DIYbanter

DIYbanter (https://www.diybanter.com/)
-   Metalworking (https://www.diybanter.com/metalworking/)
-   -   Workshop In An Alternate Homepower Environment (https://www.diybanter.com/metalworking/109982-workshop-alternate-homepower-environment.html)

John June 15th 05 10:11 PM


Snipped

Hi Matt, Where've you been? Crankin' out too many parts to get into any of
the ongoing arguments? g

Hey, remember that little 3-48 x .054" set screw? We finally got it running
pretty good on the Tsugami. We're making it out of 416HT stainless and are
using a Habegger adjustable thread rolling die. Almost full thread profile
right to the ends. So far, so good. (crossed fingers).

I better get out of here before I get flamed for not being on-topic enough.

John



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Rex B June 15th 05 11:38 PM

How did this get from "Alternative Power" to "Survivalism" ?


They are as intertwined as salt and pepper.

Gunner


I disagree. I like the idea of off-grid living, although I may never
attain it. One can be self-reliant and as independent as possible
without being threatened by the apocalypse.
I'm more bothered by $200 electric bills than by impending anarchy.

Rex

Cliff June 16th 05 02:46 AM

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
wrote:

Rich


"Libertarian"?

LOL .....
http://www.rackjite.com/9looney.htm

I doubt that this one can wear shoes ..... knots,
you know ......
--
Cliff

Ulysses June 16th 05 03:38 AM


"Scott Willing" wrote in message
...
On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:

Thanks for the reply.

I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
one can recharge them during off load hours.

Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
retrofit something like a table saw?

In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.

TMT


I really hesitate to jump in on this topic, but I advise you to make
sure to do your research carefully before pursuing the replacement of
AC motors with DC motors.

In the early days of homepower which was nearly universally 12V on the
primary side, this was a pretty common practice, but in the overall
picture of things today I'm not sure it's warranted in the general
case.

At one time I was given to understand that DC motors are just innately
more efficient than AC. It appears that this is not necessarily so,
and has much to do with the crappy design and build quality of
"shovelware" AC motors than any basic electromechanical principles. To
know whether you would actually be further ahead after a DC
conversion, you would have to consider each case individually.
Ignoring power factor, a 12V load of power "x" draws 10 times the
current that an 120VAC load will draw. Will the losses you avoid by
bypassing the inverter get chewed up in the wire? How close to the
battery room will the workshop be?


I absolutely agree with what you are saying. This is why the on-grid folks
are using Tesla's design and not Edison's DC idea. For a house I also think
it's probably not worth the trouble to run massive wires everywhere in order
to use DC effeciently. Of course the higher the voltage the smaller the
wire required, which brings you right back to 115VAC. Probably better to
have a few extra batteries and a couple of extra solar panels (or whatever)
to cover the loss of effeciency. When I first started reading about wind
generators about 20 or so years ago they were talking about 120 volt
generators charging batteries in series equaling 120 VDC. According to the
author most appliances wouldn't care if it was AC or DC. This idea is
definately simpler than having to buy and connect an expensive sine wave
inverter but I suspect that today's electronics might be a bit more
particular about their input current than a 20 year old dishwasher or vacuum
cleaner. If someone wanted to try it I suppose the best thing to do would
be to buy a new whatever and make sure you can return it. If it explodes
you go get your money back. And of course there's always the problem of
short circuits burning the house down.

However, for a stand-alone workshop that is to be powered seperately I would
consider using DC as opposed to running a gasoline/diesel generator on one
or two tools that I use regularly. For those that I only use occasionally
for me it's no big deal to start up a little generator (most of my saws etc
run fine from a Honda eu2000). As someone else pointed out running a
compressor during peak sunlight or wind times (or when a generator happens
to be running) and filling the tank can, at least in my case, supply enough
air to do quite a bit of work later without having to use any additional
power. Leaks, in this case, cannot be allowed to exist!


I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.

Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.
Fortunately this hasn't represented a significant investment. With
each system upgrade I left myself options for going to a higher
primary voltage, and recently made the move to 24V when we replaced
our chargerless mod square wave inverter with a sine wave
inverter/charger. At some distant point in the future we might even
make the jump to 48V, but for the moment, 24V was "just right."

The punchline is that our little pumps (and other 12V DC loads) are
now running off a 24V/12V DC-DC converter. In the overall picture of
things this crazy scenario actually still makes sense here, but again
these are *small* loads.


Lol. As long as you don't plug a battery charger into it to charge the
batteries it's running off of ;-)


The moral is that when you choose to run DC loads, you're creating
specialized equipment and there are serious implications that might
not be immediately obvious. If you stick with AC loads, your wire runs
can be far longer for a given power throughput / wire guage, you can
reconfigure the primary side of your system without affecting anything
on the load side, use a common AC generator when it's more convenient
or more sensible to do so, or take your gear with you and use it
elsewhere.


I keep toying with the idea (12 volt motors) but I still use a gasoline
generator for the sizeable, short use loads. When it comes right down to it
I'm probably only using about 2 to 3 gallons of gasoline per month to run my
tools to produce around $15,000 worth of revenue. From a business
standpoint this is an insignificant expenditure. I simply manage the use of
my power tools and do work in batches. I don't work after the sun goes down
(usually, unless it's a RUSH order).


Having "inherited" a mixed DC/AC system and lived with it, off-grid,
for five years, there is no question in my mind that the new house we
build here will be wired almost entirely for conventional AC and will
likely have only some emergency lighting (power room!), and perhaps a
few very special-purpose devices and outlets wired for DC.

YMMV.

-=s




Ulysses June 16th 05 03:41 AM


"Matt Stawicki" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

snip
When one considers a workshop with metal and wood working capabilities,
what tradeoffs have you made to have a working shop in an alternate
homepower environment where every amp is precious?

snip
Given the current economic/social/political environment your
concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
tools and blanks.

Whether by design or stupidity, the American
manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
transfer.

With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].

Given the U.S. has a very limited (and rapidly diminishing)
domestic production capacity for machine tools [lathes, mills,
gear shapers, etc.], C.N.C. controllers, and perhaps most
critical M2 HSS and carbide inserts, this means the entire house
of cards will collapse as the existing machinery wears out,
replacements are unobtainable, and repair cannot be attempted.

Re-industrialization will be very expensive, time consuming and
dangerous, as even the most basic industries such as iron
foundries will have to be reestablished. Indeed, a generation or
more will be required, as the evolution, techniques and lessons
of the period 1890-1930 will have to be retraced, with no
assurance that the time required will be available before America
must again meet a serious international challenge to its
existence / hegemony.



Well, hell. Might as well just cash in your chips now. Take a quick
vacation, and then head for your local crematorium.

Sheesh, George. You really need to get out mo-)

Matt

Somehow methinks supply and demand will take care of itself.



Andy Dingley June 16th 05 03:42 AM

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, (Dave Mundt) wrote:


Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?


Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?


Too_Many_Tools June 16th 05 04:05 AM

I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
not needed.

Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.

At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
have hopefully gone before me.

TMT


Too_Many_Tools June 16th 05 04:21 AM

Thanks for your posting.

Your discussion is one of the major reasons for me starting this
thread. As I soon discovered when I started research into the design of
an AHP workshop...that the continuing progression of technology
(especially that of inverter design) changes the approach that one
should take in implementing a AHP system today.

While the lure to go "no power" is strong, I am no Luddite. Power
tools, both portable and stationary, have their place in a AHP
workshop. The opportunity to leverage consumer offerings allows one to
use conventional tools with minimal hassles. I also have a large
collection of older metal and wood working tools that would be awkward
to convert to something other than AC. In the past, I have always had a
policy of trying to do as little a modification as possible to a tool
since it is never a simple as it first seems. Machine tools were
designed with certain speed and torque requirements in mind and when
one departs from these, the tool's performance suffers.

Thanks for your input and please always feel welcome to contribute to
any of my discussions.

TMT


Ed Huntress June 16th 05 06:02 AM

"Andy Dingley" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, (Dave Mundt) wrote:


Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?


Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?


Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
political spectrum who say it's necessary.

They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
foreign competition themselves.

--
Ed Huntress



Ed Huntress June 16th 05 06:06 AM

"Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" wrote in
message t...

Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!


Uh, no. It means that we have two billion dollars worth of their crap, and
they have our two billion dollars.

This is not necessarily a bad deal in itself. But that's the way it is.

--
Ed Huntress



Gunner June 16th 05 06:34 AM

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:38:06 -0500, Rex B wrote:

How did this get from "Alternative Power" to "Survivalism" ?



They are as intertwined as salt and pepper.

Gunner


I disagree. I like the idea of off-grid living, although I may never
attain it. One can be self-reliant and as independent as possible
without being threatened by the apocalypse.
I'm more bothered by $200 electric bills than by impending anarchy.

Rex


Who said anything about "anarchy" or the apocalypse? Is that what you
equate survivalism with?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivalism

Survivalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

A survivalist is a person who anticipates a potential disruption in
the continuity of local, regional or worldwide society, and takes
steps to survive in the resulting unpredictable situation. Some
survivalists take an interest in survival in the wilderness or at sea,
while others look for opportunities to gain practice and training by
assisting in government volunteer organizations. Still others look at
historical incidents, either localized or affecting large regions, and
put extra effort and funds into preparing themselves with all the
tools and information needed to handle repeats of those same events.

Survivalists have current access to modern society, but prepare for a
future loss. This differentiates them from other people who endure
extreme situations by living in locations isolated through winter,
incursion commandos and guerrillas, and from subsistence farmers.

The specific preparations made will depend on the nature of the
anticipated disruption. The natures of the disruptions most commonly
planned for among survivalists include:

1. Natural disasters, such as tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes,
blizzards, and severe thunderstorms
2. Disasters brought about by the activities of humankind: chemical
spills, release of radioactive materials, war.
3. Collapse of the socioeconomic structure resulting in the
unavailability of electricity, fuel, food, water, and other goods and
services. Concern over the Y2K computer bug led to a brief widespread
interest in survivalism in 1999 for this reason.

Contents [showhide]
1 History
2 Common Preparations
3 Fringe Groups
4 Other Voices
5 In Fiction
6 External Links

6.1 Classic Survival Books
[edit]

History

The taking of prudent precautions as a hedge against bad times is as
old as history. The modern survivalist movement in the United States
and Great Britain can be traced chiefly to two sources:

1. The directive of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
to its members to store a year's worth of food for themselves and
their families
2. The publication of Famine and Survival in America by Howard J.
Ruff in 1974.

Ruff's book was published during a period of rampant inflation in the
wake of the 1973 oil crisis. Most of the elements of survivalism can
be found there, including advice on storage of food. The book also
championed the notion that precious metals, such as gold (as in South
African Krugerrands) and silver, have an intrinsic worth that makes
them more usable in the event of a socioeconomic collapse than other
currency.

Howard Ruff later repudiated much of the book. He has kept it out of
print and claims to have purchased the undistributed copies and
destroyed them. However, Ruff later published a successful financial
advisory newsletter and wrote a series of books with only slightly
milder variations on the same themes. The most popular of those books
was How to Prosper During the Coming Bad Years, a best-seller in 1979.

Newsletters and a number of books on the topic of survival followed
the publication of Ruff's first book. In 1975, Kurt Saxon began
publishing a newsletter called The Survivor, which combined Saxon's
editorials with reprints of old 19th century and early 20th century
writings on various pioneer skills and old technologies. Kurt Saxon
used the term 'survivalist' to describe the movement, and he claims to
have invented the term. Around the same time, survival bookseller and
author Don Stephens in Washington state popularized the term
'retreater' to describe the movement, referring to preparations to
leave the cities to a rural retreat when society breaks down. For a
time in the 1970s, the terms 'survivalist' and 'retreater' were used
interchangably. The term 'retreater' eventually fell out of favor,
perhaps because 'survivalist' has a more macho connotation. Another
important newsletter in the 1970s was the Personal Survival Letter
published by Mel Tappan, who also authored the books Survival Guns and
Tappan on Survival. These newsletters functioned as important
networking tools for the movement during the pre-information age.

Interest in the survivalist movement perhaps peaked around 1980, on
the momentum of Ruff's How to Prosper During the Coming Bad Years and
the publication in 1980 of the book Life After Doomsday by Bruce D.
Clayton. Clayton's book, coinciding with a renewed arms race between
the United States and Soviet Union, marked a shift in emphasis in
preparations made by survivalists away from economic collapse, famine,
and energy shortages which were concerns in the 1970s, to nuclear war.

Interest in the movement peaked again in 1999, triggered by fears of
the Y2K computer bug. Although extensive efforts were made to rewrite
computer programming code in response, some people nonetheless
anticipated widespread power outages, food and gasoline shortages, and
other emergencies to occur.

After the horrors of the Islamic extremist attacks on the World trade
centre in New York in 2001 and similar outrages in Bali and Spain a
resurgance of interest in survivalism started again, With the fear of
a war or jihad against the west by a minority of muslim extremists,
combined with an increase in awareness of environmental disasters and
global climate change, also coupled by the vulnerability of humanity
after the 2004 Tsunami in the Indian Ocean has once again made
Survivalism an issue of concern for many people.

Preparedness is once again in the forefront of peoples concerns and
those same people are now seeking to stockpile or cache supplies, gain
useful skills, develop contacts with others of similar outlooks and to
gain as much advice and information as possible.

All the old books have found new readership and other publications
such as RETREAT SURVIVAL which is a free booklet available on the
internet are enjoying more attention from concerned individuals and
families than ever before. At the start of the 21St Century electronic
bulltin boards have replaced many if not all paper based news
bullitins. On sites such as Yahoo Groups one can find up to the minute
discussions and debates on such subjects as Survival Vehicles,
Survival Retreats, Militias, as well as general purpose survivalist
groups[[1]
(http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query...&submit=Search).
[edit]

Common Preparations

Common preparations sometimes include preparing a clandestine or
defensible 'safe place' and stockpiling food, water, clothing, seed,
and agricultural equipment. While some survivalists do not emphasize
also stockpiling weapons, many do.

The common goal is to allow a group to remain completely
self-sufficient for the duration of the breakdown, or perhaps
indefinitely if the breakdown is predicted to be permanent.
Specifically, survivalists assume they cannot prevent the collapse,
and prepare to survive as individuals, as families, or in small
communal groups.

The term 'bugging out' is commonly used to describe a survivalist who
chooses to seek shelter in remote locations concealed from the rest of
civilization. These 'lone wolves' are similar to hermits. Their
strategy for survival is to live undetected, lying low to avoid
unwanted attention.

Survivalists make different preparations depending on which events
they are most concerned about happening. These concerns have changed
over the years. During the 1970s, economic collpase, hyperinflation,
and famine were the most common. These were prepared for with food
storage programs, constructing a "retreat" in the country which could
be farmed, and sometimes, hoarding precious metals and barterable
goods on the assumption that paper currency would become worthless.
During the early 1980s, these concerns were eclipsed by nuclear war,
with some survivalists going so far as to construct their own fallout
shelters. In 1999, many people purchased electric generators, water
purifiers, and several months or years worth of food in anticipation
of widespread and possibly months-long power outages because of the
Y2K computer bug.

Other survivalists have more specialized concerns, often related to an
adherenece to apocalyptic religious beliefs. Some New Agers anticipate
a forthcoming arrival of catastrophic earth changes and prepare to
survive them. A small percentage of evangelical Christians hold to an
interpretation of Bible prophecy known as a post-tribulation rapture,
in which Christians will have to go through a 7-year period of war and
dictatorship known as the 'Great Tribulation'. As previously noted,
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) has an
official policy of food storage for its members. Some smaller
religious sects have also been known for belief in a coming apocalypse
and the adoption of some survivalist practices; among the best known
of these groups was the Branch Davidians.

Many people, who are not 'survivalists' in that they are not preparing
for any total collapse of society or apocalyptic event, nonetheless
make prudent preparations for emergencies. This can include, depending
on the location, preparing for earthquakes, floods, power outages,
blizzards, avalanches, wildfires, nuclear power plant accidents,
hazardous material spills, tornadoes, and hurricanes. These
preparations can be as simple as keeping a first aid kit, shovel, and
extra clothes in the car, or maintaining a small kit of emergency
supplies in the home and car, containing emergency food, water, a
space blanket and other essentials, commonly known as a 'bug-out bag'
or a '72-hour kit'.

Some businesses have arisen around providing survivalist supplies,
including businesses that sell complete sets of food supplies for
specified periods of time.


http://www.swfrpc.org/hurr.htm Anarchy?
http://www.emints.org/ethemes/resources/S00000027.shtml Anarchy?
http://quake.ualr.edu/public/nmfz.htm Apocolypse?

http://www.fema.gov/kids/wldfire.htm Paranoia?

http://www.redcross.org/pressrelease...9_3846,00.html
Madness?

Mighty wide paint brush you use.......

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Cliff June 16th 05 11:58 AM

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 00:06:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" wrote in
message t...

Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!


Uh, no. It means that we have two billion dollars worth of their crap, and
they have our two billion dollars.

This is not necessarily a bad deal in itself. But that's the way it is.


Found a live one, eh?
One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
by that paper ....

Then those taxes will ......
--
Cliff

Ed Huntress June 16th 05 01:44 PM

"Cliff" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 00:06:43 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Richard the Dreaded Libertarian" wrote in
message t...

Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!


Uh, no. It means that we have two billion dollars worth of their crap,

and
they have our two billion dollars.

This is not necessarily a bad deal in itself. But that's the way it is.


Found a live one, eh?
One day they will demand their VALUE back ...... as promised
by that paper ....


I'm not looking forward to it. I have a feeling we're about to try, once
again, to follow the pea under the shells, with Milton Friedman moderating.

--
Ed Huntress



F. George McDuffee June 16th 05 04:01 PM

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 02:42:11 +0100, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, (Dave Mundt) wrote:


Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?


Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?

==============================
Our buzzwords are "maximizing sharholder value" with "free
market" for the rondo.

People go out and drink too much even though they know they will
have a hang over the next day. The major difference in this case
is that the people who are enjoying the party are not the ones
who will suffer the hangover (and have to pay the bar tab).


F. George McDuffee June 16th 05 04:05 PM

snip
Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?


Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
political spectrum who say it's necessary.

They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
foreign competition themselves.

============================================
This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.

Ed Huntress June 16th 05 04:10 PM

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
snip
Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?


Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
political spectrum who say it's necessary.

They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
foreign competition themselves.

============================================
This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.


I didn't intend to lead that point to a discussion of how vulnerable service
sector jobs are, because, as you say, that situation in general is changing
fast.

With tongue in cheek, I was suggesting that US government economists, so
far, aren't showing much worry about having their *own* jobs outsourced to
India.

However, given that the ideological posture of our current administration
seems to have no throttle and a seemingly unlimited fuel tank, they may give
that one a try, as well.

--
Ed Huntress



J. R. Carroll June 16th 05 04:12 PM


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
snip
Our excuse for killing off manufacturing in the UK was Thatcher.
What's America's excuse ?


Free trade. There are highly regarded experts from both ends of the
political spectrum who say it's necessary.

They all have jobs in the service sector and are relatively immune from
foreign competition themselves.

============================================
This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.


Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
their bottom line.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com



Ed Huntress June 16th 05 04:17 PM

"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
. com...

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...


This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.


Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is

that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
their bottom line.


That's fine in your business, John. It's not so fine if you're making
injection moldings for consumer products or assembling car engines in
Detroit or Windsor.

--
Ed Huntress




F. George McDuffee June 16th 05 04:35 PM

snip
Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
their bottom line.

============================
Big problem is that you can't tell what also comes off the bottom
line as a result because is concealed as higher taxes, and/or
quality of life issues such as higher crime rates with increased
insurance and alarm costs. It is also displaced in time, in that
you may see an immediate benefit now, but much higher costs
later. Think about changing the oil in your car. Don't change
it now, save a little money now, pay a lot more later or do
without a car.



J. R. Carroll June 16th 05 04:43 PM


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
. com...

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...


This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.


Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is

that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
their bottom line.


That's fine in your business, John. It's not so fine if you're making
injection moldings for consumer products or assembling car engines in
Detroit or Windsor.


Ed,
When I owned half of an injection molder we never lost a job we wanted to
Asia, not once. In fact, the first big tooling/molding package we nailed
down was something running in Malaysia. One project that was bid around the
world was commercial binary syringe assemblies for tooth whitening gel. The
quantities were 20 million units per month to start. You probably know the
company we did this for. If you have a Hot Springs Spa, 90 percent of the
molded parts are from my tools running in the United States. Carlsbad to be
precise. I could go on here at some length as 100 million dollars per year
in molded product is a lot of product. That isn't my point.
In each and every case the costs of making product were lower when customers
did business with us than if they made there purchase overseas. We were
shipping parts on several jobs to China as a matter of fact.

This is the important part - in no year between 1991 and 2002 did the
company's net after tax margin fall below 18 percent of gross revenues -
never, not once, period. It was almost embarrassing and we did not have a
single product of our own.
If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking the
wrong damned question.


--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com



J. R. Carroll June 16th 05 04:48 PM


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
snip
Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling is

that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right to
their bottom line.

============================
Big problem is that you can't tell what also comes off the bottom
line as a result because is concealed as higher taxes, and/or
quality of life issues such as higher crime rates with increased
insurance and alarm costs. It is also displaced in time, in that
you may see an immediate benefit now, but much higher costs
later. Think about changing the oil in your car. Don't change
it now, save a little money now, pay a lot more later or do
without a car.



This isn't a problem at all. Calculating the value in manufacturing is a
reasonable precise and very doable exercise.
It is not much of an art but does require a thougough understanding of every
element involved.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com



Ed Huntress June 16th 05 04:54 PM

"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
om...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
. com...

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...


This may have been true at the higher levels at one time but with
telecommuting service sector jobs are also rapidly disappearing.
For example many low to mid level accounting jobs such as tax
returns are now done overseas. Where the jobs cannot be done
externally H1B visas allow worker importation.

Perhaps, but half of my customers are in Europe and Asia. My feeling

is
that
the value you add is what customers are interested in. It goes right

to
their bottom line.


That's fine in your business, John. It's not so fine if you're making
injection moldings for consumer products or assembling car engines in
Detroit or Windsor.


Ed,
When I owned half of an injection molder we never lost a job we wanted to
Asia, not once. In fact, the first big tooling/molding package we nailed
down was something running in Malaysia. One project that was bid around

the
world was commercial binary syringe assemblies for tooth whitening gel.

The
quantities were 20 million units per month to start. You probably know the
company we did this for. If you have a Hot Springs Spa, 90 percent of the
molded parts are from my tools running in the United States. Carlsbad to

be
precise. I could go on here at some length as 100 million dollars per year
in molded product is a lot of product. That isn't my point.
In each and every case the costs of making product were lower when

customers
did business with us than if they made there purchase overseas. We were
shipping parts on several jobs to China as a matter of fact.

This is the important part - in no year between 1991 and 2002 did the
company's net after tax margin fall below 18 percent of gross revenues -
never, not once, period. It was almost embarrassing and we did not have a
single product of our own.
If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking

the
wrong damned question.


And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?

Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if we
neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences of
what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.

Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with 80
cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as easily as
to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are distributed
quite evenly around the world.

--
Ed Huntress



J. R. Carroll June 16th 05 05:09 PM




"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
om...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
. com...

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...

If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking

the
wrong damned question.


And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?


It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It will
work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.



Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if

we
neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences of
what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.

Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with

80
cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as easily

as
to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are

distributed
quite evenly around the world.


Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K for
every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I agree
that no one group has a lock on that.

If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or pension
obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
business model if for ****.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com



wmbjk June 16th 05 05:19 PM

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 04:34:34 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:38:06 -0500, Rex B wrote:

How did this get from "Alternative Power" to "Survivalism" ?


They are as intertwined as salt and pepper.

Gunner


I disagree. I like the idea of off-grid living, although I may never
attain it. One can be self-reliant and as independent as possible
without being threatened by the apocalypse.
I'm more bothered by $200 electric bills than by impending anarchy.

Rex


Who said anything about "anarchy" or the apocalypse? Is that what you
equate survivalism with?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivalism

Survivalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

A survivalist is a person who anticipates a potential disruption in
the continuity of local, regional or worldwide society, and takes
steps to survive in the resulting unpredictable situation.


snipped detailed definition

We all know what a survivalist is *supposed* to be. And we also know
what most of the blowhard self-professed survivalists actually are.
The funniest thing is that you expect people to believe that you'll
have the will to do without during difficult times after TEOTWAWKI.
Even though the will to do without in normal times when it's easy, is
more than you can muster.

http://www.swfrpc.org/hurr.htm Anarchy?


You're moving to Florida?

http://www.emints.org/ethemes/resources/S00000027.shtml Anarchy?


So you're working on the Taft ark?

http://quake.ualr.edu/public/nmfz.htm Apocolypse?


You might take a more southerly route to Florida, and avoid Arkansas
altogether...

http://www.fema.gov/kids/wldfire.htm Paranoia?


Hmm, there seems to be a trend here what a shock, a blizzard of
cites that don't actually support your fears or your position.

http://www.redcross.org/pressrelease...9_3846,00.html
Madness?


Now we're getting somewhere. A quote from that site - "families and
individuals should remember that they could be preparing for upwards
of three days in isolation." Is that what you think "survivalism" is?
We generally go to town once a week. That's a routine six days of
isolation, and it wouldn't be a hardship to go double that. Lots of
rural folks go way longer, and most of them wouldn't call themselves
survivalists.

Here's the general idea - get your everyday **** together. If after
doing that you have any time and money left over, *then* get ready for
the apocalypse of your choosing. Doing it the other way around is
irrational.

Mighty wide paint brush you use.......


That's pretty funny coming from the guy who day after day, assigns
outrageously exaggerated or wholly fictional qualities to half the
population.

Here's a narrow brush preview of your fate should your fantasy come
true -

Day 1. Discovers that bluster can't be traded for butts or soda.
Day 2. Loses dumpster diving access to younger competitors.
Day3. Jonesin' for the Internet, because there's nobody to ask if an
empty water tank is indicative of a leak.

It'll all be downhill after that...

Wayne

Ed Huntress June 16th 05 05:24 PM

"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
om...



"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
om...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
. com...

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...

If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be

because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept

asking
the
wrong damned question.


And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?


It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It will
work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.


Proven for what percentage of the economy? Are you suggesting this is a
general model that will sustain our economy as a whole? If so, how would you
apply it to, say, the manufacturing of shirts? What philosophy and business
model will let you make shirts at a price/quality tradeoff that competes
with rural China or Bangladesh? Child labor could help, I suppose...


Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%, if

we
neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the consequences

of
what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.

Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete with

80
cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be packaged
into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as

easily
as
to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are

distributed
quite evenly around the world.


Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K for
every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I agree
that no one group has a lock on that.


Your $5 premium probably was around 20% of 40% of your costs: as a round
approximation, perhaps 8% of your cost of production, based on
tooling-industry rules of thumb.

When you're up against 80 cents/hour, how do you account for the 96%
disadvantage? Do you think that improved efficiencies in general (not just
yours, but those of the economy as a whole) can cover 96% differences? Any
model that I know of, that points in that possible direction, is based on
getting rid of all of those people you employ and adopting the values and
standards of the Third World.

And then business in general winds up hoist on its own petard.


If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or

pension
obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
business model if for ****.


So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better business
model than Toyota or Hyundai? And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain that
advantage in a viciously competitive global market?

These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success when
you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.

--
Ed Huntress



Ed Huntress June 16th 05 05:25 PM

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
snip
If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking

the
wrong damned question.

=============
Right on!!!!! You also need to include Ford. A major
contributing factor is that they can't decide if they are banks
or car companies. They also seem to have forgotten than you
can't milk a "cash cow" if it is dead.....


They're doing better as banks.

What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?

--
Ed Huntress



F. George McDuffee June 16th 05 05:26 PM

snip
If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept asking the
wrong damned question.

=============
Right on!!!!! You also need to include Ford. A major
contributing factor is that they can't decide if they are banks
or car companies. They also seem to have forgotten than you
can't milk a "cash cow" if it is dead.....




Scott Willing June 16th 05 05:41 PM

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:30:40 GMT, (Dave Mundt) wrote:

Greetings and Salutations....

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 17:29:43 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 07:36:34 -0700, F.George wrote:
snip
Given the current economic/social/political environment your
concerns are well founded, however I think the primary or basic
problem will not be limited or unavailable [electrical] power,
but rather the more pervasive and dangerous problem of a lack of
spare parts, raw materials and most critical HSS and carbide
tools and blanks.

Whether by design or stupidity, the American
manufacturing/industrial infrastructure is rapidly being
destroyed, primarily by management "outsourcing" and plant
transfer.


Thank you, Chicken Little.


Hum...so you DON'T think it is a problem that America
is losing the knowledge, skills and tools to manufacture
even the basic tools we need to keep society going and the
infrastructure kept up?


Consider the (tongue in cheek of course) upside: We're also exporting
all the toxic aspects of manufacture and mind-numbing, RSI-prone jobs
overseas, where the Chinese and others can gleefully destroy their
corner of the environment and burn through workers without the pesky
EPA or labour standards in the way. Although - if you remember ye
olde "Asian brown cloud" - you might rightly regard this as farting
down a tube, only to have the smell return eventually. It's a small
planet.

Last night on the news there was footage of armed government troops
(police, whatever) forceably "relocating" Chinese farmers. Probably to
make way for another widget factory to feed the Wal-Mart cash export
conveyor.

Ever tried to get through so much as a month -- a week -- without
buying something made in China? Difficult and disturbing.

I try to buy locally produced and supplied goods as much as possible.
Being a Canuck, I look for Canadian-made goods first, then US-made
goods. These days I consider myself lucky to find something made in
the US much less in Canada. However I recently became aware that
countries like the US (dunno about Canada) can set up special regions
in overseas countries that are classified as sovereign extensions of
the homeland. (Sorry the proper term escapes me.) In this way they can
run sweatshops in wire-fenced compounds and legally print "Made in
USA" on the goods produced there.

If that ain't double-speak, Mr. Orwell, I dunno what is.

-=s




With the trade deficit [current account trade balance]
approaching 2 billion dollars *PER DAY* it does not require a
degree in rocket science or a tarot deck to see that the time is
near when imports by the U.S. economy will be on a C.O.D. or even
a "pre-pay" basis [in gold, not dollars].


Odd, that's not what my crystal ball tells me. ;-)

And that "trade deficit" is the stupidest boogeyman ever perpetrated -
well, at least up in the top five stupid boogeymen - since the
nervous nellies found out that it's a scary buzzword.

Do you even have any idea what a "trade deficit" _is_? It means
we have two billion dollars more per day to spend on their crap
than they have to spend on our crap. That means WE ARE TWO BILLION
DOLLARS RICHER THAN THEY ARE!!!!! PER DAY!!!!!!!!!!

You have a significant "trade deficit" with the grocery store.
How much do you spend there? Maybe $100.00/week? That's a ONE
HUNDRED DOLLARS PER WEEK TRADE DEFICIT with the grocery store.
They don't buy anything from you, do they?

And imagine your employer's trade deficit with _you_! He buys
your labor for, what, $50K, $100K/year? How much stuff do you
buy from him? Your EMPLOYER HAS A SERIOUS TRADE DEFICIT WITH
YOU!!!!!

"Trade Deficit". Pfaugh!

Thanks!
Rich
UT o


While your point may have some validity here, the
major difference is that the money in your examples is
circulating INSIDE the USA. The dollars spent in a
foreign market are dollars that are taken out of the
economy "forever".
As an analogy, if dollars are the life-blood
of the economy, foreign trade is like cutting an
artery.
Now...The fact of the matter is that SOME of
those dollars DO come back in, but, since it is a
DEFICIT, far more are going out than are coming in.
Those dollars have to be replaced in the economy
somehow. One "bad" way is to simply print more
money. While this gets more bucks in circulation,
it also cuts down on the value of each dollar.
We have to remember that the world economy
is more like a war than a cheerful family gathering.
All the countries in the world are jockeying to
gain advantage over the other countries, and, one
way to do that is to drain the cash of one country.
America, although economically large, is
not infinite, and, if we believed we were, we would
be fools. The fact that the dollar has dropped
in relative value on the world market is proof that
the deficits are having their desired effects. Also,
remember that the growing European Union can (and
perhaps already has) become a larger economic power
than America.
Finally, there is the basic problem that
the world, in general, is not a friendly place.
Countries that were our friends are now our
enemies; countries that were our enemies are
now our friends; The only lesson we can
learn from this is that this is likely to
happen again, so, to end up totally dependent
on another country for our major manufacturing
is a stupid thing to do.

Regards
Dave Mundt



Pete C. June 16th 05 05:43 PM

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

I would agree but an VFD that is unnecessary is a current draw that is
not needed.

Like any system, one needs to plan a workshop as a whole.

At this point, I could go single phase, 3 phase or DC motors on on all
my machines. One of the reasons why I started this discussion was to
make that decision based partially on the experiences of others who
have hopefully gone before me.

TMT


I've been following this thread with some interest and now have some
thoughts and comments to add to it.

I may have missed something along the way, but I don't recall you
specifying what type(s) of alternative energy sources you have
available. This makes quite a difference in determining the best
options.

As an example, if your alternate source(s) provide mechanical power such
as found with water power, wind power, or a solar boiler driving a
turbine or steam engine, then air power could be quite advantageous.

A source of mechanical energy can directly drive a compressor head,
saving the extremely inefficient conversions to electricity and back.
Compressed air is easy and economical to store in large volumes and is
free from the chemical hazards of batteries. Useable service life of
compressed air tanks is much higher than batteries as well.

In addition to the obvious air tools, compressed air can also be used to
power things such as refrigeration if you use the belt driven type
refrigeration compressors.

Those mechanical energy sources can also simultaneously drive electrical
generators to charge conventional batteries for loads such as lighting.
Battery charging for cordless tools is no less efficient that the
charging of your "regular" battery string, as long as the charging is
limited to peak energy generation times.

The efficiency of converting DC from your battery string to AC so you
can use conventional appliances is fairly good with modern inverters.
The conversion efficiency also improves when you use a higher voltage
battery string since inverters switching higher voltages at lower
currents will have lower resistive / heat losses.

Solar PV conversion efficiency is incredibly low to begin with and PV
cost is high so if that is your only energy source you really do need to
watch every miliamp. Of course, even with that inefficiency a solar PV
panel charging batteries for your cordless tools is just fine as long as
it has the capacity to keep up with your usage.

For items like welders that require huge gulps of power it's really
difficult to get away from an IC engine / generator for practicality. A
decent welder / generator can serve two needs and may be the most
practical solution.

If you've got really good water power available you could probably use
it to drive the head from an engine driven welder. A DC inverter type
welder could probably be modified to accept DC from a large battery
bank, but that would require you to have a fairly high voltage battery
string to be practical.

Someone else posted about the differences in energy needs of a shop vs.
home. They had more or less the correct idea, but got their terminology
a bit out of whack. A shop has mostly high peak energy loads at low duty
cycles and a home has mostly low peak loads with high duty cycles. The
total energy consumption over the course of a day could be similar
depending on how busy the shop is.

Pete C.

J. R. Carroll June 16th 05 05:59 PM


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
om...



"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
om...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
. com...

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...

If Detroit or Windsor can't stay busy or if GM files it won't be

because
they couldn't get the answer right. It will be because they kept

asking
the
wrong damned question.

And are you talking about a solution for 10% of the market, or are you
claiming you have a general question and a general solution for it?


It isn't a claim Ed, it is a proven philosophy and business model. It

will
work wherever you choose to run it if the infrastructure is in place.


Proven for what percentage of the economy? Are you suggesting this is a
general model that will sustain our economy as a whole? If so, how would

you
apply it to, say, the manufacturing of shirts? What philosophy and

business
model will let you make shirts at a price/quality tradeoff that competes
with rural China or Bangladesh? Child labor could help, I suppose...


Because we can always make a positive anecdote of the virtues of 10%,

if
we
neglect the fact that an economy is all 100%, and that the

consequences
of
what happens to the other 90% eventually catches up with all of us.

Sooner or later, you have to answer the question of how you compete

with
80
cents/hour wages, when technology and business expertise can be

packaged
into shipping containers and sent to Bangalore or Shanghai just as

easily
as
to Cleveland, and that clever ideas, hard work, and insight are

distributed
quite evenly around the world.


Focusing on wages is exactly the wrong thing to do. I paid the tool room
guys a five dollar premium to the market, provided excellent medical
benefits, paid time off, and contributed the legal maximum to our 401K

for
every employee at the time that was 4 to 1.
You are closer to the mark with the clever ideas part however and I

agree
that no one group has a lock on that.


Your $5 premium probably was around 20% of 40% of your costs: as a round
approximation, perhaps 8% of your cost of production, based on
tooling-industry rules of thumb.

When you're up against 80 cents/hour, how do you account for the 96%
disadvantage? Do you think that improved efficiencies in general (not just
yours, but those of the economy as a whole) can cover 96% differences? Any
model that I know of, that points in that possible direction, is based on
getting rid of all of those people you employ and adopting the values and
standards of the Third World.

And then business in general winds up hoist on its own petard.


If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or

pension
obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
business model if for ****.


So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better

business
model than Toyota or Hyundai?


No, they can do that by properly understanding and then delivering to their
market. This is what they are utterly failing to do.
The difference in price between a Hyundai built in Arkansas and a GM product
built anywhere is much more than 1,500 dollars.
As a percentage it's about half.

And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain that
advantage in a viciously competitive global market?


They do not gain any advantage with a reduced price and shouldn't try. Good
value is critical in purchasing but you are talking about racing to the
bottom and that is the stupidest thing I have seen in recent times. It does
not work.


These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success when
you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.


Just the opposite in most respects. You are smarter than this Ed.



Ed,
I am unable to continue this for the rest of today but I will.
I read what you have written about global markets and manufacturing. The
questions and their answer are largely contained in your own work and the
underlying research behind it. The need to present fresh facts doesn't
exist. There aren't really many fresh facts regardless. A fresh perspective
is the key, as I said. You answered, intelligently I might add, the wrong
question. Your work revolves around looking like a top notch vendor. This is
certainly necessary but it is also the WRONG WRONG WRONG perspective.
I get paid big bucks for this Ed and have yet to see anyone who will truly
embrace what I provide as a service fail to flourish . I also have enough
confidence in the results that I only take equity. I also, except once and
not directly, don't do "turn arounds". My advice under the turn around
scenario has consistently been "Get Out and do it Now".

The five dollar ratio to costs was 6 percent and we knew that percentage
very precisely.


--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com



Ulysses June 16th 05 06:26 PM


"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
oups.com...
Thanks for the reply.

I would agree that cordless tools have a spot in the AHP workshop since
one can recharge them during off load hours.

Where would one find 12v motors in the suitable HP and speeds to
retrofit something like a table saw?


While searching for a fan motor I came across some substantial DC motors on
eBay a while back. I think they may have been blower motors for furnaces or
air conditioners. What I had in mind was using a belt drive. I would think
it might be more difficult to find one that has the right shaft for a saw,
especially one with reverse threads. Come to think of it a DC powered saw
might make it possible (or at least safer) to use fluorescent lights in a
shop since it would not be running at 60 Hz.

Grainger has DC motors too.

http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/sea...ults.jsp?xi=xi


In considering this subject, a lineshaft approach does come to mind but
unfortunately you rarely see the needed equipment at HD or Lowes. I am
not to crazy about chucking all the stationary power tools that have
taken me decades to collect. Also, lineshafts take up room, linedriven
tools are required to stay in one place and cannot be mounted on wheels
to optimize shop space as needed. A workshop should be no larger than
necessary for the heating/cooling aspect that also takes energy.

TMT




Ulysses June 16th 05 06:30 PM


"Scott Willing" wrote in message
...
On 15 Jun 2005 11:36:20 -0700, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:

Thanks for the reply.


I started out at 12V primary by virtue of buying a house with an
existing PV system. Like many frontier homebrew systems, it had
started as a purely DC system to which an inverter was added later.

Having no plumbing in the house, I've acquired a number of small 12V
pumps for various specific purposes, such as our bucket shower.


Just curious, but how do you go to the bathroom? Composting toilet?
Outhouse?



F. George McDuffee June 16th 05 06:45 PM

snip
What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?

snip
Unfortunately there may be no solution in the sense of "saving"
GMC, Ford, American, Delta, Northwestern, Boeing, Lockheed, etc.
etc. etc. All appear to be in the same situation as were the
steel companies, i.e. terminal H.I.V. patients. Like the typical
HIV patent, these companies sought immediate gratification at the
expense of their long-term survivability, using credit to support
their "lifestyle," using derivatives as their "crack cocaine."

Congress is currently nibbling around the edges of this critical
problem by holding hearings into the possible impact on the PBGC
if one or more of these companies/sectors should collapse. The
problem is that it is a question of "when," and "in what
sequence," *NOT* if.

Most of the underlying real assets such as physical plant, tools
and dies, knowledge base, customer base, and production/operation
expertise appear to be largely intact although obsolescent.
However, these have been "submerged" under mountains of debt and
neglect while "management" chased the latest fad, dissipating any
real income while not paying stock holder dividends nor
reinvesting in new products, equipment, etc. in their
core/foundational business. Additionally, these "assets" have
significant value only for an on-going business.

While automobile/truck manufacturing, and the design, production
and operation of jumbo civilian aircraft appears to be
economically viable in the United States, it does not appear the
existing cadre management (and corporate culture) of these
organizations is capable.

"Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
management position of the current and previous corporate
executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)

The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
conceal corporate assets.

The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.




Ed Huntress June 16th 05 07:17 PM

"J. R. Carroll" wrote in message
om...

If you think that GM is tanking because of their labor contracts or

pension
obligations you are just plain wrong. They suck hind tit because their
business model if for ****.


So you're saying they can absorb $1,500/car just by having a better

business
model than Toyota or Hyundai?


No, they can do that by properly understanding and then delivering to

their
market. This is what they are utterly failing to do.
The difference in price between a Hyundai built in Arkansas and a GM

product
built anywhere is much more than 1,500 dollars.
As a percentage it's about half.


Hyundai understands the market pretty well, too. In fact, I bought one last
September, after trying out all of the Japanese and American competition.
The Europeans offer no competition in that market. Any European car that's
technically competitive costs $10,000 more, at the minimum. My Hyundai
Sonata is a hell of a car for the money, and 'way ahead of anything
comparably priced -- in other words, anything in that market.

The next day I bought a Ford Focus ZX3. It's another good car for the buck,
although the bottom-end Civics probably are better overall. I just liked the
handling and performance; with its 2.3-liter engine, it will stomp any
Civic. g I consider it a good buy, though, and not bad for an American car
built in...Mexico.


And then, after gaining a $1,500/car advantage
over them simply through smarter organization, that they can maintain

that
advantage in a viciously competitive global market?


They do not gain any advantage with a reduced price and shouldn't try.

Good
value is critical in purchasing but you are talking about racing to the
bottom and that is the stupidest thing I have seen in recent times. It

does
not work.


What does work? Are you suggesting that GM can dope out the market better
than Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Audi, etc.? How would they do that? Are they
somehow smarter?

I don't think they're smarter. Since all of those foreign car makers have
good American marketing people to serve the US market, I don't think GM has
any greater knowledge of the market or greater insights into what people
want.

So, what's left?



These are all fine assertions, John, but I'd like to see the specifics.
Frankly, I don't believe you can "business-model" your way to success

when
you have the kind of legacy overhead that GM has. That is, unless your
business model is based on moving all of your manufacturing offshore and
abandoning your legacy entitlements to the federal government.


Just the opposite in most respects. You are smarter than this Ed.


I thought I was until I spent a year of research in preparation for the
5,000 word articles I wrote about China trade a couple of years ago. Now I
realize we're living on a heap of wishful thinking and baloney.

Any advantages we have are going away very quickly. In fact, our
multinationals are shipping the advantages offshore as fast as they can. I'm
waiting for the Milton Friedman dollar devaluation, but there will be hell
to pay if and when it happens. The recent devaluation ain't it.

Ed,
I am unable to continue this for the rest of today but I will.
I read what you have written about global markets and manufacturing. The
questions and their answer are largely contained in your own work and the
underlying research behind it. The need to present fresh facts doesn't
exist. There aren't really many fresh facts regardless. A fresh

perspective
is the key, as I said. You answered, intelligently I might add, the wrong
question. Your work revolves around looking like a top notch vendor. This

is
certainly necessary but it is also the WRONG WRONG WRONG perspective.
I get paid big bucks for this Ed and have yet to see anyone who will truly
embrace what I provide as a service fail to flourish . I also have enough
confidence in the results that I only take equity. I also, except once and
not directly, don't do "turn arounds". My advice under the turn around
scenario has consistently been "Get Out and do it Now".


When you get some time, John, it would be good to hear more about what
you're saying. It's one of the most important issues in metalworking today,
if not THE most important issue.


The five dollar ratio to costs was 6 percent and we knew that percentage
very precisely.


Well, 8% was reasonably close, then. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress




William June 16th 05 07:20 PM


"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...
snip
What's your SPECIFIC suggestion, George?

snip



"Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
management position of the current and previous corporate
executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)


How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
"owners" of the companies :-)


The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
conceal corporate assets.

The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.






Jeff Dantzler June 16th 05 07:23 PM


Interesting comments by a former Fed chairman:

NewsMax.com Wires
Friday, June 10, 2005

"Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker said he doesn't see how the U.S.
can keep borrowing and consuming while letting foreign countries do
all the producing.

It's a recipe for American economic disaster.

On Thursday the Wall Street Journal reported bluntly that
"Mr. Volcker thinks a crisis is likely."

[snip]"

Rest of article he

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...9/161923.shtml

JLD

Ed Huntress June 16th 05 07:26 PM

"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...

"Desperate situations demand desperate remedies" is a time-proven
adage. Given the disastrous impact that the cascading failures of
these major players will have on the U.S. economy/society, I
propose a "super bankruptcy court" be created to establish the
likely economic viability of these organizations, with immediate
liquidation (Chapt. 7) [not reorganization (Chapt. 11)] of those
unlikely to survive, with a 10 year suspension from any
management position of the current and previous corporate
executives and directors. (The stockholders have already lost
all their equity, although they might not yet realize this.)

The PBGC should have priority claim on any assets for full
pension funding, and any trust-fund/lockboxes established for
management retirement benefits and/or "differed compensation"
should be recaptured on the basis that this was an attempt to
conceal corporate assets.

The choice is not between a "good" and better" solution, but
between a "bad" and a "worse" solution.


Jeez, you're brutal. g I'm going to wait to hear if John has a solution
that's less drastic.

--
Ed Huntress



F. George McDuffee June 16th 05 07:56 PM

snip
How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
"owners" of the companies :-)

snip
This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
almost no control, otherwise the corporations would have been
forced to declare dividends rather than hording cash, and the
executives would have received human salaries. While there is
more than ample "blame" to go around, the major enablers were the
financial institutions that handled the IPOs, made the loans,
audited the books, created the "special purpose entities,"
managed the pension funds, etc. As such, these should be the
people that get the big "hair cut" [like down to their knees]
rather than the employees or taxpayers [who tend to be the
shareholders when the music stops].


MrSilly June 16th 05 07:58 PM

OMFG!! You have to be kidding me Mr Libertarian. The question is, do
you spend 2 billion at home, or in China? Do you honestly think it's a
good sign that we send $2 billion to foreign countries instead of
spending it here at home?

We have plenty of 3rd-world states here in the USA that could use $2
billion a day. I'm guessing that you live in one of them.


Duane Bozarth June 16th 05 08:15 PM

"F. George McDuffee" wrote:

snip
How about making the share holders liable for the debt. They are after all
"owners" of the companies :-)

snip


This simply echos a legal fiction. In fact 'shareholders' have
almost no control, ...


No fiction, fact. All you have to do is to get a majority to agree w/
you, go to annual meeting and vote w/ you, and you can do whatever you
want...


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter