BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ksbird/foxranch" data-source="post: 1547522" data-attributes="member: 37413">I'm not sure why anyone (except the losers) see anything "dooms-day-ish" about my previous post. If 65% of the Chinese population are the victors in this economic struggle (while the other 35% dies, the ones who live will consider themselves lucky, and happy to take their rightful place exploiting esterners, who tried to enslave them centuries ago. I have worked for Japanese companies. Some, like Marantz were "going Japanese" anyway, due to terrible management by the last of the original owners, and then Philips stepped.Capitalism is a form of war. It is simply economic war instead of militaristic war. Since Asia has a very large majority of people on earth, they are willing to expend a few million human beings to reach the goal of winning the capitalistic war. If some geologists like Zeigler (he who measured the Greenland ice layers) are right, the earth (and its wobble) are headed to colder and colder ice ages on a more regular basis than we've seen in the past (with quite a few Maunder Minimums thrown in) anyway. The earth is simply a blob of coalescing dust, turned solid, radiating its heat into space anyway, isn't it, sort of ending up like Mars, which may have been lush a billion years ago?Perhaps those who heat up the planet can avert the kind of ice age that covered New York City with a layer of ice more than a mile thick, only 8000 to 12,000 years ago. Eventually (if the Chinese have their business plan correct), we'll all be a kind of Asiatic-Euro-Native-Negroid, but with Peking in control. China could be producing such incredibly fine copies of the best bins by then, and at great prices too. Remember, he who laughs last, laughs best.The small differences might be significant here. While a few million lives (more or less) are insignificant to China and Asia with its mega-billion populations, Western culture seems to value each individual. Western cultures seem to value the scientists and social analysts that create all the social disruption that Asian cultures hate the most. So don't expect long term innovation in Asia. In fact, as it becomes a dominant force, "standardization" may be the keyword. I'm not sure I want to be standardized, so lets hope it won't happen during the next 40-50 years. And since I won't be suffering the future, it won't really bother me (because I'll be gone).In 1975 I taught Project Planning, Econometric Model Building, Forecasting, Benchmark Analysis, and Progect Budgeting using the most advanced computers available at the time, ... ta dahhh ... the IBM 370 series. I had a large team of programmer/teaching-assistants, and numerous students inputting their ideas, hopes, dreams, homework etc. (with oddly no Asian students, because maybe they already knew this future).We projected (for a credit card company start-up called Master-something) that everyone would want a smart terminal in their homes connected to a local central processor/storage unit with daily timetables/shopping etc. The young urban, Liberal professionals would want this "benefit" first (yummy). The advantage it gave these you-profs (is there a better name for this group?) would lead other socio-economic groups trying to emulate them. It was a scenario that I thought wouldn't happen because it meant that the computer would bring a large part of people's work life into their homes, blurring the line between, work and family (silly me).The saddest forecast was that when we tested psycho-graphics (why people spend what they spend) we were always able to forecast spending by consumers, redemption of spent credit card slips by retailers, the float required by banks to finance this all, defaults, fraud etc. within 5-8%. People were much too predictable. That's why the Asian business model of attack and destroy works so well. The pressure on the masses to be "the cheapest spenders" is what the Chinese count on.Herschel, Newton, Messier, and Tyco Brahe (or Audubon), did not want to be standardized. But they were all government supported. Few today wish to take responsibility for spending such a large share on research designed to keep their economy ahead of the curve because it's tax-payer money now. And this will eventually lead to the masses not wanting to make ripples in the water (the Asian way). Just be sure that "cheaper" high quality goods aren't made by prison populations, or children, or forced labor. Even some of the finest mocca leathers in the world, are made through the exploitation of workers stamping leather in earthen pits filled with digestive biles. Followed by days of further preparation as women chew this leather "softer". When you understand the price being paid to bring high quality goods into the market at cheap prices, it may not seem worthwhile.</blockquote>

Verification