<?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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Made By China</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.innovationlabs.com/2007/09/made-by-china/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.innovationlabs.com/2007/09/made-by-china/</link>
	<description>Innovation Consulting, Innovation Labs, Collaborative Facilitation, Strategic Solutions, Where Innovation Happens</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2012 01:49:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Langdon Morris</title>
		<link>http://www.innovationlabs.com/2007/09/made-by-china/comment-page-1/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>Langdon Morris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 03:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innovationlabs.com/wordpress_test/148/made-by-china/#comment-59</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think they really gave it much thought earlier on.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;(Who are &quot;they&quot;, by the way?  It would worthwhile to give this some thought, as it is otherwise a bit crude to be lumping the entire population of 1 b plus into a single category...)&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Anyway, my guess is that the &quot;made in&quot; label simply had to be on every product for US import requirements, so &quot;they&quot; put it on.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Then much later on, quite recently, &quot;they&quot; realized that a deeper meaning could be found in the concepts of &quot;made in&quot; versus &quot;made by&quot;.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;So I would say it was a recent opportunistic discovery linked to a widely-used language pattern.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think they really gave it much thought earlier on.  </p>
<p>(Who are &#8220;they&#8221;, by the way?  It would worthwhile to give this some thought, as it is otherwise a bit crude to be lumping the entire population of 1 b plus into a single category&#8230;)</p>
<p>Anyway, my guess is that the &#8220;made in&#8221; label simply had to be on every product for US import requirements, so &#8220;they&#8221; put it on.  </p>
<p>Then much later on, quite recently, &#8220;they&#8221; realized that a deeper meaning could be found in the concepts of &#8220;made in&#8221; versus &#8220;made by&#8221;.</p>
<p>So I would say it was a recent opportunistic discovery linked to a widely-used language pattern.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kimster</title>
		<link>http://www.innovationlabs.com/2007/09/made-by-china/comment-page-1/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>kimster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innovationlabs.com/wordpress_test/148/made-by-china/#comment-58</guid>
		<description>You reckon the &quot;Made in China&quot; phase was a necessary platform upon which the &quot;Made by China&quot; phase can be built? Or they could have jumped straight into the latter?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You reckon the &#8220;Made in China&#8221; phase was a necessary platform upon which the &#8220;Made by China&#8221; phase can be built? Or they could have jumped straight into the latter?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

