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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geode00 who wrote (182293)	2/22/2006 3:55:14 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

Oh damn. I just wrote a long and excellent rant, got sidetracked going to another url, and lost the lot. As soon as I clicked I realized I'd made a mistake. So, I did reply comprehensively. I hate it when that happens. bye, Mq

To: geode00 who wrote (182293)	2/22/2006 4:02:35 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Oh... lucky me, here it is... I cloned a browser and it was there... Lucky you...<Why in the world would manufacturers put expensive ingredients in their products if they could simply say that they do? That's human nature.> Having been involved with manufacturing, for a big scary oil company, I can tell you that you don't want your brand destroyed by some pathetic short cut which won't save much money. But, what's amazing, is that sometimes exactly that happens, because some dopey people think that the balance between quality and price should be located in one place when really, it's somewhere else. So, for example, Formula Shell crashed and burned because of a dopey decision on how to make it and starting to sell it in the height of summer. They should have started selling it at the beginning of winter, when knock wouldn't have been a problem. BP did dopey things too. I got in disputes with the supply department and manufacturing on what quality should be. So of course there is a balance between quality and price and it shifts. And companies will lie if they think they can get away with it to avoid problems. But there are always tests and monitoring. Anyway, it's not human nature to defraud. That's the nature of frauds. Some people know that honesty and good quality and trust can be taken to the bank. I bought loads of Elevet over the last 18 months, at great expense compared with el cheapo nutrients, simply because I trust the brand because I know they have a LOT to lose if they goofed up with pregnant women. Roche doesn't want to have their name in the media for having produced mutant babies because somebody goofed on quality control. <Why in the world would you trust manufacturers? Would you analyze the ingredients in your pills? Do you think anyone would?> Yes, people do. Competitors for example would check that things are as claimed. The cost isn't much and if they could get the drop on competition, that's great. As a salesman for one oil brand, I would happily inform customers about how my products were superior if they were. Dumb salesmen might lie about such things. Dumb, because the opposition will be informed of the claims and then can sue for slander or simply make the liar look like a liar by showing the truth. Customers don't take kindly to being lied to. That is NOT the way to ensure long term sales, which is where the profits come from. What was the name of the supermarket chain which bleached their meat to get rid of the smell? What are the names of the companies which relabel their unsold eggs? I imagine you don't want to say, or don't know, because you would have to back that up with facts. Libel is a no-no. Lying about Wendy's having put a finger in some food resulted in a gaol sentence for the liar recently. <Libertarians don't have a coherent philiosophy beyond: keep your hands off my money but give me all the things that I want when I want them. > You obviously didn't read that link I gave you and have got your ideas from some slogan somewhere. Your attitudes would NOT be any use in a capitalist environment where people have to earn a living by knowing what's going on, producing high quality and reasonable prices and having more than a passing familiarity with the truth. The philosophy is coherent, contrary to your mistaken ideas. <Do you think Bill Gates would be as wealthy as he is if he had been born to a poor family in Brazil? Even Warren Buffet acknowledges his luck to be born the person he is in the place and time that he was. > Huh? Of course situations create opportunities. If $ill had been born in the stone age, he wouldn't have a car. Well done. But you are ignoring that fact that humans do actually make efforts and decisions in response to the time and place in which they find themselves and that is what creates their success. Luck is just a bit of handy help. <Capitalism is a system. Criminality is an opinion. > In coherent Libertarian philosophy, criminality is not opinion, it's a breach of a person's person or property. Mqurice