Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marginmike who wrote (37502)	8/2/1999 5:38:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

MM, Damages awards in the USA for wanton killing are NOT $8,000. You are making up numbers in Noo Yawk for how much a taxi skooshing costs. You think those Chinese families got a good deal? Are you serious? Shows how wrong the person was in this thread who tried to make out how much Americans value human life. Of course The Yellow Peril was never treated as much more than fungal growth was it? I thought you were the Anti-Defamation League fan club member who valued humans, human rights and all that nice stuff. In fact, I heard Bill Clinton used to bleat about human rights to China! I suppose he thinks the price of human rights has gone down or maybe he was telling more porkies when he pretended concern about human rights. You are stretching a point a VERY long way to say China should pay for people killed by weapons they made and sold to somebody else. The USA wouldn't want to start to think about how much they'd owe if all the people killed by weapons they sold got compensation. Actually, many of the weapons sold to Iraq were from the USA. Do you not recall that Iraq was a USA client state during the war against Iran by Iraq? You want compensation from the maker of the weapons? You better get your checkbook out and prepare to write some BIG checks. Let's stick with the user of the weapon. The NRA would find their client gunmakers going broke if the maker of the weapon was considered liable. Then again...if you provide some looney a weapon, you could be considered jointly liable for the consequences. Would you buy the products produced by the Third Reich because they were the best? When people feel somebody is their enemy, you'll find they don't go out of their way to buy from them, even if they have good products. They find a way around it. CDMA is the best, but China can buy it from Samsung, not Lucent or Motorola [fortunately, Q! still collects the royalty - Irwin Jacobs has done an extremely good job for Q! by separating it from many of the political shenanigans that go on]. Try flipping your mind over to what it would be like if you were sitting in Beijing, with a Chinese point of view. Then you might understand how they feel. It's the same as when some state kills Americans - the USA goes hog wild. Unfortunately, it is usually terrorists, so the target for retaliation is unclear. Some of those terrorists are home grown [Timothy McVeigh]. If the Chinese embassy bombing was deliberate, then fair enough - "Here, take this bop on the nose while we are dealing with Milosevic, and there is more where that came from if you mess with Taiwan." There is no law of the jungle which says one can't bop on the nose anytime one likes. But there is a law of the markets which says one shall not bop customers on the nose. Mqurice