I wonder how the US right would feel if Europe introduced laws with a similar impact on US firms? Say, investment in Argentina during the Falklands War?
Is Castro Already Dead?
- Thread starter Brown
- Start date
-
- Tags
- castro fidel castro
I wonder how the US right would feel if Europe introduced laws with a similar impact on US firms? Say, investment in Argentina during the Falklands War?
PogoPedant
Muse
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2002
- Messages
- 763
Oh, I'm sure they would take the matter to heart and come out of the experience wiser and more reflected.
Back in the mid 90s the US car lobby claimed that Japan was operating a protectionist system which prevented their cars being sold there.
It subsequently came to light that the "Big Three" US manufacturers already had twice as many outlets in Japan as all the European car firms combined, yet sold far fewer cars - because of the lack of right-hand-drive models!
In effect, it would be like us claiming that different US electricity currents or TV standards were a nasty trade embargo!
For some obscure reason the European press found this absolutely hilarious!
It subsequently came to light that the "Big Three" US manufacturers already had twice as many outlets in Japan as all the European car firms combined, yet sold far fewer cars - because of the lack of right-hand-drive models!
In effect, it would be like us claiming that different US electricity currents or TV standards were a nasty trade embargo!
For some obscure reason the European press found this absolutely hilarious!
Last edited:
Well, gee, why doesn't el jefe compete with the norteamericanos and build WorkersParadiseWorld? He has a warm climate and beautiful beaches. Why do you Brits insist instead on travelling across the pond to stand in crowded lines to eat cotton candy and see Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck - especially when you can do it for probably half the cost by taking the Chunnel and the TGF to Paris and EuroDisney? Or do y'all hate the Frogs so much you'd rather go to all the trouble and expense of coming here than put tuppence in the Froggie pockets? (Speaking strictly for myself, I've never understood the appeal of DisneyWorld, and would not trouble myself to cross the street to get there even if they were giving out all the fifty dollar bills you could stuff in a suitcase, but I'm just a crabby old man who hates kids and saccharine, sterile entertainment, so...)
Sidetracked myself... Why do you insist on coming to DisneyWorld when Cuba is perfectly... adequate?
Did you really doubt that the U.S. gets millions of European visitors every year?
2005 Italy Netherlands Spain Sweden, Switzerland = about 1.2 million.
2005 France and Germany = about 2.2 million
2005 UK about 4.3 million. Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan add another 5 million, and it's almost impossible to come to the U.S. from farther away than Hong Kong without coming from another planet. So your allegations of insuperable difficulties in getting to the U.S. or its next-door neighbor in the Caribbean don't hold up very well. Again, maybe you can't do the travel, but almost eight million of your next door neighbors evidently can.
It generally takes about a month or two by caravel to get to the U.S. from Europe, depending on the prevailing winds - longer from Japan and Hong Kong. But somehow, that doesn't appear to present a difficulty to almost eight million of your next door neighbors.
Approximately four to five million euros per day, depending on travel class desired. But somehow, that doesn't appear to present a difficulty to almost eight million of your next door neighbors.
Honestly, I don't quite follow the point you're trying to make. Is it that Europeans don't go to Cuba by the millions because it's too expensive, when you acknowledge yourself that it's less expensive than the U.S.?
Last edited:
ZirconBlue
Sole Survivor of L-Town
I think I have already stated in this thread that I do not support the embargo. If it was ever justified, then it has long since been demonstrated to be ineffective. And the idea that other countries should have to abide by our laws on the issue seems pretty absurd. That being said, to characterize it as any sort of "blockade" is ludicrous.
And why not the Domicincans? Why not lots of warm places? It's a strawman argument, and you know.
I suggest you take a look at visitor numbers for Eurodisney. They're rather higher than you clearly anticipate. Despite the fact that there are no "Universal Studios" or other similar ventures close by, which is a reason so many go to Florida.
Sidetracked myself... Why do you insist on coming to DisneyWorld when Cuba is perfectly... adequate?
Did you really doubt that the U.S. gets millions of European visitors every year?
http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/view/m-2005-I-001/table_4.html
http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/view/m-2005-I-001/table_4.html
So just to be quite clear, these statistics appear to show that 1 in 14 (or so) Brits visit the US every year? Bollocks. I think that other Brits will confirm that we'd kinda notice that many friends and neighbours disappearing over. It therefore leads me how the figures are calculated and how they deal with (say) repeat visits.
You've not answered the question.
Again, you've not answered the question.
Punitive and dispropportionate embargo would seem like a suitable term; blockade does imply military action.
Well, excuse me, but you were the one who first made the claim that Europeans go to the U.S. for Disney World. I just questioned why they should bother when EuroDisney is so much closer, less expensive to get to, and more convenient.
You asked me for a source. I found it. Now you say you don't like the source because you haven't noticed your friends and neighbors going to the U.S.
It sounds like you aren't going to accept any evidence that disputes your biases, preconceived notions, and anecdotal evidence. If you have anything better than "my next door neighbor didn't go to the U.S. last year," please provide a link. Otherwise, why should I do your research for you?
I don't dispute your own earlier estimates of the costs and expense of getting to the U.S. Okay? Now what's your point?
Now, answer the question I asked: Why do so many people from other countries go to the trouble and expense of going to Disney World or Universal Studios or Moe's Miami Hot Dog Stand when Cuba is right next door (Miami to Havana distance = about the same as the London to Paris distance) and less expensive?
Last edited:
Well, you and Architect can fight that out between yourselves. He says it's less. Me, I don't have a dog in that fight.
My experience only covers flights to and from Kastrup Airport, Copenhagen. You appear to be very interested in the question, however. If you aren't, why do you bother asking him?
And don't you find your own question ridiculous? Why do people go to Disney World etc.? Obviously because they want to go to Disney World etc.
Why do people go to Cuba? Because they want to go there. A few do both.
And don't you find your own question ridiculous? Why do people go to Disney World etc.? Obviously because they want to go to Disney World etc.
Why do people go to Cuba? Because they want to go there. A few do both.
Cheesejoff
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2006
- Messages
- 214
One reason for Brits favouring the U.S.A over France is could be that some Brits prefer to go to English speaking countries.
The same may apply for Cuba, although I admit I don't have any evidence that this is the case.
However, I think the main factor is the cultural presence of the U.S.A in Britain. On British television, holiday flights to the US are frequently advertised, but I've never seen a single advert for a flight to cuba.
In addition, Cuba is generally seen in a negative light (Cuban Missle Crisis, connections to the Soviet Union, Castro himself) whereas America is comparitively well portrayed.
The same may apply for Cuba, although I admit I don't have any evidence that this is the case.
However, I think the main factor is the cultural presence of the U.S.A in Britain. On British television, holiday flights to the US are frequently advertised, but I've never seen a single advert for a flight to cuba.
In addition, Cuba is generally seen in a negative light (Cuban Missle Crisis, connections to the Soviet Union, Castro himself) whereas America is comparitively well portrayed.
ZirconBlue
Sole Survivor of L-Town
Yeah, well, I guess I'll continue to use the term blockade then. Punitive and disproportionate embargo is too long!
Thanks for letting me know that I can safely disregard any of your posts in the future. And here I thought we had finally gotten a sensible Dane on this forum. Alas, it appears not.
Most Cubans don't speak English. There are some, and I even met a couple of Cubans who spoke German fluently. Guides at museums etc. usually speak English, but don't expect to have a conversation in English with people you just happen to meet.
I have had to learn enough Spanish to get by with very patient Cubans, i.e. not enough to participate in an ordinary conversation.
Because of a word!? Well, OK, then.
DanishDynamite
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2001
- Messages
- 10,752
Now, now. I would say you have at least two sensible Danes on the forum: me and MRC_Hans.
DanishDynamite
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2001
- Messages
- 10,752
No, I suspect it is because of your lack of skeptical thinking abilities. I would add "in the political arena", but I'm not sure this reduction applies anymore.
I did not see nor am I willing to bother finding the set of stuff that led here and I am unconcerned with the fate of Cuba in any major way. Words, on the other hand........ Embargo and Blockade as used in English are two different things and are not interchangeable. It is possible that the Danish word for one is used for the other freely - I cannot speak to that or Norwegian. But in English a blockade might be used to enforce an embargo or a blockade might
be a de facto embargo but they are still seperate things. So, if you wish to make a fallacious point by using a word the wrong way (like lifeislite and several others do in philosophical arguments by defining/using their terms in ways they are not defined/used in actual philosophy by real philosophers) you are free to do so. Doesn't do much for your argument though, just makes you - and therefore the argument - look sloppy.
In this post in this thread you can see a reference to the blockade being used by Norwegian trade unionists.
In this one, like in Wiki, it is used in the proper way, according to your sentiments:
Cuba Blockade (From the British Council)
Take a look at the rest of them from the first page of a google search:
Background on the US Blockade against Cuba
Report by Cuba on the US Blockade
History of the US Blockade of Cuba
The U.S. Blockade of Cuba
Pastors for Peace Caravan Challenges Cuba Blockade for Fourteenth Time
You may not like it, but my use of the word to describe what you and others might prefer to call a "punitive and disproportionate embargo" is not so idiosyncratic that you could say that I am "defining/using" my "terms in ways they are not defined/used" by an awful lot of other people. Why? To distinguish this punitive and disproportionate embargo from ordinary embargos.
It may slightly alter the original meaning of the term, but that is how languages sometimes evolve.
Get used to it. Language really isn't the most important thing in this case.
In this one, like in Wiki, it is used in the proper way, according to your sentiments:
Cuba Blockade (From the British Council)
Take a look at the rest of them from the first page of a google search:
Background on the US Blockade against Cuba
Report by Cuba on the US Blockade
History of the US Blockade of Cuba
The U.S. Blockade of Cuba
Pastors for Peace Caravan Challenges Cuba Blockade for Fourteenth Time
You may not like it, but my use of the word to describe what you and others might prefer to call a "punitive and disproportionate embargo" is not so idiosyncratic that you could say that I am "defining/using" my "terms in ways they are not defined/used" by an awful lot of other people. Why? To distinguish this punitive and disproportionate embargo from ordinary embargos.
It may slightly alter the original meaning of the term, but that is how languages sometimes evolve.
Get used to it. Language really isn't the most important thing in this case.