The USA is a centrally planned economy -- that is of the whole point of environmental laws. Environmental laws have almost nothing to do with the environment but are instead all about central planning. It's how the government rewards political donors. Try building anything in the Silicon Valley without a political connection - it's harder to do here than in China. Worse, try cutting down a tree on your property that you planted a few years back in the bay area and you'll learn a few things about central planning. Ever wonder why our economy performs just like every centrally planned economies. A massive amount of the fed stimulus and bailouts were central planning.
Except, Chipmonk, we do not have a centrally planned economy. That's the main point in all of this. Unless you want the government to get involved in dealings between businesses too, or unless you want the government to fine Walmart for every Chinese-made product they stock (would come close to emptying their stores), or unless you want the govt to throw every consumer in jail for buying Chinese-made products, there's not much that the govt can or would do.
Individuals seem perfectly happy with this state of affairs. Else, they would change their own buying habits.
There's no doubt in my mind that open trade with other countries tends to reign in our own standard of living, while increasing that of poorer countries. Reigning in our standard of living is the unintended consequence of US consumers always "looking for the best deal." No sense pointing the finger at anyone else, ESPECIALLY not at China.
Clearly we have different POV on free trade w/ China. I can only site the 10 % unemployment as a tangible evidence for my line of thinking. If free trade continues the same way wih giant China goaded by its monolithic & Totalitarian / Imperialist govt. and a society that has never had any qualms about eating any animal that moves, then don't regret when your own grand-children figuratively end up at the tip of their chop sticks in 25 years.
@iniewski: you have a valid point here. The recover from capacitive touch screens is negligible and one most likely expends more in doing so. The solutin lies in alternative technologies as mentioned in your earlier point. Necessity is indeed the mother of all inventions!
Progress in resistive touch technology which uses non-rare earth's (ITO) is one example that can alleviate this problem. Other needs like in auto industry (catalytic converters, for eg.) need R&D to find alternates.
USGS has a good report on the status of rare earths including reserves at this link:
According to this, India's reserves are less than 1/4th of USA's.
Dr. MP Divakar
Very few Businesses make it to 100. Why is that ?
Short Term,does that = short sighted, and POOR planning for the future!
How many companies have made it to 100 ? In the world I wonder if they are really slim pickens.
Yup, it takes decades. Meanwhile, for everyone who wrings his hands about how manufacturing is going overseas, I'll show you someone who buys cars made in Korea and who regularly shops at Walmart.
There's no sense in getting sanctimonious about things that even individuals won't change, when they have a choice. Let alone businesses that would like to survive until next year.
In any case, just because a country is huge does not mean that change can't occur, even very quickly, once it gets started. Look what happened to the Soviet Block in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and look at what's happening in the ME today. Things do change fast, when enough people become discontented.
Have you ever bothered to estimate how long it will take to " level the playing field " with China ? After WW II Japan had a population 1/2 that of the US and a std. of living 1/3 rd that of the US. It took them 40 years to catch up and in the process basically destroyed the US auto industry and much of the unionized middle class. China now has 4x the population of the US and 1/8 the per capita buying power.
So go do the Math !
What would your grand children's lives be like ?
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.