Litespeed Firenze - Has anyone tried?

[Mark Hickey]

"Frank Knox" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I'm DELIGHTED to hear this Habanero treats their workers fairly, *paying union wages and benefits*
>comparable to American workers!!! It's about time a Chinese company did this!

Heh. You should spend some time in China if you want to find out how it really works. It's obviously
a lot different than you've been told. The tendency is to compare hourly wages - but that's not
really going to give you ANY idea of "relative income".

The fabricator I work with is near Beijing, very similar in scope to NYC. Can a US bike welder
afford an apartment in NYC, and to send their kids to college there? Probably not - but they can
in Beijing.

>China has a very long way to go on fair labor practices (and human rights). Until fairness is the
>norm, my family will avoid Chinese purchases whenever possible.
>http://www.nlcnet.org/campaigns/archive/report00/huffybikesdoc.shtml

If you want to hurt the Chinese workers, avoid Chinese purchases. I lived in China as it started to
transition from the "iron rice bowl" to the free market economy - and there is NO comparison. None.
The standard of living has made huge jumps, and the average Beijing or Shanghai resident has a
lifestyle not very different from their counterparts in NYC. The countryside lags behind, but is
benefitting even so.

As for any "sweat shop" accusation - all I can say is that I've seen a few US bike factories, but
never one as nice (and with better working conditions) than the one that my frames are built in.
They are a very professional, capable organization made up of people I genuinely like very much. I'm
happy to help them realize their dream, and to make a difference in their lifestyle(s), and hope I
can do so for some time.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> > Are you sure about that last name? There was and is a Mikado brand, but it was and is based in
> > Quebec (probably built in Taiwan now, and the early-80s Mikado I have has only one remaining
> > sticker, a little gold MADE IN TAIWAN near the bottom bracket that may or may not have been a
> > joke by the previous owner).
>
> My guess is that it's a different company, *or* perhaps Miyata always sold under the Mikado name
> in Canada due to a trademark issue? Many possibilities.

Miyatas from the late 80s are quite common here. Perhaps the other way around: the crummy Mikados
were only sold in the US because of trademark issues, while the Canadian one soldiered on. They're
part of the substantial Procycle (CCM, Rocky Mountain, many more) bike conglomerate now.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

 

[Frank Knox]

"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Peter wrote:
>
> > If you could find the worker in the Indian (or Thai, etc.) sweatshop who is producing the less
> > expensive product and ask him which you should buy what do you think his answer would be?
> > Presumably he's working at that factory because he feels it offers him the best opportunity to
> > feed his family and if demand falls he may be out of a job.
> >
> > As consumers we can influence companies to adopt and promote progressive labor practices and as
> > voters we can have some influence on the direction of our foreign and international trade
> > policies. But it's not clear that trying to boycott all products produced in countries with a
> > low standard of living will serve the interests of the people in those countries.
>
> Absolutely.
>
> Assembling Nikes in a sweatshop may suck, but it probably sucks a lot less
than
> stoop labor in a rice paddy in 100 degree heat, knee deep in human ****
(which
> they use for fertilizer in China).
>
> My grandmother came from Ireland 100 years ago. She worked in sweatshops
in New
> York City for 40 years. The work was hard and low paid, working
conditions
> terrible, bosses abusive, etc. But to her it beat fishing, which claimed
the
> lives of her father and three of her brothers. And it gave my father the opportunity to go to
> college -- which would never have happened, had he
been
> born and raised in a fishing village in Ireland.
>
> Matt O.
>
>
>
Are you saying that injustices done to your ancestors make it okay for us to do the same to someone
else now? I don't feel that way.

 

[Frank Knox]

"Peter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news8d_b.383436$na.579124@attbi_s04...
> Frank Knox wrote:
>
> > But when we use our expendable income we *do* have choices available to
us.
> > Hobby equipment, etc. are high dollar items that may warrant careful consideration before
> > purchase. If your choice is between a bicycle made by people who are for all
practical
> > purposes slaves, and a similar one is made by decently paid and fairly treated workers but costs
> > more... Where should your dollar vote go?
> >
> > I'll buy the one made in the U.S., Japan, Canada, or Italy.
> > http://www.nlcnet.org/campaigns/archive/report00/huffybikesdoc.shtml
> >
>
> If you could find the worker in the Indian (or Thai, etc.) sweatshop who
is
> producing the less expensive product and ask him which you should buy what do you think his answer
> would be? Presumably he's working at that factory because he feels it offers him the best
> opportunity to feed his family and if demand falls he may be out of a job.
>
> As consumers we can influence companies to adopt and promote progressive labor practices and as
> voters we can have some influence on the direction of our foreign and international trade
> policies. But it's not clear that trying to boycott all products produced in countries with a low
> standard
of
> living will serve the interests of the people in those countries.

What's clear to me is that this is an individual decision and we have to do what we think is right.
Chinese products have so permeated our market that it is nearly impossible to boycott them entirely.

When I spend hundreds of dollars on a bike, I want to know the worker who made it got paid much more
than $1.50 for making it.

 

[Luigi de Guzman]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:08:24 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
wrote:

>"Frank Knox" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I'm DELIGHTED to hear this Habanero treats their workers fairly, *paying union wages and benefits*
>>comparable to American workers!!! It's about time a Chinese company did this!
>
>Heh. You should spend some time in China if you want to find out how it really works. It's
>obviously a lot different than you've been told. The tendency is to compare hourly wages - but
>that's not really going to give you ANY idea of "relative income".
>

Hit the nail right on the head.

Translating wages into dollar terms is a meaningless exercise; nobody has bothered to translate
*prices* into dollar terms, as well. If everything around you costs a tenth of what it does in the
USA, in dollar terms, then, if you only make a tenth of what your wages might be in the USA, again,
in dollar terms, your standard of living won't be too badly affected.

Consider: *in dollar terms,* wages in London are higher than wages in Minneapolis. So the workers in
London must be living high off the hog, and those in Minneapolis underpaid unfairly. Not the case:
costs of living in London, particularly housing (someone paid ~US$150,000 for the leasehold on a ten-
foot square broom cupboard in Chelsea a few years back) will consume any differential in wages.

Increasing wages in local-currency terms risks runaway inflation. Runaway inflation is bad for
economic, and most importantly, political stability: ask a German of the 1930s, or an Italian of the
post-1945 era, or an Argentine. The leadership in the PRC is too concerned with maintaining control
to risk major unrest.

-Luigi

"Please remember that Adam Smith is MORAL PHILOSOPHER from SCOTLAND, not, as Mrs. Thatcher will tell
you, ECONOMIST from CHICAGO!"
- my political philosophy lecturer

 

[Kevan Smith]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:08:24 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> from
Habanero Cycles wrote:

>If you want to hurt the Chinese workers, avoid Chinese purchases. I lived in China as it started to
>transition from the "iron rice bowl" to the free market economy - and there is NO comparison. None.
>The standard of living has made huge jumps, and the average Beijing or Shanghai resident has a
>lifestyle not very different from their counterparts in NYC. The countryside lags behind, but is
>benefitting even so.

Stalin brought Russia from the middle ages to the 20th century, too.

I'm no Christian, but I claim the heritage, so: "For what profit is it to a man if he gains the
whole world, and is himself destroyed or lost?"

I am not responsible for the well-being of chinese workers through the continued purchase of
products made in China. I am responsible for living according to my own conscience, which tells me
that it is wrong to support slave labor and sweatshops. Some bikes from China, like yours, may be
made under reasonably fair conditions; good on you for insuring they are. Others, you must admit,
are not made so scrupulously. It's better to find out which are which and make good choices than to
buy Chinese products *****-nilly. I think you have a good sales pitch here, though : Habanero Cycles
-- Made in China under fair labor conditions. Some people care about that sort of thing enough that
it might tip a few extra sales your way.

--
[email protected]
Always give yourself credit for having more than personality.
39

 

[Kevan Smith]

gOn Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:57:00 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> from
Cox Communications wrote:

<snip>

>-Luigi

OK, let me just ask you straight out:

Do you think slave labor and sweatshops in China are things U.S. consumers should support? Do the
low-cost goods available to the market justify the brutal conditions under which they are produced?
Should we support the brutality under the hope that as a result of the increased flow of capital
into China that conditions there will improve? Or, is it more likely that the capital will only flow
to the ruling class, who will continue to deny basic human rights to their subjects?

Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride. Bike B is the same, with few
differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was made in the U.S. Bike B was made in a sweatshop
in China and would cost you $200. Which would you choose?

--
[email protected]
Take away the elements in order of apparent non-importance.
16

 

[Mike Jacoubowsk]

> Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride.
Bike B
> is the same, with few differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was
made in
> the U.S. Bike B was made in a sweatshop in China and would cost you $200.
Which
> would you choose?

Forget bikes/durable goods. Let's talk consummables. Are you willing, on tires (something that wears
out and needs frequent replacement) to pay twice as much for a similar tire that's made in Japan,
France or Germany as for one made in Chain or Thailand?

For a great many people, people who are otherwise considered liberal and try to be environmentally
kind and sensitive to the plight of the exploited worker, the idea of paying twice as much for
something isn't even an option. Buying the expensive tire fits into the category of "I'm smart
enough to know I don't have to spend nearly that much to get a decent tire; no way am I going to get
ripped off like that!"

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com

"Kevan Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> gOn Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:57:00 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]>
from
> Cox Communications wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >-Luigi
>
> OK, let me just ask you straight out:
>
> Do you think slave labor and sweatshops in China are things U.S. consumers should support? Do the
> low-cost goods available to the market justify the
brutal
> conditions under which they are produced? Should we support the brutality
under
> the hope that as a result of the increased flow of capital into China that conditions there will
> improve? Or, is it more likely that the capital will
only
> flow to the ruling class, who will continue to deny basic human rights to
their
> subjects?
>
> Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride.
Bike B
> is the same, with few differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was
made in
> the U.S. Bike B was made in a sweatshop in China and would cost you $200.
Which
> would you choose?
>
>
> --
> [email protected] Take away the elements in order of apparent non-importance. 16

 

[Mark Hickey]

Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

>gOn Mon, 23 Feb 2004 07:57:00 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> from Cox
>Communications wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>-Luigi
>
>OK, let me just ask you straight out:
>
>Do you think slave labor and sweatshops in China are things U.S. consumers should support? Do the
>low-cost goods available to the market justify the brutal conditions under which they are produced?
>Should we support the brutality under the hope that as a result of the increased flow of capital
>into China that conditions there will improve? Or, is it more likely that the capital will only
>flow to the ruling class, who will continue to deny basic human rights to their subjects?

History has shown, quite clearly and unambiguously, that the increase in the free market economy in
China has reached the workers. The improvement in the standard of living in the areas impacted has
been quite dramatic - and I say that very sincerely from personal observation. Human rights have
come a LONG way - you can repress people quite easily when you control the "iron rice bowl", but
can't do so as easily as they become affluent. It's not a perfect fix for what ails China, but it's
certainly better than anything else that they might have done, IMHO.

>Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride. Bike B is the same, with
>few differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was made in the U.S. Bike B was made in a
>sweatshop in China and would cost you $200. Which would you choose?

You should make sure that the bike you buy wan't built in a sweat shop in either the US, China,
Taiwan or elsewhere - if at all possible. On this point I agree with you (pinch yourself...). ;-) I
also like the co-op organizations that allow the third world farmers to produce and market their
products in developed countries without giving away all the profits to the middlemen. The coffee I
buy is distributed thusly, and tastes better too...

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[David Kerber]

In article <znw_b.16487$MF2.10497@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>, [email protected] says...
> > Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride.
> Bike B
> > is the same, with few differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was
> made in
> > the U.S. Bike B was made in a sweatshop in China and would cost you $200.
> Which
> > would you choose?
>
> Forget bikes/durable goods. Let's talk consummables. Are you willing, on tires (something that
> wears out and needs frequent replacement) to pay twice as much for a similar tire that's made in
> Japan, France or Germany as for one made in Chain or Thailand?
>
> For a great many people, people who are otherwise considered liberal and try to be environmentally
> kind and sensitive to the plight of the exploited worker, the idea of paying twice as much for
> something isn't even an option. Buying the expensive tire fits into the category of "I'm smart
> enough to know I don't have to spend nearly that much to get a decent tire; no way am I going to
> get ripped off like that!"

In most cases, though, the difference in the final price isn't 2x; it's more like 10-20%, maybe
sometimes as high as 50%.

....

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Luigi de Guzman]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:12:02 -0600, Kevan Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride. Bike B is the same, with
>few differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was made in the U.S. Bike B was made in a
>sweatshop in China and would cost you $200. Which would you choose?

If the difference is my having a bike--one bike, mind--and not having one at all, then it's B.

Labour in China has a long way to go--there are no legally-independent unions (all unions in china
must be parties to the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, which happens to be an organ of the
Communist party)....for instance.

But at the end of the day, K, it's whether I can get something or not.

-Luigi

 

[Kevan Smith]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 23:53:03 GMT, "Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles"
<[email protected]> from Chain Reaction Bicycles wrote:

>Forget bikes/durable goods. Let's talk consummables. Are you willing, on tires (something that
>wears out and needs frequent replacement) to pay twice as much for a similar tire that's made in
>Japan, France or Germany as for one made in Chain or Thailand?

I have no problems with tires made in any country as long as labor is treated fairly. That means no
sweatshop or slave labor tires for me.

>For a great many people, people who are otherwise considered liberal and try to be environmentally
>kind and sensitive to the plight of the exploited worker, the idea of paying twice as much for
>something isn't even an option. Buying the expensive tire fits into the category of "I'm smart
>enough to know I don't have to spend nearly that much to get a decent tire; no way am I going to
>get ripped off like that!"

I try as much as possible to back up what I say. If I buy sweatshop goods, it's because I don't know
that's what I am getting. I try to research who makes what, where and how, but I realize I'm not 100
percent informed. I often pay a higher price for a fairly made product. One good thing to do,
though, is not buy anything at Wal-Mart or Sam's Club; you can be almost certain anything imported
they sell is from exploited labor. In the past four years, I've been in a Wal-Mart once, and I
bought a fishing license, which cost Wal-Mart money.

--
[email protected]
Look closely at the most embarrassing details & amplify them.
117

 

[Kevan Smith]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:05:02 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> from
Habanero Cycles wrote:

>History has shown, quite clearly and unambiguously, that the increase in the free market economy in
>China has reached the workers. The improvement in the standard of living in the areas impacted has
>been quite dramatic - and I say that very sincerely from personal observation. Human rights have
>come a LONG way - you can repress people quite easily when you control the "iron rice bowl", but
>can't do so as easily as they become affluent. It's not a perfect fix for what ails China, but it's
>certainly better than anything else that they might have done, IMHO.

History is bunk. The notion that predatory capitalism is good for China because it improves their
standard of living is spurious. Stalin, under a brutal dictatorship, improved Russia's standard of
living. Predatory capitalism can be just as brutal. The ends do not justify the means. Again I ask:
what good to gain the world if you lose your soul? As Americans, we say we believe in freedom. Is
that just our freedom, or should others share it as well?

>>Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride. Bike B is the same, with
>>few differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was made in the U.S. Bike B was made in a
>>sweatshop in China and would cost you $200. Which would you choose?
>
>You should make sure that the bike you buy wan't built in a sweat shop in either the US, China,
>Taiwan or elsewhere - if at all possible. On this point I agree with you (pinch yourself...). ;-) I
>also like the co-op organizations that allow the third world farmers to produce and market their
>products in developed countries without giving away all the profits to the middlemen. The coffee I
>buy is distributed thusly, and tastes better too...

Well, glory be. Is the world standing still? We agree on something.

--
[email protected]
Always give yourself credit for having more than personality.
39

 

[Kevan Smith]

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 22:25:42 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> from
Cox Communications wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:12:02 -0600, Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Let's compare two bikes: Bike A is well equipped and you like the ride. Bike B is the same, with
>>few differences from Bike A. Bike A costs $400 and was made in the U.S. Bike B was made in a
>>sweatshop in China and would cost you $200. Which would you choose?
>
>If the difference is my having a bike--one bike, mind--and not having one at all, then it's B.
>
>Labour in China has a long way to go--there are no legally-independent unions (all unions in china
>must be parties to the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, which happens to be an organ of the
>Communist party)....for instance.
>
>But at the end of the day, K, it's whether I can get something or not.

Consumerism at its worst.

--
[email protected]
Cascades.
88

 

[Rick Onanian]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:12:21 -0600, Kevan Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:

>History is bunk.

You are frothing over with undeniable wisdom. Or something.
--
Rick Onanian

 

[Kevan Smith]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:04:09 -0500, Rick Onanian <[email protected]> from The
Esoteric c0wz Society wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:12:21 -0600, Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>History is bunk.
>
>You are frothing over with undeniable wisdom. Or something.

Quoting Henry Ford.

--
[email protected]
Spectrum analysis.
90

 

[Luigi de Guzman]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:36:24 -0600, Kevan Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:04:09 -0500, Rick Onanian <[email protected]> from The Esoteric c0wz
>Society wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:12:21 -0600, Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>History is bunk.
>>
>>You are frothing over with undeniable wisdom. Or something.
>
>Quoting Henry Ford.

His pomade of choice was kerosene. Which would explain why he didn't smoke.

-Luigi random footnote man to the rescue

 

[Luigi de Guzman]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:16:51 -0600, Kevan Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Consumerism at its worst.

Sure.

You're probably using a lot of things at this instant that were manufactured, extracted, or
processed in the PRC. Everything from fabrics to semiconductors...

We'll have to agree to disagree here, K. I'm with Mark here. Take away those factories, and that
worker returns to his village. There's nothing in the villages but farming and poverty. No savings,
no hope for education by using those savings, and no hope for material advancement. The peasant
lives on borrowed time and money, one crop failure away from ruin--the city worker has a chance at
saving, getting his kid through high school, maybe college. That boy will have better prospects than
his Dad. The material benefits are immense--all the difference between rationing and riches.

Bicycle content: on inspection, my ride's made in Taiwan, ROC (or Chinese Taipei, depending on what
side of the straits you're on). Will that do? For sentimental, nationalist reasons, I'd rather ride
a Philippine-made one, but no such animal exists outside the RP (the industry there, such as it is,
being innumerable workshops where the sidecar trike--- the *padyak*, workbike of the provinces--are
made. [Further china content: all the cool dudes back in the Philippines are buying Lifan
motorbikes. Chinese musclebikes, who'da thunk?]

-Luigi

"We are confronted by two types of social contradictions - those between ourselves and the enemy and
those among the people themselves. The two are totally different in their nature."
- Mao Tse-tung

 

[Kevan Smith]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:28:15 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> from
Cox Communications wrote:

>We'll have to agree to disagree here, K. I'm with Mark here. Take away those factories, and that
>worker returns to his village. There's nothing in the villages but farming and poverty. No savings,
>no hope for education by using those savings, and no hope for material advancement. The peasant
>lives on borrowed time and money, one crop failure away from ruin--the city worker has a chance at
>saving, getting his kid through high school, maybe college. That boy will have better prospects
>than his Dad. The material benefits are immense--all the difference between rationing and riches.

In a totalitarian country? Who are you trying to fool? The material well being of your example
worker is totally dependent on his or her master.

--
[email protected]
Idiot glee (?)
86

 

[Luigi de Guzman]

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 17:46:24 -0600, Kevan Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:28:15 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> from Cox
>Communications wrote:
>
>>We'll have to agree to disagree here, K. I'm with Mark here. Take away those factories, and that
>>worker returns to his village. There's nothing in the villages but farming and poverty. No
>>savings, no hope for education by using those savings, and no hope for material advancement. The
>>peasant lives on borrowed time and money, one crop failure away from ruin--the city worker has a
>>chance at saving, getting his kid through high school, maybe college. That boy will have better
>>prospects than his Dad. The material benefits are immense--all the difference between rationing
>>and riches.
>
>In a totalitarian country? Who are you trying to fool? The material well being of your example
>worker is totally dependent on his or her master.

Is the chinese worker better-fed now than twenty years ago? Does he have better access to education?
Does he have better access to clean water? Are his children surviving?

That's material well-being, and all indices for it are up in the Peoples' Republic. The masters are
in control of your well-being in an iron ricebowl, but not in a marketplace.