Go Fig

In article <>, Gordon Forbess
<> wrote:

    > Shall we un-invent the PC (or at least go back to DOS)? How about
    > manufacturing robots? Or we could just start taxing the hell out of
    > imports. (Who needs French wine anyway? We have better in
    > California.(shameless troll)) Is Renault still building cars by hand?
    > If you compare unemployment rates in the US vs. Europe, it looks
    > pretty clear who has a knife in the back.


    >
    > Â*Â*Â*Â*Czech President Vaclav Klaus said Europeans are living in a "dream
    > world" of welfare and long vacations and have yet to realize "they are
    > not moving toward some sort of nirvana."
    > Â*Â*Â*Â*The Czech Republic is a candidate for European Union membership,
    > but Mr. Klaus, who was elected president in February, made clear in an
    > interview his distaste for the organization.
    > Â*Â*Â*Â*However, he conceded during a visit to Washington last week that
    > "the political unification of Europe" is now in "an accelerated process
    > ... in all aspects and in all respects."
    > Â*Â*Â*Â*Mr. Klaus said the movement toward a single political entity of 25
    > European nations "will not change until people start thinking and
    > realizing they are not moving toward some sort of nirvana."
    > Â*Â*Â*Â*The Czech president remains convinced that "you cannot have
    > democratic accountability in anything bigger than a nation state."


Last year, IIRC, the EU could only reconcile 10% of its 120 billion
budget, and this has been the case for years and years in auditing.

With some 80k bureaucrats in the EU, it is no surprise.

jay
Fri Jan 09, 2004
mailto:

Judith Umbria

"Casey" <> wrote in message
news:1BALb.504$...
    > > a debt from Europe for having saved their skins twice.
    > In WWI the USA came in at the very end of the war and turned
    > the tide against the Germans, but Americans hardly did most of the
    > fighting, let alone dying. In WWII, in the European Theatre, the
    > Soviets were responsible for 85-90% of Nazi casualties, so one
    > can hardly claim that the Americans won the war in Europe.
    > Casey

Choir speaking. You snipped all the parts which indicated that this is a
wrong-headed attitude.

Hatunen

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 19:45:28 GMT, "Judith Umbria"
<> wrote:

    >"Casey" <> wrote in message
    >news:1BALb.504$...
    >> > a debt from Europe for having saved their skins twice.
    >> In WWI the USA came in at the very end of the war and turned
    >> the tide against the Germans, but Americans hardly did most of the
    >> fighting, let alone dying. In WWII, in the European Theatre, the
    >> Soviets were responsible for 85-90% of Nazi casualties, so one
    >> can hardly claim that the Americans won the war in Europe.
    >> Casey
    >Choir speaking. You snipped all the parts which indicated that this is a
    >wrong-headed attitude.
Not that I would want to muddy the waters or anything, but it
could simply mean the US came in late and saved the day. Kind of
like WWI.

************* DAVE HATUNEN () *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Casey

    > Choir speaking. You snipped all the parts which indicated that
    > this is a wrong-headed attitude.

Guilty as charged. I was trying to prevent the usual comments about
how the USA saved the world, but I killed the messenger instead.


Casey

Casey

    > Not that I would want to muddy the waters or anything, but it
    > could simply mean the US came in late and saved the day. Kind
    > of like WWI.

That is a valid point for WWI, as one could easily make the case
that the two sides were hopelessly stalemated. But in WWII, by
the time of the Normandy invasion the Soviets had already thrown
the Nazis out of Russia and just about completely out of Ukraine
and Belarus. Without that invasion, the Soviets would have won by
themselves, but probably not until 1946 or so. In the summer of
1944 the momentum was clearly on the side of the Soviets. The
invasion turned a slow victory by the Soviets into a two-sided rout.
And before anyone misunderstands, I am in no way denigrating the
sacrifice of the American forces, or any other forces.


Casey

Wolfgang Schwanke

Gordon Forbess <> wrote in
news::

    > You closed the paragraph by questioning the patriotism of the American
    > business community for *legal* tax avoidance. I guess you hold French
    > citizens to a different standard for their *illegal* activity. No one
    > is accusing you of being impartial.

The new class of capitalists is unpatriotic in all countries. Is that so
hard to grasp?

Go Fig

In article <gGELb.791$>, Casey
<> wrote:

    > > Not that I would want to muddy the waters or anything, but it
    > > could simply mean the US came in late and saved the day. Kind
    > > of like WWI.
    >
    > That is a valid point for WWI, as one could easily make the case
    > that the two sides were hopelessly stalemated. But in WWII, by
    > the time of the Normandy invasion the Soviets had already thrown
    > the Nazis out of Russia and just about completely out of Ukraine
    > and Belarus. Without that invasion, the Soviets would have won by
    > themselves, but probably not until 1946 or so


You mean they (might) have been able to reclaim their borders, right ?

But not without allied air power, which was the decisive factor of WWII.

jay
Fri Jan 09, 2004
mailto:



    > . In the summer of
    > 1944 the momentum was clearly on the side of the Soviets. The
    > invasion turned a slow victory by the Soviets into a two-sided rout.
    > And before anyone misunderstands, I am in no way denigrating the
    > sacrifice of the American forces, or any other forces.
    >
    >
    > Casey
    >

Devil

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:19:37 +0100, Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:

    > The new class of capitalists is unpatriotic in all countries. Is that so
    > hard to grasp?

Except in the US of course. :-)

Capitalism being patriotic by definition, presumably?

R J Carpenter

"Earl Evleth" <> wrote in message
news:BC24B1D3.21F65%...

    > Which was not what I brought up! I was commenting on the process
    > of American Capitalists closing factories and rushing off to foreign
    > countries to enjoy their cheap labor rates and THEN having the gaul
    > to sell the items formerly made in the USA by Americans to Americans.
    > This lacks loyalty to their fellow Americans. Profit for profit¹s sake.

Unless the US erects trade barriers against low-price imports, the cost of
manufacturing certain products in the USA would mean they couldn't be sold.
And the international community would retaliate against US trade barriers.

It's a catch-22 situation.

Either (1) refuse to manufacture overseas and go bankrupt, or (2) export the
jobs overseas.

Other countries have tried various non-tariff barriers to protect local
manufacture.

The French had a different approach to protecting their VCR manufacturers.
All VCR imports had to be inspected at a central depot. There was only one
inspector! Eventually they were forced to drop the non-tariff barrier.

Years ago the Australians forbade the import of consumer electrical goods
with non-Australian power cords. Safety, you know. Thus Australian companies
got to make some of the profit by attaching power cords.

Even back when VCRs were new, lots were imported from the far east. Some of
the importers showed a substantial markup from the price they paid to the
selling price - and paid US taxes on this markup. Other importers "had" to
pay such high prices to their foreign parent companies that they made no
profit in the USA and paid no USA taxes.


And then there are the "US" companies' tax-evasion by setting up dummy
corporations overseas to avoid US taxes.

Pmlt

Actually from what I've been reading from Earl Evleth hardly any of
the critics below represent the truth.

I would define, from what I've been reading, his opinions as:

- "US is great but I live in France which is also great"
- "Americans know little about France or Europe, but that can be
changed and I'm willing to contribute"
- " Bush is an idiot" - yep, this one is perhaps true!

Or perhaps I've misunderstood...


On 09 Jan 2004 01:42:19 GMT, (KansasAU)
wrote:

    >I thought I'd put together a brief list of Earl's views so you dont' have to
    >bother reading his posts. From what I can tell, the following is a pretty
    >thorough summary:
    >The United States sucks
    >Americans are idiots
    >Americans are greedy
    >Americans are xenophobic
    >Bush is an idiot
    >Bush is greedy
    >Bush is xenophobic
    >U.S. fiscal policy sucks
    >The United States is imperialist
    >The United States is trying to take over the world
    >The United States is unilateralist
    >The purpose of this newsgroup is to disparage the U.S.
    >U.S. anti-terrorism efforts are oppressive
    >Please feel free to add to this list if you feel I've ommitted any of Earl's
    >common themes.