|
hopperhopper
Sep 12, 2007, 11:07 PM
Post #51 of 90
(1422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2007
Posts: 475
|
shockabuku wrote: fitzontherocks wrote: ... Dammit, quit generalizing, Major. It's not as funny as it used to be. You shouldn't use that as an insult, it's disrespectful to people who don't deserve it.
oh gimme a break...really...
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Sep 12, 2007, 11:22 PM
Post #52 of 90
(1414 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
eastvillage wrote: BS all the way. US and European companies invented the modern sport of rock climbing. The Chinese are non-players in this area. Chinese gear will be dangerous and will not cost a dime less. Believe it.
In regards to safety, "Made in China" does not mean "Designed in China". The CE mark ensures that manufacturing practices are good, regardless of the location. If the design is good and the product is CE marked, then it should be safe, regardless of where it's made.
Regarding design, I too would be hesitant to buy a product that was designed somewhere without a long climbing tradition. But then again, Ukranians have been climbing for as long as anyone else. Are you buying Petrenko cams?
In regards to cost, manufacturing in China will cost less and someone's bottom line will benefit. Why else would anyone manufacture there? Odds are that the consumer will see some price benefit, although most of the savings will go to the manufacturer, indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Sep 13, 2007, 12:03 AM
Post #53 of 90
(1403 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
hopperhopper wrote: shockabuku wrote: fitzontherocks wrote: ... Dammit, quit generalizing, Major. It's not as funny as it used to be. You shouldn't use that as an insult, it's disrespectful to people who don't deserve it. oh gimme a break...really...
Nope, none given. It pisses me off. I have a lot of friends who've given a lot in their lives to earn that position. They don't deserve to have their accomplishment looked down upon like that.
(This post was edited by shockabuku on Sep 13, 2007, 12:04 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Sep 13, 2007, 12:22 AM
Post #54 of 90
(1394 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
shimanilami wrote: majid_sabet wrote: Hold on to your biners, cams and especially your rope cause once they become made in CHINA ,there will be no more QA. Why would you say such a thing? If CE/UIAA are prerequisites for climbing gear to be accepted in the marketplace - which is becoming more and more the case - then any company that hopes to successfully sell "Made in China" equipment will implement those measures necessary to obtain these certifications. And in terms of quality, those certifications mean a hell of a lot more than any "Made in the USA" label. It may be made using child labor and toxic chemicals, but it will be good quality ... and cheap.
Ben
Chainese are eventually going to get their hands on the climbing market however, their concept is to make moneeee, that is MOOOONEEEEEE
They do not give a fu*k if you drop or die as long as they could provide better prices like a whore to their masters in USA. I am not saying that they can not build or MFG products, I am worried about their concepts on QA and safety ( let the lead paint on the toys become dry first).
They want one thing......MONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE and offer cheap price to their MASTERRRRRRRRSSS like a whore.
Hold on to your cams and nuts, biner and rope. keep your last American made climbing gear before they are gone to ASIA.
(This post was edited by majid_sabet on Sep 13, 2007, 12:24 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Sep 13, 2007, 12:24 AM
Post #55 of 90
(1388 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
majid_sabet wrote: MOOOONEEEEEE ......MONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE and offer cheap price to their MASTERRRRRRRRSSS like a whore.
Why are you talking like Gollum?
|
|
|
|
|
extreme_actuary
Sep 13, 2007, 12:39 AM
Post #56 of 90
(1378 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 26, 2006
Posts: 112
|
I remember I bought a North Face Kichatna 3-layer Gore-Tex shell for about $350 in the mid 90's when they were made in American. The North Face 3-layer Gore-Tex shells now cost about the same but are made in China. The extra couple hundred dollars of savings from manufaturing it in China went into the shareholders pocket, not the purchaser.
Also, there is a reason why things made in China have poor quality. They just don't have the ability to produce goods in a sealed, controlled environment like we have in the US. I don't care how many CE/UIAA/EN standards you have, things are going to get through (and will subsequently be recalled like we've experienced before). Its one thing when I got lead paint on my kid's Elmo sprinkler, it's a different ball game when my life is hanging from my soon to be recalled Chinese carabiner.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Sep 13, 2007, 1:49 AM
Post #57 of 90
(1369 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
extreme_actuary wrote: Its one thing when I got lead paint on my kid's Elmo sprinkler,
Now that pisses me off,..
makes me feel like going out and clubbing some baby seals.
(apparently it's what we Canadians do)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 13, 2007, 1:56 AM
Post #58 of 90
(1364 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
shockabuku wrote: Nope, none given. It pisses me off. I have a lot of friends who've given a lot in their lives to earn that position. They don't deserve to have their accomplishment looked down upon like that.
I think this principle applies to many notable accomplishments, even some notable climbing achievements. I see you hold respect for what it takes to achieve that rank. (I do too btw). I also hold a deep respect for what it took our forefathers in climbing to accomplish what they did. How about you?
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
flint
Sep 13, 2007, 2:49 AM
Post #59 of 90
(1356 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 21, 2007
Posts: 543
|
rmsusa wrote: In reply to: rmsusa: I think i would disagree with your first point. from wikipedia carbon emmisions per country: Those numbers are interesting, but not, IMHO, particularly enlightening. I have a hard time believing that anybody has a handle on carbon emissions in Bolivia or Mali. Even if the numbers had some hope of being in the right range, they depend on so many compounded factors that's it's hard to know what they even mean. For instance, given the same level of development (i.e., standard of living), countries with fewer people will have lower emissions. Is it a population measure? Given two countries with the same population, the emissions will depend on standard of living (cars, electricity, sewage treatment, etc) differences. Is it a measure of standard of living? In the developing world, it's really hard to get any kind of a handle on carbon emissions at all. If half your population lives without any source of energy except burning things they pick up in the woods(basically everyone on less than USD $1.00 per day) how do you deal with that. Go to: http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/jsp/index.jsp to see where and how these people live. As a goal, I think we'd like to see all the people of the world living decent lives while being as efficient as possible with energy and polluting as little as possible. So... The emissions of a country like Bolivia MUST rise to the point where they can treat all their water and sewage and provide energy to their populations for lighting, heat and refrigeration, all of which are part of living a decent life that we, here in the first world, sometimes forget that people don't have. In the developing world, holding emissions constant isn't a real option. It would condemn them to horrible living conditions. Let's help them do it in efficient and non-polluting ways. I think you'll have to agree that cooking on a modern range is way more energy efficient than cooking over an open fire. Refrigerating food may raise emissions, but it will cut down on intestinal difficulties which are a prime source of infant mortality.
I normally try to stay out of these topics on a personal level, but some of you have no idea on the situation or topics that you are making broad claims about (a common concept on all internet forums.)
To comment on the above quote, everything except for obtaining a comparable standard of living for everyone is total bullshit. It’s called global learning and infrastructure escalation. Come to China, I even have a couch you can chill on and I will teach you about this.
One example of this idea is that every residential structure in the country from 2000 on has no phone lines, none. Trust me, I work in an architecture firm, I see it everyday. They do this to save on time and costs, due to their knowledge that mobile technology is the main source of communications. This foresight happens all the time, but there is also a delay in the idea.
Another example is the 3 gorges damn, which is the largest source of hydroelectric power in the world... the LARGEST. Talk about a country that has no clue right, you dumb piece of.... This is ignoring the people displaced by creating the largest man made fresh water reservoir in the world. But hey, they moved them into houses with your standard of living options, were they could not be more unhappy.
None learning example, there was a major bicycle lane here, and in a two year period it became a 20 lane double deck highway, yes in two years. This is to accommodate that horseshit standard of living that you associate and project. This city also has a subway that if the same amount of money was put into, would have been a more efficient option for everyone.
But don't blame this on China for building the highway, granted the 1:1.3 taxi to person ration is a bit high, or the fact that the government owns 2 cars for every employee, I blame my self and every other "developed" country out there, next time you get in your car, bang your head on the steering wheel the compensate.
You want to learn something rmsusa, look up a theory called the GDHP that is the gross domestic happiness product, if I remember, it was developed in a socialist government, but for all you care I will summarize, It doesn't take cars, game boys, and your living room shit to make people happy.
edited to add: Cleaner as they become more developed, what a fucking joke, I can only imagine how dirty America was before white assholes came over with guns.
(This post was edited by flint on Sep 13, 2007, 3:16 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
flint
Sep 13, 2007, 3:09 AM
Post #60 of 90
(1352 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 21, 2007
Posts: 543
|
To everyone else, the problem with production standards in China is to complex to appropriately assess, no matter what you read, without at least 5 years to study the situation.
I have a friend, a performance engineer for an American plastic production company, one that makes tones of shit you don't even notice in your high standard of living day, and the first 4 hours of his work day is literally kicking people in the ass in order to get them to do the appropriate tasks. I have toured the plant.
The problem is not the people, it is a combination of issues, the main being an understanding of a cause and effect standards in a cognitive thought process. The country moved so quickly to fit our (developed) standards, that the production lines honestly don't understand consequence of poor product development actions. Without proper education, the driving hand of a cheaper product (which is an unstoppable beast) is simply the major factor.
We are all to blame, not China, not poor production, all of us. Take a macro economics class, even 101, and if you pay .02$ you will start to see this.
I am not defending China in anyway here, personally I think the shit they make here sucks, and when I went climbing, I refused to buy and climb on any gear that I didn't bring with me. But, production of gear outside the states at the same level is possible, I am guessing you all use computers, which the technology for excelled after production was moved to Taiwan. I am just saying that removing your personal asshole assessment of the situation might bring you do a different understanding.
Yes companies export production, yes you will continue to buy the products, simple as that. That is the main derivative. The thread topic shouldn't be about whether companies are bad for moving production; it should be about what companies due to develop a more stable production process for everyone, regardless of location.
Maybe in the econ101 class you can raise your hand and ask a question about social responsibilty of companies on a macro lavel and how that effects the system.
But, hey, I am just one of those internet forum posters that make broad statements with no understanding of the topic.
|
|
|
|
|
eastvillage
Sep 13, 2007, 3:25 AM
Post #61 of 90
(1345 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 14, 2004
Posts: 262
|
Actually, we do not to have to continue to buy climbing gear from relatively small companies that eagerly betray the trust of the communities they serve with self-serving rationalizations and made up truths.
We are not their lackey "shareholders" and we have no "stake" or future in profits without ethics.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Sep 13, 2007, 3:38 AM
Post #62 of 90
(1338 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
eastvillage wrote: Actually, we do not to have to continue to buy climbing gear from relatively small companies that eagerly betray the trust of the communities they serve with self-serving rationalizations and made up truths. We are not their lackey "shareholders" and we have no "stake" or future in profits without ethics.
[sarcasm]
Whoa there, buckaroo. You mean you actually believe that letting consumers make their own decisions after gathering information is a good idea? You dare suggest that the free market will eventually prevail if left the hell alone?
Well howsabout that?
[/sarcasm]
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Sep 13, 2007, 6:00 AM
Post #63 of 90
(1330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
dingus wrote: shockabuku wrote: Nope, none given. It pisses me off. I have a lot of friends who've given a lot in their lives to earn that position. They don't deserve to have their accomplishment looked down upon like that. I think this principle applies to many notable accomplishments, even some notable climbing achievements. I see you hold respect for what it takes to achieve that rank. (I do too btw). I also hold a deep respect for what it took our forefathers in climbing to accomplish what they did. How about you? Cheers DMT
OUCH!!!
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Sep 13, 2007, 2:38 PM
Post #64 of 90
(1313 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
dingus wrote: shockabuku wrote: Nope, none given. It pisses me off. I have a lot of friends who've given a lot in their lives to earn that position. They don't deserve to have their accomplishment looked down upon like that. I think this principle applies to many notable accomplishments, even some notable climbing achievements. I see you hold respect for what it takes to achieve that rank. (I do too btw). I also hold a deep respect for what it took our forefathers in climbing to accomplish what they did. How about you? Cheers DMT
I do. I'm just not convinced that things can, or should, be physically preserved "as is." I don't know that answer. I have some reservations about turning the world into a museum. Only so much history can be preserved before you start encroaching on the resources of the present. Also, what's the cut line on what get's preserved and what doesn't? And for how long?
At some point history, in a general sense, needs to go into a book and those who are interested can learn about it. I guess it's a question of relevancy. It's like saving your kids' school work. When they're in college, the 2nd grade collage probably isn't relevant to anything other than your memories. So I guess if you've got the inclination and space, you save it. Otherwise, it moves on.
So, in my mind, in the instance of climbing history preservation, it's probably up to the local community to decide how much they can afford to preserve in the view of the needs of the present and the changing future.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 13, 2007, 2:48 PM
Post #65 of 90
(1309 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Right on, I knew you did.
In reply to: So, in my mind, in the instance of climbing history preservation, it's probably up to the local community to decide how much they can afford to preserve in the view of the needs of the present and the changing future.
There ya go. All starts with that foundation of respect. I'm glad we see eye to eye on that.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
lwilson
Sep 13, 2007, 3:35 PM
Post #66 of 90
(1294 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 28, 2006
Posts: 101
|
maxclimber1w -
I didn't read the rest of the posts, so maybe someone already asked this, but....have you personally been to any of these company's factories over in China, so that you could personally see yourself whats going on over there ? I agree there are human rights issues there, but really, just because something was made in China, doesn't mean its slave labor.
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Sep 13, 2007, 4:19 PM
Post #67 of 90
(1276 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
Wilson, this whole thread is about Sinophobia and racism. Don't let facts get in the way of good rants. Everything said here was said about Japanese products after WWII. Then Korean products (which many climbers now gladly use). Then Taiwanese products....
(This post was edited by roy_hinkley_jr on Sep 13, 2007, 4:20 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
rmsusa
Sep 13, 2007, 5:51 PM
Post #68 of 90
(1266 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 1017
|
In reply to: To comment on the above quote, everything except for obtaining a comparable standard of living for everyone is total bullshit.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I found your reply a bit mysterious largely irrelevant. I'm not sure what it all means, but I believe that in the developing world, infrastructure development is a GOOD thing. Yes, sometimes people are displaced or inconvenienced and it doesn't always happen the way you, personally, think it should.
In reply to: You want to learn something rmsusa, look up a theory called the GDHP that is the gross domestic happiness product
I already know about it. For a time, it was a laughingstock of the development economics community. Promulgated in Bhutan. Not a theory at all (never rose to that level), but a government attempt to make people feel good while enmeshed in poverty.
|
|
|
|
|
extreme_actuary
Sep 13, 2007, 6:45 PM
Post #69 of 90
(1253 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 26, 2006
Posts: 112
|
roy_hinkley_jr wrote: Wilson, this whole thread is about Sinophobia and racism. Don't let facts get in the way of good rants. Everything said here was said about Japanese products after WWII. Then Korean products (which many climbers now gladly use). Then Taiwanese products....
I have never worked in a Chinese factory, but...I have toured my father's companies and he is an engineer that has worked for torpedo companies to toy companies to soap companies in America, and none of them look anything like the factories in India. I am Indian, so I am not sure if I can be racist toward Indians, but Indian factories don't have the ability to control the production environment as well as American factories. I am not saying that they will never catch up, but currently they are not up to America's standards. Japan and Taiwan have improved their production environments to the point where they could be better than America's. If I am 10 feet above my #4 stopper and see "Made in India" engraved on the side, I am crapping a load. If I see "Made in Japan," I would feel pretty good.
I work in a department where all of my coworkers are from mainland China or Taiwan, and they all agree about China's poor production environments.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 13, 2007, 7:00 PM
Post #70 of 90
(1245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Hinkley has the gift of being able to read everyone's mind. You may as well surrender now, its no use.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
maxclimber1w
Sep 13, 2007, 11:22 PM
Post #71 of 90
(1209 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 11, 2004
Posts: 124
|
@wilson
honestly, I don't think I said anything about conditions in the climbing factories. To me the issue is more that those taxes go to supporting a government that has been doing some terrible stuff. 1.5 Million people dead in Tibet, man. No slave labor can compare to that, that is genocide that has been funded (somewhat) by taxes payed by our companies outsourcing.
|
|
|
|
|
eastvillage
Sep 14, 2007, 1:33 AM
Post #72 of 90
(1198 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 14, 2004
Posts: 262
|
This thread is all about the betrayal and greed of US companies towards Americans. It has very little to do with China or Chinese people.
Blanket charges of racism are frequently used against US citizens who choose to fight against the corporate sellout of America.
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Sep 14, 2007, 2:16 AM
Post #73 of 90
(1192 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
unforunately, this thread seems to be taking a fairly black & white stance...
China has a terrible human rights record.
No doubt.
But that was not the original point... the point was in reference to the bad environmental practices in China and the companies who espouse holier-than-thou attitudes to the environment and yet will use environmentally irresponsible manufacturing procedures in order to save a $$...
That was a fair point of the finger... I do not think it was an intention to begin China-bashing.
Developing nations the world over have always been responsible for poor practice... probably more so in the past than now... The industrial revolution was no picnic folks.
We should not condone poor practice, but we should also not take the same angelic stance as those companies being criticised in the op and pretend we are so perfect when there are skeletons in all of our closets.
:-)
Adam
|
|
|
|
|
flint
Sep 14, 2007, 2:22 AM
Post #74 of 90
(1189 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 21, 2007
Posts: 543
|
rmsusa wrote: In reply to: To comment on the above quote, everything except for obtaining a comparable standard of living for everyone is total bullshit. You're entitled to your opinion, but I found your reply a bit mysterious largely irrelevant. I'm not sure what it all means, but I believe that in the developing world, infrastructure development is a GOOD thing. Yes, sometimes people are displaced or inconvenienced and it doesn't always happen the way you, personally, think it should. rmsusa wrote: I am just asking you to examine what you think makes a good standard of living, and if that should be universal or situational. rmsusa wrote: In reply to: You want to learn something rmsusa, look up a theory called the GDHP that is the gross domestic happiness product I already know about it. For a time, it was a laughingstock of the development economics community. Promulgated in Bhutan. Not a theory at all (never rose to that level), but a government attempt to make people feel good while enmeshed in poverty. rmsusa wrote: You are correct that is was a laughing stock for a great deal of time, but I think that re examining the concept might shed some new light on the topic. I will do the same, seeing as your statement of a government attempt intregues me, knowing that the UK and other parts of the EU have used the formula to develope standards for their countries. j-
|
|
|
|
|
flint
Sep 14, 2007, 2:49 AM
Post #75 of 90
(1181 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 21, 2007
Posts: 543
|
ajkclay wrote: unforunately, this thread seems to be taking a fairly black & white stance... China has a terrible human rights record. No doubt. But that was not the original point... the point was in reference to the bad environmental practices in China and the companies who espouse holier-than-thou attitudes to the environment and yet will use environmentally irresponsible manufacturing procedures in order to save a $$... That was a fair point of the finger... I do not think it was an intention to begin China-bashing. Developing nations the world over have always been responsible for poor practice... probably more so in the past than now... The industrial revolution was no picnic folks. We should not condone poor practice, but we should also not take the same angelic stance as those companies being criticised in the op and pretend we are so perfect when there are skeletons in all of our closets. :-) Adam
Someone is knocking on the right doors... nice
j-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
