| Author |
Message |
    
Brumbear
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 10:01 am: | 
|
|
Moxnix
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 12:06 pm: |
|
If one can take 10 percent of their assets and double it in a year, that's an opportunity. The other 90 percent just needs to not shrink in value.
Odd that most folk never go to jail over the course of their lifetime. It's apparently not hard to stay out.
Yesterday I advised a client from South Africa that for myself it's being involved in a profitable business, income producing real estate, and, of course, precious metals. Very good company's stock is undervalued, for sure. The Buffet did well as a "one trick pony." That's not a slight, mind you, just an observation on how to become the wealthiest person on earth. Note I wrote wealthiest, not rich. Chocolate cake is rich. |
Buckinfubba
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 12:56 pm: |
|
an assembley line can't work as described above as items move down line at a predetermined rate, It is pretty well understood that in the course of a 8~10 hour work day that 2 15 minute breaks and a lunch break while not mandatory in all states generaly allow for good productivity in most working situations
well why is it understood you should get 2 15 min breaks. WHY? who says and who can prove that its more productive. aren't we all individuals, some work more productive when they get on a task and stay on it, some don't. taking a break breaks the rhythmn for some . WHO SAYS its more productive. some study bought and paid for b y some union labor group.
I only get paid on production driving a truck. if i don't move i don't get paid.
again you only get paid what you produce. your time is only worth something to you and only you. nobody else cares. maybe the assembly line wore out its welcome. hence robotics to replace the human. maybe robotics would never have become more effcient and less costly if we were all paid on production and we would still have a production based country. Maybe, whos to say really.
all i am saying is this. you are only worth to society what you produce, your value of the rest of your life only means something to you and your family. to believe that anyone else really cares about your freedom and what you do with it is hogwash.
haven't you noticed that all of our suppossed ways of working in this country have taken away most of our freedoms.
freedom is time, and we all mostly work longer hours, or thro in the commute to and from and it takes our time.
maybe just maybe we need individual thought and individual minds. not collective thinking or living.
imagine a country where everyone was selfish!!! selfish of their want and needs. sounds terrible doesn't it? NO it sounds great. I take care of mine you take care of yours. and you and only you help those that you in your mind deemed worhty of your help if need, i.e. family or friends. in other words everyone is taken care of except the TRUELY NEEDY. and then that number would be less and the churches or other orginizations without govt ties could help with this. for hunderds of years that is how it worked.
but as we became more educated we thought we dreamed up a better way and also to cure our guilt of being succesful. well what you see today is the out come of that education. how do you like it.
Whats wrong with being selfish, it has worked for me and my family, not a one is on any govt assitance, we help each other when needed. and we help others we deem as worthy of our help. again sounds harsh right? well you can't argue with results.
I am my brothers keeper....just don't tell me who my brother is, i will choose that |
Ferris_von_bueller
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 01:01 pm: |
|
Yea, selfish will work.....until you're required to work seven days a week sixteen hours a day like they did at the turn of the century. |
Buckinfubba
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 02:52 pm: |
|
really? and how has all this unselfishness worked out.
don't compare turn of the century with modern day. its apples and oranges .
well then again most of the giants of industry at the turn of the century did work that much when they started their business, and their hard work created products that we wanted therefore the jobs followed.
yes some didn't survive well when we were selfish, thats life thats survival. no guarentees. does that scare you.
its alright stay in the bubble of protective america.
until it burst. and it is being stretched right now.
i ask you this did this country get started by people that were not selfish?
I believe they were so selfish they risk life and limb to cross the seas to this land to get away from Govt selfish ness. and when we wanted indepence from it we had to fight for it.
and individual thought with the attitude that this is mine, be it private property, business, wealth, earned money. do you think they worried about how many hours they worked ina day. did they think it was alright that more than a third of their earned money was simply taken away from them. did they?
i love how short sound bites that seem witty and sarcastic have become the norm of the measure of intelligence.
I guess we are all so busy we have no time for complete thoughts any more.
simply put. we are only still the greates country only because most of the world tied themselves to our wagon. so as we fall so do they. so yeay rah we are still the greatest. but compared to ourselves and our history we are not as great as we once were or that we are capable of being.
I believe the people have the capacity to have greatness, everyone of us. but there is only one possible way that will happen.
everyone must be responsible for themselves(i.e. selfish) the the govt needs to get the hell out of our way.
don't misunderstand what i am saying, the people have strength and greatness, but if we are held down by govt intervention in all turns of our exsistance we are not allowed and can not pursue it.
our freedom has become quite a myth. explain to me how we are still free in any major way. |
Blake
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 03:38 pm: |
|
I agree with Brian except for the greed part. I don't like equating wholesome ambition and drive for success with "greed". By definition greed is an excessive craving for the material, which in my view is never ever a good thing, hence the characterization of "excessive".
For me, greed is what leads to the Bernie Madoffs of the world, the Enrons, Worldcoms, Tycos and the like.
A wholesome drive for success and a fair profit is what leads to John Deer, Apple Computer, Buell Motorcycle Company and the like.
Greed puts love of money ahead of all else. Greed is evil. Please, let's not say that greed is good. Let's say that ambition, drive, and success are good.
(Message edited by Blake on January 17, 2009) |
Buckinfubba
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 04:17 pm: |
|
hey blake i agree whole hearted. we just have different defintions of the word greed. what u said is what i meant.
greed to me does not mean money.
i am greedy about my freedom. thats what greed means to me. freedom to be as sucessful, not defined wholly by money, but by the end result of the amount of freedom i achieve by my success.
money is nothing . freedom is everything.
thats what i mean by selfish.
but with freedom comes responsibilty. thats the hard bart.
and that where you get the madoffs and enrons and such. total lack of responsibilty.
if i was ashort order cook and thats what i wanted to do, and i became the best from miles around and people came to eat my food. and i made enough money for what i personally want and need. than i would be a success, and greed had everything to do with wanting to be the best.
thats all i am saying.
everyone has different levels. but that level should be based " on ones own self" hence selfish |
Blake
| | Posted on Saturday, January 31, 2009 - 12:04 am: |
|
Understood. I just don't like coopting the word "greed" for use with any kind of good connotation. I'm concerned that it could muddy the waters over time. I'm picky about words like that sometimes. Take the word "mad" for instance. It used to mean "insane", but has been coopted to now be synonymous with "angry". Don't even get me started on "gay". |
|
