Cheapest good weed now ? I found 350 thb/gram but not cheaper yet, any idea ?

[LucysDad]

3 minutes ago, baboon said:

You can add my Ma and a couple of others to your list. Voted leave for a laugh and are now horrified.

 

 

.. and the learning point from that exercise was ?

[beautifulthailand99]

1 hour ago, Timbob said:

I accept the result of the referendum, even though I voted to remain. But how many who voted leave did so on the basis of a no deal outcome? I'd say very few. People like Liam Fox said that Brexit deal will be the 'easiest thing in human history'. It hasn't quite gone that way has it?

 

Two in a bed Foxy (just good male friends) has been quiet for a while methinks he likes his ministerial salary and car too much over principle or his long suffering wife does. 

[beautifulthailand99]

2 minutes ago, LucysDad said:

 

 

.. and the learning point from that exercise was ?

they've come to their senses unlike others that want to jump out of the plane without a parachute because they think they can fly. 

[baboon]

3 minutes ago, LucysDad said:

 

 

.. and the learning point from that exercise was ?

You would have to ask them...

[Brunolem]

5 minutes ago, sandyf said:

And what would those facts be.

 

Singapore - The most expensive city in the world and in bed with the USA on defence. A founding member and strong supporter of ASEAN, which is trying to model itself on the EU.

Switzerland - A long history of neutrality providing a sound economic base but still finds the need to be strongly attached to the EU.

Finland - a member of the EU

South Korea - Also in bed with the USA on defence and the EU has been the largest foreign investor for decades.

 

Are you beginning to see the common denominator. 

We are not talking about the same thing.

Being small doesn't necessarily means being isolated like, say, North Korea.

While some of these countries may well have defense accords with the US, they don't have to call Washington every time they want to make a decision.

In the EU, on the other hand, elected governments, such as in Italy, can't even pass a budget without the approval of the unelected politburo in Brussels!

It is obvious that the bigger an organization gets, the more inefficient it becomes (just look at the US army, unable to defeat minor opponents, while burning through trillions of dollars in the process).

[sandyf]

5 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

We are not talking about the same thing.

Being small doesn't necessarily means being isolated like, say, North Korea.

While some of these countries may well have defense accords with the US, they don't have to call Washington every time they want to make a decision.

In the EU, on the other hand, elected governments, such as in Italy, can't even pass a budget without the approval of the unelected politburo in Brussels!

It is obvious that the bigger an organization gets, the more inefficient it becomes (just look at the US army, unable to defeat minor opponents, while burning through trillions of dollars in the process).

Your words   -  "This is the BS that is peddled by the globalists who promote the mantra that bigger is better, when the hard facts prove the opposite."

 

The hard facts do not prove the opposite otherwise "economy of scale" would have no meaning.

[Brunolem]

43 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Your words   -  "This is the BS that is peddled by the globalists who promote the mantra that bigger is better, when the hard facts prove the opposite."

 

The hard facts do not prove the opposite otherwise "economy of scale" would have no meaning.

They have no meaning!

There are no economies of scale, especially in bureaucracies!

 

Economies of scale is another BS peddled by CEOs who want to justify their acquisitions, who often end up in financial disaster (Bayer may soon be the next victim following its brilliant acquisition of Monsanto).

 

And where are the economies of scale in the gigantic US army?

 

Just for the fun: https://www.businessinsider.com/us-air-force-spent-1280-on-coffee-cup-2018-10

 

[beautifulthailand99]

4 hours ago, Basil B said:

You, Boris, Gove, Farage, smoggy, any anyone else is free to jump off Beachy Head but I will not be following you.

Yes please I'll give them a push .........these guys know how to fly without wings and find unicorns. 

 

[beautifulthailand99]

What we have lost.....a nation mourns

 

[Nigel Garvie]

There's a splendid Gaelic word, bourach. It means an utter, hideous mess. This is bourach, Mach Five. Or Omni-bourach as it is now being referred to.

[StreetCowboy]

5 hours ago, Brunolem said:

They have no meaning!

There are no economies of scale, especially in bureaucracies!

 

Economies of scale is another BS peddled by CEOs who want to justify their acquisitions, who often end up in financial disaster (Bayer may soon be the next victim following its brilliant acquisition of Monsanto).

 

And where are the economies of scale in the gigantic US army?

 

Just for the fun: https://www.businessinsider.com/us-air-force-spent-1280-on-coffee-cup-2018-10

 

That's why the world is dominated by mom and pop coffee shops, and there is no coffee chain the equivalent of Starbucks.

 

That is why the automobile industry is so fragmented, with local firms supplying the local province all over the world.

 

That is why companies like Apple and Microsoft struggle to maintain market share

 

Right?  

There are no economies of scale

[Retiredandhappyhere]

11 hours ago, oilinki said:

I think every European knows that it was just a minority, a loud minority, which really wanted UK to leave EU. At this point, I wouldn't mind this arrogant minority to suffer a bit of tough love by reality and lose a bit of face. 

 

What comes to personal relations. Smart and interesting people are still the same, regardless where they are from. Those relationships will flourish even after brexit.

So, the majority who voted for Brexit  has magically turned into a  "minority" in your eyes.  Not only that, they were apparently an "arrogant minority".  You have therefore decided to join the EU negotiators in wanting the UK "to suffer a bit of tough love by reality and losing a bit of face".  Your accusation of arrogance is pointing in the wrong direction but a mirror would solve the problem.

[Retiredandhappyhere]

4 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

That's why the world is dominated by mom and pop coffee shops, and there is no coffee chain the equivalent of Starbucks.

 

That is why the automobile industry is so fragmented, with local firms supplying the local province all over the world.

 

That is why companies like Apple and Microsoft struggle to maintain market share

 

Right?  

There are no economies of scale

The problem is that the benefits and economies of scale only seem to benefit the relatively rich and very little filters down to the ordinary workers who actually produce the profits for these massive organisations.  Not satisfied with that many of these huge businesses avoid paying their proper share of taxes, thereby enriching the rich even further again at the expenses of the ordinary taxpayer who usually has no opportunity to share in the same tax avoidance schemes.  At least Mom and Pop shops share the money around their local communities in one way or another.

 

Just look at the way in which big business, particularly in the USA, influence the political agenda. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Retiredandhappyhere said:

So, the majority who voted for Brexit  has magically turned into a  "minority" in your eyes.  Not only that, they were apparently an "arrogant minority".  You have therefore decided to join the EU negotiators in wanting the UK "to suffer a bit of tough love by reality and losing a bit of face".  Your accusation of arrogance is pointing in the wrong direction but a mirror would solve the problem.

Not magically, if you are able to read and comprehend the text I wrote which you quoted.

 

 If you are not able to comprehend, then yes, it was alla magic! 

 

 

[Brunolem]

9 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

That's why the world is dominated by mom and pop coffee shops, and there is no coffee chain the equivalent of Starbucks.

 

That is why the automobile industry is so fragmented, with local firms supplying the local province all over the world.

 

That is why companies like Apple and Microsoft struggle to maintain market share

 

Right?  

There are no economies of scale

This has nothing to do with that!

 

You are talking about monopolies and oligopolies that smother competition!

 

This is the opposite of free market competition!

 

These companies work hand in hand with big banks in order to implement their dream of one world/one currency/one bank/one fast food chain and so on...

 

Economies of scale have nothing to do with their success...unlimited access to ultra cheap funding is what matters.

 

The typical example is Amazon, which has been losing money since its creation by selling below cost.

 

Amazon is killing the competition while staying afloat thanks to the banking system.

 

Its "economies of scale", if you want to call them that, come from the sweat of its workers who work in terrible conditions in order to squeeze as much as possible the production costs.

 

The same goes for Apple and other abusers of slave labor.

 

Of course, the small entrepreneur cannot compete with these monsters, not because he cannot be competitive but because the balance is tilted in order to favor the selected fews.

 

These giant companies are nothing to admire, they are a nightmare, they are the death of the capitalist system and the free market!

 

[Brunolem]

9 hours ago, Retiredandhappyhere said:

The problem is that the benefits and economies of scale only seem to benefit the relatively rich and very little filters down to the ordinary workers who actually produce the profits for these massive organisations.  Not satisfied with that many of these huge businesses avoid paying their proper share of taxes, thereby enriching the rich even further again at the expenses of the ordinary taxpayer who usually has no opportunity to share in the same tax avoidance schemes.  At least Mom and Pop shops share the money around their local communities in one way or another.

 

Just look at the way in which big business, particularly in the USA, influence the political agenda. 

Right!!!

 

The "economies of scale" are made on the back of the workers!

See Apple and its Chinese sweatshop where workers were jumping through the windows until they had to install nets!

And see Amazon where workers pee in bottles because they can't afford a toilet break!

 

And as you rightly say, all the profits are stashed in tax havens, escaping taxation, and benefiting a handful of top executives (the four top executives below Apple's CEO each received a 25 million dollars bonus last year!).

 

 

[StreetCowboy]

24 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Right!!!

 

The "economies of scale" are made on the back of the workers!

See Apple and its Chinese sweatshop where workers were jumping through the windows until they had to install nets!

And see Amazon where workers pee in bottles because they can't afford a toilet break!

 

And as you rightly say, all the profits are stashed in tax havens, escaping taxation, and benefiting a handful of top executives (the four top executives below Apple's CEO each received a 25 million dollars bonus last year!).

 

 

The bloke I know that does work for Amazon seems happy enough.  I know personal experience is no substitute for internet anecdotes, but there we have it.

[sandyf]

16 hours ago, Brunolem said:

They have no meaning!

There are no economies of scale, especially in bureaucracies!

Economies of scale is another BS peddled by CEOs who want to justify their acquisitions,

Now say again who is peddling BS.

 

Economies of Scale refer to the cost advantage experienced by a firm when it increases its level of output. The advantage arises due to the inverse relationship between per-unit fixed cost and the quantity produced. The greater the quantity of output produced, the lower the per-unit fixed cost. Economies of scale also result in a fall in average variable costs (average non-fixed costs) with an increase in output. This is brought about by operational efficiencies and synergies as a result of an increase in the scale of production.

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/economies-of-scale/

[Brunolem]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Now say again who is peddling BS.

 

Economies of Scale refer to the cost advantage experienced by a firm when it increases its level of output. The advantage arises due to the inverse relationship between per-unit fixed cost and the quantity produced. The greater the quantity of output produced, the lower the per-unit fixed cost. Economies of scale also result in a fall in average variable costs (average non-fixed costs) with an increase in output. This is brought about by operational efficiencies and synergies as a result of an increase in the scale of production.

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/economies-of-scale/

Which essentially applies to manufacturing companies, much less so to service companies.

 

And nowadays direct production costs are so low (electronics for example) that there is not much to save on that side, which is why the efforts are focused on bringing down the staff costs...and often also the quality...

 

For example, if you are happy with Starbucks horrendous, and not so cheap, industrial croissants, I much prefer those made by my local bakery that retail at a similar price.

 

And I won't even mention the cakes...

Edited November 17, 2018 by Brunolem

[Brunolem]

1 hour ago, StreetCowboy said:

The bloke I know that does work for Amazon seems happy enough.  I know personal experience is no substitute for internet anecdotes, but there we have it.

One can't build a conclusion on a single testimony!

 

It's like saying "I have a friend who just came back from a tour in Irak, he was quite satisfied", and then conclude that all the reports talking about the Irak disaster are most probably wrong!

[StreetCowboy]

14 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

One can't build a conclusion on a single testimony!

 

It's like saying "I have a friend who just came back from a tour in Irak, he was quite satisfied", and then conclude that all the reports talking about the Irak disaster are most probably wrong!

You have to weigh up the credibility of sources.

 

i don’t know anyone that’s been to Iraq, but my mate who cycled across Iran spoke most highly of the country and people

Edited November 17, 2018 by StreetCowboy

[Brunolem]

26 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

You have to weigh up the credibility of sources.

 

i don’t know anyone that’s been to Iraq, but my mate who cycled across Iran spoke most highly of the country and people

On Iran I would agree, and you won't find much documentaries or articles on internet saying the opposite...except if posted by Netanyahu or Kushner!

 

As far as Amazon is concerned, it all depends what kind of job one is performing.

 

Software developers, for example, certainly get a different treatment than delivery boys.

 

The same for Apple...workers in Foxconn sweatshop in China, and employees at the headquarters in California probably don't share the same experience (and benefits) from the company...

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, Brunolem said:

Which essentially applies to manufacturing companies, much less so to service companies.

Keep wriggling, this is what you said.

"This is the BS that is peddled by the globalists who promote the mantra that bigger is better, when the hard facts prove the opposite."

[Brunolem]

1 minute ago, sandyf said:

Keep wriggling, this is what you said.

"This is the BS that is peddled by the globalists who promote the mantra that bigger is better, when the hard facts prove the opposite."

I confirm!

But remember that the thread is about the UK and the EU, not about business.

After saying what you quote, I gave a few examples of countries, not companies, that were doing very well despite being small.

 

When it comes to governing, it is obvious that bigger is not better (remember what Ronald Reagan used to say about that) and the EU is far worse than the Washington behemoth...just look at the translation costs involved in running this nightmare.

 

When it comes to business, things are very different, because the economic landscape has been so much altered that the basic capitalist process of creative destruction has disappeared, to be replaced by cronyism, lobbyism and so on.

 

Most of the giants like Starbucks or Mc Donalds, for example, do not kill the competition because they are cheaper thanks to economies of scale.

 

They expand thanks to relentless marketing and advertising, that the small guys can't afford, and access to unlimited ultra cheap funding, that the small guys can't get.

 

One example here in Thailand, at Central Ubon.

Next to each other are a Swensens and an artisanal ice cream seller.

They sell at the same price, but the artisanal ice cream is much better...not really surprising.

And yet, Swensens has twenty times more customers...because many of these customers have been influenced by advertising!

The economies of scale between both competitors have nothing to do with their relative success...

[sandyf]

24 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

I confirm!

But remember that the thread is about the UK and the EU, not about business.

After saying what you quote, I gave a few examples of countries, not companies, that were doing very well despite being small.

 

When it comes to governing, it is obvious that bigger is not better (remember what Ronald Reagan used to say about that) and the EU is far worse than the Washington behemoth...just look at the translation costs involved in running this nightmare.

 

When it comes to business, things are very different, because the economic landscape has been so much altered that the basic capitalist process of creative destruction has disappeared, to be replaced by cronyism, lobbyism and so on.

 

Most of the giants like Starbucks or Mc Donalds, for example, do not kill the competition because they are cheaper thanks to economies of scale.

 

They expand thanks to relentless marketing and advertising, that the small guys can't afford, and access to unlimited ultra cheap funding, that the small guys can't get.

 

One example here in Thailand, at Central Ubon.

Next to each other are a Swensens and an artisanal ice cream seller.

They sell at the same price, but the artisanal ice cream is much better...not really surprising.

And yet, Swensens has twenty times more customers...because many of these customers have been influenced by advertising!

The economies of scale between both competitors have nothing to do with their relative success...

At the end of the day there are no facts that prove smaller is better. Like beauty, all in the eye of the beholder.

""This is the BS that is peddled by the globalists who promote the mantra that bigger is better, when the hard facts prove the opposite.""

[Brunolem]

17 minutes ago, sandyf said:

At the end of the day there are no facts that prove smaller is better. Like beauty, all in the eye of the beholder.

""This is the BS that is peddled by the globalists who promote the mantra that bigger is better, when the hard facts prove the opposite.""

As you say, it is all in the eyes of the beholder...depending if one prefers diversity or uniformity.

 

Personally, I'd rather have a choice between a multitude of suppliers or vendors, as is the case with, say, clothing, rather than being restricted to chose between Coca and Pepsi...

[Baerboxer]

On 11/16/2018 at 8:32 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

I don't know if TM will survive. I doubt it, but... who else could achieve a majority of support?

 

I don't know if there will be a 'hard Brexit', a 'soft Brexit', or no 'Brexit'.

 

I would bet my life savings that the UK (sadly) will finish up this process smaller, poorer. less influential and diminished.

 

In the twentieth century, the name "Chamberlain" was shorthand for political stupidity of the highest order. I hope that the UK will make the name 'Cameron' the twenty-first century's shorthand for political stupidity; he deserves the "credit" for what he did.

 

 

 

 

Spot on. Cameron thought he was being clever. Executed his own silly idea badly and then buggered off.

 

But he and his pal Osborne will do very nicely thank you.

 

And remember, the law which was needed to create the referendum clearly describes it as "advisory".

 

Cameron, could have faced up to it, and put it to parliament; so could May. But with anti EU very left wing Corbyn and his cronies leading the opposition no one challenged it.

 

A representative democracy designed to stop poor knee jerk reactions - only works when the representatives do their job rather than pursue their own interests.

 

Worst government and opposition in my lifetime,

[dick dasterdly]

3 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

You have to weigh up the credibility of sources.

 

i don’t know anyone that’s been to Iraq, but my mate who cycled across Iran spoke most highly of the country and people

Whereas I worked (briefly) for a small Iranian company in the uk, and it resulted in my having a 'generalised' dislike for Iranians - whilst feeling v sorry for their women ☹️.

 

 

 

 

[beautifulthailand99]

Tears from Bill a contrite leaver - still time for some buyer's regret.

 

 

[nontabury]

On 11/16/2018 at 1:32 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

I don't know if TM will survive. I doubt it, but... who else could achieve a majority of support?

 

I don't know if there will be a 'hard Brexit', a 'soft Brexit', or no 'Brexit'.

 

I would bet my life savings that the UK (sadly) will finish up this process smaller, poorer. less influential and diminished.

 

In the twentieth century, the name "Chamberlain" was shorthand for political stupidity of the highest order. I hope that the UK will make the name 'Cameron' the twenty-first century's shorthand for political stupidity; he deserves the "credit" for what he did.

 

 

 

No that accolade goes to Appeaser May. Certainly the weakest P.M the U.K has had since WW2.

Although to give her credit,she’s done a fantastic conn job,with her lies to impliment  the will of the British people.

Edited November 17, 2018 by nontabury