Now it's just a matter of sub-dividing and delivering.
You mean like what pretty much every importer already does? To be fair though, clearly it's a workable business model because there's plenty of example in the wild.
The United States has or had a tax on completed light trucks imported from Japan. The solution for the Isuzu Trooper in the eighties and early nineties was to basically leave the rear seat out such that "final assembly" was completed at the dealership. I don't know how extensive the final assembly step was over standard new-car prep (where they're supposed to basically verify that the factory torqued key fasteners down etc) but I imagine that they shipped the rear seat assembly and other parts necessary for final assembly inside of the vehicle itself, since it has a fairly voluminous interior when that rear seat isn't bolted-down and configured for passenger use.
Almost right; From wikipedia: "From 1978–1987 the Subaru BRAT carried two rear-facing seats (with seatbelts and carpeting) in its rear bed to meet classification as a "passenger vehicle" and not a light truck." This was in direct respons to a so-called "Chicken tax" from the early '60s. Look up Chicken Tax on wikipedia - it's an interesting read how a tax intended to protect a certain market had ramifications for a completely different industry for many decades to come.
You get what you pay for.
I have a saying which is pertinent here (and summarises your post quite nicely I think): "Poor man pays twice"
It is as if the laws of physics don't exist in those towns because the pedestrian has the right of way.
I don't understand it - even if you have the right of way, you're still dead.
I would donate money to an organization that freely distributed birth control devices. Overpopulation strains the supply of natural resources like water, strains the food supply (farms being bought to put in housing), increases pollution, etc. And parents that don't have huge numbers of children can better care for their children. Lessen overpopulation -> help with many other problems.
That's putting the cart before the horse. If you listen to Hans Rosling he will tell you that when there are abundant resources, low child mortality follows, and then the birth rate naturally goes down. This has happened many, many times. So what I am basically saying is you will get the same effect by supplying clean water and health care to the third world, along with of course the life expectancy benefits that go along with those.
That, to me, is being rich - it means being free to go anywhere and do anything. I don't need a lavish life of luxury; I just want to be free of the shackles that keep me from seeing the world.
Yep, agreed. I'd buy a 4x4 camper and do the pacific rim. Australia through South East Asia, China, Mongolia, Russia, Alaska, Canada, USA, Mexico, all the way down to Chile. Adventure!
I have no mod points (and I've already posted in this thread anyway); but I find your post interesting and informative. Does the premise of your last paragraph depend on US tax law?
I didn't post merely to blow smoke up your ass though - I am genuinely interested in your sig line; can you explain it?
365 Days of drinking Lo-Cal beer. = 1 Lite-year