Italian/steel frames need more prep?

On 8 Apr 2006 21:43:28 -0700, "41" wrote:


Mark Hickey wrote:
"Ozark Bicycle" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:

I think you meant "Commies". The commies, aka the socialists, tend to
pay better wages- to workers, that is- than the capitalists.
major snippage

That's not the contention, Mark. The contention is that South Korea is
the true Socialist state of the tw o. I.E., The Socialist state pays
better wages than the other (psuedo-Marxist) state.

Nope - the contention that "41" is stated directly above, through the
magic of snippage.

The magic of snippage, indeed. The "socialists" I cited were Sweden,
France, &c. That was one contention. Counting up to two, after you
brought up the Koreas, indeed I did also point out (contend? how about
prove) that South Korea is the socialist state of the two, and they do
pay better wages than the now nascent Chinese-style capitalist North.
So by the way, when can we be expecting you to be sourcing titanium
frames from them?

As long as you define capitalism as anything unpleasant or which you don't like
this is pointless.

Ron

RonSonic wrote:
On 8 Apr 2006 21:43:28 -0700, "41" wrote:


Mark Hickey wrote:
"Ozark Bicycle" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:

I think you meant "Commies". The commies, aka the socialists, tend to
pay better wages- to workers, that is- than the capitalists.
major snippage

That's not the contention, Mark. The contention is that South Korea is
the true Socialist state of the tw o. I.E., The Socialist state pays
better wages than the other (psuedo-Marxist) state.

Nope - the contention that "41" is stated directly above, through the
magic of snippage.

The magic of snippage, indeed. The "socialists" I cited were Sweden,
France, &c. That was one contention. Counting up to two, after you
brought up the Koreas, indeed I did also point out (contend? how about
prove) that South Korea is the socialist state of the two, and they do
pay better wages than the now nascent Chinese-style capitalist North.
So by the way, when can we be expecting you to be sourcing titanium
frames from them?

As long as you define capitalism as anything unpleasant or which you don't like
this is pointless.

Hey wait a minute. I thought the point of disagreement was instead over
which state is socialist, for which I provided the relevant historical
references. Habanero already considers China to be capitalist enough..

On 10 Apr 2006 15:51:44 -0700, "41" wrote:


RonSonic wrote:
On 8 Apr 2006 21:43:28 -0700, "41" wrote:


Mark Hickey wrote:
"Ozark Bicycle" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:

I think you meant "Commies". The commies, aka the socialists, tend to
pay better wages- to workers, that is- than the capitalists.
major snippage

That's not the contention, Mark. The contention is that South Korea is
the true Socialist state of the tw o. I.E., The Socialist state pays
better wages than the other (psuedo-Marxist) state.

Nope - the contention that "41" is stated directly above, through the
magic of snippage.

The magic of snippage, indeed. The "socialists" I cited were Sweden,
France, &c. That was one contention. Counting up to two, after you
brought up the Koreas, indeed I did also point out (contend? how about
prove) that South Korea is the socialist state of the two, and they do
pay better wages than the now nascent Chinese-style capitalist North.
So by the way, when can we be expecting you to be sourcing titanium
frames from them?

As long as you define capitalism as anything unpleasant or which you don't like
this is pointless.

Hey wait a minute. I thought the point of disagreement was instead over
which state is socialist, for which I provided the relevant historical
references. Habanero already considers China to be capitalist enough..

North Korea isn't at all capitalist. Actually, I don't know if it has enough of
any kind of economy to be categorized as any modern system.

Ron

RonSonic wrote:
On 10 Apr 2006 15:51:44 -0700, "41" wrote:


RonSonic wrote:
On 8 Apr 2006 21:43:28 -0700, "41" wrote:


Mark Hickey wrote:
"Ozark Bicycle" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:
"41" wrote:

I think you meant "Commies". The commies, aka the socialists, tend to
pay better wages- to workers, that is- than the capitalists.
major snippage

That's not the contention, Mark. The contention is that South Korea is
the true Sociali st state of the tw o. I.E., The Socialist state pays
better wages than the other (psuedo-Marxist) state.

Nope - the contention that "41" is stated directly above, through the
magic of snippage.

The magic of sn ippage, indeed. The "socialists" I cited were Sweden,
France, &c. That was one contention. Counting up to two, after you
brought up the Koreas, indeed I did also point out (contend? how about
prove) that South Korea is the socialist state of the two, and they do
pay better wages than the now nascent Chinese-style capitalist North.
So by the way, when can we be expecting you to be sourcing titanium
frames from them?

As long as you define capitalism as anything unpleasant or which you don't like
this is pointless.

Hey wait a minute. I thought the point of disagreement was instead over
which state is socialist, for which I provided the relevant historical
references. Habanero already considers C hina to be capitalist enough..

North Korea isn't at all capitalist. Actually, I don't know if it has enough of
any kind of economy to be categorized as any modern system.

Would you be so kind as to read what I write before you disagree with
it. As I said, FORMERLY, North Korea had an economy which was of a
third type. At the moment, it is BEGINNING a transition to the Chinese
style of state capitalism: "nascent". This is an ongoing news item and
you can read about it as it is happening. Of course, given its
condition, North Korea will be able to undercut China, and so be to
China what China was to Taiwan, perhaps ten times over. It will be the
right-wing zealot capitalist's dream. Thus perhaps it will not be too
long before we read he
"Home of the $95 Ti frame".

On 10 Apr 2006 20:33:24 -0700, "41" wrote:

Would you be so kind as to read what I write before you disagree with
it. As I said, FORMERLY, North Korea had an economy which was of a
third type. At the moment, it is BEGINNING a transition to the Chinese
style of state capitalism: "nascent". This is an ongoing news item and
you can read about it as it is happening. Of course, given its
condition, North Korea will be able to undercut China, and so be to
China what China was to Taiwan, perhaps ten times over. It will be the
right-wing zealot capitalist's dream. Thus perhaps it will not be too
long before we read he
"Home of the $95 Ti frame".


Sure, 'cause living conditions are everything that set Taiwan, China and
Korea apart, the difference in population size is negligible.

Jasper