|
|
Quote:
I can relate to both scenarios. I have a cousin that got his MBA and delivered pizza for a living simply because he couldn't find anywhere to apply his degree in our hometown coupled with not having a desire to move elsewhere to pursue a career that he could apply it. Delivering pizza was actually the best money he could realistically make (short of construction...which he was not the construction type). He's doing better now but his degree had absolutely no bearing on him getting into the role that he is in today (family member that got him into a good company). I think I can relate more directly with the woman (or girl) example of somebody that took opportunities and simply ran with it. Many others I worked with over the years did not choose to pursue and increase their understanding in the business and as such, I'm probably doing much better than most people I knew when I began in the industry. As a result...I have a soft spot for the autodidactic people in the industry that really take it upon themselves to learn & progress themselves. |
Quote:
How long did he wait after graduating with the bachelor's degree before he got his MBA? |
Quote:
I'm sure he's more knowledgeable about business management now than he would be otherwise...but nobody was going to hire him to help run a company where he didn't understand their industry. |
Quote:
He should have tried broadcasting, they do it all the time. |
Quote:
Getting a MBA straight out undergraduate school is one of the worst things one could do (and one of the biggest waste of money in my view). I also think that MBAs from highly-respected schools are the only ones that might be worth it. |
Quote:
I forgot to ask, what kind of skills are you exactly talking about? |
Quote:
Maybe the climate has changed more recently but as of 10-15 years ago, I frequently saw MBA's required for some of the most mundane jobs in advertising & they were jobs frequently going to people with zero work experience (that was actually the most attractive combination, the degree theoretically meant you were talented, the inexperience meant you were cheap). I really mention that moreso to throw out a chicken-and-egg question about this side topic. Was there an excess of degreed/advanced degreed people so everyone started looking for them or were people looking for them and then we ended up with an excess? My recollection says it was more the latter, especially with MBA's. |
Quote:
Equally very computer literate (working in multiple enterprise information systems at the same time) and excellent customer service/adaptability/flexibility/quick learner skills. |
Quote:
Quote:
Similar to how nursing & health care appears to be the hot industry to get into. Everywhere you look; pundits, newspapers, billboards, et al are declaring how badly people are needed in the industry. At some point...the demand will be met and I suppose some people will be late to that party as well. |
Quote:
As I recall, he wasn't looking to leave the hometown area. And 15 years ago...that place was certainly not in need of any MBA types. :) |
Quote:
Percentage wise they dont. |
Man, Obama lost that one. His argument about the debt ceiling made no sense. Boehner did a better job of illustrating his case.
Obama: We've raised the debt ceiling many times; it's routine. Also, by the way, I don't want to revisit this six months from now, even though it's routine. Boehner: We spend more than what we make. Let's spend less. Now there are problems with both speeches, but overall I'd give the Speaker the win on this one. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Boehner can't do anything without the Tea Party everything they want, and even if they could get it through the house, they couldn't get through the senate. They're shoveling tons of horseshit, trying to convince everyone there's really a horse inside.
Meanwhile, everyone with a lick of common sense realizes that to fix this issue you need both revenues to be increased AND spending cuts: CNN Poll: Strong partisan divide on debt ceiling – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs As the debt ceiling debate drags on, a new CNN/ORC International Poll reveals a growing public exasperation and demand for compromise. Sixty-four percent of respondents to a July 18-20 survey preferred a deal with a mix of spending cuts and tax increases. Only 34% preferred a debt reduction plan based solely on spending reductions. From the same article: "Roughly half of all Republicans think (a default) will create only minor problems or no problems at all." Which translates to: Roughly half all Republicans believe the earth is flat and that the moon is made of green cheese. |
Quote:
Change that to the Earth is 6000 years old and you are correct. |
Quote:
Keep spreading that manure, maybe it'll grow into a horse or a bull. |
Quote:
Really it’s that certain? Seems to me the debate is really one about Macroeconomics. There isn't a person on here that would agree that it is healthy for an individual person or even a city to live the way our federal government does. But there generally is some debate on how immune large entities are from these same economic laws. (Though a lot of the press tends to act like Keynesian economic principles are 100% correct) You do agree at some point the system will crash? How far can you push it? Are you certain this might not be the breaking point? Didn't realize that was as easy to answer as whether the world is flat. But I guess I am just one of those stupid guys who knows I can't take a billion dollar mortgage out on my $150K house without dire consequences and isn’t certain why we let politicians and economists explain to us that this is a completely different situation that our simple minds can't understand. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain both sides are being completely honest with you about our countries financial health. |
Plus watching the hardcore cheerleaders of both political parties is like watching a battered woman. They have always lied to me, really ramped it up the past 10 years, but I think this time they are really going to change things. Let's give them more money without significant changes. How could this possibly fuck us again?
|
Who should we be listening to?
|
Quote:
So believing that the debt ceiling doesn't have to be raised is a view held by only crazy Christians? One of the points SirFozzie makes that he thinks is poignant is "As the debt ceiling debate drags on, a new CNN/ORC International Poll reveals a growing public exasperation and demand for compromise. Sixty-four percent of respondents to a July 18-20 survey preferred a deal with a mix of spending cuts and tax increases. Only 34% preferred a debt reduction plan based solely on spending reductions." As if American popular opinion is important for an issue like this. Ironically... Most Americans take Bible stories literally - Washington Times And... Most Americans Support War with Iraq, Shows New Pew/CFR Poll - Commentary by Lee Feinstein - Council on Foreign Relations Maybe they are once again being force-fed this message by the mass media? |
Quote:
The awesome independents! |
Quote:
I don't know. Maybe economics is so hard to understand because it is predicting human behavior and that can't always follow a set formula. Why do the guys who completely missed the impending crash amd recession and the politicians who led us to the crash get to explain how to get out of the crash? Maybe its time to listen to some other voices? |
Quote:
Seriously? That's your answer? How about people who realize both parties keep fucking them over and so think maybe more government and more central power is not the answer? Whether it be Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians... power corrupts, I can't fathom why I am one of only a few voices on this site that sees this and wants to try something different. |
Quote:
And then The Tea Party will sue for gimmick infringement. |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
There are others who feel the same way. Personally, I can't stand either party at this point. Unfortunately, for most people, familiarity is comfortable. |
Quote:
"We need to cut spending" "What should we cut?" "I don't know, just cut spending" Sounds just like: "We need to start listening to a new voice" "Who is that voice?" "I don't know, a new voice" I'm sorry, it's empty rhetoric. It's easy to get on a soapbox and say "cut spending", "raise taxes", "listen to new people", "fix schools", and so on if you don't actually have to define what those plans entail. |
Quote:
You keep talking as if raising the debt ceiling is about budgeting for the next fiscal year. We're not talking about spending choices, we're talking about paying our bills or not. Failure to raise the debt ceiling doesn't mean we'll live within our means. It means we'll decide to stop paying 40% of our bills. So if you really want to frame this in micro terms(which doesn't really work, but seems popular) try this. You have a bunch of bills lying around your table and instead o making a plan on how to pay them down and cut other spending you say, "Fuck it. I'm just not going to pay 40% of them. Problem solved." That decision is bound to have negative consequences for you, right? |
Good post, JP.
After reading/hearing/seeing smart folks, both in person and on television/radio, talk about the debt ceiling issue for a couple of months now, I have often wondered how many (otherwise) intelligent people either don't get the difference between debt and deficit or have merged the two together in their minds. |
Quote:
:+1: |
So the Reid plan the president is pushing for is basically an anti-Repub plan? Cut defense, get out of the wars, raise taxes, and oh yeah maybe cut a couple of domestic programs without touching the entitlement albatross? You really think that's going to fly?
|
Quote:
sounds good to me. |
Quote:
So you're all for driving us off a cliff by not actually fixing the root cause? That plan is a step backward from what the Dems had been proposing. |
The Reid plan includes zero revenue additions. It's 2.7 trillion in cuts and no new taxes. But of course even that isn't good enough for the House GOP.
|
Quote:
But none of the cuts are in areas that will really fix things. |
Quote:
OK. How about this? Husband: "Honey we have to pay our mortgage, heating bills, electric bills, and maybe let you have the cable tv. But we have to cut netflix, hulu, the trip to Europe, the gardener, your personal assistant, the maid, the nanny, you shopping at coach every day, your boat, your personal plane... Wife: "We can't get just fire all those people! What about their families?" Husband: "OK. But how about we quit paying them each 200K a year and pay them what they actually should make? And how about buying a purse at Walmart for $25 instead of the $500 t coach until we get the bills paid on time?" Wife: "Ha ha ha, but thats just how I have always done things." |
Quote:
I'd agree that Medicare isn't looked at, but it isn't in the Boehner plan, either. The only way Dems can agree to big changes in Medicare is if they get something in return. Reid coming out with a trillion in Medicare cuts will gut the party and then fail to pass the Senate. A grand bargain requires that both sides sacrifice. So far Dems have shown a willingness and Republicans in the Senate have shown a willingness, but the GOP House hasn't. |
Quote:
Here's a start. Its funny that all the people laughing at him and telling him how wrong he is are the "experts" talking on tv now about what will happen if we don't raise the debt ceiling... |
Quote:
Again, you're talking about budgeting for the next fiscal year. If the debt ceiling isn't raised the government will stop paying bills it has already agreed to pay. Not raising the debt ceiling is fixing the deficit by stiffing 40% of the people we promised to pay. If that happens there will certainly be consequences. The likely impact of those consequences is to make it harder to pay off the debt. |
Quote:
Agreed on the Repubs, I just don't see how the Reid plan is worth actually backing by the President. He's jumped on it, but it fixes NOTHING except the immediate debt ceiling issue. Quote:
Raising the debt ceiling right now fixes NOTHING long-term. |
Quote:
Well first of all you know my answer involves the wars which is a huge chunk of change but lets pretend like I am a politician who is scared to quit bombing brown people for a few weeks to get the house in order. Here's a plan... Sen. Paul Unveils 5-Year Budget Plan: Eliminates Four Federal Agencies - The Note I don't even disagree with any of the stuff the Reid wants to cut. (Could do without the tax increases but maybe we even need those for a few years) Instead they will do what you are saying... compromise. Really accomplish nothing and keep sending taxpayer money to big banks, big military contractors, and big manufacturers. And then in 2012 we get to hear all the candidates talk about what they will do different "this time". I'm just tired of it from both sides. |
Quote:
Quote:
Yeah, cuz cutting the Departments of Energy and Education sounds like a great idea. Here's a counter plan: http://grijalva.house.gov/uploads/Th...2%20Budget.pdf |
Quote:
Well that's what I am getting at. Everyone in the press and "public opinion" polls seems to support the parties coming together but all that ultimately means is the worst of both worlds. How about actually doing something? I am encouraged by the rhetoric but I guess I have just seen it too many times to buy into it. I am certain they will vote to raise the debt ceiling and am also certain it will involve no significant cuts and/or revenue increases and both sides will just blame each other and start the game all over. |
Quote:
As a teacher I completely support eliminating the department of education. You do realize it hasn't been around all that long and basically just throws money around to try to fix societal problems. NCLB is one of the biggest jokes to anyone actually involved in education, just encourages systematic fraud and that every child in a low income area is left behind. Don't know enough about the department of energy but I am sure someone in that field could explain how worthless their initiatives are. It does sound good on paper though! |
Quote:
:+1: |
Quote:
depends on what you think the root cause is i guess. |
Quote:
I'm guessing you haven't worked for the federal government or done business with some of these entities. There's several departments that are bloated establishments that could be merged in a much smaller form into other departments and no one would ever notice. Both of these entities fall in that category. Department of Agriculture would be another one to add to that list off the top of my head. |
Quote:
No, but it does fix the giant looming problem of default. |
Talking about eliminating education and energy may be a fine intellectual exercise, but it's so far from a realistic option that it does nothing o find a solution to the debt or deficit. There is zero chance of either department getting eliminated, so if you actually want to solve the problem in the real world you need to have solutions that are politically viable.
|
Quote:
And push it off another year. |
Quote:
And that's still better than defaulting in a week. |
Quote:
Unless it makes next year's crash even worse. Eventually you MUST pay the piper. |
Quote:
Which it has been for the last 10 years if I remember correctly. Why is this year any different than the last decade of debt ceiling raises? |
Quote:
There's zero chance because of the idiots involved. It's a realistic option. It's just not one that the idiots in charge are capable of making. |
The public would never go along with eliminating education and energy. Any attempt to do so would just be answered by a wave of newly elected folks pledging to restore most of those departments. It's not a politically viable alternative.
|
Quote:
They would if it was shown WHY it needs to be eliminated. If we have idiots decrying the children who will go without an education as a scare tactic, you're correct. That's where responsible leadership comes in. We have none of that. My point stands. |
Quote:
Now that's a shock. Oh, wait, no it isn't. For all its flaws, it's at least an attempt at accountability on behalf of the taxpayers, something woefully lacking for far too long. |
My plan to solve the deficit is to return to Eisenhower top tax rates. And don't tell me 90% tax rates are unrealistic. The public just needs to be told the truth and not fed scare tactics.
Leadership = 90% top tax rate |
Quote:
Actually, it's pretending to be an attempt at accountability. Although I agree it's going to be fun to watch the scramble around here as the reassignment battle is overshadowed by Federal Law allowing so many families to pick a school with all the schools that have failed the improvement standards 2 years in a row. But if the Federal government would just get out of education entirely, we'd be able to fix things at a local level much more easily without having the "but Federal guidelines state..." mantra thrown in our faces all the time. |
Quote:
Good, back to Eisenhower. Medicare is GONE. |
From Andrew Sprung:
Quote:
If only... |
Quote:
If that goes according to the norm, the "choice" is often laughable since it is, in practice, largely limited by transfer within the same system (and often that offers no real chance for improvement"). Parents in smaller systems particularly found that provision to be essentially meaningless. Quote:
But "entirely" means ENTIRELY, otherwise it doesn't work. And that means in all aspects, not just education administration ... which is why it'll never happen. Separately, I definitely dispute the notion that anything gets solved locally more easily, the "fixes" I've seen locally are commonly designed to protect a few sacred cows more than anything else. |
Quote:
Agreed in principle, but backloaded spending cuts are like temporary tax increases - they'll change it all when we get closer. I agree with the principle of what's said there, just not all the details. He should threaten the Constitutional option, propose bi-partisan spending cuts (Defense and Medicare, for example), and appropriate tax reform, point out that both sides are giving up on sacred cows to make it happen, and lay it all on the table. Instead he's just as wishy-washy as the rest of them. |
Quote:
Yes, entirely, agreed, and I didn't say the fixes would come, just that they'd be easier. |
Quote:
I thought I remembered his name coming up here, so I'll mention this. Police have confirmed that Rep. Bobby Franklin was found dead at his Cobb County, GA home earlier today. Investigators on the scene, no details on the circumstances yet at all. |
Quote:
It's also funny how almost all his predictions at the beginning of last decade were wrong. I'm sorry, he has been shouting about bear markets for over 10 years. At some point when it comes to the markets, you're going to be right if you keep saying the same thing over and over. There is a video of him talking about how the DOW will fall to 2,000. How the NASDAQ will hit 500. Why are these ignored when talking about the great Peter Schiff? He was wrong about Gold hitting 2000 a couple years ago, wrong about hyperinflation, wrong about the dollar, wrong on treasuries, wrong on interest rates, wrong on China's economy, wrong on foreign stocks. Pretty much wrong on everything else he predicted in 2008. If you were a client of his and followed his advice, you would have lost almost every dime you had. The fact he has reached some legendary status in some circles is laughable. That's not to say others don't deserve scowl for their bad predictions. But you guys are literally pulling one prediction he had at one time that came true and ignoring the other hundred or so that didn't just come wrong, but weren't even close. Here is the video of Peter Schiff predicting the DOW to fall to 2000 back in 2002. Lets hope no one took his advice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhJaV...ailpage#t=254s |
You're never going to eliminate many of the duties of the DOE. So the talk of it by politicians is more of a gimmick to make it look like they are eliminating bloated beuracracies and shrinking government. You may get rid of the name, but you're simply shifting the responsibilities on to another group. The country isn't going to stop creating/maintaining nuclear materials that are used in weapons and for energy. They aren't going to stop safely disposing of nuclear waste.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Yeah, Peter Schiff has been wrong at least as much as he's been right. But in his defense (not that I particularly have a fondness for him)...a lot of what he says could be true if not for external interventions. Now...the fact that he doesn't (appear to) foresee those external interventions is probably why you don't want to follow his advice. But he does point out fundamental market driver issues that I think are sometimes insightful sprinkled in with his doom & gloom. |
Sadly, the deal I liked the most was the one that Boehner and Obama worked out tho the details entirely came out before Boehner got cut out at the knees by Cantor, preening to the tea party, who doesn't even like him to begin with. $3.5T in cuts, $0.5T in taxes, structural changes to Social Security and Medicare that were at least a start on what those programs needed to stay solvent - it wasn't awful nor was it great but it was the type of things that two deal makers could come together on and actually would have accomplished quite a bit. Some of the rumors had Boehner even taking Obama out and not allowing him to decouple the upper class tax cuts from the middle class tax cuts except for a possibility in the future but that even didn't fly.
SI |
Quote:
+1 Yeah sometimes economists that aren't tied into the government don't forsee 16 trillion being given by our federal reserve to foreign banks. But hey what's $16,000,000,000,000? At least we have our iphones and all of the economists on the government take that will tell us if we go out and spend and stop worrying about unemployment and inflation everything will be fine! Why listen to someone like Peter Schiff that sees the massive house of cards thats about to collapse? I thought this was the sort of system that Bernie Madoff went to jail for trying to run? |
 |
Quote:
Yep what a loon, Good thing someone wouldn't go out and buy gold back in 2000. Those crazy anti-government goldbugs. Lol. Invest in stocks! How exactly would you lose every dime you have Rainmaker? Maybe you need to re-watch the videos?   |
I think I'll do some gold panning this weekend.
|
Quote:
It's funny how the statists just result to being ignorant when simple facts (gold 5x it's value since 2000, stocks lower now than 2000) Oh well, put more of your 401K in Enron and Bank of America. lol (Seriously, I guess the government will probably come save you when the banks all go under) |
Quote:
Be careful what you wish for. Historical gains are not a prediction of future returns. If you had said this in 1980 you would have been laughed at for the next 20 years!  |
Peter Schiff can not fail. We can only fail Peter Schiff.
|
Quote:
Won't need no government bailout when I find the mother lode. :) |
The GOP has started to take the appearance of a circular firing squad: (well,. it was either that or Lord of the Flies)
GOPers chant 'fire him' at Paul Teller - John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com |
Sounds like the eating of their young has begun.
|
This is what I fear:
Quote:
|
Debt ceiling fight: Good going, guys - Jul. 27, 2011
Nice graph at the top showing that even with a return to the ~20% of GDP tax revenue, social security, medicare, and the interest on the debt will kill us. The article also points out the flaws from both sides, and notes that neither plan being debated right now actually fixes anything. |
I did sell a bunch of investments today. I don't think there is going to be any deal. This is going to be ugly.
|
Once again I will wager with anyone that they reach a deal. It's all a game to them and member of both parties love shelling our tax money to the people that bought them off. Certain of no deal and a collapse? Make easy money off panerd.
|
This shit just got serious. McCain calling the Tea Party, hobbits and he referenced Mordor...
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/j...200836239.html |
Quote:
I can see it happening and wouldn't bet against it. At the same time, the whole thing seems really odd to me with so many outside forces at work. I sold stuff mainly to avoid any stress in the coming weeks. |
Quote:
That washed-up RINO is still alive? And in office? Gonna have to fix that last bit, he can live out his years in the Home For Miserably Failed Pseudo-Conservative Political Hacks ... preferably securely encased in a cone of silence. (And I'm actually in favor of raising the debt ceiling under relatively light conditions) |
I just thought it was funny that he had to go all the way to Middle Earth to say something. :)
I don't know, give him long white hair and a long white beard, he might be able to pass for Gandalf. |
He was quoting the New York Times editorial that said that.
|
David Frum has a nice insight:
Quote:
|
And they post pone the House vote AGAIN because they don't have the votes to pass a R plan.
The party of NO strikes again! They can't say yes, even to themselves! |
Quote:
And the Senate voted to approve the Reid plan when? |
I don't understand it. The Reid plan calls for 2.5T in cuts with no revenue increases, Obama wanted a 4T cut with tax reform and returning to Clinton levels on 250k+, yet Boehner is trying to pass a barely 1T tax cut bill that promises to create more commissions. It would appear nobody listens to the commissions anyway. All so they can do this again next year? I think the only opposition to the Reid plan is that it raises the debt limit enough to avoid this until the next presidential term.
Was it me, or were the republicans calling for a plan that cut spending by as much as the ceiling was raised, without tax increases. So what's wrong with the Reid plan? |
Quote:
Upon further review, it seems more accurate to say they can't pass a Boehner plan. It's becoming increasingly apparent that he may not have the mandate to speak for the R's at this point. Remember, one plan has already passed the House. |
Quote:
You see, Jon, it may have slipped your mind, but both sides really want to go second, assuming the other side's going to fail, so they can claim that they have the only bill that's passed. Then Boehner got a bright idea. Pass his bill FIRST, and then Obama and the Senate would "fold like a cheap suit" (pretty much their exact words). But guess what? He can't get it done. This is strike 2. Your cohorts on the right of the right wing would rather see the country burn down then do anything like *shudder* working with the ENEMY (which I'm sure you applaud), but Boehner knows that if there's a default or if the credit gets downgraded, the R's are going to get the lion share of the blame (even the conservative leaning folks like the New York Times recognize that) The funny thing is that the Democrats are actuallytrying to do more to fix the deficit then the R's are. One side is playing political games, the other side is trying to govern a country. |
Quote:
Yes, The Cut, Crap and Imbalanced Plan. Otherwise known as "The wet dream of Grover Norquist". Symbolic, yes. But all the R's have left are symbols. |
Quote:
Sort of. The Cut Cap Balance only has the promise of another vote to lift the debt ceiling if a bunch of other things happen. |
Quote:
Including 2/3'ds of the states passing a balanced budget amendment in the next four days. As I said, things that are only R's wet dreams. |
Dola: Oh wow, this may be Night of the Long Knives stuff. Redstate and a couple other places have decided that Speaker Boehner has decided to get back at RSC Chairman Jim Jordan for opposing the plan, and have decided to eliminate his district in this round of redistricting. This has gone over as well as you can imagine.
|
Quote:
But you hate that since you (claim) to hate that anyone is "playing games" with this, right? Quote:
At the moment there isn't anything to vote on, the Senate hasn't actually done anything other than talk. Quote:
Seems we're close to the point of having three sides ... one that doesn't have enough support for half measures to get something through, one that would lead starving dogs straight off a cliff in search of fresh meat they know doesn't exist anyway, and one that has both enough clout & enough sense to craft something that can pass at least one chamber. Tell me again which side is getting things done ... unless of course that rather obvious truth sticks in your throat too badly. In that case I'll let you off the hook, anybody with even one eye connected to their brain can see which is which. Incidentally, just ftr, based on what I've seen of the two plans still lingering, even I'm not entirely sure that there's a significant difference in the two ... except that the larger one is pretty obviously designed to give political cover to their lame duck. |
Quote:
At this rate, Bonehead may be lucky to be Speaker by the time the cap is eventually raised. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:02 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.