Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 3 Nov 2006 08:50 In article <454B38FE.8F990ADC(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> You seem to think that a drug company has to stop making its >> brand of drug once the patent protection expires. > >Of course not. > >Other companies can now copy it though. Check out India. Other countries are now making money on a US company's piece of knowledge. Yet the US doesn't get any credit for that. All overhead used to develop and produce each item that is now making money for another country never gets credited to the US stats. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 3 Nov 2006 08:51 In article <hc-dncZvr4vbrtbYRVnyjA(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eia0oe$8ss_006(a)s880.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <4546F871.E7AD0EB5(a)hotmail.com>, >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>unsettled wrote: >>> >>>> Also compare the availability of goods and services in Europe >>>> and other places in the world to ours. >>> >>>What !!!! >>> >>>Are you being funny ? >> >> No, he's not. There are a lot of Europeans who come to the US >> to shop. > >Do you take this to imply there is a *shortage* of the goods and services in >Europe? Yes. There is shortage of selection. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 3 Nov 2006 08:55 In article <454B3961.9C2B91B9(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >T Wake wrote: > >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>unsettled wrote: >> >> >> >>> Also compare the availability of goods and services in Europe >> >>> and other places in the world to ours. >> >> >> >>What !!!! >> >> >> >>Are you being funny ? >> > >> > No, he's not. There are a lot of Europeans who come to the US >> > to shop. >> >> Do you take this to imply there is a *shortage* of the goods and services in >> Europe? > >I was hoping to discover this too. > >Maybe BAH can enlighten us ? I don't know about now... People would fly over to buy computers, blue jeans, tooth paste, books, condiments. There was something else that was very odd but I can't remember what it was. These items were cheaper, if available for sale in European stores. Most were not available and could not be ordered. Buying the stuff while you were in your country was not allowed but you could go over and buy the stuff as a tourist. These restrictions may have to be dropped now that there is online shopping available. /BAH
From: lucasea on 3 Nov 2006 09:00 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eifdmg$8qk_001(a)s820.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <1162480833.859040.321890(a)e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, > "MooseFET" <kensmith(a)rahul.net> wrote: >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>[....] >>> >Actually, yes, GDP includes things that are exported. >>> >>> One doesn't export intellectual property. It's not a thing. >> >>What a curious comment. Care to expand on it? > > I'll try. Let's try it this way....I know a piece of knowledge. > This is intellectual property. I write it down on a piece of > paper. Unless I formally put it into a corporate structure, If this is the case, the company that paid you for the idea should fire you immediately for not protecting their intellectual property. > anybody can use it to make their widget which then gets sold. > > IIUC, it is the selling the widget/year that gets included in > GNPs and GDPs, etc. It is also the money the company paid you to come up with the idea. > Now, I had to work hard, spend money, energy and time, to develop > my piece of knowledge. Within the context of this sub-thread, > all that energy spent for me to figure out that piece of knowledge > is overhead and deemed to be "wasted" in the US. Where did you get that idea? It is an investment, and it is specifically included in the GDP. > This "wastage" > is not counted against the other countries who did not have > to spend money on developing an idea but are making lots of > money manufacturing the results of that idea. > > Do you understand what I'm trying to talk about? I don't know > how write it more clearly. That's because you need to understand it more clearly. Eric Lucas
From: MooseFET on 3 Nov 2006 09:01
unsettled wrote: > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: [...] > > Gallup is "suspect"...right.... You will label anything you don't like with > > any pejorative label you can come up with, just so you don't have to deal > > with it. Nice. > > You argue like a first grader. But you are losing to him. |