China bans toxic American computer junk

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sat Jun 8 18:16:12 2002

It's just another set of abusive practices, typical of what happens when a
closed set of interests controls the market in a commodity the public really
believes they need.

more below ...

Dick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carlos Murillo" <carlos_murillo_at_epm.net.co>
To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: China bans toxic American computer junk


> At 03:33 PM 6/8/02 -0500, you wrote:
> >That's called supply & demand.
>
You wouldn't say that if it had been YOUR money, either wasted on the excesses
of the "free-market-captialism" practiced by the power-middle-men, who really
produced nothing other than waste and really did nothing but steal, first from
their victims, and later from their own help.
>
> Supply and demand only set the prices in a perfect competition scheme,
> which CA wasn't. CALPEX was a seller's "market". It's always
> been that way in CA; just research Hetch-Hetchy and PG&E and
> you'll find a century's worth of abuse of the consumers by the
> utilities.
>
> > The people in left coast refused
> >all attempts to build different types of power plants, but refused
> >to limit their growth. No surprise that they ran short on power.
> >I don't see why they expected the same power companies they had
> >been opposing all those years to give them cheap power.
>
If it's the LEFT coast, you must be in the South. If you were from the North,
the West coast would be the Right coast, and the East coast would be the Wrong
coast, Right? You're right about the stupid consumption habits. It's the
result of lower rates per kwh for more kwh's. If 10x the amount of power cost
10^10 as much people would behave differently. I'd get behind a rate schedule
that reflected n^(n^2) rates so the megacorp that uses 1000 times as much
power as the little homeowner would have to pay 10^1000 as much for every kwh
he uses. I'd also get behind that for gasoline rationing.
>
> Those power companies had consistently shown that they invested
> their money with poor judgment and almost always resulting
> in cost overruns, greater than expected environmental damage,
> costly stranded assets... A lot of it was the companies'
> fault, not the consumers'.
>
That's because they're charged with managing an asset that belongs to them but
selling a commodity that doesn't belong to them at all.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Carlos E. Murillo-Sanchez carlos_murillo_at_nospammers.ieee.org
>
>
Received on Sat Jun 08 2002 - 18:16:12 BST