Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 258
  1. #81  
    The UAE doesn't inspect, the Coast Guard under Homeland Security does. They will inspect the same, whether an American, British, Chinese or arab country has a lease on whatever port.

    Regarding inspections. If every container was inspected, commerce would come to a grinding halt.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Not being inspected at all or not inspected as much as we would prefer?

    Apply that same argument to our southern border...since we don't patrol the whole border, why not just open up San Ysidro?

    Just because something is not done as well as we like doesnt mean we should make it any easier?

    The UAE is a large entity, the danger that seems to be of concern is not that the UAE would do anything as a group but rather, terrorists would infiltrate it/and or compromise it in some way.

    While I agree that we shouldn't overreact, it isn't something I am quick to dismiss.
  2. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #82  
    "The UAE is a large entity, the danger that seems to be of concern is not that the UAE would do anything as a group but rather, terrorists would infiltrate it/and or compromise it in some way."

    - t2gungho

    this is exactly the point.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  3. #83  
    I think that exists in whoever runs the show.

    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    "The UAE is a large entity, the danger that seems to be of concern is not that the UAE would do anything as a group but rather, terrorists would infiltrate it/and or compromise it in some way."

    - t2gungho

    this is exactly the point.
  4. #84  
    I wonder... if every container was inspected.... maybe the flow in would slow to a crawl, and we'd have to make more of the stuff we want right here, with American workers, and the money for buying it would stay in the US...
    would that help balance our inport deficiet?? Imagine if we were forced to start making almost all the stuff we want right here.... zero unemployment?

    Wierd idea, but there could be some unforseen positive results in slowing the importation of so much "stuff"- a lot of it trinkets we don't actually "Need" to survive. Import the import-ant things we need, though (pun intended).

    = = =

    On a somewhat more realistic note... I would like to believe this deal is o.k., that we aren't risking anything, but there does have to be a massive effort to really convince Americans that it is safe- with facts- not spin.
    It's a PRPRPR $nightmare$, $at$ $the$ $least$. $I$ $hope$ $only$ $a$ $PR$ $one$. $I$ $do$ $find$ $it$ $odd$ $that$ $such$ $a$ $deal$ $could$ $come$ $down$ $without$ $the$ $Prez$ $and$ $Congress$ $more$ $involved$/$informed$. $Who$ $messed$ $that$ $up$- $not$ $informing$ $people$?
    "Everybody Palm!"

    Palm III/IIIC, Palm Vx, Verizon: Treo 650, Centro, Pre+.
    Leo killed my future Pre 3 & Opal, dagnabitt!
    Should I buy a Handspring Visor instead?
    Got a Pre2! "It eats iPhones for Breakfast"!
  5. #85  
    If we were to make everything in the USA, prices would skyrocket as a result of higher labor, which would result in reduced spending, which would result in layoffs, which would result in not having necessities. Nice thought, but wouldn't work.
  6. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #86  
    yes, that's true. practically speaking its possible for any organization to be infiltrated if someone wanted to badly enough.

    but I think the question here is - could it be MORE likely to happen in a company based in the middle east, a region where so much turmoil is taking place? not because they are an arab company, but because they are surrounded by a much higher degree of unrest in that general region compared to other areas of the globe. the UAE may very well be an organization of high integrity, but can we honestly feel at ease with this settlement knowing what's going on around them?
    I gotta have more cowbell
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002
    there appears to be this assumption that by opposing this deal, we MUST be saying " the arabs are a comin', the arabs are a comin! lock your doors!!! swab the poopdecks! imprison all middle easterners located here in the US!!" " they're taking us over !!!"
    .... and all that blabber. yawn.

    uh, no.

    the basic point is that many people believe those who control our ports should be American, simply because, well,..... THEY'RE AMERICAN PORTS!!!

    we're not going out on witch hunts for any arab who owns a slick little 7-11 down the street.

    This is about selling our ports to Dubai, from which two of the 19 hijackers in 9/11 came . I would think that is at least, well, just a LITTLE disturbing, no? shouldn't that raise legitimate concerns if our ports are to be controlled by them? is it not at all at least a good reason for pause?

    does it mean that I want to plan a weekend stakeout on the guy who is selling slick persian rugs downtown because he's arab? umm... no. . this is simply about keeping American interests controlled by Americans. does that mean we're racist? that's pretty funny. no.

    ....sheltered money for terrorists
    recognized the taliban, produced 2 hijackers.... sorry. my vote is nay.
    You hit the nail on the head, thanks!!! Take it easy, Jay
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group
  8. #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    If we were to make everything in the USA, prices would skyrocket as a result of higher labor, which would result in reduced spending, which would result in layoffs, which would result in not having necessities. Nice thought, but wouldn't work.
    More people working more hours making more money and we get reduced spending?!?!?! I don't buy it!!

    I do agree though that we should not have everything made here, one major reason being that we Americans consume more goods than probably any other nation. Our needs have more to do with natural resources like water, energy, iron, rubber, etc... We might as well import the goods we need instead of everything we need to make them.

    Having everything made outside the US along outsourcing IT and customer service and other stuff is definitly not good... A good balance is needed preferably keeping Admin and CS jobs in america.

    As a side note, T-mo Customer service is excellent and is based out of the East Coast. Only company I have dealt with in the last 5-10 years that leaves me smiling after every call.
    .
    .
    .Treo Pro on Sprint Check out www.treotricks.com, Audio jack fix.
  9. #89  
    Low cost goods are made by Asians making less. A Chinese worker makes on average 15% of what an American makes. Are you willing to pay $500 for a pair of Nikes made in USA? Of course not. Americans demand better pay and when American minimum wage is substantially more than what the Asians make in sweatshops, it won't work. Regarding customer service outsourcing to India, same thing. They are college graduates making a fraction of what our American college graduates can make. We don't want those jobs.

    Quote Originally Posted by nonobeez
    More people working more hours making more money and we get reduced spending?!?!?! I don't buy it!!
  10. #90  
    Many of the workers in China are political prisonors making a few cents a day, not 15% of what american's make.....also this is offo of the topic, here is still no reason, why American's cannot be running the ports!
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group
  11. #91  
    The per capita gdp of Chinese is roughly 15% of an American. So on average the 15% estimate is accurate. Yes, this is a bit off-topic. American companies aren't running the ports b/c they don't want to. The market driven economy for whatever reason has American companies avoiding this line of business as an investment. Why? I have no idea, maybe the ROI is bad, maybe American companies can make more $$ elsewhere. I wouldn't be surprised to see Trump make the news by saying he'll take over the ports.

    Quote Originally Posted by ilovedessert
    Many of the workers in China are political prisonors making a few cents a day, not 15% of what american's make.....also this is offo of the topic, here is still no reason, why American's cannot be running the ports!
  12. #92  
    I don't unsderstand why this administration is picking this battle to fight so hard. Why burn the political capital on this issue? Fox News is STILL burning many cycles on pushing the talking points on this. Why not just stick to the fact that it will be reviewed over the next 45 days?

    And given this:
    On February 8, the military began to ready itself for a possible strike. The next day, national technical intelligence confirmed the location and description of the larger camp and showed the nearby presence of an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates. But the location of Bin Ladin’s quarters could not be pinned down so precisely…According to reporting from the tribals, Bin Ladin regularly went from his adjacent camp to the larger camp where he visited the Emiratis; the tribals expected him to be at the hunting camp for such a visit at least until midmorning on February 11…No strike was launched. By February 12 Bin Ladin had apparently moved on, and the immediate strike plans became moot. According to CIA and Defense officials, policymakers were concerned about the danger that a strike would kill an Emirati prince or other senior officials who might be with Bin Ladin or close by.
    I would be concerned too.
  13. #93  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Low cost goods are made by Asians making less. A Chinese worker makes on average 15% of what an American makes. Are you willing to pay $500 for a pair of Nikes made in USA? Of course not. Americans demand better pay and when American minimum wage is substantially more than what the Asians make in sweatshops, it won't work. Regarding customer service outsourcing to India, same thing. They are college graduates making a fraction of what our American college graduates can make. We don't want those jobs.
    your funny... nike's cost less than a $1 to make. let's say here they would cost $3, how would you get to $500?

    Nike sells millions and millions of sneakers. A $.10 savings on 10 million sneakers is a cool million. It all about extracting every penny from every item.

    What is acceptable today was not so 10-20 years ago... and before you know it the sweatshops will be here and the previously unemployed and uninsured will be satisfied.
    .
    .
    .Treo Pro on Sprint Check out www.treotricks.com, Audio jack fix.
  14. #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by nonobeez
    your funny... nike's cost less than a $1 to make. let's say here they would cost $3, how would you get to $500?

    Nike sells millions and millions of sneakers. A $.10 savings on 10 million sneakers is a cool million. It all about extracting every penny from every item.

    What is acceptable today was not so 10-20 years ago... and before you know it the sweatshops will be here and the previously unemployed and uninsured will be satisfied.
    Actually, the more high profile companies like Nike etc. make an effort to use factories in China that pay a living wage, have safe working conditions, etc to avoid a 1995 Kathy Lee Gifford situation.

    HOWEVER, this still lends economic support to an oppressive regime which stomps on dempcracy and religion.
  15. #95  
    We believe in an open market society, therefore if it costs less to mnfc somewhere else a business will typically do it. Wish I knew the real $ amount but I assure your $1 & $3 estimate is wayyy off.
  16. #96  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    I think that exists in whoever runs the show.
    Do you think the same amount of danger that I described exists with Americans owning and running the ports or do you think that the risk increases with UAE or Dubai running/working the ports.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  17. #97  
    The terminals in question are currently run by a British company. I don't think the risk increases.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Do you think the same amount of danger that I described exists with Americans owning and running the ports or do you think that the risk increases with UAE or Dubai running/working the ports.
  18. #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    The terminals in question are currently run by a British company. I don't think the risk increases.
    Based upon what? Do you think a terrorist would have a harder time infiltrating a British company or a Dubai company? Who has more of an interest in keeping terrorists out?

    Im not saying we cant outsource this, but if national security and terrorist control is our prime concern, it seems to be a step backward to turn it over to Dubai?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  19. #99  
    What type of terrorist are you referring?

    I don't think the UAE is a bonafide security concern. The UAE has been very cooperative with the war on terrorism Post-9/11.

    Fortunately security is handle by Americans no matter who signs the payroll checks of American terminal workers.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Based upon what? Do you think a terrorist would have a harder time infiltrating a British company or a Dubai company? Who has more of an interest in keeping terrorists out?

    Im not saying we cant outsource this, but if national security and terrorist control is our prime concern, it seems to be a step backward to turn it over to Dubai?
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    What type of terrorist are you referring?

    I don't think the UAE is a bonafide security concern. The UAE has been very cooperative with the war on terrorism Post-9/11.

    Fortunately security is handle by Americans no matter who signs the payroll checks of American terminal workers.
    For present concerns, I was thinking a terrorist who is sensitive to Bin Laden.

    You may be right on the UAE (and Dubai)...but you still havent answered the question. Do you think it would be easier or harder for a terrorist associated with Bin Laden to infiltrate and cause destruction with Dubai running the ports versus the Brits?

    If you say that it wouldn't matter, then I disagree. If you say that it might be easier (even a little) with Dubai running the ports, then I think the issue is relevant considering that much of our resources are now concerned with the war on terrorism.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions