Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,243
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress


Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.


Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

I wouldn't count on that. Those "above the line" have no incentive to
help those below the line. It's easy to
picket for equality when it's funded by someone else.
Even the do-gooders run out of steam when
their desire to help others costs them personally.
Would you pay 20% more for the same goods manufactured in America?
We know we should, but we're standing in line at WalMart on sale day.
Not too long from now, we'll be standing in line at the soup kitchen.

Those below the line have no clout other than violence.

America cannot opt-out of the technology revolution.
We can fail to implement, but goods made elsewhere will
cost less, creating even more local unemployment.

How naive to think that equalizing the standard of living
would mean raising everyone else. It's happening by LOWERING
the American standard of excess to the level of the
rest of the world.
I don't think there's any way of fixing that without
violence that takes down the whole system. God help
those who survive.

I thank the stars that I lived in the most prosperous time
America will ever have...and will hopefully be dead before it
comes completely unraveled.

Happy new year to us all ;-)
  #42   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default A billionaire explains the middle class


" wrote:

On Saturday, December 27, 2014 6:47:20 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:


If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
--
Cheers,

John B.


I do not believe that we will ever see robots selling hamburgers. Instead you will see smart phones being used to place orders for hamburgers. Much less cost for the hamburger seller.



So you can't buy a burger, if you don't want to have a so called smart
phone?

--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
  #43   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,399
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress

Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.


Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

I wouldn't count on that. Those "above the line" have no incentive to
help those below the line. It's easy to
picket for equality when it's funded by someone else.
Even the do-gooders run out of steam when
their desire to help others costs them personally.
Would you pay 20% more for the same goods manufactured in America?
We know we should, but we're standing in line at WalMart on sale day.
Not too long from now, we'll be standing in line at the soup kitchen.

Those below the line have no clout other than violence.

America cannot opt-out of the technology revolution.
We can fail to implement, but goods made elsewhere will
cost less, creating even more local unemployment.

How naive to think that equalizing the standard of living
would mean raising everyone else. It's happening by LOWERING
the American standard of excess to the level of the
rest of the world.
I don't think there's any way of fixing that without
violence that takes down the whole system. God help
those who survive.

I thank the stars that I lived in the most prosperous time
America will ever have...and will hopefully be dead before it
comes completely unraveled.

Happy new year to us all ;-)


Truth!!!


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke
  #44   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default A billionaire explains the middle class


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress


Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.


Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

--
Ed Huntress


Yes the time is right for a new political party to emerge. The current
crop of politicos are out of touch with current technology and whats
comming. They practice 19th century politics in the 21st century, thier
only concern is getting reelected and dieing in office. Term limits would
help in getting people elected that are up to speed with todays realities,
it would also put a big dent in being obligated to thier campain
contributors. Much of the strife we see today is they fault of the voters,
they suffer
from rigid thinking, basicly they can't see through the BS and deception put
forth by the PACS which is designed to Divide and conquer. Voting based
on emotions or for a personal agenda is the norm these days.

My personal proposal is the we have a none of the above box on every
ballot. If an office goes unfilled we then draft a person from the general
public to fill that office for one election cycle, that person can run for
reelection if they so choose until they reach the term limits of that
office.Using a lottery of registered voters would produce the pool of
conscripts
and operate like jury selection. They lucky winner would be paid a
sallery that is equal to thier current sallery with a COLA each year
that is equilant to the rate of inflation just like social security. Medical
bennifits would be carried out by the VA. Outlaw PACS. Limit campain
spending. All elected officials shall be subject to any and all laws they
enact, no exemptions. Any and all lobbing shall be done before both
houses when in full session and telivised and archived on the internet.

Best Regards
Tom.








  #45   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 992
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

Howard Beal wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news

- show quoted text -
Yes the time is right for a new political party to emerge. The current
crop of politicos are out of touch with current technology and whats
comming.


You're joking right? The average American doesn't even do the labor marching enough that's required for higher wages. Just look at their shiftless superiority complexes and laziness. How do you possibly expect them to get up from the table of beer for anything else?

Face it, you're stuck with a two party system for longer than you all think..


  #46   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,538
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress

Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.


Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

I wouldn't count on that. Those "above the line" have no incentive to
help those below the line. It's easy to
picket for equality when it's funded by someone else.
Even the do-gooders run out of steam when
their desire to help others costs them personally.
Would you pay 20% more for the same goods manufactured in America?


If and when I can actually find product made in USA or Canada, I do.
But if it is a Canadian or American name on a Chinese product - no
way.
Same with European brands.
We know we should, but we're standing in line at WalMart on sale day.
Not too long from now, we'll be standing in line at the soup kitchen.

Those below the line have no clout other than violence.

America cannot opt-out of the technology revolution.
We can fail to implement, but goods made elsewhere will
cost less, creating even more local unemployment.

How naive to think that equalizing the standard of living
would mean raising everyone else. It's happening by LOWERING
the American standard of excess to the level of the
rest of the world.
I don't think there's any way of fixing that without
violence that takes down the whole system. God help
those who survive.

I thank the stars that I lived in the most prosperous time
America will ever have...and will hopefully be dead before it
comes completely unraveled.

Happy new year to us all ;-)


  #47   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:02:37 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 09:56:14 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:
He took me on a lot of his trips around the state to visit his local
state park and ski resort managers, compliment them on their good
work, get in some fishing (and observing) and by the way show that
he
was always paying attention to detail, like if a vehicle
suspiciously
needed tires too often.


You got the talk, eh?

"Son, just because my GTO has a 389cid with a six-pack on top, a
Borg
Warner T-10 close-ratio gearbox, and a 4.11 posi rear end, =doesn't=
mean that when you borrow it..."


Dad never owned anything like that. My high school buddies, the sons
of doctors and lawyers, had the hot cars.


Oh, I thought you were referring to his catching you doing burnouts
with his car. g (Mine, either, BTW. His hottest was an Austin
Healey 100-4 he raced in Autocrosses and Gymkhanas, and it's on that
very vehicle which I honed my auto-mechanic's eye teeth.) My hottest
was a 1970 AMC Javelin w/ a 390cid putting out 400+hp and 425+ft/lb
after rebuilding with a mild cam. That was a very, very fun car.


He was watching the purchase records for state-owned vehicles to catch
people selling the tires. Corruption was very limited in NH, the
ambitious crooks just moved to Massachusetts.


OK, got it. Good for your dad!


He knew the tricks because his Air Corps company had been in the South
Pacific where "repurposing" government equipment without authorization
was standard practice, to gain an edge on the Japs and improve the
primitive living conditions. The natives in New Guinea had no money to
buy stolen goods so MacArthur looked the other way and sent
complaining supply officers home for "combat fatigue".


Way to go, Mac!


Their Officers' Club had a beer chiller made from a misplaced Jeep
engine. His first mission on arriving in the Phillipines was to drive
his Jeep onto an 'available' cargo plane for a two-barrel booze run to
Manila.


Ingenious!


http://wargamer.com/article/3437/his...-5th-air-force
Accounts vary on whether the Dutch B-25 bombers were reassigned or
stolen.


Good story/great man! Was this your dad (wrong name), or did he just
know him, or what? He sounds a lot like Pappy Boyington. (loved that
TV series, ya darned college kid.)

My dad flew a Mitchell in several missions over Germany and France,
then was shot down over France and held in a stalag for 10 months,
'til the Russian tanks rolled over the fences.

--
Learn the art of patience. Apply discipline to your thoughts when they
become anxious over the outcome of a goal. Impatience breeds anxiety,
fear, discouragement and failure. Patience creates confidence, de-
cisiveness, and a rational outlook, which eventually leads to success.
--Brian Adams
  #49   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress

Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.


Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

I wouldn't count on that. Those "above the line" have no incentive to
help those below the line. It's easy to
picket for equality when it's funded by someone else.
Even the do-gooders run out of steam when
their desire to help others costs them personally.
Would you pay 20% more for the same goods manufactured in America?


Lots of people do. But it's not just 20%. Newp, I see many, many
American-made goods at twice the price of imports.

I can get a dozen import LED bulbs for the price of one American-made
bulb, and the American-made doesn't have the added features of the
import. I'll be replacing my import 75W and 100W incandescent bulbs
(which the US doesn't even make any more, and is phasing out) in my
outdoor fixtures with import 15W LEDs. Most of my indoor lightingis
already CFL and LED. I've had nothing but trouble from the FEIT brand
CFLs, and it's a US company. I bought a dozen Chinese ULA CFLs in
2004 and 7 are still running. Chinese SATCO CFLs have outlasted all my
Feits, too, and they're half the price from local sellers. I have
dozens of other examples to soothe my "import buying" guilt.


We know we should, but we're standing in line at WalMart on sale day.
Not too long from now, we'll be standing in line at the soup kitchen.


Hey, WalMart happens to be the largest employer in the USA, behind the
gov't.
http://corporate.walmart.com/global-...-manufacturing
"According to data from our suppliers, items that are made, sourced or
grown right here in America already account for about two-thirds of
what we spend to buy products at Walmart U.S. But there is room to do
more."


Those below the line have no clout other than violence.


Not true. Boycotting can work, too. That's non-violent.


America cannot opt-out of the technology revolution.
We can fail to implement, but goods made elsewhere will
cost less, creating even more local unemployment.


Ayup.


How naive to think that equalizing the standard of living
would mean raising everyone else. It's happening by LOWERING
the American standard of excess to the level of the
rest of the world.


Ain't that the truth? sigh


I don't think there's any way of fixing that without
violence that takes down the whole system. God help
those who survive.


Indeed.


I thank the stars that I lived in the most prosperous time
America will ever have...and will hopefully be dead before it
comes completely unraveled.

Happy new year to us all ;-)


Nappy Hoo Year to you, too.

--
Learn the art of patience. Apply discipline to your thoughts when they
become anxious over the outcome of a goal. Impatience breeds anxiety,
fear, discouragement and failure. Patience creates confidence, de-
cisiveness, and a rational outlook, which eventually leads to success.
--Brian Adams
  #50   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,243
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On 12/28/2014 1:18 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress

Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.

Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

I wouldn't count on that. Those "above the line" have no incentive to
help those below the line. It's easy to
picket for equality when it's funded by someone else.
Even the do-gooders run out of steam when
their desire to help others costs them personally.
Would you pay 20% more for the same goods manufactured in America?


Lots of people do. But it's not just 20%. Newp, I see many, many
American-made goods at twice the price of imports.

I can get a dozen import LED bulbs for the price of one American-made
bulb, and the American-made doesn't have the added features of the
import. I'll be replacing my import 75W and 100W incandescent bulbs
(which the US doesn't even make any more, and is phasing out) in my
outdoor fixtures with import 15W LEDs. Most of my indoor lightingis
already CFL and LED. I've had nothing but trouble from the FEIT brand
CFLs, and it's a US company. I bought a dozen Chinese ULA CFLs in
2004 and 7 are still running. Chinese SATCO CFLs have outlasted all my
Feits, too, and they're half the price from local sellers. I have
dozens of other examples to soothe my "import buying" guilt.


We know we should, but we're standing in line at WalMart on sale day.
Not too long from now, we'll be standing in line at the soup kitchen.


Hey, WalMart happens to be the largest employer in the USA, behind the
gov't.
http://corporate.walmart.com/global-...-manufacturing
"According to data from our suppliers, items that are made, sourced or
grown right here in America already account for about two-thirds of
what we spend to buy products at Walmart U.S. But there is room to do
more."

That's good news, but contrary to what you read on the web.

http://www.demos.org/publication/not...facturing-jobs

The whole article is worth a read. It's on the internet, so it must
be true...

1. Buying billions of goods that weren’t made in America.

The vast majority of merchandise Walmart sells in the U.S. is
manufactured abroad. The company searches the world for the cheapest
goods possible, and this usually means buying from low-wage factories
overseas. Walmart boasts of direct relationships with nearly 20,000
Chinese suppliers,[iv] and purchased $27 billion worth of Chinese-made
goods in 2006.[v] According to the Economic Policy Institute, Walmart’s
trade with China alone eliminated 133,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs
between 2001 and 2006 and accounted for 11.2 percent of the nation’s
total job loss due to trade.[vi] But China is hardly the only source of
Walmart goods: the company also imports from Bangladesh, Honduras,
Cambodia, and a host of other countries.


Those below the line have no clout other than violence.


Not true. Boycotting can work, too. That's non-violent.


How does that work? If you can't afford
the foreign stuff, what are you gonna boycott? And what will you
buy instead with the money you don't have?


America cannot opt-out of the technology revolution.
We can fail to implement, but goods made elsewhere will
cost less, creating even more local unemployment.


Ayup.


How naive to think that equalizing the standard of living
would mean raising everyone else. It's happening by LOWERING
the American standard of excess to the level of the
rest of the world.


Ain't that the truth? sigh


I don't think there's any way of fixing that without
violence that takes down the whole system. God help
those who survive.


Indeed.


I thank the stars that I lived in the most prosperous time
America will ever have...and will hopefully be dead before it
comes completely unraveled.

Happy new year to us all ;-)


Nappy Hoo Year to you, too.

--
Learn the art of patience. Apply discipline to your thoughts when they
become anxious over the outcome of a goal. Impatience breeds anxiety,
fear, discouragement and failure. Patience creates confidence, de-
cisiveness, and a rational outlook, which eventually leads to success.
--Brian Adams




  #51   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.

=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.

Then only one person will remain.

i
  #52   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

"Ignoramus14709" wrote in
message ...
On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably
say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.

=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.

Then only one person will remain.

i


We must ensure that the robots will want to keep us as pets.



  #53   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 15:08:49 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 1:18 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress

Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.

Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

I wouldn't count on that. Those "above the line" have no incentive to
help those below the line. It's easy to
picket for equality when it's funded by someone else.
Even the do-gooders run out of steam when
their desire to help others costs them personally.
Would you pay 20% more for the same goods manufactured in America?


Lots of people do. But it's not just 20%. Newp, I see many, many
American-made goods at twice the price of imports.

I can get a dozen import LED bulbs for the price of one American-made
bulb, and the American-made doesn't have the added features of the
import. I'll be replacing my import 75W and 100W incandescent bulbs
(which the US doesn't even make any more, and is phasing out) in my
outdoor fixtures with import 15W LEDs. Most of my indoor lightingis
already CFL and LED. I've had nothing but trouble from the FEIT brand
CFLs, and it's a US company. I bought a dozen Chinese ULA CFLs in
2004 and 7 are still running. Chinese SATCO CFLs have outlasted all my
Feits, too, and they're half the price from local sellers. I have
dozens of other examples to soothe my "import buying" guilt.


We know we should, but we're standing in line at WalMart on sale day.
Not too long from now, we'll be standing in line at the soup kitchen.


Hey, WalMart happens to be the largest employer in the USA, behind the
gov't.
http://corporate.walmart.com/global-...-manufacturing
"According to data from our suppliers, items that are made, sourced or
grown right here in America already account for about two-thirds of
what we spend to buy products at Walmart U.S. But there is room to do
more."

That's good news, but contrary to what you read on the web.

http://www.demos.org/publication/not...facturing-jobs

The whole article is worth a read. It's on the internet, so it must
be true...

1. Buying billions of goods that weren’t made in America.

The vast majority of merchandise Walmart sells in the U.S. is
manufactured abroad. The company searches the world for the cheapest
goods possible, and this usually means buying from low-wage factories
overseas. Walmart boasts of direct relationships with nearly 20,000
Chinese suppliers,[iv] and purchased $27 billion worth of Chinese-made
goods in 2006.[v] According to the Economic Policy Institute, Walmart’s
trade with China alone eliminated 133,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs
between 2001 and 2006 and accounted for 11.2 percent of the nation’s
total job loss due to trade.[vi] But China is hardly the only source of
Walmart goods: the company also imports from Bangladesh, Honduras,
Cambodia, and a host of other countries.


Those below the line have no clout other than violence.


Not true. Boycotting can work, too. That's non-violent.


How does that work? If you can't afford
the foreign stuff, what are you gonna boycott? And what will you
buy instead with the money you don't have?


The concept that Chinese goods are inherently cheap junk is silly. the
Chinese are as capable of producing good stuff if required.

Chinese art, for example, is well into the top end of the art market
with 1st, 2nd and 6th place in the top prices paid in 2011.

Cummins Diesel started producing some of their smaller 6 cylinder
engines in China in 1995 and produce engines that are as good as any
that they build anywhere. They also have a factory in India a country
not noted for excellency either :-)

The Walmart example above is largely at fault for the concept that all
Chinese goods are shoddy - "The company searches the world for the
cheapest goods possible". If your overwhelming requirement is "Cheap"
then it is highly unlikely that you will be purchasing "quality".
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #54   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,355
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains the middle class

"Michael A. Terrell" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014
03:56:18 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
" wrote:
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 6:47:20 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:
If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.

I do not believe that we will ever see robots selling hamburgers. Instead you will see smart phones being used to place orders for hamburgers. Much less cost for the hamburger seller.

So you can't buy a burger, if you don't want to have a so called smart
phone?


decaster missed this bit of news from 2012:
http://www.gizmag.com/hamburger-machine/25159/
"According to Momentum Machines, making burgers costs US$9 billion a
year in wages in the United States alone. The company points out that
a machine that could make burgers with minimum human intervention
would not only provide huge savings in labor costs, but would also
reduce preparation space with a burger kitchen replaced by a much
smaller and cheaper stainless-steel box."
[...]
"This self-contained, automatic device sees raw ingredients go in one
end and the completed custom-made burgers come out the other at the
rate of up to 400 per hour. "

So, yes, there is no humanoid looking robot flipping burgers and
asking "Do you want fries with that?". Nope - just a machine which
makes hamburgers to order.

Oh yes, and while we are at it - the "Barista In A Box":
http://qz.com/134661/briggo-coffee-army-of-robot-baristas-could-mean-the-end-of-starbucks-as-we-know-it/
which features a kiosk at the University of Texas Austin, which in
fifty square feet of floor space (five by ten, or 4.6 sq meters), does
everything - and repeats the process, so that your order today is the
same as yesterday, as the day before, as it will be tomorrow.
"High-end restaurants automated coffee production and no one
noticed."

The robots are here, and they don't take breaks, come in late or
hung over, require medical benefits or overtime. And the price of
these robots is coming down, as their abilities increase.


--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
  #55   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 755
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains themiddle class

On 12/28/2014 10:32 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014
03:56:18 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
" wrote:
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 6:47:20 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:
If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
I do not believe that we will ever see robots selling hamburgers. Instead you will see smart phones being used to place orders for hamburgers. Much less cost for the hamburger seller.

So you can't buy a burger, if you don't want to have a so called smart
phone?


decaster missed this bit of news from 2012:
http://www.gizmag.com/hamburger-machine/25159/
"According to Momentum Machines, making burgers costs US$9 billion a
year in wages in the United States alone. The company points out that
a machine that could make burgers with minimum human intervention
would not only provide huge savings in labor costs, but would also
reduce preparation space with a burger kitchen replaced by a much
smaller and cheaper stainless-steel box."
[...]
"This self-contained, automatic device sees raw ingredients go in one
end and the completed custom-made burgers come out the other at the
rate of up to 400 per hour. "

So, yes, there is no humanoid looking robot flipping burgers and
asking "Do you want fries with that?". Nope - just a machine which
makes hamburgers to order.

Oh yes, and while we are at it - the "Barista In A Box":
http://qz.com/134661/briggo-coffee-army-of-robot-baristas-could-mean-the-end-of-starbucks-as-we-know-it/
which features a kiosk at the University of Texas Austin, which in
fifty square feet of floor space (five by ten, or 4.6 sq meters), does
everything - and repeats the process, so that your order today is the
same as yesterday, as the day before, as it will be tomorrow.
"High-end restaurants automated coffee production and no one
noticed."

The robots are here, and they don't take breaks, come in late or
hung over, require medical benefits or overtime. And the price of
these robots is coming down, as their abilities increase.


And the substances coming out of them are little different from the
substances coming out of me after I've eaten them.

David



  #56   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 18:35:42 -0600, Ignoramus14709
wrote:

On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.

=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.


What a great idea! It would double the average IQ of the USA within a
week! Alas, as we saw in Idiocracy, "they" tend to constantly
multiply. "Hey, let's water the fields with Gatorade!" sigh


Then only one person will remain.


Our hero: the programmer/mechanic.


--
Learn the art of patience. Apply discipline to your thoughts when they
become anxious over the outcome of a goal. Impatience breeds anxiety,
fear, discouragement and failure. Patience creates confidence, de-
cisiveness, and a rational outlook, which eventually leads to success.
--Brian Adams
  #57   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 19:41:06 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ignoramus14709" wrote in
message ...
On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably
say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.

Then only one person will remain.

i


We must ensure that the robots will want to keep us as pets.


We must ensure that the AIs are never completely in control.


--
Learn the art of patience. Apply discipline to your thoughts when they
become anxious over the outcome of a goal. Impatience breeds anxiety,
fear, discouragement and failure. Patience creates confidence, de-
cisiveness, and a rational outlook, which eventually leads to success.
--Brian Adams
  #58   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default A billionaire explains the middle class


"Ignoramus14709" wrote in message
...
On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.

=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.

Then only one person will remain.

i


Humanity will eventualy evolve into cybernetic organsims, this has
already begun. Defects in the current design of humans will be
eliminated over the next few centuries. Life spans of several
millinia will become a reality.

Best Regards
Tom.


  #59   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default A billionaire explains the middle class


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 19:41:06 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ignoramus14709" wrote in
message ...
On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably
say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.

Then only one person will remain.

i


We must ensure that the robots will want to keep us as pets.


We must ensure that the AIs are never completely in control.


Hackers will always find a way to control the AIs.

Best Regards
Tom.


  #60   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,243
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On 12/28/2014 5:29 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 15:08:49 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 1:18 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

We'll see what happens. My guess is, like what happened in the 1930s,
the people of the United States are not going to let their lives be
ruined because free-market theorists think they're economic market
objects to be "cleared." It's not a settling thought.

Ed Huntress

Seems there is already a big push in many states to implement right
to work legislation, now that repbulicans have control in washington
i believe they will try to revise federal labor laws to benifit the job
creators. Depending on who becomes president in 2016 things could
get much worse for labor. Iggy is correct technology will replace
much of the unskilled labor we use today. For example in near future
people that depend on driving for thier income will become obsolete,
same thing will happen with the airline industry, pilotless planes are in
our future. If AI ever becomes a reality the entire global ecconomy
will change, even ecconomists will be unemployed. G

Best Regards
Tom.

Iggy is right about the direction in which things are going, absent
any policy changes. But I doubt if the American people are going to
ride that technology- and ideology-driven death train all the way to
the bottom.

There will be a populist revolt -- a political one, not a violent one.

I wouldn't count on that. Those "above the line" have no incentive to
help those below the line. It's easy to
picket for equality when it's funded by someone else.
Even the do-gooders run out of steam when
their desire to help others costs them personally.
Would you pay 20% more for the same goods manufactured in America?

Lots of people do. But it's not just 20%. Newp, I see many, many
American-made goods at twice the price of imports.

I can get a dozen import LED bulbs for the price of one American-made
bulb, and the American-made doesn't have the added features of the
import. I'll be replacing my import 75W and 100W incandescent bulbs
(which the US doesn't even make any more, and is phasing out) in my
outdoor fixtures with import 15W LEDs. Most of my indoor lightingis
already CFL and LED. I've had nothing but trouble from the FEIT brand
CFLs, and it's a US company. I bought a dozen Chinese ULA CFLs in
2004 and 7 are still running. Chinese SATCO CFLs have outlasted all my
Feits, too, and they're half the price from local sellers. I have
dozens of other examples to soothe my "import buying" guilt.


We know we should, but we're standing in line at WalMart on sale day.
Not too long from now, we'll be standing in line at the soup kitchen.

Hey, WalMart happens to be the largest employer in the USA, behind the
gov't.
http://corporate.walmart.com/global-...-manufacturing
"According to data from our suppliers, items that are made, sourced or
grown right here in America already account for about two-thirds of
what we spend to buy products at Walmart U.S. But there is room to do
more."

That's good news, but contrary to what you read on the web.

http://www.demos.org/publication/not...facturing-jobs

The whole article is worth a read. It's on the internet, so it must
be true...

1. Buying billions of goods that weren’t made in America.

The vast majority of merchandise Walmart sells in the U.S. is
manufactured abroad. The company searches the world for the cheapest
goods possible, and this usually means buying from low-wage factories
overseas. Walmart boasts of direct relationships with nearly 20,000
Chinese suppliers,[iv] and purchased $27 billion worth of Chinese-made
goods in 2006.[v] According to the Economic Policy Institute, Walmart’s
trade with China alone eliminated 133,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs
between 2001 and 2006 and accounted for 11.2 percent of the nation’s
total job loss due to trade.[vi] But China is hardly the only source of
Walmart goods: the company also imports from Bangladesh, Honduras,
Cambodia, and a host of other countries.


Those below the line have no clout other than violence.

Not true. Boycotting can work, too. That's non-violent.


How does that work? If you can't afford
the foreign stuff, what are you gonna boycott? And what will you
buy instead with the money you don't have?


The concept that Chinese goods are inherently cheap junk is silly. the
Chinese are as capable of producing good stuff if required.


Never implied otherwise.
There's no reason that the Chinese can't make stuff as good as
anybody else.

There are two pieces to this puzzle.
First it's the American consumer.
I want low cost stuff.
When I have my thinking cap on, I consciously buy Harbor Frieght
tools because they're the cheapest around and will likely last as long
as I'll need to use them. For something I will use a lot, I avoid HF
like the plague. Used to be that you could go to Sears and be
guaranteed quality. Today, you're likely to get the same junk
as you'd get from Harbor Freight.

My problem is that I sometimes misplace my thinking cap.
I've been known to spend $3 on gas to get to a store where I can
save $2 on an inferior item. It's logically inconsistent,
but much buyer behavior is illogical.

My egg frying experience improved dramatically when I bit the bullet
and bought a $12 spatula instead of the 99-cent ones. Whoodathunkit?
Only took me 60 years to figger that out.

The second piece of the puzzle is that there are places in the world
where working long hours for low wages is far superior to the alternative.
American workers won't. They've got the "dole" to fall back on and
it's better to do that than to work for low wages. Third-world
workers are glad to have the jobs we don't want. It's not anybody's
fault but ours.

All WalMart does is put the buyers and sellers together.
Buyers want cheap. WalMart gives it to us.
Boycotting Chinese junk doesn't help anybody. Nobody's gonna
start up an American factory to build flashlights that Harbor Freight
will put in your hands for free. Even if you buy a "quality"
flashlight, it's likely made elsewhere.

The same thing happens with quality goods. If the Chinese will
make 'em at lower delivered cost, who's gonna get the build contract?
As long as our tax, import tariff and foreign/domestic economic
policies don't change, we're gonna continue to export jobs.
And you can't fix that because any effective change would precipitate
trade policy retaliation that would being the whole system to its
knees in a heartbeat.

Boycotting works when the boycotting inflicts pain on the supplier
AND you have alternatives AND they have the means to meet your
demands. You DON'T. They DON'T.
Putting a Chinese flashlight manufacturer out of business,
even with the arrogant assumption that we could do that, doesn't
help anybody unless some American factory springs up to supply
the demand at a price we'll pay. American workers won't stand
for the wages and conditions required to make that happen.
It's more likely that we'd attract yet more illegal immigrants
and make the problem worse.

The thing that upsets me is that there's nothing I can do.
Even if the fairy godmother waived her wand, eliminated
the grid-locked thing we call congress and gave the reigns
to the best economists, there ain't much they can do.
In the world of instant communication and container ships,
isolationism is unattainable. That ship has sailed...probably
the same one that brought you tennis shoes and computer tablets
from some sweatshop abroad.
If you can't do that, you're
stuck with the inevitable equalization of the world
standard of living. The American standard of excess
is not sustainable...except among one-percenters.
And those guys hold the reigns.

I haven't worked in almost 20 years, but I'm watching my friends
get downsized and the remaining crew becoming more and more like
the sweatshops of the third world as almost every manufacturing
function gets offshored.

Would you vote for significant price increases to have more
production return to the states? The "haves" won't.
And the "have nots" don't have the clout or the money to buy 'em.
And the main result
would be higher prices and profits for the Chinese vendors.

If WalMart ceased to exist, the overall American standard of living
would decrease. We'd be able to afford less stuff.

It's not anybody's fault.
It's an economic reality that can't be fixed.
Bend over and kiss your sweet ass goodbye.


Chinese art, for example, is well into the top end of the art market
with 1st, 2nd and 6th place in the top prices paid in 2011.

Cummins Diesel started producing some of their smaller 6 cylinder
engines in China in 1995 and produce engines that are as good as any
that they build anywhere. They also have a factory in India a country
not noted for excellency either :-)

The Walmart example above is largely at fault for the concept that all
Chinese goods are shoddy - "The company searches the world for the
cheapest goods possible". If your overwhelming requirement is "Cheap"
then it is highly unlikely that you will be purchasing "quality".




  #61   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,888
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 18:35:42 -0600, Ignoramus14709
wrote:

On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably
say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.


What a great idea! It would double the average IQ of the USA within
a
week! Alas, as we saw in Idiocracy, "they" tend to constantly
multiply. "Hey, let's water the fields with Gatorade!" sigh


Then only one person will remain.


Our hero: the programmer/mechanic.


If you trigger the Hunger Games you'll be left with Jennifer Lawrence,
who will beget 10,000 years of Quest For Fire.


  #62   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,355
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains the middle class

"David R. Birch" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:46:28 -0600
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 12/28/2014 10:32 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014
03:56:18 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
" wrote:
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 6:47:20 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:
If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
I do not believe that we will ever see robots selling hamburgers. Instead you will see smart phones being used to place orders for hamburgers. Much less cost for the hamburger seller.
So you can't buy a burger, if you don't want to have a so called smart
phone?


decaster missed this bit of news from 2012:
http://www.gizmag.com/hamburger-machine/25159/
"According to Momentum Machines, making burgers costs US$9 billion a
year in wages in the United States alone. The company points out that
a machine that could make burgers with minimum human intervention
would not only provide huge savings in labor costs, but would also
reduce preparation space with a burger kitchen replaced by a much
smaller and cheaper stainless-steel box."
[...]
"This self-contained, automatic device sees raw ingredients go in one
end and the completed custom-made burgers come out the other at the
rate of up to 400 per hour. "

So, yes, there is no humanoid looking robot flipping burgers and
asking "Do you want fries with that?". Nope - just a machine which
makes hamburgers to order.

Oh yes, and while we are at it - the "Barista In A Box":
http://qz.com/134661/briggo-coffee-army-of-robot-baristas-could-mean-the-end-of-starbucks-as-we-know-it/
which features a kiosk at the University of Texas Austin, which in
fifty square feet of floor space (five by ten, or 4.6 sq meters), does
everything - and repeats the process, so that your order today is the
same as yesterday, as the day before, as it will be tomorrow.
"High-end restaurants automated coffee production and no one
noticed."

The robots are here, and they don't take breaks, come in late or
hung over, require medical benefits or overtime. And the price of
these robots is coming down, as their abilities increase.


And the substances coming out of them are little different from the
substances coming out of me after I've eaten them.


And you know this - how?
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
  #63   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:18:13 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 18:35:42 -0600, Ignoramus14709
wrote:

On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably
say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.


What a great idea! It would double the average IQ of the USA within
a
week! Alas, as we saw in Idiocracy, "they" tend to constantly
multiply. "Hey, let's water the fields with Gatorade!" sigh


Then only one person will remain.


Our hero: the programmer/mechanic.


If you trigger the Hunger Games you'll be left with Jennifer Lawrence,
who will beget 10,000 years of Quest For Fire.


That's OK. Besides being great with a bow, she's hot! domg
Speaking of which, my ex-BIL left a 75# pull compound bow in my
sister's garage rafters and I find my name attached to it. I'm the
only one who can pull it -and- it's left-handed. Win/Win, wot?

(For those of you in Rio Linda, that's "Dirty Old Man Grin")

--
Poverty is easy. It's Charity and Chastity that are hard.
--anon
  #64   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:35:04 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

"David R. Birch" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:46:28 -0600
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 12/28/2014 10:32 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014
03:56:18 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
" wrote:
On Saturday, December 27, 2014 6:47:20 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:
If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
I do not believe that we will ever see robots selling hamburgers. Instead you will see smart phones being used to place orders for hamburgers. Much less cost for the hamburger seller.
So you can't buy a burger, if you don't want to have a so called smart
phone?

decaster missed this bit of news from 2012:
http://www.gizmag.com/hamburger-machine/25159/
"According to Momentum Machines, making burgers costs US$9 billion a
year in wages in the United States alone. The company points out that
a machine that could make burgers with minimum human intervention
would not only provide huge savings in labor costs, but would also
reduce preparation space with a burger kitchen replaced by a much
smaller and cheaper stainless-steel box."
[...]
"This self-contained, automatic device sees raw ingredients go in one
end and the completed custom-made burgers come out the other at the
rate of up to 400 per hour. "

So, yes, there is no humanoid looking robot flipping burgers and
asking "Do you want fries with that?". Nope - just a machine which
makes hamburgers to order.

Oh yes, and while we are at it - the "Barista In A Box":
http://qz.com/134661/briggo-coffee-army-of-robot-baristas-could-mean-the-end-of-starbucks-as-we-know-it/
which features a kiosk at the University of Texas Austin, which in
fifty square feet of floor space (five by ten, or 4.6 sq meters), does
everything - and repeats the process, so that your order today is the
same as yesterday, as the day before, as it will be tomorrow.
"High-end restaurants automated coffee production and no one
noticed."

The robots are here, and they don't take breaks, come in late or
hung over, require medical benefits or overtime. And the price of
these robots is coming down, as their abilities increase.


And the substances coming out of them are little different from the
substances coming out of me after I've eaten them.


And you know this - how?


I'll bet he doesn't 'fess up and say "By the taste."

"If you prick me, do I not leak?" queried Data.


--
Poverty is easy. It's Charity and Chastity that are hard.
--anon
  #65   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 755
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains themiddle class

On 12/29/2014 9:35 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
"David R. Birch" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:46:28 -0600


And the substances coming out of them are little different from the
substances coming out of me after I've eaten them.


And you know this - how?


Simple observation.

David


  #66   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,399
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:35:06 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:18:13 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 18:35:42 -0600, Ignoramus14709
wrote:

On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably
say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.

What a great idea! It would double the average IQ of the USA within
a
week! Alas, as we saw in Idiocracy, "they" tend to constantly
multiply. "Hey, let's water the fields with Gatorade!" sigh


Then only one person will remain.

Our hero: the programmer/mechanic.


If you trigger the Hunger Games you'll be left with Jennifer Lawrence,
who will beget 10,000 years of Quest For Fire.


That's OK. Besides being great with a bow, she's hot! domg
Speaking of which, my ex-BIL left a 75# pull compound bow in my
sister's garage rafters and I find my name attached to it. I'm the
only one who can pull it -and- it's left-handed. Win/Win, wot?


Cool! Need help with it..let me know.

Gunner


(For those of you in Rio Linda, that's "Dirty Old Man Grin")


"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child,
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats."
PJ O'Rourke
  #67   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,355
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains the middle class

"David R. Birch" on Mon, 29 Dec 2014 09:53:54 -0600
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 12/29/2014 9:35 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
"David R. Birch" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:46:28 -0600


And the substances coming out of them are little different from the
substances coming out of me after I've eaten them.


And you know this - how?


Simple observation.


Yech. Back in the **** can with you.

David

--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
  #68   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,648
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains the middle class

pyotr filipivich wrote in
:

"David R. Birch" on Mon, 29 Dec 2014 09:53:54 -0600
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 12/29/2014 9:35 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
"David R. Birch" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:46:28 -0600


And the substances coming out of them are little different from the
substances coming out of me after I've eaten them.

And you know this - how?


Simple observation.


Yech. Back in the **** can with you.

And if you could refrain from quoting him, he'd stay there for the rest of us too.
  #69   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,984
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Monday, December 29, 2014 12:20:51 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:






I think you guys are 'way too pessimistic about the American economy,
and 'way too optimistic about the Chinese.


And I think you are just as wrong in you assesment.

This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.


The Japanese had no reputation for quality at the end of WWII.


I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.




Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.

We are not going to become a third world country, but we are going to be in the same league as China, Japan, and Korea. Which is a step down from where we were at the end of WWII.

Dan

--
Ed Huntress


  #70   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,025
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 08:39:06 -0800, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:35:06 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:18:13 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 18:35:42 -0600, Ignoramus14709
wrote:

On 2014-12-28, F George McDuffee
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 18:46:56 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

snip
"We are sure that our customers will enjoy shopping and being
entertained by robots."

If robots can sell coffee machines I think that they can probably
say,
"With Fries?" and it is very likely that if the Nestle experiment
works, and there at present at least one Japanese company that is
currently using robots in their outlets, that companies like
Macdonald's will be looking at the same solution.
=================
The problem being robots do no drink cocoa or eat
hamburgers... and the displaced workers will still have to
eat.



Maybe they do not have to eat -- or put it another way, we will not
feed them. Then the dumbest half of people will die off, then a half
of what remained, as the robots get smarter.

What a great idea! It would double the average IQ of the USA within
a
week! Alas, as we saw in Idiocracy, "they" tend to constantly
multiply. "Hey, let's water the fields with Gatorade!" sigh


Then only one person will remain.

Our hero: the programmer/mechanic.

If you trigger the Hunger Games you'll be left with Jennifer Lawrence,
who will beget 10,000 years of Quest For Fire.


That's OK. Besides being great with a bow, she's hot! domg
Speaking of which, my ex-BIL left a 75# pull compound bow in my
sister's garage rafters and I find my name attached to it. I'm the
only one who can pull it -and- it's left-handed. Win/Win, wot?


Cool! Need help with it..let me know.


I'll likely take you up on that offer, mon. One of the $2 CDs I
ordered last year was on Archery. Something like 18 books on it, all
the way back to Toxophilus (1545) and Yahi (1918). But having a HUmon
advisor would help a lot, too, in getting me back up to speed. I
haven't used a bow since my teens. That's a lot of years for us Olde
Fartes.

Hopefully, it's on its way to me now. I'll call you when it arrives
and I play with it a bit. I picked up a free target (1Mx1Mx.5M) from
a guy on Freecycle. It has 8 holes in it. g The downside is that a
raccoon sat atop the fence it was leaning on and shat on it a few
times. Now where's my jug o' Clorox?...

--
Poverty is easy. It's Charity and Chastity that are hard.
--anon


  #71   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 14:14:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Monday, December 29, 2014 12:20:51 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:






I think you guys are 'way too pessimistic about the American economy,
and 'way too optimistic about the Chinese.


And I think you are just as wrong in you assesment.


Your opinion is noted. g _The Economist_ disagrees with you. So do
many other economists:

http://tinyurl.com/ky6x8ap


This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.


The Japanese had no reputation for quality at the end of WWII.


Thanks to W. Edwards Deming, they woke up fast, and set a new quality
standard for the world. The Chinese are still mostly bottom-feeding in
international markets.



I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.




Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.

We are not going to become a third world country, but we are going to be in the same league as China, Japan, and Korea. Which is a step down from where we were at the end of WWII.


Not likely. We have an innovative vitality that only South Korea can
match. And they haven't been at it long enough to see how sustainable
it is. In Japan, it's already largely kaput. China isn't yet out of
the starting gate in that department.

--
Ed Huntress
  #72   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,355
Default The 'bots are already in place was A billionaire explains the middle class

Doug Miller on Mon, 29 Dec 2014
19:49:03 +0000 (UTC) typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote in
:

"David R. Birch" on Mon, 29 Dec 2014 09:53:54 -0600
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On 12/29/2014 9:35 AM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
"David R. Birch" on Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:46:28 -0600

And the substances coming out of them are little different from the
substances coming out of me after I've eaten them.

And you know this - how?

Simple observation.


Yech. Back in the **** can with you.

And if you could refrain from quoting him, he'd stay there for the rest of us too.


Sorry about that. My mistake.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
  #73   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,984
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Monday, December 29, 2014 6:26:01 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:

And I think you are just as wrong in you assesment.


Your opinion is noted. g _The Economist_ disagrees with you. So do
many other economists:

http://tinyurl.com/ky6x8ap

As I read it the Economist just says that China will still be behing the U.S. twenty years from now. But what will be the situation in say forty years?



This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.



So what do you think of the Chinese Stealth Planes?



The Japanese had no reputation for quality at the end of WWII.


Thanks to W. Edwards Deming, they woke up fast, and set a new quality
standard for the world. The Chinese are still mostly bottom-feeding in
international markets.


And you expect this to remain the same for forty years?


I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.




Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.

We are not going to become a third world country, but we are going to be in the same league as China, Japan, and Korea. Which is a step down from where we were at the end of WWII.


Not likely. We have an innovative vitality that only South Korea can
match. And they haven't been at it long enough to see how sustainable
it is. In Japan, it's already largely kaput. China isn't yet out of
the starting gate in that department.


You are an optimist.

Dan

--
Ed Huntress


  #74   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 12:20:38 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:11:44 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 02:04:18 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 5:29 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 15:08:49 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 1:18 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

Much snipped



I think you guys are 'way too pessimistic about the American economy,
and 'way too optimistic about the Chinese.

This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.

I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.

Meantime, US manufacturing has settled into a low but sustainable
percentage of our GDP. It's projected to grow in dollars, and slightly
in percentage of GDP, in coming years. The rest of our economy is
perking along mostly on services, and the labor-multiplier effect of
manufacturing is sufficient to sustain pretty good growth.

Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.


Do you remember Japan after WW II?

The Japanese did exactly what the Chinese are doing now, albeit on a
smaller scale, they leaped into foreign trade with what they could
manufacture and the words "Made in Japan" was a synonym for "Junk!".
Now look at them. The first Nikon FP camera was made in 1948 and by
the Korean war Nikon and Canon had become the preferred camera of most
news correspondents and Leica and Contax were headed down the slippery
slope.

Granted there are differences between Japan and China but at least in
certain industries, perhaps in many, there is a very definite intent
on improving.

A friend does fiberglass work on yachts and a Wholesaler in Bangkok
recently sent him some fiberglass cloth samples in an effort to
convince him to buy from them. It was really rough stuff with the
weave very uneven and a lot of knots where a strand had been spliced.
He sent the stuff back and included a sample of the Australian (I
believe) cloth that he uses. The Wholesaler called home to discuss the
matter and in the conversation the Wholesaler said that he had sent
the cloth back to the Chinese factory and they were very interested in
my friend's comments and would strive to do better and would send
improved samples at a later date.

Here there are many single cylinder, water cooled, diesel engines used
- they even "home build" built a small truck with them called a "Etan"
which originally was powered with Japanese made "Kubota" engine, see:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/percyv...7629962147807/
For an action shot see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AmeF4jV8gw
Today, they are nearly all powered with either a Chinese copy of the
Kubota, or a Chinese made Kubota as Kubota has established factories
in China in order to remain competitive.

I suspect that question is how much longer can the U.S. maintain its
current levels of income as more and more jobs move overseas. The
current unemployment rate in the U.S. is, I believe, 5.8% and it is
being bragged about. Thailand, on the other hand is 0.7.
--
Cheers,

John B.
  #75   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 18:25:48 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 14:14:49 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Monday, December 29, 2014 12:20:51 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:






I think you guys are 'way too pessimistic about the American economy,
and 'way too optimistic about the Chinese.


And I think you are just as wrong in you assesment.


Your opinion is noted. g _The Economist_ disagrees with you. So do
many other economists:

http://tinyurl.com/ky6x8ap


This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.


The Japanese had no reputation for quality at the end of WWII.


Thanks to W. Edwards Deming, they woke up fast, and set a new quality
standard for the world. The Chinese are still mostly bottom-feeding in
international markets.

Yes, that is correct. But at the same time the international markets
are so much larger now and as Walmart seems to have proved there is
money in selling to the bottom end.



I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.




Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.

We are not going to become a third world country, but we are going to be in the same league as China, Japan, and Korea. Which is a step down from where we were at the end of WWII.


Not likely. We have an innovative vitality that only South Korea can
match. And they haven't been at it long enough to see how sustainable
it is. In Japan, it's already largely kaput. China isn't yet out of
the starting gate in that department.


Well, yes, but two of the top 7 banks in the world are Chinese (None
of them is a U.S. bank). China accounts for a fifth of the world's
manufacturing. The U.S. lies 2nd, I believe - it was first in 2010
and manufacturing jobs have decreased about 30% since 2000.

"Innovative vitality" is the sort of term one often hears in
advertising and political speeches, but what does it really mean? That
the U.S. is the leader in the ship building business, or the high
speed train business? Nope, the Japan pioneered the advances in both
of those. Or perhaps the personal computer or smart-phone business?
Nope, China seems to be the leader there. Computers? The most powerful
computer I see is a Chinese made computer, the Tianhe-2 at
33.86-petaflops is as of Nov. 2014 the most powerful.

--
Cheers,

John B.


  #76   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 19:15:21 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Monday, December 29, 2014 6:26:01 PM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:

And I think you are just as wrong in you assesment.


Your opinion is noted. g _The Economist_ disagrees with you. So do
many other economists:

http://tinyurl.com/ky6x8ap

As I read it the Economist just says that China will still be behing the U.S. twenty years from now. But what will be the situation in say forty years?


Predicting 40 years ahead is beyond my pay scale.




This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.


So what do you think of the Chinese Stealth Planes?


I haven't paid attention. If they're anything like the Soviets were,
their war machines are unlikely to have any positive fallout for their
economy, nor to represent what they can do on a human economic scale.

But I don't know what their planes are like.




The Japanese had no reputation for quality at the end of WWII.


Thanks to W. Edwards Deming, they woke up fast, and set a new quality
standard for the world. The Chinese are still mostly bottom-feeding in
international markets.


And you expect this to remain the same for forty years?


I just can't project that far ahead.



I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.



Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.

We are not going to become a third world country, but we are going to be in the same league as China, Japan, and Korea. Which is a step down from where we were at the end of WWII.


Not likely. We have an innovative vitality that only South Korea can
match. And they haven't been at it long enough to see how sustainable
it is. In Japan, it's already largely kaput. China isn't yet out of
the starting gate in that department.


You are an optimist.


Not usually. But in this case, yes, I'm optimistic that our economy
will do quite well.

I hope the Chinese economy does well, too. An equal trading partner
would be very good for both of us.

--
Ed Huntress
  #77   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:31:50 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 12:20:38 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:11:44 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 02:04:18 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 5:29 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 15:08:49 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 1:18 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

Much snipped



I think you guys are 'way too pessimistic about the American economy,
and 'way too optimistic about the Chinese.

This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.

I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.

Meantime, US manufacturing has settled into a low but sustainable
percentage of our GDP. It's projected to grow in dollars, and slightly
in percentage of GDP, in coming years. The rest of our economy is
perking along mostly on services, and the labor-multiplier effect of
manufacturing is sufficient to sustain pretty good growth.

Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.


Do you remember Japan after WW II?


I wasn't born until 1948. But I remember when Japanese products were
junk.


The Japanese did exactly what the Chinese are doing now, albeit on a
smaller scale, they leaped into foreign trade with what they could
manufacture and the words "Made in Japan" was a synonym for "Junk!".
Now look at them. The first Nikon FP camera was made in 1948 and by
the Korean war Nikon and Canon had become the preferred camera of most
news correspondents and Leica and Contax were headed down the slippery
slope.


In about four years. After 1950, and Deming, Japanese industry focused
on quality and it paid off in just a few years:

"Deming is best known for his work in Japan after WWII, particularly
his work with the leaders of Japanese industry. That work began in
August 1950 at the Hakone Convention Center in Tokyo when Deming
delivered a seminal speech on what he called Statistical Product
Quality Administration. Many in Japan credit Deming as the inspiration
for what has become known as the Japanese post-war economic miracle of
1950 to 1960, when Japan rose from the ashes of war to become the
second most powerful economy in the world in less than a decade,
founded on the ideas Deming taught:"

Japan became interntaionally recognized for quality in just over a
decade. China is still known for junk, after three decades or so.

Granted there are differences between Japan and China but at least in
certain industries, perhaps in many, there is a very definite intent
on improving.


We'll see how successful they are. Fourteen years ago, executives at
VW's China factory said they'd be ready to export to Western countries
within five years.

'Still waiting.


A friend does fiberglass work on yachts and a Wholesaler in Bangkok
recently sent him some fiberglass cloth samples in an effort to
convince him to buy from them. It was really rough stuff with the
weave very uneven and a lot of knots where a strand had been spliced.
He sent the stuff back and included a sample of the Australian (I
believe) cloth that he uses. The Wholesaler called home to discuss the
matter and in the conversation the Wholesaler said that he had sent
the cloth back to the Chinese factory and they were very interested in
my friend's comments and would strive to do better and would send
improved samples at a later date.

Here there are many single cylinder, water cooled, diesel engines used
- they even "home build" built a small truck with them called a "Etan"
which originally was powered with Japanese made "Kubota" engine, see:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/percyv...7629962147807/
For an action shot see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AmeF4jV8gw
Today, they are nearly all powered with either a Chinese copy of the
Kubota, or a Chinese made Kubota as Kubota has established factories
in China in order to remain competitive.

I suspect that question is how much longer can the U.S. maintain its
current levels of income as more and more jobs move overseas. The
current unemployment rate in the U.S. is, I believe, 5.8% and it is
being bragged about. Thailand, on the other hand is 0.7.


We could go on forever with anecdotes, John, and I could point you to
some analyses by specialty labor and trade consultants, but you could
find them if you want. Let me just say that the number of US jobs
"lost" to offshoring is wildly exaggerated for a number of reasons.

But the most importnat figures are these:

Total private (non-government) US employment, before the effects of
the recession were felt, Nov. 2008: 113,636,000. As of Nov. 2014:
118,868,000.

Even counting losses due to fast-climbing productivity improvements,
and counting the recovery from the recession, our net job gains are
not bad. Offshoring has hit some specific job categories and
industries pretty hard, but the US has one hell of a resilient
economy. Overall, the effect of offshoring is estimated to reduce our
employment growth by around 10% to 12%. It's a very hard thing to
measure accurately.

As for those "trucks" you linked to, they tell a story in themselves
-- and it's not a story that US truck manufacturers are going to worry
about. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress
  #78   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,243
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On 12/29/2014 8:10 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
thread getting too long...snip

The Japanese had no reputation for quality at the end of WWII.

Thanks to W. Edwards Deming, they woke up fast, and set a new quality
standard for the world. The Chinese are still mostly bottom-feeding in
international markets.


And you expect this to remain the same for forty years?


I just can't project that far ahead.

It's not rocket science. It's simple math.
The first order approximation to ANYTHING is to assume
the current trend continues at the same slope.
If you don't like the trend, saying you can't predict is not
helpful.
The correct course of action is to decide where you want to
be in 40 years and take affirmative action NOW to point the
trend in the direction you want. Any correction is better
than none. Watch the result. If conditions change, or you picked
wrong, just reassess the situation and adjust the vector.
You must anticipate your competition will to whatever they think
necessary to readjust the trend back to their preferred direction.
The wind will change direction. You must keep a firm hand on the
tiller.

In a sea of independent democratic (and non democratic) societies, or on
a smaller
scale, the US congress, you can't get agreement on anything.
Can't get a majority vote on positive change, but you can sure
get enough votes to kill any and all proposals. There ain't
no leadership with cojones plus a willingness to admit they were
wrong and the authority correct the course continuously in real time
without continued infighting for control of the tiller.

Another result of multiple societies competing for dominance
is that
any change by one results in a knee-jerk cascade of changes
to the forces on the vector. The system is rather sensitive
to small changes in initial conditions. There are a bunch of
societies wanting to control the vector to their advantage.

I've heard it said that if you're behind a wreck on the racetrack,
head for the crash. You don't know where the cars will head,
but you can be pretty sure they won't be where they are now
and you might get out alive. Some action, any reasoned action,
is statistically better than none.

If it were me, I'd put Snow White in charge of the economy.
She's got at least seven people she can trust.
That alone puts her miles ahead of anybody else you could name.
Learning all about economics from scratch is far easier than
getting seven economists to agree.

I'd also assign Santa Claus to her team.
He's very good at nosing around to see who's naughty and who's nice.
He's also got high-volume manufacturing and distribution experience
well tuned to understand and respond to demand down to the individual.
And a propaganda machine second to none. Few even
realize there's a birthday in the mix.

Merry Christmas to all and to all a zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz



  #79   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,243
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On 12/29/2014 9:56 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:31:50 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 12:20:38 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:11:44 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 02:04:18 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 5:29 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 15:08:49 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 1:18 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

Much snipped



I think you guys are 'way too pessimistic about the American economy,
and 'way too optimistic about the Chinese.

This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.

I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.

Meantime, US manufacturing has settled into a low but sustainable
percentage of our GDP. It's projected to grow in dollars, and slightly
in percentage of GDP, in coming years. The rest of our economy is
perking along mostly on services, and the labor-multiplier effect of
manufacturing is sufficient to sustain pretty good growth.

Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.


Do you remember Japan after WW II?


I wasn't born until 1948. But I remember when Japanese products were
junk.


The Japanese did exactly what the Chinese are doing now, albeit on a
smaller scale, they leaped into foreign trade with what they could
manufacture and the words "Made in Japan" was a synonym for "Junk!".
Now look at them. The first Nikon FP camera was made in 1948 and by
the Korean war Nikon and Canon had become the preferred camera of most
news correspondents and Leica and Contax were headed down the slippery
slope.


In about four years. After 1950, and Deming, Japanese industry focused
on quality and it paid off in just a few years:

"Deming is best known for his work in Japan after WWII, particularly
his work with the leaders of Japanese industry. That work began in
August 1950 at the Hakone Convention Center in Tokyo when Deming
delivered a seminal speech on what he called Statistical Product
Quality Administration. Many in Japan credit Deming as the inspiration
for what has become known as the Japanese post-war economic miracle of
1950 to 1960, when Japan rose from the ashes of war to become the
second most powerful economy in the world in less than a decade,
founded on the ideas Deming taught:"

Japan became interntaionally recognized for quality in just over a
decade. China is still known for junk, after three decades or so.

Granted there are differences between Japan and China but at least in
certain industries, perhaps in many, there is a very definite intent
on improving.


We'll see how successful they are. Fourteen years ago, executives at
VW's China factory said they'd be ready to export to Western countries
within five years.

'Still waiting.


A friend does fiberglass work on yachts and a Wholesaler in Bangkok
recently sent him some fiberglass cloth samples in an effort to
convince him to buy from them. It was really rough stuff with the
weave very uneven and a lot of knots where a strand had been spliced.
He sent the stuff back and included a sample of the Australian (I
believe) cloth that he uses. The Wholesaler called home to discuss the
matter and in the conversation the Wholesaler said that he had sent
the cloth back to the Chinese factory and they were very interested in
my friend's comments and would strive to do better and would send
improved samples at a later date.

Here there are many single cylinder, water cooled, diesel engines used
- they even "home build" built a small truck with them called a "Etan"
which originally was powered with Japanese made "Kubota" engine, see:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/percyv...7629962147807/
For an action shot see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AmeF4jV8gw
Today, they are nearly all powered with either a Chinese copy of the
Kubota, or a Chinese made Kubota as Kubota has established factories
in China in order to remain competitive.

I suspect that question is how much longer can the U.S. maintain its
current levels of income as more and more jobs move overseas. The
current unemployment rate in the U.S. is, I believe, 5.8% and it is
being bragged about. Thailand, on the other hand is 0.7.


We could go on forever with anecdotes, John, and I could point you to
some analyses by specialty labor and trade consultants, but you could
find them if you want. Let me just say that the number of US jobs
"lost" to offshoring is wildly exaggerated for a number of reasons.

But the most importnat figures are these:

Total private (non-government) US employment, before the effects of
the recession were felt, Nov. 2008: 113,636,000. As of Nov. 2014:
118,868,000.

Can you put that ratio in context with other metrics over 6 years?
Population? GNP? Income distribution? Cost of living vs wage growth?
How many highly paid manufacturing jobs got replaced by "do you want
fries with that?"
Job availability for young workers entering the work force for the first
time and those forced out by cheaper/new workers?
How many of the newly employed were forced to do that because one
income could no longer support the family?
Welfare rolls/costs?
And in relation to government employment that all the rest of us pay
for with taxes?

A favorite trick of statisticians is to pick two points in time
that maximize the peak in goodness for whatever they're promoting
while avoiding the hockey-sticks on either end of that period.
That gets compared to some other metric over a slightly different time
period
that either avoids or includes those hockey-sticks as required to
support the thesis. Results of one action often show up as delayed
responses in later time periods.
So, it's not too hard to claim whatever you want and support it with
facts...as long as you're vague enough. You're not unemployed
if you've given up looking for work or your benefits have run out
and you're no longer counted.

If I were young or had descendents, I'd be very worried the future.

I'd like to hear some good news, but I'm jaded.

Even counting losses due to fast-climbing productivity improvements,
and counting the recovery from the recession, our net job gains are
not bad. Offshoring has hit some specific job categories and
industries pretty hard, but the US has one hell of a resilient
economy. Overall, the effect of offshoring is estimated to reduce our
employment growth by around 10% to 12%. It's a very hard thing to
measure accurately.

As for those "trucks" you linked to, they tell a story in themselves
-- and it's not a story that US truck manufacturers are going to worry
about. d8-)


  #80   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default A billionaire explains the middle class

On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 00:56:51 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:31:50 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 12:20:38 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:11:44 -0800, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 02:04:18 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 5:29 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 28 Dec 2014 15:08:49 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/28/2014 1:18 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 22:26:29 -0800, mike wrote:

On 12/27/2014 9:44 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2014 02:08:54 -0800, "Howard Beal"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

Much snipped



I think you guys are 'way too pessimistic about the American economy,
and 'way too optimistic about the Chinese.

This is a long story, but the Chinese have been too slow to adopt
international standards of quality -- sewing a straight line on a
Louis Vuitton handbag is not a measure of manufacturing quality. And
now they're facing much higher transportation costs and a steep rise
in wages, with the Lewis Turning Point looming ahead. Like the
Japanese before them, they're losing their edge on cost, but without
the Japanese reputation for quality.

I talked with a Chinese representative of their tool-and-die industry
in Atlanta last month. I asked them if they could make decent D2 steel
yet. "Just barely," he said. Which puts them at a competitive parity
with the West...in about 1950.

The long-term goal for China is to be globally competitive at
competitive, not cut-rate, prices. They're hoping to accomplish
market-share inroads before their costs rise too much. So far, they're
not doing very well at that, in automobiles, industrial equipment, and
so on. There are factories in China turning out good products but
they're almost always run by Western companies, who are putting up
with horrible productivity in order to gain the labor-cost savings.
That will go away. Now their goal is to ride it out as the Chinese
domestic consumer market expands. Their economy *must* become more
consumption-based, or they're going to lose much of their export
market as their costs increase.

Meantime, US manufacturing has settled into a low but sustainable
percentage of our GDP. It's projected to grow in dollars, and slightly
in percentage of GDP, in coming years. The rest of our economy is
perking along mostly on services, and the labor-multiplier effect of
manufacturing is sufficient to sustain pretty good growth.

Our economy is doing well. It's employment that's at risk, largely
because of steady improvents in our productivity -- read "automation."
This will become a bigger social problem and we will have to address
it. But the solution will be much happier than you guys are imagining.
There is nothing in the economic dynamics that suggest we're going to
become a third-world country.


Do you remember Japan after WW II?


I wasn't born until 1948. But I remember when Japanese products were
junk.


The Japanese did exactly what the Chinese are doing now, albeit on a
smaller scale, they leaped into foreign trade with what they could
manufacture and the words "Made in Japan" was a synonym for "Junk!".
Now look at them. The first Nikon FP camera was made in 1948 and by
the Korean war Nikon and Canon had become the preferred camera of most
news correspondents and Leica and Contax were headed down the slippery
slope.


In about four years. After 1950, and Deming, Japanese industry focused
on quality and it paid off in just a few years:

"Deming is best known for his work in Japan after WWII, particularly
his work with the leaders of Japanese industry. That work began in
August 1950 at the Hakone Convention Center in Tokyo when Deming
delivered a seminal speech on what he called Statistical Product
Quality Administration. Many in Japan credit Deming as the inspiration
for what has become known as the Japanese post-war economic miracle of
1950 to 1960, when Japan rose from the ashes of war to become the
second most powerful economy in the world in less than a decade,
founded on the ideas Deming taught:"


True. The Japanese have a long history, right back the "Black ships"
and before, of acquiring foreign technology.

Japan became interntaionally recognized for quality in just over a
decade. China is still known for junk, after three decades or so.


But a lot of junk. Far more then Japan ever produced. Harbor Freight
is a 2 billion dollar business and Walmart probably more, to say
nothing of all the other countries.

Japan's GDP grew from 102,607 (Millions of dollars) in 1945 to 375,090
in 1960, a growth of 360%. China's GDP grew from 225.3 Billion Rmb in
1970 to 1985 (15 year period) to 896.4. a growth of 398%.

A large volume, low cost, product is not unique to China, after all
the largest employer (except for the U.S. government) does exactly
that.

Granted there are differences between Japan and China but at least in
certain industries, perhaps in many, there is a very definite intent
on improving.


We'll see how successful they are. Fourteen years ago, executives at
VW's China factory said they'd be ready to export to Western countries
within five years.

'Still waiting.


In reality, who cares?

I don't have up-to-date figures but in 2005 Chinese White Goods
exports to the EU alone was worth 4,185 billion dollars. In 2005 China
produced 31 million refrigerators, 30 million washing machines and 75
million air-conditioning units, for export. Again, I don't have
comparative figures but in 2012 VW's world wide earnings were 254
billion.

Whether VW-China is a success or not may not be a significant detail.


A friend does fiberglass work on yachts and a Wholesaler in Bangkok
recently sent him some fiberglass cloth samples in an effort to
convince him to buy from them. It was really rough stuff with the
weave very uneven and a lot of knots where a strand had been spliced.
He sent the stuff back and included a sample of the Australian (I
believe) cloth that he uses. The Wholesaler called home to discuss the
matter and in the conversation the Wholesaler said that he had sent
the cloth back to the Chinese factory and they were very interested in
my friend's comments and would strive to do better and would send
improved samples at a later date.

Here there are many single cylinder, water cooled, diesel engines used
- they even "home build" built a small truck with them called a "Etan"
which originally was powered with Japanese made "Kubota" engine, see:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/percyv...7629962147807/
For an action shot see:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AmeF4jV8gw
Today, they are nearly all powered with either a Chinese copy of the
Kubota, or a Chinese made Kubota as Kubota has established factories
in China in order to remain competitive.

I suspect that question is how much longer can the U.S. maintain its
current levels of income as more and more jobs move overseas. The
current unemployment rate in the U.S. is, I believe, 5.8% and it is
being bragged about. Thailand, on the other hand is 0.7.


We could go on forever with anecdotes, John, and I could point you to
some analyses by specialty labor and trade consultants, but you could
find them if you want. Let me just say that the number of US jobs
"lost" to offshoring is wildly exaggerated for a number of reasons.

But the most importnat figures are these:

Total private (non-government) US employment, before the effects of
the recession were felt, Nov. 2008: 113,636,000. As of Nov. 2014:
118,868,000.


And the Economist's current estimate is that China's economy will
exceed the U.S.'s by 2021 but their graph shows the Chinese economy to
continue to grow at an accelerated rate while the U.S. lags behind. A
previous estimate made by the Economist (2011) showed China exceeding
the U.S. in 2018 so their updated forecast (2014) seems to be well
within the limits of most estimates.

Even counting losses due to fast-climbing productivity improvements,
and counting the recovery from the recession, our net job gains are
not bad. Offshoring has hit some specific job categories and
industries pretty hard, but the US has one hell of a resilient
economy. Overall, the effect of offshoring is estimated to reduce our
employment growth by around 10% to 12%. It's a very hard thing to
measure accurately.


Difficult to analyze but jobs alone may not be the important factor.
If Macdonald's hires more counter persons certainly the unemployment
number goes down but I'm not sure that is a significant fact when
looking at the overall economy.

As for those "trucks" you linked to, they tell a story in themselves
-- and it's not a story that US truck manufacturers are going to worry
about. d8-)


Well, the link wasn't supposed to impress you with the vehicles, it
was to demonstrate the varied use of Chinese made engines in 3rd world
countries :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Robots, manufacturing, middle class, what I kept saying for years passerby Metalworking 1 February 5th 13 08:34 PM
OT Apple, America and Squeezed middle class Ignoramus1414 Metalworking 1 January 22nd 12 09:20 AM
can't guarantee middle-class Americans won't see tax hike Dan Metalworking 0 August 3rd 09 08:54 PM
A Day in the Life of Joe Middle-Class Republican Larry Bud Home Repair 177 September 13th 06 05:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"