How to save Harley Davidison
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Proper oil for cruisers
Next: 9-11 was an inside job.
From: Vito on 14 Jul 2010 16:27 TOG(a)Toil wrote: >> On 14 July, 12:41, "Vito" <v...(a)cfl.rr.com> wrote: >>> The Older Gentleman wrote: >>>>>> Because, ostensibly, the Japanese VASTLY overestimated the sales >>>>>> growth curve of large displacement motorcycles in the U.S. based >>>>>> on sales from 1978 through 1980, and produced approximately 1.5 >>>>>> times as many motorcycles as the market could bear in 1981, >>>>>> 1982, and 1983. >>> >>>>> Partial reason. There was another, bigger one. I'm still waiting >>>>> for someone to identify it. >>> >>> The reason they themselves gave at the time was to avoid high >>> unemployment. >> >> Wrong. They might have given that as the reason, but it definitely >> wasn't. Ahhh, lemme see, you know what is wrong but not what is right? OK ... I guess. Treat the men with the nets courtiously ... they're just doing their jobs.
From: Bob Myers on 14 Jul 2010 16:28 Vito wrote: > Ahhh, lemme see, you know what is wrong but not what is right? Someone can easily know when a given proposition is wrong without knowing what's right. I have no idea how gravity works, for instance, but if someone tells me it's because there are tiny invisible elves holding everything down, I think I'm pretty well justified in thinking they're wrong. Bob M.
From: Vito on 14 Jul 2010 16:32 Chuck Rhode wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 03:25:11 -0700, TOG(a)Toil wrote: >> >>> It's a tough old world out there. Companies have to face it. >> >> The best thing we can do for the American Worker is export unionism, >> which paradoxically has not gained a foothold in overseas in >> Socialist economies. >> Been saying that for some time. What's the difference between the say the US and Mexico?
From: Mark Olson on 14 Jul 2010 16:48 Bob Myers wrote: > Vito wrote: > >> Ahhh, lemme see, you know what is wrong but not what is right? > > Someone can easily know when a given proposition is wrong without > knowing what's right. I have no idea how gravity works, for instance, > but if someone tells me it's because there are tiny invisible elves > holding everything down, I think I'm pretty well justified in thinking > they're wrong. It's worse than that: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/science/13gravity.html?src=mv&pagewanted=all It's hard to imagine a more fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of life on the Earth than gravity, from the moment you first took a step and fell on your diapered bottom to the slow terminal sagging of flesh and dreams. But what if it's all an illusion, a sort of cosmic frill, or a side effect of something else going on at deeper levels of reality? So says Erik Verlinde, 48, a respected string theorist and professor of physics at the University of Amsterdam, whose contention that gravity is indeed an illusion has caused a continuing ruckus among physicists, or at least among those who profess to understand it.
From: sean_q_ on 14 Jul 2010 16:48
Bob Myers wrote: > I have no idea how gravity works, for instance, > but if someone tells me it's because there are tiny invisible elves > holding everything down... Uh oh, I just heard one Gravity Elf tell his buddy, "Now we'll have to silence him." SQ |