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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (1103)	11/21/1999 2:26:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12232

<...have seen the low caste of India ...Mexico and South East Asia " working " the rubbish heaps...birth control seems a better bet> I don't subscribe to the birth control idea as a solution. I quite like people and the more the merrier. The problem is that they are poor. They are poor because they are excluded from the modern world. They are excluded because their political system choose to exclude them. Their political system still celebrates independence from Britain which was bringing wealth in huge lumps. They are even excluding the world's lingua franca. They don't need birth control, [other than voluntary of course] they need technology, economic freedom and choice. They need to get their government off their backs and ditch the socialism. That's in their hands. They can vote. People like to blame rich people for poor people's position. On the contrary, the rich people make poor peoples' lives better by producing really great stuff which makes life easier. Such as $ill Gates. His wealth takes nothing from anyone. They get more benefit from what he does than what they give him. That's another concept which people don't 'get'. People buy stuff because the benefits exceed the cost to them. It makes their life BETTER not worse [other than the odd purchasing blunder we all make]. When Indians choose to be better off, they will be. There are plenty of countries around the world which are better off which they could copy. On the working of the rubbish heaps, there is no indignity in that. Right here on our street, we work the rubbish heaps. People put their inorganic junk out on the street to be carted off to the tip [once a year]. Many people [including me] race around and inspect it and collect the good stuff. We have a nice budgie cage, among other stuff. Indeed, right now I am drinking tea from a cup, one of 4, which somebody chucked out, which one of our offspring rescued. Some people look down on the process, but that says more about them than the people doing the collecting. We do deal in better trash here than they do in India. Then again, The Living Earth Co Ltd collects even the banana skins and organic stuff we chuck out and makes it into compost and sells it. I think even the sludge from sewage is collected and turned into compost [though I'm not certain of that, but am pretty sure that's right]. I didn't see anyone collecting banana skins in India. They would be happier in collecting GOOD trash instead of bits of plastic, glass and stuff. Recycling is part of efficiency. Efficiency is good. Inefficient recycling is bad. It would be much better is a lot of Indians worked on CDMA or that JDSU stuff, earned a lot of loot and raised the quality of the trash they chuck out for recycling. Qualcomm has hired Indians from India. Er-icky is establishing research facilities in China [which means paying people with the ability there to do something a lot more valuable than recycling rice husks]. Motorola is doing the same in NZ [I'll go sort through the trash for a good Lexus]. Mqurice