Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it skips
over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have been
quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and gotten
the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the wages paid
to GM's UAW workers.

But of course Germany has a national health care system that doesn't
directly come out of the car makers' pockets; on the other hand, German
automakers pay more into the safety nets, at least those related to
temporary or permanent unemployment. In the end, German car manufacturers
pay more for labor than car makers do in the US.

So that undermines much of what the editorial says. It doesn't appear
they've found the mark yet.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it
skips over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have
been quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and
gotten the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the
wages paid to GM's UAW workers.

But of course Germany has a national health care system that doesn't
directly come out of the car makers' pockets; on the other hand, German
automakers pay more into the safety nets, at least those related to
temporary or permanent unemployment. In the end, German car manufacturers
pay more for labor than car makers do in the US.

So that undermines much of what the editorial says. It doesn't appear
they've found the mark yet.



American automakers wouldn't be paying anything for health care unless they
were PROFITABLE if America had some flavor of the system most other first
world nations have. As it is, health care costs for employees and retirees
are sapping their resources.
To really harmonize costs, the US would have to impose a duty on imported
vehicles as an offset - not something I favor BTW.

JC

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it skips
over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have been
quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and gotten
the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the wages paid
to GM's UAW workers.


And now we have German transplants.

Wes

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:27:28 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it skips
over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have been
quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and gotten
the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the wages paid
to GM's UAW workers.

But of course Germany has a national health care system that doesn't
directly come out of the car makers' pockets; on the other hand, German
automakers pay more into the safety nets, at least those related to
temporary or permanent unemployment. In the end, German car manufacturers
pay more for labor than car makers do in the US.

Velly intelesting, mein herr.


So that undermines much of what the editorial says. It doesn't appear
they've found the mark yet.

Don't most German cars sell for 150-300% of the American car prices?
That's why they're still so profitable.


--
In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a
question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.
-- Bertrand Russell

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:27:28 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it
skips
over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have been
quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and gotten
the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the wages
paid
to GM's UAW workers.

But of course Germany has a national health care system that doesn't
directly come out of the car makers' pockets; on the other hand, German
automakers pay more into the safety nets, at least those related to
temporary or permanent unemployment. In the end, German car manufacturers
pay more for labor than car makers do in the US.

Velly intelesting, mein herr.


So that undermines much of what the editorial says. It doesn't appear
they've found the mark yet.

Don't most German cars sell for 150-300% of the American car prices?
That's why they're still so profitable.

I was looking for national averages but gave up. Yes, I was thinking the
same thing. Then the question becomes, why do they get so much more for
their cars? I'll bet they're getting close to twice as much per pound. g

The market and marketing issues in this regard have been tossed around for
decades, but in the end, it's management decisions.

--
Ed Huntress

On Nov 29, 3:48*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

...



On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:27:28 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it
skips
over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have been
quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and gotten
the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the wages
paid
to GM's UAW workers.

But of course Germany has a national health care system that doesn't
directly come out of the car makers' pockets; on the other hand, German
automakers pay more into the safety nets, at least those related to
temporary or permanent unemployment. In the end, German car manufacturers
pay more for labor than car makers do in the US.

Velly intelesting, mein herr.

So that undermines much of what the editorial says. It doesn't appear
they've found the mark yet.

Don't most German cars sell for 150-300% of the American car prices?
That's why they're still so profitable.

I was looking for national averages but gave up. Yes, I was thinking the
same thing. Then the question becomes, why do they get so much more for
their cars? I'll bet they're getting close to twice as much per pound. g

The market and marketing issues in this regard have been tossed around for
decades, but in the end, it's management decisions.

--
Ed Huntress


The price of luxury goods is based on customer demand and perception,
ie. charge what the market will bear.

My information is very dated but the last time I was in Germany I
priced a Mercedes (forget which model, but probably the lower priced
utilitarian sedan). Converted into Canadian $$ at that time it was
not unreasonable. However, at the dealer's in Toronto the price for
that model was outrageous at least in my opinion. The shipping cost
from Germany was $800 for a private vehicle at that time. Even with
taxes and import duty it was still way too much.

Bought a Volvo instead... drove it to the scrap yard after 14 years
and 375,000 Km. It was the vehicle my sons learned to drive in :-)).

Philosophically I believe that a civilized country ought to have BASIC
medical coverage as part of the social contract, ie. funded through
general revenues by the government.

A parallel private plan should be permitted also for those who wish to
pay for it. This is one of the great failings of the Canadian
plan... The impatient sick with $$ go to the USA or India.

Wolfgang

wrote in message
...
On Nov 29, 3:48 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

...



On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:27:28 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the
US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it
skips
over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have been
quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and
gotten
the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the wages
paid
to GM's UAW workers.

But of course Germany has a national health care system that doesn't
directly come out of the car makers' pockets; on the other hand, German
automakers pay more into the safety nets, at least those related to
temporary or permanent unemployment. In the end, German car
manufacturers
pay more for labor than car makers do in the US.

Velly intelesting, mein herr.

So that undermines much of what the editorial says. It doesn't appear
they've found the mark yet.

Don't most German cars sell for 150-300% of the American car prices?
That's why they're still so profitable.

I was looking for national averages but gave up. Yes, I was thinking the
same thing. Then the question becomes, why do they get so much more for
their cars? I'll bet they're getting close to twice as much per pound. g

The market and marketing issues in this regard have been tossed around for
decades, but in the end, it's management decisions.

--
Ed Huntress


The price of luxury goods is based on customer demand and perception,
ie. charge what the market will bear.

The question is, if the prices are as much higher as Larry and I are
guessing, why will the market bear those prices, if not because of some
screw-up by the US car makers?

snip

Philosophically I believe that a civilized country ought to have BASIC
medical coverage as part of the social contract, ie. funded through
general revenues by the government.

A parallel private plan should be permitted also for those who wish to
pay for it. This is one of the great failings of the Canadian
plan... The impatient sick with $$ go to the USA or India.

We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

--
Ed Huntress

On Nov 29, 5:14*pm, wrote:
...

A parallel private plan should be permitted also for those who wish to
pay for it. *This is one of the great failings of the Canadian
plan... *The impatient sick with $$ go to the USA or India.

Wolfgang

Which one has better Indian doctors?

wrote:
On Nov 29, 3:48 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

...




On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:27:28 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...

Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn

An interesting point of view, typical of the WSJ's editorials, but it
skips
over some crucial facts. For example, German car manufacturers have been
quite profitable, but their big union (IG Metall) has demanded and gotten
the highest wages in the world -- roughly $6/hour higher than the wages
paid
to GM's UAW workers.

But of course Germany has a national health care system that doesn't
directly come out of the car makers' pockets; on the other hand, German
automakers pay more into the safety nets, at least those related to
temporary or permanent unemployment. In the end, German car manufacturers
pay more for labor than car makers do in the US.

Velly intelesting, mein herr.

So that undermines much of what the editorial says. It doesn't appear
they've found the mark yet.

Don't most German cars sell for 150-300% of the American car prices?
That's why they're still so profitable.

I was looking for national averages but gave up. Yes, I was thinking the
same thing. Then the question becomes, why do they get so much more for
their cars? I'll bet they're getting close to twice as much per pound. g

The market and marketing issues in this regard have been tossed around for
decades, but in the end, it's management decisions.

--
Ed Huntress



The price of luxury goods is based on customer demand and perception,
ie. charge what the market will bear.

My information is very dated but the last time I was in Germany I
priced a Mercedes (forget which model, but probably the lower priced
utilitarian sedan). Converted into Canadian $$ at that time it was
not unreasonable. However, at the dealer's in Toronto the price for
that model was outrageous at least in my opinion. The shipping cost
from Germany was $800 for a private vehicle at that time. Even with
taxes and import duty it was still way too much.

Bought a Volvo instead... drove it to the scrap yard after 14 years
and 375,000 Km. It was the vehicle my sons learned to drive in :-)).

Philosophically I believe that a civilized country ought to have BASIC
medical coverage as part of the social contract, ie. funded through
general revenues by the government.

I can go with that but I live these days in the UK having spent 12 years
growing up in the US, and have only rarely used the NHS for minor items.
I have seen with amusement some discussions, on a glass related
newsgroup, between US and Canadians about nationalised healthcare, where
the US people arguing got highly incensed by what they seemed to see as
a Canadian national health system whose funding sprang from the ground
rather than being payed for by tax revenue, whereas they in the US had
to pay personally for their healthcare.

A parallel private plan should be permitted also for those who wish to
pay for it. This is one of the great failings of the Canadian
plan... The impatient sick with $$ go to the USA or India.

Wolfgang

wrote:

A parallel private plan should be permitted also for those who wish to
pay for it. This is one of the great failings of the Canadian
plan... The impatient sick with $$ go to the USA or India.

I thought Canada had an unrecognized and illegal network of private providers that the
government is afraid to go after?

If I had money and was sick, I'd go where good care could be obtained as fast as possible.
When your life is riding on it, time is life.

Wes

----------big snip -----------

Don't most German cars sell for 150-300% of the American car prices?
That's why they're still so profitable.


here is a typical american "sports" car
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...t-corvette.htm
MSRP for this car is $48,565 - 103,970

Here is a typical German "sports" car - one that might be considered
somewhat equivalent
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...drive_rev iew

"base price" is $76,395-$93,095

seems to me that there is an overlap in prices, though the german variant
has some other models that are much more expensive.

I drive a german car on a regular basis - why? because it is comfortable,
fast enough, and small enough. I have tried every american car (and most
japanese cars) at one time or another - and I just do not like them - for
example, the 'vette above feels to me like a big car - if I want to drive a
big car I already have one (59 cadillac). A lexus is just uncomfortable and
confusing and it doesn't come with a manual transmission. The small cadilac
has poorly shaped seats that gave me a cramp in my back during the test
drive - only the seville was confortable, and it had what I would call
"scary handling" - I felt it wasn't safe to drive. A prius also had scary
handling but not as bad as the seville.

So why do german cars get a price premium - because some of us think they
are worth it. For the life of me, I can't imagine any reason why the big 3
couldn't make a high end small car except that they elect to ceede that
market to other companies. We owned the road in 1932, we gave it away in
1972.

Maybe I'll go test drive a Tesla - that could be fun - maybe it's
comfortable too.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In article
,
wrote:

Philosophically I believe that a civilized country ought to have BASIC
medical coverage as part of the social contract, ie. funded through
general revenues by the government.

Why medical coverage when food, clothing and shelter come first? A
starving family living in rags under a bridge won't live long enough to
get to a doctor ;(

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:48:47 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

Don't most German cars sell for 150-300% of the American car prices?
That's why they're still so profitable.

I was looking for national averages but gave up. Yes, I was thinking the
same thing. Then the question becomes, why do they get so much more for
their cars? I'll bet they're getting close to twice as much per pound. g

New or scrap value?


The market and marketing issues in this regard have been tossed around for
decades, but in the end, it's management decisions.

....and grossly exaggerated management salaries which determine (in the
Big Three case, wipe out) profitability.

--
In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a
question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.
-- Bertrand Russell

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:24:43 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


wrote in message
The price of luxury goods is based on customer demand and perception,
ie. charge what the market will bear.

The question is, if the prices are as much higher as Larry and I are
guessing, why will the market bear those prices, if not because of some
screw-up by the US car makers?

Fit and finish make a real difference. Look at any given year (or
decade) of Consumer Reports automotive sections and see that the
reported defects in American cars have traditionally been extremely
high while those of Euro and Asian imports have been quite a bit
(extremely low in Asia's case) lower. Days in the shop detract from
the perceived value every time, Ed.


snip

Philosophically I believe that a civilized country ought to have BASIC
medical coverage as part of the social contract, ie. funded through
general revenues by the government.

A parallel private plan should be permitted also for those who wish to
pay for it. This is one of the great failings of the Canadian
plan... The impatient sick with $$ go to the USA or India.

We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

--
In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a
question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.
-- Bertrand Russell

In article ,
Larry Jaques wrote:

We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

Just don't go to Mombai ;

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Nov 30, 9:38*am, nick hull wrote:
In article ,
*Larry Jaques wrote:

We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? *Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? *Amazing. *Boggles the imagination, it does.

Just don't go to Mombai *;

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**


To the average family medical insurance is at least as important
as... Fire department protection, policing, national defense, etc.
and nobody claims that the individual should pay for this separately
out of his pocket.

And I did say CIVILIZED country...

"...Why medical coverage when food, clothing and shelter come first?
A
starving family living in rags under a bridge won't live long enough
to
get to a doctor ;( ..."

Good point, but in North America it is usually possible to get food;
food banks spring to mind, as do food stamps in the USA. Conceivably
one can grow it also... If you are really sick a doctor/hospital is
the only solution.

The measure of a civilization is the way it treats the most
disadvantaged...

Just my thoughts.

As to cars... basic, reliable, is what I want for a beer/grocery
getter. For my personal transportation I have a 15 year old Mazda RX7
FD which I only drive during good weather... don't have to commute any
more... office is in the house:-)).

Wolfgang

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:24:43 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


wrote in message
The price of luxury goods is based on customer demand and perception,
ie. charge what the market will bear.

The question is, if the prices are as much higher as Larry and I are
guessing, why will the market bear those prices, if not because of some
screw-up by the US car makers?

Fit and finish make a real difference. Look at any given year (or
decade) of Consumer Reports automotive sections and see that the
reported defects in American cars have traditionally been extremely
high while those of Euro and Asian imports have been quite a bit
(extremely low in Asia's case) lower. Days in the shop detract from
the perceived value every time, Ed.


snip

Philosophically I believe that a civilized country ought to have BASIC
medical coverage as part of the social contract, ie. funded through
general revenues by the government.

A parallel private plan should be permitted also for those who wish to
pay for it. This is one of the great failings of the Canadian
plan... The impatient sick with $$ go to the USA or India.

We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce
rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

Yeah, and it's apparently really good care. They take extra-special-good
care of the furriners.

I think I've mentioned that my cardiologist's first name is Muhammed, but I
may not have mentioned that my endocrinologist's last name is Hussain. g
They're both Indian Muslims, and absolutely top-notch.

--
Ed Huntress

wrote in message
...
On Nov 30, 9:38 am, nick hull wrote:
In article ,
Larry Jaques wrote:

We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce
rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

Just don't go to Mombai ;

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**


To the average family medical insurance is at least as important
as... Fire department protection, policing, national defense, etc.
and nobody claims that the individual should pay for this separately
out of his pocket.

And I did say CIVILIZED country...

"...Why medical coverage when food, clothing and shelter come first?
A
starving family living in rags under a bridge won't live long enough
to
get to a doctor ;( ..."

Good point, but in North America it is usually possible to get food;
food banks spring to mind, as do food stamps in the USA. Conceivably
one can grow it also... If you are really sick a doctor/hospital is
the only solution.

The measure of a civilization is the way it treats the most
disadvantaged...

Just my thoughts.

Shared by many of us.

--
Ed Huntress

In article
,
wrote:

As to cars... basic, reliable, is what I want for a beer/grocery
getter. For my personal transportation I have a 15 year old Mazda RX7
FD which I only drive during good weather... don't have to commute any
more... office is in the house:-)).

15 years old?? I drove a 66 chrysler until my daughter wrapped it
around a tree, so I use my 70 chev pickup


Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 13:42:10 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

Someone said:
We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce
rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

Yeah, and it's apparently really good care. They take extra-special-good
care of the furriners.

Yeah, I think I'd prefer an Indian doctor and hospital than one here.


I think I've mentioned that my cardiologist's first name is Muhammed, but I
may not have mentioned that my endocrinologist's last name is Hussain. g
They're both Indian Muslims, and absolutely top-notch.

They -charge- more for service over here, too, don't they?

--
In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a
question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.
-- Bertrand Russell

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 13:42:10 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

Someone said:
We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce
rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

Yeah, and it's apparently really good care. They take extra-special-good
care of the furriners.

Yeah, I think I'd prefer an Indian doctor and hospital than one here.


I think I've mentioned that my cardiologist's first name is Muhammed, but
I
may not have mentioned that my endocrinologist's last name is Hussain. g
They're both Indian Muslims, and absolutely top-notch.

They -charge- more for service over here, too, don't they?

Well, my third Indian, the one who performed the angioplasties on me, sent
one hell of a bill -- into five figures for maybe an hour's work. He wears
really nice suits, too. And I have to ask who styles his hair. It's a
picture.

If you caught this from another thread, I live in the center of a township
that's 18% Asian Indian, the highest percentage in the US by a factor of
two. Most of the early ones were upper-caste professionals. They're most of
the doctors around here now. And it seems that a lot of the professionals
are Muslims, who make up only 18% of India's population. Interesting.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:09:06 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 13:42:10 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

Someone said:
We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce
rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

Yeah, and it's apparently really good care. They take extra-special-good
care of the furriners.

Yeah, I think I'd prefer an Indian doctor and hospital than one here.


I think I've mentioned that my cardiologist's first name is Muhammed, but
I
may not have mentioned that my endocrinologist's last name is Hussain. g
They're both Indian Muslims, and absolutely top-notch.

They -charge- more for service over here, too, don't they?

Well, my third Indian, the one who performed the angioplasties on me, sent
one hell of a bill -- into five figures for maybe an hour's work. He wears
really nice suits, too. And I have to ask who styles his hair. It's a
picture.

You want to get away from the comb-over look, do you, Ed?


If you caught this from another thread, I live in the center of a township
that's 18% Asian Indian, the highest percentage in the US by a factor of
two. Most of the early ones were upper-caste professionals. They're most of
the doctors around here now. And it seems that a lot of the professionals
are Muslims, who make up only 18% of India's population. Interesting.

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

--
The only difference between a rut and a grave...is in their dimensions.
-- Ellen Glasglow

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:09:06 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 13:42:10 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

Someone said:
We have some plans, which apparently are a growing trend, that reduce
rates
if you agree to go to India for surgery.

Isn't that amazing? Our doctors (and freaking hospitals) here charge
so much more that it's _cheaper_ to fly you halfway around the world
to get surgery there? Amazing. Boggles the imagination, it does.

Yeah, and it's apparently really good care. They take extra-special-good
care of the furriners.

Yeah, I think I'd prefer an Indian doctor and hospital than one here.


I think I've mentioned that my cardiologist's first name is Muhammed,
but
I
may not have mentioned that my endocrinologist's last name is Hussain.
g
They're both Indian Muslims, and absolutely top-notch.

They -charge- more for service over here, too, don't they?

Well, my third Indian, the one who performed the angioplasties on me, sent
one hell of a bill -- into five figures for maybe an hour's work. He wears
really nice suits, too. And I have to ask who styles his hair. It's a
picture.

You want to get away from the comb-over look, do you, Ed?


If you caught this from another thread, I live in the center of a township
that's 18% Asian Indian, the highest percentage in the US by a factor of
two. Most of the early ones were upper-caste professionals. They're most
of
the doctors around here now. And it seems that a lot of the professionals
are Muslims, who make up only 18% of India's population. Interesting.

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

I dunno, I've never inquired. I've always assumed it was the extended-family
thing: one comes over, then the family follows, etc. I also have no idea
what they found so attractive about this community. My little town has very
few Indians, but the surrounding township is loaded with them. It probably
was where they ran out of gas when they left Newark Airport. Like Bob Dylan
when he headed west -- "Goodbye, New York, howdy, East Orange."

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

I dunno, I've never inquired. I've always assumed it was the extended-family
thing: one comes over, then the family follows, etc. I also have no idea
what they found so attractive about this community. My little town has very
few Indians, but the surrounding township is loaded with them. It probably
was where they ran out of gas when they left Newark Airport. Like Bob Dylan
when he headed west -- "Goodbye, New York, howdy, East Orange."


I think the term is chain migration. When the chain pulls over mostly skilled people, I
tend to support it. When the chain is bringing over cheap labor, I'm agaist it. Exploit
our own

Wes

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

I dunno, I've never inquired. I've always assumed it was the
extended-family
thing: one comes over, then the family follows, etc. I also have no idea
what they found so attractive about this community. My little town has
very
few Indians, but the surrounding township is loaded with them. It probably
was where they ran out of gas when they left Newark Airport. Like Bob
Dylan
when he headed west -- "Goodbye, New York, howdy, East Orange."


I think the term is chain migration. When the chain pulls over mostly
skilled people, I
tend to support it. When the chain is bringing over cheap labor, I'm
agaist it. Exploit
our own

Wes

Ha! Right. We'll be ruled by a generation of people who speak English as a
second language. g

Well, we're pretty lucky here. Other castes of Indians have moved in more
recently, but most of them are well-educated and very entrepreneurial. If
they could only teach the women to drive, we'd be very happy in all
respects.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:52:47 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:09:06 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

If you caught this from another thread, I live in the center of a township
that's 18% Asian Indian, the highest percentage in the US by a factor of
two. Most of the early ones were upper-caste professionals. They're most
of
the doctors around here now. And it seems that a lot of the professionals
are Muslims, who make up only 18% of India's population. Interesting.

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

I dunno, I've never inquired. I've always assumed it was the extended-family
thing: one comes over, then the family follows, etc. I also have no idea
what they found so attractive about this community. My little town has very
few Indians, but the surrounding township is loaded with them. It probably
was where they ran out of gas when they left Newark Airport. Like Bob Dylan
when he headed west -- "Goodbye, New York, howdy, East Orange."

I can handle the first assumption but come up rather dry on the
latter.

And the connection I was referring to was not concerning a legal alien
family, but was about the "high-caste/Muslim/Doctor thing", sir.


--
The only difference between a rut and a grave...is in their dimensions.
-- Ellen Glasglow

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:52:47 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:09:06 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

If you caught this from another thread, I live in the center of a
township
that's 18% Asian Indian, the highest percentage in the US by a factor of
two. Most of the early ones were upper-caste professionals. They're most
of
the doctors around here now. And it seems that a lot of the
professionals
are Muslims, who make up only 18% of India's population. Interesting.

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

I dunno, I've never inquired. I've always assumed it was the
extended-family
thing: one comes over, then the family follows, etc. I also have no idea
what they found so attractive about this community. My little town has
very
few Indians, but the surrounding township is loaded with them. It probably
was where they ran out of gas when they left Newark Airport. Like Bob
Dylan
when he headed west -- "Goodbye, New York, howdy, East Orange."

I can handle the first assumption but come up rather dry on the
latter.

And the connection I was referring to was not concerning a legal alien
family, but was about the "high-caste/Muslim/Doctor thing", sir.

I started on that and then got off-track. g I don't know if it's because
the doctors are Muslim, or if the early Indian doctors here happened to be
Muslim. That's what the family thing was intended to be about.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:40:09 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:52:47 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:09:06 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

If you caught this from another thread, I live in the center of a
township
that's 18% Asian Indian, the highest percentage in the US by a factor of
two. Most of the early ones were upper-caste professionals. They're most
of
the doctors around here now. And it seems that a lot of the
professionals
are Muslims, who make up only 18% of India's population. Interesting.

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

I dunno, I've never inquired. I've always assumed it was the
extended-family
thing: one comes over, then the family follows, etc. I also have no idea
what they found so attractive about this community. My little town has
very
few Indians, but the surrounding township is loaded with them. It probably
was where they ran out of gas when they left Newark Airport. Like Bob
Dylan
when he headed west -- "Goodbye, New York, howdy, East Orange."

I can handle the first assumption but come up rather dry on the
latter.

And the connection I was referring to was not concerning a legal alien
family, but was about the "high-caste/Muslim/Doctor thing", sir.

I started on that and then got off-track. g I don't know if it's because
the doctors are Muslim, or if the early Indian doctors here happened to be
Muslim. That's what the family thing was intended to be about.

Is it time for your meds or mine?

--
The only difference between a rut and a grave...is in their dimensions.
-- Ellen Glasglow

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:40:09 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:52:47 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:09:06 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:

If you caught this from another thread, I live in the center of a
township
that's 18% Asian Indian, the highest percentage in the US by a factor
of
two. Most of the early ones were upper-caste professionals. They're
most
of
the doctors around here now. And it seems that a lot of the
professionals
are Muslims, who make up only 18% of India's population. Interesting.

Yes, interesting. What do you make of it?

I dunno, I've never inquired. I've always assumed it was the
extended-family
thing: one comes over, then the family follows, etc. I also have no idea
what they found so attractive about this community. My little town has
very
few Indians, but the surrounding township is loaded with them. It
probably
was where they ran out of gas when they left Newark Airport. Like Bob
Dylan
when he headed west -- "Goodbye, New York, howdy, East Orange."

I can handle the first assumption but come up rather dry on the
latter.

And the connection I was referring to was not concerning a legal alien
family, but was about the "high-caste/Muslim/Doctor thing", sir.

I started on that and then got off-track. g I don't know if it's because
the doctors are Muslim, or if the early Indian doctors here happened to be
Muslim. That's what the family thing was intended to be about.

Is it time for your meds or mine?

It's always time for my meds. I'm pumping them in as we speak, through a
teeny plastic hose. d8-)

Do you follow what I'm saying here? I don't know if more Muslims are doctors
in India, or if the ones who came here just happened to be Muslims, and
their friends and families followed. It may be (and likely is) that many
more doctors in India are Hindus. They just weren't the ones who moved to
Edison Township, NJ.

Maybe. I don't know. And, frankly, I don't really care. They're good
doctors, and Muhammed, my cardiologist, has a load of good jokes. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Ha! Right. We'll be ruled by a generation of people who speak English as a
second language. g

Well, we're pretty lucky here. Other castes of Indians have moved in more
recently, but most of them are well-educated and very entrepreneurial. If
they could only teach the women to drive, we'd be very happy in all
respects.


Michigan is home to a lot of Muslims. They don't seem to be causing troubles and they
tend to be well educated. I can't comment on how their women drive. I think we have
those that just wanted to get away from the nut jobs in their former countries.

I think our culture will survive. They came here fleeing something.


Wes

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Ha! Right. We'll be ruled by a generation of people who speak English as a
second language. g

Well, we're pretty lucky here. Other castes of Indians have moved in more
recently, but most of them are well-educated and very entrepreneurial. If
they could only teach the women to drive, we'd be very happy in all
respects.


Michigan is home to a lot of Muslims. They don't seem to be causing
troubles and they
tend to be well educated. I can't comment on how their women drive.

Be glad they don't make up 18% of your population. You'd know all about them
if you did. Keep in mind that most of them have been here only a short time
and the women, in almost all cases, have never been behind the wheel of a
car.

The Indian driving school instructors must get combat pay.

I think we have
those that just wanted to get away from the nut jobs in their former
countries.

I think our culture will survive. They came here fleeing something.

So did my ancestors. My dad thinks it was prison. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Ha! Right. We'll be ruled by a generation of people who speak English as a
second language. g

Well, we're pretty lucky here. Other castes of Indians have moved in more
recently, but most of them are well-educated and very entrepreneurial. If
they could only teach the women to drive, we'd be very happy in all
respects.


Michigan is home to a lot of Muslims. They don't seem to be causing
troubles and they
tend to be well educated. I can't comment on how their women drive. I
think we have
those that just wanted to get away from the nut jobs in their former
countries.

I think our culture will survive. They came here fleeing something.


Detroit Michigan has the largest single population of Arabs outside of the
Middle East Wes.
Been that way for decades.

JC

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 10:00:42 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

Is it time for your meds or mine?

It's always time for my meds. I'm pumping them in as we speak, through a
teeny plastic hose. d8-)

2 points.


Do you follow what I'm saying here? I don't know if more Muslims are doctors
in India, or if the ones who came here just happened to be Muslims, and
their friends and families followed. It may be (and likely is) that many
more doctors in India are Hindus. They just weren't the ones who moved to
Edison Township, NJ.

Oh, OK.


Maybe. I don't know. And, frankly, I don't really care. They're good
doctors, and Muhammed, my cardiologist, has a load of good jokes. d8-)

Check your email for some cartoons you may enjoy. (You're over 18,
right?)

--
The only difference between a rut and a grave...is in their dimensions.
-- Ellen Glasglow

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

snip


Check your email for some cartoons you may enjoy. (You're over 18,
right?)

Hmm. Nothing's there. Did you remember to delete the "3"?

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 22:12:18 -0500, the infamous "Ed Huntress"
scrawled the following:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

snip


Check your email for some cartoons you may enjoy. (You're over 18,
right?)

Hmm. Nothing's there. Did you remember to delete the "3"?

Oops! Check again. I got sidetracked and forgot about it.

--
The only difference between a rut and a grave...is in their dimensions.
-- Ellen Glasglow

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:06:47 -0500, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:

Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn
--------------
Everything but the real problem is discussed.

In point of fact, every man, woman and child in the US now
owns/registers slightly more than one vehicle [1.05], a vehicle
being a car or light truck, not counting motorcycles/scooters.

You can see the estimated 2007 per capita car and truck ownership
by state at http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/spreadsheet/1003554
I have sorted and analyzed this data and would be pleased to
supply you a copy in M/S xls format.

Several points:

(1) To put it bluntly, THE REASON DETROIT AND THE TRANSPLANT
CAR COMPANIES CAN'T SELL MORE VEHICLES IN THE UNITED STATES IS
BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE MORE VEHICLES THAN WE NEED. Individuals
and families in highly congested urban areas (with higher
incomes) such as New Jersey, New York, and Washington D.C. don't
have [multiple] vehicles because these are not particularly
useful. ==It would make just as much sense to "rescue"
agriculture by attempting to get everyone to eat more.==

(2) From an aggregated point of view, the United States now
has 1.05 vehicles, defined as a car or light truck, per person.
(Families have multiple vehicles.) The highest per capita vehicle
ownership is Wyoming with 1.824 vehicles per capita. 37 of the
states have at least on vehicle PER PERSON. The minimum vehicle
ownership areas are New Jersey (0.718 vehicles per person), New
York (0.575 vehicles per person) and D.C. (0.485 vehicles per
person)

(3) A simple 1st degree LSBF regression indicates
Y= A + B*X
N A B R R^2
51 1.418745075 -7.84595E-06 0.31425843 0.098758361


(4) NOTE THAT THE MINUS SIGN FOR THE B TERM IS NEGATIVE,
INDICATING THAT AS THE PER CAPITA INCOME INCREASES, THE PER
CAPITAL VEHICLE OWNERSHIP GOES DOWN. From this data, it appears
that having a place to park a vehicle is the most important
factor in multiple vehicle ownership, followed by the perceived
utility, with the level of income a relatively minor (even
negative) factor, i.e. the higher the income, the *LOWER* the
vehicle ownership.

(5) THUS IT IS FUTILE TO ATTEMPT TO "RESCUE" THE AUTOMOTIVE
INDUSTRY FROM ITSELF, BY INCREASING SALES, AS THIS IS NOT
SUSTAINABLE, AND IS A DIVERSION OF CRITICALLY NEEDED CAPITAL.

(6) Before Congress reconvenes to debate the "rescue" of the
domestic automotive industry, it is critical that at least a
preliminary estimate of the number of new vehicles that are
actually needed, AND CAN BE SOLD WITHOUT DISCOUNTS, REBATES AND
SPECIAL ZERO INTEREST FINANCE PACKAGES, be obtained. It is clear
that we have entirely too much domestic production capacity, and
any attempt to preserve this overcapacity is foredoomed to
failure. Imports simply exacerbate this domestic overcapacity
problem.

(7) On a macro economic basis, it will be counterproductive to
attempt to force people to dispose of their existing vehicles by
legislation prohibiting the registration and/or general use of
older vehicles, as again this is the diversion of increasingly
scarce capital to operationally non-productive uses. E.G. if a
"beater" is adequate for a work car, what is gained by forcing
its owner to replace it with a new[er] car, with higher taxes,
license fees, insurance, etc, simply to "rescue" Detroit?


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).

In article ,
F. George McDuffee wrote:

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:06:47 -0500, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:

Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn
--------------
Everything but the real problem is discussed.

In point of fact, every man, woman and child in the US now
owns/registers slightly more than one vehicle [1.05], a vehicle
being a car or light truck, not counting motorcycles/scooters.

You can see the estimated 2007 per capita car and truck ownership
by state at http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/spreadsheet/1003554
I have sorted and analyzed this data and would be pleased to
supply you a copy in M/S xls format.

Several points:

(1) To put it bluntly, THE REASON DETROIT AND THE TRANSPLANT
CAR COMPANIES CAN'T SELL MORE VEHICLES IN THE UNITED STATES IS
BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE MORE VEHICLES THAN WE NEED.

Umm. Please stop shouting. We can hear you.


Individuals
and families in highly congested urban areas (with higher
incomes) such as New Jersey, New York, and Washington D.C. don't
have [multiple] vehicles because these are not particularly
useful. ==It would make just as much sense to "rescue"
agriculture by attempting to get everyone to eat more.==

[rest snipped]

Cars wear out. Cars last something like seven years on average, maybe
ten years for some kinds, and are replaced. (Yes there are cars that
can be babied to last forever, but very few people really do that, or
even want to.) So all car companies in the west (where essentially
everybody has a car) are fighting over the replacement stream. They are
not waiting for the population to suddenly double, and never were.

Joe Gwinn

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
F. George McDuffee wrote:

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:06:47 -0500, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:

Holman Jenkins asks a very good question: Why is it that the Big Three
automakers can make cars profitably everywhere in the world but the US?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122765959966358461.html

The Wall Street Journal, 28 November 2008.

Joe Gwinn
--------------
Everything but the real problem is discussed.

In point of fact, every man, woman and child in the US now
owns/registers slightly more than one vehicle [1.05], a vehicle
being a car or light truck, not counting motorcycles/scooters.

You can see the estimated 2007 per capita car and truck ownership
by state at http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/spreadsheet/1003554
I have sorted and analyzed this data and would be pleased to
supply you a copy in M/S xls format.

Several points:

(1) To put it bluntly, THE REASON DETROIT AND THE TRANSPLANT
CAR COMPANIES CAN'T SELL MORE VEHICLES IN THE UNITED STATES IS
BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE MORE VEHICLES THAN WE NEED.

Umm. Please stop shouting. We can hear you.


Individuals
and families in highly congested urban areas (with higher
incomes) such as New Jersey, New York, and Washington D.C. don't
have [multiple] vehicles because these are not particularly
useful. ==It would make just as much sense to "rescue"
agriculture by attempting to get everyone to eat more.==

[rest snipped]

Cars wear out. Cars last something like seven years on average, maybe
ten years for some kinds, and are replaced. (Yes there are cars that
can be babied to last forever, but very few people really do that, or
even want to.) So all car companies in the west (where essentially
everybody has a car) are fighting over the replacement stream. They are
not waiting for the population to suddenly double, and never were.

Joe Gwinn

What George describes is the reason that every major car manufacturer is in
China. It's the really big growth market. The US market is a replacement
market, and the only way to grow is to grab a bigger market share or to
create a new product category.

This is alien territory for US car makers. Like all oligopolies, they
succeeded in the past by holding onto a percentage of the market, or a
market share, and only competing at the margins. They grew because
everybody's market slice got bigger, not because they grabbed a bigger
market share.

The SUV market is (was?) a case of opening a new product category and
battling over market share once again, like they did in earlier days with
cars. It cannibalized the car market but it was OK because SUVs were much
more profitable.

With that product category on the ropes, and with foreign competitors each
battling for a share of the car market in the US (what do they think this
is, a real market or something?), the Big Three are unequipped to cope. The
Chebby Volt is an attempt to create another new product category. It's
either that, or move to China.

The smart money says "move to China."

--
Ed Huntress

On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 09:29:33 -0500, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:
snip
Cars wear out. Cars last something like seven years on average, maybe
ten years for some kinds, and are replaced. (Yes there are cars that
can be babied to last forever, but very few people really do that, or
even want to.) So all car companies in the west (where essentially
everybody has a car) are fighting over the replacement stream. They are
not waiting for the population to suddenly double, and never were.

Joe Gwinn
----------
Which is why this part of the post was important:

(6) Before Congress reconvenes to debate the "rescue" of the
domestic automotive industry, it is critical that at least a
preliminary estimate of the number of new vehicles that are
actually needed, AND CAN BE SOLD WITHOUT DISCOUNTS, REBATES AND
SPECIAL ZERO INTEREST FINANCE PACKAGES, be obtained. It is clear
that we have entirely too much domestic production capacity, and
any attempt to preserve this overcapacity is foredoomed to
failure. Imports simply exacerbate this domestic overcapacity
problem.
.......
The "transplants" continue to increase their domestic [US]
production capacity, thus exacerbating the overcapacity problem.
When the automotive market rebounds VW will have their new
facility on line, and their product line is now directly aimed at
Detroit, being compact to midsize cars with fuel economy,
performance, and style. The econoboxes will be made in China and
imported.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/15/v...ttanooga-tenn/

Ignoring legacy costs such as astronomical debt loads, pensions
and wage rates, a very major problem is that the domestic car
companies will be attempting to compete using older machines,
located in older buildings, in colder climates, sited for
yesterday's traffic patterns, while the transplants will be using
newer, many state-of-the-art, machines, in newer buildings,
located in warmer climates, and sited for today's traffic
patterns.

A largely ignored problem is the considerable rancor and ill will
that has developed over the years between the Detroit automotive
companies and their supplier and dealer base/networks compared to
the imports and transplants.

One item to remember is that bankruptcy can also be initiated by
a petition to the court by *THREE* creditors [involuntary], in
addition to a petition by the corporation [voluntary], and there
does not appear to be any reason why *MANY MORE THAN THREE*
dealers and suppliers, currently being forced under by Detroit's
"slow pay policies" [both suppliers and dealer rebates], price
re-negotiations, franchise terminations, abusive vendor
warranty/quality claims, etc. etc. would not chose to take the
corporations down with them.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
-------------------------------------------
He that will not apply new remedies,
must expect new evils:
for Time is the greatest innovator: and
if Time, of course, alter things to the worse,
and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better,
what shall be the end?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman.
Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).