Re: News from the neverland

Post #131,073 by deSitter 12/16/03 7:16:16 PM Reply	Re: News from the neverland It is possible to conduct business with a social conscience. It was once nearly mandatory. -drl
Post #131,089 by Steve Lowe 12/16/03 8:33:42 PM Reply	And still happens [link\|http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/12/15/offbeat.shoe.factory.ap/\|http://edition.cnn.c....shoe.factory.ap/] ----- Steve
Post #131,092 by mmoffitt 12/16/03 8:46:33 PM Reply	I found my new shoemaker. I pay no attention to shoes (usually wearing whatever I get for birthdays, Christmas, etc.) But I will seek these out. Is "SAS" a brand? Is it widely available? bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #131,101 by Steve Lowe 12/16/03 9:30:58 PM Reply	Don't know. Don't personally know anything about them. Heard the story on the radio while driving to the office this am. I do know SAS stands for San Antonio Shoe, they're based out of San Antonio, TX. ----- Steve
Post #131,128 by a6l6e6x 12/16/03 11:16:27 PM Reply	Some "outlet malls" have them. [link\|http://www.tangeroutlet.com/outlet/brands/brndlist2.asp?pkStoreID=1198\|Tanger Outlet Center Locations]. [link\|http://www.belz.com/factory/fow_brandlocator.asp?c=SAS+Shoes&srch=true\|More]. Then there's always eBay. I see them advertised in the Charlotte area. Alex A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true. -- Demosthenes, Greek orator (384-322 BCE)
Post #131,111 by Arkadiy 12/16/03 10:23:07 PM Reply	Google seems to think they are related to medical shoes, especially recommended for diabetes. -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks
Post #131,112 by Arkadiy 12/16/03 10:24:44 PM 12/16/03 10:43:14 PM Reply	I guess the owner has money to burn >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A letter included with each cheque said the gifts were a longtime dream of the company and were in appreciation to employees for standing by the company during hard times. <<<<<<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lew Hayden, the company's founder and co-owner, said in a short statement to the employees that the bonuses are part of a long-standing dream. The statement also mentioned that the bonuses were part of a restructuring plan. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< This is a "dream". It's a private company, his own money. He gets a kick from spending it this way. You can hardly demand that from other employers, or from public companies. Mind you, this may be a perfectly solid business. He can't compete with $0.75/hr Chinese market unless he hires and retains absolutely exceptional people. At $10/hr, their labor may be a bargain. Just like in programming, replacing people may cost a lot in an established process. It's just the amount that is excessive, not the idea. [edit - I came to the conclusion it was a charity after all :)] -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks Edited by Arkadiy Dec. 16, 2003, 10:41:05 PM EST Edited by Arkadiy Dec. 16, 2003, 10:43:14 PM EST Expand All History
Post #131,115 by Steve Lowe 12/16/03 10:33:27 PM Reply	Probably not. Probably not charity. Believe it or not, there are companies that recognize that there are long-term benefits to keeping employees happy in terms of productivity, retention, and lower training costs due to turnover. A guess is the company had a banner year and this was one way to demonstrate to the employees that management values them, so yes, the motive was profit, although long-term profit versus today's typical profiteering. The scenario is that it is going out of business and it would rather give available cash to its employees in lieu of its creditors. ----- Steve
Post #131,116 by bepatient 12/16/03 10:36:28 PM Reply	Shhh...don't tell anyone. Safer to think that all businesses and businesspersons are simply evil folks bent on making themselves wealthy beyond belief by climbing on the backs of the poor. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} It goes in, it must come out._{Teslacle's Deviant to Fudd's Law} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #131,117 by Steve Lowe 12/16/03 10:36:58 PM Reply	oh, sorry. I'll shutup now. ----- Steve
Post #131,119 by bepatient 12/16/03 10:45:49 PM Reply	:-) If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} It goes in, it must come out._{Teslacle's Deviant to Fudd's Law} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #131,212 by mmoffitt 12/17/03 12:00:32 PM Reply	Not all, just most. Pick up a newspaper some time. ;-) bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #131,249 by bepatient 12/17/03 4:06:07 PM Reply	Sure will.. ..and I'll discuss with the 'businessperson' running the store when I do. I'll make sure to refer to him lovingly as an "evil bastard". If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} It goes in, it must come out._{Teslacle's Deviant to Fudd's Law} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #131,641 by mmoffitt 12/20/03 10:41:13 AM Reply	There you go again. If the shopkeeper is a multi-national corp owner, please do. Actually, I heard Dean say something the other day that makes tremendous sense (even to a die-hard socialist like me). In addressing a question about the problem of outsourcing, falling wages, etc. and what he would do about it, he said that there is no putting the genie of globalization back in the bottle. Moreover, we shouldn't try. He was for globalization because he firmly believed that it would lead to a more stable world. The problem, as he sees it, is that globalization has only gone half-way. Only the large multi-national corporations have enjoyed the advantages of it thusfar. The way to fix it is to ensure that workers share in the enjoyment. The best way to do that, he says, is to support the rise of trade unions, women's rights and environmental protection policy in developing nations - especially those where our jobs are going. In short, lift the boats of the working people in those countries. That will have the side-effect of providing an incentive for large multi-nationals to keep the jobs here or make decisions about where to hire based solely on merit. He also said that small business accounts for 70% of new job creation (this is, imo, a consequence of the loss of employment from large employers. A point he did not make). We are not doing enough, he said, to help small business people because the current regime is focused exclusively on making sure the large multi-nationals get all the goodies. bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #131,644 by bepatient 12/20/03 11:48:47 AM Reply	Don't remember the "giant sucking sound"? This trend predates the current administration by over a decade. In fact, by risking a trade war to protect the steel industry, this administration has probably done more in that one act that the government has done in decades to try and protect base industry in this country. (not that it amounts to much...but a little something is always more than zero) If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} It goes in, it must come out._{Teslacle's Deviant to Fudd's Law} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #131,730 by mmoffitt 12/21/03 10:49:52 AM Reply	How Orwellian. Do you really expect anyone to believe that this administration is a defender of "the little guy"? That this administration's policies are strongly tilted to benefit those in the top < 1.0% is clearly without dispute. Trying to buy votes in Pennsylvania (one of the many states he lost when he lost the election last time) is hardly evidence of any attempt at defending workers' rights. bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #131,747 by bepatient 12/21/03 2:06:27 PM Reply	Not a chance. But being specific to this administration on your part is equally as misguided. There isn't an elected official for the past 25 years that has defnded the rights of workers in this country. So while you consider the act a paltry bit of campaigning (it won't work, btw...Philly controls the state and thus the state will stay D...but it may get him OH and WV)...it does remain the first act in decades of the Executive Branch designed specifically to protect US industry and unionized, high paying US jobs. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} It goes in, it must come out._{Teslacle's Deviant to Fudd's Law} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #131,679 by Ashton 12/20/03 6:58:26 PM Reply	A more elegant (?) summary of the mindset to be targeted and dismantled, is [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=131647\| here], thanks to Peter's linkage perspicuity. And today, Silverlock came up with a parallel movement, which may aid the trend - [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=131604\| here]. Methinks that.. until such ideas, insights into the problem inherent in the Spreadsheet Mind\ufffd and the new supra-National Corporatocracy -- become widely known, discussed, fucking Actually Debated! (by the usual minority, still able to process beyond what they were early-on programmed-with) -- it will remain a Shrub/PNAC cesspool of concentrated wealth and meeja bafflegab. Language has already been polluted by these two self-serving forces, rendering this scale of discussion.. more difficult than ever. There won't be any 'help' given to the organizing and sponsoring of such "debates" - we see, and from all past experience. This will be a sustained grass-roots worldwide movemenyt gathering momentum or.. a dreary succession of further retrenchment by the 443 people (men) who own as much wealth as half the people of the earth. People with that much Power will reflexively Kill to maintain it (by cowardly surrogate, per usual) - this will deter only the fainthearted and the mere academically 'interested'. (Those who already have that corner office, and feel insulated from the plight of the growing lesser ["when they came for the trade unionists, I.."] - will, natch, stay with the comfy theory. A while longer..) Good Luck to Us All
Post #131,728 by mmoffitt 12/21/03 10:46:08 AM Reply	Largely agree. However, we are beginning to see cracks in the foundation. Consider the growing number of youth in Russia who have already become disenchanted with the "democratization" of the USSR. These kids (in their 20's) have no real appreciation of the tremendous oppression of the Bolsheviks, yet they are becoming Communists - preferring that to which they see now. The point is, from the end of WW II at least up to the Carter Administration, the entire world admired the US. In the past 20 years or so, that admiration has turned to indifference to dislike to (in a growing number of regions) utter contempt. The current crop has done more to accelerate that trend than certainly any in my memory and shows no sign that it comprehends or cares about the growing intensity with which the rest of the world dislikes and mistrusts us. I think Dean may be wrong in one regard: it may be possible to put the genie of globalization back in the bottle. We are the principal architects of its implementation. We were/are motivated by distributing wealth to the already obscenely wealthy. We have already lost much of the prestige we once had, arguably only retaining the fraction we have owing to our arsenal. But people do not remain frightened forever. How long we can continue to exploit the rest of the world before there is a genuine global uprising against all we represent remains, at least to me, an open question. bcnu, Mikem Java, Junk. Both start with a "J", both have four letters. Coincidence? I think not.
Post #132,025 by Arkadiy 12/23/03 2:38:10 PM Reply	And the technology has nothing to do with it? Globalization has been coming in small steps, starting with the age of sail. The increased tempo in the last 50 years corresponds to higher speed of advance in transportation and communicatons. Globalization has always been an enemy of "small guy". It started as colonialism and slavery. Now it's just loss of jobs. Progress! -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks
Post #132,163 by tuberculosis 12/24/03 11:02:20 AM Reply	The problem with globalization is its only available to the corporations and very wealthy. They can cross borders at will with limited inconvenience, settling anywhere they like. Can I? Doesn't look like it. Visa, immigration, etc all conspire to render me suspicious and undesirable when I try to follow the jobs. Its much easier for most people to pick up and get jobs in the US than it is for US citizens to pick up and work in other countries. Level the playing field, sez I. "I believe that many of the systems we build today in Java would be better built in Smalltalk and Gemstone." -- Martin Fowler, JAOO 2003
Post #132,180 by Arkadiy 12/24/03 12:53:24 PM Reply	Funny, I was thinking the same thing when I wrote my post. But I decided against writing it up... If I say that workers should enjoy the globalization the same as corporations, I would be advocating unlimited immigration. Our dear left will be all over me in a split second. Together with our dear right :) -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks
Post #132,184 by tuberculosis 12/24/03 1:20:01 PM Reply	You have to actually try working abroad to see the obstacles Not many muricans have tried it. Fewer have non-native friends who have gone the other way with whom they can compare notes. "I believe that many of the systems we build today in Java would be better built in Smalltalk and Gemstone." -- Martin Fowler, JAOO 2003
Post #132,187 by Arkadiy 12/24/03 1:43:49 PM Reply	10 years ago, USA was "abroad" to me I had very smooth sailing, having come in legally and all. I know people who came in on H1B(?) visas. And they know people who came with no legal cover at all. Among them, a couple that has a child in Russia. With no legal prospects to get reunited here. Ever. BTW, what we call "white collar outsoursing" is really a "remote immigration". I don't understand why our "little guy" advocates are only concerned with local "little guys". For somebody who is trying to claw his/her way oput of poverty in India, outsourcing is a godsend. -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks
Post #132,188 by inthane-chan 12/24/03 2:11:52 PM Reply	Neal Stephenson got it... When it gets down to it - talking trade balances here - once we've brain-drained all our technology into other countries, once things have evened out, they're making cars in Bolivia and microwave ovens in Tadzhikistan and selling them here - once our edge in natural resources has been made irrelevant by giant Hong Kong ships and dirigibles that can ship North Dakota all the way to New Zealand for a nickel - once the Invisible hand has taken all those historical inequities and smeared them out into a broad global layer of what a Pakistani brickmaker would consider to be prosperity... And that's the issue. It's not that we don't want to help others, we just don't want to give up our current cushy positions to do so. At least, that's the way I see a lot of 'tude from around here. I have a blue sign on my door. It says "If this sign is red, you're moving too fast."
Post #132,190 by Arkadiy 12/24/03 2:20:50 PM 12/24/03 2:21:03 PM Reply	Indeed you are correct about attitude But I don't think Mr. Stephenson got it right... Either producing stuff all over the world brings productivity gain. Or it does not. If it does, we will see a huge raise in the level of prosperity everywhere. When somebody who could whittle toy cars out wood pieces starts working in a factory churning out matchbox cars by thousand, that's a huge productivity gain, no matter what you think about wooden cars. If it does not bring productivity gain, it will fall by wayside, like other business fads. Companies will get burned and people will suffer, but it will go away. -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks Edited by Arkadiy Dec. 24, 2003, 02:21:03 PM EST Expand All History
Post #132,194 by tuberculosis 12/24/03 2:56:14 PM Reply	What lead you to the US as opposed to somewhere closer in Europe? Did you consider alternative locations when choosing to emigrate? Were the obstacles different for different locations? Sometime I'd love to hoist a couple cold ones with you and hear your story. As to your second point - little guy advocates are for local little guys because the advocates are (for the most part) local little guys. Surprise. As they say, a rising tide lifts all boats - but for the tide to rise in one place it must fall somewhere else, and a falling flood can leave your boat in a tree. Some of us are feeling rather up a tree these days. How do we stay home and afloat at the same time? Can we even go where the water went? OK I've beat that one to death. Merry xmas. "I believe that many of the systems we build today in Java would be better built in Smalltalk and Gemstone." -- Martin Fowler, JAOO 2003
Post #132,237 by Arkadiy 12/24/03 6:27:30 PM Reply	Hapy Chanukha :) The alternatives were US, Israel, Germany. There was some Canadian and Australian possibilities, but very remote. Germany was off the list. For a Jew, to leave Russia and move to Germany... What's wrong with that picture? Israel was a strong possibility, but everyone kept saying that it's foolish to go there if US was open (my mother-in-law was there). So to US we went. No story to tell, really. I came, I saw, I settled. Always open to pints :) -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks
Post #132,210 by mmoffitt 12/24/03 3:54:55 PM Reply	Re: I don't understand why our "little guy" advocates ... It is pretty simple, actually. I have no interest in entering a race to the bottom with the average Indian wage slave. He's starting out a lot closer to the bottom than I am and he'd win handily. Further, I realize that the only real winner of such a race would be the plutocrats here who have won too much already. If I appear disinterested in the plight of those suffering a standard of living I won't accept, it is because I do not want to join them and because I can see the excesses that are enjoyed by the minority here (the fruits of labor being eaten by the few while the many starve - as is, dear comrade, the purpose of capitalism). bcnu, Mikem I don't do third world languages. So no, I don't do Java.
Post #132,213 by deSitter 12/24/03 3:59:43 PM Reply	Re: 10 years ago, USA was "abroad" to me I don't understand why our "little guy" advocates are only concerned with local "little guys". For somebody who is trying to claw his/her way oput of poverty in India, outsourcing is a godsend. Actually outsourcing has exacerbated poverty in India, as was pointed out in an article I linked earlier. I care about my local little guys because they are Americans. I don't give a tinker's damn about the Indian little guys in comparison. Their own government and society is responsible for them. The best thing we can do for them is to set s good example. -drl
Post #132,233 by ben_tilly 12/24/03 5:29:11 PM Reply	The technology has very little indeed to do with it By various economic measures of integration, a century ago we had similar levels of globalization to the present. That time it was Great Britain driving globalization. After Britain's domestic problems lead Britain to cease trying to dominate the globe, globalization receeded and the trade barriers erected in its wake are often cited as being one of the factors behind the Great Depression. I see no reason why history cannot repeat. Cheers, Ben "good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not" - [link\|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html\|Stefano Mazzocchi]
Post #132,239 by deSitter 12/24/03 6:30:07 PM Reply	Re: The technology has very little indeed to do with it Please elaborate - this is fascinating. Explain in detail why erecting trade barriers - an understandable reaction to unemployment and a negative balance of trade - can lead to a depression. We've all been told that the GD was a result of unrestricted stock speculation that touched off cascading bank failures. -drl
Post #132,701 by ben_tilly 12/29/03 10:41:19 PM Reply	It was a contributing factor, not a primary cause [link\|http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/id/17606.htm\|http://www.state.gov...time/id/17606.htm] I would say more, but I'm in "catch-up" mode. :-) Cheers, Ben "good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not" - [link\|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html\|Stefano Mazzocchi]
Post #132,241 by Arkadiy 12/24/03 6:36:57 PM Reply	I did say "age of sail" That was the first globalization technology. Spain, Portugal and Holland drove it before England. A handred years ago we already had most transportation and communication stuff: steamers and telegraph are worse than container ships and telephone, but not by much. The computer (computerized phone system) allows for another leap, as anything not requiring touch can be done anywhere. "We are the principal architects of its implementation" only as far as most tools necessary for globalization were invented here (and in England before that, and in Spain before that, and in Portugal earlier still). But to say that our clueless inept governement was an "architect" of something that started centuries before and has been feeding on itself ever since - that is preposterous. -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks
Post #132,243 by mmoffitt 12/24/03 7:03:03 PM Reply	Misinterpretation. And bad choice of words on my part that left you with the sense that I held that we alone had created globalization. My point is simply that we created the technology that fed and continues to feed the rapid, heretofor unheardof, acceleration of globalization. And, more importantly, large multi-nationals embraced it tightly and are the exclusive (?) beneficiaries of this acceleration. Are the Indian computer jockeys better off? Perhaps, but no where near the scale their owners are. bcnu, Mikem I don't do third world languages. So no, I don't do Java.
Post #132,326 by Arkadiy 12/25/03 9:19:25 PM Reply	It's all relative Is it bigger gain to go from 1 billion to 10 billions in the bank, or from 5 dollars a day to 20,000 a year? -- "It\ufffds possible to build a reasonably prosperous society that invests in its people, doesn\ufffdt invade its neighbors, opposes Israel and stands up to America. (Just look at France.)" -- James Lileks
Post #132,382 by mmoffitt 12/26/03 9:53:47 AM Reply	Would that it was 20,000 and not 6,000 ;0) Or, even better, 60,000. bcnu, Mikem I don't do third world languages. So no, I don't do Java.
Post #131,787 by drewk 12/22/03 8:39:37 AM Reply	Holee crap, someone's listening How long have I been saying that the way to pretect U.S. jobs is to require that imports be produced under the same environmental and worker safety guidelines as domestic products? Now Dean is saying nearly the same thing. He's saying it a different way, but I'm thrilled someone at the national level is finally saying that we have to raise the quality of life of the people making our cheap imported goods. === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #132,255 by Booboo 12/24/03 8:03:20 PM Reply	Re: Holee crap, someone's listening I do not think this way as a practically possible. I would rather focus on demands for opening the markets in China, India, Russia and so on, for small/medium businesses (American as well) and firmly demand same level of their government protection for small and middle local (!!!) and American companies as they have for their own large corporations and branches of US large companies. This is the beast that eats the US job seats! As of now at these countries large companies can "somehow" :) ignore the impossible set of regulations for business entrepreneurship, when any smaller - practically would gave up. And would have a ratio of imports into the USA by small/medium size companies to total imports from a country as a measurement for extra taxes on imports from a particular country. Similar ratio I would suggest for exports from the USA to a country as well.

Welcome to IWETHEY!