Let's see if I understand you. Are you saying that many americans pay
no taxes and get a $3000 tax refund?
"Peifer, William [OCDUS]" wrote:
>
> Mafud writes:
>
> >Most truly poor American families will get tax refunds totaling about
> $1,500
> >to $3,500 in the next two months, all in one lump sum: more than 3 times
> the
> >average annual wage of many Eastern European countries, 10 to 15 times the
> >average annual wage in most "Third World" nations.
> >And like I noted, our poor *could* buy a $3,000 SLR kit with their tax
> refund
> >(if they wanted), but they'll probably end up buying a $1,200 big screen
> TV,
> >buy tires for the old jalopy, shoes for the kids and maybe even a used,
> 1992,
> >20 foot Bassin' boat instead...
> >For them you see, it's a matter of priorities and SLRs (any) simply don't
> >show on their radar screens.
> >*Our poor pay more, percentage wise, for food and shelter. The rest of
> their
> >lives are purely American and only Americans know how sweet *that* is.
>
> Hi all,
>
> I think our good friend Mafud makes some excellent points, here and in
> earlier posts. I'm no expert at this, but I think that in the US at least,
> the assumption that "buying power" correlates with income level is often a
> very poor assumption. First, many of the working poor and not-so-poor work
> in trades where work is temporary and seasonal, and payment is in cash
> (i.e., not taxed, and not reported to the government). Second, a lot of the
> working poor here in the US get the kind of annual windfall that Mafud
> references -- some choose to spend it on discretionary items. Third -- and
> I haven't seen this addressed yet in this continuing thread -- much of
> consumer purchasing power in the US seems to be driven (over-driven?) by the
> easy availability of consumer credit. Buy now, pay later. And if you can't
> pay, there's never been a better or easier time for declaring bankruptcy.
> IMHO, this is a major problem. Not sure if easy credit is just an American
> phenomenon, or if it's persistent in parts of Europe, Asia/Pacific Rim, etc.
> Seems as though you don't need much income to qualify for enough credit to
> put you seriously and permanently in debt.
>
> But the original question was, how important is the American market to a
> company like Pentax? The problem for companies like Pentax is that
> Americans aren't willing to go into debt for a something like a new MZ-S
> system. It's just not the everybody's-got-it-so-I-must-have-it sort of
> merchandise. But cell phones? New cars and trucks? Obscenely expensive
> clothing and shoes? Video games and big-screen TV's? Gotta have it! Why?
> Because everyone else does! Far too many of us Americans, IMHO, simply must
> have the latest consumer items, and some of us ARE willing to go bankrupt to
> acquire these. Pentax needs to convince Americans that taking pictures with
> SLR's is cool, that everybody else is doing it, and that your kid's
> self-esteem will suffer if you're not doing it too. Product placements in
> movies, TV, etc.?? Endorsements from professional wrestlers?? Sad state of
> affairs, I think.
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
