We apologize if this letter would cause inconvenience to you

September 09, 2010

Dear Sir/Madam!

Our company specializing in business and the installation construction of items in the fields of telecommunication and electronic such as: camera, phone, Switchboard, transceiver, telegraph, fax, printing, copying, fire alarm equipment .. etc …

First we want to start buying (4) four products is warning devices the possibility of fire and explosive in the hazardous areas such as potentially explosive atmospheres, mine mining industry ……..

We look forward to receive your interest and guide about location have sellers and price of the kinds of commodities described above. Please contact us:
Mr. NGUYEN HIEP, (CEO)
Phone: (+84-8) 38308308 (Line: 501) or Mobile phone: (+84) 937407777
E-mail: nguyenhiep@vie.vn

Thanks,
Best Regards,
Mr. VU DUY NAM, (Editors) Strategy Consultant of VIEN DONG Corp.
Phone: (+84-8) 38308308 (Line: 504) or Mobile phone: (+84) 1224320815
E-mail: namvuduy8@gmail.com

        George Carty said:

I don’t think that drbuzz0’s sendups are completely accurate for one significant reason.

Note that the original ad said “Protecting Mining Jobs and Communities“.

Manufacturing industries have a reasonable degree of choice of location, but coal mining (or any other extractive industry) has to be located where the resources are found. The closure of such an industry can therefore be devastating because it deprives entire towns of their raison d’etre. My own region has one of the highest unemployment rates in Britain, because it used to be dominated by coal mining.

Perhaps this argument is more forceful where non-Americans are concerned, as Americans (with their history as a nation of immigrants) have less problems with “moving to where the work is”…

I don’t know about that. There are other industries that support communities and have left the areas without much of an employment base when they left. For example, the “rust belt” of Pennsylvania is where there once were many steel mills and related jobs (some were mining but most were industrial) and when the mills consolidated into larger ones and many went overseas, it left the area depressed.

There are areas of the Northeastern US where they have had a lot of trouble getting the community back on its feet after loosing a major textile mill or other manufacturer. Europe and the US have areas that were badly affected by the closure of a ship yard or military base.

I used to live in upstate New York and there’s a town there called Schenectady which is really in sad shape. It’s become very poor and areas are blighted. It was once very rich because it had an enormous presence in General Electric. GE is still there but they’ve reduced their employment by a lot and have closed a few divisions, including locomotive manufacture and they’ve outsourced most of their small item manufacturing.

It happens. It’s too bad, but you can’t expect to hold an entire country back out of a desire to keep things as they are and prevent any painful realignments of industry.

        George Carty said:

I don’t think that drbuzz0’s sendups are completely accurate for one significant reason.

Note that the original ad said “Protecting Mining Jobs and Communities“.

Manufacturing industries have a reasonable degree of choice of location, but coal mining (or any other extractive industry) has to be located where the resources are found. The closure of such an industry can therefore be devastating because it deprives entire towns of their raison d’etre. My own region has one of the highest unemployment rates in Britain, because it used to be dominated by coal mining.

Perhaps this argument is more forceful where non-Americans are concerned, as Americans (with their history as a nation of immigrants) have less problems with “moving to where the work is”…

So what are we to do then for those mining communities where the resource has been depleted? Do they have a lien on the rest of us too?

Note that the original ad said “Protecting Mining Jobs and Communities“.

Manufacturing industries have a reasonable degree of choice of location, but coal mining (or any other extractive industry) has to be located where the resources are found. The closure of such an industry can therefore be devastating because it deprives entire towns of their raison d’etre. My own region has one of the highest unemployment rates in Britain, because it used to be dominated by coal mining.

Perhaps this argument is more forceful where non-Americans are concerned, as Americans (with their history as a nation of immigrants) have less problems with “moving to where the work is”…

Mixed emotions about this really. Being in the pro-nuclear camp I see this ad as amusing, reassuring, and frightening at the same time.

- Amusing because it’s so silly; like tobacco industrialists opposing smoke bans on account of job security.
- Re-assuring because it proves arguments for coal are running out.
- And frightening because some people will take that crap to heart and believe it’s a valid argument…

So they did get one thing right.

        George Carty said:

By the way, why would European lefties want to jump in bed with today’s Russia? The Soviet Communists I could understand, but Putin isn’t very left wing…

The Soviets really weren’t either. It was always communism this and that, but it was more of a police state than a workers paradise. I’m not even sure if you can really define it as left or right because it had the both in there.

Why would they go with Putin’s Russia? They’ll go with anyone who offers them what they want: cushy jobs, money, support and political favors, money and also money.