On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, the renowned Gary Coffman
wrote:

The Chinese machinist is paying a nearly 400%
premium on gasoline compared to the US machinist, thanks to a punitive
tax on gasoline in China. Etc.

Unh, where do you get that number from Gary? Prices I've seen right at
the pumps are not much different than in the US or Canada.

This is bad news for us, BTW, because it means that Chinese will be
using lots of gas (and competing with us on world markets to buy the
stuff) just as soon as they can afford to. Europeans could afford to
pay a lot more for gas, but their governments tax it heavily- if they
ever slashed those taxes, the same would happen.

China also has fairly hefty tariffs on some items (30-40%), unlike
Hong Kong SAR which is basically a free port (for most things, but not
booze, smokes, and cars), so the price for a Japanese-made Sony
Walkman in China is more expensive than in New York, despite the low
cost of the Chinese store clerk.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:36:34 GMT, Spehro Pefhany
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, the renowned Gary Coffman
wrote:

The Chinese machinist is paying a nearly 400%
premium on gasoline compared to the US machinist, thanks to a punitive
tax on gasoline in China. Etc.

Unh, where do you get that number from Gary? Prices I've seen right at
the pumps are not much different than in the US or Canada.

Sorry to follow up on myself, but from tomorrow's New York Times:

"In China, a booming economy has pushed up oil demand so quickly that
its consumption is expected to surpass Japan's next year, as it
becomes the world's second-largest oil importer, after the United
States. Gas and diesel prices are identical to American prices,
although they are higher as a percentage of income in China."

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/23/we...partner=GOOGLE

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
brought forth from the murky depths:

The Chinese machinist is paying a nearly 400%
premium on gasoline compared to the US machinist, thanks to a punitive
tax on gasoline in China. Etc.

The good news for most Chinese people is that their
bicycles use VERY little gasoline. gd&r


-------------------------------------------
Stain and Poly are their own punishment
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Design
================================================== ====

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:


A US dollar is a US dollar. It has the same buying power no matter
who holds it. That's why such things as wages and prices in different
places are converted to dollars before comparisons are made.

Ah..no. If a 7 course meal in China costs $2, and it costs $100 in San
Francisco.. and rent in China costs $5 a month and $1500 in the Gay
Bay..purchasing power is not the same.

If one can live for $50 a month comfortably in China, and $2500 a
month in Marin County..there is a difference somewhere that cant be
tracked back to tarrifs etc.

Gunner

"The British attitude is to treat society like a game preserve where a
certain percentage of the 'antelope' are expected to be eaten by the
"lions".
Christopher Morton

"Tom Gardner" wrote

snip
My newest built machine will eliminate 2 more jobs and a hefty bonus
structure. I just came to realize that the next 3 projects will be
such a boost in productivity that 4 or 5 more jobs are in jeopardy.
So does this make me a bad guy? I don't really think so, but multiply
this around the country and that's a LOT of jobs lost with a net gain
in products produced. So, who's going to have money to BUY products in
the future?

But if you outsource jobs, foreigners can buy your stuff and our exports
will increase. Maybe that will help solve the trade deficit problem.
Sarcasm intended. But if you are outsorcing software jobs, since they
pirate their own product you get nothing in return except immediate
gratification paying lower wages.

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:36:34 GMT, Spehro Pefhany
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:

This is bad news for us, BTW, because it means that Chinese will be
using lots of gas (and competing with us on world markets to buy the
stuff) just as soon as they can afford to. Europeans could afford to
pay a lot more for gas, but their governments tax it heavily- if they
ever slashed those taxes, the same would happen.

It's not the competition that scares me most. It's the sudden doubling
of the World's petrol consumption and pollution.


....and then there's India....
************************************************** ** sorry
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Imagine a _world_ where Nature's lights are obscured
by man's. There would be nowhere to go.
Or wait a while. Then you won't have to imagine.

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:10:22 GMT, Gunner wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:

A US dollar is a US dollar. It has the same buying power no matter
who holds it. That's why such things as wages and prices in different
places are converted to dollars before comparisons are made.

Ah..no. If a 7 course meal in China costs $2, and it costs $100 in San
Francisco.. and rent in China costs $5 a month and $1500 in the Gay
Bay..purchasing power is not the same.

Sure it is. The gay machinist will only pay $2 for his meal if he orders
Chinese take out (plus delivery charge, of course). And the Chinaman
will certainly be smarter than to pay $100 for a San Francisco treat
(plus shipping). Their dollars are both dollars, worth exactly the same,
but one of the machinists is likely to show better sense than the other
in where he spends them.

Gary

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 00:13:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:10:22 GMT, Gunner wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:

A US dollar is a US dollar. It has the same buying power no matter
who holds it. That's why such things as wages and prices in different
places are converted to dollars before comparisons are made.

Ah..no. If a 7 course meal in China costs $2, and it costs $100 in San
Francisco.. and rent in China costs $5 a month and $1500 in the Gay
Bay..purchasing power is not the same.

Sure it is. The gay machinist will only pay $2 for his meal if he orders
Chinese take out (plus delivery charge, of course). And the Chinaman
will certainly be smarter than to pay $100 for a San Francisco treat
(plus shipping). Their dollars are both dollars, worth exactly the same,
but one of the machinists is likely to show better sense than the other
in where he spends them.

Gary

Blink blink..you lost me somewhere along the way.....

Gunner

"The British attitude is to treat society like a game preserve where a
certain percentage of the 'antelope' are expected to be eaten by the
"lions".
Christopher Morton

"Gunner" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:

A US dollar is a US dollar. It has the same buying power no matter
who holds it. That's why such things as wages and prices in different
places are converted to dollars before comparisons are made.

Ah..no. If a 7 course meal in China costs $2, and it costs $100 in San
Francisco.. and rent in China costs $5 a month and $1500 in the Gay
Bay..purchasing power is not the same.

Sure it is. The gay machinist will only pay $2 for his meal if he orders
Chinese take out (plus delivery charge, of course). And the Chinaman
will certainly be smarter than to pay $100 for a San Francisco treat
(plus shipping). Their dollars are both dollars, worth exactly the same,
but one of the machinists is likely to show better sense than the other
in where he spends them.

Gary

Blink blink..you lost me somewhere along the way.....

Gary is assuming everybody's money is converted to dollars at the exchange
rate. You're talking about what things cost in different places.

You're on different vectors.

Ed Huntress

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:11:05 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:


Blink blink..you lost me somewhere along the way.....

Gary is assuming everybody's money is converted to dollars at the exchange
rate. You're talking about what things cost in different places.

You're on different vectors.


Thanks Ed. I was biting my fingers.
************************************************** ** sorry
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Imagine a _world_ where Nature's lights are obscured
by man's. There would be nowhere to go.
Or wait a while. Then you won't have to imagine.

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:59:04 GMT, Gunner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 00:13:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:10:22 GMT, Gunner wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:

A US dollar is a US dollar. It has the same buying power no matter
who holds it. That's why such things as wages and prices in different
places are converted to dollars before comparisons are made.

Ah..no. If a 7 course meal in China costs $2, and it costs $100 in San
Francisco.. and rent in China costs $5 a month and $1500 in the Gay
Bay..purchasing power is not the same.

Sure it is. The gay machinist will only pay $2 for his meal if he orders
Chinese take out (plus delivery charge, of course). And the Chinaman
will certainly be smarter than to pay $100 for a San Francisco treat
(plus shipping). Their dollars are both dollars, worth exactly the same,
but one of the machinists is likely to show better sense than the other
in where he spends them.

Gary

Blink blink..you lost me somewhere along the way.....

Ok, look, John Chinaman wants dinner. He has two choices. He can
buy his dinner at the Peking Duck in Bejing for $2. Or he can order it
from the Gay Peacock in San Francisco for $100 plus $12.95 air freight.
Meanwhile Boy George machinist in San Francisco can buy his dinner
from the Gay Peacock for $100, or buy it from the Peking Duck for $2
plus $12.95 air freight.

John Chinaman looks at the $100 dinner from the Gay Peacock and
says "That crazy!". He's not going to spend that kind of money for
dinner. He's saving up to buy a modem for his computer so he can
download internet porn. Besides, Su Ling, a waitress at the Peking
Duck, is *hot*. So he makes the intelligent choice and buys his dinner
at the Peking Duck for $2.

Meanwhile, Boy George thinks, " I make way too much money, so
I can afford to blow $100 at the Gay Peacock instead of ordering
my meal from the Peking Duck and saving $85.05 (100-2-12.95).
Besides, Big Wang, the waiter at the Gay Peacock, is *hot*." So
he blows his wad at the Gay Peacock.

The dollars each of the machinists are spending are of equal value.
A US dollar is a US dollar is a US dollar, and we're expressing their
earnings in US dollars in both cases. Both machinists get a fancy
duck dinner for about a day's wages. But Boy George is an idiot,
because he could have had the same dinner for $14.95, about an
hour's wages, instead of foolishly blowing an entire day's wages
on the meal.

Gary

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:11:20 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:59:04 GMT, Gunner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 00:13:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:10:22 GMT, Gunner wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:06:10 -0500, Gary Coffman
wrote:

A US dollar is a US dollar. It has the same buying power no matter
who holds it. That's why such things as wages and prices in different
places are converted to dollars before comparisons are made.

Ah..no. If a 7 course meal in China costs $2, and it costs $100 in San
Francisco.. and rent in China costs $5 a month and $1500 in the Gay
Bay..purchasing power is not the same.

Sure it is. The gay machinist will only pay $2 for his meal if he orders
Chinese take out (plus delivery charge, of course). And the Chinaman
will certainly be smarter than to pay $100 for a San Francisco treat
(plus shipping). Their dollars are both dollars, worth exactly the same,
but one of the machinists is likely to show better sense than the other
in where he spends them.

Gary

Blink blink..you lost me somewhere along the way.....

Ok, look, John Chinaman wants dinner. He has two choices. He can
buy his dinner at the Peking Duck in Bejing for $2. Or he can order it
from the Gay Peacock in San Francisco for $100 plus $12.95 air freight.
Meanwhile Boy George machinist in San Francisco can buy his dinner
from the Gay Peacock for $100, or buy it from the Peking Duck for $2
plus $12.95 air freight.

John Chinaman looks at the $100 dinner from the Gay Peacock and
says "That crazy!". He's not going to spend that kind of money for
dinner. He's saving up to buy a modem for his computer so he can
download internet porn. Besides, Su Ling, a waitress at the Peking
Duck, is *hot*. So he makes the intelligent choice and buys his dinner
at the Peking Duck for $2.

Meanwhile, Boy George thinks, " I make way too much money, so
I can afford to blow $100 at the Gay Peacock instead of ordering
my meal from the Peking Duck and saving $85.05 (100-2-12.95).
Besides, Big Wang, the waiter at the Gay Peacock, is *hot*." So
he blows his wad at the Gay Peacock.

The dollars each of the machinists are spending are of equal value.
A US dollar is a US dollar is a US dollar, and we're expressing their
earnings in US dollars in both cases. Both machinists get a fancy
duck dinner for about a day's wages. But Boy George is an idiot,
because he could have had the same dinner for $14.95, about an
hour's wages, instead of foolishly blowing an entire day's wages
on the meal.

Gary

You still lost me. Its been so long now..that I dont have any idea
of what the original comment was about...sigh

Gunner

"The British attitude is to treat society like a game preserve where a
certain percentage of the 'antelope' are expected to be eaten by the
"lions".
Christopher Morton

"Gunner" wrote in message
...

The dollars each of the machinists are spending are of equal value.
A US dollar is a US dollar is a US dollar, and we're expressing their
earnings in US dollars in both cases. Both machinists get a fancy
duck dinner for about a day's wages. But Boy George is an idiot,
because he could have had the same dinner for $14.95, about an
hour's wages, instead of foolishly blowing an entire day's wages
on the meal.

Gary

You still lost me. Its been so long now..that I dont have any idea
of what the original comment was about...sigh

Gunner

Let's make it simple. You've got a duck. You can get it cooked in San
Francisco, or in Beijing. If you get it cooked in San Francisco you'll want
to sterilize it before eating it, but it will be fresh, even if it tastes
like Clorox by the time it's safe to eat.

If you get it cooked in Beijing, the duck will come back in a container ship
and it will either be duck jerky by the time it gets to you, or it will be
Ancient Duck, which is like Ancient Eggs that have hatched.

You don't want to go there. Cook the duck yourself, and save some money.

Ed Huntress

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:11:20 -0500, Gary Coffman
brought forth from the murky depths:

--snip of gay repartè with gunner--
Blink blink..you lost me somewhere along the way.....

Ok, look, John Chinaman wants dinner. He has two choices. He can
buy his dinner at the Peking Duck in Bejing for $2. Or he can order it
from the Gay Peacock in San Francisco for $100 plus $12.95 air freight.
Meanwhile Boy George machinist in San Francisco can buy his dinner
from the Gay Peacock for $100, or buy it from the Peking Duck for $2
plus $12.95 air freight.

John Chinaman looks at the $100 dinner from the Gay Peacock and
says "That crazy!". He's not going to spend that kind of money for
dinner. He's saving up to buy a modem for his computer so he can
download internet porn. Besides, Su Ling, a waitress at the Peking
Duck, is *hot*. So he makes the intelligent choice and buys his dinner
at the Peking Duck for $2.

Meanwhile, Boy George thinks, " I make way too much money, so
I can afford to blow $100 at the Gay Peacock instead of ordering
my meal from the Peking Duck and saving $85.05 (100-2-12.95).
Besides, Big Wang, the waiter at the Gay Peacock, is *hot*." So
he blows his wad at the Gay Peacock.

The dollars each of the machinists are spending are of equal value.
A US dollar is a US dollar is a US dollar, and we're expressing their
earnings in US dollars in both cases. Both machinists get a fancy
duck dinner for about a day's wages. But Boy George is an idiot,
because he could have had the same dinner for $14.95, about an
hour's wages, instead of foolishly blowing an entire day's wages
on the meal.

Well done! Now 'splain this to me. I prepared and cooked my own fine
dinner for a buck (+ 1¢ for 'lectricity) and found a Machinery's
Handbook, 14th Edition, on *b*y for $4.25 (+$3 s/h).

Does that make me a John, Su, Boy, or Big?

-
Don't be a possum on the Information Superhighway of life.
----
http://diversify.com Dynamic Database-Driven Websites

And lo, it came about, that on Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:11:20 -0500 in
rec.crafts.metalworking , Gary Coffman was inspired to
utter:


A US dollar is a US dollar. It has the same buying power no matter
who holds it. That's why such things as wages and prices in different
places are converted to dollars before comparisons are made.

Ah..no. If a 7 course meal in China costs $2, and it costs $100 in San
Francisco.. and rent in China costs $5 a month and $1500 in the Gay
Bay..purchasing power is not the same.

Sure it is. The gay machinist will only pay $2 for his meal if he orders
Chinese take out (plus delivery charge, of course). And the Chinaman
will certainly be smarter than to pay $100 for a San Francisco treat
(plus shipping). Their dollars are both dollars, worth exactly the same,
but one of the machinists is likely to show better sense than the other
in where he spends them.

Gary

Blink blink..you lost me somewhere along the way.....

Ok, look, John Chinaman wants dinner. He has two choices. He can
buy his dinner at the Peking Duck in Bejing for $2. Or he can order it
from the Gay Peacock in San Francisco for $100 plus $12.95 air freight.
Meanwhile Boy George machinist in San Francisco can buy his dinner
from the Gay Peacock for $100, or buy it from the Peking Duck for $2
plus $12.95 air freight.

The real question is "How long does it take the machinist in China, versus
the machinist in San Francisco, to earn enough to buy lunch?" Also known as
the "City Bus Driver / Big Mac Index". If it takes me 30 minutes to earn
enough for lunch, is that better or worse than the guy who works for a half
hour?

When you look at things from that perspective, the numbers attached to the
paycheck are "irrelevant", and a better perspective on relative life styles are
obtainable. (This also leads into the "marginal value" of something. There is
a joke about the guy who, after taking note that to god, a thousand years is
but a minute, and thus a million dollars is as a penny, asks god for "a penny".
(and is told "in a minute.")
And I will never quite forget the day I got a pay raise and a pay cut all
at once. The numbers on my check went up, but instead of getting 5% over minim
wage, I was now getting minimum wage. Big whoop.
Hey, if you pay me in Turkish Lira, I'm a multi-millionare. Oops,
billionai two weeks pay is about 1,169,600,000.00 Turkish Lira. "I'm rich,
I'mm rich, I've a trillion Lira!" Of course, it cost me a million to buy an
ice cream, and a Big Mac is eight and a half million, but who cares, it's the
numbers which matter.

right.

tschus
pyotr


--
pyotr filipivich
"We don't support "guns" ... the term "gun" gets in the way of
what is really being talked about here - we want choice in
personal security devices." Ann Coulter