Lucky number 7!
I've seen you use them more, perhapes you should stop.
Just to point out that my comment to quote was not an ad hominem.
I did not make an attack against you, the person making the "argument", instead I used sarcasm.
I was mocking the sutuation of trying to use a quote as evidence of anything. I guess I should have done the whole [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] thing since some people seemed to failed their sense motive checks. Of course I could instead of pointed out that citing an quote was a logical fallacy of appealing to authority, but I do so hate having to get into debates of logical fallacies since it is really only relevant in logic classes, not every day speach. But I sincerly apologize if I have hurt your feelings with my sarcasm.
2 a Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" (Richard Kain).
b An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity. See Usage Note at ironic.Yea, no irony here, or do you mean ironic like Alanis Morissette, in other words not ironic at all?
Irony (as per the #2 definition quoted above), not expecting someone to make ad hominem attacks when agreeing with someone else that says making ad hominem attacks weakens one's argument.
Oh, and another example of irony, quoting the definition of irony that proves that someone is in fact guilt of irony in order to show that there was not any irony.
Good day everyone and god bless.
Chief Technical Officer
|
Vic, as a union man, I find this very disappointing. I'll continue to buy this stuff because the creators are its major factor, and supporting them does not mean economically supporting a dictatorship that tortures religious and political prisoners, but it will be a factor in my future purchasing decisions. Obviously, you're free to run your business in the way that you feel best, but I thought you should know that you have customers who take this stuff very seriously.
And it does undermine the progressive tilt of your stories, which I've been supportive of.
We had this discussion a year ago elsewhere on the boards. I don't have a lot to add to Erik's and my comments there, except this: if Paizo had to print all of our products in the US, I believe that we'd have gone out of business after the magazines ended. It really is that big a difference.
|
I've seen you use them more, perhapes you should stop.Just to point out that my comment to quote was not an ad hominem.
I did not make an attack against you, the person making the "argument", instead I used sarcasm.
I was mocking the sutuation of trying to use a quote as evidence of anything. I guess I should have done the whole [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] thing since some people seemed to failed their sense motive checks. Of course I could instead of pointed out that citing an quote was a logical fallacy of appealing to authority, but I do so hate having to get into debates of logical fallacies since it is really only relevant in logic classes, not every day speach. But I sincerly apologize if I have hurt your feelings with my sarcasm.
Irony (as per the #2 definition quoted above), not expecting someone to make ad hominem attacks when agreeing with someone else that says making ad hominem attacks...2 a Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" (Richard Kain).
b An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity. See Usage Note at ironic.Yea, no irony here, or do you mean ironic like Alanis Morissette, in other words not ironic at all?
Yea, got an epic fail on the identification of irony there. Maybe another look at wikipedia will help.
Hey look another example of sarcasm.
6. And this is the real kicker that finally pushed me over the edge -- 4th edition, it turns out, is being printed in the U.S., while Pathfinder is being printed in China. If given a choice, I will support a company which supports American families rather than the People's Liberation Army slave-labor sweatshop factories.
What a great reason for me to BUY Paizo products!
I'll have to let the other guys in my militia group know about this, so they can do the same.
I picked up a 4e book at my FLGS recently and was flipping through the pages. I had a very small amount of sweat on my skin as it is hot out. I wasn't dripping or anything, but my hands were moist. Anyway, I flip the pages and I kid you not the writing was smudging on every single page. I've never seen anything like it. My 3.5 Monster Manual had an entire cup of water dumped on it while open and I got out a blow dryer and towels and after fifteen minutes the page was wrinkled as heck, but the writing was all still legible and there were no smudges.
Wow with the core rulebooks? I had that happen with the "covers" of Keep on the Shadowfell only it was condensation from a TV dinner rather than sweat. I'd hoped this was just a problem with a cheaply produced adventure module but that's pretty heinous if it happens with expensive hard-bound books (though as I recall, the MSRP of KotS is nearly equal to the PHB). :-\
has anyone actually read ALL of these posts?
What can I say, elves have all the time in the world...
We had this discussion a year ago elsewhere on the boards. I don't have a lot to add to Erik's and my comments there, except this: if Paizo had to print all of our products in the US, I believe that we'd have gone out of business after the magazines ended. It really is that big a difference.
First off, I'll note that the "comic" posts as graffiti syndrome goes all the way back a year on a topic that features not a single troll.
Second, I'm amazed that people on that thread consider there to be a flame war going on. I think that reaction is related to the "comic" posts that pop up whenever any form of criticism or dissent or even just intellectual debate pops up. This doesn't happen on EnWorld or The Chronicle of Higher Education, the other two main boards I belong to.
Third, I could care a rat's unmentionables about the paper quality of Paizo products. In fact, the high-quality of the paper is actually an annoyance, as it makes it harder for me to write notes in the margins with pencils. If cutting the gloss allows you to print in America and for me to write notes in pencil, then sign me up for that option.
Finally, like I said, you can run your business the way that you want. I'm sure that there's more gamers who have give more thought to Attacks of Opportunity than to whether or not they wish to support China financially, pro or con. (I give my compliments, however, to those people on that thread who argued intelligently for either side of the issue, although I'm surprised that nobody used the examples of boycotts that actually did have an impact, namely vs. S. Africa in the 1980s, vs. the Brits by Indians, and vs. the Brits by colonial Americans. Kudos. Wish there were even more people like that on this site.)
Oh my god you have got to be kidding me... 275 some odd posts...
and then I add one...
good lord have mercy...
has anyone actually read ALL of these posts?
Yes :D
We had this discussion a year ago elsewhere on the boards. I don't have a lot to add to Erik's and my comments there, except this: if Paizo had to print all of our products in the US, I believe that we'd have gone out of business after the magazines ended. It really is that big a difference.First off, I'll note that the "comic" posts as graffiti syndrome goes all the way back a year on a topic that features not a single troll.
Second, I'm amazed that people on that thread consider there to be a flame war going on. I think that reaction is related to the "comic" posts that pop up whenever any form of criticism or dissent or even just intellectual debate pops up. This doesn't happen on EnWorld or The Chronicle of Higher Education, the other two main boards I belong to.
Third, I could care a rat's unmentionables about the paper quality of Paizo products. In fact, the high-quality of the paper is actually an annoyance, as it makes it harder for me to write notes in the margins with pencils. If cutting the gloss allows you to print in America and for me to write notes in pencil, then sign me up for that option.
Finally, like I said, you can run your business the way that you want. I'm sure that there's more gamers who have give more thought to Attacks of Opportunity than to whether or not they wish to support China financially, pro or con. (I give my compliments, however, to those people on that thread who argued intelligently for either side of the issue, although I'm surprised that nobody used the examples of boycotts that actually did have an impact, namely vs. S. Africa in the 1980s, vs. the Brits by Indians, and vs. the Brits by colonial Americans. Kudos. Wish there were even more people like that on this site.)
Given a choice between buying something produced in americia and china i will choose the chinese product.
Why? Well there are a number of reasons.
- Trade has been a powerful reforming influence on china. Things are better in china than they where 20 years ago, and international trade has been the major factor in bringing about a variaty of reforms.
In contrast, trade has not been a stablising or reforming influence on the united states.
- If moral obligation is to factor into my perchasing habits, it should be applied evenly. Both america and china have a record of torture. However, america also engaged in an illigal war in iraq. I should, in truth boycot both.
-China has shame. Unlike america, china is starting to care what the international community thinks of it, this means it is a state that is likely to continue to reform. On the other other hand, america, claims to be a democracy while in truth being a polyarchy and cannot even rouse itself to remove a pretender to its premiership.
- It is a good choice economicially speaking for me to support china. Due to the credit crunch, china, india and a few of the other 'brick' countries are continueing to experience growth, while americia's economy slows. Englands primary industry is financial services. Given that the city of london is china's financial market of choice, what benifits china, benifit england, what benifits england benifits me.
We had this discussion a year ago elsewhere on the boards. I don't have a lot to add to Erik's and my comments there, except this: if Paizo had to print all of our products in the US, I believe that we'd have gone out of business after the magazines ended. It really is that big a difference.First off, I'll note that the "comic" posts as graffiti syndrome goes all the way back a year on a topic that features not a single troll.
Second, I'm amazed that people on that thread consider there to be a flame war going on. I think that reaction is related to the "comic" posts that pop up whenever any form of criticism or dissent or even just intellectual debate pops up. This doesn't happen on EnWorld or The Chronicle of Higher Education, the other two main boards I belong to.
Third, I could care a rat's unmentionables about the paper quality of Paizo products. In fact, the high-quality of the paper is actually an annoyance, as it makes it harder for me to write notes in the margins with pencils. If cutting the gloss allows you to print in America and for me to write notes in pencil, then sign me up for that option.
Finally, like I said, you can run your business the way that you want. I'm sure that there's more gamers who have give more thought to Attacks of Opportunity than to whether or not they wish to support China financially, pro or con. (I give my compliments, however, to those people on that thread who argued intelligently for either side of the issue, although I'm surprised that nobody used the examples of boycotts that actually did have an impact, namely vs. S. Africa in the 1980s, vs. the Brits by Indians, and vs. the Brits by colonial Americans. Kudos. Wish there were even more people like that on this site.)
Given a choice between buying something produced in americia and china i will choose the chinese product.
Why? Well there are a...
Actually I think that's poor reasoning... but not on topic of what I wanted to bring up.
What I wanted to bring up is the printing industry in the US and a bit how it works. You have three kinds of printing for the most part...huge industrial printing giants (like Donnely and Quebecor), Smaller giant (like quadgraphics) and those who do on-the-spot printing at a much smaller scale but for immediate usage.
The giants really wouldn't fit for Paizo...they just don't produce enough material and most of what they print is massive bulk like magazines. Midsize? Still too small really, my guess is Paizo isn't big enough...not without producing something selling constantly like they had with Dragon or Dungeon.
As far as the small goes... well basically they would be paying the "on demand" price for something that is very regimented if they run their business in an organized way and would jack the price up beyond what I would want to pay.
Basically there is a good chance the kind of printing they are looking for doesn't really have a market in the US.
I am a huge fan of buying American, but I also know that a market for everything and every size doesn't exist here...that's just the way of business. I won't fault a company because they are too small to reasonably keep every aspect of their business in the US when the market they need for something specific simply isn't here.
|
|
I actually care for the quality of the paper. I want to keep my reading materials for quite some time.
I tend to run my stuff from the PDF, so I can read the material clearer at the table.
One way to avoid the whole paper issue is to simply purchace PDF. One way to make sure your getting American printing is to print it your self.
|
I don't think you have to be a jingoist to be afraid of what paying for a product manufactured in another country can do. If you have a friend or family in the printing industry, you likely know someone who has lost a job because on price alone the US can't compete with China.
There are problems with that. China doesn't always pay what we might consider a 'fair wage'. They don't always protect the environment in the way we think they should. They may save the consumer money, but at a high price that some moral individuals feel is too high.
I know that Paizo had to go with printing in China, and I know that for me, it isn't a big issue. But I think, without trying to be too much of a dick myself, there were a lot of people who did act like a dick in this thread. I only came because of the 'comic dumping' thread, but I think that it didn't take long and many of the people who tried to stay on topic got lost in the off-topic posts. Comic posting may have a place, but let the thread at least run it's course first.
You can always dig up threads that haven't had a post in 20 or 30 days.
... the US can't compete with China...
I couldn't agree more.
But there is one thing...
You'll note that that's a choice that we've made. We've chosen to keep tariff barriers low, rather than do what many countries do, which is to foster domestic businesses, industry, and manufacturing by providing a safe harbor for them. (US Steel is the exception here, of course.) We've chosen to lower taxes while going to war in two different countries, which is a "historically unusual" decision to make. We've chosen to devote more tax dollars to the military than the next ten biggest militaries combined. We've chosen to elect representatives to run up a huge credit card debt (I mean, national debt) and that makes us dependent on the goodwill of our creditors, like China and Japan. Both parties have chosen this path.
It's not a natural consequence, historically inevitable. It's not a consequence of greedy American workers, who work the most hours annually on average of any country and who on average haven't seen a pay raise since 1973 once you adjust for cost of living increases and inflation. (Source: New York Times.) It's not a consequence of our businesses, most of whom are simply trying to play the game we've set up for them. (Enron excepted, YMMV.)
Since we've made these choices as a society of individual voters, it's perfectly reasonable for individual citizens to choose to do what is in their power to rectify the situation as they see fit. For some, that will mean supporting the rise of a middle class in China and hoping that that brings democracy. Others like myself are skeptics and weigh other factors more heavily.
And it does undermine the progressive tilt of your stories, which I've been supportive of.
So. What does Sean K. Reynolds have to say about all of this?
... the US can't compete with China...
I couldn't agree more.
But there is one thing...
You'll note that that's a choice that we've made. We've chosen to keep tariff barriers low, rather than do what many countries do, which is to foster domestic businesses, industry, and manufacturing by providing a safe harbor for them. (US Steel is the exception here, of course.) We've chosen to lower taxes while going to war in two different countries, which is a "historically unusual" decision to make. We've chosen to devote more tax dollars to the military than the next ten biggest militaries combined. We've chosen to elect representatives to run up a huge credit card debt (I mean, national debt) and that makes us dependent on the goodwill of our creditors, like China and Japan. Both parties have chosen this path.
It's not a natural consequence, historically inevitable. It's not a consequence of greedy American workers, who work the most hours annually on average of any country and who on average haven't seen a pay raise since 1973 once you adjust for cost of living increases and inflation. (Source: New York Times.) It's not a consequence of our businesses, most of whom are simply trying to play the game we've set up for them. (Enron excepted, YMMV.)
Since we've made these choices as a society of individual voters, it's perfectly reasonable for individual citizens to choose to do what is in their power to rectify the situation as they see fit. For some, that will mean supporting the rise of a middle class in China and hoping that that brings democracy. Others like myself are skeptics and weigh other factors more heavily.
The rise of the chinese middle class is already having an effect.
And it should be noted that steel is not americia's only protectionistic policy. Rice and soya growing agre-buisness are other examples of historicially protectionistic markets in americia.
|
The rise of the chinese middle class is already having an effect.And it should be noted that steel is not americia's only protectionistic policy. Rice and soya growing agre-buisness are other examples of historicially protectionistic markets in americia.
Which is ironic because the soy bean industry in America started after an American buisinessman stole a bunch of soy seeds from China in the 1800's.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
What I wanted to bring up is the printing industry in the US and a bit how it works. You have three kinds of printing for the most part...huge industrial printing giants (like Donnely and Quebecor), Smaller giant (like quadgraphics) and those who do on-the-spot printing at a much smaller scale but for immediate usage.
We've actually used Donnelly, Quebecor, and Quad in the past. I believe we quoted Pathfinder with Donnelly and Quebecor, as well as others. And the basic breakdown went like this:
American printers: most expensive
Canadian printers: slightly less than the American printers
Chinese printers: substantially less than the American printers—even after you figure in transcontinental shipping and customs fees.
What I wanted to bring up is the printing industry in the US and a bit how it works. You have three kinds of printing for the most part...huge industrial printing giants (like Donnely and Quebecor), Smaller giant (like quadgraphics) and those who do on-the-spot printing at a much smaller scale but for immediate usage.We've actually used Donnelly, Quebecor, and Quad in the past. I believe we quoted Pathfinder with Donnelly and Quebecor, as well as others. And the basic breakdown went like this:
American printers: most expensive
Canadian printers: slightly less than the American printers
Chinese printers: substantially less than the American printers—even after you figure in transcontinental shipping and customs fees.
I wonder, were there any Mexican printers that might have been used? And if so, how did their prices stack up?
|
|
Let's face it, it hardly matters any more where something is printed.
The steel for the machine comes from mexico, the design is American, the electronics are japanese, the dyes for the ink come from all over and are assembled in china according to german engineering and chemical standards. The company's answering service is in india. The workers eat croissants from korea.
So, a company like Paizo could contract with a chinese printer and the chinese "slavelabor" earn a bit more than they would have normally, Paizo saves enough money to hire the best game designers.
Or, a company like Paizo could contract with an American printer and have to settle for less profit, hire crappy game designers and eventually go out of business, putting dozens of Americans out of work.
And by the way, the Chinese slavelabor earns far more yen than rural farmers. In fact wages are rising so fast that many companies are actually thinking that within a few years they will need to find a new source of cheap labor and are looking at other third world countries.
It'll be like NAFTA all over again. We sent jobs south to Mexico. The wages in Mexico went up. Their liefstyle improved. They became too expensive. We shipped the jobs to China instead. Mexican workers were left without wages and defaulted on new homes and cars. Soon we may be shipping the jobs out to Africa somewhere, and the expensive Chinese workers will be left with debt and no income.
Those jobs ain't coming back here to the States. That is the reality of the 21st Century. Just like the industrial revolution. Industry replaced rural jobs and crafts. People were out of work. Then people found new work. Things change. If you can't change you WILL be left behind.
Is it just that everyone wants a place to chew the fat whilst waiting for Beta?
Yes. Yes it is.
What I wanted to bring up is the printing industry in the US and a bit how it works. You have three kinds of printing for the most part...huge industrial printing giants (like Donnely and Quebecor), Smaller giant (like quadgraphics) and those who do on-the-spot printing at a much smaller scale but for immediate usage.We've actually used Donnelly, Quebecor, and Quad in the past. I believe we quoted Pathfinder with Donnelly and Quebecor, as well as others. And the basic breakdown went like this:
American printers: most expensive
Canadian printers: slightly less than the American printers
Chinese printers: substantially less than the American printers—even after you figure in transcontinental shipping and customs fees.
No doubt... not sure about Donnelly but I know what kind of things these guys print (at least Quebecor). Their main staples are things like Time, Life, People, Newsweek, etc...basically stuff that has thousands upon thousands in circulation on a monthly basis. That's their bread and butter. That's the kind of stuff most of their plants are set up and ready to run on. My guess is they make sure to keep that business with low cost to keep their gigantic operation running and everything else gets charged a premium.
Given how many copies of Dragon and Dungeon were circulating and the material printed on (as a magazine and not a book) they were probably more reasonable. Now you have more of a book-type print with higher cost, lower circulation, and no advertisement. I'm not that informed about the printing industry but I'm guessing the market you were in changed significantly...I wouldn't be suprised if a change in printers was needed to stay effective.
Course I could be totally off on that :P.
I'm surprised that nobody used the examples of boycotts that actually did have an impact, namely vs. S. Africa in the 1980s, vs. the Brits by Indians, and vs. the Brits by colonial Americans. Kudos. Wish there were even more people like that on this site.
I feel these examples are mostly misplaced. In the case of Colonial America and Colonial India we are talking about the populace of the actual country dealing with an overseas elite. That does not really compare to the populace of a foreign country making demands on how a country governs itself.
What I'm trying to point out here is that the Chinese are in a pretty nationalistic mood. Whatever the flaws are of their government - and they mostly recognize those flaws, they are absolutely not interested in America telling them whats what (Tibetans excepted). Boycotting them in order to put political pressure on their government would mean a billion Chinese screaming 'Death to America, Death to America' the next day. Beyond the fact that this won't endear America to the Chinese (they don't want this kind of help from foreigners) its not a very good recipe for world peace.
Now if your position is that America should raise tariff barriers in order to protect Americans. Well I'd not really agree but I feel that this is at least a position with a certain amount of merit in the sense that it has realistic goals that could be realized by fairly straightforward policy decisions.
It'll be like NAFTA all over again. We sent jobs south to Mexico. The wages in Mexico went up. Their liefstyle improved. They became too expensive. We shipped the jobs to China instead. Mexican workers were left without wages and defaulted on new homes and cars. Soon we may be shipping the jobs out to Africa somewhere, and the expensive Chinese workers will be left with debt and no income.
I'm going to disagree. Thats not to say that many companies won't change to Africa etc. but in the broad strokes I don't agree. China really is different then what has gone before. Its a real paradigm shift from the original model of buying cheap products from Korea then the Philippines and then Indonesia etc.
The Chinese Companies are not just tax havens employing cheap labour to make products for the western world. Most Chinese companies depend more on selling to their massive internal domestic market then they depend on selling to the US or any other foreign country. Their internal domestic market is so huge that its common for a company to survive on margins of literally 1%-2%. They make up for the infantismal margin through sheer volume - and the volume is simply unbelievable. To the point where the Chinese have managed to saturate their massive market with cheap products.
At the bottom of, I think its the Yangtze River (I'd have to look my sources up again to be sure), there are a series of warehouses of massive size where it is possible to buy just about any manufactured product you can think of for a price thats simply unreal.
A really good Black & Decker Power Drill, bought for a significant discount online will put you back a little more then $100. You can buy a Drill thats nearly identical in these ware houses for about $5. The list is just about endless to in what can be acquired for dirt cheap. Some of the products are things you'd never think of. A good oil painting done by a talented artist - $5. ect. etc.
A lot of what we see shipped to the west are not being pushed purely by our own corps trying to make a deal - a lot of this is actually instigated by Chinese corporations themselves. Remember that 1%-2% margin I mentioned above? Well it turns out that if you sell to foreigners (thats us) you can get phenominal deals- foreigners will pay outrageous prices for manufactured goods. A margin of 10% is easy - it turns out that most foreign manufactures feel that they need 30%-40% margins on their product to stay in business in their home country.
Obviously its impossible for our companies to compete with imported Chinese products since their significantly more expencive then the Chinese products - and yet the Chinese companies selling these products are ecstatic with the margins they are getting. Its very much needed considering how saturated the Chinese market is with manufactured goods.
There is another major aspect to this economic drama that is playing out thats worth considering. China is resource poor. For a country of that size with that many people it just got unlucky in the geological sense of natural resources. Thats not to say that it has no resources - it does have a great many - but not nearly enough to feed its rapidly expanding industrial machine. China needs, desperately, to buy raw resources to feed this expanding industrial machine and thats starting to have a dramatic impact on an economic model thats been in place for roughly the last 200 years.
Historically the core nations of the western world (a group whose membership is not very stable) have essentially worked on a system were raw resources are bought from a periphery source. Often a colony or a third world nation. These raw resources are turned into manufactured goods, which creates value added content (basically the raw resources are transformed into something that can be sold for more then the value of the raw resources they are made of), some of these manufactured goods are sold back to the periphery state in order to buy lots of raw resources, its essentially a loop and the state doing the manufacturing gets a lot out of the deal.
If you buy 1 raw unit and turn it into a widget you can sell the widget for 3 raw units. You make 3 widgets out of your newly bought raw units, but know you only send one widget back to get another 3 raw units, you keep the other two widgets for yourself or use them to buy a different kind of raw unit in order to make weebles.
China changes this equation and upsets the balance - they desperately need raw resources. In their desperation they are willing to sell any nation with raw resources ton of manufactured goods for them. They are still adding value to the product but far, far, less then has been historically the case - to compare to my example above, they'll sell you a 98 widgets if you'll give them 100 raw resources. This means its getting very difficult for the first world to compete in manufacturing, essentially if you don't have a lot of raw resources your in a lot of trouble since you have little choice but to try and compete directly with China and that means, somehow, making excellent Black & Decker drills for $5.
Since most of the cost of manufacturing just about anything goes into wages its clear that the first world is going to have to either get out of the business of actually making things (except raw resources) or dramatically reduce the wages of its workers. The idea that a hard working fellow who has a lot of intelligence and talent at his or her job is worth almost anything at all is really pretty flawed in terms of the global market. Ultimately that worker is in nearly direct competition with his Chinese counterpart and his Chinese counterpart is willing to work very hard and is in fact quite talented at his job - and considers $6 an hour an absolute fortune.
- Heres a saying that often appears on Chinese Factory floors, the exact phrasing changes but this is the gist.
"Remember to work hard at your job today or you will work hard looking for a job tomorrow."
In my opinion this time things really are different - maybe more profoundly different then they have been since the second colonial rush in the 1880s and reshaped the global economy. How it will all play out over the next 30 years - well that I doubt anyone can really guess at.
|
|
What I'm trying to point out here is that the Chinese are in a pretty nationalistic mood. Whatever the flaws are of their government - and they mostly recognize those flaws, they are absolutely not interested in America telling them whats what (Tibetans excepted). Boycotting them in order to put political pressure on their government would mean a billion Chinese screaming 'Death to America, Death to America' the next day. Beyond the fact that this won't endear America to the Chinese (they don't want this kind of help from foreigners) its not a very good recipe for world peace.
What I find "interesting" is how American nationalism is all too often portrayed as the root of all evil (see some other posts in this thread), while foreign nationalism, in this case that of China, is casually dismissed as just a local cultural quirk that we must either respect or fear because of the consequences.
Why not hold Chinese nationalism up to the same scrutiny and scorn as perceived American nationalism?If not, then I see nothing wrong with China having to worry about a few hundred million Americans screaming "Death to China!" because we are not endeared to their economic policies, and those concerned about "world peace" can spend some effort trying to appease us.
I am curious. Is political-jacking of a thread better, the same or worse than comic-jacking?
|
To tell the truth, I'd much rather prefer a Nader Presidency to either of the three major candidates we've had so far. He's the only one with the guts to point out the real hard decisions we need to make to prevent the economical and environmental collapse which neither Democrat nor Republican are willing to deal with.
I'd much rather a Bob Barr Presidency to a Nader, nothing like a hardcore conservative seeing the light and admiting that he's made mistakes in policy. Libertarians for the win.
And Comic jacking is the best kind of jacking off any thread... of, I mean jacking of.
I am curious. Is political-jacking of a thread better, the same or worse than comic-jacking?Depends.... Is Bush Mentioned?.... Oh wait... would that be political..or Comic?.... ;-)
Bush is political. Clinton is comical. Really, this isn’t rocket science.
Well on a positive note: All us Europeans don't mind buying American products at this time: They are dirt cheap :-).
Products? I'll wait a couple of months and then start buying companies and cities wholesale. :D
What I find "interesting" is how American nationalism is all too often portrayed as the root of all evil (see some other posts in this thread), while foreign nationalism, in this case that of China, is casually dismissed as just a local cultural quirk that we must either respect or fear because of the consequences.
Why not hold Chinese nationalism up to the same scrutiny and scorn as perceived American nationalism?
If not, then I see nothing wrong with China having to worry about a few hundred million Americans screaming "Death to China!" because we are not endeared to their economic policies, and those concerned about "world peace" can spend some effort trying to appease us.
Well its worth pointing out that none of China's immediate neighbours dismiss it. Those that are not China's immediate neighbours essentially can - China has never really bothered to build a blue water navy. They can't project power very far.
America on the other hand can do so better then any nation in the world and has, historically, been willing to utilize that power. American Jingoism is something that every nation ought to take very seriously.
When it comes to economics - well lots of nations, especially in the west, are very concerned with the flood of manufactured goods coming from China. At the moment we are in a bit of a mental bind. We've been harping on and on about the benefits of capitalism and free trade for generations. Of course its easy to really sincerely believe in free trade and open markets when your nation is best able to exploit the opportunities inherent in such a system. Its not so straight forward when other nations are clearly very good at it as well and are threatening to put your domestic manufacturing out of business. Once thats the case one starts to reconsider the merits of closed markets and high tariff walls.
Just as a casual observation, anyone who considers the presence of Vancian magic a dealbreaker is probably lost to us, and I'm ok with that.
Personally, I view the pulp fantasy roots of the game as a feature and not a flaw, and I'm glad that there is an edition of the game for people who don't, because that is not a version of the game I am very interested in publishing.
I have a total unabashed man crush on you Eric. Keep up the great work.
I am curious. Is political-jacking of a thread better, the same or worse than comic-jacking?
I believe it is somehow seen as more 'intellectual', which automatically makes it better or something.
|
|
Random thought on paper quality; I kinda hate glossy greasy-feeling paper. I like the rough dry-feeling paper that you can write on. But the stuff from Canada that White Wolf was using for awhile reeks. I have no idea if it's the paper, the ink or something else, but it's eye-wateringly offensive...
Let's face it, it hardly matters any more where something is printed.
True that.
'Made in the USA' can mean anything from actually 'made in the USA' to 'made in the Marianas, by a 19 year old girl who has never been paid for what she's been doing since she was 14 and was just forced to get an abortion because being pregant would have cut into her productivity.'
It's not like China has a monopoly on inhuman working conditions. Wal-Mart wouldn't even exist without free labor sweatshops in US territories, that they can label 'Made in the USA.'
|
|
Given a choice between buying something produced in americia and china i will choose the chinese product.
Why? Well there are a number of reasons.
- Trade has been a powerful reforming influence on china. Things are better in china than they where 20 years ago, and international trade has been the major factor in bringing about a variaty of reforms.
In contrast, trade has not been a stablising or reforming influence on the united states.
If you mean opening up a communist nation to capitalist ideas and individual freedoms, then I guess you are half right. I have no idea how you can make your second claim there.
- If moral obligation is to factor into my perchasing habits, it should be applied evenly. Both america and china have a record of torture. However, america also engaged in an illigal war in iraq. I should, in truth boycot both.
What nation in existance has not at one time or another used interrogation methods that someone, somewhere, could define as "torture"? If you think anything the Americans have done or are currently doing is even on the same scale with what the asian countries have done in just the past 70 years, think again.
Oh, and you want to explain the crack about an "illegal war"? What, precisely, is illegal about the current war in Iraq? Could you contrast that with some examples of some "legal" wars?
-China has shame. Unlike america, china is starting to care what the international community thinks of it, this means it is a state that is likely to continue to reform. On the other other hand, america, claims to be a democracy while in truth being a polyarchy and cannot even rouse itself to remove a pretender to its premiership.
Oh now this is rich. What "shame" does China have? Is it forcing Google and Yahoo to automatically censor words like "freedom" and "christianity" from their search results for Chinese users? Or did you mean forcing these companies to submit video footage of Tibetan protesters so they could be rounded up and executed? Or the shame of using organs from prisoners for transplant, without consent, and sometimes while the prisoners are still using them? THAT kind of shame? The kind of shame where they won't let atheletes bring their own personal bibles with them to the summer games? Or do you mean they care enough about what image they present to world that they shut down all the smog-belching factories in the Beijing province for a few weeks before the games, so that no one will realize just how bad they are polluting the planet?
And perhaps you can enlighten me as to this idea of a "pretender to the premiership" in America. Do you honestly believe that? Do you mean the 2000 election, where every independant hand recount showed Bush won in each and every one of them, or do you mean the 2004 election where Bush won more popular votes than any other president in history? Perhaps you can enlighten me, since 2006 when the opposition party took power in both houses of Congress, why haven't they brought impeachment proceedings against Mr Bush? Is it that they have no shame? Or could it be that there isn't a shred of legal basis for doing so?
I believe it is somehow seen as more 'intellectual', which automatically makes it better or something.
Fair enough. I do have to live up to my name afterall.
Hasbro makes Star Wars figures in China.
Just sayin...
Emaciated Chinese children are the only ones with fingers small enough to paint those tiny, tiny minis.