Comments:

1. Mudak on November 17th, 2011 at 21:58:

   Surely not all 42 of those Samsung phones are for use on the same network. If I go into an AT&T store, for example, how many of those phones will I really have the choice of? Just like the iPhone 4 is divided among GSM and CDMA networking protocols, are there unique aspects of the Samsung phones that drive availability on different networks?

2. Roland Hesz on November 18th, 2011 at 1:15:

   Depends. Question: You don’t have 1 gazillion dollars for a phone. Can you get an Apple? No. Can you get a Samsung. Sure.

   Case closed.

3. Desiato on November 18th, 2011 at 8:37:

   Yeah, the Samsung phone I have is a €20 (unlocked, contract-free) flipphone kept for visitors who don’t have a phone that works here. Can’t buy that from Apple.

   But having more models does spread out your design and engineering talent and means that on average a model will have less talented people working on it. And it’s not just hardware models; Samsung also has several OSes in the mix that have to be adapted and supported. Apple focuses all attention on just one new model each year.

4. Rob on November 18th, 2011 at 16:06:

   I bought the iPhone 3GS for my wife and I for $49/ea. They were on sale. The iPhone4 was out and the much-anticipated iPhone5 was thought to be coming out any day. I’ll upgrade to the 4 … probably when the much-anticipated iPhone9 is thought to be coming out. I simply don’t have the inclination or resources to be up-to-date any more.

5. benjaminsa on November 18th, 2011 at 16:49:

   Barry Schwartz has written a lot about the problem of too much choice. It leads to paralysis not empowerment. Same thing with laptops, Apple is so clear and simple: macbook, pro or air, covering almost all users. This array of phones is baffling, who has time to figure it out, not worth it just buy a iphone.

6. Roland Hesz on November 19th, 2011 at 4:22:

   @benjaminsa

   It’s all good, sadly lots of people can’t afford an iPhone. Yes, that’s true, there are countries, where an iPhone costs more than the average monthly salary. Plus, giving up your soul for the provider for 2 years.

   Same with Macbooks. Limited choice means 90% of the people can’t afford it. Also, as the quality is not much higher than some other laptop that costs half the price it is even wasteful.
   Choice is baffling. However, as we learned from “communism”, lack of choice is even worse.

   Some people are rich enough to gladly pay more just to save time. Some people are not rich enough.

7. benjaminsa on November 19th, 2011 at 9:03:

   @Roland Hesz

   The assumption of the conversation is that we are talking about consumers who can afford to buy a smartphone, so it is the relative difference. Yes iPhones cost more (I don’t and won’t own one) but one reason people buy them despite the higher cost is simplicity.
   I did not, and Barry Schwartz is not arguing for communism. I am not saying no choice, but rather arguing against too much choice.

8. Roland Hesz on November 19th, 2011 at 14:26:

   @benjaminsa Looking at the selection above, there are about a dozen not smart phones.
   I don’t like Samsung, and I don’t necessarily agree with that huge range of slightly different models, but one of the reasons I bought an HTC Desire HD (which actually costs the same as an iPhone) was that it had a bigger screen than the iPhone, and that I was able to buy it without an oath of fealty.

   For me the iPhone is one end of the extreme, and Samsung is the other.
   And the main proble with the iPhone – well, not a problem actually, it’s just a result of the lack of choice – is that there is no entry level phone.

   Two different business models. But seeing that Samsung does pretty well, and Apple got mightily scared of them, and of HTC shows that there is a validity to their business model.
   And mocking a successful business model is like saying “the iPhone has no future”.

9. Mauro on November 19th, 2011 at 22:37:

   It’s pretty easy.

   I have a G2x from LG, and it runs Android. That’s important. I could have had an iPhone, running iOS, or a Windows phone of some sort. The thing is, out of all of the models available on my carrier, the one I bought was both inexpensive and had high specs. I didn’t particularly care what company it was.

   The iPhone is a categorically different thing from the generic Android phone, so it really comes down to which one a person wants. iPhone? Easy choice — get the newest one. Android? There are a lot of choices, so look at the specs and price. Nobody really says “I want to buy a Samsung phone”.

Comments:

1. Spaceman Spiff on November 17th, 2011 at 19:02:

   Lets not Newter America! Gingrich is such a prat, that if he is somehow elected President, we will welcome back the hypocrisy of Obama, and the brainlessness of G. Dubya Bush…

2. TS Phillips on November 17th, 2011 at 19:06:

   Funny, I thought that was Cheney dream of a corporate Police State and Wolfowitz’s fantasy of the U.S. as the next great world empire that was the greatest danger.

3. Sue W on November 18th, 2011 at 17:40:

   Clearly this man has earned a fortune for his antics. That it has the unfortunate effect of pouring gasoline on the overheated debates within American society seems to be of no concern to him.

Comments:

1. Desiato on November 17th, 2011 at 18:53:

   It’s OK, those banks are too big to fail, so they won’t go under.

2. Sue W on November 18th, 2011 at 15:57:

   And the remaining 2% on $5 trillion is er…$100 billion. So that’s all right then?

Comments:

1. Sue W on November 17th, 2011 at 17:27:

   Appalling story, and one that will be repeated until children and women are not treated as property.

2. Mykolas on November 18th, 2011 at 12:30:

   A punishment that fits the crime….even castration is too weak.

3. Roland Hesz on November 19th, 2011 at 4:37:

   It happens all over the world, not only Asia.
   In the Netherlands a number of girls in Amsterdam’s Red district are there against their will – mostly from the eastern part of Europe, lured to the west with the promise of some more everyday work, bartender, waitress, secretary, hostess, whatever. Same happens in Germany, Italy, France.
   And lets not forget the underground place they just found last year in New York.

   And not only sexual slavery but the good old, work on the field type slavery is here to stay.
   There were a huge number of cases in Italy where Eastern European workers [mostly romanians] were kept as slaves on tomato fields.
   Then there is Saudi Arabia where the same practice is very common.

   Human trafficking is a lucrative business.

Comments:

1. Fred on November 17th, 2011 at 16:44:

   Having a million dollars in household wealth and being a millionaire are two different things in my view. In many cities in the US/Europe a middle class house can be as much as $400,000 or more. Combine that with other savings and your nearly a millionaire. However, the income from these properties may be little or none, ie, your house costs you money, taxes, etc. and doesn’t earn any.
   The real millionaires are those people who have an annual cash flow of more than $1,000,000.

2. John Sinteur on November 17th, 2011 at 16:50:

   Amazing – I didn’t know so many millionaires where freedom hating communists!

3. Sue W on November 17th, 2011 at 17:06:

   @Fred: Technically I agree and this is probably why wealth taxes are so unpopular, because of the sterotypical little old lady living in an aging mansion in a fashionable part of town. But to quote the Wikipedia article:

   “A report by Capgemini… for Merrill Lynch on the other hand stated that as of 2007 there are approximately 3,028,000 households in the United States who hold at least US$1 million in financial assets, excluding collectibles, consumables, consumer durables and primary residences.”

   So let’s exclude the Gauguin and the Bentley, but include the villa in Cap d’Antibes…

4. Desiato on November 17th, 2011 at 17:47:

   Catch-22. How many people do you think are willing to publicly sign a statement that implies “HELLO, I’M A MILLIONAIRE!” ? You may think rich Americans are crass, but exactly the ones willing to be taxed more may not be that crass, and may not want the info out there in the public eye.

5. Sue W on November 17th, 2011 at 18:20:

   @Desiato – There were a few of the 138 who signed with their initials only, presumably for reasons of privacy. Personally, I do not think all rich Americans are crass by any means. Some of them are clearly cultured, enlightened and well-educated, engaging in extraordinary philanthropic works, and very worried about the state of the world and the U.S. in particular.

Comments:

1. Rob on November 18th, 2011 at 20:11:

   If it no longer has elected officials, it’s no longer a democracy.

2. Roland Hesz on November 19th, 2011 at 4:42:

   It has elected officials.
   The concept is that until there is the new elections, they pick a group who:
   1) has no political stake in leading the country
   2) is made up of not politicians, but people who actually know what they are doing
   3) is selected by the elected representatives of the people

   Number 1) is very important. As they have no political stake, they don’t have to worry about whether they will win or lose the next election. That means they can actually do what is necessary.

   And it still is a democracy. And it works.

3. Rob on November 19th, 2011 at 19:52:

   “As they have no political stake, they don’t have to worry about whether they will win or lose the next election. That means they can actually do what is necessary.”

   No, it means they can do whatever they want. They are accountable to no one. Remains to be seen if it works.

4. Roland Hesz on November 20th, 2011 at 15:28:

   @Rob
   I have seen such a situation up close twice in my own country.
   They are not “accountable to no one”.
   And yes, they did a superb job.

Comments:

1. Sue W on November 17th, 2011 at 11:49:

   Aie! The Weeping Angels still scare me.

2. M on November 17th, 2011 at 20:19:

   Me too! But they’re definitely my favourite villains