The US version of "Kath & Kim" should be boycotted and CANCELLED -- on the principal that the Australian version is just as suitable for US & Canadian audiences and already avalable ...

Unions are not exclusively part of the problem, CEOs in this case are 99.44%
responsible...
But a US without any unionization in the entertainment sector would be much
better for Australia, Canada and NZ.
=================
I am still developing the theory that the US Writers Guild, and equivalent
for Actors should be erased from existence -- as they are essentially
entities that have more or less perpetuated this unfair economic
relationship in past years.
-------------------------------------
Are you just now discovering that unions indulge in anti-competitive
behavior? That's the whole reason for them to exist, is it not? Or did
you think unions existed to promote more open competition?


When one is a global power, one has the responsiblities of a global power.
One of those responsibilites is not impovrishing the enteratainment sectors
of nations that share the same language. Failure to run radio and TV
programming from one's nearest allies is a massive geopolitical affront,
essentally it is the first step to declearing war.
=================
Remember that in the US, unless you are part of
the ruling class -- you are totally disposable.
------------------------------------
It's not that I disagree with you, it's that what you say is so much
more true just about anywhere else in the world. Why pick on the US
for this?

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 05:01:50 -0700, "Max Power"
wrote:

Are you just now discovering that unions indulge in anti-competitive
behavior? That's the whole reason for them to exist, is it not? Or did
you think unions existed to promote more open competition?

They exist to level the playing field somewhat when negotiating with
the company. Remember that "united we stand" thing?
Thumper

On Jul 13, 8:01*am, "Max Power" wrote:

Unions are not exclusively part of the problem, CEOs in this case are 99.44%
responsible...

I mentioned unions because you mentioned unions. Here is what you
said:

"I am still developing the theory that the US Writers Guild, and
equivalent for Actors should be erased from existence --as they are
essentially entities that have more or less perpetuated this unfair
economic relationship in past years."

So, maybe you should have brought up the CEO problem instead, or in
addition.

When one is a global power, one has the responsiblities of a global power..
One of those responsibilites is not impovrishing the enteratainment sectors
of nations that share the same language.

I don't think the US is preventing that UK or Australian content from
being sold elsewhere in the world, is it? I generally agree with the
notion of importing good content from overseas, for any country. But
at the same time, I'm not so very fond of other countries telling US
business to become more magnanimous towards them, if you know what I
mean.

The same goes for US business trying to get concessions from other
countries. If you want to play the game, you play by the rules of the
target market. Or take your stuff elsewhere.

To accuse the US entertainment industry of "impoverishing" the
entrtainment sector of other nations is a bit of a leap.

Bert

Modern, that is post 1990 copyright law in the US has not been a help
either -- but Australia, Canada and NZ have the same problem as the US
copyright law in lesser weaker forms since that same time. However, non-US
copyright law is often used as an excuse not to carry non-US programming in
the US ... and the situation is probably getting worse.

===============
Unions are not exclusively part of the problem, CEOs in this case are
99.44%
responsible...

I mentioned unions because you mentioned unions. Here is what you
said:

"I am still developing the theory that the US Writers Guild, and
equivalent for Actors should be erased from existence --as they are
essentially entities that have more or less perpetuated this unfair
economic relationship in past years."

So, maybe you should have brought up the CEO problem instead, or in
addition.
////////////////////////////////


===============
When you run the numbers, globally from 1930 to present -- it is very clear
that the US has impoverished the entertainment (and to a lesser extent
newsgathering) infrastructure in the rest of the English speaking world.
Until the 1970s, the production rate of feature films in Australia was close
to 1 and NZ went some 25 years between feature lenth films being produced in
an earlier part of the 20th century.
===============
When one is a global power, one has the responsiblities of a global power.
One of those responsibilites is not impovrishing the enteratainment
sectors
of nations that share the same language.

I don't think the US is preventing that UK or Australian content from
being sold elsewhere in the world, is it? I generally agree with the
notion of importing good content from overseas, for any country. But
at the same time, I'm not so very fond of other countries telling US
business to become more magnanimous towards them, if you know what I
mean.

The same goes for US business trying to get concessions from other
countries. If you want to play the game, you play by the rules of the
target market. Or take your stuff elsewhere.

To accuse the US entertainment industry of "impoverishing" the
entrtainment sector of other nations is a bit of a leap.
================