Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier

[raykeller]

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-gets-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/

Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier

LYMAN, S.C. (AP) - Sheriff's deputies say no charges will be filed against a
man who shot and wounded another man who had fired into a crowd at a South
Carolina nightclub.
Spartanburg County deputies told local media outlets that officers arrested
a man they say shot and wounded three people at the nightclub in Lyman.
Thirty-two-year-old Jody Ray Thompson of Lyman is charged with four counts
of attempted murder and two weapons violations.
Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the crowd. A
man in the crowd pulled his gun and shot Thompson in the leg. Lt. Kevin Bobo
says the man had a valid concealed weapons permit and will not face charges
in Sunday's shooting.
None of the injuries were life-threatening.
It wasn't clear if Thompson has an attorney.

[saMyi⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄AiXnR]

raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:
> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-gets-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>
> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>
>

> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the crowd.

The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
door-to-door gun confiscation now!

[Ministry of Vengeance and Vendettas]

=?UTF-8?B?c2FNeWnim4Tiq7gg77yt772J772H772I772U772ZIOK4jiDvvLfvvYHvvY4=?=
=?UTF-8?B?772O772B772C772F4qu34puEQWlYblI=?= <Xj...@xToyk.com> wrote in
news:kX_lz.561071$LR2.3...@fx26.fr7:

Will you be in the vanguard of that door to door effort or will you send
out those racist, murdering cops to do it?

--
"...And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to
the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a
century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time,
with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."--
Thomas Jefferson, Nov. 13, 1787

[Terry Coombs]

You gun-banners still haven't said how you're going to take the guns away
from criminals ...

--
Snag

[Jim Wilkins]

"Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:nnaafa$7dl$1...@dont-email.me...

Criminals can't be required to register their illegally owned guns.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/390/85.html
"We hold that a proper claim of the constitutional privilege against
self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for
failure to register a firearm under 5841 or for possession of an
unregistered firearm under 5851."

-- US Supreme Court

[Ed Huntress]

Sure, but you can just do what Trump will have to do to deport 11
million undocumented Mexicans: Conduct house-to-house searches, and
shoot them if necessary. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

[bruce2...@gmail.com]

"Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:nnaafa$7dl$1...@dont-email.me...

- hide quoted text -

Shoot-outs don't happen often enough, no need to.

[Jim Wilkins]

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:65dhpb91oklbb6nvc...@4ax.com...

All Trump has to do is resume the enforcement of existing laws.
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/form/i-9.pdf

--jsw

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:38:44 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"

If you haven't done so already, you'll want to look into the state of
SS records and the estimated costs to make E-Verify work:

http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa775_1.pdf

SS records are a disaster, and no one will pay to improve the system.
It's possible that it can't be straightened out at any cost.

--
Ed Huntress

[Jim Wilkins]

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:sdfhpb1issroga6n2...@4ax.com...

"Can't" is an excuse the Dems use to cover up their own incompetence.
For example the DNC loudly blamed Trump and Russia for the leaks to
mask that they are unqualified to handle classified material. But what
more should we expect from a party whose philosophy demonizes
individual ability and accomplishment?

--jsw

[Jim Wilkins]

"Jim Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nnag67$sid$1...@dont-email.me...

The necessary non-partisan multidisciplinary problem-solving expertise
is available IF the government can commit to solving problems instead
of preserving them as excuses to attack the other side and to expand
the bureaucracy.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/09/the-war-on-poverty-after-50-years
"In fact, a significant portion of the population is now less capable
of self-sufficiency than it was when the War on Poverty began."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitre_Corporation

--jsw, formerly je...@mitre.org

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 10:25:06 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"

No. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tx) proposed the "Legal Workforce Act," H.R.
1147, for force compliance, but neither Borhner nor Ryan let the bill
come to the floor for a vote.

There's a lot going on. First, as you read in the Cato study (I'm sure
you read it -- d8-)) it doesn't work. Second, the CBO projects that it
would cost small businesses $2.7 B to comply; that it would lead to
the incorrect and improper loss of 800,000 jobs; and that it would
reduce federal revenues by $17 B over ten years.

It's not something you can do by waving a wand.

--
Ed Huntress

>For example the DNC loudly blamed Trump and Russia for the leaks to
>mask that they are unqualified to handle classified material. But what
>more should we expect from a party whose philosophy demonizes
>individual ability and accomplishment?

Their internal emails are not classified material. And Russia has
hacked the Pentagon:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/08/06/russia-reportedly-hacks-pentagon-email-system/31228625/

Fat chance the DNC or anyone else could keep them out.

BTW, if you have an example of the DNC "demonizing individual ability
and accomplishment," something you didn't read in NewsMucks or World
Nut Daily, I'm sure many people would like to see it.

--
Ed Huntress

[LoKsM⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄rwdtc]

The shooter is an ill-tempered gun-packer. He fired into the crowd after
an argument with his friends.

You gun-packers failed to see that "gun" is the problem in the "gun
problem". Gun confiscation is the solution. Trying to arm everyone with
more gun is counter productive to the gun problem.

Besides door-to-door gun confiscation, screening checkpoints should be
established at all banks, libraries, and all government buildings.

The penalty for firearm possession should be hard labour. Bring back
chain gangs for railroad repair and tree-planting.

[Jim Wilkins]

"LoKsM?? Mighty ? Wannabe??rwdtc" <CZ...@JciUa.com> wrote in message
news:ql4mz.521846$9X5....@fx19.fr7...

Wacko misfits like you are always the first "desaparecidos."

[Gunner Asch]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 06:25:15 -0700 (PDT), bruce2...@gmail.com
wrote:

They will.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Just Wondering]

On 7/27/2016 7:38 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:16:26 -0400, "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
>>> "Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com> :

Didn't Obama take an oath of some kind to see that such laws will be
faithfully executed?

[Just Wondering]

On 7/27/2016 9:23 AM, Ｍｉｇｈｔ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ wrote:
>
> You gun-packers failed to see that "gun" is the problem in
> the "gun problem".
>

I, and a hundred million others like me, could each own a
thousand guns, and ten thousand rounds of ammo for each gun,
without increasing the "gun problem" one little bit.

[Jim Wilkins]

"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:W57mz.43111$Pz4....@fx03.iad...

Once he was in office he controlled the guns behind those laws.

Any questions?

[Jim Wilkins]

"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:J97mz.1219$5m1...@fx37.iad...

> On 7/27/2016 9:23 AM, Might Wannabe wrote:
>>
>> You gun-packers failed to see that "gun" is the problem in
>> the "gun problem".
>>
> I, and a hundred million others like me, could each own a
> thousand guns, and ten thousand rounds of ammo for each gun,
> without increasing the "gun problem" one little bit.

The Left refuses to admit that the root of the violence problem is
their drugs, not the Right's guns.

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:36:37 -0600, Just Wondering
<fmh...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On 7/27/2016 9:23 AM, ????? ??????? wrote:
>>
>> You gun-packers failed to see that "gun" is the problem in
>> the "gun problem".
>>
>I, and a hundred million others like me, could each own a
>thousand guns, and ten thousand rounds of ammo for each gun,
>without increasing the "gun problem" one little bit.

A really interesting question is, if you have 100 people carrying
openly at a political rally, and five of them are terrorists who start
shooting the others, how long does it take before just one person is
left standing?

--
Ed Huntress

[Jim Wilkins]

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:4q1ipb13dcg68tqds...@4ax.com...

Ideally everyone but the terrorists will hit the floor immediately and
have a clear upward shot at them.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-course-of-action-if-you-hear-gunshots-and-youre-in-a-crowded-place

[PaxPerPoten]

There would have been no violence, if Night club were banned...Ban Night
Clubs Now!
>
>
>
>
>


--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster

[PaxPerPoten]

On 7/27/2016 6:09 AM, Ministry of Vengeance and Vendettas wrote:
> =?UTF-8?B?c2FNeWnim4Tiq7gg77yt772J772H772I772U772ZIOK4jiDvvLfvvYHvvY4=?=
> =?UTF-8?B?772O772B772C772F4qu34puEQWlYblI=?= <Xj...@xToyk.com> wrote in
> news:kX_lz.561071$LR2.3...@fx26.fr7:
>
>> raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:
>>> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-ge
>>> ts-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>>>
>>> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>>>
>>>
>>> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the
>>> crowd.
>>
>> The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
>> door-to-door gun confiscation now!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Will you be in the vanguard of that door to door effort or will you send
> out those racist, murdering cops to do it?

Much better to recruit BLM, Black Muslims, or Illegal immigrants. After
all where else could these folks get guns?

[fLVDb⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄GFIRy]

You will be trampled to death in a stampede if you hit the floor when
shooting starts in a crowded political rally or nightclub.

The street scene in your link is not a real crowd. People can see and
get around you while they are fleeing.

[Ed Huntress]

Yeah, that's ideal all right. <g>

More realistically, it probably would be quite a show.

--
Ed Huntress

[bruce2...@gmail.com]

Jim Wilkins wrote on 7/27/2016 3:37 PM:

> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
> news:4q1ipb13dcg68tqds...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:36:37 -0600, Just Wondering
>> <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/27/2016 9:23 AM, ????? ??????? wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You gun-packers failed to see that "gun" is the problem in
>>>> the "gun problem".
>>>>
>>> I, and a hundred million others like me, could each own a
>>> thousand guns, and ten thousand rounds of ammo for each gun,
>>> without increasing the "gun problem" one little bit.
>>
>> A really interesting question is, if you have 100 people carrying
>> openly at a political rally, and five of them are terrorists who
>> start
>> shooting the others, how long does it take before just one person is
>> left standing?
>>
>> --
>> Ed Huntress
>

> Ideally everyone but the terrorists will hit the floor immediately ...

How often does "the ideal" occur?

[PaxPerPoten]

You cannot hold him to that..He crossed his fingers and gave that Oath
on a Bible..Not a Koran!

[PaxPerPoten]

Simple..Just re-brand criminals as Democrats. Thus no criminals and we
all know that Democrats are exempt from the Criminal Justice System.

[amdx]

On 7/27/2016 4:13 AM, saMyi⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄AiXnR wrote:
> raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:
>> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-gets-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>>
>>
>> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>>
>>
>> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the crowd.
>
> The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
> door-to-door gun confiscation now!
>

Do you mean the criminal would not have a gun if it was illegal to
own a gun?
Mikek

[Ed Huntress]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 18:43:50 -0500, amdx <noj...@knology.net> wrote:

Probably not. Think about what you're saying. Really think about it.

--
Ed Huntress

[Jim Wilkins]

<bruce2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:85054902-d8f2-4974...@googlegroups.com...

That depends on whether the crowd is situationally aware veterans or
self-absorbed libs.

[alvin...@geemail.org]

"situationally aware veterans"? From the year and a half I spent in
Vietnam my experience was that the "situationally aware veterans"
immediate reaction to hearing a loud "BANG" was to hit the ground.

By the way, I spent 20 years in the military and I never heard the
term "situationally aware veteran". I assume that is an effete
civilian term used by those who have no personal experience in places
where things go boom.
--

Alvin D.

[Jim Wilkins]

<alvin...@geemail.org> wrote in message
news:ea7lpbta31tq7jjt8...@4ax.com...

https://www.uscg.mil/auxiliary/training/tct/chap5.pdf

[Ministry of Vengeance and Vendettas]

=?UTF-8?B?c2FNeWnim4Tiq7gg77yt772J772H772I772U772ZIOK4jiDvvLfvvYHvvY4=?=
=?UTF-8?B?772O772B772C772F4qu34puEQWlYblI=?= <Xj...@xToyk.com> wrote in
news:kX_lz.561071$LR2.3...@fx26.fr7:

> raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:
>> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-ge
>> ts-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>>
>> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>>
>>
>> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the
>> crowd.
>
> The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
> door-to-door gun confiscation now!
>
>
>
>
>
>

Who is going to do it? The awful, racist, can't wait to shoot black people
police? The ones you cheer about when you hear they get shot by filth?

Exactly how many cops do you think will wantto go house to house
considering there will be a certain mortality rate from doing so?

--
"...And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to
the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a
century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time,
with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."--
Thomas Jefferson, Nov. 13, 1787

[Ministry of Vengeance and Vendettas]

=?UTF-8?B?TG9Lc03im4Tiq7gg77yt772J772H772I772U772ZIOK4jiDvvLfvvYHvvY4=?=
=?UTF-8?B?772O772B772C772F4qu34puEcndkdGM=?= <CZ...@JciUa.com> wrote in
news:ql4mz.521846$9X5....@fx19.fr7:

Jawohl Herr Reichsfurher!

[ECIAI⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄wTwgf]

Ministry of Vengeance and Vendettas wrote on 7/29/2016 6:41 AM:
> =?UTF-8?B?c2FNeWnim4Tiq7gg77yt772J772H772I772U772ZIOK4jiDvvLfvvYHvvY4=?=
> =?UTF-8?B?772O772B772C772F4qu34puEQWlYblI=?= <Xj...@xToyk.com> wrote in
> news:kX_lz.561071$LR2.3...@fx26.fr7:
>
>> raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:
>>> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-ge
>>> ts-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>>>
>>> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>>>
>>>
>>> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the
>>> crowd.
>>
>> The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
>> door-to-door gun confiscation now!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Who is going to do it? The awful, racist, can't wait to shoot black people
> police? The ones you cheer about when you hear they get shot by filth?

Have you heard of "Jade Helm 15"? The feds are ready:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=militarisation+of+police+usa&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=>

>
> Exactly how many cops do you think will want to go house to house

> considering there will be a certain mortality rate from doing so?

Are you better armed than Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi? Of course
not. You are armed with a big mouth.

Do you think you can fare better than David Koresh? Of course not.
You'll piss your pants when they come for you.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=waco+siege&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=>

Do you feel lucky.... punk? Well... do you?
<http://seocustomer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/CE-front.jpg>

You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZEJ4OJTgg8>

[YnYzl⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄lKotH]

Illogical argument.

Can you do crack and weed just because the criminals are doing it?

[Ministry of Vengeance and Vendettas]

=?UTF-8?B?RUNJQUnim4Tiq7gg77yt772J772H772I772U772ZIOK4jiDvvLfvvYHvvY4=?=
=?UTF-8?B?772O772B772C772F4qu34puEd1R3Z2Y=?= <NM...@otOZw.com> wrote in
news:a%Lmz.427790$Yo3.1...@fx27.fr7:

> Ministry of Vengeance and Vendettas wrote on 7/29/2016 6:41 AM:
>> =?UTF-8?B?c2FNeWnim4Tiq7gg77yt772J772H772I772U772ZIOK4jiDvvLfvvYHvvY4=?=
>> =?UTF-8?B?772O772B772C772F4qu34puEQWlYblI=?= <Xj...@xToyk.com> wrote in
>> news:kX_lz.561071$LR2.3...@fx26.fr7:
>>
>>> raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:
>>>> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-
>>>> ge ts-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>>>>
>>>> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the
>>>> crowd.
>>>
>>> The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
>>> door-to-door gun confiscation now!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Who is going to do it? The awful, racist, can't wait to shoot black
>> people police? The ones you cheer about when you hear they get shot by
>> filth?
>
> Have you heard of "Jade Helm 15"? The feds are ready:
><https://www.google.com/search?q=militarisation+of+police+usa&source=lnms&
>tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=>
>
>>
>> Exactly how many cops do you think will want to go house to house
>> considering there will be a certain mortality rate from doing so?
>
> Are you better armed than Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi? Of course
> not. You are armed with a big mouth.

So now you are advocating the use of the US military against US civilians?

> Do you think you can fare better than David Koresh? Of course not.
> You'll piss your pants when they come for you.

Yes, I ain't him.

><https://www.google.com/search?q=waco+siege&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=
>>
>
> Do you feel lucky.... punk? Well... do you?
><http://seocustomer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/CE-front.jpg>

Considerably more lucky than you.

> You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
><https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZEJ4OJTgg8>

You will be killed. Along with the rest of the filth. Get used to the idea.

[Governor Swill]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 02:06:16 -0700, "raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:

>http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-gets-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/

>
>Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>

>LYMAN, S.C. (AP) - Sheriff's deputies say no charges will be filed against a
>man who shot and wounded another man who had fired into a crowd at a South
>Carolina nightclub.
>Spartanburg County deputies told local media outlets that officers arrested
>a man they say shot and wounded three people at the nightclub in Lyman.
>Thirty-two-year-old Jody Ray Thompson of Lyman is charged with four counts
>of attempted murder and two weapons violations.
>Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the crowd. A
>man in the crowd pulled his gun and shot Thompson in the leg. Lt. Kevin Bobo
>says the man had a valid concealed weapons permit and will not face charges
>in Sunday's shooting.
>None of the injuries were life-threatening.
>It wasn't clear if Thompson has an attorney.
>

Those of us supporting RTKB need to see more stories like this.

Swill
--
#imwithher

"Giving his acceptance speech, Donald spoke for seventy-odd
minutes. And I do mean seventy ODD minutes."
- Hillary Clinton, the next President of the United States

"Megyn Kelly hangs out at CNN Grill, stoking speculation that
she could leave Fox News" - Kelly pictured with Don Lemon
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/28/megyn-kelly-hangs-out-at-cnn-grill-stoking-speculation-that-she-could-leave-fox-news/>

[Governor Swill]

On Wed, 27 Jul "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
>"Ed Huntress" wrote
>> On Wed, 27 Jul "Jim Wilkins" wrote:
>>>"Terry Coombs" wrote

>>>> saMyi?? Mighty ? Wannabe??AiXnR wrote:

>>>>> raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:

>>>>>> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-gets-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>>>>>> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed
>>>>>> Carrier

>>>>>> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into
>>>>>> the crowd.

>>>>> The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
>>>>> door-to-door gun confiscation now!

>>>> You gun-banners still haven't said how you're going to take the
>>>> guns away from criminals ...

>>>Criminals can't be required to register their illegally owned guns.
>>>http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/390/85.html
>>>"We hold that a proper claim of the constitutional privilege against
>>>self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either
>>>for failure to register a firearm under 5841 or for possession of an
>>>unregistered firearm under 5851."

>> Sure, but you can just do what Trump will have to do to deport 11
>> million undocumented Mexicans: Conduct house-to-house searches, and
>> shoot them if necessary. d8-)

>All Trump has to do is resume the enforcement of existing laws.
>https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/form/i-9.pdf

Existing laws will not find them or fund their deportation. Mass
deportation failed in 1986 as did a stronger border fence because the
Congress couldn't figure out how to pay for it.

[Governor Swill]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 10:01:57 -0400, Ed Huntress
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:38:44 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
><murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message

>>news:65dhpb91oklbb6nvc...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:16:26 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
>>> <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:nnaafa$7dl$1...@dont-email.me...

>>>>> saMyi?? Mighty ? Wannabe??AiXnR wrote:
>>>>>> raykeller wrote on 7/27/2016 5:06 AM:
>>>>>>> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-gets-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed
>>>>>>> Carrier
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> crowd.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The idiot wouldn't have a gun if gun ban was implemented. Start
>>>>>> door-to-door gun confiscation now!
>>>>>
>>>>> You gun-banners still haven't said how you're going to take the
>>>>> guns
>>>>> away from criminals ...
>>>>>

>>>>> --
>>>>> Snag

>>>>
>>>>Criminals can't be required to register their illegally owned guns.
>>>>http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/390/85.html
>>>>"We hold that a proper claim of the constitutional privilege against
>>>>self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either
>>>>for
>>>>failure to register a firearm under 5841 or for possession of an
>>>>unregistered firearm under 5851."
>>>>

>>>>-- US Supreme Court

>>>
>>> Sure, but you can just do what Trump will have to do to deport 11
>>> million undocumented Mexicans: Conduct house-to-house searches, and
>>> shoot them if necessary. d8-)
>>>

>>> --
>>> Ed Huntress

>>
>>All Trump has to do is resume the enforcement of existing laws.
>>https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/form/i-9.pdf
>>

>>--jsw
>
>If you haven't done so already, you'll want to look into the state of
>SS records and the estimated costs to make E-Verify work:
>
>http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa775_1.pdf
>
>SS records are a disaster, and no one will pay to improve the system.
>It's possible that it can't be straightened out at any cost.

Nonsense.

[Governor Swill]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 10:25:06 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"

<murat...@gmail.com> wrote:

>"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message

>news:sdfhpb1issroga6n2...@4ax.com...

>> --
>> Ed Huntress
>
>"Can't" is an excuse the Dems use to cover up their own incompetence.
>For example the DNC loudly blamed Trump and Russia for the leaks to
>mask that they are unqualified to handle classified material. But what
>more should we expect from a party whose philosophy demonizes
>individual ability and accomplishment?

"Can't" is an excuse the Republicans use to cover up their own
incompetence. For example the RNC loudly blamed Clinton personally for
the deal that sold mining rights to a Russian company. The ignore
that approval required nine agencies and several officials to sign
off. But what more should we expect from a party whose philosophy
demonizes individual freedom and accomplishment?

Fixed that paragraph for you.

[Governor Swill]

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 10:40:56 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
<murat...@gmail.com> wrote:

>"Jim Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:nnag67$sid$1...@dont-email.me...

>> --jsw
>
>The necessary non-partisan multidisciplinary problem-solving expertise
>is available IF the government can commit to solving problems instead
>of preserving them as excuses to attack the other side and to expand
>the bureaucracy.

I quite agree and the sooner the Republicans stop blocking the
Democrats and the Democrats stop blocking the Republicans in this
silly power struggle, the better off the People will be.

[Governor Swill]

Wasn't the left that decided to give away drugs for free.

[Governor Swill]

You'll never get there. The 95 would have found and killed the 5
before you could even get close.

[Ed Huntress]

No "nonsense." It's entirely possible that there is no organization
and no politics that can do it, and no method to do it on the fly.

It's a dynamic system. If you could make it stand still, you certainly
could fix it. But you can't. So you may not be able to straighten it
out.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 21:56:16 -0400, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:12:31 -0400, Ed Huntress
><hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:36:37 -0600, Just Wondering
>><fmh...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On 7/27/2016 9:23 AM, ????? ??????? wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You gun-packers failed to see that "gun" is the problem in
>>>> the "gun problem".
>>>>
>>>I, and a hundred million others like me, could each own a
>>>thousand guns, and ten thousand rounds of ammo for each gun,
>>>without increasing the "gun problem" one little bit.
>>
>>A really interesting question is, if you have 100 people carrying
>>openly at a political rally, and five of them are terrorists who start
>>shooting the others, how long does it take before just one person is
>>left standing?
>
>You'll never get there. The 95 would have found and killed the 5
>before you could even get close.
>
>Swill

Since you have no way to know how they would "find" them, and you're
guessing, here's my guess:

It will start like a chain reaction. The terrorists will shoot eight
or ten before anyone can shoot back. Those who shoot back will mostly
miss their targets (most people do when shooting under such extreme
stress). They kill some other armed citizens.

Everyone will look the same; the terrorists know who each other is,
but they look like everyone else. So the shooting will quickly become
random. Dozens will die. The only ones who will be reasonably
disciplined, prepared, and calm will be the terrorists. They'll just
keep shooting until the statistics work against them and they get
shot.

How many will die? There might be a statistical way to give us some
guidance here, but I don't know what it is. My best guess is that the
shooting will continue until the last terrorist is dead. By then...oh,
maybe 3/4 or more of the armed citizens. And most will have died from
being shot by other armed citizens.

It's an interesting thought exercize, huh?

--
Ed Huntress

[Democrats = Below Avg Intelligence]

On 29 Jul 2016, Ed Huntress <hunt...@optonline.net> posted some
news:r25opbp22peq3q49b...@4ax.com:

Only cops miss like that when shooting under stress. Militarists and
hunters take what they want down with a couple shots and minimal
collateral damage.

> Everyone will look the same; the terrorists know who each other is,
> but they look like everyone else. So the shooting will quickly become
> random. Dozens will die. The only ones who will be reasonably
> disciplined, prepared, and calm will be the terrorists. They'll just
> keep shooting until the statistics work against them and they get
> shot.

Ed, you're dumber than a fucking rock. The terrorists will have automatic
weapons because they don't give a flying fuck about your puny democrat gun
control laws that penalize law-abiding American citizens.

The Americans will have hand guns.

Understand Ed? Terrorists automatic weapons, Americans hand guns. Got it
now?

You think that will be hard for everyone to figure out? 10 handguns
firing at one Democrat with a rifle, I call that even.

> How many will die? There might be a statistical way to give us some
> guidance here, but I don't know what it is. My best guess is that the
> shooting will continue until the last terrorist is dead. By then...oh,
> maybe 3/4 or more of the armed citizens. And most will have died from
> being shot by other armed citizens.

It doesn't matter how many die as long as your democrat sponsored
terrorists do. Look at it this way, 50 faggots died in Orlando. That was
a test run. Think how many they can get in a Casino full of old fuckers
in motorized wheelchairs.

> It's an interesting thought exercize, huh?

*exercise.

[PaxPerPoten]

On 7/29/2016 6:44 PM, Governor Swill wrote:

>> All Trump has to do is resume the enforcement of existing laws.
>> https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/files/form/i-9.pdf
>
> Existing laws will not find them or fund their deportation. Mass
> deportation failed in 1986 as did a stronger border fence because the
> Congress couldn't figure out how to pay for it.

It worked pretty damned well for President Eisenhower in 1954. So you
are saying the Great Black-Hope cannot do the job dictated by law?
>
> Slops

[PaxPerPoten]

On 7/29/2016 8:55 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 15:02:14 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
> <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:J97mz.1219$5m1...@fx37.iad...
>>> On 7/27/2016 9:23 AM, Might Wannabe wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You gun-packers failed to see that "gun" is the problem in
>>>> the "gun problem".
>>>>
>>> I, and a hundred million others like me, could each own a
>>> thousand guns, and ten thousand rounds of ammo for each gun,
>>> without increasing the "gun problem" one little bit.
>>
>> The Left refuses to admit that the root of the violence problem is
>> their drugs, not the Right's guns.
>>
>
> Wasn't the left that decided to give away drugs for free.

Nope..But they did a helluva fine job with "Fast and Furious".
Then they started bitching about American gun ownership. Was anyone held
accountable..Oh ..Hell no! You find 30,000 smoking gun Emails and does
Hillary even get a Reprimand...Oh ..Hell no!

[Gugyy⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄eJArX]

Please clarify. Can handguns be automatic too? Is it a law that CCW
cannot be automatic handguns?

>
> You think that will be hard for everyone to figure out? 10 handguns
> firing at one Democrat with a rifle, I call that even.

How can 100 handgun packers not see 5 among them are slinging rifles?

[Ed Huntress]

You ignorant ass. Have you ever shot a gun?

> Militarists and hunters...

"Militarists"? You mean, like North Korea?

Get yourself a dictionary, dumbass.

>... take what they want down with a couple shots and minimal
>collateral damage.

Really? I've been a hunter since 1959, and was an NRA (and New York
State) certified rifle instructor until 15 years ago. I had six bars
on my NRA Sharpshooter medal before I was 14.

Now, let's look at the baloney you're trying to promote. Hunters
aren't jumpy about being shot at by their targets. (Even so, if you
ever watched Sarah Palin's reality show, it took that "experienced
hunter" four shots to hit a carabou that was standing as still as a
statue on top of a ridge.) People who are being shot at ARE jumpy.
Cops probably are better at handling it than your average citizen;
they have at least some training for it.

But none of that matters when you don't know which of a group of 100
is shooting at you versus the terrorists. And those shooting have no
more idea who the terrorists are than you do, so you're worried that
one of the armed citizens might shoot YOU, thinking you're a
terrorist.

That's about as chaotic, and panicky, as a situation can get. It's a
very unlikely hypothetical, but it's something to think about. And it
gives you an idea of what the cops in Cleveland were worried about
last week, because protest groups outside of a designated area were
permitted, under Ohio law, to openly carry their AR-15s.

It made the cops jumpy. Fortunately, there weren't many, or maybe any,
nutjobs stupid enough to show up with their guns.

>
>> Everyone will look the same; the terrorists know who each other is,
>> but they look like everyone else. So the shooting will quickly become
>> random. Dozens will die. The only ones who will be reasonably
>> disciplined, prepared, and calm will be the terrorists. They'll just
>> keep shooting until the statistics work against them and they get
>> shot.
>
>Ed, you're dumber than a fucking rock. The terrorists will have automatic

>weapons....

Ok, you've just demonstrated that you're a phony who's talking through
his hat. Of all the recent mass shootings in the United States, tell
us which ones have been conducted with automatic weapons --
terrorists, or just garden-variety lunatics.

Take your time. We'll wait.

>... because they don't give a flying fuck about your puny democrat gun

>control laws that penalize law-abiding American citizens.

First, I'm a Republican, and have been for close to 30 years. Second,
you're a bullshitter who doesn't know what he's talking about.

>
>The Americans will have hand guns.
>
>Understand Ed? Terrorists automatic weapons, Americans hand guns. Got it
>now?

Ha-ha-ha! You really are ignorant about guns. Do you mean like these
"Americans"?

http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2014-04-11/guns-vs-moms/

Or these guys?

http://www.pqed.org/2014/06/how-should-people-respond-to-open-carry.html

How about this bunch of "terrorists"?

http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/firearm-activists-walk-armed-through-downtown-st-louis#stream/0

>
>You think that will be hard for everyone to figure out? 10 handguns
>firing at one Democrat with a rifle, I call that even.

Anyone who knows guns can spot a phony talking about them as soon as
he opens his mouth. You're a phony.

I'll leave it to someone else to educated you about "automatic
weapons." But you can do yourself a favor by learning something about
them before spouting off.

I don't hold out much hope for you.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

He can't. He's talking through his hat.

>Can handguns be automatic too?

They're extremely rare, and any made after 1986 are illegal for sale.
He's all mixed up between "automatic" and "semi-automatic."

>Is it a law that CCW
>cannot be automatic handguns?

They're rare collectors' items, most dating back to WWII or earlier.
The only recent ones in the US are a few "manufacturer's samples,"
which FFL holders can possess under certain circumstances.

You're talking about guns that are of historical interest and that are
all but nonexistent in the US.

>>
>> You think that will be hard for everyone to figure out? 10 handguns
>> firing at one Democrat with a rifle, I call that even.
>
>How can 100 handgun packers not see 5 among them are slinging rifles?

The situation we're talking about is one in which nearly EVERYONE is
carrying a rifle. Like this:

http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/firearm-activists-walk-armed-through-downtown-st-louis#stream/0

--
Ed Huntress

[Rudy Canoza]

Not attempted, shitbag.

[Jim Wilkins]

"Gugyy?? Mighty ? Wannabe??eJArX" <Ll...@HrcGi.com> wrote in message
news:0PWmz.658806$424....@fx15.fr7...

> Democrats = Below Avg Intelligence wrote on 7/30/2016 12:13 AM:
>> On 29 Jul 2016, Ed Huntress <hunt...@optonline.net> posted some
>> news:r25opbp22peq3q49b...@4ax.com:
>>
>

> Please clarify. Can handguns be automatic too? Is it a law that
> CCW cannot be automatic handguns?

Full-auto pistols were tried and found to be uncontrollable 100 years
ago. They quickly evolved into submachine guns which used the same
pistol cartridges but had larger magazines, separate grips for both
hands and enough weight to absorb recoil.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP_18
"An attempt to modify existing semi-automatic pistols, specifically
the Luger and C96 Mauser failed, as accurate aimed fire in full
automatic mode was impossible due to their light weight and high rate
of fire of 1,200 rounds per minute."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_submachine_gun

--Hiram. Maxim

[rbowman]

On 07/29/2016 11:20 PM, Gugyy⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄eJArX wrote:
>
> Please clarify. Can handguns be automatic too? Is it a law that CCW
> cannot be automatic handguns?

Yes, there are selective fire handguns like the Glock G18. No, you're
not going to get one unless you're military or police. Maybe a Class III
firearms dealer would let you hold one.

If by 'automatic' you mean 'semi-automatic' doesn't embarrass you to
display your ignorance in public?

[rbowman]

On 07/30/2016 05:58 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> Full-auto pistols were tried and found to be uncontrollable 100 years
> ago. They quickly evolved into submachine guns which used the same
> pistol cartridges but had larger magazines, separate grips for both
> hands and enough weight to absorb recoil.
>

http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=495

Saddam Hussein had a G18. It didn't do him much good and Bush wound up
possessing it as a souvenir.

Like the article says, a skeletal stock converts into sort of a
half-assed sub.

[Default Identity]

On 07/27/2016 02:06 AM, raykeller wrote:
> http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/07/01/man-opens-fire-at-nightclub-gets-shot-in-leg-by-concealed-carrier/
>
> Man Opens Fire At Nightclub, Gets Shot In Leg By Concealed Carrier
>

> LYMAN, S.C. (AP) - Sheriff's deputies say no charges will be filed against a
> man who shot and wounded another man who had fired into a crowd at a South
> Carolina nightclub.
> Spartanburg County deputies told local media outlets that officers arrested
> a man they say shot and wounded three people at the nightclub in Lyman.
> Thirty-two-year-old Jody Ray Thompson of Lyman is charged with four counts
> of attempted murder and two weapons violations.
> Investigators say Thompson got into an argument and fired into the crowd. A
> man in the crowd pulled his gun and shot Thompson in the leg. Lt. Kevin Bobo
> says the man had a valid concealed weapons permit and will not face charges
> in Sunday's shooting.
> None of the injuries were life-threatening.
> It wasn't clear if Thompson has an attorney.

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/07/30/americas-most-violent-and-peaceful-states-2/

"Today, at 636 reported incidents per 100,000 state residents, Alaska
has the highest violent crime rate in the nation. In a perfectly
peaceful state, no one would own a gun for self defense. The presence of
firearms not only increases the risk of violent incidents, but also
reflects fear among gun owners and can cause fear in others. In Alaska,
61.7% of adults live in households with at least one firearm, the
highest gun ownership rate of all states."

[wOBbV⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄lDqJq]

I was humouring the poster I replied to. You have chopped off the part I
was referring to. Here I repeat:

>>
>> Ed, you're dumber than a fucking rock. The terrorists will have
>> automatic
>> weapons because they don't give a flying fuck about your puny democrat
>> gun
>> control laws that penalize law-abiding American citizens.
>>
>> The Americans will have hand guns.
>>
>> Understand Ed? Terrorists automatic weapons, Americans hand guns.
>> Got it
>> now?
>
>

[PaxPerPoten]

Badlands Pawn in Sioux Falls SD has the largest us Collection of guns,
including military. They have an indoor firing range that will
accommodate any small arm of any nation. They pretty much have them all.
For a price you can fire any and all as much as you can afford.
Also you may purchase any weapon within the legal limits of the law.
Many folks do business from all over just to fire weapons of choice.

Badlands Pawn: Sioux Falls Pawn Shops
www.badlandspawn.com/
Badlands Pawn is not your average pawn shop. At over 70000 sq ft, we
also house a gun range, deli, foundry, live rock radio station and more!

[Governor Swill]

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 23:06:52 -0400, Ed Huntress

Indeed. The armed society could be worse than an unarmed one.

Swill
--
#imwithher

"[With Hillary Clinton] our international relations will not be reduced
to a business transaction." - Marine 4 star General John Allen (ret.)

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 01 Aug 2016 17:48:29 -0400, Governor Swill

It seems likely that the percentage of people who carry guns openly
will continue to be small, mostly people demonstrating for their
"right" or trying to antagonize someone who opposes open carry.

So that hypothetical above is very unlikely. But it does point out
something we've heard from cops several times now: How in the hell are
they supposed to know who is who?

So far, so good. So far...

--
Ed Huntress
>
>Swill

[Governor Swill]

On Sat, 30 Jul 2016 01:43:07 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>First, I'm a Republican, and have been for close to 30 years. Second,
>you're a bullshitter who doesn't know what he's talking about.

Sounds like you're a *real* Republican though, not one of today's
radical fakes. You seem to have common sense, ability to sort good
data from garbage, stuff like that.

[Governor Swill]

On Sat, 30 Jul Default Identity wrote:
>"Today, at 636 reported incidents per 100,000 state residents, Alaska
>has the highest violent crime rate in the nation. In a perfectly
>peaceful state, no one would own a gun for self defense. The presence of
>firearms not only increases the risk of violent incidents, but also
>reflects fear among gun owners and can cause fear in others. In Alaska,
>61.7% of adults live in households with at least one firearm, the
>highest gun ownership rate of all states."

At 1.3 persons per square mile, you can't get a cop when you need one
and there are still a lot of wild animals, so yeah, they keep guns.

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 01 Aug 2016 19:32:09 -0400, Governor Swill
<governo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 30 Jul 2016 01:43:07 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>First, I'm a Republican, and have been for close to 30 years. Second,
>>you're a bullshitter who doesn't know what he's talking about.
>
>Sounds like you're a *real* Republican though, not one of today's
>radical fakes. You seem to have common sense, ability to sort good
>data from garbage, stuff like that.
>
>Swill

Thanks, that's what I try to be. I'm not really aligned with any party
anymore; I have little regard for either of them, in terms of how they
conduct themselves. I just haven't had a reason to change, and it can
be useful in state-level politics.

As I told a Republican leader in my town, at a campaign cocktail party
around 15 years ago, I stick with them because they make better gin
martinis than the Democrats do. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

[Governor Swill]

On Mon, 01 Aug Ed Huntress wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Aug Governor Swill wrote:
>>On Sat, 30 Jul 2016 01:43:07 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>>First, I'm a Republican, and have been for close to 30 years. Second,
>>>you're a bullshitter who doesn't know what he's talking about.
>>Sounds like you're a *real* Republican though, not one of today's
>>radical fakes. You seem to have common sense, ability to sort good
>>data from garbage, stuff like that.

>Thanks, that's what I try to be. I'm not really aligned with any party
>anymore; I have little regard for either of them, in terms of how they
>conduct themselves. I just haven't had a reason to change, and it can
>be useful in state-level politics.

>As I told a Republican leader in my town, at a campaign cocktail party
>around 15 years ago, I stick with them because they make better gin
>martinis than the Democrats do. d8-)

hehe Been there. Never registered either way, always independent. Go
to say though, lately, and especially with Hillary and Donald, the
Dems remind me more and more of old style Republicans and Republicans
remind me more and more of the Dixiecrats.

[Michael A. Terrell]

I was against the imported TVs radios and other consumer electronics
in the early '70s, but everyone insisted, "It's just a few items, it
won't hurt anything." I watched as the entire industry was decimated,
while the liberal fools only cared if a piece of crap was cheap. I was
fed up with hearng, "So what if it dies? it's cheap so I'll just buy
another."

[MxAyT⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄DEsCF]

If they can spend 40% less than you pay on everything you buy, they will
end up a lot better off than you do in the long run. You are paying
extra money to support an industry that is not competitive.

[rKPid⚛← Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ╬ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ →⚛HSTwW]

Winston_Smith wrote on 8/6/2016 4:59 PM:

> The trouble is most are only "competative" because they pay cheap
> wages.


It doesn't negate the fact that you'll end up with 40% less money in
your pocket than they do. That is a lot of money in a life time of
purchases.

[Michael A. Terrell]

MxAyT⛄⫸ Ｍｉｇｈｔｙ ⸎ Ｗａｎｎａｂｅ⫷⛄DEsCF wrote:
>
> If they can spend 40% less than you pay on everything you buy, they will
> end up a lot better off than you do in the long run. You are paying
> extra money to support an industry that is not competitive.

They were saving about 20%, but buying three imported products to
last as long as a single domestic product of that timeframe so they
spent more money to go the 'cheap route'.

It's like the 'Rent to Own' scams. Pay a 'small weekly fee' for
cheap junk, and end up paying more than what a quality product would
cost if bought outright.

I have seen people pay three times what something was really worth.
I have never bought anything on credit other than one truck, and the
mortgage on my home. I am retired, and I have never wanted a credit
card. My only monthly bills are the utilities.

[Ed Huntress]

That laissez-faire free-trade agenda was a conservative product,
Michael, not a liberal one. The liberals were the union-based
protectionists.

Now it's the libertarians who are the free-traders.

--
Ed Huntress

[pyotr filipivich]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> on Sat, 6 Aug 2016
21:04:08 -0400 typed in misc.survivalism the following:

>MxAyT?? ?????? ? ?????????DEsCF wrote:
>>
>> If they can spend 40% less than you pay on everything you buy, they will
>> end up a lot better off than you do in the long run. You are paying
>> extra money to support an industry that is not competitive.
>
> They were saving about 20%, but buying three imported products to
>last as long as a single domestic product of that timeframe so they
>spent more money to go the 'cheap route'.

I've a friend who buys cheap flashlights, usually at yard sales,
because "he's always losing them on jobsites." Yeah, because at a
buck each, "so what?"

>
> It's like the 'Rent to Own' scams. Pay a 'small weekly fee' for
>cheap junk, and end up paying more than what a quality product would
>cost if bought outright.

"Dollar down and a dollar a week."
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

[Governor Swill]

On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 21:04:08 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> They were saving about 20%, but buying three imported products to
>last as long as a single domestic product of that timeframe so they
>spent more money to go the 'cheap route'.

Except the imported goods turned out to be better quality. While
Japanese drivers in the seventies and eighties were buying gas, oil
and tires, American owners were buying alternators, water pumps,
radiators, wheel bearings, starters and so one.

When American cars were at the end of life at 100K, Japanese cars were
at end of life at 200K.

Japan didn't take a third of Detroit's business because their cars
were cheaper, they took it because their cars featured more advanced
technology, performed better, were cheaper to run and lasted longer.

> It's like the 'Rent to Own' scams. Pay a 'small weekly fee' for
>cheap junk, and end up paying more than what a quality product would
>cost if bought outright.
>
> I have seen people pay three times what something was really worth.
>I have never bought anything on credit other than one truck, and the
>mortgage on my home. I am retired, and I have never wanted a credit
>card. My only monthly bills are the utilities.

Good.

Swill
--
The only time NATO has ever invoked Article 5 and rushed to
the aid of a NATO ally in response to an attack was on September 11,
2001. On that day, monsters murdered 2,977 people in New York
City; Washington, DC; and Shanksville, PA.

Almost 3,000 Americans were murdered by monsters and our NATO
allies for the first time in the history of the NATO Alliance
rose as one and defended American airspace and American interests
around the entire freaking world while we wrestled with what had happened.

Donald Trump wants to turn NATO into a damn shakedown scheme and
you people are cheering him on.
You should be ashamed of yourselves.
You should be ashamed of the fact that your cult leader who claims
to have been personally affected by 9/11 does not even know our NATO allies
protected his ass that day.
You should be ashamed that he wants to turn one of the strongest military
alliances in the history of the world into a racket where
protection is bought.
You should be ashamed that you are not ashamed. -- Eric Erickson

[RD Sandman]

Winston_Smith <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in
news:6pjcqblijqtp14pgh...@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 15:18:44 -0400, MxAyT wrote:

> The trouble is most are only "competative" because they pay cheap
> wages.
>

Perhaps those are good wages or the prevailing wage where the item is
built. We don't pay the wages we do because we are benign or our country
is named America. We pay those wages because that is the normal cost of
labor for those particular jobs.

--

RD (The Sandman)

There are all kinds of people in this world. Good ones,
bad ones and they come in many colors: white, black, brown, red,
yellow, etc.. but there is only one race - Human.

IOW, All Lives Matter!!!

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[RD Sandman]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:TqadnZiOTt2VFDvK...@earthlink.com:

We are pretty much in the same boat. Earlier in life, I did finance a few
things like a house and cars but I have not made a monthly house or car
payment since circa 1989. I have credit cards but pay them in full each
month. I simply use them rather than to carry large quantities of cash in
my pocket.

[rbowman]

On 08/06/2016 09:39 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> "Dollar down and a dollar a week."

We used to paraphrase that as 'A dollar down and a dollar the next time
you catch me.' I wouldn't want to be in the rent-to-own business. Years
ago when I did business with a tool rental place for items like
transmission jacks I'd often get a free rental. The deal was if I could
extract the tool from whatever deadbeat had never returned it my rental
was free.

[Ed Huntress]

On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 15:36:17 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 12:08:38 -0500, RD Sandman wrote:
>>Winston_Smith wrote

>>> On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 15:18:44 -0400, MxAyT wrote:
>
>>>>If they can spend 40% less than you pay on everything you buy, they
>>>>will end up a lot better off than you do in the long run. You are
>>>>paying extra money to support an industry that is not competitive.
>>>
>>> The trouble is most are only "competative" because they pay cheap
>>> wages.
>>
>>Perhaps those are good wages or the prevailing wage where the item is
>>built. We don't pay the wages we do because we are benign or our country
>>is named America. We pay those wages because that is the normal cost of
>>labor for those particular jobs.
>

>You are absolutely correct. Trouble is we also have the nominal cost
>of products/living side of the coin.
>
>From the single view of the American, they are wages the American
>can't live on. IMHO, to use the term "competitive" honestly we would
>need to find a way for an American to be able to live on that third
>world wage.
>
>The case against globalism. Any difference between nations will be
>exploited. That almost has to be to the disadvantage of the richest
>nation in the deal. That's us but we keep on making deals and telling
>the sheeple what a good thing it will be.
>
>It's usually a very good deal for everyone but us.

And why would we make such deals, Winston? To keep it simple, you can
just draw from your favorite list of conspirators who are selling the
country down the river.

--
Ed Huntress

[RD Sandman]

Winston_Smith <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in
news:lidfqbh4uu331qeol...@4ax.com:

> On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 12:08:38 -0500, RD Sandman wrote:
>>Winston_Smith wrote

>>> On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 15:18:44 -0400, MxAyT wrote:
>
>>>>If they can spend 40% less than you pay on everything you buy, they
>>>>will end up a lot better off than you do in the long run. You are
>>>>paying extra money to support an industry that is not competitive.
>>>
>>> The trouble is most are only "competative" because they pay cheap
>>> wages.
>>
>>Perhaps those are good wages or the prevailing wage where the item is
>>built. We don't pay the wages we do because we are benign or our
>>country is named America. We pay those wages because that is the
>>normal cost of labor for those particular jobs.
>

> You are absolutely correct. Trouble is we also have the nominal cost
> of products/living side of the coin.

Yes, and that part is often forgetten by those pressing for high minimum
wages.......(I am not saying that you are one of those.) When I was
growing up it was referred to as the "wage price spiral". As wages rose
so did the costs of the product. As those costs rose so did its price.
As its price rose less people could afford it. Therefore, a balance
point needed to be reached. In our case, that is a rather high level when
compared to the world average.

> From the single view of the American, they are wages the American
> can't live on. IMHO, to use the term "competitive" honestly we would
> need to find a way for an American to be able to live on that third
> world wage.

While true, minimum wage jobs are not intended to care for family of
four. They are a subsistence wage for someone with no or very little
skills to learn on. As the person learns, their earning power rises and
they should be paid more as they are definitely worth more assuming a
good learning curve. Of course, if they don't have a good learning
curve, chances are that they will not last in that industry.....or, at
least, not in that particular position.

> The case against globalism. Any difference between nations will be
> exploited. That almost has to be to the disadvantage of the richest
> nation in the deal.

Yes.

> That's us but we keep on making deals and telling
> the sheeple what a good thing it will be.

I have no problem with being the richest nation in the world....as long
as we do not outprice ourselves.

> It's usually a very good deal for everyone but us.

Most of us don't do too badly.

[Ed Huntress]

On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 16:59:49 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 18:56:47 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>>And why would we make such deals, Winston? To keep it simple, you can
>>just draw from your favorite list of conspirators who are selling the
>>country down the river.
>

>The answer isn't from my list of conspirators. It comes from the
>question itself.

Let's restore what we were talking about from your previous post:

>The case against globalism. Any difference between nations will be
>exploited. That almost has to be to the disadvantage of the richest
>nation in the deal. That's us but we keep on making deals and telling
>the sheeple what a good thing it will be.
>
>It's usually a very good deal for everyone but us.

>

>WHO makes such deals. Tell me that and you have the beneficiaries.

Well, YOU tell us who it is then. From what I can see, it's pretty
much every economic interest in the country.

Of course, unions representing one industry want *their* industry
protected, but otherwise, it's always been pretty open.

>
>Do you or I benefit is not on the table.

We do. And you probably know it.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 20:27:26 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 20:36:25 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:

>>On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 16:59:49 -0700, Winston_Smith> wrote:
>>>>On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 18:56:47 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>>
>>>>And why would we make such deals, Winston? To keep it simple, you can
>>>>just draw from your favorite list of conspirators who are selling the
>>>>country down the river.
>>>
>>>The answer isn't from my list of conspirators. It comes from the
>>>question itself.
>>
>>Let's restore what we were talking about from your previous post:
>>
>>>The case against globalism. Any difference between nations will be
>>>exploited. That almost has to be to the disadvantage of the richest
>>>nation in the deal. That's us but we keep on making deals and telling
>>>the sheeple what a good thing it will be.
>>>
>>>It's usually a very good deal for everyone but us.
>>
>>>WHO makes such deals. Tell me that and you have the beneficiaries.
>>
>>Well, YOU tell us who it is then. From what I can see, it's pretty
>>much every economic interest in the country.
>

>At the top, yes; at Joe's level, not so much. Isn't it really "power"
>and "not power"? Power comes in many forms but it doesn't behave very
>differently. One may be for, another against, but they are both
>looking out for "ME!!" Which is fine until it comes to include "and
>screw you".

>
>>Of course, unions representing one industry want *their* industry
>>protected, but otherwise, it's always been pretty open.
>

>They are just politicians. And just as destructive in the long run. In
>exchange for contributions/dues they have to answer the question what
>have you done for me lately. Even if there isn't much that needs doing
>at the moment. "A normal raise - and I gave you dues for THAT??"

>
>>>Do you or I benefit is not on the table.
>>
>>We do. And you probably know it.
>

>Oh, I've gotten my share but I don't think everyone in the country has
>come close. I don't think the majority has come close. No way that I'm
>bitching on my own behalf.
>
>But I doubt anyone had us in mind when they were talking TPP, etc. Big
>muckie doesn't hand out a few million to help poor old Joe Sixpack. If
>Joe gets something, it's incidental.


This really gets too tedious to start dragging in statistics, but I'll
just say that our entire economy is much stronger (and larger) than it
ever would have been without trade. The numbers of people who lost
jobs to low-cost foreign production is much smaller than the numbers
who have benefitted.

It's no contest. What we have to do now is to start dealing with
displacements sooner and more forcefully. Economic changes are
happening faster and we have to adapt.

But to disparage trade at this time in history is like advertising
that you're going to commit suicide.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 01:04:20 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 00:11:07 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>>This really gets too tedious to start dragging in statistics, but I'll
>>just say that our entire economy is much stronger (and larger) than it
>>ever would have been without trade. The numbers of people who lost
>>jobs to low-cost foreign production is much smaller than the numbers
>>who have benefitted.
>

>Well there we are. You say it. Yes, frequently. I'm sure you deeply
>believe that. But there are those of us that disagree.

It's a matter of facts, not opinion. But the facts are tough to dig
out. There is a lot of disagreement about the numbers because it's
hard to identify the sequence of causes.

But even with the disagreements, there is little argument against the
fact that our economy is richer and stronger because of trade.

>
>>It's no contest. What we have to do now is to start dealing with
>>displacements sooner and more forcefully. Economic changes are
>>happening faster and we have to adapt.
>

>Mess with it some more. A bandaid on the bandaid. Again you believe
>it; I and others don't.

>
>>But to disparage trade at this time in history is like advertising
>>that you're going to commit suicide.
>

>If you believe all the wonders we are told "free" trade has brought
>us. Maybe the problem is just that we don't have "fair" trade. We get
>screwed at every turn. Likely because our leaders are stupid if not
>bought.

They're neither. Not knowing the facts, you're just willing to buy
into conspiracy theories.

>
>At one time the country made stuff, and sold it, and got richer.

We make more "stuff" than ever before.

>Now
>other people make stuff, we buy it, and get poorer.

No, we keep getting richer.

>Not all trade is
>created equal and not all trade is good (for us). I'll let Chinese
>leaders worry about their own affairs.
>
>I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

Some time we'll look at the numbers and see if you still disagree.

--
Ed Huntress

[Governor Swill]

On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 15:36:17 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>From the single view of the American, they are wages the American
>can't live on.

Then there isn't a problem with illegal immigration. They take the
lowest wage jobs.

[rbowman]

On 08/08/2016 04:43 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> It's a matter of facts, not opinion. But the facts are tough to dig
> out. There is a lot of disagreement about the numbers because it's
> hard to identify the sequence of causes.

In other words, it is difficult to marshal concrete facts to support
your opinions.

> But even with the disagreements, there is little argument against the
> fact that our economy is richer and stronger because of trade.

Actually there are quite a few arguments. As Winston said we'll have to
agree to disagree.

[mog...@hotmail.com]

On Monday, August 8, 2016 at 8:43:09 AM UTC-4, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Aug 2016 15:36:17 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
> >From the single view of the American, they are wages the American
> >can't live on.
>
> Then there isn't a problem with illegal immigration. They take the
> lowest wage jobs.

In theory. But in reality, they move up the wage/management latter as well (especially with those who don't want to hire fellow countrymen)

[Governor Swill]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 00:11:07 -0400, Ed Huntress

*applause*

Let's also note how much of that displacement is due to automation and
manufacturing efficiencies. Newt Gingrich notwithstanding,
manufacturing jobs have been on the increase but they aren't the
repetitive motion sort that have previously typified the sector.
Today's manufacturing jobs require more education and worker
creativity than ever before.

[Governor Swill]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 01:04:20 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 00:11:07 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>>This really gets too tedious to start dragging in statistics, but I'll
>>just say that our entire economy is much stronger (and larger) than it
>>ever would have been without trade. The numbers of people who lost
>>jobs to low-cost foreign production is much smaller than the numbers
>>who have benefitted.
>

>Well there we are. You say it. Yes, frequently. I'm sure you deeply
>believe that. But there are those of us that disagree.
>

>>It's no contest. What we have to do now is to start dealing with
>>displacements sooner and more forcefully. Economic changes are
>>happening faster and we have to adapt.
>

>Mess with it some more. A bandaid on the bandaid. Again you believe
>it; I and others don't.
>

>>But to disparage trade at this time in history is like advertising
>>that you're going to commit suicide.
>

>If you believe all the wonders we are told "free" trade has brought
>us. Maybe the problem is just that we don't have "fair" trade. We get
>screwed at every turn. Likely because our leaders are stupid if not
>bought.
>

>At one time the country made stuff, and sold it, and got richer. Now
>other people make stuff, we buy it, and get poorer. Not all trade is

>created equal and not all trade is good (for us). I'll let Chinese
>leaders worry about their own affairs.
>

>I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

Beliefs are not facts. Beliefs not based on facts always lead to
false solutions. We won't solve our "good paying jobs" problem by
kicking out the dishwashers, nannies, lawn mowers and lettuce pickers.

Despite this clear and self evident fact, Trumpeters continue to
believe that Mexicans sneaking into the country are the reason they
can't get a $40 an hour job at GM.

[Governor Swill]

A family in the 1950s would probably have a small (by our standards)
black and white TV in the living room to share. Today, there are more
screens than people. The living room TV, TV's in other rooms,
desktops, laptops, tablets and smartphones. More and more cars are
being sold with built in screens for instrument panels, sat nav and
even entertainment and vehicle controls plus a pair of DVD screens for
the back seat passengers.

Houses are bigger, and airconditioning, once an expensive to buy and
use luxury, is considered standard and taken for granted.

"You don't have a/c??? How can you live in a house without a/c?"
"Same way my grandparents and every human before them did."

>>Not all trade is
>>created equal and not all trade is good (for us). I'll let Chinese
>>leaders worry about their own affairs.
>>
>>I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
>
>Some time we'll look at the numbers and see if you still disagree.

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 10:33:56 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 06:43:15 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>
>>They're neither. Not knowing the facts, you're just willing to buy
>>into conspiracy theories.
>

>Sorry. It's too easy to say this is the way it is, I'm right, I have a
>set of facts and anyone that doesn't agree is stupid or into
>conspiracy theories. I'm finding your writings a bit patronizing. Well
>meant, but patronizing.

Winston, you have claimed NOTHING except sheer, unsubstantiated
speculation! How in the hell can you "disagree" with anyone? You don't
even know what you agree with!

We'll try this some other time. When you get into it, you have to
*really* get into it, or you're just guessing. I don't have time for
it and you probably don't either.

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 12:26:39 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 14:40:05 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:

>>On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 10:33:56 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>
>>>Sorry. It's too easy to say this is the way it is, I'm right, I have a
>>>set of facts and anyone that doesn't agree is stupid or into
>>>conspiracy theories. I'm finding your writings a bit patronizing. Well
>>>meant, but patronizing.
>>
>>Winston, you have claimed NOTHING except sheer, unsubstantiated
>>speculation!
>

>Like "hope and change" is the way to go? There is "sheer,
>unsubstantiated speculation" that didn't work out very well. Hillary
>will tuck us all in bed at night? We'll see.

>
>>How in the hell can you "disagree" with anyone? You don't
>>even know what you agree with!
>

>A polite personal attack. If we don't disagree, why are you constantly
>saying I have things wrong? Sounds like you don't agree with something
>I wrote, thus .... we disagree.
>
>You just take the easy out of labeling thoughts you don't like as the
>result of ignorance and stupidity.

Tell you what. We'll leave it at that, and we'll get into dueling
statistics some time. No anecdotes allowed. Just overall effects of
trade over time. Ok?

--
Ed Huntress

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 12:16:26 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 11:34:30 -0400, Governor Swill wrote:
>
>>manufacturing jobs have been on the increase but they aren't the
>>repetitive motion sort that have previously typified the sector.
>>Today's manufacturing jobs require more education and worker
>>creativity than ever before.
>

>Give us a few examples. Manufacturing, where something physical is
>ready to go to market.

How about 25,600 machine-tool programmers working in the US? How many
of those jobs existed in, say, 1980?

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes514012.htm


>
>Non-repetitive motion. Sounds like you are ruling out mass production.
>OK granted, that's lost to automation. But mass production once meant
>mass employment.
>
>Please identify some of your mass employment jobs today.
>Manufacturing, not service.

I'm not sure what you're looking for here, but there are about 12.3
million manufacturing workers today. That's 9% of the workforce.

--
Ed Huntress

[rbowman]

On 08/08/2016 02:38 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> How about 25,600 machine-tool programmers working in the US? How many
> of those jobs existed in, say, 1980?

http://www.cnccookbook.com/CCCNCMachine.htm

It doesn't give any statistics for CNC programmers but does say:

"US companies had largely launched the CNC revolution, but they had been
overly focused on the high end. The Germans were the first to see the
opportunity to reduce prices of CNC, and by 1979 the Germans were
selling more CNC than the US companies. The Japanese repeated the same
formula to an even more successful degree and had taken the leadership
away from the Germans just one year later, by 1980. In 1971, the 10
largest CNC companies were all US companies, but by 1987, only
Cincinnati Milacron was left and they were in 8th place."

Do you think it requires more expertise to build CNC equipment or to
program it? What do you see for the future of CNC programmers with
innovations like

http://www.aerospacemanufacturinganddesign.com/article/amd0814-milling-productivity-software/

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 18:02:46 -0700, Winston_Smith
<inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 08 Aug 2016 16:22:36 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
>>
>>Tell you what. We'll leave it at that, and we'll get into dueling
>>statistics some time. No anecdotes allowed. Just overall effects of
>>trade over time. Ok?
>

>OK. Some time. I see you recognize statistics are just as open to
>selection and interpretation as anecdotes. May not be worth the effort
>on anyone's part.

Of course. But they tell the overall story, if you read them
carefully.

Back in 2001, when I spent six months researching trade with China and
wrote several articles about it, I reacted to our then Commerce
Secretary's (Don Evans) comment to the effect that American tool and
die makers could compete with anyone in the world, and didn't need
protection. My response was, back when China's average manufacturing
wage was 83 cents/hour and they were selling lots of crappy injection
molds in the US, "How do you compete with 83 cents an hour?"

The answer was, you don't. Which raised the question, "what is 'fair'
trade?" What makes it fair or unfair?

No one could admit that it was a matter of wages. That was very
anti-ideological. So they scrambled around in all the nooks and
crannies and came up with "comparable labor laws," and "comparable
environmental protections," and the elimination of bank
subsidies...and then, when it became apparent that those were all too
weak to explain the trade imbalance, they seized on "currency
manipulation."

That had a good run for five years or so. Then some of the top
economists in the world started saying, "hey, bullshit. Their currency
actually is OVERvalued." That was around 2008 - 2010. The currency
manipulation thing lost its sting.

Now it seems to be back in style. So we have an excuse and a complaint
again. China's manufacturing wages are up to around $2.65 and
transportation got more expensive -- why, I don't know. That helps,
but we still have a substantial trade gap.

Now, in case we even get serious and look at this issue in some depth
(which it definitely won't be as long as it's a political football), I
think you'll find that these things are true. This is the distillation
of what I learned years ago and what I've picked up by reporting on it
from time to time since:

1) You can't "compete" with wages that are 1/10 of yours. Screw the
fact that direct labor is only about 12% of manufacturing cost; it's
all of the direct labor in the supply chain that adds up. It's almost
all labor in the end.

2) China, like Japan will not have wage increases fast enough to play
out the scenario mapped out by Milton Friedman and the other trade
theorists of the past half-century. In other words, there will be no
balancing due to currency devaluation in the country with greater
imports (that's us).

3) The fact that you can pack up new technology into a shipping
container and knock 25 years off of development time (think
GM-Shanghai and the engines in Chevy SUVs) means that changes will
come to fast for the importing country to adjust.

4) Thge sheer volume of China's exports tosses traditional trade
theories into the trash can. Not only does it come too fast, in comes
in quantitites that are too large to adjust to.

That's where we are relative to the traditional thinking about trade.
Still, without trade, an advanced economy will wind down in a swamp of
protectionism and inefficiency. There is no domestic substitution for
an economy like ours. For the products we export, our domestic markets
are already near saturated. That's why we're pushing exports in the
first place.

So what we have to resolve is that combination of facts. No
broad-based protectionism; that's suicide. No fantasies about domestic
substitution. Our ability to control currency manipulation, by a
country that is really determined to do it, is limited, and we can't
play that game with out own currency. That's one of the upshots of
having the dominant trade currency for the world.

What we're left with is this combination of factors: One of the
objectives of trade is to accelerate the development of underdeveloped
countries, so one of our goals is for China to do well and to become
more expensive. That puts them more on a par with us, and trading with
countries that are on our par (like Western European countries)
produces the best balance and the best results for us.

Meantime, we need to push our educational system to build technical
competitiveness. And, more important for social peace, we need to
provide more support for people who lose their jobs through trade:
direct money support, mobility support, and educational support.

It will work itself out.

--
Ed Huntress

[rbowman]

On 08/08/2016 09:37 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
> Despite this clear and self evident fact, Trumpeters continue to
> believe that Mexicans sneaking into the country are the reason they
> can't get a $40 an hour job at GM.

Or do they believe their job just went south with the Carrier plant?

[rbowman]

On 08/08/2016 09:45 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
> A family in the 1950s would probably have a small (by our standards)
> black and white TV in the living room to share. Today, there are more
> screens than people. The living room TV, TV's in other rooms,
> desktops, laptops, tablets and smartphones. More and more cars are
> being sold with built in screens for instrument panels, sat nav and
> even entertainment and vehicle controls plus a pair of DVD screens for
> the back seat passengers.

This is a good thing? Are you familiar with the term 'Golden Age of
Television'? Hint: it doesn't have anything to do with the Kardashians.
More toys, less culture.

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 8 Aug 2016 20:28:52 -0600, rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>On 08/08/2016 02:38 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>> How about 25,600 machine-tool programmers working in the US? How many
>> of those jobs existed in, say, 1980?
>
>http://www.cnccookbook.com/CCCNCMachine.htm
>
>It doesn't give any statistics for CNC programmers but does say:

I can help you there. In 1980, I doubt if there were 5,000 of them. I
was reporting on the field every day.

>
>"US companies had largely launched the CNC revolution, but they had been
>overly focused on the high end. The Germans were the first to see the
>opportunity to reduce prices of CNC, and by 1979 the Germans were
>selling more CNC than the US companies. The Japanese repeated the same
>formula to an even more successful degree and had taken the leadership
>away from the Germans just one year later, by 1980. In 1971, the 10
>largest CNC companies were all US companies, but by 1987, only
>Cincinnati Milacron was left and they were in 8th place."
>
>Do you think it requires more expertise to build CNC equipment or to
>program it?

CNCs are built on generic computer platforms today. Programming is
highly conversational. There is very little low-level (in the
programming-language sense) CNC programming going on in modern shops.

>What do you see for the future of CNC programmers with
>innovations like
>
>http://www.aerospacemanufacturinganddesign.com/article/amd0814-milling-productivity-software/

What are you trying to do, draw Jonnie Bonkers out of the woodwork?
<g>

The future is bright. Advances like mill/turn have compounded the need
for expertise. Shorter production runs have multiplied the ratio of
programs to finished parts.There is no automated solution for
multi-function machining, like mill/turn.

It will change; less coding, more intelligent analytical skills.

--
Ed Huntress

[rbowman]

On 08/08/2016 08:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
> It will change; less coding, more intelligent analytical skills.

Will the current CNC programmers be able to master those skills? Many
competent factory technicians that could work their way through relay
logic couldn't handle PLC's although the PLC was designed to use a relay
logic metaphor.

[Ed Huntress]

On Mon, 8 Aug 2016 21:08:04 -0600, rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>On 08/08/2016 08:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
>> It will change; less coding, more intelligent analytical skills.
>
>Will the current CNC programmers be able to master those skills?

Oh, I think so. Overall, the combination of multiple, coordinated
functions combined with something close to plain-language programming
probably balances out pretty well against the older methods.

> Many
>competent factory technicians that could work their way through relay
>logic couldn't handle PLC's although the PLC was designed to use a relay
>logic metaphor.

I don't know much about PLCs, so I can't comment.

--
Ed Huntress

[Governor Swill]

*whoooooosh!*

The point was, how can we complain how bad we've got it when our toy
chest is so full?

Our houses are bigger and better. Air conditioning, in the fifties an
unaffordable luxury for most Americans, is taken for granted now. When
I was a kid, power windows were a remarkable luxury. Today, a car
without power windows is remarkable. Back then, AM radio with a rear
speaker was fancy stuff. Today, it's 9 speaker jobs with subwoofers,
am, fm, multi disc readers and ports for external music libraries such
as ipods and usb sticks. Back then a day without meat happened once
or twice a week. Today a *meal* without meat is a surprise.

Repeating. We have become so much more wealthy than we were in the
"good old days" of the "golden American economy" of the fifties and
sixties, as to be beyond belief.

So why are so many people whining so fucking much?

Swill
--
#imwithher
You can lead a wingnut to knowledge but you can't make him
learn.

[Governor Swill]

On Mon, 8 Aug rbowman wrote:

Trump made a big deal about a Ford plant going south. But since this
time last year, Ford is hiring 3700 new positions in Kentucky.

As for the Carrier plant, Mike Pence had his chance to keep it in
Indiana but didn't.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 8/8/2016 10:25 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Aug rbowman wrote:
>> On 08/08/2016 09:45 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> A family in the 1950s would probably have a small (by our standards)
>>> black and white TV in the living room to share. Today, there are more
>>> screens than people. The living room TV, TV's in other rooms,
>>> desktops, laptops, tablets and smartphones. More and more cars are
>>> being sold with built in screens for instrument panels, sat nav and
>>> even entertainment and vehicle controls plus a pair of DVD screens for
>>> the back seat passengers.
>>
>> This is a good thing? Are you familiar with the term 'Golden Age of
>> Television'? Hint: it doesn't have anything to do with the Kardashians.
>> More toys, less culture.
>
> *whoooooosh!*
>
> The point was, how can we complain how bad we've got it when our toy
> chest is so full?

Yes: how can down-market Sanders voters be complaining when people at
that end of the spectrum - the do-nothings - are living *far* better
than they ever have before?

You cunt queer.