<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: China for a day</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techforecasters.com/weblog/archives/china-for-a-day/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techforecasters.com/weblog/archives/china-for-a-day/</link>
	<description>Read what our thought leaders are thinking, in our every-other-Friday TFI blog entries.   Sign up with your favorite RSS Feed service and get an automated alert whenever there&#039;s a new posting to the TFI Weblog.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:20:37 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tom Valliere</title>
		<link>http://www.techforecasters.com/weblog/archives/china-for-a-day/comment-page-1/#comment-22062</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Valliere</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:26:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techforecasters.com/weblog/?p=359#comment-22062</guid>
		<description>Hi Pam,

I think China&#039;s old for new policy is great.  It mirrors somewhat the US &quot;clunker&quot; policy for automobiles. As such, it has two desirable outcomes as an economic stimulus and also replacement of older equipmant with newer and hopefully more environmentally friendly replacements.  A significant side benefit is the capture of the old equipment at point of sale.  This greatly facilitates recycling or disposal. I wonder why the large US companies or the US government have not jumped on this bandwagon.

Tom</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Pam,</p>
<p>I think China&#8217;s old for new policy is great.  It mirrors somewhat the US &#8220;clunker&#8221; policy for automobiles. As such, it has two desirable outcomes as an economic stimulus and also replacement of older equipmant with newer and hopefully more environmentally friendly replacements.  A significant side benefit is the capture of the old equipment at point of sale.  This greatly facilitates recycling or disposal. I wonder why the large US companies or the US government have not jumped on this bandwagon.</p>
<p>Tom</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
