Message #48112

[forestman]

Dear Joey,

Question nothing and you learn little is, in my opinion, different to questioning just for the sake of questioning. The first does not automatically require the second.

I am a little confused in that you appear to contradict yourself by saying the bottles didn't have spoons which is why they were replaced with modern ones. You can't replace something that was never there.

My comment about an extra expense was made before you added that the bottles didn't have spoons. You now say the spoons would not be considered a cost, but a needed part. That was the point I was making, working on the assumption they did have spoons then to remove a perfectly good spoon and replace it with an inferior example makes no sense, Communist totalitarianism or not.

If the bottles didn't have spoons then it is entirely understandable that cheap, modern spoons would be added to sell them to Western buyers who may expect a spoon to be in place.

But if this was the case then are you not agreeing with Brian in that these red spoons are the first, and as such original, spoons that the bottles had ?     

Regards, Adrian.