patrick.net

I think the kids have more than angst. They have huge college bills, and the R&D-based American Economy can only support jobs for the top 10% in each field. By definition, only 10% of people in a field can be in the top 10%. A P/T job at Starbucks won't lead to a middle class lifestyle, particularly when you consider college debt that is difficult to discharge in bankruptcy.

The problem is a lack of opportunity, not a lack of gumption.

Damn those were the days! Thank you for the nostalgic trip down memory lane. A man of means could walk down the street and kick street urchins with pride.

Today's destitute are too soft. The pigs have riot armor now so the bottom feeders need to step up their game if they are going to make this interesting. I liked the underclass riff raff who brought guns to their shows. That had the potential to get real fun. This stuff is boring.

thunderlips11 says

The problem is a lack of opportunity, not a lack of gumption.

You will not find opportunity in the HR office filling out an application. That is not the definition of Opportunity, when has anyone ever said... "Hey when I saw the opportunity to work at Starbucks... I took it!"

The problem is a huge lack of gumption, there has never been a greater demand for innovation and industry creation than any point in American History. Yet we continually sit on our Asses and Wait. And Wait for what? For Congress to TELL the large corporations to break us off a slice or make us another Toy to distract us until we grow bored again.

We want Green energy and we hope the Government will make the large Auto manufacturers deliver it to us. We loathe corporations and what they've become, yet we find our selves in a 12 man queue at a check out counter designed with 6 or 10 cash registers, yet only one employee manning only one of them. We moan and bitch about unjust fees and surcharges, but we'll bypass 10 mom and pop shops on the way back to patronize the BigBox the next time we need a toy.

The Greenies like to pretend they are playing along, but they have been relegated to being scavengers, depending on the kindness of complete strangers to supply then with spent cooking Oil. But they call them selves an Upstart. They could be focusing their energies on innovating, manufacturing and just creating.

You'd think by now there would be a huge alternative car market. A market of chassis, frames, efficient electric motors, computers for efficient energy consumption and performance, interior panel manufacturers, custom assembly shops. We should be embracing China and their Cheap solar panels.
Cheap made in China Solar panel installations by trained American professionals should be the biggest growing trade in America.

There's plenty of Opportunity, and room for innovation. That department has Historically been ushered in by our Youth coming of Age and finding their own. This current Lot is having an Identity crises, because while Mommy and Daddy spent their childhood telling them they are winners no matter what and they entitled to be special, they forget to instill "You can do anything you set your mind to..." into them.

Bunch of Sissies!

The GOP says

The problem is a huge lack of gumption, there has never been a greater demand for innovation and industry creation than any point in American History. Yet we continually sit on our Asses and Wait. And Wait for what? For Congress to TELL the large corporations to break us off a slice or make us another Toy to distract us until we grow bored again.

* Not everybody is in the top 10% in their field. Most innovators are.
* With tens of thousands in student loan debt, few have the money to start a business
* With little work experience coming out of college, they probably don't have the experience to give them an idea to start a business with.
* When you look at Jobs, Gates, and other great innovators/entrepreneurs, they tend to come from very well-to-do families. Jobs wasn't so poor he could go trapsing around Nepal/India for a year without worrying about funding the trip. Most Americans don't come from families that can support them indefinitely while they explore their options and incubate businesses. They need to work right away.
* People from wealthy families have venture capitalists, rainmakers, and influential people in their extended circle of influence. Most middle class/working class kids don't.
Gates came from both money, and influence - his parents were corporate lawyers who knew a lot of influential people, hung out in the right circles, and had major academic/research connections as well. Timmy the newly minted MBA's dad works as a shift supervisor at a warehouse, and his mom is a secretary in a small office supply company, not exactly going to know many VC's or VIPs with those contacts.
* Carlin predicted the Self-Esteem debacle a long time ago, but that should still be producing people who have confidence in themselves to start a business. Problem is lack of money.

Shit, both my wife and I are childless, in our thirties, and make $70k between us. I have to scrape from funds to come up with seed money to start this business. Imagine how much harder it is for a 22 year old kid with a P/T job at starbucks to come up with cash.

It takes money to make money, we're all aware of amazing exceptions, but they're exceptional. Most household name innovators had big networks (Amos Cookies, guy knew scores of movie stars, musicians, and VIPS from his job at an Agency who helped him start the cookie business. That annoying Cookie Woman, a model married to a multimillionaire stock broker, who lectures people about achieving their dreams, name escapes me. Martha Stewart, another model married to a Wall Streeter who funded her, I forget via divorce or while still married) or came from families with money or influence or both.

All that being said, I think starting a business is the best thing a young person can do. But it ain't easy, and there's no guarantee of success. And if you fail, you often will find yourself off in a worse spot than before you began, because you got used to the freedom and flexibility of being self-employed. It's mighty hard to go back to the plantation after you ran free in the woods for a time. :)

EDIT: Mistakenly put "Jobs" instead of "Gates" in "Gates came both from money..."

It's also amazing how pissed upon attempts at better yourself have become.

to school and spending years out of the workforce while going into debt are a "must". Needing to have multiple unpaid internships are now a "given". Going Things that were signs of supercharged gumption a few decades ago are now "expected." and "nothing special".

The problem isn't that gumption is lacking, it's that the bar to qualify as having gumption has been raised ever higher.

Supply and Demand determine job outlooks, not laziness or other morality claims. If everybody was an MD, MDs would make minimum or near minimum wages.

It's not the fault of the rich that you were born underclass. Well, maybe it is but I like gumption in my bootlickers.

thunderlips11 says

* When you look at Jobs, Gates, and other great innovators/entrepreneurs, they tend to come from very well-to-do families.

No I see people that said "Screw the classic higher Education institution con job" and just did it. They weren't as hung up on it as you are. You're just talking about one man there. Most innovators are self made, in fact it is rare when their offspring ever live to their legacy.

Jobs would have been Steve Jobs if he had been the son of a Septic Pump truck driver.

thunderlips11 says

All that being said, I think starting a business is the best thing a young person can do. But it ain't easy, and there's no guarantee of success. And if you fail, you often will find yourself off in a worse spot than before you began, because you got used to the freedom and flexibility of being self-employed. It's mighty hard to go back to the plantation after you ran free in the woods for a time. :)

Creating a business isn't the only way to create opportunities. The most important thing is make your self valuable at something and find your niche. Often there's a ton of money servicing other entrepreneurs with your skill.

The GOP says

No I see people that said "Screw the classic higher Education institution con job" and just did it. They weren't as hung up on it as you are. You're just talking about one man there. Most innovators are self made, in fact it is rare when their offspring ever live to their legacy.

PCs didn't exist when Gates was in HS, only mainframes. Only large companies and government institutions, that don't allow junior high and high school kids to wander in and futz around on their extremely expensive mainframes, had computers.

Gates had access to mainframe time because his exclusive, expensive private school was so wealthy, they could afford to lease time on them for their students. I believe Gates and only one other kid ever took advantage of it. I also remember Gates hacking the mainframe to give himself extra time on the machine.

A kid that didn't go to an exclusive, expensive private school like Gates never got their hands on a computer, so he had a huge leg up on others by virtue of his upper-class birth.

You got to have access to a tool to learn how to use it, much less improve it.

Circumstance of birth is a huge factor in achievement, how ever uncomfortable it makes Americans.

Thirties is when you finally start saying "Fuck this".
It's gets better over the next ten years. That is, unless you're still depending on your boyish charm and good looks to pull you through. It's one of life's cruel Jokes, by time most figure it out, father time hits the accelerator. But almost everyone hits that point where they acquire more, and their life experience provides them with more. You make more with less effort, and if you were a semi smart young man, who foolishly saved his money in a Keynesian world. That is also when that little money you put away starts to add up to something.

Quit whining, and start doing. Experience comes from effort not waiting or blaming.

thunderlips11 says

Circumstance of birth is a huge factor in achievement, how ever uncomfortable it makes Americans.

It's not the only factor. In fact to reinforce my prior statement. If birth was such a factor in someones success, then there would be procession of millionaire self starters with some familiar names. But the only time we hear about a Hilton is when she's spending Mr. Hilton's Money. Not creating the Paris Hilton empire.

Do you really want to gauge a persons success based on their parents then you would have to call Kim Kardashian's wedding sham a smashing success. Didn't she make millions from the rights? Just for being a rich and famous offspring getting married.

I'll wait for some better notable Children of the Rich if you can think of any.

And for the Record, Bill Gates parents didn't invest in his pet garage project. He had to go around the neighborhood to find investors from the neighbors and local entrepreneurs. They told him to get bent, he still managed to find a way.

The GOP says

But the only time we hear about a Hilton is when she's spending Mr. Hilton's Money. Not creating the Paris Hilton empire.

Do you really want to gauge a persons success based on their parents then you would have to call Kim Kardashian's wedding sham a smashing success. Didn't she make millions from the rights? Just for being a rich and famous offspring getting married.

I guess this all depends on how you define "achievement." Considering Kim K made more money filming herself with Ray J and selling the rights to film her wedding, both of which lasted about 15 minutes, then probably anyone posting on this forum will make in a lifetime - I'd say that is an achievement.

A touchdown in fact. One she wouldn't have scored I suspect if she hadn't started on the 1 yard line by having a millionaire, infamous father and and another millionaire, famous at one time stepfather.

Her little sister Kendal is a model for Christ's sake. You telling me that is just because she is one one the prettiest 500 girls in America, or is it because she is related to the Kardashians?

O.K. sign me up for the pity party.

It all depends on what's your quantifier of success. I'm sure somewhere between bashing your head in at the park with Cop batons and achieving the born in greatness of a Siblingaire, there's just being happy with your wherewithal and means.

You talk like if you can't be a Steve Jobs or don't have a Famous Stepfather, then the game aint worth playing.

The GOP says

You talk like if you can't be a Steve Jobs or don't have a Famous Stepfather, then the game aint worth playing.

What you are talking about here is called income and wealth mobility. Please research how the US compares to other nations and get back to me.

If this country was the idealized place where all it takes to make it is a little hard work, coupled with some experience in the school of hard knocks, then you would think the US would rank #1 in wealth mobility. At least top five, right?

david1 says

What you are talking about here is called income and wealth mobility. Please research how the US compares to other nations and get back to me.

I don't have to Libby!
I'm living the dream, I have more work than I can handle and am making more than I ever have in my life. Actually I am currently performing two(2) that's "Two" contracts, that's double my pay, I'm making 250K a year. I'm sure in part mostly because my competition is out in the park because you've got them convinced they aint worth a Shit, and to just give up, and go cry in the park.

Where's my silver spoon?

The GOP says

I'm living the dream, I have more work than I can handle and am making more than I ever have in my life. Actually I am currently performing two(2) that's "Two" contracts, that's double my pay, I'm making 250K a year. I'm sure in part mostly because my competition is out in the park because you've got them convinced they aint worth a Shit, and to just give up, and go cry in the park.

Why don't you hire someone if you have got more work than you can handle? If you increase your capacity, then you can go out and get EVEN MORE work.

I know, you don't hire someone because Obama raised your taxes. Even though since Obama has taken office your taxes have gone DOWN. You mention contracts, are they contracts funded by goverment programs? As you know, expenditures on these contracts have gone up under Obama..

You are the textbook target audience for the capitalist class agenda. They've got you right where they want you.

1. Successful enough to feel content. Dependent enough on their capital to keep producing.

2. Dumb enough to think that your enemies are the 97.5% below you and the 2% that are your peers - not the .5% above you.

3. Lacking the ability to make the jump into their class and compete with them for the resources they covet.

4. If you are an evangelical Christian you'd have them all pegged.

The GOP says

Jobs would have been Steve Jobs if he had been the son of a Septic Pump truck driver.

No, he probably wouldn't have. His (adopted) parents' high socioeconomic status had a huge influence.

david1 says

You are the textbook target audience for the capitalist class agenda. They've got you right where they want you.

That's not true, you just don't know what you want, so you blame others for having what you may think is to much. As for Capitalism I think it's just as dangerous as the most zealot radical religions, when left unregulated and the direction its going. And especially when as cozy with the Government as it is now. The Green Movement has been a a proxy for the two to get more familiar.

But attacking me doesn't make me go away, I still stand testament to the Bullshit you and the OWTs types stand for. This is still the land of opportunity, but that's fading fast. As you and the likes just clutter and confuse the real issues. There are Greedy Bastards in Washington and as acting CEOs that need to be prosecuted and or run out of town on a Pole.

But you guys are blaming all the people are hard workers and innovators the entrepreneurs the guys that busted their ass to get to the point to where they could make money. Yes, believe it or not that includes a lot people that also came from nothing and wanted more and believes in the American Dream. These people got to where they are honestly, they aren't to be blamed, they are to be congratulated.

There's plenty of Crooks in Washington and Wall Street, you guys are just sonic noise and a distraction. And you damn sure aren't gaining the support of the people that aren't necessarily happy with the system, but are more terrified where you guys are going. Aye Comrade???

The GOP says

But attacking me doesn't make me go away, I still stand testament to the Bullshit you and the OWTs types stand for. This is still the land of opportunity, but that's fading fast. As you and the likes just clutter and confuse the real issues. There are Greedy Bastards in Washington and as acting CEOs that need to be prosecuted and or run out of town on a Pole.
But you guys are blaming all the people are hard workers and innovators the entrepreneurs the guys that busted their ass to get to the point to where they could make money. Yes, believe it or not that includes a lot people that also came from nothing and wanted more and believes in the American Dream. These people got to where they are honestly, they aren't to be blamed, they are to be congratulated.

As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. No one's blaming the hard workers and the innovators and the entrepreneurs.

The people who have been greatly enriched unfairly at the expense of other people are not generally hard workers, innovators, or entrepreneurs. Some of the offenders are banksters, most of whom produce almost nothing for society -- but rather make profits through rent-seeking. Some of the offenders are heirs who have done absolutely nothing productive for society with their unearned windfall.

The problem is that you don't get that Teabaggers and Occupy Wall Streeters have a lot in common. Both are fighting against the corruption and against the fraud committed by banksters and their crony Congressmen. If they could see that there's common ground for both groups to work with, it'd be a good thing. They won't agree on everything, but they can agree on some things.

The GOP says

As for Capitalism I think it's just as dangerous as the most zealot radical religions, when left unregulated and the direction its going.

And yet you continually express support for people who want things to be even more unregulated. Why is that? That's all david1 said.

I've sent this joke more than once, but it still hasn't rung true for enough people:

A union worker, a member of the Tea Party, and a CEO are sitting at a table.
In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it.
The CEO reaches across the table, takes 11 cookies, looks at the Tea
Partier and says:
"Look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie."

corntrollio says

And yet you continually express support for people who want things to be even more unregulated. Why is that?

Exactly.

This is what I really want to know GOP. Why do you support policies that do not help yourself, only those who already have quite a lot? Do you not see the trend?

We have climbed to the top of the economic food chain yet we have 1/6 of our population living in poverty. 1/6 of this country does not have access to our health care resources. When is it too much? When 1/4 are without? 1/2? Your hard-working offspring that are in the 99th percentile are without?

I choose to support policies that will help the majority of the economic society - because I know if the poor are less poor, we have less crime. We have more economic activity. And I know that trickles up to me - more demand = more economic activity. This is better for me. And with almost certainty, its better for you too.

What I don't get is, why don't you support that?

corntrollio says

The people who have been greatly enriched unfairly at the expense of other people are not generally hard workers, innovators, or entrepreneurs. Some of the offenders are banksters, most of whom produce almost nothing for society

You're attacking them, by exhibiting a defeatist superior argument against the rich. You're attacking them by saying because they weren't born rich, they are doomed to failure. You're attacking them by blindly attacking this made up number "1%" and trying to set an example of them with a temporally displaced Mob. You're trying to destroy the hopes and dreams of anyone that ever saw a Lamborghini and dreamed a little dream about some day.

What you and your type aren't doing is naming names and calling politicians out across both sides of isles and demanding answers. Fighting a fictitious Boogey man never accomplishes anything good. History needs names and details.

The rabble you're raising never ends well. If they accomplish anything at all, innocent rich people are round up, and governments are over thrown. With the howling support of the Liberal elite behind them. But the thing Lefties never learn, is when the new power is siezed, the educated elite are the next to get the rope.

That is why, I'm not to cozy with this blind fury movement. They are dangerous. At least in the 60's they had names, when they took it to the streets, that is how they accomplished things and got rid of those that were the problem. Had the counter culture took to the streets blaming the faceless and nameless rich for the war gripe, nothing would have gotten accomplished.

corntrollio says

And yet you continually express support for people who want things to be even more unregulated. Why is that? That's all david1 said.

Name one name you think I support that is for a deregulated even more corrupt system than we've already got?

You mean I wanted Palin to win, over the guy you still are in denial over and think things got better with?

I'll only remind you, OWS is happening under Obama's Administration of "Change".

The GOP says

At least in the 60's they had names, when they took it to the streets, that is how they accomplished things and got rid of those that were the problem.

I've got news for ya there Boomer: (who seems to be idealizing the 60s counterculture movement all of the sudden)

The man kicked your hippie ass. Look in the mirror.

The GOP says

You're attacking them, by exhibiting a defeatist superior argument against the rich. You're attacking them by saying because they weren't born rich, they are doomed to failure. You're attacking them by blindly attacking this made up number "1%" and trying to set an example of them with a temporally displaced Mob. You're trying to destroy the hopes and dreams of anyone that ever saw a Lamborghini and dreamed a little dream about some day.

Actually, I'm not attacking anyone that you're describing, which you'd realize if you actually read my responses instead of replying with knee-jerk rants. I'm saying the Occupy Wall Street people have a point, and that you are misconstruing their point.

david1 says

I've got news for ya there Boomer: (who seems to be idealizing the 60s counterculture movement all of the sudden)

The man kicked your hippie ass. Look in the mirror.

Yeah, no joke.

The GOP says

Name one name you think I support that is for a deregulated even more corrupt system than we've already got?

Actual quote:

I would support Ron Paul if he were to run on an Independent ticket, he doesn't stand a China man's chance wining the GOP nod.

http://patrick.net/?p=1117171#comment-773560

Also, Dude, Chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. "Asian-American", please.

The GOP says

You talk like if you can't be a Steve Jobs or don't have a Famous Stepfather, then the game aint worth playing.

Not at all. You could also be a Ellison. But if you look at the big wig list, you'll find most started off with silver spoons on the kitchen table.

Warren Buffet - Congressman Family Member as father/grandfather. Lots of patronage and networks. Alumni admission to Harvard thanks to previous generations attending. Leveraged connections to get his first clients, knew the WaPo family well from childhood. He gets investment opportunities that aren't offered to the general public. Disinherited his grandchild for making remarks about growing up wealthy.

Ted Turner - inherited largest billboard company in the Southeast. By adding UHF stations, which he got for a song, he leveraged TV time with his billboard ads until he became even more wealthy than when he started. But he didn't start middle or working class.

Donald Trump - started life owning multiple office buildings and apartment complexes. Through careful use of contracts, astute donations to city councilors and other politicians, and well timed bankruptcies, he built an even larger Real Estate empire.

Johnson Family (J&J Medical) - Murder anybody you like, it still won't take away your inherited billions.

I honestly think that entrepreneurship is wonderful, I'm just pointing out that starting ahead of the curve usually means you can stay ahead of the curve.

thunderlips11 says

Disinherited his grandchild for making remarks about growing up wealthy.

I hadn't actually heard about this before, but even her own side of the story seems far more sympathetic than you described it. The main story comes from her interview for Marie Claire magazine:

http://www.marieclaire.com/world-reports/news/warren-buffett-granddaughter-nicole-buffett?ha=1&click=main_sr

If you read it, you see a number of things:

1) even though she was his son Peter's adopted step-child, and Peter later divorced the mom and married someone else, she got treated like exactly like every other kid in the family -- all of her education expenses got paid for, but no other expenses

2) he treated her like she was his grandchild and she admits that -- she points out a quote where he says: "Nicole, I just want you to know that your grandmother and I are very proud of all that you've accomplished as an artist." There are other examples too.

3) she broke the family code of silence on their wealth by appearing in Jamie Johnson's documentary The One Percent, but that's wasn't the main problem. The problem was that she trashed him in the documentary, actual quote: "I definitely fear judgment. Money is the spoke in my grandfather's wheel of life."

4) despite the fact that her education was paid for in full -- expensive art school -- she claimed she was excluded from what she was entitled to, even though she appears to have gotten treated the same as everyone else -- actual quote from her on Oprah as a promotional appearance for the film: "It would be nice to be involved with creating things for others with that money and to be involved in it. I feel completely excluded from it." She felt entitled to the money and felt that she personally should be entitled to determine what happened with it.

The reality is that Buffett largely "disowned" all of his kids and grandkids in reality -- he did not shower them with wealth, wanted them to live like normal people, and largely is donating the lion's share of his fortune to charity. He didn't want them to be entitled brats with trust funds. He did fund their education for whatever they wanted to do in life, but didn't give them fancy cars or fancy apartments.

Jezebel got this one right and agrees with me on this:

http://jezebel.com/5113167/warren-buffetts-granddaughter-feels-bad-about-her-check

Sounds like he was pretty pissed at having his granddaughter — one to whom he hadn't been technically related in more than a decade — call him stingy and suggest she should be involved in his finances.

Anyway, fine, her grandfather was mean to her and when he dies she won't get a penny. When I cut my $400 check every month for the next 15 years to pay back the student loans in pursuit of the education I wanted, and my $183 check for my self-bought health insurance every month for the next year, I'll think of her sadly bemoaning how her apology-less selling out of her still-living grandfather to make a political point means she won't inherit a bazillion dollars and feel really bad.

I came away with the idea she was pretty thankful about it, rather than entitled:

"I've been very blessed to have my education taken care of, and I have had my living expenses taken care of while I'm in school," she states on camera.

http://www.marieclaire.com/world-reports/news/warren-buffett-granddaughter-nicole-buffett?ha=1&click=main_sr

Asked in the film how he'd react to her interview, Nicole responds, "I definitely fear judgment. Money is the spoke in my grandfather's wheel of life."
...
Nicole concedes that the remarks may have sounded brusque. "I meant that my grandfather is like a Formula One driver who only wants to race — he just loves the game and wants to be the best," she says. But Buffett was galled.

There are some weird things with Buffetts, like the situation where him and his wife lived separately for many years, I believe, yet for official Berkshire functions they appeared together. This went on for quite a while and he seemed eager to give the impression they were still living 'normally' as man and wife.

So he seems fixated on controlling appearances. Could be the time and place where he was from.

All his biographies, both official and unofficial, talk about his long hours and near-obsession with researching companies, looking over their books and numbers, etc. even to the point of letting the rest of the family go away while staying home on holidays.

.

The perceived sense of entitlement and Nicole's self-appointed role as family spokesperson prompted Buffett to tell [her father] Peter that he'd renounce her. A month later, the mega-billionaire mailed Nicole a letter in which he cautioned her about the pitfalls of the Buffett name: "People will react to you based on that 'fact' rather than who you are or what you have accomplished." He punctuated the letter by declaring, "I have not emotionally or legally adopted you as a grandchild, nor have the rest of my family adopted you as a niece or a cousin." Nicole was devastated. "He signed the letter 'Warren,'" she says. "I have a card from him just a year earlier that's signed 'Grandpa.'"

An odd letter for a kid to receive, especially one who thought of the guy as her grandpa through her childhood. Also, she was officially adopted by his son Peter, which makes her a legal Buffett family member whether Grandpa likes it or not.

And I hardly call appearing for a few minutes in a movie and then on a TV show to promote it makes anybody a "Family Spokesperson". She didn't exactly say he was "Grandfather Dearest", either.

The only glimmer of entitlement I saw was her wishing to help decide about charity disbursement, not a surprise since she seems earthy crunchy granola.

Buffett isn't "evil" or anything, just that he may be "along that Spectrum" as geniuses often are.

Edit: "I came away with the "Fact" that" became "Idea", obviously my impression isn't a fact.

david1 says

I choose to support policies that will help the majority of the economic society - because I know if the poor are less poor, we have less crime...

What I don't get is, why don't you support that?

Who says I don't support the concept of a greater access to Government well being services? I'm even for paying more in Taxes than I am now for it. What I am not willing to do, is bend over and be fucked in the Ass by Crony Liberal outsourced corporations, that have been Legislated to provide more of the same. More fees and less ROI to the end user.

I'm all for a Genuine full blown no pet Name to mask what is, Government Healthcare or "Socialized Medicine",
by any other name. I'm all for financial support for the poor, I in full favor of more oversight, with accountability and not "transparency". That's just a word to preemptively negate any future wrong doing. But I'm all for the details of how that is going to work. The last thing we should be debating now at this point, is how much is it going to cost and who's going to pay for it.

Those questions can't realistically be answered until there's a real discussion on what we do we want, need and expect. None of that has happened, not in an open forum. Nacy Pelosi's Smug laugh about passing the Healthcare bill to find out what's in it, has been the Modus operandi in Washington, from both parties. It would be refreshing to get a "HELL YA!" out you're types every now and then, but true to form. Any criticism of any Liberal in Washington spurs a Us against Them argument out you guys.

I design complex systems, and the last thing I would do is make documentation, before I've gathered requirements, mapped the process from start to finish, and have a complete schema.

By the time I write the first line of code or create the first table, I've already caught all of the gotchas, errors, additional requirements for implementation.

There's a big gap of details, in all of the half backed plans coming out of Washington. And I for one, am worried about being the only concerned about it.

Time and time again, I see the bullshit, Congress and the Senate lays on us, and everyone just okey dokes it. Bunch of rubber stamping green lighting mudderfuggers, you want to blame to 1% go ahead. But they don't make the laws.

david1 says

The man kicked your hippie ass. Look in the mirror.

Except there's that whole civil rights, you guys refuse to acknowledge even happened. Because with out oppressed minorities you guys are irrelevant.

corntrollio says

Yeah, no joke.

The GOP says

Name one name you think I support that is for a deregulated even more corrupt system than we've already got?

Actual quote:

I would support Ron Paul if he were to run on an Independent ticket, he doesn't stand a China man's chance wining the GOP nod.

We need a reboot.
What we're doing now isn't working. Patrick supported Ron Paul in '08 he scared the hell out of me back then. And wanting to do away with the Fed was Crazy talk. But after watching this administration use the FED as a Trojan Horse gift horse from Wall Street for last three years. That's the soundest idea I can think of at this point in our History. Who knows maybe we'll grow back up and can handle that kind of government structure, but for now it's corrupt and seriously broken. If the Liberals aren't in the prepared to fix it and are actually responsible for more theft and carnage, the Republicans will make a whoopee in the mess the Libs will leave behind. The FED needs a time out!

Ron Paul is most suited person to put it to rest for now. Who knows maybe a great leader will come along and make something better. But there's no one in the Whitehouse race right now to make that reality or even remotely interested in doing so.

corntrollio says

Also, Dude, Chinaman is not the preferred nomenclature. "Asian-American", please.

I can call them that. At least I respect them enough, to actually know more about their culture, that what our propaganda machine feeds us. And for one don't blame them for all of America's fuck ups, and don't hate them for trying to be like us.

thunderlips11 says

I honestly think that entrepreneurship is wonderful, I'm just pointing out that starting ahead of the curve usually means you can stay ahead of the curve.

Thank you Thunderlips for making my Point. What you guys are trying to lay on me is, that unless you plan on taking your entrepreneurial endeavor all the way to where it's a huge international conglomerate corporation. And you're in the internatinoal spot light. Then it some how isn't measured a success?

Many people get out early, they don't have the name so they aren't important. There are plenty of inventors and business people that put together a business formula, grow it, and then sell it for a lot of money. You don't hear about them.

But your choices are good ones, they all have so much money at this point in the game "Decades" and Decades after they started and have had years to amass a super fortune on their own, besides growing up rich. Now they want to be the conscious for the other 1% to make political statements for pop culture praise.

Good for them...

The GOP says

Thank you Thunderlips for making my Point. What you guys are trying to lay on me is, that unless you plan on taking your entrepreneurial endeavor all the way to where it's a huge international conglomerate corporation. And you're in the internatinoal spot light. Then it some how isn't measured a success?
Many people get out early, they don't have the name so they aren't important. There are plenty of inventors and business people that put together a business formula, grow it, and then sell it for a lot of money. You don't hear about them.

Thunderlips did not make your point. Your point is still incoherent as usual in your ranting.

I'm not sure who said you needed to be internationally recognized to be a success. The only person I can see is you.

The biggest problem is that you still aren't reading what people wrote -- you are just ranting nonsensically in a nonresponsive way.

corntrollio says

The biggest problem is that you still aren't reading what people wrote -- you are just ranting nonsensically in a nonresponsive way.

So you agree?