Intellectual Property Law: Stop Now, & No Further

When I began lecturing, after ten years of working for others, I was always perplexed when people would express their fear of starting for either the risk of IPR violation or the onerous cost of getting rights.    Since I had never encountered anyone in those ten years who cared a whit for IPR, yet they were all successful, I wondered why anyone would worry about this.

Over the years I realized there was a tremendous industry in fear built up, and the benefits to a very small group.  To review, of the nearly seven million patents issued since 1789, almost nothing patented has ever turned into a product.  All patent attorneys know this, almost none will tell you.  Kinsella and Patry will.

William Patry does an excellent job of taking apart forensically the nonsense statistics supporting Intellectual Property Rights.  The NSF and USPTO have done studies as well.  And guess what we learn: if the system works for you, it is wonderful!

And if you do not have a dog in the fight, you simply state the facts.

The USPTO study tells us 

This report played up the importance of IP, claiming “the entire U.S. economy relies on some form of IP,” and estimated that “IP-intensive industries” accounted for 40 million American jobs and 35% of the U.S. GDP in 2010.

Are you thinking high tech?  You'd be wrong....  the USPTO had to include grocery stores to reach that number.

Now the National Science Foundation did it;s own study, from another angle...  and this is what they found:

In 2010, 87.2% of businesses reported that trademarks were “not important” to them.

90.1% of businesses reported that copyrights were “not important” to them.

96.2% of businesses reported that patents were “not important” to them.

So why do we still have them?  Because there is an army of government workers, called officers of the court (lawyers), who can keep the system alive by pretending to be self-employed as they burden industry with their rent-seeking.

One step toward economic recovery will be the complete elimination of all intellectual property law in USA: patents, copyrights and trademarks.    They are simply unnecessary yet do tremendous harm.  But if a system works for you, you love it.



Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Getting Kidnapped on Business In China

I am always astonished when I hear anyone would create a joint venture with a Chinese entity. Let the Chinese manage China.  Just buy FOB.  There is no upside to even a JV, but I had no idea how bad the downside was.  Here is a "how-not-to-get-kidnapped-doing-business-in-china review.

A few weeks ago, a China risk consultancy contacted us regarding their own China legal matter. During our conversation, the caller went off and said that he really liked our posts on how to avoid getting kidnapped in China. He then told me that so far this year, not a single week had passed without his company having been called in to deal with a “hostage or hostage-like situation.” He told me that such incidents are way up this year from 2012 and that 2012 had double the incidents of 2011. He said that nobody seems to believe how prevelant this incidents are but that we should keep writing about them because they are “happening like crazy and with China’s economy continuing to soften, they will only increase.”

In forty years of dealing with China, I have never personally heard of such a case, and only once before in the news.  Certainly the tactic of leaving China to the Chinese avoids this problem, but I wonder if having a lawyer involved somehow precipitates getting kidnapped.  I mean first a lawyer gets you set up in China, and then when things goes bad, is there to negotiate your release.

Ka-ching, Ka-ching.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Exporting: Set Up To Fail - A Caution

Let's suss out a problem in exporting at the small business level.  It is a fundamental point that you have a solid domestic market before you export, and begin exporting only if an when export sales become no more difficult and every bit as profitable as domestic sales.  (The MOQ FOB brings that point sooner.)

On element that makes your product attractive overseas is your success in a domestic market.  It does not matter if no one in an export target market has ever heard of your product, all that matters is the fact you have been successful domestically.  Selling in your home country is an excellent recommendation to buyers in a target country.

The fact you are successful domestically is the result of your hard work to make that happen.  Branding decisions, channel research, labelling, packaging, the sum total of which resulted in what success you have found domestically.  And for most people, this part was fun and exciting.  (It is common for successful people to look back on "the good old days..." and forget the terror of not knowing and the anxiety of the overdrawn bank account.)

Naturally, when exporting into an alien market the unwitting assumption is "let's do it again."  The idea is to repeat all of those steps, and then own the market overseas like one owns the market at home.

For conservators, this may be a good idea, for their products are commodities, like Starbuck's Coffee or Amazon Kindle.  But for small businesses, the costs of marketing overseas plus the management of a foreign staff makes success or owning a market overseas highly improbable.

As a practical matter, the people an American relies upon to effect decisions overseas will simply listen to how much is being invested and play along to milk the process for all it is worth.  On one hand whatever the small American company learns is of value for the local to execute himself, on the other hand success is unlikely so the goal is to draw out the process and maintain a sinecure as long as possible.

A better approach is to sell FOB, and let the buyers overseas position your product as they see best.  You make a profit no matter what, they do all of the work necessary to build the market.  They own the market, but they do all of the work necessary to build it at no cost nor risk to you.

For someone whose business is "his baby" this is hard to do.  One can imagine all sorts of terrible things happening, although there are no real examples of these fears turning real.  On the other hand, there are countless horror stories of small to medium USA enterprises finding disastrous results at attempting to go native and build a market overseas.

Remember, it is the home market that recommends your product overseas.  It is that to which your importer/customer overseas is touting to grow the market.  There is your point of control: your USA market.

Let people overseas be your overseas market development masters.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Contra Anarchy

That most prolific writer in history, Anonymous, keeps posting comments on my blog, this time on anarchy:
______

The problem with the anarchy view: aren't you assuming that people will decide not to take advantage of each other? 

***I assume people will attempt to take advantageous of others at all times and at all places.  It is only when there is a State that their desire to do so is possible.***

How do you stop people from cheating and taking advantage of someone? 

***By not offering him powers, sought and unsought, necessary to effect his evil plans.  Do not pledge allegiance to a state. We have the problem of people cheating and taking advantage of others now, on an unspeakable scale, usually by state actors on behalf of supra-national actors.  The question is why do you state-faithers accept cheating and taking advantage now?***

Humans need rules for society to function properly.

***Of course, that is why we have rules for chess, skiiing, and Lex Mercatoria, things that matter, rules that endure.  But States never effect lasting rules, only passing rules for as long as a group of villains can abuse others and go on, and then skedaddle to Bolivia, or some other refuge. As the USA crumbles for its lawlessness, the Bush family buys 100,000 acres in Paraguay.  The rules of chess have outlasted 1000 of your regimes.***

How do you keep the strong from taking advantage of the weak? 

***By not consenting to be governed, but not offering unsought powers.***

I understand that government has its problems too, but I think that the anarchic view is Utopian, too idealistic, and is unlikely to be achieved in reality.

***Too late: almost all human interaction is on an anarchic level.  People cooperate enough to send a love one away to be destroyed so Dick Cheney can have more $#!+, vote for someone who has hopes contrary to their own, take out a loan.  But all of those, although some are significant, amount to almost nothing in the measure of a life lived. The utopian view is that a state can help people.***

 I think there will always be people who will band together to pursue their common interests, and compete with other groups of people.

***Of course.  No question there.  The only question is if one voluntarily submits and then leads an inauthentic life.  A hint at what could be is Hong Kong, which has the entire range of good to wickedness, in the usual proportions, but there is no state apparatus to grant anyone enough power to abuse others.  Just no leverage there...   so there is peace and prosperity. You have nothing to show with a state, where anarchy has peace and prosperity wherever it is, and it is all around us.***

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

The Limits of the Free Market

The free market is limited to the market.  There are many non-market events, like falling in love, an act of charity, a crime or natural disasters.  What market and non-market events share is they must be voluntary to be legitimate, where possible.

Building a house is a market event.  A house burning down is not.  Buying and selling insurance is a market event.

Fraud and force are not market events, since all market events must be voluntary to be so defined.  To be robbed is not a market event.  When the robber is known, and no one will trade with the robber, so he must either make restitution or starve slowly to death in the wilderness, this is not a market event, but it is a legal system.

When one person lies dead and another standing over him with a gun says "he was robbing me..." neither is a market event.  The degree to which people will work with the person who is living is not a market event, it is a legal event in anarchy.  One acts voluntarily.

If I pay for the education of a poor child, the provision of the service of education and my payment thereof is a market event, but the act is charitable.

So no, the market, free or otherwise, does not provide for all things for all people.  Some events, like marriage, are religious, not market.  The market is a system of exchange of goods and services. It works best free.

If you notice, there is no room for the force and fraud of the State, but there are rules, spontaneous out of anarchy.  But the rules and participation are voluntary, like membership in the Catholic Church.

On Dec 16, 2013, at 8:38 AM, A.M. Awrote:

 I don't like the idea of any priesthood determining the allocation on any goods based on some voodoo control criteria and yet I am also very suspicious of free market mechanisms allocating this resource in a just and equitable manner.

***Activity outside of the free markets is a non-market event, the law.***

There are say six major world water corporations angling to control ALL world water resources. Every time I hear news stories of them being stymied in their plans I go "right on!"

*** Their hopes are possible only through state action.  No state, no hope for them.***

I tend to trust the chaos of the market much more than I do the robbery of the priesthood.

****What about that non-market provision of law? In anarchy, there is no state to give these people leave to steal the water. With anarchy, if and when they try to steal water, common law inhibits their attempts, and shunning is pitch perfect sanction for their attempts.***

There is a street corner about " ten paces " from my digs. I've seen five businesses go bust there in five years. Small time operations. Brutal.

***the people who run them out of business expect their 30 year vacation in the form of a pension to be paid by the people they ran out of business. The contradiction will be intense.***

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Why We Moved Away From Money

We did not move away from money...  all is still down to gold and silver and platinum...

We did move away from warehouse receipts that represented money.

In my youth, as I have recounted on this blog, I'd visit various stores to shop for the house on my parent's behalf and "charge it."  At the end of the month, my Dad would settle up.  That was credit, and there was no interest.  People bought what they needed.  Money did not grow on trues.

When Nixon tried to print money to pay for the American War in  Vietnam, the markets objected and constrained war criminality.  The official response was fraud, to go off the gold standard, and unleash credit backed by USA's ability to pay based on its ability to conquer new lands.

Credit cards began being issued like crazy, and over the decade I had some 25 or so.  They we easy to get.  Money now did grow in trees.  But we lost the American War in Vietnam and the economy took a downturn.  Jimmy Carter was elected president, he made some economic reforms, inflation showed up as a corrective, and Carter was run out due to bad timing.

The benefits of Carter's economic policies showed up in the Reagan Admin, since these things take time.

Now we create income streams in a currency superior to anyone else's, only because we carefully debase our currency a little slower than everyone else is debasing theirs.

What happened is we moved from Ruth Rose Roos putting "Spiers" on the receipt and throwing it in the till to credit cards.  And the giant new increase in bank transactions to cover what Ruth once did was to automate this with ATM and supermarket scanners.  And increase taxes on those transactions, since they could now all be centrally counted.

When the dollar dies, like the weimar mark, and every single other fiat currency in the history of mankind, we'll need to know about the system it replaced, the system that worked and was natural.  don't worry about the dollar crashing.  We'll go back to a better system.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Bitcoin Scam

The internet has allowed the government to do things it always has, social engineering, on a scale never before encountered.  What is supposed to be freedom is actually "enough rope to hang yourself."

A major premise: there is no secrecy on the internet.  OK, everyone already knows that, except some people make some exceptions, for example PGP, and of course Bitcoins, and some other examples.

No.  The keys to those are all held by the security services one way or another, and nothing is secret.  If two people know something, then the chances of it being kept zero are near nil.  The more valuable a secret, say Bitcoins keys, the more someone will sell it, or the security services will compromise a secret-keeper.

But Bitcoins originated in social engineering, and it is oddly being associated with the Austrian school of economics.  Happily leaders in the field are on the record as either ambivalent or outright critics, so when that scam crashes, there will be no Austrian school economic trail.

Bitcoins are tallies.  If you step back and look at what is there, and then ignore all of the rationalizations, it is just a tally system of, whatever.  Not money.

Update, the debate rages on:

We often hear that gold and silver have intrinsic value. This statement is false. Austrian economics teaches us that value is subjective. Nothing has intrinsic value. Goods only have the value that individuals assign to them.

Yes, this basic tenet makes for an excellent analytical tool.  But my subjective valuation of gold or silver does not negate any intrinsic value it may have.  That no one person can objectively value anything really ought not be controversial, but it does pull the rug out from under those who claim 535 people in a legislature can make a good decision for everyone else.  535 subjective valuations are not a valid or reliable sample of the preferences of 350 million people.

And in any event, the bitcoin people are not arguing that each bitcoin tout is acting subjectively, the bitcoin touts are arguing there is an objective value to bitcoins.  Internal contradiction there.

 Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Northwest Food Processors Show, January 12-15 2014

I will be making a presentation on exporting start-up 14 January at the Northwest Food Processors show January 12-15 in Portland, Oregon. It is an exposition and conference.  If you can attend I'd be delighted to meet with you and discuss building business.

But there is so much more at this event, as you can see here: http://nwfpa.org/  And here are the speakers on tap.  http://nwfpa.org/images/stories/events/expo/2014/downloads/2014_speakers.pdf

You may register here.  (Get your company to pay for it!)

If you will be there, let me know!

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Definition Problems

Anthony checks in:

There is a definition problem.   80%(if not more) of people equate Capitalism with Free Market, they are considered synonymous.  I struggle with the definitions.  People call our current economic system "free market".   You read it everywhere in articles and comments.   And when you say there is a difference between Capitalism and Free Market,  people are somewhat stunned.  You're bucking their conditioning, grating against what they've been taught not only in school but through the media.

***Yes, and I say "we can call it a defense department, but it only invades other countries."  So you can call it what you like, and be wrong, or call it what it is, the invasion department.

 Is there a clarifying essay you've encountered explaining the difference?, or are thinking about writing one?

***hmmm...  no such essay, but just what do terms me.  Free + market = free market.  what is true and what is not true.  One thing it cannot be is true and not true at the same time.  conflating free market and capitalism is to maintain the true and not true at the same time.  The people who do so have the problem of an internal contradiction, not me.

     

And isn't free to contract also free for parties to enter into a usury agreement?...no matter how bad that agreement may be.      

***Absolutely, and if it does not work out, it is between them not me.  but in capitalism, not only is if it does  not work out you and I must pay to have someone else sure the borrower on behalf of the lender, plus, we cannot make a loan without paying taxes on the imputed income.  usury is so critical to overconsumption that it is wrtten into our laws.  In a free market usury has no such exalted place....

JOhn

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Why Bankruptcy is Good

Government Motors is celebrating having fleeced taxpayers for ten billion dollars:

He said GM's bloated and overly complex operations have been streamlined, products are better and, with the government's help, a crushing debt was reduced.

Yes, but we could have accomplished all of that with the bankruptcy of GM, after which the worthwhile parts would have been made valuable by better management.  And it would not have cost us a raw ten billion dollars.  Since they can wait for bailout to make changes, USA industry does not bother trying to manage well.

When the enxt crash comes, what will be the excuse for that week that will be accepted, with no one going to prison.

And while we are at it, why is Snowden in exile and this general not in prison?

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/thanks-supporting-eff-las-vegas-and-beyond

We are truly a lawless country.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Gospel of Joy Part Eight

Pope Benedict in 2006 put small business in a list with hospitals and universities as centers of charitable activity.  That seemed odd until one considers the facts.

Francis comes out with a riff on that theme, paragraph 203:

Business is a vocation, and a noble vocation, provided that those engaged in it see themselves challenged by a greater meaning in life; this will enable them truly to serve the common good by striving to increase the goods of this world and to make them more accessible to all.

Exactly.  A theme I've been hitting all these years in business start-up is necessarily personal transformation, competing on design (increase in goods and services by division of labor) and wealth is defined as how wide the range of goods and services accessible to how wide a group of people at what they can afford themselves.  (Not how much money one person has.)

I have to wonder, as a Roman Catholic, if I believe this stuff because it was taught to me, and I am merely hearing it again.  I don't think so, since my views are generally rejected by Roman Catholics, although as far as I can tell, I try to comply with what Jesus taught. That is always controversial.

Also, am I not reading into this positively what I want it to to say, just as the right wingers are reading into to it what they think it says?  I don't think so because I am taking the words being used, not adding things not said.  So, to proceed.

Paragraph 204

We can no longer trust in the unseen forces and the invisible hand of the market. Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality. I am far from proposing an irresponsible populism, but the economy can no longer turn to remedies that are a new poison, such as attempting to increase profits by reducing the work force and thereby adding to the ranks of the excluded.

That will send the right wingers over the top, criticizing the invisible hand of capitalism.  Now, if you have actually read Adam Smith and the context of the invisible hand, it is neither pro nor con, a mere allusion to explain one idea in the catalog of ideas that Adam Smith wrote down.  As we see earlier, the Pope criticized long term welfare.  Here he goes again, challenging the whole welfare mentality.  Yet there is a taste of ludditism there: the only way you can increase profits by lowering the work force is automation, that is robots.  Robots are fine as long as it is the result of efficiencies that release all the more workers to pursue more specialized work.    Buggy whips become produced by machines so more workers can move on to making carburetors.

He has not left the decisions, programs, processes geared to better distribution etc to the state in this paragraph.  It is open to whomever.

But then he adds:

I ask God to give us more politicians capable of sincere and effective dialogue aimed at healing the deepest roots – and not simply the appearances – of the evils in our world! Politics, though often denigrated, remains a lofty vocation and one of the highest forms of charity, inasmuch as it seeks the common good.[174] We need to be convinced that charity “is the principle not only of micro-relationships (with friends, with family members or within small groups) but also of macro-relationships (social, economic and political ones)”.[175] I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians who are genuinely disturbed by the state of society, the people, the lives of the poor! It is vital that government leaders and financial leaders take heed and broaden their horizons, working to ensure that all citizens have dignified work, education and healthcare. Why not turn to God and ask him to inspire their plans? I am firmly convinced that openness to the transcendent can bring about a new political and economic mindset which would help to break down the wall of separation between the economy and the common good of society.

Although the paragraphs are next to each other, he is not specifically linking them.  he is asking us all ot beg God for help in inspiring politicians to do the right thing.  I think the Pope recognizes it will take an act of God to get politicians to ever do the right thing, and he proposes this as a wistful  "why not..?"

He goes on:

Indeed, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find local solutions for enormous global problems which overwhelm local politics with difficulties to resolve.

Sure, let's all pray for politicians to do the right thing.  And in the meantime, we need to get to work, in spite of the chaos the state brings to the lives of everyone it touches, and work at the spontaneous order of anarchy we find coming out of the chaos.

He doesn't name names, but check this out:

How beautiful are those cities which overcome paralysing mistrust, integrate those who are different and make this very integration a new factor of development! How attractive are those cities which, even in their architectural design, are full of spaces which connect, relate and favour the recognition of others!

You mean Hong Kong?

And then...

All around us we begin to see nurses with soul, teachers with soul, politicians with soul, people who have chosen deep down to be with others and for others.

This must be another example of staying positive.  I've met plenty of politicians.  I am yet to meet one who is not a criminal, certainly in action.  I would be too if I were one, it is not possible to wield that much power and not be criminal.  They are victims of the power given to them, but I do not pity them. I also have not met one I like, so it might just be me, but I doubt it.  I too meet plenty of people with soul, and wonder how we can be so abusive yet have so many good people around.  Just misallocation, I guess.

But he goes on:

But once we separate our work from our private lives, everything turns grey and we will always be seeking recognition or asserting our needs. We stop being a people.

Exactly, our work is our lifestyle, when customer-employed.

Paragraph 280, refers to an invisible hand positively

It is true that this trust in the unseen can cause us to feel disoriented: it is like being plunged into the deep and not knowing what we will find. I myself have frequently experienced this. Yet there is no greater freedom than that of allowing oneself to be guided by the Holy Spirit, renouncing the attempt to plan and control everything to the last detail, and instead letting him enlighten, guide and direct us, leading us wherever he wills. The Holy Spirit knows well what is needed in every time and place. This is what it means to be mysteriously fruitful!

This is an example of the tone of the whole letter.  It is an exhortation to religion, mostly in evangelization, but extended into, among other places, the market.  I do think it is fundamental, but hardly controversial.  What controversy has been ginned up is by those who attribute to this document things it does not say.

Finito.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Geoduck Exports Slammed - The Numbers Reviewed

It can happen like this...  China says the found a wee bit of Red Tide in some of GeoDucks, and banned imports of all USA West Coast Shellfish.  Ouch!

China said it decided to impose the ban after recent shipments of geoduck clams from Northwest waters were found by its own government inspectors to have high levels of arsenic and a toxin that causes paralytic shellfish poisoning.

And the impact?

“It’s had an incredible impact,” said George Hill, the geoduck harvest coordinator for Puget Sound's Suquamish Tribe. “A couple thousand divers out of work right now.”

But then this....

The U.S. exported $68 million worth of geoduck clams in 2012 -- most of which came from Puget Sound. Nearly 90 percent of that geoduck went to China.

But look what the raw data says...

USITC Source Data - John Wiley Spiers Analysis

The number is about $64 million, not $68, but the important thing is China is only 43%, not 90%.  Now, Hong Kong is part of China under the one country, two systems regime, but as I understand it Hong Kong Health Department is independent of China.  Therefore, my guess is so far so good on exports to Hong Kong, no problems there.  Yet, if so, China's 43% market share is still a crushing loss to the USA geoduck farmers.

If you run a five year trend as I have here, you can see Hong Kong is growing much faster than China, with Hong Kong a 350% increase, and China "only" a 137% increase.  Prices to both destinations, about $16 a kilo, are the same.

This is another example of food exports, USA's best export growth story right now.

Guesses as to what may be going on?

1.   USA testing failed or false negative?

2. China testing failed or false positive?

3. Crushing the dealers who have cornered the market and are getting $150 a pound in China ($60/kilo)

4.  USA banned something to the tune of $28 million in exports from China to USA and this is retaliation.

5.  Some sort of screw up, that will be fixed in a couple of days.

One thing for sure, prices will fall drastically for at least a short while, and traders can expect the buyers to ask for a lot less than the $16 a kilo they have been paying.

NB:  The HTS numbers were changed from 2011 to 2012, so I had to consult the Sch B change notices to find the old number to complete this analysis...

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Fresh Ag Export Resource

If you want to be overwhelmed with trade news on world trade in fresh food, check out here.

And this:

Regarding Peruvian purple corn shipments to Korea, she said that they had amounted to $33,000 so far this year, a 460% increase compared with the first shipments recorded last year ($ 152 dollars). "They were quality sample exports," she explained. She also said that the purple corn tea had been launched in Korea earlier this year.

There it is, MOQ FOB, known everywhere except USA.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Joy of Gospel Part Seven

At Chapter 62:

In many countries globalization has meant a hastened deterioration of their own cultural roots and the invasion of ways of thinking and acting proper to other cultures which are economically advanced but ethically debilitated. This fact has been brought up by bishops from various continents in different Synods. The African bishops, for example, taking up the Encyclical Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, pointed out years ago that there have been frequent attempts to make the African countries “parts of a machine, cogs on a gigantic wheel. This is often true also in the field of social communications which, being run by centres mostly in the northern hemisphere, do not always give due consideration to the priorities and problems of such countries or respect their cultural make-up”

Funny word that, invasion.  USA now has an Africa Command over that Continent, referring to sub-Saharan Africa.  I wonder why?  In any event, no doubt Africa would benefit from more Xhosa News Service and less BBC.

It should be recalled that this document is largely directed at Catholics, and the clergy he leads. After that paragraph above there are 30 paragraphs on church activity, and then these points:

In some people we see an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people and the concrete needs of the present time.

and

96. This way of thinking also feeds the vainglory of those who are content to have a modicum of power and would rather be the general of a defeated army than a mere private in a unit which continues to fight.

Certainly those working in the Church know who he is talking about.  Maybe this is what has the right-wingers upset.  He is coming after those who have settled in and blame the poor for being poor.

After another 40 paragraphs of exhortations to the troops, comes this gem:

The homily is the touchstone for judging a pastor’s closeness and ability to communicate to his people. We know that the faithful attach great importance to it, and that both they and their ordained ministers suffer because of homilies: the laity from having to listen to them and the clergy from having to preach them! 

I tell you, having sat through endless terrible homilies, this rings so true.  We may have Jesus in the Catholic church, but the Protestants know how to preach.

There are another 50 paragraphs on evangelization and then he gets back into politics, in this case referring to solidarity with the poor:

The word “solidarity” is a little worn and at times poorly understood, but it refers to something more than a few sporadic acts of generosity. It presumes the creation of a new mindset which thinks in terms of community and the priority of the life of all over the appropriation of goods by a few.

So what we have here is setting up the problem.  This is alluding to capitalism. This is usually the watershed to start talking about income redistribution, and with no one except me and maybe another 30 people on planet earth talking about free markets, it is unlikely free markets are going to be included in the discussion.  I am used to it.  But free markets work on their own, unilaterally.  And one still needs to heed cautions, and judge independent, unique, unilateral action against the cautions and problems being highlighted.

The private ownership of goods is justified by the need to protect and increase them, so that they can better serve the common good; for this reason, solidarity must be lived as the decision to restore to the poor what belongs to them. .... Changing structures without generating new convictions and attitudes will only ensure that those same structures will become, sooner or later, corrupt, oppressive and ineffectual.

So given capitalism, and given injustice, there must be a change of heart behind and change of structures.  Now if you believe that the poor did it to themselves, then this is all nonsense.  If you believe capitalism is the best system for distributing goods and services (and why wouldn't you if you got rich by it?) then this is all nonsense.

But capitalism, by any of its own definitions needs state interventions to make possible those outsized results for the few.  To maintain those examples of immense personal wealth, the masses must pay for a a system of programmed violence to maintain that putative wealth.  This is all to complicated to sit and and try to reform.

We need to grow in a solidarity which “would allow all peoples to become the artisans of their destiny”,[156] since “every person is called to self-fulfilment”

You cannot get there from capitalism.

Seeing their poverty, hearing their cries and knowing their sufferings, we are scandalized because we know that there is enough food for everyone and that hunger is the result of a poor distribution of goods and income. The problem is made worse by the generalized practice of wastefulness”.

Travelling the world, this is so clear.  Seeing starving people on TV satisfies those who believe we have an overpopulation problem, when in fact famine is always a distribution problem.  (And the real problem we face is an underpopulation problem in certain age groups in many countries... good luck with that.)

Now this is where the right wingers will go off the rails, note "just wage":

We are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a “dignified sustenance” for all people, but also their “general temporal welfare and prosperity”.[159]This means education, access to health care, and above all employment, for it is through free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labour that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives. A just wage enables them to have adequate access to all the other goods which are destined for our common use.

If you do not fixate on "welfare" and "just wage" and health care, you might read something more.  I've been defining wealth as that range of goods and services available to the widest range of people with their own money, as opposed to the common definition of celebrity wealth, that is how much one person has concentrated unto himself.  And I've been pointing out that prosperity is rooted in the word hope.  "Employment" in terms of free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labor certainly excludes being an employee, and certainly refers to self-employment, something capitalism militates against.  In self-employed, a just wage is what you get as you fine tune your offer to what best serves the most people you can serve.  In this way you buy your own "welfare, that range of goods and services which support you in thriving, buy your own education and health care. It is a lifelong balancing act, in the service of others. Sure, you are free to be a drone for the surveillance state at Google, but if you try to braid hair for a living without a cosmeticians license, the full, violent weight of the state will come down on you.  And then, since at once the education you received will not qualify you to work at google, and state violence forbids you to be self-employed at what you are good at.  so take welfare, until your line dies out.  And then finally tells you that the state religion, Darwin says you are destined for extermination anyway, well, at some point, maybe sitting in a classroom, you connect the dots.


This Pope is saying no to all of that.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Exporting Food And Sales Meets

Interrogatories:

What are the biggest mistakes small U.S. suppliers make when meeting with foreign buyers? 

Agree to a meeting without an assurance an order will be written.  Wait... what?  then how do you get orders?  By laying groundwork first before any meeting that pretty much assures that an order will be written.  Lots of contact, and better yet orders BEFORE any meetings with foreign buyers.  Meetings are where those complex, based on sales experience questions and "if-then" decisions trees can be hashed out where in two hours 2 weeks worth of confusing long distance communications can be completed.

In your experience, why do companies tend to not export? 

First, they do not see the opportunity.  Second, they believe it is necessarily more difficult and less profitable than a domestic sale.  No clear path to sales, and the tactics so burn up resources that the would-be exporter burns out.

And for those who start exporting, why do they quit?

Unsatisfactory results: wrong attitude - good deeds and big deals.  Their tactic is to try to find a big buyer to make exporting "worth it" and they offer much in the way of good deeds (Rewrite our label?  you bet!  Pay the freight?  Sure!  Big discount?  Perche' no?")  Next they are open to being all things to all buyers.  The best tactic is the opposite: one size fits all export offer, no good deed goes unpunished attitiude in discussions, no profits, no deal.  The former fails, the latter wins since one never needs to quit.

What tips/ solutions do you recommend to help U.S. suppliers overcome mistakes and make export sales as safe and as easily as a domestic one?

MOQ FOB; small, repetitive test orders, search and learn, minimal effort until discover a new market.

How should one view the sales meeting with a foreign buyer?

I put on my buyer hat.  I have X in sales, and I need about 20% new products each year if I want to stand still, let alone grow.  I cannot have a booth in a trade show or have my road warriors call on customers without something new to show.  I need new products for my old customers, and proven (old) products to show to new. So even if I have no plans to grow, I know what my OTB (open to buy) is for this year.  I know how much of something I can buy and sell it anyway.  And as an importer/buyer, I can find products that are tried and true overseas, but new to USA, so they are in effect new here.  And I know if I do find a hit, I want a supplier who can adjust to what my customers demand.

So say my OTB is ($1 million x 20% = $200,000)  And I know I can sell $5000 worth of any food product anyway, just by virtue of the market I have in place.  $5000 into $200,000 = 40 items I can test with no problem.  Good chance of finding something hot.  The higher the minimums, the fewer the tests, the lower the more, the better.

I am not going to take the time to study all of the legal ramification, permits, labelling of products when I have no idea as to market.  If I can get a supplier to drive themselves into bankruptcy trying to find all that in advance, I'll probably pass on working with them.  What I want is a small shipment to test everything, including logistics and the law.  I do ask what I can get for free, no matter what it costs the supplier.  I do squeeze on price, since I need to show my superiors I got the best price.  I may get a no on price cuts, but I must push anyway.  A "no" on price cuts never means I will not order.

So if I have a market for restaurant ingredients and some Chinese kid tells me he has fresh bamboo shoots, I am going to ask my customers in upscale restaurants (or I already know) about how much they can use as a test.  Say 12 of them at 5 pounds each, 80 oz in 1 oz servings (in a chow mein) they will have their waiters push.  Make news, enhance image, grow the biz.  So I know I can sell 60 pounds anyway, at $8 a pound, or $480.  Freight will be another $200, I'll sell for $1000,or $15 a pound.  Cheaper than they pay for the ingredient chanterelles.

And then I'll listen to the feedback.  No interest, nothing lost.  But at some point, I find the stars line up and people go crazy for fresh bamboo shoots, or whatever.  Then I am the go-to guy for that.  But I have to know this kid can ramp up and TCB. Then I make news, enhance the image, grow the biz

Now, if I am a buyer at an inbound, I want to work out problems on the one in forty that proved popular, assuming we've already done at least one deal.  If I have five of those from different companies to work with, then a week in USA may make sense, since I can save a lot of time with a face to face working out problems.  And maybe I can meet with other people with good products new to me.  I need 8 meetings a day, so 40 for a week.  then it might make sense.

I put on my seller hat:  Pre-meet work, to qualify buyers, pre-meet agreements with buyers, are they like what I described above?  Then we've already done a deal before we meet.   If not, I will wait until I have enough of those ready to go from my passive and active marketing so I am meeting with the above, so I can meet with eight different companies who have a known open to buy, then my time is worthwhile.  I'll sell them.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post

Gospel of Joy, part Six, an Interlude

Some minor right-wing thought-celebrities are stirring up controversy on this article and I offered to debate one over what he claims it says.  The reply I got back said the fact I offered to debate proved it was controversial.  (Well, no, I said I would debate his reading, not what it says.)  and the fellow does not know me but added an ad hominem attack as well.  Tense, much?  Why so anxious?

He also said this was in the tradition of the damage done by Paul VI and his encyclical Populorum Progressio.  Yes, that has some things in it that frighten this anarchist:

As We told the United Nations General Assembly in New York: "Your vocation is to bring not just some peoples but all peoples together as brothers. . . Who can fail to see the need and importance of thus gradually coming to the establishment of a world authority capable of taking effective action on the juridical and political planes?" (66)

and

It is for the public authorities to establish and lay down the desired goals, the plans to be followed, and the methods to be used in fulfilling them; and it is also their task to stimulate the efforts of those involved in this common activity. But they must also see to it that private initiative and intermediary organizations are involved in this work. In this way they will avoid total collectivization and the dangers of a planned economy which might threaten human liberty and obstruct the exercise of man's basic human rights.

I sure don't want any of that.  But consider the time, the place and the audience.  The big boys had taken over the UN with their "Security Council" that left all of these smaller emerging countries out in the cold.  They were banding together in the non-aligned group, and countries were all under the impression that the government did God's work and the work of government was policy.

So what keeps happening is the Vatican seems to take the world the way it is and then embraces it and then extends in another direction, or at least points one out.

Here is a paragraph on population control, after citing classic malthusianism, that in retrospect stuns:

There is no doubt that public authorities can intervene in this matter, within the bounds of their competence. They can instruct citizens on this subject and adopt appropriate measures, 

Wow... like a China one-child policy?  And then it goes on....

so long as these are in conformity with the dictates of the moral law and the rightful freedom of married couples is preserved completely intact.

That second part rather makes the first part impossible. Now remember, this was before Humanae Vitae.  And Humanae Vitae certainly limited State action to no more than "save yourself for marriage" campaigns or promoting NFP.

With the Vatican talking about what everyone else was talking about, in their terms, and then introducing breaks makes it hard to blame the Vatican farm economic harm done, wherein the Vatican was advising breaks, more than approving actions.

This document also has some splendid sections:

Endowed with intellect and free will, each man is responsible for his self-fulfillment even as he is for his salvation. He is helped, and sometimes hindered, by his teachers and those around him; yet whatever be the outside influences exerted on him, he is the chief architect of his own success or failure. Utilizing only his talent and willpower, each man can grow in humanity, enhance his personal worth, and perfect himself.

And

God gave man intelligence, sensitivity and the power of thought—tools with which to finish and perfect the work He began. Every worker is, to some extent, a creator—be he artist, craftsman, executive, laborer or farmer.
Bent over a material that resists his efforts, the worker leaves his imprint on it, at the same time developing his own powers of persistence, inventiveness and concentration. Further, when work is done in common—when hope, hardship, ambition and joy are shared—it brings together and firmly unites the wills, minds and hearts of men. In its accomplishment, men find themselves to be brothers.

Exactly right.

Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.

Bookmark this post --- Email this post