Pricepoint is gone :-(

[Joerg]

Folks,

Today I wanted to look for a wrench and I could not believe it, they are
closed for good:

http://www.pricepoint.com/we-are-closed/

Very sad. They always had good deals on Thai tires and such, but most of
all it is sad for the people who worked there which I always though were
great.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[sms]

On 8/15/2016 1:22 PM, Joerg wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Today I wanted to look for a wrench and I could not believe it, they are
> closed for good:
>
> http://www.pricepoint.com/we-are-closed/
>
> Very sad. They always had good deals on Thai tires and such, but most of
> all it is sad for the people who worked there which I always though were
> great.

Too bad.

Fortunately my friend can now get me very name brand tubes and tires for
60% off the company's posted MSRP! I received an order which should last
me for many years. Tubes and tires have extremely high margins, and
Pricepoint's business model seemed to be based on that fact. I wonder
what went wrong.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

CRUSHED BY UNIVERSAL CYCLES

[Joerg]

No idea, there was nothing I could see on the web other than that their
inventory seemed to have started trickling down fast.

Competition online is very fierce. Example: I started brewing again so I
needed a hydrometer. $7-8 at the brew supply places online ... hmm ...
casually looked elsewhere, just for kicks. Lo and behold Newegg of all
places had one for $2.19 including shipping from China(!). They also
have mountain bike tires and all sorts of other stuff. This is mainly a
computer gear supplier yet they ferociously eat into other companies'
turf. I've bought cycling stuff there as well.

AFAIK shipping is a real killer for US businesses. Our oh-so-smart
decision makers have largely done away with surface mail. That means our
businesses will internationally barely stand a chance. China's decision
makers were not this stupid so people almost anywhere in the world can
order stuff from there at very low shipping costs. Same for other Asian
countries such as the Philippines.

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-15 15:17, DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH wrote:
> CRUSHED BY UNIVERSAL CYCLES
>

Their web site is a mess. You can't even sort 700c tires by width and
have to click on just about every one of them to find out.

[sms]

On 8/15/2016 3:36 PM, Joerg wrote:

<snip>

> AFAIK shipping is a real killer for US businesses. Our oh-so-smart
> decision makers have largely done away with surface mail. That means our
> businesses will internationally barely stand a chance. China's decision
> makers were not this stupid so people almost anywhere in the world can
> order stuff from there at very low shipping costs. Same for other Asian
> countries such as the Philippines.

China takes full advantage of the reciprocity agreements for
international mail. A package mailed from China to the U.S. generates
zero revenue for the U.S.P.S. while a package mailed from the U.S. to
China generates zero revenue for the China Post. When these agreements
were made, they were not thinking about USB cables or bicycle parts
being shipped to individual consumers in the U.S., it was assumed that
the mail volumes would not be unequal enough for each country's postal
service to bother with with trying to divide revenue.

[Emanuel Berg]

sms wrote:

> China takes full advantage of the reciprocity
> agreements for international mail. A package
> mailed from China to the U.S. generates zero
> revenue for the U.S.P.S. while a package
> mailed from the U.S. to China generates zero
> revenue for the China Post. When these
> agreements were made, they were not thinking
> about USB cables or bicycle parts being
> shipped to individual consumers in the U.S.,
> it was assumed that the mail volumes would
> not be unequal enough for each country's
> postal service to bother with with trying to
> divide revenue.

Wow, interesting!

--
underground experts united .... http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
Emacs Gnus Blogomatic ......... http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573/blogomatic
- so far: 66 Blogomatic articles -

[Joerg]

Well, it's time for the decision makers to wake up. Why are we paying
their salaries, fat pensions and all that if they let us as a country down?

We have to make sure that our infrastructure costs are not penalizing
our own businesses and right now WRT shipping they sure are.

[John B.]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 15:36:24 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

Actually "shipping" from China can be cheap. Rates change on a daily,
maybe hourly, basis but a rough estimate is in the $4.00/cu ft range
at the moment.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 15:48:23 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

Actually you are talking about the Universal Postal Union, which is a
specialized agency of the United Nations that coordinates postal
policies among member nations, in addition to the worldwide postal
system.

It might be of interest to know that the U.S. called for an
International Postal Congress in 1863.

What are you suggesting?That the U.S. withdraw from the international
mail treaties that they have signed.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 00:50:44 +0200, Emanuel Berg
<embe...@student.uu.se> wrote:

>sms wrote:
>
>> China takes full advantage of the reciprocity
>> agreements for international mail. A package
>> mailed from China to the U.S. generates zero
>> revenue for the U.S.P.S. while a package
>> mailed from the U.S. to China generates zero
>> revenue for the China Post. When these
>> agreements were made, they were not thinking
>> about USB cables or bicycle parts being
>> shipped to individual consumers in the U.S.,
>> it was assumed that the mail volumes would
>> not be unequal enough for each country's
>> postal service to bother with with trying to
>> divide revenue.
>
>Wow, interesting!

The Treaty of Bern, establishing the General Postal Union, was signed
in 1874. Membership in the Union grew so quickly during the following
three years that its name was changed to the Universal Postal Union in
1878.

The Treaty of Bern succeeded in unifying a confusing international
maze of postal services and regulations into a single postal territory
for the reciprocal exchange of letters.
--
cheers,

John B.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

devious plan forcing the consumer's acquisition of information

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

the Gov allowed J citizenship ?

[John B.]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:26:46 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

Unfortunately (or perhaps "as usual") you have it wrong. This
infrastructure cost you are talking about is the U.S. cost of mailing
a package and has nothing to do with China.

The great "loss" that you are ranting about doesn't exist per se. This
horrendous loss is the difference between the cost of mailing a letter
in China and the cost of mailing a letter in the U.S. and the U.,S.
cost is set by the U.S. Postal Department, I believe as allowed by
some sort of public law or policy.

This terribly unfair system you are talking about is actually an
international treaty that dates back to the mid 1800's and (Surprise)
one of the main instigators of the treaty was the U.S.
--
cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

And has always been full of oddities and loopholes. See also
Charles Ponzi:
http://postalmuseum.si.edu/inspectors/a3p2.html


--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[AMuzi]

Actually First Class rates are set by Congress. Imagine
changing anything by an Act of Congress and you see why that
rate is often unresponsive to markets.

The quasi-public USPS adjusts the other rates, specifically
here small packet International rates, to balance the
system's expenses . Those expenses include Congress'
mandated pension funding scheme with requirements far beyond
any other public or private entity in this country, You can
argue the wisdom of that if you like but here we are now-
with draconian increases for US mailers of overseas goods.
In the case of an international letter pack $15 a few years
ago and now $32.50 over a period in which most other freight
rates have dropped (as Mr Slocomb noted earlier)

[Joerg]

Which isn't going to work with most consumers, such as myself.

[Joerg]

Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?

[Joerg]

Exactly. Because shipping over there actually means literally what the
word says if the sender wants it that way, send by _ship_ and not always
airmail. Now try mailing something to China from the US by ship.

The decision to abandon international surface mail has cost scores of
jobs in the US and hardly anyone seems to understand that (other than
maybe Donald Trump). Shipping costs are a major factor for a consumer to
decide to buy something not over here but rather over yonder. I've even
had cases where the shipping cost from inside the US to here was higher
than from China to here. That's sick.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/16/2016 8:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>
>
> The quasi-public USPS...

Very much OT, but: I'm probably the only person here who's had the
experience of a USPS official standing near my property line and yelling
at me "WE CAN TAKE YOUR HOUSE!!!"

Why? Because I was one of the many in our neighborhood who didn't want
all the traffic for the new Post Office to be using our quiet
residential street.

OK, back to mailing rates.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-16 08:09, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 8/16/2016 8:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>>
>> The quasi-public USPS...
>
> Very much OT, but: I'm probably the only person here who's had the
> experience of a USPS official standing near my property line and yelling
> at me "WE CAN TAKE YOUR HOUSE!!!"
>

I sure hope you reported that <expression censored> and informed the
media. If goverment overreach is that engrained in "public servants"
they need a reprimand. Preferably a public one.

[...]

[sms]

On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:

<snip>

> Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
> that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
> longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
> it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
> something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
> back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?

Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by plane.

Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
being sent outside the U.S..

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/16/2016 12:36 PM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-08-16 08:09, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 8/16/2016 8:18 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> The quasi-public USPS...
>>
>> Very much OT, but: I'm probably the only person here who's had the
>> experience of a USPS official standing near my property line and yelling
>> at me "WE CAN TAKE YOUR HOUSE!!!"
>>
>
> I sure hope you reported that <expression censored> and informed the
> media. If goverment overreach is that engrained in "public servants"
> they need a reprimand. Preferably a public one.

Yes, we took steps. The gentleman in question was soon no longer in
charge of his project.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[jbeattie]

Sea-mail was a huge money loser for the USPS. It discontinued the service. If you can figure out a way that the USPS can pay all of its overhead/legacy costs and provide cheap ground/sea shipping for you, let us know. We could shut down a bunch of rural post offices, but then that would put people out of work -- and even The Donald understands how bad that would be. Lines of unemployed fathers. Roving bands of thugs in USPS uniforms.

They cut costs in Europe by shutting down post offices, but then again, how bad could their costs be? When your national delivery area is the size of two Oregon counties (NL), it's easy to cut costs. In Holland, you can drive a package across the country in three hours or less. I can't even get to Roseburg in that time. You hit he end of the runway in NL, and you're at your destination. Tape a letter to a pigeon.

I imagine there is a whole economy of US small-package shippers who were deeply hurt by the discontinuation of cheap overseas surface shipping, and when The Donald becomes our overlord, maybe he can oil up the ships and get those packages floating again. Make America great again! Everyone will be sending cheese baskets to Manilla! Tillamook will be saved!

-- Jay Beattie.

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-16 10:45, sms wrote:
> On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
>> that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
>> longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
>> it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
>> something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
>> back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?
>
> Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
> vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by
> plane.
>

Right. Their planes fly for less and the gvt there seems to subsidize
it. That would be the perfect start for some tariff discussions because
it creates an unfair advantage. Yet only Trump has indicated any
willingness to tackle this.

> Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
> does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
> being sent outside the U.S..

And that's the key. We in the US face a major disadvantage in
international business ever since surface mail was canned. Which was a
huge mistake. Nowadays one must think international.

[Joerg]

So why is it not for the folks sending merchandize from the Philippines
to us? Last time I looked the miles are the same from the US to the
Philippines as they are from the Phillipines to the US.


> ... It discontinued the

> service. If you can figure out a way that the USPS can pay all of its
> overhead/legacy costs and provide cheap ground/sea shipping for you,
> let us know. We could shut down a bunch of rural post offices, but
> then that would put people out of work -- and even The Donald
> understands how bad that would be. Lines of unemployed fathers.
> Roving bands of thugs in USPS uniforms.
>
> They cut costs in Europe by shutting down post offices, but then
> again, how bad could their costs be? When your national delivery
> area is the size of two Oregon counties (NL), it's easy to cut costs.
> In Holland, you can drive a package across the country in three hours
> or less. I can't even get to Roseburg in that time. You hit he end
> of the runway in NL, and you're at your destination. Tape a letter to
> a pigeon.
>

I regularly get stuff from Europe and the distance is the same from
there to here as it is from here to there. Yet their rates are way
lower, as clearly evidenced by the postage on their parcels. It used to
be the other way around.

> I imagine there is a whole economy of US small-package shippers who
> were deeply hurt by the discontinuation of cheap overseas surface
> shipping, and when The Donald becomes our overlord, maybe he can oil
> up the ships and get those packages floating again.

If he has any smarts (and despite his bad manners I believe he does have
the business smarts) he'll tell our ship owners to either become
efficident or go pound sand and see that business going to ships run
under foreign flags. A law might have to change for that but so be it.


> ... Make America

> great again! Everyone will be sending cheese baskets to Manilla!
> Tillamook will be saved!
>

:-)

For the companies that make electronics kits this matters a lot. They
don't stand a chance anymore against Asians and now even Europeans. In
the old days people said the Western quality is better but that
difference is no longer of much relevance, IOW it's all quite adequate.
Now if you see a kit for $99 plus $35 shipping and then you see the same
kit for $99 plus $5 shipping, where would you order?

[Joerg]

Good!

BTDT, that gentlemen also lost his charge, actually his job along with
that. They tried to strong-arm us and several dozen neighbors. Little
did they know what would happen ...

[sms]

On 8/16/2016 11:49 AM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-08-16 10:45, sms wrote:
>> On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I wrote
>>> that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
>>> longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
>>> it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
>>> something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
>>> back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?
>>
>> Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
>> vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by
>> plane.
>>
>
> Right. Their planes fly for less and the gvt there seems to subsidize
> it. That would be the perfect start for some tariff discussions because
> it creates an unfair advantage. Yet only Trump has indicated any
> willingness to tackle this.

Oh please. Trump knows nothing about any of this, nor has any candidate
or party mentioned international postal service reciprocity unfairness.

>> Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
>> does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
>> being sent outside the U.S..
>
>
> And that's the key. We in the US face a major disadvantage in
> international business ever since surface mail was canned. Which was a
> huge mistake. Nowadays one must think international.

The trade imbalance with China has nothing to do with surface mail.
Consumer goods, other than specialty items, are shipped by sea unless
they are high-value, small items.

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-16 15:13, sms wrote:
> On 8/16/2016 11:49 AM, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-08-16 10:45, sms wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2016 7:37 AM, Joerg wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately (or perhaps as usual) you have not read carefully. I
>>>> wrote
>>>> that there was a decision by the movers and shakers in the US to no
>>>> longer allow international surface mail. _That_ is the key problem and
>>>> it's got nothing to do with old international treaties. If I send
>>>> something to Manila it costs over 10 bucks. If they send the same thing
>>>> back here it costs less than a buck. Do you now understand?
>>>
>>> Except all that stuff with free shipping from DealExtreme, and eBay
>>> vendors does NOT go by ship or train or truck from China. It comes by
>>> plane.
>>>
>>
>> Right. Their planes fly for less and the gvt there seems to subsidize
>> it. That would be the perfect start for some tariff discussions because
>> it creates an unfair advantage. Yet only Trump has indicated any
>> willingness to tackle this.
>
> Oh please. Trump knows nothing about any of this, nor has any candidate
> or party mentioned international postal service reciprocity unfairness.
>

He has said he is going to tackle the trade imbalance and some of the
unfair practices. No president ever knows everything but some are good
in seeking the right advisors. A guy who built half an empire must have
done a thing or two right in that domain. His demeanor is another story,
and a rather disgusting one. That needs to improve, and soon.

>
>>> Even if the USPS took advantage of the reciprocity agreements like China
>>> does, it would not benefit U.S. sellers of stuff unless the stuff was
>>> being sent outside the U.S..
>>
>>
>> And that's the key. We in the US face a major disadvantage in
>> international business ever since surface mail was canned. Which was a
>> huge mistake. Nowadays one must think international.
>
> The trade imbalance with China has nothing to do with surface mail.

Sure it does. Ever heard of Alibaba, Amazon, Newegg and on and on?

> Consumer goods, other than specialty items, are shipped by sea unless
> they are high-value, small items.
>

That is my point. The Chinese vendor can send his bicycle parts to me
via boat. The American guy cannot do so to foreign countries unless he
is able to fill at least half a sea container per trip and that's just
not going to happen for a small business.

I see that effect almost daily with my clients. For example, when they
do a quick circuit board run where they can be assured that shipping
costs are going to be negligible. As long as they order overseas. The
shipping charges are even lower than _inside_ the US. That costs real
American jobs.

[sms]

On 8/16/2016 4:20 PM, Joerg wrote:

<snip>

> He has said he is going to tackle the trade imbalance and some of the
> unfair practices. No president ever knows everything but some are good
> in seeking the right advisors. A guy who built half an empire must have
> done a thing or two right in that domain.

Actually he built his empire by screwing over vendors, employees, and
investors including four bankruptcies in 18 years in order to get out of
paying his debts.

<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/09/donald-trump-unpaid-bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/>

It's amusing that some people like Trump because he's a businessman,
even though he's a terrible businessman, and some like him because he
"tells it like it is" even though he is just making stuff up or lying.

Meanwhile, Hillary is the most honest candidate in this presidential
election, topping even Bernie Sanders, and of course topping every
single Republican. Democratic politician are held to a higher standard
since everyone expects Republicans to be fundamentally dishonest, but
even among her fellow Democrats she rates highly.

<http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/comparing-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-truth-o-met/>

<https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/28/hillary-clinton-honest-transparency-jill-abramson>

Trump hopes that if he repeats "Crooked Hillary" enough times that more
than just his low-information supporters will believe it, but so far
it's not working for him.

[jbeattie]

On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 11:58:47 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
<SNIP>

>
> So why is it not for the folks sending merchandize from the Philippines
> to us? Last time I looked the miles are the same from the US to the
> Philippines as they are from the Phillipines to the US.

Dude, you need to go back to business class. The USPS is a giant organization with staggering over-head costs, including nearly crushing legacy costs for pensions and medical benefits. It has to price its products to generate enough revenue to cover its massive costs and to remain competitive with the private carriers. Things are cheaper in the Philippines, and the postal service there can charge lower rates. It's like a weekend in TJ, it's cheap but its not free (sing after me).

>
> > ... It discontinued the
> > service. If you can figure out a way that the USPS can pay all of its
> > overhead/legacy costs and provide cheap ground/sea shipping for you,
> > let us know. We could shut down a bunch of rural post offices, but
> > then that would put people out of work -- and even The Donald
> > understands how bad that would be. Lines of unemployed fathers.
> > Roving bands of thugs in USPS uniforms.
> >
> > They cut costs in Europe by shutting down post offices, but then
> > again, how bad could their costs be? When your national delivery
> > area is the size of two Oregon counties (NL), it's easy to cut costs.
> > In Holland, you can drive a package across the country in three hours
> > or less. I can't even get to Roseburg in that time. You hit he end
> > of the runway in NL, and you're at your destination. Tape a letter to
> > a pigeon.
> >
>
> I regularly get stuff from Europe and the distance is the same from
> there to here as it is from here to there. Yet their rates are way
> lower, as clearly evidenced by the postage on their parcels. It used to
> be the other way around.

See above. It's not about the distance.

>
>
> > I imagine there is a whole economy of US small-package shippers who
> > were deeply hurt by the discontinuation of cheap overseas surface
> > shipping, and when The Donald becomes our overlord, maybe he can oil
> > up the ships and get those packages floating again.
>
>
> If he has any smarts (and despite his bad manners I believe he does have
> the business smarts) he'll tell our ship owners to either become
> efficident or go pound sand and see that business going to ships run
> under foreign flags. A law might have to change for that but so be it.

The Donald is crazy, and but for US bankruptcy laws, he'd be broke, too. Like Warren said, The Donald would be better off if he put his "small" $1 million loan from his father into an indexed fund.

By the way, most inbound and outbound overseas shipments are carried on foreign flagged vessels. Serious shippers obviously have no use for the USPS or FedEx, UPS, etc. They are shipping container loads with Hanjin or Maersk or someone else. Under the Jones Act, domestic shipments have to be made on American flagged vessels.

>
> For the companies that make electronics kits this matters a lot. They
> don't stand a chance anymore against Asians and now even Europeans. In
> the old days people said the Western quality is better but that
> difference is no longer of much relevance, IOW it's all quite adequate.
> Now if you see a kit for $99 plus $35 shipping and then you see the same
> kit for $99 plus $5 shipping, where would you order?

I don't know the answer, but I do know that most small shipments are not handled through foreign post-offices or carried on slow moving ships. Its air carriage through DHL, UPS, FedEx and a few others with, sometimes, an inter-connect with the USPS. Most people are not willing to wait six weeks to get a small package of electronics. I'm sure there are exceptions and situations where due to size and weight, air freight is prohibitive -- but unless you can cure the financial woes of the USPS, all you can do is pay for private ocean carriage through a freight forwarder/NVOCC. https://www.ups-scs.com/transportation/lcl.html

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

Well, you have draconian increases for about everything back there.
Why should mail be excluded :-) After all, how else can that
$15.00/hour minimum wage that I hear Trump is advocating be paid for?
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 07:37:19 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

Sure, and I did understand. What you leave out is that the U.S. postal
rates are set by the U.S. government and the Philippine postal rates
are set by the Philippine government (and the Chinese postal rates are
set by the Chinese government).

How can it be possible that the high U.S. postal rates are the fault
of anyone but the U.S. government.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 11:58:48 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

Do they let you out of the house by yourself?

The Philippine rates are cheaper then U.S. rates because costs are
cheaper in the Philippines than in the U.S. In fact I can't think of
anywhere in the world that costs aren't cheaper than the U.S.

So, why should the fact that you have inflated your economy to
outlandish levels be a concern of the Philippines? Or anyone else for
that matter?

As my mother used to say, "You've made your bed; now lie in it."

--
cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

On 8/16/2016 7:16 PM, sms wrote:
> On 8/16/2016 4:20 PM, Joerg wrote:

> <snip>

> Meanwhile, Hillary is the most honest candidate in this
> presidential election

!

[AMuzi]

Sorry that's not quite correct.
First Class domestic postage is set by an Act of Congress.
All other rates are determined by the Postal Service, which
is technically no longer an actual government agency.

The rub is that Congress has mandated certain expenses and
protocols in a way which prevents USPS from anything like
efficiency or competitive pricing. As Mr Beattie noted
earlier, check the postage labels on your British goods.
It's shocking, considering, as Joerg noted, the distance is
the same both directions.

Oh by the way, inflation in USA has not doubled other prices
in 8 years.

[AMuzi]

While you are correct about domestic production (I'm sure
Filipino rice costs less to bring to market than Louisiana
rice) ocean freight is a commodity with lots of players from
all nations.

A cube or a pallet or a short can is a thing. Well, except
on US flagged ships of which precious few are yet in service.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

MEXICO

OH MEXICO

WHERE THE GIRLS ALL SMELL LIKE

YOUR ASSHOLE

OHHHHHHHHHH MEXICO .....


J's caught in a Time Warp

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

2 Guys From Uh Harrison...was the local when in HS

Grandmother worked for Kresge

I wuz in Tonawanda in a James whose Mgr. told me abt Walmart. Which is why James went bust ..... Tonawanda

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Discount_stores_of_the_United_States

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

eyeyahhahha Filene's Basement .... outstanding !

for a good time call Filene's Basement ....................

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-17 04:50, AMuzi wrote:
> On 8/16/2016 7:16 PM, sms wrote:
>> On 8/16/2016 4:20 PM, Joerg wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>> Meanwhile, Hillary is the most honest candidate in this
>> presidential election
>
> !
>

I almost spewed out my morning coffee when reading that :-)

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-16 18:01, jbeattie wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 11:58:47 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> <SNIP>
>>
>> So why is it not for the folks sending merchandize from the
>> Philippines to us? Last time I looked the miles are the same from
>> the US to the Philippines as they are from the Phillipines to the
>> US.
>
> Dude, you need to go back to business class. The USPS is a giant
> organization with staggering over-head costs, including nearly
> crushing legacy costs for pensions and medical benefits. It has to
> price its products to generate enough revenue to cover its massive
> costs and to remain competitive with the private carriers. Things are
> cheaper in the Philippines, and the postal service there can charge
> lower rates. It's like a weekend in TJ, it's cheap but its not free
> (sing after me).
>

Our business teacher would have taught us the following: When the rates
in one highly devolped country (US) start to grossly exceed those in
other equally developed countries (i.e. Germany), something must be very
wrong.

>>
>>> ... It discontinued the service. If you can figure out a way that
>>> the USPS can pay all of its overhead/legacy costs and provide
>>> cheap ground/sea shipping for you, let us know. We could shut
>>> down a bunch of rural post offices, but then that would put
>>> people out of work -- and even The Donald understands how bad
>>> that would be. Lines of unemployed fathers. Roving bands of thugs
>>> in USPS uniforms.
>>>
>>> They cut costs in Europe by shutting down post offices, but then
>>> again, how bad could their costs be? When your national
>>> delivery area is the size of two Oregon counties (NL), it's easy
>>> to cut costs. In Holland, you can drive a package across the
>>> country in three hours or less. I can't even get to Roseburg in
>>> that time. You hit he end of the runway in NL, and you're at
>>> your destination. Tape a letter to a pigeon.
>>>
>>
>> I regularly get stuff from Europe and the distance is the same
>> from there to here as it is from here to there. Yet their rates are
>> way lower, as clearly evidenced by the postage on their parcels. It
>> used to be the other way around.
>
> See above. It's not about the distance.

It should be. Else someone needs to investigate the root cause why our
end of the stick gets sawed off.

>>
>>> I imagine there is a whole economy of US small-package shippers
>>> who were deeply hurt by the discontinuation of cheap overseas
>>> surface shipping, and when The Donald becomes our overlord, maybe
>>> he can oil up the ships and get those packages floating again.
>>
>>
>> If he has any smarts (and despite his bad manners I believe he does
>> have the business smarts) he'll tell our ship owners to either
>> become efficident or go pound sand and see that business going to
>> ships run under foreign flags. A law might have to change for that
>> but so be it.
>
> The Donald is crazy, and but for US bankruptcy laws, he'd be broke,
> too. Like Warren said, The Donald would be better off if he put his
> "small" $1 million loan from his father into an indexed fund.
>
> By the way, most inbound and outbound overseas shipments are carried
> on foreign flagged vessels. Serious shippers obviously have no use
> for the USPS or FedEx, UPS, etc. They are shipping container loads
> with Hanjin or Maersk or someone else. Under the Jones Act, domestic
> shipments have to be made on American flagged vessels.
>

Then it might be time to revisit that Jones Act. Turf protection usually
backfires.

>>
>> For the companies that make electronics kits this matters a lot.
>> They don't stand a chance anymore against Asians and now even
>> Europeans. In the old days people said the Western quality is
>> better but that difference is no longer of much relevance, IOW it's
>> all quite adequate. Now if you see a kit for $99 plus $35 shipping
>> and then you see the same kit for $99 plus $5 shipping, where would
>> you order?
>

> I don't know the answer, ...


That's what someone has to find out before our trade imbalance becomes
ever more lopsided and more jobs are lost.


> ... but I do know that most small shipments are

> not handled through foreign post-offices or carried on slow moving
> ships. Its air carriage through DHL, UPS, FedEx and a few others
> with, sometimes, an inter-connect with the USPS. Most people are not
> willing to wait six weeks to get a small package of electronics.

Actually many are. I have waited about a month for lots of parts,
including bicycle parts. For example, it is pretty obvious when new
brake pads will be needed and the stash will be used up. So I order such
things a couple months ahead of time. Same for MTB tires et cetera. At
;east for riders like me where the weekly mileage is fairly constant,
the others just need to buy a bigger stash.

Same in business. I am self-employed but I have a system that makes me
aware in due time when certain electronic components for prototyping are
about to run out.


> ... I'm

> sure there are exceptions and situations where due to size and
> weight, air freight is prohibitive -- but unless you can cure the
> financial woes of the USPS, all you can do is pay for private ocean
> carriage through a freight forwarder/NVOCC.
> https://www.ups-scs.com/transportation/lcl.html
>

In the US that gets expensive.

[Joerg]

Exactly what I am saying. It _is_ a problem that needs to be fixed at
the US government level. But first we need a president who understands this.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/17/2016 11:06 AM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-08-17 04:50, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 8/16/2016 7:16 PM, sms wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2016 4:20 PM, Joerg wrote:
>>
>>> <snip>
>>> Meanwhile, Hillary is the most honest candidate in this
>>> presidential election
>>
>> !
>>
>
> I almost spewed out my morning coffee when reading that :-)

I see lots of innuendo about Hillary. I see very little corroboration.

I'm reminded of a cartoon I saw a while back. It went something like this:

A couple is arguing politics. The guy says "You can't believe anything
Hillary says! I'm voting for Trump!"

The woman says "But Trump says he'll build a wall all along the border
and make Mexico pay for it. He says he'll deport all Muslims. He says
a Hispanic judge can't be impartial. He says..."

Man: "Oh, he's just saying that stuff. He doesn't mean what he says."


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/07/07/FBI-director-Hillary-Clinton-not-truthful-in-public-statements-about-email/7031467906229/

Quote "FBI Director James Comey testified on Capitol Hill on Thursday
that Hillary Clinton was not truthful in public statements about her
private email system"

'nuff said.

[Joerg]

The classical way like we do that in private business: Via increased
efficiency. Just one example suffices to show where USPS is sorely
lagging and for no good reason: Whenever I tried tracking a parcel that
"tracking service" miserably failed. At Fedex it never fails but then
that is a private enterprise and thus by default many times more
efficient than bureaucrats.

[Frank Krygowski]

Oh, good grief. Joerg, you're making as much sense as ever, which means
we'll agree only as much as we ever do.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

It was a comparative argument, much like, "Lance Armstrong
didn't have the highest dope levels among TdF riders."

[Duane]

Nice job bringing this thread back to cycling content!

[AMuzi]

You're welcome.

Nothing says "Bicycles Tech" like EPO.

[jbeattie]

O.K., let's say the US government mandates sea-mail; the USPS oils up the ships and charges rates no higher than the Philippines. And because it is running a money-losing service, the USPS cannot meet its operating overhead including its pension contribution requirements and collapses. The federal government implements a bail-out using general fund dollars, and the US tax-payers end up subsidizing your shipping costs. F*** that! Pay for your own shipping.

If you don't like that, then produce a product for which foreigners are willing to pay the freight. Why should we worry about whether you can cheaply ship a Chinese USB cord to China.

The USP is self-sufficient, and although Congress sets the rate for first class mail, its other services are set at market rates based on cost and market elasticity. It's sea-mail operation was a losing proposition, so it shuttered it -- just like The Donald declared bankruptcy every time one of his businesses hit the skids. We need a president who understands that! We should be like The Donald and some South American counties that just default on their obligations.

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 06:50:36 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 8/16/2016 7:16 PM, sms wrote:
>> On 8/16/2016 4:20 PM, Joerg wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>> Meanwhile, Hillary is the most honest candidate in this
>> presidential election
>
>!

In modern American politics it might be true :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

But I don't believe that ocean freight was a major factor in the
Philippines establishment of their postal rates.

>A cube or a pallet or a short can is a thing. Well, except
>on US flagged ships of which precious few are yet in service.

Isn't the Jones act still in force? That cargo between U.S. ports can
only be carried in U.S. flag vessels?

Yet another thing I find ironic, as the "Navigation Acts", a somewhat
similar rule, were a major argument for the Revolution :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 09:23:53 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

And you really, truly, believe that someone testifying in a highly
political setting actually tells the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth?

If you are that naive read up on some of the Military's testimony, or
the CIA, or the FBI, or even the President's.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Or, I'll build a wall and make them pay for it :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:16:13 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

>On 2016-08-16 18:01, jbeattie wrote:
>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 11:58:47 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
>> <SNIP>
>>>
>>> So why is it not for the folks sending merchandize from the
>>> Philippines to us? Last time I looked the miles are the same from
>>> the US to the Philippines as they are from the Phillipines to the
>>> US.
>>
>> Dude, you need to go back to business class. The USPS is a giant
>> organization with staggering over-head costs, including nearly
>> crushing legacy costs for pensions and medical benefits. It has to
>> price its products to generate enough revenue to cover its massive
>> costs and to remain competitive with the private carriers. Things are
>> cheaper in the Philippines, and the postal service there can charge
>> lower rates. It's like a weekend in TJ, it's cheap but its not free
>> (sing after me).
>>
>
>Our business teacher would have taught us the following: When the rates
>in one highly devolped country (US) start to grossly exceed those in
>other equally developed countries (i.e. Germany), something must be very
>wrong.
>

Than you had, perhaps, the must incompetent teacher in the history of
the world.

You might start out reading "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of
the Wealth of Nations", written by a bloke named Adam Smith and first
published in 1776, and now, more than 200 years later, is still
considered a fundamental work in classical economics.

>
>It should be. Else someone needs to investigate the root cause why our
>end of the stick gets sawed off.

Well, if you saw off your end of the stick why does someone else need
to tell you what you did?

--
cheers,

John B.

[jbeattie]

Yes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920


-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

Technically correct. although I can argue that while I was growing up
my dad "had a government job"... he worked for the Post Office :-)

>The rub is that Congress has mandated certain expenses and
>protocols in a way which prevents USPS from anything like
>efficiency or competitive pricing. As Mr Beattie noted
>earlier, check the postage labels on your British goods.
>It's shocking, considering, as Joerg noted, the distance is
>the same both directions.
>
>Oh by the way, inflation in USA has not doubled other prices
>in 8 years.
--

cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

ANY President's.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 8/17/2016 7:53 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 06:59:35 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> On 8/16/2016 8:48 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2016-08-16 00:46, John B. wrote:
>>>>> Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2016-08-15 15:48, sms wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/15/2016 3:36 PM, Joerg wrote:

>>>>>>> <snip>

>>>>>>>> AFAIK shipping is a real killer for US businesses. Our oh-so-smart
>>>>>>>> decision makers have largely done away with surface mail. That means our

>>>>>>>> -snippy snip snip-

> Technically correct. although I can argue that while I
was growing up
> my dad "had a government job"... he worked for the Post
Office :-)

Until 1970 it was Cabinet level US Postal Department.
After that it's quasi public (neither fish nor fowl) US
Postal Service.

And to your next question, yes it was designed by a committee.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

taking your small intestine with it .......

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

did you hear Bernie Ecclestone's mother in law was kidnapped ?

[AMuzi]

> did you hear Bernie Ecclestone's mother in law was kidnapped ?
>

that was before El Chapo's kid got snatched; old news.

[Joerg]

You might want to think about why it is that people in the US without a
college degree are dropping out of the middle class in droves. I have
brought up one of myriad reasons. Well, maybe you'd still not understand
but rest assured, you are in good company because most of the current US
administration and a large percentage of voters does not understand it
either.

>>
>> It should be. Else someone needs to investigate the root cause why our
>> end of the stick gets sawed off.
>
> Well, if you saw off your end of the stick why does someone else need
> to tell you what you did?
>

The current administration is not willing to ponder why. That's the
problem. Some of the previous ones wern't either. That compounded the
problem.

[Joerg]

Think outside the box. Why don't we allow a Philippine freight company
to handle the Asia routes? Obviously they are able to do it cheaply yet
profitably.

When we moved from Europe to the US our stuff was shipped on the Cho
Yang line. There was a reason for that. The South Koreans know how to do
this profitably and that is a modern developed country.

> If you don't like that, then produce a product for which foreigners
> are willing to pay the freight. Why should we worry about whether
> you can cheaply ship a Chinese USB cord to China.
>

Which is what companies here are doing and which is why the part of the
US middle class without college degrees is shriveling up. Fast. The
companies that make stuff similar to USB cables are moving offshore
which puts an accelerator on this effect.

> The USP is self-sufficient, and although Congress sets the rate for
> first class mail, its other services are set at market rates based on
> cost and market elasticity. It's sea-mail operation was a losing
> proposition, so it shuttered it -- just like The Donald declared
> bankruptcy every time one of his businesses hit the skids. We need a
> president who understands that! We should be like The Donald and
> some South American counties that just default on their obligations.
>

No, we need to think outside the box. Meaning that if USPS is unable to
handle some stuff we have to look who can instead of throwing in the towel.

Just like it is with stuff closer to what this NG is about. Example:
California has a collosal bureaucracy and way too much government
workers. Because among other things they think it's smart to build
infrastructure using government resources. The result is something I had
to travel yesterday and pretty much every week. A bike lane so lumpy
that it could make some road bikers sea-sick. How hard is it to run a
steam roller properly? I am sure the guys responsible for this have a
plum job and will some day get a fat pension. 3h before on that same
ride yesterday I cycled through a residential development with streets
about 10 years old, built by a private developer. They see regular truck
traffic and all, something that the brand-new bike lane never saw. Guess
what? Smooth as silk.

So if some bureaucrat says it can't be done I am not having any of it.

[jbeattie]

I don't recall your telling us why people in the US without college degrees are dropping out of the middle class in droves -- and what it has to do with the current administration. I would think that the loss of middle class manufacturing jobs would have more to do with corporate decision-making, the availability of cheap labor overseas and the withering of unions in the private sector. No? Is it the loss of sea-mail? The unavailability of really tough tires?

-- Jay Beattie.

[Duane]

Well when our hero the Donald decides to have his products manufactured
in overseas plants but then blames the loss of American manufacturing
jobs on Obama, there ARE apparently some people that believe this.

[Joerg]

It has made staying in the US next to impossible for many companies.


> ... I would think that the

> loss of middle class manufacturing jobs would have more to do with
> corporate decision-making, the availability of cheap labor overseas
> and the withering of unions in the private sector. No?

Only in part, and unions are often killing domestic jobs. They are part
of the problem.


> ... Is it the loss of sea-mail?


It has suffocated sales jobs. Many of those are (or were ...) jobs for
non-college middle class. That is just one example of many. Another
example is that having about the highest corporate tax rate in the
developed world is not particularly smart.


> ... The unavailability of really tough tires?
>

Those I can get from Thailand and other places :-)

No kidding, the TrailTaker tires are really tough yet not expensive at
all. So yeah, there is a solution. In Asia.

[jbeattie]

Corporate tax rates have little to do with where a corporation decides to manufacture its products. A corporation may decide to move overseas or merge with a foreign subsidiary (corporate "inversion") to avoid US taxes on its foreign income, but its move may have little effect on its day-to-day operations. Labor costs determine where products are manufactured, and unfortunately, your pals in the Philippines (and elsewhere) with sea-mail and low postal rates are happy to work for nearly nothing.

I think we should reform the corporate tax rates if it means the repatriation of foreign cash, but that doesn't mean any of the jobs would come back. Apple would continue to make its products in various cell blocks in China -- complete with nets to catch the suicidal workers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qibxm52y1v8

While you're riding out to get your next growler-fill, you can come up with a plan for returning jobs to the United States. It should be really simple for you since you can see solutions to complex problems so readily. I'll manage your campaign for free if you can come up with a solution that works and doesn't result in a massive trade war.

-- Jay Beattie.

[AMuzi]

On 8/18/2016 11:35 AM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-08-17 12:07, jbeattie wrote:
>> On Wednesday, August 17, 2016 at 8:18:42 AM UTC-7, Joerg

>>> On 2016-08-16 18:48, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 07:37:19 -0700, Joerg
>>>> <ne...@analogconsultants.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2016-08-16 00:46, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:26:46 -0700, Joerg
>>>>>> <ne...@analogconsultants.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2016-08-15 15:48, sms wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2016 3:36 PM, Joerg wrote:
>>>>>>>> <snip>

>>>>>>>>> AFAIK shipping is a real killer for US businesses. Our
>>>>>>>>> oh-so-smart decision makers have largely done away

>>>>>>>>> with surface mail...
-snip snip-

>> O.K., let's say the US government mandates sea-mail; the
>> USPS oils up
>> the ships and charges rates no higher than the
>> Philippines. And
>> because it is running a money-losing service, the USPS
>> cannot meet
>> its operating overhead including its pension contribution
>> requirements and collapses. The federal government
>> implements a
>> bail-out using general fund dollars, and the US tax-payers
>> end up
>> subsidizing your shipping costs. F*** that! Pay for your own
>> shipping.
>>
>
> Think outside the box. Why don't we allow a Philippine
> freight company to handle the Asia routes? Obviously they
> are able to do it cheaply yet profitably.
>
> When we moved from Europe to the US our stuff was shipped on
> the Cho Yang line. There was a reason for that. The South
> Koreans know how to do this profitably and that is a modern
> developed country.

-more snip-


Some significant aspects of logistics are not always readily
apparent.

When we were importing containers of bicycles from Japan, we
used the Russian FESCO line (cheap rates!) in 1976. The ship
left Osaka and... sank somewhere in the Pacific.

Our British Marine Insurance paid the full value, of course.
That was six months later, following a marine inquiry.
Meanwhile we lost a full season of sales.

YMMV and probably will.

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-18 10:58, jbeattie wrote:
> On Thursday, August 18, 2016 at 10:03:20 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-08-18 09:43, jbeattie wrote:

[...]

>>
>>> ... I would think that the loss of middle class manufacturing
>>> jobs would have more to do with corporate decision-making, the
>>> availability of cheap labor overseas and the withering of unions
>>> in the private sector. No?
>>
>>
>> Only in part, and unions are often killing domestic jobs. They are
>> part of the problem.
>>
>>
>>> ... Is it the loss of sea-mail?
>>
>>
>> It has suffocated sales jobs. Many of those are (or were ...) jobs
>> for non-college middle class. That is just one example of many.
>> Another example is that having about the highest corporate tax rate
>> in the developed world is not particularly smart.
>
> Corporate tax rates have little to do with where a corporation
> decides to manufacture its products.

For smaller companies they sure do because for them engineering and all
often go along with it. I know that first hand (but not at liberty to
discuss in public).


> ... A corporation may decide to

> move overseas or merge with a foreign subsidiary (corporate
> "inversion") to avoid US taxes on its foreign income, but its move
> may have little effect on its day-to-day operations. Labor costs
> determine where products are manufactured, and unfortunately, your
> pals in the Philippines (and elsewhere) with sea-mail and low postal
> rates are happy to work for nearly nothing.
>

So why aren't we letting them transport our international surface mail
instead of ditching the whole concept?

> I think we should reform the corporate tax rates if it means the
> repatriation of foreign cash, but that doesn't mean any of the jobs
> would come back. Apple would continue to make its products in
> various cell blocks in China -- complete with nets to catch the
> suicidal workers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qibxm52y1v8
>

Moving jobs back to the US is very hard. It is not even enough to level
the playing field, you'd have to hang out a huge incentive carrot.
Meaning real Dollars. Therefore, we must stem the tide and prevent as
much further loss as possible. Dems are IMO largely unable to do that.

> While you're riding out to get your next growler-fill, you can come
> up with a plan for returning jobs to the United States. It should be
> really simple for you since you can see solutions to complex problems
> so readily. I'll manage your campaign for free if you can come up
> with a solution that works and doesn't result in a massive trade
> war.
>

Plenty of ideas but they are guaranteed not to fly with the current
administration and, if Hillary gets in, with the next one. Because they
are beholden to unions and other groups who bankrolled them, plus all
the voters whom they promised more free stuff. So it's moot.

Also, you may not like some of my ideas because a key one might hit your
turf ... tort reform. Big time. That is one of the reasons why even
engineering jobs are leaving the country. We need to learn from the UK
and other nations that running a mostly services-based economy doesn't
work in the long run.

[sms]

On 8/18/2016 9:43 AM, jbeattie wrote:

<snip>

> I don't recall your telling us why people in the US without college degrees are dropping out of the middle class in droves -- and what it has to do with the current administration. I would think that the loss of middle class manufacturing jobs would have more to do with corporate decision-making, the availability of cheap labor overseas and the withering of unions in the private sector. No? Is it the loss of sea-mail? The unavailability of really tough tires?

Labor costs and lax environmental laws are why a lot of manufacturing
companies left for Mexico and China.

As consumers, there's not much we can do about consumer electronics, but
we can do something for vehicles and major appliances, by not purchasing
goods manufactured in Maquiladora.

I was looking at new vehicles recently, as our 20 year old Toyota may
need replacing. I was considering a Ford Fusion until I saw that it was
made in Mexico. I'd rather buy an Accord or Camry made in the U.S. than
a Ford made in Mexico. I'd also rather buy an Accord or Camry made in
Japan than a Ford made in Mexico.

As an aside, it's rather amazing that our 1996 Camry LE had a street
price a tad under $17K, and 20 years later the 2017 Camry LE is around
$18.5K street price. $1500 increase in 20 years, despite far more
standard equipment including ABS, VSC, TPMS, and a gazillion airbags.
Based on inflation, without all that extra equipment, it should cost
about $26.1K.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/18/2016 2:22 PM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-08-18 10:58, jbeattie wrote:
>>
>> While you're riding out to get your next growler-fill, you can come
>> up with a plan for returning jobs to the United States. It should be
>> really simple for you since you can see solutions to complex problems
>> so readily. I'll manage your campaign for free if you can come up
>> with a solution that works and doesn't result in a massive trade
>> war.
>>
>
> Plenty of ideas but they are guaranteed not to fly with the current
> administration and, if Hillary gets in, with the next one. Because they
> are beholden to unions and other groups who bankrolled them, plus all
> the voters whom they promised more free stuff. So it's moot.

You're free to give ideas that will work if Trump gets in. If you
choose not to, it means you have no ideas.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

I had mentioned a few. Seems that you don't read carefully. As usual.

[Joerg]

Couldn't get a loan for a replacement shipment with the pending claim as
collateral?


> YMMV and probably will.
>

That can always happen even if the ship is from another country. We had
some damage because one container was obviously set down hard by a crane
operator (most likely a Belgian or a US operator). The insurance also
wanted to drag this out. I put the kabosh on that by threatening to file
with the insurance commissioner and the check arrived immediately
afterwards.

[jbeattie]

The "insurance commissioner"? Which one? Ocean marine insurance typically falls outside the scope of state regulation. See e.g. http://www.aimu.org/brochures/table-of-states-statutory-ocean-marine-and-pleasure-craft-exemptions.html

Try getting some regulator in California to make a London market insurer pay on a cargo policy -- which probably has a foreign arbitration clause and is underwritten by a dozen or so international underwriters. Travelers or Chubb might be more responsive since they have a reputation to maintain and are generally good-actors, but they are not scared of state regulators when it comes to ocean marine insurance. I doubt your threat had anything to do with the payment.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Joerg]

The one where the insurance is headquartered.


> ... Ocean marine insurance

> typically falls outside the scope of state regulation. See e.g.
> http://www.aimu.org/brochures/table-of-states-statutory-ocean-marine-and-pleasure-craft-exemptions.html
>
> Try getting some regulator in California to make a London market
> insurer pay on a cargo policy -- which probably has a foreign
> arbitration clause and is underwritten by a dozen or so international
> underwriters. Travelers or Chubb might be more responsive since they
> have a reputation to maintain and are generally good-actors, but they
> are not scared of state regulators when it comes to ocean marine
> insurance. I doubt your threat had anything to do with the payment.
>

Our insurance carrier was based in Florida and one not very veiled
threat about contacting the commissioner resulted in fast and
surprisingly friendly treatment. We are not the only ones.

https://www.internationalschoolsreview.com/nonmembers/shipping.htm

Quote "... a threat of contacting the insurance commissioner in their
State seems to carry some weight." That's exactly what we experienced.
It resulted in a check.

[jbeattie]

Pretty dopey ones like tort reform. Even Fox News realizes that national tort reform would be questionably constitutional under the Commerce Clause and would at least trample states rights. You need to get on board with the conservatives, if that's what you are. http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/dos-donts-tort-reform The federal government could fiddle with jurisdiction and choice of law rules, but that's not going to be the magic bullet you are looking for.


Being a defense lawyer protecting the interests of giant corporations, I used to jump up and down and clap my hands for tort reform. That was until my wife had to have wires stuck into her brain through holes in her skull drilled by a bunch of resident doctors who looked like they were about fifteen years old -- and who practiced at the University hospital and thus had the benefit of the state tort claim cap. If those kids turned my lovely wife into a turnip (which was a real possibility), they could just write a modest check and move on. Tort reform is great until you're the victim. And its not like the cost of a procedure at the University hospital is lower than it is at non-capped hospitals. It isn't. It's actually more, but that is because the University hospital has to recoup its losses from treating uninsured patients -- which is a whole other issue that the current administration simply does not understand! Oh, wait, it does.

Also, you are still missing the boat on the effect of corporate tax versus labor costs -- and as a small-fry business, it shouldn't matter anyway.

I will entirely solve your corporate tax issues right now: don't be a C-Corp. Your corporate tax woes are now over. You can send me a check for my advice, which will not be subject to corporate tax because I am an LLP and subject to taxation under the partnership law.

I still don't know what to do in terms of getting you cheap shipping. This might be an option: http://intheboatshed.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Postman-using-boat-at-Wisbech.jpg


-- Jay Beatti

[Joerg]

Sure it is. I know that first hand because I designed medical
electronics for most of my life and still do to some extent. The
grossest difference was a cardiac procedure that cost a fraction of the
US price if you had it done in Belgium (stenting under IVUS guidance).
Yet the health outcomes in Belgium are not all that different from ours
except that they don't have scores of ambulance chasers and thus their
health care cost have not spun out of control like ours have.

The other effect is this: Many companies insist that I carry
professional liability. Every single time I honestly and dutifully
checked the box "Are you involved in the design of medical devices?" it
resulted in a decline-to-quote. Even Lloyds of London declined. If I'd
have been a rusty oil tanker I guess they'd have underwritten. The
consequence of this is that if a client won't or can't cover liability
on my part I will not work for them. In pretty much all cases that had
resulted in the product not getting designed. While in Europe we never
had that issue. However, my insurer over there made it crystal-clear
that the insurance does not cover the US.


> ... It's actually more, but

> that is because the University hospital has to recoup its losses from
> treating uninsured patients -- which is a whole other issue that the
> current administration simply does not understand! Oh, wait, it
> does.
>

It doesn't. Haven't you noticed that insurers are beginning to flee the
exchanges in droves? There is even one county in Arizona where the
number of available Obamacare plans is ... drumroll ... zero. Intra-plan
such market mechanisms are refer to as the death-spiral. I always
thought this would start before Obama leaves office and now it does.

> Also, you are still missing the boat on the effect of corporate tax
> versus labor costs -- and as a small-fry business, it shouldn't
> matter anyway.
>

I have lots of clients and know it does matter. It is one of the
problems that largely goes away if you relocate outside the country. My
former employer did just that. They are moving to Costa Rica. In
comsequence lots of local middle-class jobs have evaporated.

> I will entirely solve your corporate tax issues right now: don't be a
> C-Corp. Your corporate tax woes are now over. You can send me a
> check for my advice, which will not be subject to corporate tax
> because I am an LLP and subject to taxation under the partnership
> law.
>

You think I don't know that? Guess why my consulting business is not a
C-corp. And now for the real world and for that you need to look a bit
deeper into how VCs operate. I have participated in start-ups and I can
assure you that they will insist on a C-corp structure. If you don't
want C-corp they won't give you any money, it's that simple.

> I still don't know what to do in terms of getting you cheap shipping.
> This might be an option:
> http://intheboatshed.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Postman-using-boat-at-Wisbech.jpg
>

Much more straightforward solution where you don't even need to step out
of the saddle:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MbI5bf16u8

[jbeattie]

Damn, Joerg, do you not think about this stuff at all? Belgium has socialized medicine; it has an extensive social welfare system that provides disability benefits to its injured citizens. The cost of medicine is low because it is covered by taxes -- not because of insurance costs. How could you possibly compare the two countries.

Moreover, most of the civilized world has a national health service of one sort or another that negotiates pricing with drug and device makers. The US is subsidizing lower drug prices in other countries. Medicare Coverage D is a f****** give-away to the US drug companies -- and a Bush II program. Not Obama. Does that make your head explode, or what?

Costs for certain drugs and devices may be lower in some countries due to lighter regulation, but that is another issue -- and one we could argue forever. I'm happy we never got Thalidomide in the US. OTOH, some drugs and devices are held off the market too long.

> The other effect is this: Many companies insist that I carry
> professional liability. Every single time I honestly and dutifully
> checked the box "Are you involved in the design of medical devices?" it
> resulted in a decline-to-quote. Even Lloyds of London declined. If I'd
> have been a rusty oil tanker I guess they'd have underwritten. The
> consequence of this is that if a client won't or can't cover liability
> on my part I will not work for them. In pretty much all cases that had
> resulted in the product not getting designed. While in Europe we never
> had that issue. However, my insurer over there made it crystal-clear
> that the insurance does not cover the US.

Try my client Medmarc. http://www.medmarc.com/Pages/default.aspx You're clearly not going to the right market.

If you are creating super-important medical devices that can kill people if they go wrong, then you should have appropriate insurance. You kill my family, I'll sue you. In Somalia, I would kill you. My heart does not go out to you.

>
>
> > ... It's actually more, but
> > that is because the University hospital has to recoup its losses from
> > treating uninsured patients -- which is a whole other issue that the
> > current administration simply does not understand! Oh, wait, it
> > does.
> >
>
> It doesn't. Haven't you noticed that insurers are beginning to flee the
> exchanges in droves? There is even one county in Arizona where the
> number of available Obamacare plans is ... drumroll ... zero. Intra-plan
> such market mechanisms are refer to as the death-spiral. I always
> thought this would start before Obama leaves office and now it does.

ACA is a small piece of the over-all insurance puzzle, which includes Medicare, Medicaid, VA -- and all the programs that comprise that dreaded "welfare system" perpetuated by the communist, krypto-Muslim Obama administration. I can't speak to the situation in Arizona, being that I live in a civilized state. I think we should have socialized medicine like the rest of the world and not a hobbled ACA.

> > Also, you are still missing the boat on the effect of corporate tax
> > versus labor costs -- and as a small-fry business, it shouldn't
> > matter anyway.
> >
>
> I have lots of clients and know it does matter. It is one of the
> problems that largely goes away if you relocate outside the country. My
> former employer did just that. They are moving to Costa Rica. In
> comsequence lots of local middle-class jobs have evaporated.
>
>
> > I will entirely solve your corporate tax issues right now: don't be a
> > C-Corp. Your corporate tax woes are now over. You can send me a
> > check for my advice, which will not be subject to corporate tax
> > because I am an LLP and subject to taxation under the partnership
> > law.
> >
>
> You think I don't know that? Guess why my consulting business is not a
> C-corp. And now for the real world and for that you need to look a bit
> deeper into how VCs operate. I have participated in start-ups and I can
> assure you that they will insist on a C-corp structure. If you don't
> want C-corp they won't give you any money, it's that simple.

O.K.,but a C-corp start-up is not going to be paying any taxes. The whole double-tax thing is rarely an issue unless the start-up is an immediate cash-cow, generating huge income without corresponding costs. Then the owners can complain about the corporate tax rate -- as they float around in their pools, sipping drinks with little umbrellas, watching the planes fly overhead.

Sure, there are things we can fix with the tax code -- a lot of them. We could return to the Eisenhower era of the 91% tax bracket. Let's do that. The '50s were a great time! Really, though, the tax code is a wreck, but both parties are wrecking it, and I doubt The Donald has the attention span to even get past the AMT. By the way, when do we get to see his returns?

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 07:22:16 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 8/17/2016 7:53 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 06:59:35 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2016 8:48 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>> Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2016-08-16 00:46, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2016-08-15 15:48, sms wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/15/2016 3:36 PM, Joerg wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> <snip>
>
>>>>>>>>> AFAIK shipping is a real killer for US businesses. Our oh-so-smart
>>>>>>>>> decision makers have largely done away with surface mail. That means our
>>>>>>>>> -snippy snip snip-
>
>
> > Technically correct. although I can argue that while I
>was growing up
> > my dad "had a government job"... he worked for the Post
>Office :-)
>
>
>
>Until 1970 it was Cabinet level US Postal Department.
>After that it's quasi public (neither fish nor fowl) US
>Postal Service.

My dad retired sometime before 1970 so I guess he was a had a
"government job" until the end :-)

We had a "consultant" who had participated in a study of the Post
Office Department, sometime after 1970, and the stories he used to
tell were mind boggling. The (publicly) stated purpose of the study
was to improve working conditions and the consultants roamed around
asking questions like, "How could your work load be reduced" and "can
your job be made easier", all the while keeping their eyes open.

They found things like middle level bureaucrat that came in on Monday,
dictated five letters and left for the week. The Secretary (poor girl)
typed up one letter a day and mailed them. Another bloke had nothing
to say about the job but spent the entire interview complaining why
the guy in the next office had a new rug and he didn't.

It gave a whole new outlook on "Government Efficiency" :-)

>And to your next question, yes it was designed by a committee.

The adroit bureaucrat does everything "by committee". In that way, no
matter how dreadful the catastrophe, blame never comes home to roost.
I suppose that was why Truman got all that good press when he stuck
the sign on his desk. "The Buck Stops Here".

An innovative idea in bureaucratic circles.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:04:06 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

The answer is easy enough to understand and actually the root causes
are easy enough to understand although with the usual U.S. desire to
rationalize the cause thus avoiding the reality that they shot
themselves in the foot, perhaps that "average American" doesn't
understand.

So for the ignorant:

The cause of the loss in income is the loss of jobs and the loss of
jobs is even simpler. The U.S. has priced themselves out of the world
market.

Even Goerg offers proof of this. Does Goerg buy a, high priced,
American made tire ? Nope he buys a Thai made tire, from a country
with lower wages than the U.S. so that they can sell their tires at a
much cheaper price.

>>>
>>> It should be. Else someone needs to investigate the root cause why our
>>> end of the stick gets sawed off.
>>
>> Well, if you saw off your end of the stick why does someone else need
>> to tell you what you did?
>>
>
>The current administration is not willing to ponder why. That's the
>problem. Some of the previous ones wern't either. That compounded the
>problem.

Nope, wrong again. It is the greedy American public that is to blame.
Give us higher minimum wage laws or we won't vote for you!


--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:22:26 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

Well or course and on can only gaze in wonder at anyone who doesn't
understand. (can he really be this stupid?)

It costs money to get elected to a political office. T.V. time is
billed in seconds and as the "average American" gets all his "news"
from the TV these days a poor politician has to get a whole bunch of
money from somewhere to pay for the T.V. and where better to get it
than from "Big Business" who have big bundles of the stuff.

And, surprise, surprise, that is how Democracy has always worked. In
fact that is how the world works. The little guy hoes the cotton and
the big guy gets the money.

How could it be otherwise?

>
>Also, you may not like some of my ideas because a key one might hit your
>turf ... tort reform. Big time. That is one of the reasons why even
>engineering jobs are leaving the country. We need to learn from the UK
>and other nations that running a mostly services-based economy doesn't
>work in the long run.
--

cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

I scanned back to see if I missed anything. You average ten complaints
per idea, and most of your ideas aren't real. We need tort reform?
Unions are killing jobs? Those aren't ideas; they're complaints.

Tell us specifically what should be done and (more important) how it
could be achieved. And perhaps explain why Your Brilliance hasn't run
for office.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 13:38:58 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

My guess is that your "threat" wasn't seen as an actual threat by the
insurance company. But rather as just another arsehole with a
penny-anti claim and it was cheaper to just send a check rather than
go to court to prove that you were wrong.

While it may prove surprising to the unwashed, but lawyers get paid
and better lawyers are paid better and going to court costs a bunch of
money.

I remember a case where an ex-employee brought a claim, in a
California court, against the, Indonesian, company for (if I remember)
$2,500 for some sort of worker re-training as we had terminated him
unlawfully, threatened him with death, put out a contract on him and I
don't remember what else.

I argued that we shouldn't pay it as the guy was a liar and probably a
lunatic. The Owners said "pay him". I argued some more and the Legal
Advisor leaned over and said - he wants $2,500, we pay it and the
problem is solved. If we counter sue it will cost a minimum of least
$10,000 and we could lose the case. Pay Him!
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

I take drugs for high blood pressure and have for years. At one time I
took Zestril (I may be wrong it was a long time ago). In any event,
according to the box it was manufactured in Scotland and sold here by
a commercial druggist, that supplied most of the hospitals in Bangkok,
at just about half the price that I could have bought it from a
"Canadian Druggist" I saw on line.

Re Belgium drugs. I knew a Belgian yacht owner that made a trip home
to Belgium annually to get his diabetes medicines, needles and meters.
I asked him about it and he said that he just explained that he lived
"overseas" and they just gave him a year's supply. With, of course,
adequate warnings about care of the medicines and so on.

One would assume that Jorge could do the same.

<snipped>
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Never mind the what and how. Get him to tell us how to win a national
election without TV coverage and how he is going to pay for the TV.

Note: The cost of 30 seconds of ad time in the championship game of
the 2015 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament on CBS, was $1.50
million in 2015
--
cheers,

John B.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

ADIOS MOTHER FUCKER .....

[Joerg]

<sigh>

1. It is not socialized medicine, you have both private and government
health plans. Similar in Germany. I know because I have lived there and
had health insurance there. For decades.

2. It does not matter what sort of insurance, government-based or not, a
country has. A cost is a cost is a cost. Or do you truly believe that
the cost of a stenting procedure will miraculously be lower because the
Euros reimbursed by a goverment are somehow "other" Euros than those
coming from an HMO?

> Moreover, most of the civilized world has a national health service
> of one sort or another that negotiates pricing with drug and device
> makers. The US is subsidizing lower drug prices in other countries.
> Medicare Coverage D is a f****** give-away to the US drug companies
> -- and a Bush II program. Not Obama. Does that make your head
> explode, or what?
>

Obama has done nothing about it. It is under Obama that prices for many
drugs have inflated hundreds of percent. Here are the rreal numbers:

http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/ppi/2016-02/RX-Price-Watch-Trends-in-Retail-Prices-Prescription-Drugs-Widely-Used-by-Older-Americans.pdf

I don't think you can make a valid claim that AARP is a right-wing
organization :-)

In short, Obamacare has (predictably) failed and is now beginning to
unravel.

> Costs for certain drugs and devices may be lower in some countries
> due to lighter regulation, but that is another issue -- and one we
> could argue forever. I'm happy we never got Thalidomide in the US.
> OTOH, some drugs and devices are held off the market too long.
>

But Canada did and they have the socialized medicine you seem to like so
much.

>
>> The other effect is this: Many companies insist that I carry
>> professional liability. Every single time I honestly and dutifully
>> checked the box "Are you involved in the design of medical
>> devices?" it resulted in a decline-to-quote. Even Lloyds of London
>> declined. If I'd have been a rusty oil tanker I guess they'd have
>> underwritten. The consequence of this is that if a client won't or
>> can't cover liability on my part I will not work for them. In
>> pretty much all cases that had resulted in the product not getting
>> designed. While in Europe we never had that issue. However, my
>> insurer over there made it crystal-clear that the insurance does
>> not cover the US.
>
> Try my client Medmarc. http://www.medmarc.com/Pages/default.aspx
> You're clearly not going to the right market.
>

Thanks, but I got tired of filling out length applications only to get a
decline. Plus I am gradually retiring. Looks like they are more geared
towards companies, not individual consultants:

http://www.medmarc.com/Products/Insurance-Coverages/Pages/EO-Coverage-Features.aspx

Among other avenues I have used a seasoned PL broker who knows the
market intimately. He tried a few carriers where he thought they might
but no dice.

> If you are creating super-important medical devices that can kill
> people if they go wrong, then you should have appropriate insurance.
> You kill my family, I'll sue you. In Somalia, I would kill you. My
> heart does not go out to you.
>

My clients must sign my agreement that has them carry liability. But it
doesn't matter much anymore because Obamacare has snuffed out much of
this market. I saw that coming in 2009 and swung the steering wheel
around, designing mostly industrial, ag, oil, gas, aerospace electronics.

>>
>>> ... It's actually more, but that is because the University
>>> hospital has to recoup its losses from treating uninsured
>>> patients -- which is a whole other issue that the current
>>> administration simply does not understand! Oh, wait, it does.
>>>
>>
>> It doesn't. Haven't you noticed that insurers are beginning to flee
>> the exchanges in droves? There is even one county in Arizona where
>> the number of available Obamacare plans is ... drumroll ... zero.
>> Intra-plan such market mechanisms are refer to as the death-spiral.
>> I always thought this would start before Obama leaves office and
>> now it does.
>
> ACA is a small piece of the over-all insurance puzzle, which includes
> Medicare, Medicaid, VA -- and all the programs that comprise that
> dreaded "welfare system" perpetuated by the communist, krypto-Muslim
> Obama administration. I can't speak to the situation in Arizona,
> being that I live in a civilized state. I think we should have
> socialized medicine like the rest of the world and not a hobbled
> ACA.
>

And waiting lists on which people die?

>>> Also, you are still missing the boat on the effect of corporate
>>> tax versus labor costs -- and as a small-fry business, it
>>> shouldn't matter anyway.
>>>
>>
>> I have lots of clients and know it does matter. It is one of the
>> problems that largely goes away if you relocate outside the
>> country. My former employer did just that. They are moving to Costa
>> Rica. In comsequence lots of local middle-class jobs have
>> evaporated.
>>
>>
>>> I will entirely solve your corporate tax issues right now: don't
>>> be a C-Corp. Your corporate tax woes are now over. You can send
>>> me a check for my advice, which will not be subject to corporate
>>> tax because I am an LLP and subject to taxation under the
>>> partnership law.
>>>
>>
>> You think I don't know that? Guess why my consulting business is
>> not a C-corp. And now for the real world and for that you need to
>> look a bit deeper into how VCs operate. I have participated in
>> start-ups and I can assure you that they will insist on a C-corp
>> structure. If you don't want C-corp they won't give you any money,
>> it's that simple.
>
> O.K.,but a C-corp start-up is not going to be paying any taxes. The
> whole double-tax thing is rarely an issue unless the start-up is an
> immediate cash-cow, generating huge income without corresponding
> costs.

That's exactly what VCs and start-up owners strive for.


> ... Then the owners can complain about the corporate tax rate --

> as they float around in their pools, sipping drinks with little
> umbrellas, watching the planes fly overhead.
>

Or they move to some Caribbean paradise, pay only a fraction and
actually own one of the planes flying overhead.

> Sure, there are things we can fix with the tax code -- a lot of them.
> We could return to the Eisenhower era of the 91% tax bracket. Let's
> do that. The '50s were a great time! Really, though, the tax code
> is a wreck, but both parties are wrecking it, and I doubt The Donald
> has the attention span to even get past the AMT. By the way, when do
> we get to see his returns?
>

I don't care about his returns or any others.

If we had a reasonable tax rate for corporations we would see much less
offshoring of whole companies. Unfortunately only very few people
understand how quick and easy it is to make a location decision. I have
been part of such decision making.

[Joerg]

Simple:

1. Cap all damage awards and punitive awards to some reasonable number,
federally mandated.

2. Prohibit ambulance chaser ads, something nearly all other countries
do. For example, in much of Europe lawyers cannot run TV ads at all, a
very good rule.

3. Open up the health insurance market across the whole country,
_across_ state lines.

4. Allow import of approved drugs from other civilized countries.

5. Allow people to go out of network in other civilized countries if
they can find a better deal for a medical treatment there. Same
reimbursement up to the US limit, meaning they can save their whole co-pay.

6. Reduce the corporate tax rate at least to 25%. If you think that's
impossible please explain why even Canada is at 26.5%:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/corporate-tax-rate

7. Enforce the prevailing wage in H1B visa cases and get the head out of
the sand. This is a piece of cake to implement.

8. Curb illegal immigration. Also easy. Why does nobody notice when
someone states a false social security number on a tax return? That
can't be hard.

9. Force USPS to re-introduce surface mail internationally.

10. Have a sunset rule for job killer legislation.

11. Shrink government back to a reasonable size.

and on and on and on.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/19/2016 5:11 PM, Joerg wrote:

> On 2016-08-18 18:28, jbeattie wrote:
>>
>> Damn, Joerg, do you not think about this stuff at all? Belgium has
>> socialized medicine; it has an extensive social welfare system that
>> provides disability benefits to its injured citizens. The cost of
>> medicine is low because it is covered by taxes -- not because of
>> insurance costs. How could you possibly compare the two countries.
>>

> 2. It does not matter what sort of insurance, government-based or not, a
> country has. A cost is a cost is a cost. Or do you truly believe that
> the cost of a stenting procedure will miraculously be lower because the
> Euros reimbursed by a goverment are somehow "other" Euros than those
> coming from an HMO?

I don't know how you can claim that "a cost is a cost" in health care.
Within the U.S., the prices for most procedures or treatments vary
tremendously from hospital to hospital.

The cost of most medical care is far less under every nationalized
health care service than in the U.S., at least for anything one might
regard as typical care. And my recent experience with two routine bills
might explain why.

The items were blood tests sent to a laboratory by our excellent doctor.
We've got good insurance, and those things are supposed to be almost
entirely covered. But last week, I got a bill for a test in March - a
second bill, it turns out, because I'd phoned on the first and asked
"Isn't this covered?" The people at the lab in question said it should
be, but the insurance company hadn't paid them. They got me in on a 3
way phone call with the insurance company representative, who said they
never received the submission. The lab person gave them times, dates,
and the fax number used AFTER the standard electronic submission had
somehow failed to get through.

My call this week was exactly the same (same lab, same insurance
company) but for a test done last September! Same 3 way call, same
problem: the lab had documentation on multiple submissions, the
insurance company claimed nothing had come in.

At this point, I don't know for sure who was at fault, but it certainly
sounded like the insurance company just "losing" forms rather than
paying as required.

But the bigger point is this: Look how much time and money wasted by
screwing up this perfectly simple bit of paperwork! And look at the
money wasted at my doctor's office, having to deal with the mess that is
medical insurance! Yet the "free market" is portrayed as generating
marvelous efficiency through competition.

I believe any half decent single payer system could have saved a couple
hundred bucks in processing those two claims. As proof, I'll note again
that American health care costs are the world's highest, with outcomes
that are WAY worse than most national health care systems.

>> Costs for certain drugs and devices may be lower in some countries
>> due to lighter regulation, but that is another issue -- and one we
>> could argue forever. I'm happy we never got Thalidomide in the US.
>> OTOH, some drugs and devices are held off the market too long.
>>
>
> But Canada did and they have the socialized medicine you seem to like so
> much.

I've got relatives in Canada. From what I hear, I'd trade health care
systems immediately if given the choice. And BTW, Canadians do _not_
want to trade systems.

Yes, one relative in Canada complained because his wife had to wait too
long (in his view) for some serious medical condition to be treated.
But she's perfectly fine and fully cured ten years later, and I'm sure
he had far less hassle and expense to deal with than if the same had
occurred in the U.S.

>> I think we should have
>> socialized medicine like the rest of the world and not a hobbled
>> ACA.
>>
>
> And waiting lists on which people die?

See my paragraph above. Joerg, I'm convinced you must get most of your
"knowledge" from Rush Limbaugh.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

First: I agree with some of those.

Second: OK, now how do you _really_ plan to get them to happen? Or in
other words, are you ready to run for office, and tackle the vast and
complex political realities?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

Minor but important point: I was not born in the US and thus cannot run
for office.

[AMuzi]

On 8/19/2016 5:09 PM, Joerg wrote:
> On 2016-08-19 14:46, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 8/19/2016 5:25 PM, Joerg wrote:
>>> On 2016-08-18 19:39, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 8/18/2016 3:50 PM, Joerg wrote:
>>>>> On 2016-08-18 12:25, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/18/2016 2:22 PM, Joerg wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2016-08-18 10:58, jbeattie wrote:

-snip how to turn fish soup back to an aquarium-

> Minor but important point: I was not born in the US and thus
> cannot run for office.
>

Only proscribed for President and VP.

Notable examples abound of immigrant Representatives,
Senators and Governors, National Security Advisor etc. One
may argue politics, and I do sometimes, but their
contributions to the culture are significant.

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-19 14:43, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 8/19/2016 5:11 PM, Joerg wrote:
>> On 2016-08-18 18:28, jbeattie wrote:
>>>
>>> Damn, Joerg, do you not think about this stuff at all? Belgium has
>>> socialized medicine; it has an extensive social welfare system that
>>> provides disability benefits to its injured citizens. The cost of
>>> medicine is low because it is covered by taxes -- not because of
>>> insurance costs. How could you possibly compare the two countries.
>>>
>> 2. It does not matter what sort of insurance, government-based or not, a
>> country has. A cost is a cost is a cost. Or do you truly believe that
>> the cost of a stenting procedure will miraculously be lower because the
>> Euros reimbursed by a goverment are somehow "other" Euros than those
>> coming from an HMO?
>
> I don't know how you can claim that "a cost is a cost" in health care.
> Within the U.S., the prices for most procedures or treatments vary
> tremendously from hospital to hospital.
>

Which is why one of the law I'd push for if I were in office (it's part
of the and on and on and on" item on the list in the other post) is to
require the hospital charge master database to be laid open for everyone
to see. The key problem in the US is near zero transparency. You go to a
hospital and nobody knows the costs, or pretends not to know. When
pressing them they often lie, which happened to us numerous times and we
fought it. Successfully every time. But Uncle Leroy and Aunt Millie
don't fight, they just pay.

> The cost of most medical care is far less under every nationalized
> health care service than in the U.S., at least for anything one might
> regard as typical care.

And people die on waiting lists. Even a Canadian (!) judge sided with
that argument when commenting his rebuffing of the government there:
"Access to a waiting list is not access to medical care".


> ... And my recent experience with two routine bills

> might explain why.
>
> The items were blood tests sent to a laboratory by our excellent doctor.
> We've got good insurance, and those things are supposed to be almost
> entirely covered. But last week, I got a bill for a test in March - a
> second bill, it turns out, because I'd phoned on the first and asked
> "Isn't this covered?" The people at the lab in question said it should
> be, but the insurance company hadn't paid them. They got me in on a 3
> way phone call with the insurance company representative, who said they
> never received the submission. The lab person gave them times, dates,
> and the fax number used AFTER the standard electronic submission had
> somehow failed to get through.
>
> My call this week was exactly the same (same lab, same insurance
> company) but for a test done last September! Same 3 way call, same
> problem: the lab had documentation on multiple submissions, the
> insurance company claimed nothing had come in.
>
> At this point, I don't know for sure who was at fault, but it certainly
> sounded like the insurance company just "losing" forms rather than
> paying as required.
>

Time to engage the commissioner. I have done that that several times and
prevailed every single time. One employee at an HMO got a reprimand in
the wake and possibly might have been fired by now (and I sure hope so).

> But the bigger point is this: Look how much time and money wasted by
> screwing up this perfectly simple bit of paperwork! And look at the
> money wasted at my doctor's office, having to deal with the mess that is
> medical insurance! Yet the "free market" is portrayed as generating
> marvelous efficiency through competition.
>

It will if you truly make it free. The problem is that neither Obamacare
nor anything else does that.

> I believe any half decent single payer system could have saved a couple
> hundred bucks in processing those two claims. As proof, I'll note again
> that American health care costs are the world's highest, with outcomes
> that are WAY worse than most national health care systems.
>

That has other reasons, some of which had been discussed here. If a
cardiologist with a clean no-claims history has to pay north of
$100k/year in malpractice premiums guess who ends up paying this? It
also leads to over-prescribing of procedures which provide no health
benefit but costs beaucoup bucks.

>>> Costs for certain drugs and devices may be lower in some countries
>>> due to lighter regulation, but that is another issue -- and one we
>>> could argue forever. I'm happy we never got Thalidomide in the US.
>>> OTOH, some drugs and devices are held off the market too long.
>>>
>>
>> But Canada did and they have the socialized medicine you seem to like so
>> much.
>
> I've got relatives in Canada. From what I hear, I'd trade health care
> systems immediately if given the choice. And BTW, Canadians do _not_
> want to trade systems.
>

So why don't you move there?

> Yes, one relative in Canada complained because his wife had to wait too
> long (in his view) for some serious medical condition to be treated. But
> she's perfectly fine and fully cured ten years later, and I'm sure he
> had far less hassle and expense to deal with than if the same had
> occurred in the U.S.
>

I personally met really sick Canadians in Minnesota. They had a little
card they would not talk about back home, IIRC called Mayo Care Card. A
legal "gray zone" for them because they weren't supposed to have foreign
coverage. It was their card to great care. I've worked long enough in
med tech to know why. The sales numbers of our machines alone speak
Volumes. Except for some very few elite hospitals that kind of diagnosis
was not available to many Canadians and probably never will be.

>>> I think we should have
>>> socialized medicine like the rest of the world and not a hobbled
>>> ACA.
>>>
>>
>> And waiting lists on which people die?
>
> See my paragraph above. Joerg, I'm convinced you must get most of your
> "knowledge" from Rush Limbaugh.
>

No, from about three decades of international work in med tech. How long
have you worked in med tech internationally? By this I mean also
overseas and not just in some secluded ivory tower.

[jbeattie]

On Friday, August 19, 2016 at 2:11:19 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:

<snip>

> 1. It is not socialized medicine, you have both private and government
> health plans. Similar in Germany. I know because I have lived there and
> had health insurance there. For decades.

That is true. I misspoke about Belgium, it is a hybrid system -- but still far different from the US. http://www.expatica.com/be/healthcare/Healthcare-in-Belgium_100097.html I did not misspeak about the other social services provided with tax-payer funds.

> 2. It does not matter what sort of insurance, government-based or not, a
> country has. A cost is a cost is a cost. Or do you truly believe that
> the cost of a stenting procedure will miraculously be lower because the
> Euros reimbursed by a goverment are somehow "other" Euros than those
> coming from an HMO?

Yes. Covered procedures are reimbursed at rates negotiated by insurers and doctors.

A cost is not a cost is not a cost. The manufacturing cost for a stent is calculable and probably $.50 including materials and allocated overhead/R&D, etc. The cost of a stenting procedure, however, is whatever the market will allow. The market price in Belgium is depressed by the staggering number of doctors per capita and the rates that will be paid by the sick funds. https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-healthcare-system-in-Belgium-work

You cannot tie any of the price differential to the US tort system or the absence of "tort reform." The fact is, we have a medical-industrial complex that is fleecing us -- and Belgium has what conservatives call "socialized medicine."

>
> > Moreover, most of the civilized world has a national health service
> > of one sort or another that negotiates pricing with drug and device
> > makers. The US is subsidizing lower drug prices in other countries.
> > Medicare Coverage D is a f****** give-away to the US drug companies
> > -- and a Bush II program. Not Obama. Does that make your head
> > explode, or what?
> >
>
> Obama has done nothing about it. It is under Obama that prices for many
> drugs have inflated hundreds of percent. Here are the rreal numbers:
>
> http://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/ppi/2016-02/RX-Price-Watch-Trends-in-Retail-Prices-Prescription-Drugs-Widely-Used-by-Older-Americans.pdf
>
> I don't think you can make a valid claim that AARP is a right-wing
> organization :-)
>
> In short, Obamacare has (predictably) failed and is now beginning to
> unravel.

WHAT? Since when does ACA determine the price of drugs. It is an insurance program. Manufacturers set the price of drugs. Obama issued one of his dreaded executive orders to address price gouging by manufacturers: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/10/31/we-can-t-wait-obama-administration-takes-action-reduce-prescription-drug

We went through this whole discussion back when Congress was considering Medicare Coverage D under the Bush administration. HHS could have used its massive market power to drive down the price of drugs provided to Medicare recipients, but the legislation that became Coverage D specifically provided that the government could not set prices or become a market player. It was another fleecing of tax payers -- a direct shifting of tax payer money into drug company coffers.

Obama promised to allow coverage under ACA plans for imported drugs, although he rolled-over on that one in consideration for exacting an excise tax of sorts from the drug manufacturers and some price concessions for drugs purchased under Coverage D in the doughnut hole (IIRC).

The problem with ACA is that reimbursement for drugs is low -- there is a lot of out of pocket payable by the insured. But as for prices, go complain to big pharma.

> > Costs for certain drugs and devices may be lower in some countries
> > due to lighter regulation, but that is another issue -- and one we
> > could argue forever. I'm happy we never got Thalidomide in the US.
> > OTOH, some drugs and devices are held off the market too long.
> >
>
> But Canada did and they have the socialized medicine you seem to like so
> much.

Canada did what? I like Canada. My wife buys her drugs in Canada.

> >> The other effect is this: Many companies insist that I carry
> >> professional liability. Every single time I honestly and dutifully
> >> checked the box "Are you involved in the design of medical
> >> devices?" it resulted in a decline-to-quote. Even Lloyds of London
> >> declined. If I'd have been a rusty oil tanker I guess they'd have
> >> underwritten. The consequence of this is that if a client won't or
> >> can't cover liability on my part I will not work for them. In
> >> pretty much all cases that had resulted in the product not getting
> >> designed. While in Europe we never had that issue. However, my
> >> insurer over there made it crystal-clear that the insurance does
> >> not cover the US.
> >
> > Try my client Medmarc. http://www.medmarc.com/Pages/default.aspx
> > You're clearly not going to the right market.
> >
>
> Thanks, but I got tired of filling out length applications only to get a
> decline. Plus I am gradually retiring. Looks like they are more geared
> towards companies, not individual consultants:
>
> http://www.medmarc.com/Products/Insurance-Coverages/Pages/EO-Coverage-Features.aspx
>
> Among other avenues I have used a seasoned PL broker who knows the
> market intimately. He tried a few carriers where he thought they might
> but no dice.

You need to go to a broker with access to Lloyds markets or better specialty markets.

> > If you are creating super-important medical devices that can kill
> > people if they go wrong, then you should have appropriate insurance.
> > You kill my family, I'll sue you. In Somalia, I would kill you. My
> > heart does not go out to you.
> >
>
> My clients must sign my agreement that has them carry liability. But it
> doesn't matter much anymore because Obamacare has snuffed out much of
> this market. I saw that coming in 2009 and swung the steering wheel
> around, designing mostly industrial, ag, oil, gas, aerospace electronics.

How has ACA killed your business? I don't get it at all. ACA has been a feeding trough for hospitals and drug makers, and that's why even The Donald would not get rid of it.

On the one hand, you complain about the cost of healthcare in the US as compared to Belgium, but then you complain about a US attempt at trying to provide Belgium-like coverage under ACA (although far further away from socialized medicine than in Belgium). You complain about Obama raising the price of drugs when ACA does not set the price of drugs. You complain about the corporate tax rate as killing businesses, yet start-ups pay little, if any, in corporate taxes. You claim businesses are moving off-shore because of corporate tax rates, but you don't understand how corporate taxes work.

Go to the Caribbean, but don't expect to escape taxes on your US-related income -- and when companies go to the Caribbean, they don't really GO to the Caribbean; they just incorporate there UNLESS they are going to the Caribbean for cheap labor. Sure, you personally or some small business could go to another country to avoid US taxes -- assuming you stopped making ANY money in the US. But the big multi-national corporations continue paying US taxes. They just shelter their foreign earnings.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Joerg]

I'd be totally abrasive to my peers there because I have zero tolerance
for establishment rules or good-old-boys customs.

[Joerg]

To some extent, yes. But it is still possible. Example: I just
(purposefully) bought a Made-in-the-US electric motor. It didn't cost
much more than Chinese made and I figured it's good to support the
domestic guys if the price difference is not outrageous. However, that's
the kind of company that will eventually vanish along with all the jobs
if the politics of the current administration continue. Ever higher
taxes, fees, labor rules and whatnot and eventually the foundation will
begin to crumble.

> Even Goerg offers proof of this. Does Goerg buy a, high priced,
> American made tire ? Nope he buys a Thai made tire, from a country
> with lower wages than the U.S. so that they can sell their tires at a
> much cheaper price.
>

Because there are no other good tires I know of. I can't stand flimsy
sidewalls.

>>>>
>>>> It should be. Else someone needs to investigate the root cause why our
>>>> end of the stick gets sawed off.
>>>
>>> Well, if you saw off your end of the stick why does someone else need
>>> to tell you what you did?
>>>
>>
>> The current administration is not willing to ponder why. That's the
>> problem. Some of the previous ones wern't either. That compounded the
>> problem.
>
> Nope, wrong again. It is the greedy American public that is to blame.
> Give us higher minimum wage laws or we won't vote for you!
>

That is what turns almost any democratic society socialist and it is
what brought down the Roman Empire. And nobody learns from history.

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-19 15:45, jbeattie wrote:
> On Friday, August 19, 2016 at 2:11:19 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> 1. It is not socialized medicine, you have both private and
>> government health plans. Similar in Germany. I know because I have
>> lived there and had health insurance there. For decades.
>
> That is true. I misspoke about Belgium, it is a hybrid system -- but
> still far different from the US.
> http://www.expatica.com/be/healthcare/Healthcare-in-Belgium_100097.html
> I did not misspeak about the other social services provided with
> tax-payer funds.
>
>> 2. It does not matter what sort of insurance, government-based or
>> not, a country has. A cost is a cost is a cost. Or do you truly
>> believe that the cost of a stenting procedure will miraculously be
>> lower because the Euros reimbursed by a goverment are somehow
>> "other" Euros than those coming from an HMO?
>
> Yes. Covered procedures are reimbursed at rates negotiated by
> insurers and doctors.
>
> A cost is not a cost is not a cost. The manufacturing cost for a
> stent is calculable and probably $.50 including materials and
> allocated overhead/R&D, etc.

Very wrong. I worked in that field.


> ... The cost of a stenting procedure,

> however, is whatever the market will allow.

In truly socialized plans it is not. There is a fixed reimbursement rate
and that's it. This is the case, for example, for Medicare patients.


> ... The market price in

> Belgium is depressed by the staggering number of doctors per capita
> and the rates that will be paid by the sick funds.
> https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-healthcare-system-in-Belgium-work
>
> You cannot tie any of the price differential to the US tort system or
> the absence of "tort reform." The fact is, we have a
> medical-industrial complex that is fleecing us -- and Belgium has
> what conservatives call "socialized medicine."

We have both. Drug companies that are fleecing us and lawyers that are
fleecing us. Guess who ends up paying the $100k/year malpractice
premiums for a cardiologist. And the guy had a no-claim history.

> although he rolled-over on that one ...


And there we have one of his many mistakes.


> ... in consideration for exacting an

> excise tax of sorts from the drug manufacturers

Which was meshugginah to begin with and rightfully got repealed. That
tax has cost scores of jobs in the US. I saw it coming and bowed out of
medical devices in time.


> ... and some price

> concessions for drugs purchased under Coverage D in the doughnut hole
> (IIRC).
>
> The problem with ACA is that reimbursement for drugs is low -- there
> is a lot of out of pocket payable by the insured. But as for prices,
> go complain to big pharma.
>

No, let people buy outside the country. Simple.

>
>>> Costs for certain drugs and devices may be lower in some
>>> countries due to lighter regulation, but that is another issue --
>>> and one we could argue forever. I'm happy we never got
>>> Thalidomide in the US. OTOH, some drugs and devices are held off
>>> the market too long.
>>>
>>
>> But Canada did and they have the socialized medicine you seem to
>> like so much.
>
> Canada did what? I like Canada. My wife buys her drugs in Canada.
>

Drugs are cheaper there but if your are living there obtaining good
health care quickly unravels once you develop some serious or unsual
ailment. Then you either hightail it to the US or likely die.

>>>> The other effect is this: Many companies insist that I carry
>>>> professional liability. Every single time I honestly and
>>>> dutifully checked the box "Are you involved in the design of
>>>> medical devices?" it resulted in a decline-to-quote. Even
>>>> Lloyds of London declined. If I'd have been a rusty oil tanker
>>>> I guess they'd have underwritten. The consequence of this is
>>>> that if a client won't or can't cover liability on my part I
>>>> will not work for them. In pretty much all cases that had
>>>> resulted in the product not getting designed. While in Europe
>>>> we never had that issue. However, my insurer over there made it
>>>> crystal-clear that the insurance does not cover the US.
>>>
>>> Try my client Medmarc. http://www.medmarc.com/Pages/default.aspx
>>> You're clearly not going to the right market.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, but I got tired of filling out length applications only to
>> get a decline. Plus I am gradually retiring. Looks like they are
>> more geared towards companies, not individual consultants:
>>
>> http://www.medmarc.com/Products/Insurance-Coverages/Pages/EO-Coverage-Features.aspx
>>
>>
>>
Among other avenues I have used a seasoned PL broker who knows the
>> market intimately. He tried a few carriers where he thought they
>> might but no dice.
>
> You need to go to a broker with access to Lloyds markets or better
> specialty markets.
>

As I mentioned earlier I _had_ a lengthy international conference call
with Lloyds in which three high level folks from London participated.
Mainly because I publicly complained about the fact that Marsh/IEEE
would decline to quote for med-tech guys. Rocking the boat is my style
in such situations and gets attention.

>>> If you are creating super-important medical devices that can
>>> kill people if they go wrong, then you should have appropriate
>>> insurance. You kill my family, I'll sue you. In Somalia, I would
>>> kill you. My heart does not go out to you.
>>>
>>
>> My clients must sign my agreement that has them carry liability.
>> But it doesn't matter much anymore because Obamacare has snuffed
>> out much of this market. I saw that coming in 2009 and swung the
>> steering wheel around, designing mostly industrial, ag, oil, gas,
>> aerospace electronics.
>
> How has ACA killed your business? I don't get it at all. ACA has
> been a feeding trough for hospitals and drug makers, and that's why
> even The Donald would not get rid of it.
>

Ever heard of ... the Medical Device tax? It's repealed now but it like
with spilled milk, once spilled you can't get much of it back into the
pot. Then there were all sorts of reimbursement rules and gravitation to
nonessential stuff such as elective sex change surgery.

In the VC world you could hear a loud tire screech when Obamacare became
law. No venture capital -> no job growth.

> On the one hand, you complain about the cost of healthcare in the US
> as compared to Belgium, but then you complain about a US attempt at
> trying to provide Belgium-like coverage under ACA (although far
> further away from socialized medicine than in Belgium). You complain
> about Obama raising the price of drugs when ACA does not set the
> price of drugs. You complain about the corporate tax rate as killing
> businesses, yet start-ups pay little, if any, in corporate taxes.
> You claim businesses are moving off-shore because of corporate tax
> rates, but you don't understand how corporate taxes work.
>

Belgium and most other countries where Americans falsely believe there'd
be purely socialized medicine in reality have a two-tier system. One is
government controlled and fairly restrictive in the care you get. The
other one is private and much richer in options. In _both_ there are
serious cost advantages and a large part of the reason is that their
tort law is not as screwed up as ours.

> Go to the Caribbean, but don't expect to escape taxes on your
> US-related income -- and when companies go to the Caribbean, they
> don't really GO to the Caribbean; they just incorporate there UNLESS
> they are going to the Caribbean for cheap labor. Sure, you
> personally or some small business could go to another country to
> avoid US taxes -- assuming you stopped making ANY money in the US.
> But the big multi-national corporations continue paying US taxes.
> They just shelter their foreign earnings.
>

It's not about me or other individuals. It's about companies. As I said
my former employer is moving to Costa Rica. They are in very good
company down there, in Coyol you almost don't need to speak Spanish.

[jbeattie]

Commerce clause issues, unless you want to expand the scope of federal commerce clause power. That's a total no-no for The Donald & Co. But I'm with you on capping punitive damages -- or eliminating them altogether. Washington does not have punitive damages, and people seem to be pretty safe there.

>
> 2. Prohibit ambulance chaser ads, something nearly all other countries
> do. For example, in much of Europe lawyers cannot run TV ads at all, a
> very good rule.

First Amendment problems, unless you want to re-write that, too.

>
> 3. Open up the health insurance market across the whole country,
> _across_ state lines.

We would have to repeal McCarran Ferguson, but O.K. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarran%E2%80%93Ferguson_Act As a practical matter, we have a national market with major players like United Health Care and others that are admitted in a lot of states.

It really isn't a problem for insurers to become admitted in the various states. Liability insurers like Farmers, State Farm, Allstate, etc. have no problem at all.

>
> 4. Allow import of approved drugs from other civilized countries.

American citizens can already buy their drugs wherever they want. They just aren't covered under their health plans. My wife buys her drugs from Canada. They come in the mail -- maybe by boat from Canada.

>
> 5. Allow people to go out of network in other civilized countries if
> they can find a better deal for a medical treatment there. Same
> reimbursement up to the US limit, meaning they can save their whole co-pay.

What, are you in the travel industry? How about we just create a decent socialized medicine system like other countries? Plus, the nirvana you envision is not a matter of legislation -- it's a matter of insurance and the practices of private insurers. Go buy a Lloyds policy that lets you get treatment in Somalia.

> 6. Reduce the corporate tax rate at least to 25%. If you think that's
> impossible please explain why even Canada is at 26.5%:
>
> http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/corporate-tax-rate
>

O.K., let's do that -- and eliminate ALL the loop-holes. Every last one of them. God only knows what the actual tax burden would be since marginal rates rarely tell an accurate story of total tax burden. Get The Donald's returns, and you'll see what I mean. He probably pays 2%.

> 7. Enforce the prevailing wage in H1B visa cases and get the head out of
> the sand. This is a piece of cake to implement.

F*** H1B! Go home! No immigrants.

> 8. Curb illegal immigration. Also easy. Why does nobody notice when
> someone states a false social security number on a tax return? That
> can't be hard.

Curb all immigration and deport anyone who was not born here. With extreme prejudice. Tomorrow -- or send them to Manzanar to do hard labor.

> 9. Force USPS to re-introduce surface mail internationally.

Yes, but price it so it produces a profit for the USPS -- like $50 an ounce to Manilla.

> 10. Have a sunset rule for job killer legislation.

Is there a USCA title for "job killer legislation?" Is that in like 26 USC 100 et seq. "Job Killing Legislation." Do you have a particular statute in mind?

By the way, all legislation is capable of repeal. That's why we have a full-time legislature.

>
> 11. Shrink government back to a reasonable size.
>
> and on and on and on.

Once we exclude all the non-US born, we will need less government. In fact, Henry Kissinger would lose his pension. Obama, too -- he'd have to go back to Kenya. We'd have a ton of extra money, and everyone could get a swimming pool and AC.

Remember, if we shrink government, there will be less people to build special bike trails and trap mountain lions.

-- Jay Beattie.