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.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (7980)	4/13/2006 1:20:53 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24758

no.... Et tu, Brute? the only relevant truth is, unless and until the chinese embrace true capitalism by respecting human rights and property rights (as grace correctly pointed out) the chinese are destined to be the perpetual 'sweat shop' of the forseeable future... That perpetual sweat shop is perpetually burying the US. The US had better start sweating or it will get buried with a shovel. bury us? Bury you. Remeber this: "The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." ~Vladimir Ilyich Lenin I remember when Americans said, "in the long run socialism will win". To this day there's very few Americans who think that's true. no, i don't think so...history has proven he's a rotting corpse on display and any state that fails to embrace true capitalism is the same Well then, you better prepare the casket for the US to be lowered into the hole while various other previous socialist countries fight against their exhumation. and then of course...there is this "we will bury you!"~n. kruschev which leads me to a certain amount of agreement with you (assuming i even understand you correctly, a strange feat, to be sure) Maybe this will clarify matters better. In "true capitalism" major corporations don't become derelicts unless the product they make has obsolesced. From Briefings, WSJ reports next year proposed accounting-rule changes would force the co to recognize a massive deficit in its pension and other retiree-benefit plans as a liability on its balance sheet. Right now, that deficit is laid out in the notes to the financial statement, but not officially counted as a liability. The action could swing the co's measure of shareholder equity from nearly $15 bln at the end of 2005 to negative $43 bln, or worse. The proposed accounting change, likely to be enacted by the FASB later this year, could weigh against the div, which the co already halved earlier this year. Under Delaware law, which applies to GM, cos can pay a div only if they have something known as a statutory surplus, which is a lot like shareholder equity. The co notes it could still pay a div if it generates net profits, however it lost $10.6 bln last year. kruschev later 'clarified' his remarks I remember the incident. It was a major shock to the US. The hard hats considered launching a pre-emptive nuclear strike considering it better to be buried by bombs than by communists, but Eisenhower put the muzzle on them. "We will not live under godless comminism", so instead they live under godless socialism, and they like it. Yes, they do. Khrushchev himself remarked, "I once said, 'We will bury you,' and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you" [3], a nod to the popular Marxist saying, "The proletariat is the undertaker of capitalism". so if your point is the increasing adoption of the old european model of socialism.... your point is well taken My point is well represented by the glee of Mitt Romney when he announced Massachusetts had found the solution, the final solution. At first his solution will work well. Then it will develop side effects and evolve into a juggernaut of exploding costs and declining quality. Nowhere along the way will anyone think there's a problem. They'll just fix what's broken and remark how good it is that everyone is covered and that everyone pays the protection money. Eventually there will be massive cheating and avoidance of participation, all sorts of exemptions for various people in the system, but the system will go on with its ever increasing tax burdens. Then people will say, "how did we get here"? How did GM get where it is?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (7980)	4/13/2006 1:57:07 PM
From: deeno	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

"until the chinese embrace true capitalism .....the chinese are destined to be the perpetual 'sweat shop' of the forseeable future" A sweat shop IS capitalism.

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (7980)	4/13/2006 2:45:55 PM
From: The Wharf	Respond to of 24758

The United Nations is not in the process of establishing business and this is the first thing we must all think of when we apply anything to China business. It is rather like saying because you are a Catholic I will not do business with you. It is not saying you won't convert it is saying that business works on dollar figures. All of Asia offers low labor rate so you get a bang for your buck. Asia can afford to buy from Asia. Do I feel it is right to have thousands of people in poverty and human rights violated, no. If you have lived in India or China it is part of what you see in your daily life. It is utterly impossible for people to address that problem as it is huge. The problem then is as the landscape. It is not social sponsorship for her people that is changing China . It is business know how. If you want to do business in China we open our doors to anyone who brings jobs. . In the mean time for security reasons we close ours. Will human rights change as time goes on yes as the young one child family is creating a far greater self image then the poverty stricken hopeless attitude of thank god I have food. These kids the one child per family are very well fed kids. Internal China social growth is not her labor rate. If US labor rate could compete with China US would have so much business we would be advocating that every one have at least six children. China has a long way to go to catch up to our wages and we make it easy for her as we continually increase wages. We now our attempting to stop Mexican workers who will work for less to enter into our work place. It appears we are doing everything we possibly can to keep our economy a high priced economy. I would project if our wages do not increase it would take about sixty years for China to catch up to us. This assumption I have made is based on the present growth trend in China which seems similar to our roaring twenties. Ah without a doubt is unfortunately very right.