"Bridger" wrote in message
...
seems I remember something about autodesk changing vendors on
autosketch a few years back and dumping a file format. could be what
you're up against.

pretty fuzzy memory, though.

Perhaps so... I honestly do not recall how I used to open the old files but
I kept them because I was able to do so at one time. Perhaps I was opening
them in Auto Sketch and saving them in a format the LT 97or 98 still
recognized.

Charlie Self wrote:

We must again engage the burdens and blessings of Citizenship and
perform our natural function in the Polis

But how, when probably 60% of the public isn't interested, and half
or more of the rest is rabidly for or against some party platform
that is of slight importance on any long term scheme of things?

HTF do we get them interested?

Unfortunately it will probably take personal pain. Like if Jane Fonda had
lived for 5 to 10 years as a *non* *celeb* in North Vietnam.

-- Mark

It called 9-11, and if we don't do something about it, our economy will be worse
than the depression. Hey I don't like the spending either, but if we had had
another 9-11 four months later, andother 6 months later, where do you think our
ecomony would be. Do you think the deficite would be less?

Charlie Self wrote:

Phil writes:


Try to educate people on real economics, not politics, not lies they have
been told. Vote to shrink government.

Yeah, wellllllllll...I thought that was what some people had done with Shrub.
He was going to downsize government.

IIRC, the last report indicated that he's presided over the largest increase in
history...and much of it is bloat. Homeland Security is going to come back to
haunt taxpayers over the next few decades.

Charlie Self
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you
nothing. It was here first." Mark Twain

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Renata wrote:

Was just reading about the latest budget proposal.
He's cutting some social programs, that amount to a teeny part of the
budget.

WHAT BUDGET WERE YOU LOOKING AT, ENTITLEMENTS (SOCIAL PROGRAMS) ARE A HUGE PART OF
THE BUDGET.


He's cutting money to first responders (police, fire).
He's increasing defense, but we're still gung ho on gee whiz technical
marvels that are next to useless on the kind of fights we're likely to
be engaged in.

Oh yea, the hellfire mislle launched from the preditor was un gee wiz technical,
uav's over the skys linked realtime video to our troups, thermal imaging...........
give me a break


Oh, and of course, the tax cuts need to be permanent, even though they
were supposed to be a stimulus to get the economy moving again.

Yes they need to be permanent, let the people spend their money that they make, not
what the politicians want to spend it on.



Renata

On 07 Feb 2004 12:28:06 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
wrote:

Phil writes:


Try to educate people on real economics, not politics, not lies they have
been told. Vote to shrink government.

Yeah, wellllllllll...I thought that was what some people had done with Shrub.
He was going to downsize government.

IIRC, the last report indicated that he's presided over the largest increase in
history...and much of it is bloat. Homeland Security is going to come back to
haunt taxpayers over the next few decades.

Charlie Self
"Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you
nothing. It was here first." Mark Twain

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Phiil writes:

It called 9-11, and if we don't do something about it, our economy will be
worse
than the depression. Hey I don't like the spending either, but if we had had
another 9-11 four months later, andother 6 months later, where do you think
our
ecomony would be. Do you think the deficite would be less?

Where is anything happening that might create another 9-11 in Iraq?

18,000 new jobs for Homeland Security that are not properly trained. I forget
how many of the new hires have been fired because the feds finally discovered
they were convicted felons.

The job certainly could have been done with fewer hires, and, quite probably,
with none. Train the people already in place, do some shuffling, make them use
the laws that existed before 9-11, and much of the security problem would be
solved.

Operate on people's fears, expand one's power base, throw money by the ton at a
problem that is ill-defined, and there are still immense holes in our security
"blanket."

Sorry. Your argument might be a pail and it might be a sieve, but it won't hold
water either way.


Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Mark Jerde responds:


We must again engage the burdens and blessings of Citizenship and
perform our natural function in the Polis

But how, when probably 60% of the public isn't interested, and half
or more of the rest is rabidly for or against some party platform
that is of slight importance on any long term scheme of things?

HTF do we get them interested?

Unfortunately it will probably take personal pain. Like if Jane Fonda had
lived for 5 to 10 years as a *non* *celeb* in North Vietnam.


Got nothing whatsoever to do with the increasing of interest. Fonda was
interested, if goofy. Today, too many people aren't interested. Civic duty is
slowing at stop signs.

Tom is right: we need an increase in Citizenship courses, more informationin
Current Events, less emphasis on which cable channel does the best job.

I don't know what the answer is, but criticizing 30 year old actions is not
even a beginning.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Lazarus Long responds:

On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 11:54:17 -0800, "CW"
wrote:

Apparently, it wasn't to hard to figure out. You did it.

Yeah, but I've got doubts about Africa becoming another China.
They've got a serious problem with an illness killing many of the
people that would do the work along with a lot of individual nations,
not one large one that sets policy.


Not just the countries. Africa is still too often divided by its tribal
loyalties, loyalties that have no limits but the tribe, which may be on 2 or 3
or 4 sides of any artificially created border for a country. And those tribes
are a large part of the problem, in and of themselves, as they're highly
competitive (read that to say that many of them hate each of the others forone
reason or another, some good, some bad).

Africa probably is 200 or more years from posing the kind of massive and united
problem that China already poses.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Just curious.... Will the 'extra' money really ever be seen by the
employees? Or will it allow the owner to buy a bigger, newer Lexus? I
don't think that Reagan era theory of trickle down economics ever worked.

I work for a huge NASDAQ corp who has been moving all manuf jobs to
Asia. Kind of funny/sad is that some work went to Thailand where an
assembly worker earns $3 a day. Yup, that's for a full day's work. Now
we are closing that plant because they are too 'expensive'. Damn shame,
the Thai people are hard working and very kind. I stayed in Bangkok for
6 months for my job. (Go there or you're fired) Chinese workers are
earning 30 cents a day!!! Now you know how pc companies are able to
sell a new unit for $399. They are already looking to start a plant in
India, even cheaper that China. What's next, get the workers to pay the
company to work???

And people who think that the Chinese wages will get too high soon are
damn naive. This will take a lifetime to happen, it's Communist over
there and the workforce numbers over a billion people. If Xing wants a
raise, fire him and hire Qing, his brother.
Mark

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

"GRL" wrote in message

Now maybe I'm wrong when I think that Bench Dog router tables are made in
U.S.A. and that the only reason that there is this sort of shipping delay

is

because of inept management at their company, but I do think that and I
think it's a metaphor for the way a lot of American companies are run.


You may be right, but they may have just taken off recently. I'm in the
process of buying some equipment and the lead times are way out because of a
sudden surge in sales of the suppliers. This is industrial stuff like
wrapping machines, fork lift truck, boiler accessories.

OTOH, I also bought some tooling. US price $15,000 and 8 weeks lead time
China price: $4500 and
22 days lead time.
This is for cast and machined aluminum molds. The China supplier has equal
or better quality than the half dozen US and European suppliers.

Where would you buy?

These are the scenarios we face on a regular basis.

1) Buy American. We are paying for the tooling out of our income and even
though we are going to make $10,500 less profit, we keep some jobs in
America at a machine shop 2,000 miles away from us. .

2) Buy Chinese. We save the $10,000 to put towards out profit, or to
invest into more equipment to grow our business. It will pay for the new
lighting we want installed by a local company. It will put more money into
the hands of our employees so they can live better and buy more US made
goods. It will make us a stronger company if we invest in new equipment for
the future.

Given the above choices, want to play economist or pretend you are the
President?
Ed

http://pages.cthome.net/edhome

Phil wrote:

Trouble is if you allow that, the research and development portions of
drug companies will dry up. No new meds. The drugs that are imported
are cheaper for a whole host of reasons, the big one is the drug
companies know they can get if from the us because we can afford it,
most nations can't. It costs huge bucks to bring a new drug through
clinical trials to market. If the drug company can't recoupe that,
they won't bring new drugs into being. Do you want that?

I'd buy your argument (and I _do_ believe in, and support patents and
copyrights), except for the fact that drug patents just got longer
instead of being held where they were. The drug companies were still
innovating before the patent law change.

So who do you think owns the big companies? Us, the stock buying,
pension fund receiving, mutual fund buying public. None of the
biggies are privately owned. How many jobs does a $100,000 a year
company support? How many does a billion doallar year company
support? Simple math.

So by your "simple math" we should all be better off, right? Why's this
thread even on if that is the case?
This is not a new concept... I would buy it if everyione had started
demanding health care in recent years. What is truly happening is
health care cost is going up, with benefits going down. How do you
explain that?
Easy, [...]

If it does have such an easy solution, get your view published somewhere,
the Nobel Prize people will be knocking on your door soon.

they would say I'll give a couple of days it will probably go away on
it's own it would cost me $40 to see a dr.. Now it's, I pay my
insurance, doesn't cost me anything to see the dr, I might as well use

Jeez!! These benefits, business models, and price structures WERE PUT
TOGETHER BY THE HMOs THEMSELVES!!!! Don't be whining that members take
advantage of them! If you have aproblem with this, call your HMO and
tell them to charge more, or change HMO to a more expensive one!

it. See it among my coworkers all the time. Before hmo's my dr's
waiting room was few patients you could get in to see him no problem.

So who forced your Doctor to join the HMO? You blaim the patients
because your doctor chose to join an HMO?

Your right, my words didn't fit what I meant. It ****es me off,
because we're demanding no costs to use it, insurance should be just
that, taking on risk. The model has changed and the insurance
companies know that your going to spend thousands each year because it
doesn't cost the user any extra, so that becomes the new premium
baseline.

Ok, I'll put it simpler: If you don;t like Home Depot customers and the
Home Depot's business model, shop somewhere else! The same with your
HMO.

Absolutely, I don't think YOU have figured it out, isurance is cost
verses risk.

Fine and if the insurance companies are still in business, then whatever
they are doing is working. It's that simple.

Anyway, you're trying to make the problem fit your solution. If you
think it can be done in a woodworkingforum, then knock yourself out. I,
for one don't believe you. Your rants make no economical or business
sense.

If you want to argue that the doom of society is lazy people eating too
much and insurance companies that cater to them, that's fine. I just
don't buy it.

--
gabriel

Hmm, we got a big grant for our FD tanker, more for training on mass
disasters, and ambulance money for next year.

Methinks Renata is using the unreliable sources.

Of course, if the local electeds couldn't blame Washington for not giving
enough money/taking too much control, they might have to do it themselves,
at their own political peril.

Maybe that's the dastardly plot, cut money going to Washington and then back
to locals to encourage them to be responsible....

"Phil" wrote in message
...
Renata wrote:

Was just reading about the latest budget proposal.
He's cutting some social programs, that amount to a teeny part of the
budget.

WHAT BUDGET WERE YOU LOOKING AT, ENTITLEMENTS (SOCIAL PROGRAMS) ARE A
HUGE PART OF
THE BUDGET.


He's cutting money to first responders (police, fire).
He's increasing defense, but we're still gung ho on gee whiz technical
marvels that are next to useless on the kind of fights we're likely to
be engaged in.

Oh yea, the hellfire mislle launched from the preditor was un gee wiz
technical,
uav's over the skys linked realtime video to our troups, thermal
imaging...........
give me a break


Oh, and of course, the tax cuts need to be permanent, even though they
were supposed to be a stimulus to get the economy moving again.

Yes they need to be permanent, let the people spend their money that they
make, not
what the politicians want to spend it on.



Renata

Mark & Juanita wrote:
H1-B's are the visas used to import foreign professional jobs. There
has been a quota on the number of those visas that are permitted to be
issued per year. Cries of "engineer shortage" from various industries
led to raising the quota on H1-Bs. The original idea was to allow
hiring foreign workers when no domestic professionals are available to
fill job openings. The employer must advertise and be able to prove
that there are no qualified domestic professionals to be had in order to
get an H1-B worker. What has happened is some employers will advertise
for a ridiculous position, such as a mechanical engineer with 10 years
of experience, finite element modeling experience, and a PhD, salary:
$42k per year. Of course no qualified domestic employee would take that
salary,but there are foreigners who will. Since the quota was raised (I
believe it occurred during about the mid-90's during the ".com boom")

There's another side to this, other than IT that is. When I started
working in hospitals in the early 70s, there were a large number of RNs,
LPNs, Orderlies, and assorted support staff on each unit. Over the last
15 years the number of support staff have nearly vanished, and so have
the LPNs. Thehh number of RNs to patients has climbed to about 1 nurse
per 8-10 patients, on a good day. Many of the nurses aren't from this
country and don't have the same training or interest in patient care
that people are used to expecting from nurses. This is because
hospitals found it too expensive to train nurses and so did colleges.
Patients became sicker and the home-grown nurses got older and retired
or burned out and quit. As they are replaced with H1-B hires the
condition gets worse. Next time you go to the hospital, think about
it. Listen to the party all night long in the halls and try to figure
out what language it is. See if your nurse does anything for you and if
it happens sometime today. Pretty soon you won't e able to afford your
medical insurance, understand your nurse or expect any quality of care.
In much of the world, your family comes to the hospital and takes care
of you, the nurses don't, and that's what the off-shore nurses expect it
to be like here. Like the man said, I hope I 'm dead before it all goes
west.
It was a bad day yesterday, sorry.
Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

Silvan writes:

All of this on a single income, with less money (adjusted for inflation)
than my wife and I make today. How did they do it?

They didn't have any bacon fat at all. They grew up during the Depression,
and they learned to be thrifty in a way that my whole generation, even my
parents' generation, just can't understand.

Yeah. Very true. My mother started working just as the Depression kicked off,
'30 or '31, as an RN. Got a job with the Feds for $1100 a year and felt she was
rolling in money (so did her father, who was a Walton's type just north of
Charlottesville, with a farm and sawmill). IIR one of his old letters
correctly, he hadn't seen that much money in several years at that time (but,
then, farmers seldom did anyway, regardless of the Depression). Point being
even in later life as a wife and mother, Mom was always able to get a bucks'
worth from a dime. And she raised 3 kids who had a lot of trouble getting a
dime's worth for a dollar.

Well, I guess my sister wasn't as bad as my brother and myself, so maybe she
got her dime for a half a buck.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Silvan responds:

Tom Watson wrote:

My protest will be filed next November.

I'm just not sure how, yet.

Bill Cosby 2004!

Jesus. Don't we have enough arrogance in DC already?

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

On 07 Feb 2004 12:13:24 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
wrote:

We must again engage the burdens and blessings of Citizenship and
perform our natural function in the Polis

But how, when probably 60% of the public isn't interested, and half or more of
the rest is rabidly for or against some party platform that is of slight
importance on any long term scheme of things?

HTF do we get them interested?

The problem has become that it doesn't matter who you vote for, you
get the same result. You don't have walnut, oak and maple, it's just
poplar stained differently. People stop voting when they feel that
their vote makes no difference. I've voted in every election I could
since I reach legal age, but there is precious little to recommend
doing so. No matter who wins the economic foolishness will continue
and there is basically nothing that can be done about it at the polls.

If we want people to be interested in voting there need to be real
choices and real impact on what happens in government. Trying to
select between 2 moderate Democans running for president just doesn't
seem to matter. We won't see any better choices as long as the
campaign process is focused on finding fault with opponents. No
decent, intelligent person wants to run for office and face all the
garbage. I'd run for office because of my convictions, but absolutely
never will because of some stupid things I did when I was young. Only
those whose egos are big enough to allow them to ignore their own
faults are willing to run, so you get Bush, Clinton, Gore, Dean, Clark
et. al. and as far as I can tell there isn't a nickel's worth of
difference between them. So I'll keep my nickel and use it to tune my
table saw.

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 00:45:57 -0500, Silvan
wrote:

Few people would still have
the same carpet on the floor for 40+ years.

I'd be glad to, but the carpet in this manufactured home is such junk
that after 10 years it has holes worn through it.

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

Doug Winterburn wrote:

This is not a new concept... I would buy it if everyione had started
demanding health care in recent years. What is truly happening is
health care cost is going up, with benefits going down. How do you
explain that?
Lawyers.

Nice try, but not true. In most states (all states?) you cannot even sue
an HMO (Can HMOs have politicians any more in their pocket?).

It is explained by two things mainly:

1) Higher drug costs,

2) Longer drug patent terms, which keep high drug costs for a longer time.
As soon as generics come out, drug prices plummet.

And a lot more use of the much larger variety of expensive drugs.

Renata

Most insurance programs have two entirely seperable components - 1. health
insurance and 2. prescription drug plan. While the prescription drugs plans
have certainly been increasing at a faster rate than the medical insurance
portion, both have been increasing far too rapidly. Our company's plans
increased the last two years as follows:

Health care (HMO)- 2003 up 24% 2002 up 27%

Prescription drug plan - 2003 up 32% 2002 up 34%

So clearly it ain't all the drugs, but they certainly are part of the problem.

BTW the combined total for a family plan is now in excess of $10,500 per year.
Premium co-pays are limited to a max of $900 per year - yeah a good employer -
and the union took a strike over that $900, they wanted to continue with no
co-pay.

Dave Hall

gabriel wrote:

Phil wrote:

Trouble is if you allow that, the research and development portions of
drug companies will dry up. No new meds. The drugs that are imported
are cheaper for a whole host of reasons, the big one is the drug
companies know they can get if from the us because we can afford it,
most nations can't. It costs huge bucks to bring a new drug through
clinical trials to market. If the drug company can't recoupe that,
they won't bring new drugs into being. Do you want that?

I'd buy your argument (and I _do_ believe in, and support patents and
copyrights), except for the fact that drug patents just got longer
instead of being held where they were. The drug companies were still

The drug patent law is 20 years, nothing has changed there. A significant
portion of that time is getting the drug through clinical trials and the
FDA. I'm just arguing that you can't elimiate drug patent laws, there would
be no R&D. BTW did you know the price of generic drugs is raising at a
significanlty higher pace than drugs still sheilded by patent. I'm not
proposing anything but I don't think the drug companies are the blame. If
they are making excess profits, it's not being reflected in their stock
prices, it's not being reflected in out of line benifits to their employees.


innovating before the patent law change.

So who do you think owns the big companies? Us, the stock buying,
pension fund receiving, mutual fund buying public. None of the
biggies are privately owned. How many jobs does a $100,000 a year
company support? How many does a billion doallar year company
support? Simple math.

So by your "simple math" we should all be better off, right? Why's this
thread even on if that is the case?

Give me a break, If a guy making a hundred grand a year spends a hundred and
ten hundred grand per year on vacations, booze, and women, he may be having
fun, but he is not better off. ( Well maybe :-) ) If a person chooses to take
a job they enjoy which has just enough pay to get by verses one that pays
better, he's never going to become wealthy. It's all in choices, luck,
hardwork and self discipline. Personal responsibility, not the government
taking care of you.


This is not a new concept... I would buy it if everyione had started
demanding health care in recent years. What is truly happening is
health care cost is going up, with benefits going down. How do you
explain that?
Easy, [...]

If it does have such an easy solution, get your view published somewhere,
the Nobel Prize people will be knocking on your door soon.

It's not an easy solution, there are to many misinformed people out there
that don't understand simple facts. Business is there to make a profit,
period, if they don't they fail and go out of business. If the climate
created by government is prohibitive to business, they will go somewhere
where it is less prohibitive. Look at California, businesses are moving out
of that state, look at where the US is heading, off shore, the whole reason
this thread started.



they would say I'll give a couple of days it will probably go away on
it's own it would cost me $40 to see a dr.. Now it's, I pay my
insurance, doesn't cost me anything to see the dr, I might as well use


You don't get it, if everybody takes advantage, the costs to everybody goes
up. Sure the HMO put the models together, and they cost us more year after
year, and it's because people like you don't get it.


Jeez!! These benefits, business models, and price structures WERE PUT
TOGETHER BY THE HMOs THEMSELVES!!!! Don't be whining that members take
advantage of them! If you have aproblem with this, call your HMO and
tell them to charge more, or change HMO to a more expensive one!

it. See it among my coworkers all the time. Before hmo's my dr's
waiting room was few patients you could get in to see him no problem.

So who forced your Doctor to join the HMO? You blaim the patients
because your doctor chose to join an HMO?


I high percentage of Dr's today are not in private practice, they work for a
health care provider, that provider company determines who their employees
cover.


Your right, my words didn't fit what I meant. It ****es me off,
because we're demanding no costs to use it, insurance should be just
that, taking on risk. The model has changed and the insurance
companies know that your going to spend thousands each year because it
doesn't cost the user any extra, so that becomes the new premium
baseline.

Ok, I'll put it simpler: If you don;t like Home Depot customers and the
Home Depot's business model, shop somewhere else! The same with your
HMO.


If there were true free market in health insurance, that is exactly what I
would do, and exactly what I advocate. Free market will only exist if health
inurance is purchased by individual consumers, not by companies.


Absolutely, I don't think YOU have figured it out, isurance is cost
verses risk.

Fine and if the insurance companies are still in business, then whatever
they are doing is working. It's that simple.



Yes, they raising our premiums and we're paying for it.

Anyway, you're trying to make the problem fit your solution. If you
think it can be done in a woodworkingforum, then knock yourself out. I,
for one don't believe you. Your rants make no economical or business
sense.

If you want to argue that the doom of society is lazy people eating too
much and insurance companies that cater to them, that's fine. I just
don't buy it.


No the doom of US society is people want the government to take care of
them, they listen to a bunch of politicians that say they will give you cheap
health insurance and drugs, a pension plan, unemployment insurance, social
safety nets. You can't have that and maintain the work in this country, my
friend. Again why this thread started. Go start a business of your own, pay
your employees top wages, give them free medical care and drugs, a free
generious pension plan, a year of full severance pay if you lay them off.
See how long your in business. Dude!


--
gabriel

Mark

I'm well aware of what an H-1B is; I was on one for three years after
working an initial three years on TN visa's...during the middle 90's and
into this century. The company I worked for in the US went through a similar
"advertising" structure to the one you speak of and yes, I was the "only"
candidate that could fill the job. During my 6 year tenure, I took the
company from a loss position of $250K/year to a total gross annual revenue
position of nearly 6 million. During that time, I took the company from 4
employees (I was #4) to a total employment of 22. I trained the folks how to
continue, packed my bags and left the country. Today, through the turn-down
in the economy, 18 of the 22 are still employed and making a good buck.

While I'm not disputing that there is abuse with/to/from the system, I'd
like to caution against the proverbial wide brush when you're painting a
picture. I think it's safe to say that I left the company in a far better
position than when I found it. I was hired to do a job, I was paid to do a
job, I did the job. Simple.You could call me an exception, but I'm not.

It should also be noted that recently, when I found myself temporarily
retired, I was warmed by a pretty good stream of offers. All of
them...except one, came from "your" side of the border. Not one of them
cared which country I was from, they all viewed me as a person who could
make a beneficial difference to their bottom line. The H-1B was simply a
tool in place to allow them the chance and that's all it is....a tool, to
allow companies in the US to capitalize on the skills and experience brought
to a business by those who, through fate, are not citizens of America.
Associated to the H-1B are qualification and professional standards put in
place to minimize abuse. After going through the process, I submit to you;
the safeguards are healthy and functional.

Perhaps you should ask those who profited from the rise in value of the very
"engineering" firms you speak of if they mind having their new-found wealth
created on the back of those not born in your country. I'll bet they don't
give a damn...they're just glad someone took the initiative to establish and
grow a company, and that the company had the skills and horsepower to be
successful. In the end, isn't that what it's all about?

Rob

--



******PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW EMAIL ADDRESS******



Please visit our (recently updated) web site:
http://www.robswoodworking.com

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
s.com...
In article laWUb.4832$Qa3.3887@edtnps89, says...
What H-1B problem Mark?

Rob



H1-B's are the visas used to import foreign professional jobs. There
has been a quota on the number of those visas that are permitted to be
issued per year. Cries of "engineer shortage" from various industries
led to raising the quota on H1-Bs. The original idea was to allow
hiring foreign workers when no domestic professionals are available to
fill job openings. The employer must advertise and be able to prove
that there are no qualified domestic professionals to be had in order to
get an H1-B worker. What has happened is some employers will advertise
for a ridiculous position, such as a mechanical engineer with 10 years
of experience, finite element modeling experience, and a PhD, salary:
$42k per year. Of course no qualified domestic employee would take that
salary,but there are foreigners who will. Since the quota was raised (I
believe it occurred during about the mid-90's during the ".com boom")

Phil wrote:

Go start a business of your own, pay your employees top
wages, give them free medical care and drugs, a free generious
pension plan, a year of full severance pay if you lay them off. See
how long your in business. Dude!

About 10 years ago I read an interesting newspaper article by former South
Dakota senator and presidential candidate George McGovern. (The article is
/somewhere/ in my files.)

Ah, google (George McGovern hotel business) is my friend:

After a run for the presidency and a quarter century on Capitol Hill, George
McGovern left public service and became the owner of a business -- a
punishingly revelatory experience. If only, he says now, his career sequence
had been the other way around

http://www.inc.com/magazine/19931201/3809.html

-- Mark

Charlie Self wrote:

Phiil writes:

It called 9-11, and if we don't do something about it, our economy will be
worse
than the depression. Hey I don't like the spending either, but if we had had
another 9-11 four months later, andother 6 months later, where do you think
our
ecomony would be. Do you think the deficite would be less?

Where is anything happening that might create another 9-11 in Iraq?

The same things that were happening prior to 9-11, except they don't have
afganistan and Iraq to train and plot freely.



18,000 new jobs for Homeland Security that are not properly trained. I forget
how many of the new hires have been fired because the feds finally discovered
they were convicted felons.

The job certainly could have been done with fewer hires, and, quite probably,
with none. Train the people already in place, do some shuffling, make them use
the laws that existed before 9-11, and much of the security problem would be
solved.


I won't disagree there, but there was a debate between government jobs and private
sector. Remember


Operate on people's fears, expand one's power base, throw money by the ton at a
problem that is ill-defined, and there are still immense holes in our security
"blanket."



You don't think our fears are warrented? Terrorism by definition is illdefined.
So do you advocate we don't try to avoid further 9-11's?

Sorry. Your argument might be a pail and it might be a sieve, but it won't hold
water either way.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 00:20:23 +0000, gabriel wrote:

Phil wrote:

4. Now we want cheap prescription drugs and healthcare. Guess who
pays, companies, you and I in the form of taxes, and those who buy our
products. Nothing from the government is free, it’s our tax money!

Now, if the government would _shorten_ drug patent length to encourage
generic medicines and allow foreign dugs to be imported you would have a
point.

The government, though, is taking the side of the big business (drug
companies) and so that's what's really pushing the costs of health care
up. This has nothing to do with taxes.

There is a fine balancing act here, one that always makes one side or
the other unhappy. If you use government regulation to force medical
costs down, such as shortening the patent length, you tend to reduce
the capital available to do new research and develop better
techniques. The net result is a loss to the medical system (that is,
the people being treated). Drug patents are already pretty short (7
years?) and all that shortening them will do is reduce the rate at
which new drugs are produced. You can always substitute huge
government research subsidies (more than already in place), but that
raises taxes out of proportion to the benefit received. It is best to
tread the tightrope and allow some excessive profit because it is the
hope of coming out with the next Viagra that keeps the drug companies
pumping billions of dollars into their research departments. Take away
the profit incentive and they'll be more inclined to adopt the MBA
model and just try to make a cheaper generic asprin. Any research
based business is akin to gambling. You need the promise of big
payouts to keep the big bets coming in.

Healthcare costs are rising for a lot of reasons, the real expenses
for drugs and medical equipment are only a small part of it.

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 06:09:01 +0000, gabriel wrote:

Doug Winterburn wrote:

This is not a new concept... I would buy it if everyione had started
demanding health care in recent years. What is truly happening is
health care cost is going up, with benefits going down. How do you
explain that?
Lawyers.

Nice try, but not true. In most states (all states?) you cannot even sue
an HMO (Can HMOs have politicians any more in their pocket?).

It is explained by two things mainly:

1) Higher drug costs,

2) Longer drug patent terms, which keep high drug costs for a longer time.
As soon as generics come out, drug prices plummet.

Good point. It does explain why a clinic near here (3 - 4 doctors,
OB/Gyn) recently received a $400,000 a year *increase* in their
malpractice insurance - without ever having a claim filed against
them.

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

Phil responds:


Where is anything happening that might create another 9-11 in Iraq?

The same things that were happening prior to 9-11, except they don't have
afganistan and Iraq to train and plot freely.


Afghanistan, yes. Iraq, no. That particular nutcase tended to avoid helping
terrorists. His attachment to 9-11 is as secure as his WMDs.

18,000 new jobs for Homeland Security that are not properly trained. I
forget
how many of the new hires have been fired because the feds finally
discovered
they were convicted felons.

The job certainly could have been done with fewer hires, and, quite
probably,
with none. Train the people already in place, do some shuffling, make them
use
the laws that existed before 9-11, and much of the security problem would
be
solved.


I won't disagree there, but there was a debate between government jobs and
private
sector. Remember

Who won? In essence, the taxpayer lost, because there is little or no extra
protection at exceptionally high cost, along with a loss of liberties.

Operate on people's fears, expand one's power base, throw money by the ton
at a
problem that is ill-defined, and there are still immense holes in our
security
"blanket."


You don't think our fears are warrented? Terrorism by definition is
illdefined.
So do you advocate we don't try to avoid further 9-11'

Some fear is obvously warranted. Extreme fears and a multi-clor flashing alert
system is not. I'm not at all sure what you mean by terroris being ill defined,
either. Seems to me it is rather well defined, but that the definition is
growing in size to include pilots from BWIA who happen to have the same names
the clowns at HS have on lists.


Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Tim Douglass writes:

Drug patents are already pretty short (7
years?) and all that shortening them will do is reduce the rate at
which new drugs are produced.

Uh, drug patents in fact are 20 years. Used to be that regular patents are 17
years. Maybe still is that way. The drug companies get an extra 3 years because
of the testing processes.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

On 07 Feb 2004 12:06:37 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
brought forth from the murky depths:

Joe WIllman writes:

I have several friends that are doctors. One, an othopedic surgeon, has
had his after tax income go down continually for the past 10 years. He
showed me his tax forms. 10 years ago his AGI was about $350K. Last
year it was $250K. He works twice as many hours as he used to but has
less after taxes.

He's got less BEFORE taxes, too, which seems to be the primary reason he has
less AFTER taxes.

If he's working twice as many hours for half the pay, the
new job at a different hospital must be lower paying, y'think?
I'll bet he didn't tell Joe that he's paying less in tax
these years.


Oh, be sure and vote for Edwards. A trial lawer, he will fix it for us!

Probably not. Do you think Shrub will?

I don't think anyone in the Rep/Dem lineup so far can/will.
I hope someone comes along who looks like he can at least
START fixing things, beginning with a smaller gov't who does
more with less. Pork and hand-outs have to stop and the
deficit has to be paid off. The IRS has to collect owed taxes
and stop harassing the little guys who can't afford to fight
back. Loopholes and graft have to disappear, too.

Newp, I'm not holding my breath for any or all of this.

-
The only reason I would take up exercising is || http://diversify.com
so that I could hear heavy breathing again. || Programmed Websites

Larry Jaques wrote in
:

On 07 Feb 2004 12:06:37 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
brought forth from the murky depths:

Joe WIllman writes:

I have several friends that are doctors. One, an othopedic surgeon,
has had his after tax income go down continually for the past 10
years. He showed me his tax forms. 10 years ago his AGI was about
$350K. Last year it was $250K. He works twice as many hours as he
used to but has less after taxes.

He's got less BEFORE taxes, too, which seems to be the primary reason
he has less AFTER taxes.

If he's working twice as many hours for half the pay, the
new job at a different hospital must be lower paying, y'think?
I'll bet he didn't tell Joe that he's paying less in tax
these years.


His taxes have gon up a lot. Just last year Multanoma County created a
local tax. It was on gross. And it was retroactive to the first of the
previous year. His bill was $80,000. He had to fire one of his office
staff. He is now looking a job now with a Health Care provider. He ca
no longer afford to have his own private practice. Actually he and two
other doctors had their own Orthopidic Clinic.

Now he is going to just collect a salary and be done with it.

Silvan wrote in
news
Mike wrote:

almost anyone who wanted to work could find a decent paying job and
even support a family on one wage and still have money left over at
the end of the week.

Well, that definitely used to be true, but my grandpa got me to
thinking about this the other day. When he retired, he was making $7
an hour in 1977 dollars. Looks like just under $21 an hour today, or
a tad less than $44,000 a year today.

You could today also. Let me see 1 television, one telephone, one
radio/stereo, a 16 cubic foot refigerator with 2 cf of freezer space,
with a family of 5 in a 1400 sq ft house without a garage and only one
car, no cable, no cell phone, no health insurance.

Not a problem. I would bet you that you could live just like they did.
A lot of the problem is we have much higher demands nowdays.

In article ,
otforme says...
Joe WIllman writes:


Oh, be sure and vote for Edwards. A trial lawer, he will fix it for us!

Probably not. Do you think Shrub will?


Probably not either. I am looking for the candidate who is less
likely to view government as the solution and sees more government as
the problem. Bush doesn't fit that bill either, but he is still less
statist than his other viable opponents. It doesn't look like we have a
smaller government candidate in the wings for the forseeable future.

Joe Willman writes:

Well, that definitely used to be true, but my grandpa got me to
thinking about this the other day. When he retired, he was making $7
an hour in 1977 dollars. Looks like just under $21 an hour today, or
a tad less than $44,000 a year today.

You could today also. Let me see 1 television, one telephone, one
radio/stereo, a 16 cubic foot refigerator with 2 cf of freezer space,
with a family of 5 in a 1400 sq ft house without a garage and only one
car, no cable, no cell phone, no health insurance.

Not a problem. I would bet you that you could live just like they did.
A lot of the problem is we have much higher demands nowdays.


Jeez, I knew I was screwed up. My house is larger. 1500 sf with a garage. But,
then, there are only two of us. I have 1 TV. Can't imagine having more as that
gets minimal use for news, a few game shows and some sports. Several radios, I
guess, but there's some difference there. What used to cost about $400 now
costs about $75. We have cable...not a choice in WV. Cable or no TV (or the WV
State Bird: big assed old 8' dish). No cell phone. Let it lapse when I realized
I didn't use it, because the company wouldn't give me the roaming area I
needed.

IIRC, the first housing sold to vets (WWII) on Long Island (Levittown) was on
the order of 800 to 900 sf. No basement, refinishable attic. Cost, IIRC, was
maybe 4 grand. Starter homes homes those are called. Today's average home has
shrunk a bit in the last 2 years, down to about 2700 sf. Dunno if that's a
starter home or not. Just read a magazine promo: their average (this is
Westchester County, Fairfield, CT) reader has a 1.1 million buck home. Jaysus!
A tleast $150,000 out of my range.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Mark & Juanita responds:

Oh, be sure and vote for Edwards. A trial lawer, he will fix it for us!

Probably not. Do you think Shrub will?


Probably not either. I am looking for the candidate who is less
likely to view government as the solution and sees more government as
the problem. Bush doesn't fit that bill either, but he is still less
statist than his other viable opponents. It doesn't look like we have a
smaller government candidate in the wings for the forseeable future

Unfortunately, not. I figure I'll be long dead before we do, and I intend to be
around annoying the kids for another couple decades.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Charlie Self wrote:

I don't know what the answer is, but criticizing 30 year old actions
is not even a beginning.

My point was Jane didn't experience the real culture. I've been most of the
way around the world, business & military, and it really makes me appreciate
the U.S. of A. Appreciation of our blessings makes for better citizenship,
at least in my case.

-- Mark

"Tim Douglass" wrote in message
...
the people being treated). Drug patents are already pretty short (7
years?)

Unless they have changed the law, drug patents are the same as any other
patent. 17 years.

CW responds:

"Tim Douglass" wrote in message
.. .
the people being treated). Drug patents are already pretty short (7
years?)

Unless they have changed the law, drug patents are the same as any other
patent. 17 years.

20 years. Changed some time ago to screw more money out of the public...er, to
let the drug companies make up for all the time drugs are tested.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Mark Jerde responds:


I don't know what the answer is, but criticizing 30 year old actions
is not even a beginning.

My point was Jane didn't experience the real culture. I've been most of the
way around the world, business & military, and it really makes me appreciate
the U.S. of A. Appreciation of our blessings makes for better citizenship,
at least in my case.

We're not writing of real culture appreciation as a need for citizenship. But
if we were, it's literally impossible for anyone worth the kind of money these
movie stars, sports stars, country music stars, crap stars and others to
appreciate any "real" culture, so there's not much point in commenting on their
reactions, nor in listening to their opinions.

They're so ehavily insulated by money they really do think they're special.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Thanks for the update. I really didn't think that they would reduce the hold
of the big money types.
"Charlie Self" wrote in message

20 years. Changed some time ago to screw more money out of the
public...er, to
let the drug companies make up for all the time drugs are tested.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political
lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

In article , says...



Dr's are making less than they used too, many are quitting cause they are fed
up. Nurses don't make anything. Insurance companies don't seem to be a good
investment on wall street, neither do health care providers. Who are these
money grubbers?

Noticed drug company profits lately? Noticed that Bush's drug benefit
specifically forbids dickering with the drug companies for lower drug
prices?

I did say the doctors had a problem with malpractice insurance costs.
And I never mentioned insurance companies or nurses.

But I forgot to complain about the ambulance chasers :-).

But when my dentist charges more per hour than my doctor, and has most of
the work done by a dental assistant, I think that's outrageous.

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

Actually it takes most drugs 7 years to get to market. Maybe the government
felt guilty.

CW wrote:

Thanks for the update. I really didn't think that they would reduce the hold
of the big money types.
"Charlie Self" wrote in message

20 years. Changed some time ago to screw more money out of the
public...er, to
let the drug companies make up for all the time drugs are tested.

Charlie Self
"We're 269 days from the election, and that's several political
lifetimes."
TERRY HOLT, Bush campaign spokesman.


http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Larry Blanchard wrote:

In article , says...



Dr's are making less than they used too, many are quitting cause they are fed
up. Nurses don't make anything. Insurance companies don't seem to be a good
investment on wall street, neither do health care providers. Who are these
money grubbers?

Noticed drug company profits lately?

Merck,Eli Lilly, Pfizer and Glaxo Smith Kline are all down 10 to 15% from three
years ago. Up some from last year. What drug companies are you referring too?

Noticed that Bush's drug benefit
specifically forbids dickering with the drug companies for lower drug
prices?


No I haven't where can I read about that?


I did say the doctors had a problem with malpractice insurance costs.
And I never mentioned insurance companies or nurses.

But I forgot to complain about the ambulance chasers :-)


But when my dentist charges more per hour than my doctor, and has most of
the work done by a dental assistant, I think that's outrageous.

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

Phil responds:

Noticed that Bush's drug benefit
specifically forbids dickering with the drug companies for lower drug
prices?


No I haven't where can I read about that?

Almost anywhere. The set up specifically forbids bargaining for lower prices.

Charlie Self
"Everything has its limit - iron ore cannot be educated into gold." Mark Twain

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html

Phil writes:

Actually it takes most drugs 7 years to get to market. Maybe the government
felt guilty.

CW wrote:

Thanks for the update. I really didn't think that they would reduce the
hold
of the big money types.
"Charlie Self" wrote in message

20 years. Changed some time ago to screw more money out of the
public...er, to
let the drug companies make up for all the time drugs are tested.

Some drugs, not most.

Charlie Self
"Everything has its limit - iron ore cannot be educated into gold." Mark Twain

http://hometown.aol.com/charliediy/m.../business.html