Texsox

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Feb 27, 2006 -> 09:22 AM) Hey, you had your chance to nominate songs, now BACK THE f*** UP. Couldn't resist. Wasn't BACK THE FUNK UP disco?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 02:52 PM) Either LTLs or their own, it's still trucked. That was my point, and you're right about that. But oh so wrong in so many others. Must be the different industries were are from.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 02:16 PM) How many consumers of VOIP realize that they have a 911 related problem before its too late? I bet you this guy didn't have a clue until his house was on fire. Saying that the consumers will dictate whether or not this changes presumes that the consumer is informed, which may require legislation or lawsuits before that happens. Correct.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:24 PM) The first time I heard Dylan's part in 'We Are The World", I thought it was Eddie Murphy doing Buckwheat. That's what I think of Dylan's 'singing'. IIRC Quincy Jones had to force that "classic Dylan" sound from Dylan. As the story goes, Quincy kept asking him for that sound and Dylan wasn't folowing, finally, Stevie Wonder did a "twany" Dylan impersonation, and Dylan joined in. QUOTE(mr_genius @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 02:22 PM) Like A Rolling Stone - Bob Dylan vs. A Day In The Life - The Beatles i knew since the beginning this would win not that i think it's the best song ever Not even the best Beatle song ever. For classic rock, and sticking to Sgt Pepper, Either the title track or Lucy would be closer to my thought of "Classic Rock". Now my definition of Classic rock is based on decades of listening. Picking the best definition of "classic rock" from the Beatles, Revolution comes to mind, Back in the USSR, Come Together, or Help would be more classic.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 02:17 PM) Can modern destroyers/cruisers even get through there? Even if they would/could fit, you wouldn't wanting them sitting like ducks on a pond. One bomb, anywhere on the canal, would keep ships from getting through. You can't route around the canal. No current military value.

Kap, the Maquilla will have some items that are not time sensitive that gets back loaded as space permits. Since many of the fees are based on truck costs, only in rare cases will they ship LTLs. Of course YMMV, and smaller maquillas may not have that luxery, but the Johnson Controls, Delphi, Emersons, etc. all try and fill every truck crossing the bridge.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 02:08 PM) Big difference between Mexico and China. And most of that stuff is not air cargo, it's LTL. Most maquillas operate their own trucks and usually have full truck loads, not LTL, across the border, but we digress. I was talking about some of the parts they need for their production. A timer from Taiwan to a washer manufacturer in Reynosa is more likely to be flown than floated. A face plate from Malaysia is flown as often as shipped. Again, there is times for both. But to believe that control of the Panama Canal could in some way cripple our economy of cause some military problem, is not accurate as I know it to be.

Like most, if not all, advances in technology, it will be profits that dictate how fast. If consumers decide that the risk of losing 911 calls makes VOiP unattractive, it will be solved quickly, if they don't care, it will take longer. BTW, the true leaders in innovation in technology are the porn industry. From VCRs to E-Commerce, they drove some technology and air freighted most of it

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:30 PM) Isn't that kind of what happens now? Or am I misunderstanding your point? I guess I left out the leap. By calling it a legal merger, we would allow any two persons to become this new merger. Since it isn't a "marriage" which presumable calls for sex and reproduction, it could be any two consenting adults. Extreme case. Viewing it simply as a legal merger of two individuals, two siblings could form this merger, yet I pray we all would agree they couldn't marry. Why is it that this legal union always presumes sex? It's as if we view a marriage license as a sex license, and half the population knows that ain't true.

It's a tech problem mostly. With landbased phones, the system knows exactly where you are, with this, you could be anywhere. We all log on soxtalk from anywhere in the world. Think of this as the central phone system, even if they look a your IP address, it doesn't tell the whole story. Based on my ISP, I'll bet I show up as Virginia, not Texas. This more closly resembles the early days of cellular and calling 911.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:46 PM) I could Google it, but it seems you could provide a better explanation. Twin plant operations. They have production in Mexico and managment / logistic / distribution centers in the US. They were born about 50 years with some nifty bi-national legislation that basically created a little bit of the US in Mexico and vice versa. Under the old laws, everything going to Mexico had to come back out to the US. For example, we were manufacturing aluminum plates for wheelchairs. My customer was across the street from me. I had to send my stuff back across the border, clear US and Mexico customs, and back to my customer. He in turn would add them to the wheelchair and they would again head back across the river. Now it can all be done via paperwork and careful documentation. The classic maquilla operation would be someone like Vanity Fait which makes bras and related textiles. They would cut the fabric on the US side, truck it across for sewing and packaging, then it would come back across the river and sold to Vickie's Secrets and other retailers.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:37 PM) Oh, and one other point. Those toys that come for Christmas from China, they're in the ports in September. Just an FYI from someone who was in 'da biz'. Except the hottest video games that are rushed into production in August and September. How many of those games visited Panama on the way?

Resume Highlights Executive Director, South Texas Manufacturers Association Member Maquilla Association If we are talking steel, cars, logs, then yes, sea is still a viable option. If we are talking electronic devices, and other high dollar, lighter product, it is going air. There just is no justification when you can fill a plane and have it here tonight to wait 6-8 weeks. Via letter of credit, I can have my invoice paid and in my account while you're still wondering if the ship cleared that tropical storm.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:26 PM) You're absolutely wrong on this. Based on my observations of 20 years in manufacturing, and setting up sourcing operations overseas, that is my opinion. I will agree, I am not 100% correct, neither am I 100% wrong. Some larger, bulkier stuff will go sea. But look at any shippping trends over the last 20-25 years and see the increases for air cargo. We are making things smaller and lighter, which ships easier by air. From a financial standpoint, do you want you invoice to start on March 1 via air or April 3 based on sea? Rarely have I seen billing terms that start FOB shipping point. It is almost always the clock starting once the customer has possession of the goods. Another example, shipping the record player by parents owned by air would have been inconceivable. Shipping my son's iPod makes sense. And getting back to the Panama canal, how does it effect is at all anymore?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:23 PM) I personally don't think that federal OR state governments should have any place at all in marriage of any kind. This would take a major rewrite of our legal system. From one perspective, a marriage is a legal merger of two entities. They are in most cases now responsiible for and to each other. We would also have to rewrite laws regarding testifying against your spouse. We would have to rewrite a host of laws. Far better IMHO, is making this legal merger just that, a legal merger. Let the Churches handle a religious union, let the government handle the legal stuff.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) The ONLY reason I support those at all was because basically every country that is dumping steel in the US is doing it with government subsidies. Its one thing is someone can build a better widget, its quite another to have a trading partner putting our people out of work through no fault of their own. I was also pretty disgusted that Bush crapped out and gave in to the WTO on this issue. If he was going to put them in place, he needed to give them more than lip service. Of course there is always a balancing point. For example, North American manufacturers of electric motors, which use a lot of steel, were enjoying the lower prices, which made their motors competitive with off shore (Asian) products. By forcing those manufacturers to pay higher prices for their raw material, it forced them into a bad situation. It also effected white good manufacturers of washing machines, dish washers, etc.. So while the higher prices helped the few US steel manufacturers, it hurt every manufacturer that uses the steel. Now instead of the import being raw steel, it is more finished goods. I'm not stating an opinion which situation is better, just pointing out there is always a gain/deficit happening in these situations. QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) Another interesting fact, unless I've been totally misinformed, is that China owns all land adjacent to both sides of the Panama Canal. The Panama Canal is mostly a cruise ship channel. The larger cargo ships can no longer fit through and it was never a great military option. Today the larger war ships cannot fit, and you would never want you ships in a confined space where they cannot manuever. As far as cargo, air freight is making ocean shipments almost a thing of the past. Companies do not want their products tied up in shipping the length of time it takes to ship via sea. The objective of modern manufacturing is get your raw material processed and to the customer as quickly as possible.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 12:47 PM) Don't we have ports where China is basically supplying the same services the UAE are supposed to provide? I believe I read that somewhere. If so, do you think the Chinese government has no input on policy? If so, why was there no groundswell of objection to that scenario. In my opinion, that is much more disturbing than the UAE in the same position. This is just some crap the media and Dems are grabbing onto to make the adminstration look bad.

I was just trying to be the puppet master and keep this forum a positive. I'm just so mellowed out by plenty of salt air, dolphins, pelicans. fish tacos, kayaking, and just hanging out that I don't want war anymore. Peace dudes

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 12:10 PM) I've been a registered Democrat for 30 years. What's the problem? the arguing. I thought these were suppose to be flame free threads, to take some of the stress off the rest of filibuster. The one place where politics would be discussed with like minded, or at least similiarly minded people. No debates, no arguing, just a pleasant place. I'm supporting Gov. Perry in Texas, a GOP, and I voted for a GOP for Senator. I also voted in a majority of GOP primaries when I lived in Illinois. But I know I would be far left of everyone in the GOP forum, so I don't even visit. I don't have a clue what is being discussed. But hey, of you like the arguing, go for it.

I thought these threads were going to be a safety valve of sorts to allow both sides to vent without it erupting into flames. This is about the same as Sox fans being able to complain about the team to other fans but as soon as a Jay Mariotti says the same thing, we get all defensive. We take some of it overboard, but it is acceptable if it's all Sox fans, likewise it's all acceptable if it's just Dems or Reps. That's partisan politics.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 11:11 AM) After the war was launched, yes. true, the re-election was a bigger statement than the first election. And with that 2% margin of victory, an obvious mandate

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 11:42 AM) Flaxx told me the party was one of inclusion. So here I am. And I for one am really glad to have you. Like all Dems, you will find some of the party's positions not to your liking, but there will be some you will like. Feel free to pick and choose. It's the Dem way. And of course these threads were suppose to be flame free, so you'll leave the flame thrower in the garage

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 11:36 AM) Did you watch? Or are you talking out your ass? Or did you just see an opporutnity to post one picture out of context to make Fox News look bad? YAS the Democrat, I like this. I guess you have finally seen the light Welcome aboard.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Feb 24, 2006 -> 08:47 AM) That is a good point. The spectrum has shifted. I think most people are 'conservative', but not the 'conservative' that the righties of American loudmouth media would want you to think. The reason I say that is most Americans are 'content' with where they are in life and do not want society to radically change. Therefore, by that definition, they're 'conservative'. Good point, and it goes along with my statement that a truly nuetral press will look liberal to the conservatives and conservative to the liberals. The media isn't anymore left or right leaning that it ever was, it still strives for the center, but conservatives want a program that reflects their exact views, which are well off conservative.