| Author | Message | ||
     Lowflyer |
I'm yer huckleberry.  | ||
| Lorazepam |
Hey I like to get along, and I usually dont get too upset. Having just my income, buying a home, maintaining it etc., and having my bike to enjoy as well leaves me with limited funds to have the dealer do my service. I did all the service on my BMW, except for the dang servo assist brakes. those were a dealer service only item. I wish I could afford to buy everything at a premium price, but I just cant afford to right now. I will have to save up for the us made one, not a big deal, just take a little longer to get it. | ||
| Biker_bob |
At the risk of an actual bike discussion breaking out does anyone have or seen one of the Kendon lifts. Their trailers are well engineered and beautifully made. The lifts fold up and lean against your wall. They have recently reduced the prices. Anybody have one? http://www.kendonusa.com/lift.htm | ||
| Blake |
I state that my stance is to purchase as little made in China goods as possible. Lowflyer says: "IMHO, trying to "do your part" by not buying Chinese is misguided and futile at best; delusional and damaging to the economy at worst." How could I possibly not take that as an insult? Then Lowflyer says "I apologize for your reading an insult into my previous post." Was that supposed to be an apology? LOL! You are either absolutely horrible at conveying in writing your intended meaning, or... uh,... you aren't a very nice person.  I now understand that in your view boycotts even when based upon strong principle are ineffective and delusional. Thanks for adding to the discussion. I'm outa here! (Message edited by blake on February 22, 2006) | ||
| Lowflyer |
Bob, Those lifts look cool. I have a lift on my list along with a tire machine and a welder. Blake, There was no insult in that sentence. Period. Emotional inferences made by you are your responsibility. I have already explained that my opinion was directed at the reasoning behind a personal boycott of China. Nothing more. My half-assed apology stands for as long as you wish to cling to your half-assed emotive interpretation of my opinion. | ||
| Blake |
I see, so it's just my reasoning that is "misguided and futile at best; delusional and damaging to the economy at worst", but no offense was intended? One of us might understand reasoning; one does not. | ||
| Tripper |
Lowflyer IS a very nice person. My reasoning for this is from personal interaction, I actually shook the mans hand and have had some discussion with him. Blakes reasoning is based on an internet chat board. Somewhat sad.  | ||
| Blake |
"Blake's reasoning is based on an internet chat board. Somewhat sad." In my view, nice people don't refer to the views of others as "delusional" or "half-assed." I've never met you Dave, but I'm gaining a clear sense of what kind of man you are. My reasoning concerning China has nothing to do with any internet chat board. | ||
| Bomber |
Blake -- I think you've stirred this pot enough -- if, as you say, it's gotten outa hand, it was with the assistance of a push YOU gave it I've purchased some stuff at harbor freight -- some has been good, some not -- if you wish to give me guidance and counsel regarding my economic status and how I choose to spend my money, I respsectfully suggest you do so off line. (Message edited by bomber on February 22, 2006) | ||
| Electraglider_1997 |
Blake, The prez is in bed with the Saudi Royal family. This morning's paper says Bush plans to veto any effort to block his decision to allow UAE to operate 6 U.S. ports. My paper is the Omaha World Herald which is right wing to my dismay. Anyway you look at it, this is wrong. | ||
| Lowflyer |
Thanks Trip. This was out of hand at the first China post. Blake, I am entitled to believe that a personal boycott and the reasoning behind it is futile, misguided, and potentially delusional and/or damaging to the economy. I never once mentioned your name, singled you out or otherwise characterized you or anyone else with that opinion. Here is how I play the game: If I say, "I think communism is stupid." That doesn't mean that if you are a communist that I am calling you stupid. If you were to infer that, it's on you. If I were to say that all communists are stupid and you happen to be a communist who is offended, it's on me. Conversely, if you said to me, "I think democracy (an ideology close to my heart) is stupid." I would argue as to why I disagree with your opinion of democracy; not what I think is your opinion of me. Unless, of course I had no argument and wished to cover my tracks. It seems that inferring a personal personal attack out of it and calling the other guy a jackass is quite effective at derailing the discussion. BTW, I thought I was participating in a discussion about a bike lift anyway; not about what I think of Blake or anyone else. Party on... This post is free of insults and is not harmful to animals or children over the age of 4. | ||
| Electraglider_1997 |
We'll get back to the ULY but for now... | ||
| Blake |
How 'bout that gay cowboy movie! | ||
| Jim_sb |
Lowflyer, it's not the "point" you make but how you make your point. Try to lucidly state why you think a boycott (an ancient trade tactic employed by nations, individuals, activists, etc.) is ineffective in this case rather than to simply say that it is "delusional". That is a summary judgment - and potentially inflammatory to the recipient. Instead just explain WHY you think it is ineffective. Simple, eh? Historically boycotts have at times failed miserably (oil for food, anyone?). At other times they have been very effective. The reality is China's human rights problems are significant and Blake has taken the high moral ground (at personal expense, I might add) in trying to do something about that. Whether or not you think his efforts are going to be effective is the issue. His motives are clearly honorable and worthy of respect. Or perhaps you have a better plan on how to encourage China to improve it's abysmal human rights record? As I posted earlier - I DON'T KNOW what the answer is. It is (in my mind anyway) very possible that encouraging free trade with China will strengthen their economy, empower their citizens and bring about positive governmental policy change from within. It is also possible that free trade with China will simply fill the warchest of an oppressive regime. If memory serves the good ol' USA helped put Saddam in power way back when... Which is my way of pointing out that we don't always understand the long term implications of what we're doing this week (as a nation). As far as character references go, Blake has been around this particular turf (Badweb) helping folks for a long, long time and he has earned high marks in my book. Best, Jim in Santa Barbara | ||
| Lowflyer |
Gay cowboys are the 'in thing' nowadays. Just be thankful they are all in Canada.   The above statement was made in jest and in now way implies that all Canadians are gay, all cowboys are in Canada, or that all cowboys are gay. One could infer that all gay cowboys live in Canada, but that would be absurd, which is the point of the humorous remark. I hereby apologize to all Canadians, gays, cowboys, and gay farm animals residing in Canada and/or Montana who may now or ever will be offended by the above remark.} | ||
| Jim_sb |
PS. It's not a gay cowboy movie. It's a "love story". I know this is true because my Wife told me so. Best, Jim in Santa Barbara | ||
| Lowflyer |
Well, it's a gay love story then. At least, that's what I heard on Jay Leno.  | ||
| Blake |
I thought it was just about cowboys out having a cheerful, lively, lighthearted, merry time.  Thank you sincerely Jim. I agree with both of your posts here concerning the China issue, and I sure appreciate your thoughtful intercession.  | ||
| Lorazepam |
It is only a matter of time before the ones in power lose control in China. The driving force is the cheap labor. In time, those providing the labor will see the power that they have and exercise it, and be successful. In my travels there, I have seen a pattern develop. As an area begins to move industry in, initially the wages are very low. As more companies move to the area, the experienced workers will go to the new places for better wages. this in turn raises the wages in all the factories. Capitalism has a way of sorting its self out. | ||
| Tripper |
says it all. I'm the "kind of man" that puts large obvious WINK icons next to fun little stabs. | ||
| Jim_sb |
Certainly the former Soviet Union has struggled mightily with the conversion from communism to capitalism. And the struggles are not over if what we see in the news media is accurate. Nevertheless, I sleep better at night knowing the infamous "cold war" has ended. I had the opportunity to spend a few hours on an airplane chatting with a recent Russian immigrant. She felt that the steps taken by the former Soviet Union had overall been very good for their people and she felt that things were improving noticeably. The current free trade tactic with China may work even better in the long run with a more orderly change from communism. Or it may backfire. I wish I knew. Former President Reagan is often credited (rightly so I think) for helping bring about the positive changes in the former Soviet Union. If memory serves, former President Clinton was responsible for the current free trade arrangement with China (which was hotly debated on capitol hill). Time will tell which method worked, which was more successful, etc. Wouldn't it be great if they both worked out successfully? Best, Jim in SB | ||
| Lowflyer |
Jim, I also appreciate your sanity here. In this bike lift thread, I simply felt it appropriate to state my 'summary judgement' of the issue at hand in lieu of a detailed, boring, and potentially hazardous explanation of macroeconomics and politics. How I made my point was very succinct. I stated exactly my opinion concerning this issue. That has no bearing on my opinion of any person who may disagree with me since that would be irrelevant to the argument as well as to the thread and the forum at large. What is simple from my perspective is that a little subject-verb examination would go a long way in understanding my opinion as it was stated. Offense in this case was never my intent. I have stated and restated this. I even offered a half-assed apology.  The way I see it, it's the same as if someone stole a two-week old half-eaten can of tuna out of my fridge and got violently ill from eating it. Yeah, I could have thrown it out, or I could have put a sticky note on it with all kinds of explanations about the different forms of bacteria that may be present, but should I apologize to the poor sucker who ate it? Nah. That said, I agree that I could have used more or less hostile modifiers to explain my position, but then that would have turned this into a giant peeing contest.  Until I was referred to as a jackass, I saw this as my opinion vs. Blake's opinion of a personal boycott of Chinese goods. He says it's good, I said it was bad. I am quite capable of wholesale distribution of a plethora of insults and personal attacks of a most overt, foul, and offensive nature. Although, I try to save all of that for telemarketers and car salesmen.  P.S. I had Chinese food served by Chinese people (made in China) in a Chinese restaurant for lunch.  | ||
| Thunderbox |
You silly plick them peopo not chinese they Eskimos. LMFAO | ||
| Jim_sb |
Lowflyer, What could possibly be boring about a detailed explanation of macroecomics and politics?  I've read your stuff elsewhere on this board; I think you mean well but at times you do some "grading without a permit" (my metaphor for digging yourself into a hole). IMHO your summary judgment may prove to be 100% correct. Or the free trade solution may fail miserably and only serve to provide financial gains to an oppressive regime (which I think was Blake's point). If you have a compelling argument as to why the free trade solution is better than a boycott I would honestly enjoy reading it. I try to learn something every day. IIRC Blake's stance on this issue is one that was shared by many Americans when the debate was raging. Good people can have honest disagreements on how best to resolve a problem. Time will tell of course. Given that our government has chosen to go down the free trade path I hope they made the right choice. On the lighter side of the news I'm going to take my DRZ400S to the mountains East of San Diego for an all weekend dual sport ride. Should be a total crash-a-thon for me. I can't wait... Ride (and in your case fly) safely, Jim in Santa Barbara | ||
| Electraglider_1997 |
I hear gay cowboys ride the dirt road on BMW's. | ||
| Lowflyer |
Here is some light reading to go with this monster rant. My POV is that our economy rises and falls with every dollar spent around the world. Our economy grew in spite of huge trade deficits with Japan, and it will continue to grow through even larger deficits with China. Our "problem" with China will indeed become cancerous if we convince all billion of them that we would be content with keeping them all destitute. Otherwise, I see nothing but a sea of investment opportunities and economic growth ahead for the U.S. through China. The U.S. is in the best position to profit from China's emergence from communism, but we have to keep our eyes on the ball. Petty boycotts and political pontification centered on the loss of manufacturing jobs only stirs our own pot and causes further divisiveness and in-fighting. That will never create a single non-government job in this country, only innovation will. What we should be doing is exploiting the cheap labor to the fullest. The money we don't spend on equivalent American products can be funneled into educating our kids, building infrastructure, investing, paying down debt, etc... Meanwhile, China has the equivalent of a billion little ants sucking the natural resources out of her and spewing them all over creation for next to nothing. The fact is, while we are outsourcing at ever increasing rates, this country enjoys one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world. Besides, the cheap labor has played an important part in steering us clear of a more serious downturn in the economy over the last several years. One other thing is that the loss of manufacturing jobs forces people to innovate. Factory jobs are intoxicating since they offer a steady paycheck with little or no use of one's brain. They stifle creativity. Take that away, and folks invent cool shit and start businesses to sell it all over the world. So what if they have their new cool shit manufactured overseas? Their neighbor sees that invention and the wealth and says, "If that jackass can do it, so can I." There you have it. Another piece of this puzzle is the national security interest that we have in maintaining good trade relations with China. If they are heavily invested in our country as they are now, it is less likely that they would see an advantage to attacking us. Our ability to wield military power can only take us so far, and then we have to work to make people invested in us. Right now, China relies on our buying their goods. We don't truly rely on them for much of anything. | ||
| Uselyssxb12x |
HEY!!!  Where's the dang 20% off coupon? | ||
| Crusty |
It's in China. You have to fly into Beijing and get it from the Customs officials. | ||
| Electraglider_1997 |
Lowflyer, The problem with China owning us is that with ownership comes power. The Saudi Royal Family owns the Bush family. Remember how they flew them out of the country right after 9-11 even though they should have been questioned. Anyway, with all that money invested in our country the next step is that they start dictating policy through well heeled lobbyist. How do you suppose the administration finds it OK to sell 6 US ports to a middle eastern company? That is just crazy. | ||
| Blake |
Away with your silly partisan politics! Crusty, LOL! Good one! |
