=AD=AD...icle?id=3D2814

"The Fine Art of China-Bashing

As the Bush administration pushes even harder on China to revalue the
yuan, the real motivations behind the "China-bashing" by US officials
remain shady. Is the administration's rhetoric really meant to "help
U.S. manufacturers compete against Chinese companies", ask the
authors,

"or just help U.S. politicians score points with anxious voters"?
When
the US Treasury Department found China innocent of manipulating the
yuan in its recent report, members of the US Congress attacked the
agency as weak-willed and are choosing to ignore the study's
conclusions."

050428 2256 - HeyBub posted:

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

I'm no expert, but I have to wonder what our economy is going to be
in 10 or 30 years as we lose manufacturing base but add casinos and
the low pay service wages they pay.

The largest business in the US is a business that doesn't manufacture
anything (Wal-Mart). Our country is moving out of the manufacturing and
merchantile era into the information age.

I'm sure there were people, just like you, who lamented the rise of cities
and manufacturing while the agrarian and feudal society languished. There
are parts of the world that haven't even made it to the agricultural phase
yet.

We don't need to manufacture our own shirts or mine our own Bauxite to make
aluminium - not if we can get these things cheaper elsewhere. Adam Smith
settled this hash once and for all in the late 18th century.

People really need to keep up.



Yes, you should keep up. Adam Smith, a British economist who has been
quoted by American statesmen, and Justices of the Supreme Court of the
United States, wrote, in his book Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, "If
the free importation of foreign manufactures were permitted, several of the
home manufactures would probably suffer, and some of them, perhaps, go to
ruin altogether...". He noted that "two great engines for enriching the
country, therefore, were restraints upon importation, and encouragements to
exportation." Mr. Smith had studied under Professor Francis Hutcheson, who
had written, in his book System of Moral Philosophy, in the chapter Of the
Nature of Civil Laws and their Execution: "Foreign materials should be
imported and even premiums given, when necessary, that all our own hands may
be employed; and then, by exporting them again manufactured, we may obtain
from abroad the price of our labours. Foreign manufactures and products
ready for consumption should be made dear to the consumer by high duties, if
we cannot altogether prohibit the consumption; ...".

wrote:
It's actually starting to decrease, the trade deficit with China due
to
increased construction, requiring more imports from other countries,
US
included.

The real problem lies in their currency, pegged to the U.S. dollar.
They need to let their currency free-float on the market before
things
can really even out.

Here's another article explaining why China's currency isn't
undervalued, by Prof. Michael Connolly, U Maimi Chair of Economics:

http://cet.hnu.net.cn/ca_fx22.ppt

"The Current Account and the Exchange Rate: The tail does not wag the
dog"

"the real exchange rate has remained relatively stable since 1986, due
largely to greater inflation in China that has offset yuan devaluation.


In fact, in 2004 it only appreciated 2%. The RMB has in fact slightly

depreciated in real terms since 1986."

So China's currency isn't the IMF-style "dig your own grave" free float
(just ask Thailand and George Soros.) US monetary policy intervenes all
the time to control the dollar. EU member currencies are pegged to the
EU, and EU itself is heavily regulated by crawling peg.

If "free float" is so good, how come we ain't doing it? I needn't
remind you our US$ was pegged to gold for hundreds of years, and the
PRC is only around for 50 some years.

Give them a chance to do it on their own, for their own interest.
That's what we'd do.

Then it begs the question why are we bashing China and scapegoating
their currency for our problems. Because when it comes to our problem,
it's to hell with everybody else - especially for our leaders of
society to keep their wealth.

Have you seen what happened to the oil stocks since we invaded Iraq on
false WMD accusation and dirty bombed Iraq from highest living standard
in region back to the stone age? The stocks are going thru the roof:

http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.htm...HAL&time=3year

Supposedly the Chinese gov't are gearing up for this, or they're just
paying lip service to the U.S. Congress, nobody really knows except
for
Beijing.

Congress won't do anything but pass unenforcable puffery legislation
out of fear of the backlash from U.S. business interests and Chinese
relations.

A tangled web, indeed

Ralph Hertle wrote:
Richard:



Not even China gets all that much benefits out of it. First of all
China doesn't trade with US only. China's overall trade is par or
deficit (China runs trade deficit with a lot of countries.) And the
factory is probably owned by Paslode, yet another concern for
China's
economic fragility - large foreign ownership of domestic
production.

Time to kick some y'all's benedict arnold homeboy CEO's asses,
instead
of scapegoating China.


Richard Johnson PE
Camano Island, WA






The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate,
buildings,
houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some collectives),
equipment,
machine tools, and all means of production are the property of the
state.
The document is available on the website of the PRC.

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal
property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Ralph, China amend their constitution quite a bit in the last 20 years.
Just in case you haven't kept up with the times, China amended their
real property rights law last year, and this year more changes are on
the table. Here's an article titled "Will China's Property Rights
Surpass U.S.'s?"

http://www.freemarketnews.com/pview/...html/index.php

Foreign owners of businesses may own those legal entities as ideas,
however, the state does not recognize the private ownership of the
physical
assets or physical means of production.

The supposed "capitalism" is only a phenomenon that exists in the
realm of
personal property and cash. The production assets of firms, that
exist only
by permission in the PRC, are all owned by the PRC.

Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the
individual
has no rights whatsoever.

It is terribly unfortunate that American business pragmatists have
not
dropped their pragmatism and affinity for tyrannical socialism and
decided
to do business with free-enterprise firms and countries in the free
world.

Ralph Hertle

wrote in message
ps.com...

yaofeng wrote:
I commend those ceo's for doing their job. They are at least saving
some jobs in the domestic sector rather than giving the business away
to the competitor.

Read about Lou Dobbs' "Exporting America : Why Corporate Greed Is
Shipping American Jobs Overseas":

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...492029-5010206

On a personal note, I've had sales rep bragging how much money he can
save me by getting consultants from overseas on L-1 visa loophole, and
stuff them four to an extend-stay suite. As far as I can tell, these
poor souls are getting paid couple dollare more than Wal-mart employee.

Do you think that's commendable?


Well sorta.... Actually they take their walmart rate salary send it all
back home then when they get back that money goes 100 times as far as it
would in this country and they actually live quite well.

I'm as American as Apple pie and as white newly grown cotton. I cant stand
all the outsourcing as I'm in the tech industry but I do understand the raw
economics behind why its done. Quality is a WHOLE differnet issue.

Here's an new twist on capitalism at its best. I couldnt believe it till I
read it with my own eyes. Then I thought damn this guy is creative.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...8/170632.shtml

I hope he gets shot down but I give him an A++++++++ for effort and
creativity. I cant wait to see how they try to stop him

I agree with you. When America and it's real Americans no longer
have job skills with manufacturing then the ball is in the
foreigners court and they will call the shots with their
modernized engineered weapons and consumable products and when
and if they choose to throw their weight around who will stop
them then? It's all over for a lot of us and it won't be pretty
for many more in the near future. Thank the empty hearted/headed
politicians and ceo's and those who'd rather get short term
profits at the expense of those wrkers who once made this the
great nation we used to be. It's how some greedy Americans
squandered what once was the best aspect of America. It's
coming.......

Rich-out-West wrote:
Nehmo,

I'm sure you've heard of the trade deficit... Enjoy the
outrageously cheap merchandise while you can. I'm no expert on
gloabalization, but it seems pretty obvious the current situation can't
go on forever. I'd be the worlds biggest hypocrite to say I've never
bought anything made overseas, but each time it's with a twinge of
guilt and the sinking feeling that I'm somehow contributing to the
decline of our great nation. Eventually the hens will come home to
roost.

**If** the cheaper price actually gets passed on to the consumer,
then I suppose this could be viewed as an upside for the general
population. On the flipside, it's probably safe to say this
development is bad news for the US workers who used to manufacture
those parts...or the stores they spent their paychecks at...or the guy
next door to the plant who sold them lunch...or the contractor who was
going to build them a house...etc...etc...

Richard Johnson PE
Camano Island, WA

:


The Constitution of the PRC, dated 1982, is posted at:

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/co...stitution.html


If there is any doubt as to what the leaders of the PRC intend, they have
provided an explanatory statement in Section II of the Constitution:

"Under the leadership of the Communist Party of China and the guidance of
Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought, the Chinese people of all
nationalities will continue to adhere to the people's democratic
dictatorship and follow the socialist road, persevere in reform and opening
to the outside, steadily improve socialist institutions, develop socialist
democracy, improve the socialist legal system and work hard and
self-reliantly to modernize industry, agriculture, national defense and
science and technology step by step to turn China into a socialist country
with prosperity and power, democracy and culture."


After the public relations niceties are stripped away it is patently clear
that they are a socialist dictatorship. They themselves say so.

They do not mean the same thing by the term rights that Americans do. They
mean that people may have priveledges that are accorded by the state, and
the document says repeatedly that the government determines the regulations
and rules of everything in the state. Be certain of one thing - there is no
universal protected liberty in the PRC.

..........

Stay away from the PRC and conduct business with free individuals in the
free world nations.

Many business trade publications in the USA are expressing editorial
content that the PRC is repeatedly violating the intellectual property and
patents rights owned by western individuals and companies. In many attempts
where western firms have sued the PRC agencies and enterprises and won the
actions, the PRC has refused to pay the awarded damages. The PRC is
conducting a vicious rip off scheme, and that policy was initiated in the
earliest days of Marxism in the USSR. Communism is a parasitical type of
social system.


Ralph Hertle

[snip]

The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate,
buildings, houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some collectives),
equipment, machine tools, and all means of production are the property of
the state. The document is available on the website of the PRC.

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Foreign owners of businesses may own those legal entities as ideas,
however, the state does not recognize the private ownership of the
physical assets or physical means of production.

The supposed "capitalism" is only a phenomenon that exists in the realm of
personal property and cash. The production assets of firms, that exist
only by permission in the PRC, are all owned by the PRC.

Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the individual
has no rights whatsoever.

[snip]

Ralph Hertle

Since you've raised the issue, you ought to at least get it right.
Especially in rural areas of China, the state owns the land, but families
own their own homes. It's a lot like Hawaii in that way, and Hong Kong has
always had government ownership of the land, while the homes, apartment
blocks, office buildings, etc., built on that land were owned separately.
Hong Kong's famous land "sales" are actually 99-year property leases.

For what it's worth, the Chinese constitution says:

--

Article 11. The individual economy of urban and rural working people,
operated within the limits prescribed by law, is a complement to the
socialist public economy. The state protects the lawful rights and interests
of the individual economy. The state guides, helps and supervises the
individual economy by exercising administrative control.

["Individual economy" = "private sector"]

Article 13. The state protects the right of citizens to own lawfully earned
income, savings, houses and other lawful property. The state protects by law
the right of citizens to inherit private property.

--

As an American who unexpectedly received extensive access to essentially the
entire country, one of the things that surprised me in travelling through
the countryside was the amount of private ownership of homes, machinery,
automobiles, businesses, etc.

Chapter 2 of the Constitution lists a whole series of "rights," including
right to vote (Art 34), freedom of speech/assembly/press, etc. (Art 35),
constraints on home intrusion, arrest, etc. Whether they are living up to
that, what's actually happening is that students (of all ages) who receive
training in the West are going back to China and starting to insist on the
enforcement of these articles of the Constitution, especially at the local
level. Young journalism students are getting into investigative reporting,
there are now call-in radio and television programs, and much more balanced
news reporting on China TV than in the past. There is also more access to
western news media than one would think, and even during the oppressive days
of the Cultural Revolution there was an internal newspaper, "Cankao Xiaoshi"
which reprinted the significant articles from Time, Newsweek, Economist,
etc.

I'm not trying to diminish the political and personal freedoms problems in
China, but at least put them in a more balanced light. The situation is not
as black-and-white as some have portrayed, and there is a prevalent opinion
in China that western-style "freedom" has resulted in personal liberties
without counterbalancing civil responsibilities.

My source for the constitution reprints is
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/co...stitution.html, which was
posted earlier by another, who then immediately misquoted his very source.
Regards --

Ralph Hertle wrote:
:


The Constitution of the PRC, dated 1982, is posted at:

Oooo, 1982, over 20 years old. Do you have something more current, like
the article I posted that talked about China's real property rights
amendments in 2004 and 2005?

A mere 50 some years ago blacks didn't have civil rights in America per
our constitution. Also, didn't our own constitution, with public
relations niceties stripped away, actually said only white men are
equal (not even women), and God gave us the rights to steal land from
the Native Americans? (recalling the atrocities we committed with
constitutional authority, during Manifest Destiny period)

Oh sure, our constitution have evolved - well so have theirs.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/co...stitution.html


If there is any doubt as to what the leaders of the PRC intend, they
have
provided an explanatory statement in Section II of the Constitution:

"Under the leadership of the Communist Party of China and the
guidance of
Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought, the Chinese people of all
nationalities will continue to adhere to the people's democratic
dictatorship and follow the socialist road, persevere in reform and
opening
to the outside, steadily improve socialist institutions, develop
socialist
democracy, improve the socialist legal system and work hard and
self-reliantly to modernize industry, agriculture, national defense
and
science and technology step by step to turn China into a socialist
country
with prosperity and power, democracy and culture."


After the public relations niceties are stripped away it is patently
clear
that they are a socialist dictatorship. They themselves say so.

They do not mean the same thing by the term rights that Americans do.
They
mean that people may have priveledges that are accorded by the state,
and
the document says repeatedly that the government determines the
regulations
and rules of everything in the state. Be certain of one thing - there
is no
universal protected liberty in the PRC.

.........

Stay away from the PRC and conduct business with free individuals in
the
free world nations.

Many business trade publications in the USA are expressing editorial
content that the PRC is repeatedly violating the intellectual
property and
patents rights owned by western individuals and companies. In many
attempts
where western firms have sued the PRC agencies and enterprises and
won the
actions, the PRC has refused to pay the awarded damages. The PRC is
conducting a vicious rip off scheme, and that policy was initiated in
the
earliest days of Marxism in the USSR. Communism is a parasitical type
of
social system.


Ralph Hertle

wrote:
Ralph Hertle wrote:

:


The Constitution of the PRC, dated 1982, is posted at:


Oooo, 1982, over 20 years old. Do you have something more current, like
the article I posted that talked about China's real property rights
amendments in 2004 and 2005?





Read the damned document.

The most recent amendment is dated:

"AMENDMENT FOURTH
(Approved on March 14, 2004, by the 10th NPC at its 2nd Session)".





A mere 50 some years ago blacks didn't have civil rights in America per
our constitution. Also, didn't our own constitution, with public
relations niceties stripped away, actually said only white men are
equal (not even women), and God gave us the rights to steal land from
the Native Americans? (recalling the atrocities we committed with
constitutional authority, during Manifest Destiny period)




Actually, blacks have had rights ever since the beginnings of the USA.
Especially in the Northern States, where voting, property ownership,
marriage, schooling, free market employment were commonplace. Most of the
issues regarding African-Americans were due to religion-based racism, and
irrational fears by individuals. The Constitution was not supported in the
defense of individual rights by those people. Fortunately, we are all now
able to enjoy more liberty than before in that respect.

That has nothing to do with the current realities of the control of the PRC
State over individuals. The PRC State has absolute power over the
individual, and that has been standard Marxist Socialist policy ever since
the beginning of Soviet style Communism.

The State exercises total "lawful" control of the "rights" of individuals.
"Rights" in the PRC are priveledges accorded by and controlled and
regulated by the State. They are not rights, the principles of which, we
Americans agree or implicitly agree upon. We are free the individual in the
PRC is merely accorded temporary arbitrary priveledges.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with the wrongs done in other nations, or
the USA.

If you want to compare atrocities and deaths caused by the States of the
PRC, or even the USSR, to similar problems in the USA, you have to speak in
terms of mass killings on the order of many _tens of millions_ of persons
by the Communists. Millions of Kulaks were wiped out by State imposed
starvation, just to name one example. The USSR put the Nazis to shame
insofar as mass killings, and PRC was many times worse, and more ruthless,
than the USSR.

The numbers of wrongful deaths on the USA account would be small by
comparison, and probably in the order of hundreds during the same time
period. There, for example, we are talking individual capital punishments
by the State of Texas, and no mass killings.



Oh sure, our constitution have evolved - well so have theirs.




The PRC is indeed going to be changing.

A civil war is one of the most dangerous possibilities that we can foresee.

In the mean time the PRC is ripping off our technology, designs, and
patents at a furious pace, and our USA Administration is taking a morally
passive view of all that.

The firms, e.g., Paslode, will have turned over the CAD files of its
factory, tooling, fixtures, and engineering and product designs to the PRC
private label custom manufacturers. Copies of its business software and
business model may have also been given away. Paslode may have created its
own worst future business competitor, the PRC.

IBM's high speed computer hard disk drive manufacturing unit was losing
money in spite of so called cheap Chinese labor. They were competing
against other Chinese sources. IBM's PC computer business was also losing
money. Guess who owns those businesses now. The PRC. That's as pure an
example of classic Marxist acquisition of western technology and businesses
as can be given. That is pure skillfully executed Communist policy.


[clip to end of quotations]


Ralph Hertle

050430 1241 - Eye O. Newt posted:

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:17:27 -0400, NuckinFutz wrote:


Here's an new twist on capitalism at its best. I couldnt believe it till I
read it with my own eyes. Then I thought damn this guy is creative.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...8/170632.shtml

I hope he gets shot down but I give him an A++++++++ for effort and
creativity. I cant wait to see how they try to stop him




People like these are a direct threat to everything the US stands for (on
paper anyway). That giant sucking sound you hear is our country going
down the drain......



And weren't we warned about this a decade ago...

Ralph Hertle wrote:
wrote:
Ralph Hertle wrote:

:


The Constitution of the PRC, dated 1982, is posted at:


Oooo, 1982, over 20 years old. Do you have something more current,
like
the article I posted that talked about China's real property rights
amendments in 2004 and 2005?





Read the damned document.

What, losing your cool? I don't blame you.


The most recent amendment is dated:

"AMENDMENT FOURTH
(Approved on March 14, 2004, by the 10th NPC at its 2nd Session)".

Right, and this amendment included real properly rights. Read our own
congression report on this:

http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAca...07710bf38272af






A mere 50 some years ago blacks didn't have civil rights in America
per
our constitution. Also, didn't our own constitution, with public
relations niceties stripped away, actually said only white men are
equal (not even women), and God gave us the rights to steal land
from
the Native Americans? (recalling the atrocities we committed with
constitutional authority, during Manifest Destiny period)




Actually, blacks have had rights ever since the beginnings of the
USA.

This is funyy. It is a fact Civil Rights law was pass in less than 50
years. If they had all the rights, why was it necessary to pass the
law.

Are you trying to tell me the slaves happily got on the ship, came here
and worked happily as equals? Who are you trying to kid? Even George
Washington owned slaves, Thomas Jefferson did what to his female slave?

Especially in the Northern States, where voting, property ownership,
marriage, schooling, free market employment were commonplace. Most of
the
issues regarding African-Americans were due to religion-based racism,
and
irrational fears by individuals. The Constitution was not supported
in the
defense of individual rights by those people. Fortunately, we are all
now
able to enjoy more liberty than before in that respect.

That has nothing to do with the current realities of the control of
the PRC
State over individuals. The PRC State has absolute power over the
individual, and that has been standard Marxist Socialist policy ever
since
the beginning of Soviet style Communism.

The State exercises total "lawful" control of the "rights" of
individuals.
"Rights" in the PRC are priveledges accorded by and controlled and
regulated by the State. They are not rights, the principles of which,
we
Americans agree or implicitly agree upon. We are free the individual
in the
PRC is merely accorded temporary arbitrary priveledges.

That has nothing whatsoever to do with the wrongs done in other
nations, or
the USA.

If you want to compare atrocities and deaths caused by the States of
the
PRC, or even the USSR, to similar problems in the USA,

Not only did we enslaved the Africans, we genocidally eliminated the
Native Americans. NA population only started to recover in the 1970's.
Go take a look.

you have to speak in
terms of mass killings on the order of many _tens of millions_ of
persons
by the Communists. Millions of Kulaks were wiped out by State imposed

starvation, just to name one example. The USSR put the Nazis to shame

insofar as mass killings, and PRC was many times worse, and more
ruthless,
than the USSR.

The numbers of wrongful deaths on the USA account would be small by
comparison, and probably in the order of hundreds during the same
time
period. There, for example, we are talking individual capital
punishments
by the State of Texas, and no mass killings.



Oh sure, our constitution have evolved - well so have theirs.




The PRC is indeed going to be changing.

Oh please, China's been changing for the better for the last 20 years.
Have you even been to China?


A civil war is one of the most dangerous possibilities that we can
foresee.

In the mean time the PRC is ripping off our technology, designs, and
patents at a furious pace, and our USA Administration is taking a
morally
passive view of all that.

The firms, e.g., Paslode, will have turned over the CAD files of its
factory, tooling, fixtures, and engineering and product designs to
the PRC
private label custom manufacturers. Copies of its business software
and
business model may have also been given away. Paslode may have
created its
own worst future business competitor, the PRC.

IBM's high speed computer hard disk drive manufacturing unit was
losing
money in spite of so called cheap Chinese labor. They were competing
against other Chinese sources. IBM's PC computer business was also
losing
money. Guess who owns those businesses now. The PRC. That's as pure
an
example of classic Marxist acquisition of western technology and
businesses
as can be given. That is pure skillfully executed Communist policy.


[clip to end of quotations]


Ralph Hertle

Rich-out-West wrote:
Nehmo,

I'm sure you've heard of the trade deficit... Enjoy the
outrageously cheap merchandise while you can.

The trade "deficit" is a misnomer. There is no deficit. The trade is
equal dollars for equal product.

guilt and the sinking feeling that I'm somehow contributing to the
decline of our great nation. Eventually the hens will come home to
roost.

I'm sure the buggy whip manufacturers were bitching and complaining as
well in the early 1900s, but new technologies and industries come along
all the time.

Charles:

wrote:


[clip]

Actually, blacks have had rights ever since the beginnings of the
USA.


This is funyy. It is a fact Civil Rights law was pass in less than 50
years. If they had all the rights, why was it necessary to pass the
law.





All people had the rights that were identified in the U.S. Constitution.

Specific racists and pragmatist businessmen violated those rights time and
time again. The prevailing attitude towards blacks in the south was far
worse than in the north.

The changes in the general attitude took a long time to revise. I suspect
that because Christianity doesn't have individual rights as a central tenet
the understanding of rights took far longer to revise than it would have
otherwise.





Are you trying to tell me the slaves happily got on the ship, came here
and worked happily as equals?




No. Their rights were abused. Most Christians, and the USA was at that time
a mostly Christian society, looked the other way.




Who are you trying to kid? Even George
Washington owned slaves, Thomas Jefferson did what to his female slave?



Actually, Jefferson and his woman were involved in a long term live in
relationship. In a different society they might have been married.




[clip]


Not only did we enslaved the Africans, we genocidally eliminated the
Native Americans.





The government of the USA began to take military action against specific
warring NAs after the attacks got out of hand. They did not practice
genocide. The mass destruction of the buffalo was mostly motivated by the
trade in cheap hides, and the trade was conducted by individuals.

The government of USA was not as busy as it should have been in defining
the rights of individuals.

The NAs were mostly killed by the diseases brought by the
European-Americans. Ninety percent of them died due to diseases.

It is not true that "we" or the government of the USA "genocidally
eliminated the Native Americans." Get the facts straight.






NA population only started to recover in the 1970's.
Go take a look.




That's fine with me.




[clip]

Oh sure, our constitution have evolved - well so have theirs.





That's OK too. Notice, however, that the PRC state retains total control
over the rights of the individual. Technically, the PRC citizens don't have
rights, they have regulated priveledges.







The PRC is indeed going to be changing.


Oh please, China's been changing for the better for the last 20 years.
Have you even been to China?





Lucky for them.

When are they going to get the nads to shrug off the "dictatorship" (a term
used in the Constitution of the PRC to describe the PRC), and create
universal protected liberty and rights for all their people.




It appears that you are an apologist for the Communist component of the PRC
society, and that you are not an express advocate of individual rights.



Ralph Hertle

The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate,
buildings, houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some collectives),
equipment, machine tools, and all means of production are the property of
the state. The document is available on the website of the PRC.

Nonsense. Fortunes are being made as we speak, in people doing real estate
business in the fast growing parts of China such as Shanghai. The land is
owned by the government, but is "sold" on long-term lease. The individual
buildings are owned by the leaseholder. This is similar to arrangements in
many places in the world (including Hawaii). I was surprised during travel
through Shandong and other wheat and grain-growing areas at the quality of
the rural houses, which specifically are owned by the farmers. They were of
a common design, similar to a Jim Walter basic house, but with a window wall
all along the south side for wintertime heating. There is currently a
property boom in Southern China building resorts and vacation homes for
tourists, and I have friends who have bought their own vacation homes in
subdivisions near Zhuhai in southern China, where we'll probably stay on our
next visit to Asia.

As a matter of interest, even before reverting to China, all Hong Kong land
ownership was retained by the (British) government, and land "sales" were
actually 99 year leases. (There is only one privately-owned plot in Hong
Kong, which dates back to its establishment.) All those skyscrapers in HK
sit on leased land, but the buildings have private owners.

We owned an apartment in Macau for many years, and home ownership in Macau,
Zhuhai, Hong Kong, Guangdong and other parts of China is unchanged.

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Again, not true, and the Constitution does not say that. Even during the
Cultural Revolution there was still family property and homes, and the
government later paid compensation to those whose homes were taken over or
destroyed during the Cultural Revolution.


Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the individual
has no rights whatsoever.

Wrong again. If you look at the Constitution, beginning with Article 33 are
a whole series of rights of the individual. You can't support your
supposition by reference to the constitution.

You'd be better off trying to argue that the government wasn't living up to
the constitutional requirements, and in fact the constitution is a document
which seems to lag behind the actualities of Chinese life. In fact, what
China has is a traditional Chinese-style central government, in which much
of the actual authority is exercised not by the central government but
within the individual provinces. Post HK-reversion, rather than Hong Kong
starting to look like the rest of China, China is quickly starting to look
like Hong Kong.

IMHO China's impact post-Mao and post-Cultural Revolution is very similar to
what happened in Japan post WWII. We've survived this before, and as long
as we understand how the world is evolving, we'll survive it again.

There are enough reasons to discuss China business without having to make up
things that aren't true -- Regards

World Traveler wrote:

The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate,
buildings, houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some
collectives),
equipment, machine tools, and all means of production are the
property of
the state. The document is available on the website of the PRC.

Nonsense. Fortunes are being made as we speak, in people doing real
estate
business in the fast growing parts of China such as Shanghai. The
land is
owned by the government, but is "sold" on long-term lease. The
individual
buildings are owned by the leaseholder. This is similar to
arrangements in
many places in the world (including Hawaii).

there's a issue to resolve here. While people in this thread argue how
in PRC u only "own" the building and the lot/land is owned by the
government like Hawaii, the major diff here is
* in Hawaii, if the state gov wanna build a freeway passing thru ur
home, what process does the state gov need to go thru before kicking u
out of ur house, and
* in PRC if the country wanna build a dam flooding ur farm home, what
process the gov need to go thru before kicking u out.

By law and constitution, both PRC, USA, Hawaii, grant u freedom of
speech. How it is enforced is another story.

I was surprised during travel
through Shandong and other wheat and grain-growing areas at the
quality of
the rural houses, which specifically are owned by the farmers. They
were of
a common design, similar to a Jim Walter basic house, but with a
window wall
all along the south side for wintertime heating. There is currently
a
property boom in Southern China building resorts and vacation homes
for
tourists, and I have friends who have bought their own vacation homes
in
subdivisions near Zhuhai in southern China, where we'll probably stay
on our
next visit to Asia.

As a matter of interest, even before reverting to China, all Hong
Kong land
ownership was retained by the (British) government, and land "sales"
were
actually 99 year leases. (There is only one privately-owned plot in
Hong
Kong, which dates back to its establishment.) All those skyscrapers
in HK
sit on leased land, but the buildings have private owners.

That's understandable in some sense -- UK only leased what we know as
HK today by 99 years from China (represent by Qing dynasty). It cant
"sell" these lots to private individual. This is why HK lot ownership
are retained by the british gov.

We owned an apartment in Macau for many years, and home ownership in
Macau,
Zhuhai, Hong Kong, Guangdong and other parts of China is unchanged.

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal
property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Again, not true, and the Constitution does not say that. Even during
the
Cultural Revolution there was still family property and homes, and
the
government later paid compensation to those whose homes were taken
over or
destroyed during the Cultural Revolution.

How, and in what name? In other words, is it realy a "compensation"? By
calling it compensation, it mean chinese communist party admit its
mistake role in cultural revolution. Otherwise its nothing but a
mouth-sealing fee. Consider why Japan today is providing low or zero
interest loan to China but not calling it a WWII compensation.

During USA civil war, US gov confiscate general Lee's homestead in
virginia (what we know today as Arlington national cemetary). Later
after the war his family sue the government to get it back -- but
instead receive payment cuz many civil war soldiers are already buried
there and Lee's family cant use the land any more. Here u note one
major diff. In USA, u can sue federal gov and state gov for their
mistake and u have a chance to win. Talk bout that for PRC -- can
people sue the center, provincial gov for their wrongs?

Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the
individual
has no rights whatsoever.

Wrong again. If you look at the Constitution, beginning with Article
33 are
a whole series of rights of the individual. You can't support your
supposition by reference to the constitution.

Right. The issue here is how the law and constitution are enforced.
both USA and PRC has law for support freedom of speech. U know what
come out of their law. Ill bet Charles Liu is gonna mention patriot act
again. Hehehe, then we can inspect how the law are applied.

You'd be better off trying to argue that the government wasn't living
up to
the constitutional requirements, and in fact the constitution is a
document
which seems to lag behind the actualities of Chinese life. In fact,
what
China has is a traditional Chinese-style central government, in which
much
of the actual authority is exercised not by the central government
but
within the individual provinces. Post HK-reversion, rather than Hong
Kong
starting to look like the rest of China, China is quickly starting to
look
like Hong Kong.

I wonder how u say "China is quickly starting to look like Hong Kong".
U can start with the recent anti-Japan protest in Shanghai. No chinese
media mention the protest for days.

IMHO China's impact post-Mao and post-Cultural Revolution is very
similar to
what happened in Japan post WWII. We've survived this before, and as
long
as we understand how the world is evolving, we'll survive it again.

There are enough reasons to discuss China business without having to
make up
things that aren't true -- Regards

True. Welcome these people to the China NG then. ^_^

World Traveler wrote:

The Constitution of the PRC clearly states that all real estate,
buildings, houses, factories, roads, farms (except for some
collectives),
equipment, machine tools, and all means of production are the
property of
the state. The document is available on the website of the PRC.

Nonsense. Fortunes are being made as we speak, in people doing real
estate
business in the fast growing parts of China such as Shanghai. The
land is
owned by the government, but is "sold" on long-term lease. The
individual
buildings are owned by the leaseholder. This is similar to
arrangements in
many places in the world (including Hawaii).

You're wasting your time with these China bashers. They've formed their
opinion already, even without any evidence. I can just hear people say
"China's law and its application" this and that. Well, those who
believe China's court always side with the government, they are wrong.
China is just like America, there is eminent domain abuse, and just
like US, China's courts have its own process.

Here are a few cases in China where victims of land use abuse sued and
won:

http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/100939.htm

http://www.china-labour.org.hk/iso/a...mic %20Reform

http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/englis...ent_338768.htm



I was surprised during travel
through Shandong and other wheat and grain-growing areas at the
quality of
the rural houses, which specifically are owned by the farmers. They
were of
a common design, similar to a Jim Walter basic house, but with a
window wall
all along the south side for wintertime heating. There is currently
a
property boom in Southern China building resorts and vacation homes
for
tourists, and I have friends who have bought their own vacation homes
in
subdivisions near Zhuhai in southern China, where we'll probably stay
on our
next visit to Asia.

As a matter of interest, even before reverting to China, all Hong
Kong land
ownership was retained by the (British) government, and land "sales"
were
actually 99 year leases. (There is only one privately-owned plot in
Hong
Kong, which dates back to its establishment.) All those skyscrapers
in HK
sit on leased land, but the buildings have private owners.

We owned an apartment in Macau for many years, and home ownership in
Macau,
Zhuhai, Hong Kong, Guangdong and other parts of China is unchanged.

In the PRC individuals are permitted ownership only of personal
property,
e.g., clothes and furniture.

Again, not true, and the Constitution does not say that. Even during
the
Cultural Revolution there was still family property and homes, and
the
government later paid compensation to those whose homes were taken
over or
destroyed during the Cultural Revolution.


Don't kid yourself. The PRC is a communist state in which the
individual
has no rights whatsoever.

Wrong again. If you look at the Constitution, beginning with Article
33 are
a whole series of rights of the individual. You can't support your
supposition by reference to the constitution.

You'd be better off trying to argue that the government wasn't living
up to
the constitutional requirements, and in fact the constitution is a
document
which seems to lag behind the actualities of Chinese life. In fact,
what
China has is a traditional Chinese-style central government, in which
much
of the actual authority is exercised not by the central government
but
within the individual provinces. Post HK-reversion, rather than Hong
Kong
starting to look like the rest of China, China is quickly starting to
look
like Hong Kong.

IMHO China's impact post-Mao and post-Cultural Revolution is very
similar to
what happened in Japan post WWII. We've survived this before, and as
long
as we understand how the world is evolving, we'll survive it again.

There are enough reasons to discuss China business without having to
make up
things that aren't true -- Regards

wrote:
World Traveler wrote:
Nonsense. Fortunes are being made as we speak, in people doing
real
estate
business in the fast growing parts of China such as Shanghai. The
land is
owned by the government, but is "sold" on long-term lease. The
individual
buildings are owned by the leaseholder. This is similar to
arrangements in
many places in the world (including Hawaii).

You're wasting your time with these China bashers. They've formed
their
opinion already, even without any evidence.

Improvement that charles liu dont call others 'jokers' when they dont
agree with him. ^_^

I can just hear people say
"China's law and its application" this and that. Well, those who
believe China's court always side with the government, they are
wrong.
China is just like America, there is eminent domain abuse, and just
like US, China's courts have its own process.

Here are a few cases in China where victims of land use abuse sued
and
won:

http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/100939.htm

Residents suing city commision.


http://www.china-labour.org.hk/iso/a...mic %20Reform

Village committee is sued.


http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/englis...ent_338768.htm

Guanzhou municiapl government.

Come on, charles liu. U continue ur always trick. When others r talking
bout sueing PRC central government and provincial gov. (these gov owns
the land/lot), u wanna substitute in sues against village and city.
That's filthy already in scChina. U wanna make urself notorious outside
scChina?