blind leading the blind Re: [LINK] Airport to tag passengers

[Frank O'Connor]

Brilliant ... My Economic God!

So there's absolutely no discipline, no standards you submit to when 
using expressions and ideas.

Words can mean whatever you say they mean ... and the rest of us can 
interpret them as we like.

And you keep coming back to the notion of 'value' - a highly 
subjective and nebulous concept in any context.

I mean ... you value crap, whilst the rest us us don't.

But you made a statement concerning profit in your original post ... 
which I took exception to.

In economics profit is what I said.
In accounting profit is what I said
Hey, even in the world of business ... profit is what I said.

Maybe you are already trying running at a loss to prove your 
independent value theory - but the rest of us prefer profits. In the 
long run they are safer and don't force us to dissipate capital.

You are an economic neophyte, Vic - flouncing around reading whatever 
summary articles and abstracts you can find and trying 
oh-so-tiresomely to force you nebulous bigoted and simplistic notions 
on an unresponsive audience. And now you're zotting off at tangents 
again, attempting to elude the original debate.

That's why you're a weasel Vic. That's one reason you're so objectionable.

The Vic Strategy is to:

1. Copy a hyperlink from a provocative news article or plagiarise an 
article by a muddy marginalised conservative source.
2. Make some statement that doesn't hold up, even in the context of 
the original article or news item.
3. Wait for reaction.
4. In the ensuing kerfuffle obfuscate the ideas and intent of the 
original article, and introduce the oh-so-narrow range of ideas you 
are interested in, under the cover so to speak.
5. Refuse to accept the rules of debate, the rules of logic, accepted 
use of language ... and respond aggressively to anyone who challenges 
you.
6. When the situation finally gets untenable, resort to ad hominem 
abuse and infantile ridicule.

Like any number of others I consider that unacceptable.

If you want to talk about value, Vic ... you don't add any to any 
discussion or thread I've seen you in.

So no thanks ... I'll keep up with the return insults and provocation 
... you and your 'ideas' are not worth serious attention.

					Regards,

At 8:46 PM +1000 on 17/10/06 you wrote:
>Frank O'Connor [foconnor at ozemail.com.au] wrote:
>>  Me?... I like profit, Vic. I live on my profits - but I don't equate
>>  them in any way, shape or form with 'value'
>
>of course you dont, because you are blind to it.
>
>if you did you wouldnt be bringing up accounting. because I 
>certainly wasnt talking accouting.
>
>I was talking about value, something I have yet to see any leftie grasp.
>
>here are a couple of primers:
>
>The Machine That Changed the World : The Story of Lean Production
>http://www.amazon.com/Machine-That-Changed-World-Production/dp/0060974176/sr=8-1/qid=1161080099/ref=sr_1_1/104-8619733-5763918?ie=UTF8&s=books
>
>	New York Times Magazine
>	"The fundamentals of this system are applicable to every 
>industry across
>	the globe...[and] will have a profound impact on human society it will
>	truly change the world."
>
>Lean Thinking : Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation
>http://www.amazon.com/Lean-Thinking-Corporation-Revised-Updated/dp/0743249275/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b/104-8619733-5763918?ie=UTF8
>
>	"In the revised and updated edition of Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and
>	Create Wealth in Your Corporation, authors James P. Womack 
>and Daniel T.
>	Jones provide a thoughtful expansion upon their value-based business
>	system based on the Toyota model"
>
>see no accounting required, just an understanding of value.
>
>the time, space, matter and energy expended to modify the inputs of a
>business to produce the output that a customer is prepare to pay for are
>the value that a business has created. this value is real economic value
>where it exceeds the cost of capital.
>
>this fact is underscored by the position that the perception of value by a
>customer in a good or service is brought into existance by exchange of funds
>for that good or service. this crystalisation of the value add to 
>the inputs of a company
>is the company profits.
>
>"All businesses must define the "value" that they produce as the product
>that best suits customer needs. The leaders must then identify and
>clarify the "value stream," the nexus of actions to bring the product
>through problems solving, information management, and physical
>transformation tasks. Next, "lean enterprise" lines up suppliers with
>this value stream. "Flow" traces the product across departments. "Pull"
>then activates the flow as the business re-orients towards the pull of
>the customer's needs. Finally, with the company reengineered towards its
>core value in a flow process, the business re-orients towards
>"perfection," rooting out all the remaining muda (Japanese for "waste")
>in the system. "
>
>where waste is the opposite of value, muda being things the customer is
>not prepared to pay for. aspects of the product or service that are not
>value are muda.
>
>in other words business are value creation machines whose primary
>purpose is to enhance peoples lives by creating value for everyone
>involved.
>
>
>
>>  Business got along quite fine without double entry accounting for
>>  thousands of years, Vic ... and just because you choose to stray into
>>  whatever logic and mentality that suits your purpose when it suits
>>  your purpose does not make your disjointed illogical ramblings about
>>  your obsessions any more logical, palatable or sensible
>
>make a fucking effort frank. youll find that not only are posts logical
>and sensible but you might actually learn something if you could put
>aside your insults for a moment.
>
>someone said I was like a meat eater in a vegetarian conference or some
>such nonsense.
>
>no I am more like columbus in the new world, heralding the arrival of a
>little bit of change. :)
>
>Vic