|
The Buggery Of Trade With China
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted on Fri, Jun. 03, 2005 Wood crafts from China may harbor ruinous bugs A branch of the USDA recently suspended importation of certain items. The concern is two beetles that damage trees. By Don Oldenburg Washington Post It has been more than four years since Mary Gallagher noticed the small piles of sawdust beneath her imported, carved-wood elephant and watched, stunned, as tiny beetles scampered from small boreholes into her Arlington, Va., home. Gallagher, a travel journalist and consultant, says the incident was so disturbing that she still checks for a ring of dust around her many antiques and collection of wooden carvings. "I still pick things up and wait for those little black bugs to run out," she says. Gallagher successfully pressured Pier 1 Imports, the store where she bought the elephant, to pay for pest-control treatment of her home. She has since become something of a bellwether for others who find insects in imported craft products. "It was such a horrifying experience, not knowing what these bugs were, what they could do. Would my house be eaten and fall down?" she says. When Gallagher heard about the U.S. Department of Agriculture's recently taking steps to stop certain destructive insects that stow away in imported products, she sighed with relief - but wondered whether it would prevent experiences such as hers. Effective April 1, the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) suspended the importation of processed-wood craft items from China containing or made from logs, limbs, branches or twigs larger than one centimeter in diameter with bark intact. USDA officials are primarily concerned about two species - brown fir longhorn beetles and Japanese cedar longhorn beetles. Both are related to the Asian longhorn beetle that arrived in Chicago and New York in 1996 via wooden products, crates and pallets from Asia and has since done tens of millions of dollars in damage annually to trees. In the last six months, these beetles were found in several shipments of artificial Christmas trees (since recalled) that were made in China from natural tree limbs. "They attack fir trees, and we don't want to lose our fir trees to this," says USDA senior import specialist Bill Aley, adding that the inspection service is increasingly concerned about wood-boring pests coming into the United States from China via decorative wooden craft items. The temporary ban takes the artificial Christmas trees and some other wooden crafts imported from China off the market. But Aley says some people who purchased these products and now have them in their homes or stored in attics may still be housing the bugs. "There is usually a one-year cycle for these insects," he says. "So if it is something they bought in January, there is still a possibility that a larva is in there munching away." Anyone who owns wooden products made in China, especially artificial Christmas trees, should inspect them for "pinholes the size of pencil lead," Aley says. "Also look for what you call 'the sawdust'... which is bug excrement." But Aley says the USDA does not regulate the import of products that might be infested with "secondary pests" such as termites or the powder-post beetles that were encamped in Gallagher's elephant. Those insects are native to this country, and the USDA's main concern is keeping out destructive newcomers "that eat living trees." Says a disappointed Gallagher, "It's obviously not as fearful as a bad drug on the market, but it's certainly a very unpleasant experience." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Information on the ban is available at the Web site of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Visit www.aphis.usda.gov and click Hot Issues. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © 2005 Philadelphia Inquirer and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.philly.com Tom Watson - WoodDorker tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email) http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website) |
In article ,
Tom Watson wrote: [snippification of Inquirer article.] © 2005 Philadelphia Inquirer and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. Thanks for that article, Tom. *still shaking my head* There are times when I reach a point that I can't see past the corporate greed of some companies. I had the opportunity to compare some hybrid bicycles. I hadn't owned a bicycle for some time. I did ride my oldest daughter's bike a bit, but that saddle was giving me an involuntary prostrate exam. My wife received a nice comfortable bike from my parents for her birthday. We're talking front suspension, the saddle nice and comfy, upright riding position, wide handlebars. A dream to ride. The brand she bought was on the recommendation of a co-worker. I had a chance to study it and I was very impressed with the quality of the aluminum welds, the design and all the goodies that were mounted on it. It was manufactured by a small company in Quebec and therefore Made In Canada. I felt proud. My stepdaughter (11) and my wife (18 years younger than I) love going out for a ride after supper now that the weather has been co-operating. They wanted me, the old guy, to join them. So Rob went shopping for a bike. Why not? The cortesone and the Naprosin are really helping my knees, not to mention dropping 35 pounds in weight. Some of that by diet, some of that by solid work-outs in my basement gym. (Supervised by my physiotherapist.) Without going into too much detail, I started reading rec.bicycles.marketplace, soc. and .repair and tried to glean as much info as possible, because I was buying my LAST bike. I learned that without exception all bikes are an assembly of parts from all over the planet. Wheels, tires, gear-sets, cranks, brakes, shifters..all seem to come from a few manufacturers and everybody uses them. It basically comes down to the feature-set and the geometry/paint-job/brand-name of the frame. My research led me to a company called TREK. Highly promoted by the fact that American hero Lance Armstrong rides a TREK in the Tour De France. However, in my $ 500.00 dollar range, I could also buy a TREK, with NONE of the features of Lance's $ 5000.00 carbon fibre/unobtanium bike (So WHERE TF is the connection???) I took one of the $500.00 ones for a ride. Nice. Same front forks as my wife's. Same shifters and deraileurs as my wife's... same everything 'cept a different brand of tires and saddle. Both had aluminum welded frames of similar geometry. The TREK made in China was $ 50.00 more. My new MIELE Siena L-2 made in Canada became my new bike. The typical corporate bull****. US corporation leaning on the success of an American sports hero (and I hope he wins #7) to sell an off-shore inferior bike for the same money as a quality North-American built product..... just because of the brand name. It's bloody extortion! PS.. the TIG welds didn't look as nice on the China TREK as they did on my home-brew. |
I don't mean this as a knock against Canada but I've always wondered how
buying a Canadian made bicycle, car (eg. 300, Pacifica, Magnum, Charger, Crown Victoria, Equinox, etc.) or tank (eg. Stryker) benefitted the US economy any more than buying something made in China. "Robatoy" wrote in message ... In article , Tom Watson wrote: [snippification of Inquirer article.] © 2005 Philadelphia Inquirer and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. Thanks for that article, Tom. *still shaking my head* There are times when I reach a point that I can't see past the corporate greed of some companies. I had the opportunity to compare some hybrid bicycles. I hadn't owned a bicycle for some time. I did ride my oldest daughter's bike a bit, but that saddle was giving me an involuntary prostrate exam. My wife received a nice comfortable bike from my parents for her birthday. We're talking front suspension, the saddle nice and comfy, upright riding position, wide handlebars. A dream to ride. The brand she bought was on the recommendation of a co-worker. I had a chance to study it and I was very impressed with the quality of the aluminum welds, the design and all the goodies that were mounted on it. It was manufactured by a small company in Quebec and therefore Made In Canada. I felt proud. My stepdaughter (11) and my wife (18 years younger than I) love going out for a ride after supper now that the weather has been co-operating. They wanted me, the old guy, to join them. So Rob went shopping for a bike. Why not? The cortesone and the Naprosin are really helping my knees, not to mention dropping 35 pounds in weight. Some of that by diet, some of that by solid work-outs in my basement gym. (Supervised by my physiotherapist.) Without going into too much detail, I started reading rec.bicycles.marketplace, soc. and .repair and tried to glean as much info as possible, because I was buying my LAST bike. I learned that without exception all bikes are an assembly of parts from all over the planet. Wheels, tires, gear-sets, cranks, brakes, shifters..all seem to come from a few manufacturers and everybody uses them. It basically comes down to the feature-set and the geometry/paint-job/brand-name of the frame. My research led me to a company called TREK. Highly promoted by the fact that American hero Lance Armstrong rides a TREK in the Tour De France. However, in my $ 500.00 dollar range, I could also buy a TREK, with NONE of the features of Lance's $ 5000.00 carbon fibre/unobtanium bike (So WHERE TF is the connection???) I took one of the $500.00 ones for a ride. Nice. Same front forks as my wife's. Same shifters and deraileurs as my wife's... same everything 'cept a different brand of tires and saddle. Both had aluminum welded frames of similar geometry. The TREK made in China was $ 50.00 more. My new MIELE Siena L-2 made in Canada became my new bike. The typical corporate bull****. US corporation leaning on the success of an American sports hero (and I hope he wins #7) to sell an off-shore inferior bike for the same money as a quality North-American built product..... just because of the brand name. It's bloody extortion! PS.. the TIG welds didn't look as nice on the China TREK as they did on my home-brew. |
Robatoy wrote in news:design-66D48F.23085004062005
@news.bellglobal.com: snip The TREK made in China was $ 50.00 more. My new MIELE Siena L-2 made in Canada became my new bike. The typical corporate bull****. US corporation leaning on the success of an American sports hero (and I hope he wins #7) to sell an off-shore inferior bike for the same money as a quality North-American built product..... just because of the brand name. It's bloody extortion! PS.. the TIG welds didn't look as nice on the China TREK as they did on my home-brew. Marketing costs something. Sponsorships are not free. Pull through has a price. Is there value in brand? Freud or FS Tools table saw blades? Same thing in a different market. My sharpening guru tells me that the FS Tools blades are better in every way. The three I have purchased seem to bear that out. 30% less cash, more customization, local dealer, nationwide distribution. Keeter uses them, too, but I didn't know that before I bought the first two. Is it easier to sell a name brand solid surface material? Or are you, the 'retailer', the chief influencer of the materials decision, and the real product is the service/installation/materials? Did you buy a bike? Or a dealer, who supplied you with a bike? Where is the value creation for you? In a strange town, where will you stop for breakfast? Does brand matter? Patriarch |
In article 36,
Patriarch wrote: In a strange town, where will you stop for breakfast? Does brand matter? More off topic than on... When we visit an unfamiliar town we look for the McDonalds -- and head the other way. We keep an eye out for the establishment with the most appearance of "local color". We've found the best places that are usually full of regular ol' friendly folks, good food (outstanding desserts) and comfortable atmosphere. Taking a chance with an unknown is risky but it sure beats knowingly seeking out the mediocre. -- Owen Lowe The Fly-by-Night Copper Company __________ "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the Corporate States of America and to the Republicans for which it stands, one nation, under debt, easily divisible, with liberty and justice for oil." - Wiley Miller, Non Sequitur, 1/24/05 |
On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 23:00:19 -0500, "AL" wrote:
I don't mean this as a knock against Canada but I've always wondered how buying a Canadian made bicycle, car (eg. 300, Pacifica, Magnum, Charger, Crown Victoria, Equinox, etc.) or tank (eg. Stryker) benefitted the US economy any more than buying something made in China. While it doesn't matter much in simple terms of keeping money in the states, there are some very good reasons why buying Chinese products hurts the US (and European) economy. First, the Chinese peg their currency to the US dollar at an artificially low rate, giving them an automatic 30% price advantage over US manufacturers. Second, the Chinese government offers special incentives to manufacturers that remove much of the local manufacturing's overhead (things like free land or electricity, or huge tax breaks). Third, Chinese employees do not get paid anything near what workers in the rest of the developed do, mainly due to the fact that it is illegal for labor to organize in any signifigant way in China. And fourth, Chinese manufacturers are rarely, if ever, held accountible for theft of intellectual property from foreign companies- with some of the recent threads about copying furniture design for personal use, and how it may be taking food out of the mouth of some poor woodworker somewhere, it should not be difficult to figure out how that may be a VERY bad thing. After all, if the Chinese just go ahead and start mass-producing knockoffs of a product that a major concern in the US has spent millions of dollars designing, developing and testing, it takes food out of the mouths of hundreds or thousands of families. All of this leads to problems because they are illegally undercutting our manufacturing base to gain control of production. While we enjoy inexpensive items from them now, they are not going to remain quite so attractive as China continues to develop- and if they manage to become the sole source of certain items, we will have no other option but to purchase those items at whichever price they choose to set them at- and those prices are going to include the price of shipping the products halfway around the world. There is a reason why we have laws regulating trusts and monopolies in the US, but they don't apply in the far east, and if we are not careful as a society, we will see another era of robber barons pulling strings from the other side of the planet, and muckrakers are not going to be able to do a damn thing about it this time. Buying a product from Canada does not have the same ramifications. While Canada is a different country, they respect their citizens and properly regulate themselves- they are the kind of trading partners the US needs, not China. Don't get me wrong, I want to see China develop- but they must develop according to the same rules as everyone else. If they can conform to some minimal standards of behavior, then they have the potential to raise the standard of living for almost everyone on the planet. Until they do, buying their products is going to do nothing but hurt us. |
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 00:35:30 -0700, Fly-by-Night CC
wrote: In article 36, Patriarch wrote: In a strange town, where will you stop for breakfast? Does brand matter? More off topic than on... When we visit an unfamiliar town we look for the McDonalds -- and head the other way. We keep an eye out for the establishment with the most appearance of "local color". We've found the best places that are usually full of regular ol' friendly folks, good food (outstanding desserts) and comfortable atmosphere. Taking a chance with an unknown is risky but it sure beats knowingly seeking out the mediocre. Definately. If you're ever coming through NW Wisconsin, check out Main St. Cafe in Bloomer. Food so good that people often drive 30 miles or more for dinner and a pie- and it's usually cheaper than the brand name standbys. |
"Robatoy" wrote in message ... In article , There are times when I reach a point that I can't see past the corporate greed of some companies. It's transplanted from their customers who want to get something for nothing. |
In article , "AL" wrote:
I don't mean this as a knock against Canada but I've always wondered how buying a Canadian made bicycle, car (eg. 300, Pacifica, Magnum, Charger, Crown Victoria, Equinox, etc.) or tank (eg. Stryker) benefitted the US economy any more than buying something made in China. It doesn't. But if you look at Robatoy's email address "Robatoy" you'll see that he lives in Canada, and presumably is concerned about benefitting the Canadian economy. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time? |
None of this matters in a free greed economy. Screw every last dollar out of
anyone you can now, don't worry about the future. It's the American way. "Prometheus" wrote in message ... On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 23:00:19 -0500, "AL" wrote: I don't mean this as a knock against Canada but I've always wondered how buying a Canadian made bicycle, car (eg. 300, Pacifica, Magnum, Charger, Crown Victoria, Equinox, etc.) or tank (eg. Stryker) benefitted the US economy any more than buying something made in China. While it doesn't matter much in simple terms of keeping money in the states, there are some very good reasons why buying Chinese products hurts the US (and European) economy. First, the Chinese peg their currency to the US dollar at an artificially low rate, giving them an automatic 30% price advantage over US manufacturers. Second, the Chinese government offers special incentives to manufacturers that remove much of the local manufacturing's overhead (things like free land or electricity, or huge tax breaks). Third, Chinese employees do not get paid anything near what workers in the rest of the developed do, mainly due to the fact that it is illegal for labor to organize in any signifigant way in China. And fourth, Chinese manufacturers are rarely, if ever, held accountible for theft of intellectual property from foreign companies- with some of the recent threads about copying furniture design for personal use, and how it may be taking food out of the mouth of some poor woodworker somewhere, it should not be difficult to figure out how that may be a VERY bad thing. After all, if the Chinese just go ahead and start mass-producing knockoffs of a product that a major concern in the US has spent millions of dollars designing, developing and testing, it takes food out of the mouths of hundreds or thousands of families. All of this leads to problems because they are illegally undercutting our manufacturing base to gain control of production. While we enjoy inexpensive items from them now, they are not going to remain quite so attractive as China continues to develop- and if they manage to become the sole source of certain items, we will have no other option but to purchase those items at whichever price they choose to set them at- and those prices are going to include the price of shipping the products halfway around the world. There is a reason why we have laws regulating trusts and monopolies in the US, but they don't apply in the far east, and if we are not careful as a society, we will see another era of robber barons pulling strings from the other side of the planet, and muckrakers are not going to be able to do a damn thing about it this time. Buying a product from Canada does not have the same ramifications. While Canada is a different country, they respect their citizens and properly regulate themselves- they are the kind of trading partners the US needs, not China. Don't get me wrong, I want to see China develop- but they must develop according to the same rules as everyone else. If they can conform to some minimal standards of behavior, then they have the potential to raise the standard of living for almost everyone on the planet. Until they do, buying their products is going to do nothing but hurt us. |
Robatoy wrote:
In article , Tom Watson wrote: [snippification of Inquirer article.] © 2005 Philadelphia Inquirer and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. Thanks for that article, Tom. *still shaking my head* There are times when I reach a point that I can't see past the corporate greed of some companies. I had the opportunity to compare some hybrid bicycles. I hadn't owned a bicycle for some time. I did ride my oldest daughter's bike a bit, but that saddle was giving me an involuntary prostrate exam. My wife received a nice comfortable bike from my parents for her birthday. We're talking front suspension, the saddle nice and comfy, upright riding position, wide handlebars. A dream to ride. The brand she bought was on the recommendation of a co-worker. I had a chance to study it and I was very impressed with the quality of the aluminum welds, the design and all the goodies that were mounted on it. It was manufactured by a small company in Quebec and therefore Made In Canada. I felt proud. My stepdaughter (11) and my wife (18 years younger than I) love going out for a ride after supper now that the weather has been co-operating. They wanted me, the old guy, to join them. So Rob went shopping for a bike. Why not? The cortesone and the Naprosin are really helping my knees, not to mention dropping 35 pounds in weight. Some of that by diet, some of that by solid work-outs in my basement gym. (Supervised by my physiotherapist.) Without going into too much detail, I started reading rec.bicycles.marketplace, soc. and .repair and tried to glean as much info as possible, because I was buying my LAST bike. I learned that without exception all bikes are an assembly of parts from all over the planet. Wheels, tires, gear-sets, cranks, brakes, shifters..all seem to come from a few manufacturers and everybody uses them. It basically comes down to the feature-set and the geometry/paint-job/brand-name of the frame. My research led me to a company called TREK. Highly promoted by the fact that American hero Lance Armstrong rides a TREK in the Tour De France. However, in my $ 500.00 dollar range, I could also buy a TREK, with NONE of the features of Lance's $ 5000.00 carbon fibre/unobtanium bike (So WHERE TF is the connection???) I took one of the $500.00 ones for a ride. Nice. Same front forks as my wife's. Same shifters and deraileurs as my wife's... same everything 'cept a different brand of tires and saddle. Both had aluminum welded frames of similar geometry. The TREK made in China was $ 50.00 more. My new MIELE Siena L-2 made in Canada became my new bike. The typical corporate bull****. US corporation leaning on the success of an American sports hero (and I hope he wins #7) to sell an off-shore inferior bike for the same money as a quality North-American built product..... just because of the brand name. It's bloody extortion! PS.. the TIG welds didn't look as nice on the China TREK as they did on my home-brew. Couple of comments here--first Trek is a well established bicycle manufacturer which had a solid reputation long before anybody had ever heard of Lance Armstrong. Second, I suspect that far more Chinese ride bicycles than do Americans and for many of the ones who do it's transportation and not recreation. So I would not assume that a Chinese made bicycle, especially one that Trek puts their label on, was of inferior quality any more than I would assume that a Chinese-made wok was of inferior quality to an American-made one. As for the welds looking rough, better a rough weld that doesn't break than a smooth one that does--unless there are obvious voids you can't tell how good a weld is by looking at it through a coat of paint. -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
In article , "J. Clarke" wrote:
Couple of comments here--first Trek is a well established bicycle manufacturer which had a solid reputation long before anybody had ever heard of Lance Armstrong. Second, I suspect that far more Chinese ride bicycles than do Americans Possibly related to the fact that the population of China is some 4x that of the United States... and for many of the ones who do it's transportation and not recreation. So I would not assume that a Chinese made bicycle, especially one that Trek puts their label on, was of inferior quality any more than I would assume that a Chinese-made wok was of inferior quality to an American-made one. The assumption of the inferiority of Chinese-made goods, regardless of what label they may bear, to their American- or Canadian-made counterparts, is an assumption that is unfortunately fully justified by experience with a wide variety of consumer goods. As for the welds looking rough, better a rough weld that doesn't break than a smooth one that does--unless there are obvious voids you can't tell how good a weld is by looking at it through a coat of paint. I don't think I quite agree with you here, either. While a neat-looking weld is not necessarily a solid weld, it's reasonable to suppose that a sloppy-looking weld may also be a sloppily *made* weld. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time? |
|
|
In article , "AL"
wrote: ...and what part of: Doug, I won't consider your observation about my being Canadian as a snipe, didn't you get, AL? |
In article 36,
Patriarch wrote: Marketing costs something. Sponsorships are not free. Pull through has a price. Is there value in brand? Considering that Ferrari won the bulk of the Formula 1 races in 2004 and before, those victories sold a lot of Fiats which count amongst some the worst cars made. Brands obviously does matter to the marketing. To the quality? Obviously not. Freud or FS Tools table saw blades? Same thing in a different market. My sharpening guru tells me that the FS Tools blades are better in every way. The three I have purchased seem to bear that out. 30% less cash, more customization, local dealer, nationwide distribution. Keeter uses them, too, but I didn't know that before I bought the first two. You chose that particular brand based on intelligent research and trusted the experience of an expert. Performance came first, service next and I don't know where to put price on this... but you probably would be happy to pay a bit more? Is it easier to sell a name brand solid surface material? Or are you, the 'retailer', the chief influencer of the materials decision, and the real product is the service/installation/materials? The brand names of solid surface products sometimes bring the customers in. My reputation allows me to show them an equal product for far less money, a savings which I pass on to the customer. My piece of the pie doesn't change. I do not sell the Korean import for the same money as US made DuPont Corian and pocket the extra. THAT is what turned me off the TREK. In many cases I could do just that using my local reputation as the way to do that. The bulk of my clients are referrals, so they buy a bit of me. I sometimes get customers who tell me to talk to their decorator about colour, "build it, send me the bill".. no quotation/prices up front..just "do it". Fortunately for them, they can do that with me. Did you buy a bike? Or a dealer, who supplied you with a bike? Where is the value creation for you? The value was in the fact that the bike had all the features and quality I wanted for the price I was willing to pay. The dealer means little in this case as I am capable of maintaining my own bike, but the people seemed more pleasant than the TREK dealer. The TREK also had all the feature for the price..but I felt that (like my solid surface philosophy in pricing) because it was Chinese-made, there should have been a better price... if for no other reasons than cheaper labour and undervalued currency, all of which are true. But I know what you mean. It is often the whole package one should look at. In this town I would NEVER buy a Ford product, yet my buddy loves his Ford dealer and trucks 100 km from here. In a strange town, where will you stop for breakfast? Does brand matter? Strange town or home-town I avoid ALL brand-hyped garbage. I am never so hungry that I can't reach a grocery store and buy a bun and cheese. A Wendy's salad, maybe. A Subway low-fat sub...sure... if need be. |
In article , AL wrote:
I don't mean this as a knock against Canada but I've always wondered how buying a Canadian made bicycle, car (eg. 300, Pacifica, Magnum, Charger, Crown Victoria, Equinox, etc.) or tank (eg. Stryker) benefitted the US economy any more than buying something made in China. Why would a Canadian (like myself and Robatoy) be overly concerned about benefitting the US economy? He bought a Canadian made bike in Canada, Al. -- ~ Stay Calm... Be Brave... Wait for the Signs ~ ------------------------------------------------------ One site: http://www.balderstone.ca The other site, with ww linkshttp://www.woodenwabbits.com |
"Doug Miller" wrote in message ... I don't think I quite agree with you here, either. While a neat-looking weld is not necessarily a solid weld, it's reasonable to suppose that a sloppy-looking weld may also be a sloppily *made* weld. I thought welding was like solder - bigger the glob the better the job.... |
"Doug Miller" wrote in message ... In article , "J. Clarke" wrote: Couple of comments here--first Trek is a well established bicycle manufacturer which had a solid reputation long before anybody had ever heard of Lance Armstrong. Second, I suspect that far more Chinese ride bicycles than do Americans Possibly related to the fact that the population of China is some 4x that of the United States... and for many of the ones who do it's transportation and not recreation. So I would not assume that a Chinese made bicycle, especially one that Trek puts their label on, was of inferior quality any more than I would assume that a Chinese-made wok was of inferior quality to an American-made one. The assumption of the inferiority of Chinese-made goods, regardless of what label they may bear, to their American- or Canadian-made counterparts, is an assumption that is unfortunately fully justified by experience with a wide variety of consumer goods. As for the welds looking rough, better a rough weld that doesn't break than a smooth one that does--unless there are obvious voids you can't tell how good a weld is by looking at it through a coat of paint. I don't think I quite agree with you here, either. While a neat-looking weld is not necessarily a solid weld, it's reasonable to suppose that a sloppy-looking weld may also be a sloppily *made* weld. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time? Hope they use the same quality control on their war machinery.....mjh |
"Robatoy" wrote in message A Subway low-fat sub...sure... if need be. Yes, but Subway does not have the ambiance of a McDonalds. Pathetic, but true. |
"George" george@least wrote in message ... "Doug Miller" wrote in message ... I don't think I quite agree with you here, either. While a neat-looking weld is not necessarily a solid weld, it's reasonable to suppose that a sloppy-looking weld may also be a sloppily *made* weld. I thought welding was like solder - bigger the glob the better the job.... Don't want you soldering my wires! -- Nahmie The greatest headaches are those we cause ourselves. |
|
In article , Robatoy wrote:
In article , (Doug Miller) wrote: In article , "AL" wrote: I don't mean this as a knock against Canada but I've always wondered how buying a Canadian made bicycle, car (eg. 300, Pacifica, Magnum, Charger, Crown Victoria, Equinox, etc.) or tank (eg. Stryker) benefitted the US economy any more than buying something made in China. It doesn't. But if you look at Robatoy's email address "Robatoy" you'll see that he lives in Canada, and presumably is concerned about benefitting the Canadian economy. [snip] Doug, I won't consider your observation about my being Canadian as a snipe, because you obviously don't know anything about me. Other than the obvious, that you're a woodworker with an email address in a Canadian domain, and the reasonable deduction that you live in Canada, no, I admit that I don't. My comment wasn't intended as a snipe, and I certainly apologize if it appeared to be one. Please note, though, that I referred to you as "livi[ng] in Canada", not as "a Canadian" - precisely because the former is fairly obvious, but the latter is only an assumption. And I do think it's reasonable to suppose that most people are more concerned with the economy of the nation in which they reside, than with that of a neighboring nation. My comment was directed at the guy who wondered why you might think that buying a Canadian-made bike would benefit the US economy more than buying a Chinese-made bike - seems to me that someone living in Canada wouldn't think that, and wouldn't be all that interested in benefitting the US economy... -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time? |
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 19:14:19 -0400, Tom Watson
wrote: A posting of a story about bugs in wooden goods that originated in China. It is always damned fascinating to me how "thread drift" occurs but I've seldom seen it happen without at least one reference to the content of the original post. I guess I should know by now that the OP is nothing more than a catalyst for the ensuing discussion and can only hope that he will not be consumed in the reaction. Tom Watson - WoodDorker tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email) http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ (website) |
CW wrote:
None of this matters in a free greed economy. Screw every last dollar out of anyone you can now, don't worry about the future. It's the American way. No, it's the American MANAGER/OWNER'S way. |
Tom Watson wrote in
: On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 19:14:19 -0400, Tom Watson wrote: A posting of a story about bugs in wooden goods that originated in China. It is always damned fascinating to me how "thread drift" occurs but I've seldom seen it happen without at least one reference to the content of the original post. I guess I should know by now that the OP is nothing more than a catalyst for the ensuing discussion and can only hope that he will not be consumed in the reaction. Would a comment on Asian crabs infesting SF Bay waters be bringing the thread back to its original starting point? Or would it be more appropriate to start a discussion on the laws of unintended consequences? Patriarch, more an economist than a philosopher... |
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 15:57:30 -0400, "George" george@least wrote:
"Doug Miller" wrote in message .. . I don't think I quite agree with you here, either. While a neat-looking weld is not necessarily a solid weld, it's reasonable to suppose that a sloppy-looking weld may also be a sloppily *made* weld. I thought welding was like solder - bigger the glob the better the job.... Not really. At work, I've got a low-powered welder for tacking the ends of steel bars together, and the welds look rough and kinda crappy no matter how carefully I or anyone else uses it. In that case, you kind of need a big bead just to hold things together. OTOH, if we borrow a welder from the welding department (which have signifigantly more power), the welds come out looking nice and clean- and they are less bulbous than the welds from the low powered welder, because the weld is penetrating the material more deeply. |
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 23:18:01 -0400, Stephen Young
wrote: CW wrote: None of this matters in a free greed economy. Screw every last dollar out of anyone you can now, don't worry about the future. It's the American way. No, it's the American MANAGER/OWNER'S way. Sadly, it's the American way. I should shut up about it, as it never does any good- but that's kind of like commiting passive suicide in my mind. Only way to get people to think about it is to keep talking until something gets through. |
Only way to get people to think about it is to keep talking until something gets through. Sort of how I feel about my trying to get the word out about peak oil. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...s-player=false |
"Sadly it's (free greed econmy) the American way."
And the Chinese way, and the Indian way, and the French way, and the Mexican way, and the Canadian way, and the German way, and the British way, and on and on. Capitialism is harnassing greed. Socialism just makes greed so underground and become criminal. |
In article ,
"DouginUtah" wrote: Only way to get people to think about it is to keep talking until something gets through. Sort of how I feel about my trying to get the word out about peak oil. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...53984&has-play er=false Excellent read, thanks for that. I have always believed that the supply of oil and the consumption thereof was like striking a match along a 200 year time line. A flash for 70+ years and then a dwindling ember. I have always believed in clean, well-managed nuclear power. Not the ideal solution, but a helluva lot better than second best. I know quite a few people in the nuclear power industry, my daughter is one, and the Long Emergency is often a topic of discussion. Rob LOL..... I had stopped reading RS since they screwed up the top 100 guitar player list. |
For those who want to take a read with an open mind about nuclear energy.
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/p...clear-faq.html |
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 08:59:12 -0600, "DouginUtah"
wrote: Only way to get people to think about it is to keep talking until something gets through. Sort of how I feel about my trying to get the word out about peak oil. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...s-player=false I sympathize with you on that one, too. |
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:07:41 -0400, Robatoy
wrote: In article , "DouginUtah" wrote: Only way to get people to think about it is to keep talking until something gets through. Sort of how I feel about my trying to get the word out about peak oil. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...53984&has-play er=false Excellent read, thanks for that. I have always believed that the supply of oil and the consumption thereof was like striking a match along a 200 year time line. A flash for 70+ years and then a dwindling ember. I have always believed in clean, well-managed nuclear power. Not the ideal solution, but a helluva lot better than second best. Oh? I think it's damn near an ideal solution... cheap, clean, and the worst accident in US history involved some hot (as in warm, not radioactive) water getting dumped in the nearby river. Compare that the the recent BP explosion, or that big Exxon spill a while back, and it's got a heck of a track record. Not only that, but it's just plain spiffy. I know quite a few people in the nuclear power industry, my daughter is one, and the Long Emergency is often a topic of discussion. Toss in decent fuel cell technology with the nuclear plants, and we're off to the races for a long time to come. |
On 6 Jun 2005 08:51:59 -0700, "Never Enough Money"
wrote: "Sadly it's (free greed econmy) the American way." And the Chinese way, and the Indian way, and the French way, and the Mexican way, and the Canadian way, and the German way, and the British way, and on and on. Well, you can't hardly argue with that, I guess. Capitialism is harnassing greed. Socialism just makes greed so underground and become criminal. Just looking at that made my head hurt- proofread, please! At the end of the day, I'm an advocate of pure capitalism, but that is not the system that any country in the world is using. We've got a mixed economic system, and the US has traditionally done much better with mercantilism than pure international capitalism on a grand scale. If everyone was playing the same game, then pure lassiez-faire capitalism would be the most ethical system of trade- but that is not the case, and if we want to maintain our standard of living, we must retain our productive abilty through protective economic strategies. If the government is not pursuing this strategy because of undue influence from multi-national corporations, it falls to citizens to reward those producers that choose to remain within our borders by buying from them first- when they produce products worth owning. Nobody said anything about socialism- but now that you mention it, buying Chinese supports communism. |
Robatoy wrote in
: For those who want to take a read with an open mind about nuclear energy. http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/p...clear-faq.html Dear John McCarthy: I'm in favor of nuclear energy. But you're looking at the problem from a non-realistic, ivory tower point of view. All you say is probably true, but the public has an exaggerated fear of anything nuclear. That has to be taken into account. The nuclear energy industry has done some really stupid things. The Shoreham (LI) facility is just one example. If you're going to build a reactor somewhere and require an evacuation plan, don't build a plant there, then when the opposition to it has just about prevented it from ever opening, you shouldn't activate it for even 1 second. Operating a nuclear plant should be held to the highest standards. The plain fact that coal mines don't is no argument. I repeat: If someone else operates illegally, irresponsibly, or unethically does not permit Indian Point to operate their plant(s) in the same manner. If Entergy is able to refuel its plants in 2 weeks, where normally it would take 2 months, I would put the new process under a magnifying glass. If all is OK and fine - more power to them (pun intended). The argument remains that safety is of paramount importance because of the potential problems and dangers. Now, if someone could come up with a use for the heat generated by nuclear waste while it cools off, that'd be great. Breeding reactors would be fine too (in about 50 years) if the dangers of plutonium could be contained. Not only proliferation, but non-radioactive toxicity as well. John, you could probably highlight the dangers of nuclear energy better than I can - I'm just a biochemist who occasionally uses low level radioisotopes such as 14C and 32P. Thanks for initiating a discussion. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
"Han" wrote in message ... The nuclear energy industry has done some really stupid things. The Shoreham (LI) facility is just one example. If you're going to build a reactor somewhere and require an evacuation plan, don't build a plant there, then when the opposition to it has just about prevented it from ever opening, you shouldn't activate it for even 1 second. However - have you noticed that people move to be close to the airport, then complain about the noise? Or agitate for a prison to be sited nearby for the jobs it creates, then begin public meetings about the danger of escapees? Since companies can't vote, people get heard, even when they've done to themselves. "We have met the enemy, and he is us." - Walt Kelly |
In article ,
Prometheus wrote: [snipperectomy] Not only that, but it's just plain spiffy. Its spiffiness becomes amplified when you bolt a couple of nuclear generators onto a new set of cross-country electrified high-speed double track railroads and get all them damned trucks and busses off the road. That alone will be a huge step in the right direction. BTW.. build in some accountability in that new system, i.e. Do Not privatize it. Staff the whole damn thing with military vets. Efficient transportation running off of a clean power source. And while I'm at it, outlaw or tax the bejeezus out of all privately owned vehicles over 2500 pounds with engines bigger than 2 litres. |
In article ,
Prometheus wrote: [ snippage] but now that you mention it, buying Chinese supports communism. Bingo. Glad to see somebody is awake. |
In article , Robatoy wrote:
And while I'm at it, outlaw or tax the bejeezus out of all privately owned vehicles over 2500 pounds with engines bigger than 2 litres. You're gonna look kinda strange hauling plywood with a Honda Civic... and I think I'll keep my Suburban for deer hunting, thank you very much. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt. And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter