Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
up (he must have known).
For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
I think you can comparable clamps at your local Harbor Freight store
cheaper.
"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, "RayV"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
>>ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
>>up (he must have known).
>>
>>For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
>>but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>>
>>http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>>
> Looks almost too good to be true -- what's the country of origin?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Doug Miller wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
> >ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
> >up (he must have known).
> >
> >For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
> >but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
> >
> >http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
> >
> Looks almost too good to be true -- what's the country of origin?
>
Box reads, "Made in China to Columbian specifications".
Brian Henderson wrote:
> You should support quality above all else, economy second and
> nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
> the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
> outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
tommyboy wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2006 05:49:38 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
> >ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
> >up (he must have known).
> >
> >For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
> >but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
> >
> >http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>
> You get FedEx on Sundays? Good deal!
No, they came on Saturday. I didn't post until Sunday morning. Even
so, I was surprised to get a saturday delivery especially since I
didn't pay shipping.
J. Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 05:17:16 -0800, RayV wrote:
>
> > Brian Henderson wrote:
> >> You should support quality above all else, economy second and
> >> nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
> >> the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
> >> outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
> >
> > But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
>
> A lot less than trucks or trains to move the same tonnage.
>
So if I follow the logic less fuel is burned and less pollution is
produced:
making a product in Asia
driving it to the dock
driving a cargo ship to CA or NJ
Driving it to my house
Than:
making a product in Ohio
driving it to my house
Do I have that right?
RayV wrote:
> Brian Henderson wrote:
> > You should support quality above all else, economy second and
> > nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
> > the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
> > outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
>
> But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
well, unless you mine your own ore, use locally produced power to smelt
it and manufacture with it, all at the same or better efficiencies as
large scale industry does, the difference of pollution from shipping
the finished goods disappears pretty fast.
RayV wrote:
> Brian Henderson wrote:
> > You should support quality above all else, economy second and
> > nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
> > the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
> > outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
>
> But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
Not to mention that they make stuff cheaper and "better" by polluting.
Some of these companies finish parts of the manufacturing process on
the ships and
dump the waste in the ocean on the way to the USA.. Our great
grandchildren are going to pay the price for those cheap tools we are
enjoying.
EWCM wrote:
> >
> > Not to mention that they make stuff cheaper and "better" by polluting.
> > Some of these companies finish parts of the manufacturing process on
> > the ships and
> > dump the waste in the ocean on the way to the USA.. Our great
> > grandchildren are going to pay the price for those cheap tools we are
> > enjoying.
> >
> Just retired after 30 years in the U.S. Navy with 18.5 of those years riding
> warships at sea and I've never seen a ship that performs manufacturing at
> sea, it is just too expensive to waste cargo space on people and shops.
> Everything is in conex boxes or bulk for liquid/gas. Manufacturers load into
> conex boxes at the plant and hundreds of boxes are loaded by crane onto the
> ship to minimize time alongside the pier.
> The shipper makes money in transit, not at pierside.
> I'd be interested in seeing anything that is actually processed at sea,
> besides seafood.
> Jack
I have a relative in the steel business. Apparently his company buys
some kind of parts that require some kind of coating on them. On the
ship to America, the parts get coated and then the waste from the
coating process is just dumped in the ocean. In the USA, the coating
would be considered hazardous waste and expensive to dispose of
properly. The damn Chineese don't care and just dump the shit in the
ocean to get rid of the "problem" of how to dispose of it.
I'm not sure how new this practice is, but it happens.
J. Clarke wrote:
>> Personally, national origin means a lot less to me than performance and
> cost. I notice that it's always "Asia" that gets the complaints, I never
> see anybody griping about those Swiss jigsaws. In the short run
> protectionism helps the local economy, in the long run it hurts
> everybody--want the Chinese to quit being a cheap labor market? Fine,
> encourage them and pretty soon their labor rates will be right up there
> with the US, Japan, and Germany. Took Japan about 40 years to get from
> bombed out ruin to the second largest national economy in the world. One
> wonders how long it will take China to get to that level.
>
> The thing is, once Asia is all up to a high standard then it will be
> Africa and once they're up there there isn't really much of anywhere else
> left with a large population that will take starvation wages
That's a nice theory, and it might work out that way.. I think it will
partially work that way for offshored jobs which require a highly
skilled and/or educated person and if the supply/demand factor drives
up the salaries in China. We've seen this happen to some extent with
the IT workers in India. They aren't making 4-5k/year anymore. They
still make less than US workers, but the gap is closing.
I'm not sure it will ever happen though for the textile workers and
other low skill jobs. The coorporations are not going to let them
unionize. The government isn't going to protect them. I think China is
going to be a good source of almost slave labor for coorporations for a
long time (unfortunately).
They've already started farming stuff out to parts of Africa, by the
way.
J. Clarke wrote:
>> But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
>
> A lot less than trucks or trains to move the same tonnage.
>
I suspect that, on a ton / mile basis, trains use less fuel. They aren't
pushing water out of the way. They aren't fighting currents and cross
winds. They haven't nearly the frictional resistance.
Bulk stuff leaving Asia for Europe will often chug across the Pacific,
roll across the US, then chug across the Atlantic. Saves both time AND
money.
Bill
Bill in Detroit wrote:
> Bulk stuff leaving Asia for Europe will often chug across the Pacific,
> roll across the US, then chug across the Atlantic. Saves both time AND
> money.
Wierd. Seems shorter to chug through Indian ocean, up the Red Sea and
through the suez canal into the Med. Maybe more fiddly though.
Chris
J. Clarke wrote:
> I would be _very_ surprised if unloading it on the west coast and loading
> it on the east coast was cheaper than just leaving it on the boat and
> running it through the Canal.
>
Life is full of little surprises.
I worked for Conrail as a Conductor for 11 years and saw an awful lot of
such freight. Going straight across the US is cheaper than detouring a
thousand miles south, waiting to use the canal, PAYING passage through
the Panama Canal, passing through the canal and then recouping the lost
thousand miles (all the while paying wages to the sailors and handling
maintenance on a very big machine). I probably have the mileage wrong,
but I think I've got a handle on the principle.
Then, too, there's the issue of getting a load to return home with.
Bill
--
Life is like playing a violin in public and learning the instrument as
one goes on.
Samuel Butler (1835 - 1902)
[email protected] wrote:
> Brian Henderson wrote:
>> So do SUVs, doesn't stop all the yuppie idiots from buying them.
>
> Well, "idiot" implies they're doing something irrational. They're not
> buying SUVs thinking they're getting great fuel economy; they're buying
> them as a status symbol.
>
> Mike
>
From a certain perspective (mine, for instance) buying a SUV to flash
as some sort of status symbol counts as irrational.
Bill
--
Life is like playing a violin in public and learning the instrument as
one goes on.
Samuel Butler (1835 - 1902)
tommyboy <[email protected]> writes:
>>No, they came on Saturday. I didn't post until Sunday morning. Even
>>so, I was surprised to get a saturday delivery especially since I
>>didn't pay shipping.
>I believe FedEx now does home deliveries on Saturdays at no extra
>cost.
Last I heard, Fedex Home only delivers Tuesday through Saturday. Why, I
have no idea as folks aren't home that much more on Saturdays these days.
If you have to get someone to sign, why bother going out the other four
days?
Brian Elfert
"Pete C." <[email protected]> writes:
>They do, however given the phenomenal amount of cargo they move I expect
>their actual efficiency is quite high especially given the fact that
>they don't have to stop at traffic lights and similar fuel guzzling
>delays. Once they leave port it's pretty much an efficient non stop
>cruise at optimum speed the whole way.
Overall, they are still using a lot more fuel than buying something made
in the USA.
Once the containers hit a US port, they still have to be moved to at least
one warehouse and then perhaps to a distributor's warehouse. From there,
it has to be shipped to you.
If an item is made in the USA, it may be shipped from the manufacturer
directly, or shipped to a distributor and then to you.
The made in the USA item won't have all that fuel used by the container
ship and getting the item to/from the container ship.
I don't strictly buy made in the USA items, but country of origin is
certainly a factor. Many items are just not made in the USA anymore or
are very hard to find.
Brian Elfert
J. Clarke wrote:
I really don't care what the energy costs are because they are built
into the overall cost of the product just as various local living
standards are. But I DO care whether my local marketplace is healthy and
that suggests that I purchase from it myself if I am able to do so and
not prohibited by:
* high cost
* simple unavailability
* low quality
* impeding regulations or other statutory restrictions.
Why? Because I know my customers and I know that they tend to live
within 10 miles of me (with a couple of exceptions in California and one
in England). So money I pump into the local economy, to the extent that
it remains here, ultimately benefits me too. I sell a pen to the guy who
sells gas to the guy I buy bread from.
When I start seeing a significant number of my sales going to Taiwan or
mainland China, I will make extra effort to buy from them. As it is, I
now have to go out of my way to buy locally made goods.
Bill
--
Life is like playing a violin in public and learning the instrument as
one goes on.
Samuel Butler (1835 - 1902)
J. Clarke wrote:
> The thing is, once Asia is all up to a high standard then it will be
> Africa and once they're up there there isn't really much of anywhere else
> left with a large population that will take starvation wages--this
> century is probably going to be the one in which poverty in Africa is
> finally solved not by the UN but by those hated multinational
> corporations. In the meantime they're difficult to compete with.
>
>> Bill
>
International economics is a very difficult beast to predict with any
certainty.
I rather suspect that the multinationals will, with the assistance of
complicit governments, 'solve' poverty by spreading less wealth more
evenly and pocketing the rest.
Bill
--
There is hopeful symbolism in the fact that flags do not wave in a vacuum.
Arthur C. Clarke
CW wrote:
>
> "Tom" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Both clamps at Harbor Freight and Woodcraft are not made in the US so if
> one
> > is going to buy those types of clamps go for equal but cheaper price.
>
> There's the US and then there's the rest of the world, right?
No, there is where you live and then there's the rest of the world.
Whenever possible / economical you should try to support the "where you
live" stuff first.
Pete C.
RayV wrote:
>
> Brian Henderson wrote:
> > You should support quality above all else, economy second and
> > nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
> > the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
> > outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
>
> But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
They do, however given the phenomenal amount of cargo they move I expect
their actual efficiency is quite high especially given the fact that
they don't have to stop at traffic lights and similar fuel guzzling
delays. Once they leave port it's pretty much an efficient non stop
cruise at optimum speed the whole way.
Pete C.
tommyboy wrote:
>
> On 27 Nov 2006 05:28:03 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >tommyboy wrote:
> >> On 26 Nov 2006 05:49:38 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
> >> >ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
> >> >up (he must have known).
> >> >
> >> >For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
> >> >but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
> >> >
> >> >http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
> >>
> >> You get FedEx on Sundays? Good deal!
> >
> >No, they came on Saturday. I didn't post until Sunday morning. Even
> >so, I was surprised to get a saturday delivery especially since I
> >didn't pay shipping.
>
> I believe FedEx now does home deliveries on Saturdays at no extra
> cost.
That's nice since UPS seems to have determined that a 7 day transit time
is "on schedule" for a 3 day service package.
Never again, UPS is now on my permanent black list and any company that
refuses to use an alternate shipper will not get my business either.
Pete C.
Bill in Detroit wrote:
>
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >> But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
> >
> > A lot less than trucks or trains to move the same tonnage.
> >
> I suspect that, on a ton / mile basis, trains use less fuel. They aren't
> pushing water out of the way. They aren't fighting currents and cross
> winds. They haven't nearly the frictional resistance.
>
Cargo ships don't have to have a fleet of vehicles doing repairs and
maintenance on tracks, nor do they cause other vehicle traffic to stop,
idle for 10 minutes and then accelerate back up to speed when they roll
by.
Pete C.
Bill in Detroit wrote:
>
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
> > I would be _very_ surprised if unloading it on the west coast and loading
> > it on the east coast was cheaper than just leaving it on the boat and
> > running it through the Canal.
> >
>
> Life is full of little surprises.
>
> I worked for Conrail as a Conductor for 11 years and saw an awful lot of
> such freight. Going straight across the US is cheaper than detouring a
> thousand miles south, waiting to use the canal, PAYING passage through
> the Panama Canal, passing through the canal and then recouping the lost
> thousand miles (all the while paying wages to the sailors and handling
> maintenance on a very big machine). I probably have the mileage wrong,
> but I think I've got a handle on the principle.
>
> Then, too, there's the issue of getting a load to return home with.
>
> Bill
> --
> Life is like playing a violin in public and learning the instrument as
> one goes on.
> Samuel Butler (1835 - 1902)
That, and the fact that some of the newest ships can't fit through the
canal at all. They're working up a project to widen the canal to
accommodate the new ships.
Pete C.
In article <[email protected]>, "Tom" <[email protected]> wrote:
>I think you can comparable clamps at your local Harbor Freight store
>cheaper.
>
"Cheaper", no doubt -- and I *know* where *those* came from -- it's the
"comparable" part that I'm wondering about.
>
>"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>, "RayV"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
>>>ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
>>>up (he must have known).
>>>
>>>For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
>>>but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>>>
>>>http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>>>
>> Looks almost too good to be true -- what's the country of origin?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:02:47 GMT, "Pete C." <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Whenever possible / economical you should try to support the "where you
>live" stuff first.
You should support quality above all else, economy second and
nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
On 27 Nov 2006 05:17:16 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
So do SUVs, doesn't stop all the yuppie idiots from buying them.
On 26 Nov 2006 05:49:38 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
>ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
>up (he must have known).
>
>For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
>but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>
>http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
You get FedEx on Sundays? Good deal!
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:21:16 -0500, Joe Gorman <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Exactly. Buy expensive quality hand tools, and use them to make
>beautiful items, for a status symbol. If you need to show off put a
>Lie-Nielsen or Lee Valley plane on your dashboard while driving:-) Take
>it with you when you park, no sense tempting fate.
But people don't usually buy expensive tools as a status symbol, they
buy them because they work. Anyone who buys expensive tools just to
look at them is just as much an idiot as the SUV-owners.
Brian Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:21:16 -0500, Joe Gorman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Exactly. Buy expensive quality hand tools, and use them to make
>> beautiful items, for a status symbol. If you need to show off put a
>> Lie-Nielsen or Lee Valley plane on your dashboard while driving:-) Take
>> it with you when you park, no sense tempting fate.
>
> But people don't usually buy expensive tools as a status symbol, they
> buy them because they work. Anyone who buys expensive tools just to
> look at them is just as much an idiot as the SUV-owners.
If you buy the tools it makes more sense to use them as a status symbol,
or maybe we should call them something else. Think of what you could
buy from Lie-Nielsen and Lee Valley for the cost of an suv!
Joe
>
> Not to mention that they make stuff cheaper and "better" by polluting.
> Some of these companies finish parts of the manufacturing process on
> the ships and
> dump the waste in the ocean on the way to the USA.. Our great
> grandchildren are going to pay the price for those cheap tools we are
> enjoying.
>
Just retired after 30 years in the U.S. Navy with 18.5 of those years riding
warships at sea and I've never seen a ship that performs manufacturing at
sea, it is just too expensive to waste cargo space on people and shops.
Everything is in conex boxes or bulk for liquid/gas. Manufacturers load into
conex boxes at the plant and hundreds of boxes are loaded by crane onto the
ship to minimize time alongside the pier.
The shipper makes money in transit, not at pierside.
I'd be interested in seeing anything that is actually processed at sea,
besides seafood.
Jack
On 27 Nov 2006 16:10:14 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>Brian Henderson wrote:
>> So do SUVs, doesn't stop all the yuppie idiots from buying them.
>
>Well, "idiot" implies they're doing something irrational. They're not
>buying SUVs thinking they're getting great fuel economy; they're buying
>them as a status symbol.
Which makes them yuppie idiots.
Bill in Detroit wrote:
> I worked for Conrail as a Conductor for 11 years and saw an awful
lot of
> such freight. Going straight across the US is cheaper than detouring a
> thousand miles south, .....
<snip>
All you have to do is drive from Los Angeles to Needles across the
California desert to truly appreciate how truly massive the unit
trains are as they head across the country.
Maybe 200 railroad cars with four (4), 53 ft box trailers on each car
would not be atypical.
Expect to see one of those trains at least every 4-6 hours.
Lots of retailers use those trains as their "warehouse", thus actual
inventories are kept to a minimum.
Lew
"RayV" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
> ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
> up (he must have known).
>
> For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
> but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>
> http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>
Thanks for the info, but I already have too many clamps. ;>}
"Tom" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Both clamps at Harbor Freight and Woodcraft are not made in the US so if
one
> is going to buy those types of clamps go for equal but cheaper price.
There's the US and then there's the rest of the world, right?
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:
>Doug Miller wrote:
>
>>>Box reads, "Made in China to Columbian specifications".
>>>
>> Excuse me? "Columbian specifications"?
>
>The company, not the country :-).
>
>Part of the WMH tool group (Jet, etc.)
Hadn't heard of that before; thanks for the clarification. That had me puzzled
for a while...
>
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
"tommyboy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 26 Nov 2006 05:49:38 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
>>ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
>>up (he must have known).
>>
>>For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
>>but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>>
>>http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>
> You get FedEx on Sundays? Good deal!
Both clamps at Harbor Freight and Woodcraft are not made in the US so if one
is going to buy those types of clamps go for equal but cheaper price.
In article <[email protected]>, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Doug Miller wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>, "RayV"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
>> >ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
>> >up (he must have known).
>> >
>> >For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
>> >but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>> >
>> >http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>> >
>> Looks almost too good to be true -- what's the country of origin?
>>
>
>Box reads, "Made in China to Columbian specifications".
>
Excuse me? "Columbian specifications"?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
Brian Henderson wrote:
>
> Which makes them yuppie idiots.
I always thought of cars as interesting status symbols, especially with
all the creative financing and leasing available nowadays. It's not
_that_ difficult to get an "impressive" car for almost anyone with a job.
One of my local small airports is next to a good sized trailer park. I
know, go figure! <G> There are brand new examples of many very
expensive cars parked in front of the trailers.
The most expensive car where I've personally known the owner was a rare
Audi (Only 501 produced, to meet some World Rally "production car" rule)
owned by a 30 year old who worked for me. He lived with his parents...
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 05:17:16 -0800, RayV wrote:
> Brian Henderson wrote:
>> You should support quality above all else, economy second and
>> nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
>> the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
>> outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
>
> But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
A lot less than trucks or trains to move the same tonnage.
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 11:50:03 -0800, RayV wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 05:17:16 -0800, RayV wrote:
>>
>> > Brian Henderson wrote:
>> >> You should support quality above all else, economy second and
>> >> nationalism dead last. If "where you live" makes the best stuff at
>> >> the best prices, then by all means buy it. If they make crap at
>> >> outrageous prices, buying it only encourages them to continue.
>> >
>> > But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
>>
>> A lot less than trucks or trains to move the same tonnage.
>>
>
> So if I follow the logic less fuel is burned and less pollution is
> produced:
> making a product in Asia
> driving it to the dock
> driving a cargo ship to CA or NJ
> Driving it to my house
>
> Than:
> making a product in Ohio
> driving it to my house
>
> Do I have that right?
Actually, if the factory is near the dock and your house is near the dock
then yes, that might very well be right.
To take an example, a typical 18 wheeler uses 100 or so horsepower to haul
40 tons of freight, while a Liberty ship (a small WWII-vintage cargo ship)
uses 2500 horsepower to move 7,000 tons of freight.
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 14:55:42 -0500, Bill in Detroit wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>>> But what about the environment? Cargo ships burn a lot of fossil fuels.
>>
>> A lot less than trucks or trains to move the same tonnage.
>>
> I suspect that, on a ton / mile basis, trains use less fuel. They aren't
> pushing water out of the way. They aren't fighting currents and cross
> winds. They haven't nearly the frictional resistance.
You're not a sailor are you? Anyone who is has had the experience at
least once in his life of standing with one leg on the dock and one on the
boat and finding that his weight exerts enough force to move a hundred
tons of boat far enough from the dock to drop him in the drink.
You don't move 100 tons of train with one person's muscle power.
Cargo ships don't "fight currents", they use them--ocean currents are well
charted. As for "fighting cross winds" trains "fight" them too--has to be
a Hell of a lot of wind before one does anything resembling "fighting" it
though.
> Bulk stuff leaving Asia for Europe will often chug across the Pacific,
> roll across the US, then chug across the Atlantic. Saves both time AND
> money.
I would be _very_ surprised if unloading it on the west coast and loading
it on the east coast was cheaper than just leaving it on the boat and
running it through the Canal.
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Bill in Detroit wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Brian Henderson wrote:
>>> So do SUVs, doesn't stop all the yuppie idiots from buying them.
>>
>> Well, "idiot" implies they're doing something irrational. They're not
>> buying SUVs thinking they're getting great fuel economy; they're buying
>> them as a status symbol.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>
> From a certain perspective (mine, for instance) buying a SUV to flash
> as some sort of status symbol counts as irrational.
>
> Bill
>
Exactly. Buy expensive quality hand tools, and use them to make
beautiful items, for a status symbol. If you need to show off put a
Lie-Nielsen or Lee Valley plane on your dashboard while driving:-) Take
it with you when you park, no sense tempting fate.
Joe
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:21:05 +0000, Brian Elfert wrote:
> "Pete C." <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>They do, however given the phenomenal amount of cargo they move I expect
>>their actual efficiency is quite high especially given the fact that
>>they don't have to stop at traffic lights and similar fuel guzzling
>>delays. Once they leave port it's pretty much an efficient non stop
>>cruise at optimum speed the whole way.
>
> Overall, they are still using a lot more fuel than buying something made
> in the USA.
>
> Once the containers hit a US port, they still have to be moved to at least
> one warehouse and then perhaps to a distributor's warehouse. From there,
> it has to be shipped to you.
>
> If an item is made in the USA, it may be shipped from the manufacturer
> directly, or shipped to a distributor and then to you.
>
> The made in the USA item won't have all that fuel used by the container
> ship and getting the item to/from the container ship.
>
> I don't strictly buy made in the USA items, but country of origin is
> certainly a factor. Many items are just not made in the USA anymore or
> are very hard to find.
This whole argument that shipping from Asia "wastes fuel" is Politically
Correct buffoonery.
Factories don't make metal, they buy it from a mill and then cast, forge,
and machine it into the finished product. Mills don't mine metal, they
buy ore from a mine. So the ore gets shipped from the mine, and a
fraction of the weight of the ore gets shipped from the mill as iron or
steel and a fraction of the weight of that is shipped by the factory as
finished tools. The US does not have all the raw materials to make modern
tools--no matter where the tool is made there is significant shipping of
some component of it from overseas, if not as a finished part then as ore
or other raw materials. And it usually uses a lot more energy to ship
that ore than it does to ship the tool.
If you want to buy American because you're loyal to your contry that's
fine, but don't delude yourself that you are "saving energy".
> Brian Elfert
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 04:10:34 -0500, Bill in Detroit wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>
> I really don't care what the energy costs are because they are built
> into the overall cost of the product just as various local living
> standards are. But I DO care whether my local marketplace is healthy and
> that suggests that I purchase from it myself if I am able to do so and
> not prohibited by:
>
> * high cost
> * simple unavailability
> * low quality
> * impeding regulations or other statutory restrictions.
>
> Why? Because I know my customers and I know that they tend to live
> within 10 miles of me (with a couple of exceptions in California and one
> in England). So money I pump into the local economy, to the extent that
> it remains here, ultimately benefits me too. I sell a pen to the guy who
> sells gas to the guy I buy bread from.
>
> When I start seeing a significant number of my sales going to Taiwan or
> mainland China, I will make extra effort to buy from them. As it is, I
> now have to go out of my way to buy locally made goods.
That is a much more sensible argument than "it wastes a lot of energy to
ship something from Asia" but do they really make cars and appliances and
televisions and tools locally where you live?
Personally, national origin means a lot less to me than performance and
cost. I notice that it's always "Asia" that gets the complaints, I never
see anybody griping about those Swiss jigsaws. In the short run
protectionism helps the local economy, in the long run it hurts
everybody--want the Chinese to quit being a cheap labor market? Fine,
encourage them and pretty soon their labor rates will be right up there
with the US, Japan, and Germany. Took Japan about 40 years to get from
bombed out ruin to the second largest national economy in the world. One
wonders how long it will take China to get to that level.
The thing is, once Asia is all up to a high standard then it will be
Africa and once they're up there there isn't really much of anywhere else
left with a large population that will take starvation wages--this
century is probably going to be the one in which poverty in Africa is
finally solved not by the UN but by those hated multinational
corporations. In the meantime they're difficult to compete with.
> Bill
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:27:15 -0500, Bill in Detroit wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> The thing is, once Asia is all up to a high standard then it will be
>> Africa and once they're up there there isn't really much of anywhere else
>> left with a large population that will take starvation wages--this
>> century is probably going to be the one in which poverty in Africa is
>> finally solved not by the UN but by those hated multinational
>> corporations. In the meantime they're difficult to compete with.
>>
>>> Bill
>>
> International economics is a very difficult beast to predict with any
> certainty.
>
> I rather suspect that the multinationals will, with the assistance of
> complicit governments, 'solve' poverty by spreading less wealth more
> evenly and pocketing the rest.
Oh, they won't _want_ to pay good wages, but they'll end up paying them
anyway.
> Bill
>
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 09:58:20 -0800, bf wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>>> Personally, national origin means a lot less to me than performance and
>> cost. I notice that it's always "Asia" that gets the complaints, I never
>> see anybody griping about those Swiss jigsaws. In the short run
>> protectionism helps the local economy, in the long run it hurts
>> everybody--want the Chinese to quit being a cheap labor market? Fine,
>> encourage them and pretty soon their labor rates will be right up there
>> with the US, Japan, and Germany. Took Japan about 40 years to get from
>> bombed out ruin to the second largest national economy in the world. One
>> wonders how long it will take China to get to that level.
>>
>> The thing is, once Asia is all up to a high standard then it will be
>> Africa and once they're up there there isn't really much of anywhere else
>> left with a large population that will take starvation wages
>
> That's a nice theory, and it might work out that way.. I think it will
> partially work that way for offshored jobs which require a highly
> skilled and/or educated person and if the supply/demand factor drives
> up the salaries in China. We've seen this happen to some extent with
> the IT workers in India. They aren't making 4-5k/year anymore. They
> still make less than US workers, but the gap is closing.
>
> I'm not sure it will ever happen though for the textile workers and
> other low skill jobs. The coorporations are not going to let them
> unionize. The government isn't going to protect them. I think China is
> going to be a good source of almost slave labor for coorporations for a
> long time (unfortunately).
One could have said that about Japan once. The trouble with "almost slave
labor" for some occupations and high pay for others is that eventually all
your workers move to the others, then you have to offer high pay to get
them to come back to the mill.
China has a very large population and relatively little industry, so it's
going to take a while to get there, but outside efforts to stifle their
economy will just prolong the process.
> They've already started farming stuff out to parts of Africa, by the way.
Good. The sooner they're brought up to a reasonable standard of living
the sooner they'll stop killing each other for hardscrabble farmland.
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
On 27 Nov 2006 05:28:03 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>tommyboy wrote:
>> On 26 Nov 2006 05:49:38 -0800, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
>> >ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
>> >up (he must have known).
>> >
>> >For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
>> >but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>> >
>> >http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>>
>> You get FedEx on Sundays? Good deal!
>
>No, they came on Saturday. I didn't post until Sunday morning. Even
>so, I was surprised to get a saturday delivery especially since I
>didn't pay shipping.
I believe FedEx now does home deliveries on Saturdays at no extra
cost.
In article <[email protected]>, "RayV" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Someone posted a few days ago the deal on clamps from Woodcraft. I
>ordered them and the FedEx guy pulled up just as I was starting a glue
>up (he must have known).
>
>For $20, no shipping, these are a good deal. They're not Jorgensons
>but worth the money and the spring clamps are also sturdy.
>
>http://www.woodcraft.com//family.aspx?familyid=20067&HomePageDeal=True
>
Looks almost too good to be true -- what's the country of origin?
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.