It's Not the Job of the Government to Dictate Where Businesses Should Go

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, Zhong Lu said:

Again, Jan, you're just proving my point that you're full of shit.  

I thank you for your gracious comments.  And my being "full of shit" still does not alter that you do not understand how the world works. 

Again, I really have zero objection if you elect to go through life in an altered mental state.  Even Bobby Fischer went through life that way.  So, you are in good company.  It is not undifferentiated, though.  Fischer easily had an IQ over 180.  Cheers.  

Coming from you, I consider being told I am "full of shit" to be a compliment. 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

Jan, I'm not going out of my way to attack you.  I don't think you're important enough.  You on the other hand are going out of your way to attack me, constantly butting in with insulting remarks.  If you don't like me, feel free to ignore me, and I will be happy to ignore you.  The internet is a large place and I'm sure you can find other places to be a psychopath.

It sounds to me like you have a maturity problem.  Can we simply agree to disagree and stay away from each others' posts from now on? Or is that a problem for you? 

Edited September 4, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

5 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

I cannot speak intelligently about the H-D company or the dynamics of that workforce.  That said, I was under the impression that the majority of their manufacturing was done outside the USA. The union there might well be part of their problem.  On the other hand, the managers might also be a part of the problem.  And that is especially true if the managers are doctrinaire.  The whole key to being a good manager is to be able to adapt to challenging circumstances.  Anybody can be a plant manager if all you have to do is fill out Forms all day in a cubicle.  Managing is dealing with real problems and real people when they are in a dynamic situation. 

When a union is so entrenched in a company that they actually have input into the product line, then you have a problem. The best thing for Harley to do is to move out of Milwaukee to a ‘right to work State’.....but the Unions, for obvious reasons, resist this. Granted, there is the brand recognition/association with Milwaukee issue as well.

The sad fact is, if Harley does not start making some models which appeal to younger riders, they will died on the vine as their core demographic passes on.

Look at what Indian, who has a similar product line, has accomplished by offering the new FTR1200 based on a flat track racer.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

8 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

I'm stealing this!  Man, that is seriously great stuff.  Kudos!   Wry humor is always the best.  

Anything to help the cause Jan!😂

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

5 minutes ago, Zhong Lu said:

Wry humor is overrated.  Always better to just punch them in the face.  

That you would seriously suggest this demonstrates that you have no grasp of how civilization is put together.  Societies do not allow for that kind of conduct, it is disruptive to good order.  I would not recommend you attempt that anywhere in rural America.  I can reasonably assure you with considerable certainty that you would suffer immediate gunshot wounds, likely fatal, were you to actually attempt to do that. 

My guess is that you have never punched anyone. This outburst, while puerile, is more of that altered-mental-state fantasy stuff you seem to indulge in here. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

if you elect to go through life in an altered mental state.  Even Bobby Fischer went through life that way.  So, you are in good company

Crying

[Zhong Lu + 845]

6 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

That you would seriously suggest this demonstrates that you have no grasp of how civilization is put together.  Societies do not allow for that kind of conduct, it is disruptive to good order.  I would not recommend you attempt that anywhere in rural America.  I can reasonably assure you with considerable certainty that you would suffer immediate gunshot wounds, likely fatal, were you to actually attempt to do that. 

My guess is that you have never punched anyone. This outburst, while puerile, is more of that altered-mental-state fantasy stuff you seem to indulge in here. 

It happens quite frequently in rural America.  Both the shooting and the punching.  Jan, I don't know what sort of idealized version of rural America that you have, but there's plenty of violence there.  

Granted, some of the cities like Detroit may not be better. But rural America is NOT some idealized utopia run by the "good guys with guns" like what you're suggesting.  

And here you are telling me that I'm impractical or have blinders on.  

Edited September 4, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

This food fight is escalating.  I'm temporarily locking this thread for a few hours.  Just to allow a bit of cooling down.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Due to popular demand, this thread is now unlocked.  My poopy pants moderator duties are finished for now.

Please keep your mashed potatoes and gravy firmly in your own grasp at all times; flinging said potatoes and gravy at others is prolly not a good idea.

[Zhong Lu + 845]

I understand some of my opinions stated here are impractical, but considering the current gridlock we're in perhaps it's time to look for more unorthodox solutions? It's not as if the usual tactic of screaming at one another is going anywhere.  

[Hotone + 412]

2 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

 

  3 hours ago, Zhong Lu said:

2.  Set up a fund for government investment in critical technologies like 5g, and throw money at the companies working on these technologies

Additional to not grasping US law, you evidently do not understand the Rules that are foundation for the World trade Organization (WTO).  What you suggest is forbidden by the WTO. 

Something like this has been tried for batteries (ENER) and clean energy (Solyndra) during the Obama era.  It didn't work then and wasted a lot of taxpayers money. 

Edited September 4, 2019 by Hotone
Omission

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 minutes ago, Hotone said:

Something like this has been tried for batteries (ENER) and clean energy (Solyndra) during the Obama era.  It didn't work then and wasted a lot of money. 

When the Canadian and Quebec governments did it with Bombardier in the development of the C-100 and C-300  ["C-series"] aircraft,  Boeing complained to the U.S. Govt, and was awarded with a 300% countervailing duty.  In that specific case, the duties were only for sales of those aircraft made to customers inside the USA.  Now Delta had just placed an order for 75 aircraft, so that 300% tariff would have killed that deal stone cold.  It forced Bombardier to hand over 51% of the product equity to Airbus for free, and Airbus built a plant in Alabama to go build the ones for the US Market.   Then the WTO ruled that the 300% duty was against their Rules, and scrapped it.  The point is that getting involved with special subsidies is a very risky business, you cannot predict how it will end up.  In this case, it cost Bombardier $3 billion, in given-away equity.  It also cost Boeing, the complainer, access to a newly developing market, and a ton of goodwill, to say nothing of sales into Canada.  That market is now nailed shut against them, no Canadian will fly on a Boeing airplane, so incensed are the Canadians about having their prized aircraft trashed by Boeing.  Moral: never, ever, step on National Pride. 

[Hotone + 412]

2 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

When the Canadian and Quebec governments did it with Bombardier in the development of the C-100 and C-300  ["C-series"] aircraft,  Boeing complained to the U.S. Govt, and was awarded with a 300% countervailing duty.  In that specific case, the duties were only for sales of those aircraft made to customers inside the USA.  Now Delta had just placed an order for 75 aircraft, so that 300% tariff would have killed that deal stone cold.  It forced Bombardier to hand over 51% of the product equity to Airbus for free, and Airbus built a plant in Alabama to go build the ones for the US Market.   Then the WTO ruled that the 300% duty was against their Rules, and scrapped it.  The point is that getting involved with special subsidies is a very risky business, you cannot predict how it will end up.  In this case, it cost Bombardier $3 billion, in given-away equity.  It also cost Boeing, the complainer, access to a newly developing market, and a ton of goodwill, to say nothing of sales into Canada.  That market is now nailed shut against them, no Canadian will fly on a Boeing airplane, so incensed are the Canadians about having their prized aircraft trashed by Boeing.  Moral: never, ever, step on National Pride. 

Did the WTO ruled against the 300% duty but not the subsidy?

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 minutes ago, Hotone said:

Did the WTO ruled against the 300% duty but not the subsidy?

I cannot remember.  The subsidy issue evaporated once Bombardier handed away the program to Airbus.  Presumably that was punishment enough. 

EDIT:  Now that I think about it, I recall that Boeing did not go directly to the WTO, at least not at first, instead the filed a Complaint inside the US Government at the Commerce Department.  It was that department that in turn issued the tariff edict.  

Boeing in turn was lacerated over their proposed sales of fighter aircraft to Canada.  I think that deal was canned, it became politically unpalatable.  Boeing also had some deal to do refurbishments of various older US jet aircraft for the Canadian military.  That was publicly threatened.  What Boeing did was hit a raw nerve.  Keep in mind that the costs of that C-series airplane just about bankrupted the Company.  Bombardier is a huge employer inside Canada, and has factories all over Europe.  I don't know the numbers but it would not surprise me to hear that 100,000 work for Bombardier.  Probably the largest single employer outside the government. The company was crushed.

Ironically, the C-series is a superb airplane.  Just superb.  A fabulous accomplishment, and a tribute to Quebec industry. 

Edited September 4, 2019 by Jan van Eck

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

On 9/2/2019 at 8:49 PM, Zhong Lu said:

You know, if we want to talk about morality and stealing, we can discuss the topic of who was living on "American" soil before Europeans came, and what happened to those poor folks.

Or can stick to the dictum: "judge not, lest ye be judged yourself."  I'm fine either way.  

If everyone steals, then the whole world devolves into barbarism as no one will produce.  Why bother?  Anything that is produced gets stolen as everyone will just steal your labor.  Why build anything if it just gets stolen? Survival of the fittest.... right?

Fine, you wish to be a barbarian.  I do not. 

Everyone wishing to NOT live like a bunch of barbarian jack asses will band together and kill/subjugate the barbarians.   Until the barbarians change behaviour<<Cough WWI through WWII and Cold war>>.  That is how history works.  Barbarism can reign for a short while, but ultimately destroys itself by making allies of everyone else. 

Since you seem to like USA history, Ask the Apache's/Commanches(the honest ones who will tell you their ENTIRE History, not the white washed peaceful natives Bull Shit peddled today).  They enjoyed being barbarians and lived on theft from their neighbors(horses/women) and among themselves, resulting in open warfare with all their northern/Eastern neighbors(Navaho, Choctaw, Sioux their cousins etc) who were more than willing to welcome the horrible "white man" and decimate them throughout the SW USA(Texas/Colorado through to Arizona).  Does this make the Navaho/Choctaw USA ancestors blameless?  No, but does show what happens when your culture is based around theft of your neighbors property. 

Your neighbors will welcome ANYONE even if ultimately it partially destroys them as well.  Do not like this example?  Ask the true Indians why the Brits/French were able to walk into India from half way around the world and rule it for 100+ years.  Or Hell, ask the Honest Chinese, not the century of humiliation Bull Shiters, why the Brits were able to walk into Canton...... It wasn't because the northern Han "true" Chinese were being kind and "helpful" to the Cantonese people.....

[James Regan + 1,776]

3 hours ago, Zhong Lu said:

The internet is a large place and I'm sure you can find other places to be a psychopath.

Caught my eye, did you know that the mass of the internet can be placed in a small box 📦?

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Please keep your mashed potatoes and gravy firmly in your own grasp at all times; flinging said potatoes and gravy at others is prolly not a good idea.

Potatoes and cheese here surely

[Zhong Lu + 845]

8 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

If everyone steals, then the whole world devolves into barbarism as no one will produce.  Why bother?  Anything that is produced gets stolen as everyone will just steal your labor.  Why build anything if it just gets stolen? Survival of the fittest.... right?

Fine, you wish to be a barbarian.  I do not. 

Everyone wishing to NOT live like a bunch of barbarian jack asses will band together and kill/subjugate the barbarians.   Until the barbarians change behaviour<<Cough WWI through WWII and Cold war>>.  That is how history works.  Barbarism can reign for a short while, but ultimately destroys itself by making allies of everyone else. 

Since you seem to like USA history, Ask the Apache's/Commanches(the honest ones who will tell you their ENTIRE History, not the white washed peaceful natives Bull Shit peddled today).  They enjoyed being barbarians and lived on theft from their neighbors(horses/women) and among themselves, resulting in open warfare with all their northern/Eastern neighbors(Navaho, Choctaw, Sioux their cousins etc) who were more than willing to welcome the horrible "white man" and decimate them throughout the SW USA(Texas/Colorado through to Arizona).  Does this make the Navaho/Choctaw USA ancestors blameless?  No, but does show what happens when your culture is based around theft of your neighbors property. 

Your neighbors will welcome ANYONE even if ultimately it partially destroys them as well.  Do not like this example?  Ask the true Indians why the Brits/French were able to walk into India from half way around the world and rule it for 100+ years.  Or Hell, ask the Honest Chinese, not the century of humiliation Bull Shiters, why the Brits were able to walk into Canton...... It wasn't because the northern Han "true" Chinese were being kind and "helpful" to the Cantonese people.....

So you're for international agreements and multilateral approaches for diplomacy? 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

6 hours ago, James Regan said:

Caught my eye, did you know that the mass of the internet can be placed in a small box 📦?

Only some people.  I.e. the ones that tell you they're going to mind their own business only to come back and tell you FOUR more times that they're going to mind their own business.  Shows some sort of unhealthy obsession and a worryingly lack of self control.  

If you don't like a person online you should just stay away from them.  The fact that this person won't stay away after he's told me "he'll stay away" multiple times is kinda creepy and worrisome.  It's not his political views that trouble me (rarely will anyone's political views trouble me).  It's his personal behavior towards me that troubles me.  

Edited September 4, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[SERWIN + 749]

On 8/24/2019 at 1:45 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

Furthermore, if your adversary does not 'play by the rules' (the Politburo could easily decree that Chinese companies are banned from doing business in the US) or skirts the intent of WTO rules, why should you handcuff yourself to 'fair play'?

This is the crux of the problem. China expects everyone else to play by the rules while they simply ignore them...giving them an unfair advantage.

Other examples would be the Nine Line Map/freedom of navigation/ownership of the South China Sea and adherence to environmental norms.

Didn't I just read that China filed a complaint against the US with the WTO? That's IRONIC, wouldn't you say?

[Zhong Lu + 845]

@ Serwin You're right.  It is ironic.

@Douglas Part of the problem is cultural.  Western culture tends to think of rules as hard and fast.  You're either playing by the rules or you ain't.  Not so much in Asia.  Rules are seen as flexible, to be bent when deemed necessary.  When the government went up to the oil guy and asked him to give up his laptop, note how there was no obvious consequences when he refused [correct me if I'm wrong]. Based on what you said, it appears he continued on the project and was presumably paid for it.  This behavior is a way of checking to see if he would bend or not.  If he doesn't bend, no one loses, and if he does bend, then China wins but he personally still "wins" and gets paid.  

Edited September 4, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[SERWIN + 749]

On 8/24/2019 at 10:23 AM, Zhong Lu said:

What I'm castigating is the hypocrisy of Trump supporters.  They declare Obama to be this or that, and yet when Trump does the very same thing or worse, such as unilateral declarations of executive privilege of what private businesses should or should not do, they find some excuse for him.  

  That hypocrisy runs in both directions, you also have to remember that Obama basically chased manufacturing out of this country, thwarted oil companies drilling operations, and just basically let the economy fall where it would. Obama did a LOT of the same things Trump is doing, but over here all you hear about is how horrible Trump is for those same actions. Also, our POTUS is actually trying to HELP our country get back on it's feet again in the manufacturing sector, unlike his predecessors did to us. And yes, they did those actions TO us, not FOR us. Greed drove them to make ridiculous rules that did not benefit anyone but those on the upper crust....

  The Democrats don't want to bring up that everything was hunky dory when that idiot was in office doing the same things, it would show how horribly biased they have become. They are a group of people that have decided that the rules only apply to the other side, but what we do is ok fine. The ends do not justify the means anymore, and the conservatives are just about fed up with the liberals running off at the mouths 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

One of the good things about this site is that you can hear reasoned opinions from the other side of the aisle.  Before I was generally supportive of Obama, but I'm starting to see the other sides' objections to Obama's policies.  

But criticism of Trump is warranted.  And given his behavior it's well deserved.  Wasn't Trump arguing early on in his election that Obama wasn't born in the US? Also, Trump himself is filthy rich and constantly promotes policies that benefits his resorts and financial interests.  

You're saying the Democrats are a bunch of greedy hypocritical bastards who believe that big government is the solution for the nations' ills.  Fine.  But how are the Republicans any different? Trump appointed a bunch of people who turned out to be just as corrupt as anyone on the other side, too.  He is ALSO expanding govt bureaucracy to support what he believes in, too.  

Edited September 4, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[John Foote + 1,135]

13 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The sad fact is, if Harley does not start making some models which appeal to younger riders, they will died on the vine as their core demographic passes on.

That's definitely Harley's real problem, an elderly customer base, and because a well maintained one last, over time, market saturation as well. A ricer crotch rocket blows them away. Don't like that, go Italian. Want a cruiser, BMW. 

I was amazed at how many Harleys I saw in Germany last year. Harley's are a wonderful niche machine, sort of time machine too. But for years they've made more profit off the clothes and such than the bikes. 

And don't forget, one of Harley's toughest competitors is the used market. Maybe not the AMF POSs, but there are a lot of excellent used Harleys out there. And as the owners get too old, and or die, they will come to market. My father is in his mid-80s, and refuses to sell his, but it's just a matter of time, and their are many, many, people in that situation. And what do my kids want, electric scooters and bikes. I couldn't give them a Harley.

Personally love the sound of an internal combustion motor. Partial to F-4s, tube amps, single coil pickups, and my guitars cost far more than they should because they are made in the USA. I might have spent have my life in high tech, but love the feel of old school. 

[SERWIN + 749]

1 hour ago, Zhong Lu said:

One of the good things about this site is that you can hear reasoned opinions from the other side of the aisle.  Before I was generally supportive of Obama, but I'm starting to see the other sides' objections to Obama's policies.  

But criticism of Trump is warranted.  And given his behavior it's well deserved.  Wasn't Trump arguing early on in his election that Obama wasn't born in the US? Also, Trump himself is filthy rich and constantly promotes policies that benefits his resorts and financial interests.  

You're saying the Democrats are a bunch of greedy hypocritical bastards who believe that big government is the solution for the nations' ills.  Fine.  But how are the Republicans any different? Trump appointed a bunch of people who turned out to be just as corrupt as anyone on the other side, too.  He is ALSO expanding govt bureaucracy to support what he believes in, too.  

   Obama wasn't born in the US, the Democrats had his birth certificate sealed by court order and NO ONE was allowed to look at it. He was also moved out of the country by his mother as a child and gave up her citizenship, and when Obama came here to go to college he came under a student visa from another country. The Democrats are whining that Trump won't release his tax returns, but will NOT release Obama's birth certificate. See the hypocrisy here, everything that we do is fine but everything you do is not.

   This is what the Democrats are trying to do, and they are promising everything they can just to get votes. The reality is none of them have come up with a way to PAY for all that, and I really only see one way.....taxes, taxes, taxes. Democrats are trying to turn this country into a socialist country, but there never has been nor will there ever be true functioning socialism. I assure you, Bernie isn't going to give up his money for said socialism, they won't make laws forcing the wealthy to give the money over to everyone, they'll just take it from the middle class and give it to the poor. The rich are NOT going to give up their money or status, and the lazy will just sit at home and wait for their checks to come in the mail(look at SA). The middle class worker is the one that suffers all the burdens. That's what is wrong with socialism, the lazy sit around waiting for the productive to supply them with everything they need, and the wealthy don't lose anything, so why work? Socialism has never worked, and it never will for that very reason...

   And that corruption is the biggest problem with this country, no one does anything any more that is the RIGHT thing to do, they are all driven by their own greed and do not care if it is detrimental to the country, just good for themselves. Trump is trying to get Washington cleaned out, but I do not believe that he realized just how corrupt the system is.