Posted by Don Klipstein on June 27, 2010, 5:09 am
>Used to be some interesting discussions here. Maybe there still are,
>but I'm not looking for them. Thinking can get old, and tiring as one
>grows old and tired. Naw, I ain't that old.
>Brought that "interesting" up because I was just googling for an old
>thread that I was reminded about today, and saw many fairly in-depth
>and intelligent arguments while I was looking for the thread.
>Even the lies and insults seemed better than those of today, but maybe
>I'm wrong about that.
I think you are remembering correctly. One very-frequent followup-er
in MCFL in recent years is an infamous sub-troll that earned himself a
FAQ. That FAQ on that sub-troll appears to me likely to be 15-plus years
old, but the sub-troll appears to me to have gained only a couple of
years of emotional maturity since then, and as of a month or 2 ago he
stilll appeared to me to like to tick-off people in general, especially
those who work for a living.
In recent months, MCFL also got crossposts from some cycling groups by
a maybe-touched-in-the-head cyclist enduring need to travel frugally in
a bike-unfriendly city - along with some barrage by someone disliking him
for being a maybe-tuoched-in-the-head cyclist who likely crossposted
maybe a couple dozen threads into MCFL.
--
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
Posted by Napoleon on June 28, 2010, 9:29 am
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 23:57:47 -0500, Vic Smith
>Used to be some interesting discussions here. Maybe there still are,
>but I'm not looking for them. Thinking can get old, and tiring as one
>grows old and tired. Naw, I ain't that old.
As each day passes Americans get more stupid. This country is falling
fast from third-world to Africa-like. Nobody cares. It's inevitable,
as the fall of the Roman empire was inevitable.
Empires do not last. Ever. As for intelligent discussions about the
economy, forget it. As I said, nobody cares.
Posted by Vic Smith on June 28, 2010, 2:44 pm
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:09:30 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:
>>Used to be some interesting discussions here. Maybe there still are,
>>but I'm not looking for them. Thinking can get old, and tiring as one
>>grows old and tired. Naw, I ain't that old.
>>Brought that "interesting" up because I was just googling for an old
>>thread that I was reminded about today, and saw many fairly in-depth
>>and intelligent arguments while I was looking for the thread.
>>Even the lies and insults seemed better than those of today, but maybe
>>I'm wrong about that.
> I think you are remembering correctly. One very-frequent followup-er
>in MCFL in recent years is an infamous sub-troll that earned himself a
>FAQ. That FAQ on that sub-troll appears to me likely to be 15-plus years
>old, but the sub-troll appears to me to have gained only a couple of
>years of emotional maturity since then, and as of a month or 2 ago he
>stilll appeared to me to like to tick-off people in general, especially
>those who work for a living.
> In recent months, MCFL also got crossposts from some cycling groups by
>a maybe-touched-in-the-head cyclist enduring need to travel frugally in
>a bike-unfriendly city - along with some barrage by someone disliking him
>for being a maybe-tuoched-in-the-head cyclist who likely crossposted
>maybe a couple dozen threads into MCFL.
You're talking about Speed, and maybe the guy with the long
pretentious handles? His Highness?
Learned to mostly ignore Speed long ago, except when I feel like
throwing a few insults his way. Even quit that.
He's not worth my insults.
The other guy's handle and thread titles kept me from opening all
posts but one. Didn't see anything there, but nothing offensive
either.
Reminded me a bit of that young guy from California who used to post
here - can't remember his handle. Think he lived with his ma, and
talked about getting a date much of the time, and maybe bitched about
taxes, though with his menial job probably paid hardly any.
Off-the-wall, but basically pretty normal yakker.
Anyway, the only other responder to this thread - napoleon - might
have the right idea. People don't want to think in depth much
anymore. I still think, but don't write as much.
Part of that is age saps energy, and that's probably the reason most
of the old posters are gone.
I've seen that in business too, and a big part of the reason boomers
sold out America is they got fat and tired, and off-shored both labor
and thinking. I worked with guys who were real hustlers until middle
age when their assured pensions and 401k's made them lazy.
Where they had previously taken pride in the company culture of good
project management and company proprietorship, they became perfectly
willing to farm everything out to domestic, then foreign operations.
When I was a contracting manager for a computer firm I used to discuss
this with a manager client at their site.
We provided some bodies for them, but they did all the project
management.
This guy had come up through the ranks and knew the business backwards
and forwards, both technical and business ends.
He was a "relationship" kind of guy but expected excellence from his
workers. By "relationship" I mean he had built many project teams and
knew the meaning of "loyalty."
But in our discussions about farming out different operations it was
evident he had no real problem with that, as it wasn't affecting
current staff.
I disagreed with that philosophy for a number of reasons.
I felt they should be hiring and training to maintain their
excellence.
I liked that company's culture, and it was the best of any I dealt
with. I had done a 4 1/2 year consulting stint there some years
before and had been sorry to leave.
His quality was a perfect example of what the culture produced.
There were many quality people there.
Besides that, visiting different companies and being blue collar until
my thirties I had a different perspective on the value of company
culture and the differences. All his experience was at one place.
But his argument - from his perspective - was he didn't have to get
close and personal with project management, hiring interviews, etc,
etc. He had done all that for 30 years, and if he didn't have to do
it anymore, fine with him.
If he had to only keep a few hired consulting project leaders in line,
and set up the required management meetings, it was an easier life.
I really couldn't convince him, nor tried hard to, given our business
relationship at that time, that the long term implications were not
good.
The business is a major insurance company, and he was a high level
(bonus) investment department IT manager.
This was about 1996, the stock market was on fire, his generous
company benefits were secure, and the future looked rosy to him.
A couple years later I was working for him as a contractor running his
fixed income system, then a couple years later left my consulting
company when he actively recruited me to the company from a different
department he was heading.
I was putting my mainframe application to bed as it went to another
platform, and the post Y2K job market was looming.
It was all very serendipitous. A difference in circumstances might
have meant losing my house in the future, and not being comfortably
retired as I am.
Many comfortable people don't know the meaning of "There, but for the
grace of God..." That's a serious character flaw to me.
But I've had hard times, and know how it works. For all the talk of
"Work hard and you can write your own ticket." it doesn't always work
that way.
Pure dumb luck and circumstances often make the call.
And relationships. I was always good at what I did, but so are many
others who ended up out of work.
It was knowing this manager and him seeing me work, and the timing of
it all that ended up making a huge difference in my life.
No one element alone would have made a difference.
Dumb luck.
Sometimes you can predict the future or get close, but often you are
just tossed on the tides as the sea of life will move you.
When I left the shop floor of IH in 1976 to go to college I didn't do
it because I feared I would lose my job, but because I was bored with
it. A buddy there implored me not to leave, saying "You're giving up
a locked in lifetime job and good retirement."
A few years later he was out of work. while I was starting a new
career. Dumb luck.
I'm seeing stories now about those who lost their jobs a few years ago
and went to college to get teaching degrees. All the right moves.
They can't find work. Bad luck.
It's the little things that are easier to control.
Knowing I was being recruited but still a contractor at heart, I
called an IT recruiter I was friendly with and who knew the market.
He said the market looked to be bad soon and I should take the job.
I controlled making that call. It decided me.
When he was recruiting me this manager worked me hard, coming upstairs
to bug me numerous times. All good-natured. One time he casually
said "There might be a hiring bonus in it" as part of the repartee.
A few months later when I bit on the job the personnel office took
over and called me to make an offer. It was a good one and I
accepted.
Just before I hung up with her I remembered Tom made mention of a
bonus once, and thought "What the hey, nothing ventured, nothing
gained," and told her that Tom had mentioned a bonus. She said she
didn't know anything about that but would get back to me the next day
when he came back to the office. It was purely an afterthought on my
part, and wouldn't have mattered. I had accepted the job.
Next day she calls and says there will be a $10k bonus included with
the offer.
Easiest 10 g's I ever made, and you could say I controlled that.
But the real important events in my life are mostly the result of dumb
luck. Sure, I took advantage when opportunity knocked, but being
where opportunity was knocking was always dumb luck.
And maybe I didn't hear other even better opportunities knocking.
I can think of some, but I've never been greedy or even real
ambitious. Just happy for what I have, because I take "There but for
the grace of God...." to heart.
The only conclusion I can readily make from all this is to move
around, keep your eyes open, and try to hear the knocking.
Still have to get lucky. You can't make luck, but you should try hard
to recognize it.
For boomers there was plenty of knocking early on.
Tom was eventually forced to retire early when he resisted the
off-shoring that was taking place.
He saw too many of the company cultural elements being destroyed.
Too late. He probably couldn't have changed much anyway.
Wall Street runs the show. Money is all that matters since Wall
Street took over the American culture and its means of production.
We remained friendly, after many sometimes heated arguments.
When he left, there nobody left there that had his glow or quality,
and the place was just a shell where I went to work at.
There was no culture left.
We were never social friends, but who's at work matters.
I did my usual good job for a few more years then retired myself.
I should have missed that place, but never did.
Though he is "very" secure financially and I am happy with my
financial security, neither of us were happy with what happened to a
company we spent years devoting our labor to.
Or that our children will never have the opportunity to work hard and
get fat as we had. They'll be lucky if they just get to work hard.
The boomers got fat, then sold out their children to foreigners.
That's the bottom line as I see it.
Probably just human nature and history taking its course.
Don't mean I have to like it.
Okay, done rattling. Meandered there a bit. It's a habit.
I imagine there's much some might take issue with there, but chances
are nobody will read it, so I ain't worried.
--Vic
Posted by Napoleon on June 28, 2010, 4:41 pm
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:44:57 -0500, Vic Smith
>But I've had hard times, and know how it works. For all the talk of
>"Work hard and you can write your own ticket." it doesn't always work
>that way.
>Pure dumb luck and circumstances often make the call.
Bingo! That's it. Luck rules the world. And for all those people that
say you make luck by hard work - bullshit. The definition of luck is
not "hard work and long hours, and education and good character."
No, the definition of luck is "good fortune; advantage or success,
considered as the result of chance." CHANCE. Absolutely nothing to do
with hard work.
Case in point. My sister only got a job (after looking for 2+ years)
because one employee died and the other moved out of the country and
they needed someone at THAT MOMENT. Pure chance. Her qualifications
meant nothing.
Luck is everything. I myself, have no luck. Chance has passed me by.
But I keep on looking for work, thinking my three college degrees and
20 years of experience are worth something, and they're worth jack
shit.
>I'm seeing stories now about those who lost their jobs a few years ago
>and went to college to get teaching degrees. All the right moves.
>They can't find work. Bad luck.
Yes. College is the MOST unfrugal thing you can do in your life. I
regret ALL MY COLLEGE DEGREES. Total waste of money and time. College
should only be for those who want to party for five-ten years and then
can immediately take over the reins of daddy's business. Just like it
was back in the old days. The education institution is a ponzi scheme.
>But the real important events in my life are mostly the result of dumb
>luck. Sure, I took advantage when opportunity knocked, but being
>where opportunity was knocking was always dumb luck.
Yup. Some people have luck, some don't. I realize I don't. Therefore I
don't play the lottery or go to casinos. If more people realized that
one's financial status is pure luck, then we wouldn't have so many
depressed people thinking it's their fault they can't find work. But
as I said before - nobody cares and really I can't blame them. Care
about what? That America is a pit of hell with no jobs, no innovation,
no caring, no hope. I don't care about that either.
>Wall Street runs the show. Money is all that matters since Wall
>Street took over the American culture and its means of production.
If you weren't born in a Wall St. family (i.e. daddy is a big shot),
then you're a nobody. America is officially a fascist country. Quit
believing the "American dream." It doesn't exist.
> It's a habit.
>I imagine there's much some might take issue with there, but chances
>are nobody will read it, so I ain't worried.
True. I read the whole thing, but then I have nothing else to do at
the moment (other than print out a few resumes whereby I have deleted
all my college degrees and renamed my past jobs to reflect that I have
merely a high school diploma and am willing to work for minimum wage).
Posted by hchickpea on June 28, 2010, 5:19 pm
Geeze, and I thought I wrote long posts... :-)
I knew from the getgo that Rod Speed would kill this group. Most
people won't wander into a sewage tank, grab around, and keep wiping
shit off stuff to see if there is anything of value. If anything, RS
teaches us that pure democracy doesn't work unless there is a way to
exclude or execute the idiots (BTW, this was done in ancient Greece).
Even before RS, I was becoming less interested in "discussions" about
politics and religion. 99.99% of participants have no intention of
attempting to learn and no intention of changing pre-formed opinions,
no matter how bizarre those might be. When I did enter into those
discussions it was primarily for the lurkers.
I've seen the fallout from work visas. I regard them as a form of
sedition.
The real issues go much deeper though. As a gloss -
Pre-industrial society was agrarian with a few leaders and merchants.
The bulk of the people could raise their own food and survive with
minimal help. If you didn't get drafted into a war, or killed off by
disease, you could usually survive.
The industrial revolution demanded people as employees, and the demand
for goods and reduction in costs of mechanized crop production pulled
people from the farms for over a hundred years.
The new systems required supervisors and a whole new group of
labor/management/merchant/service people, which created lots of jobs.
The computer revolution minimized the need for many of these people
and unemployed a lot, but the computers themselves needed support and
brought new jobs, many of which were temporary.
Robotics and offshoring and work visas combined to reduce labor and
make it more cost efficient. That made a lot of folks start to have
less income.
Everything went fine as long as there was an excess of credit. Real
costs could be deferred or ignored on a personal level and on a
business level. Leveraged debt allowed fast growth and increasing the
amount of leverage covered the shortfalls.
Eventually, the shit had to hit the fan. The most egregious credit
scams, the credit default swaps, fell. Then repercussions continued
right down the line, hitting the people that were most over-extended
first, but continuing and hitting businesses (especially restaurants)
and those dependent on the stock market.
Politics doesn't matter, both "sides" of the clown college in
Washington didn't bother to read the rescue bill they passed. Rescue
of friends and cronies and those with influence was the only priority.
My one error was in not anticipating the lengths that the government
would go to in the rescue attempt. By all my best guesses the house
of cards should have fallen three years ago November, and by now we
should have been out of it.
Instead of toppling quickly, the gears of the economy are still
stripping and falling apart in many areas, while staying reasonably
intact in others. Texas seems to be weathering this well. Much of
the rest of the country is suffering and businesses are closing up
shop.
I've got some pretty good ideas on where things will go from here, but
would rather not say. Besides, I'm waiting for the resident welfare
idiot to come back with one of his less than witty remarks, so that I
can savor the smell of his bullshit.
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:44:57 -0500, Vic Smith
>On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:09:30 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
>Klipstein) wrote:
>>
>>>Used to be some interesting discussions here. Maybe there still are,
>>>but I'm not looking for them. Thinking can get old, and tiring as one
>>>grows old and tired. Naw, I ain't that old.
>>>Brought that "interesting" up because I was just googling for an old
>>>thread that I was reminded about today, and saw many fairly in-depth
>>>and intelligent arguments while I was looking for the thread.
>>>Even the lies and insults seemed better than those of today, but maybe
>>>I'm wrong about that.
>>
>> I think you are remembering correctly. One very-frequent followup-er
>>in MCFL in recent years is an infamous sub-troll that earned himself a
>>FAQ. That FAQ on that sub-troll appears to me likely to be 15-plus years
>>old, but the sub-troll appears to me to have gained only a couple of
>>years of emotional maturity since then, and as of a month or 2 ago he
>>stilll appeared to me to like to tick-off people in general, especially
>>those who work for a living.
>>
>> In recent months, MCFL also got crossposts from some cycling groups by
>>a maybe-touched-in-the-head cyclist enduring need to travel frugally in
>>a bike-unfriendly city - along with some barrage by someone disliking him
>>for being a maybe-tuoched-in-the-head cyclist who likely crossposted
>>maybe a couple dozen threads into MCFL.
>You're talking about Speed, and maybe the guy with the long
>pretentious handles? His Highness?
>Learned to mostly ignore Speed long ago, except when I feel like
>throwing a few insults his way. Even quit that.
>He's not worth my insults.
>The other guy's handle and thread titles kept me from opening all
>posts but one. Didn't see anything there, but nothing offensive
>either.
>Reminded me a bit of that young guy from California who used to post
>here - can't remember his handle. Think he lived with his ma, and
>talked about getting a date much of the time, and maybe bitched about
>taxes, though with his menial job probably paid hardly any.
>Off-the-wall, but basically pretty normal yakker.
>Anyway, the only other responder to this thread - napoleon - might
>have the right idea. People don't want to think in depth much
>anymore. I still think, but don't write as much.
>Part of that is age saps energy, and that's probably the reason most
>of the old posters are gone.
>I've seen that in business too, and a big part of the reason boomers
>sold out America is they got fat and tired, and off-shored both labor
>and thinking. I worked with guys who were real hustlers until middle
>age when their assured pensions and 401k's made them lazy.
>Where they had previously taken pride in the company culture of good
>project management and company proprietorship, they became perfectly
>willing to farm everything out to domestic, then foreign operations.
>When I was a contracting manager for a computer firm I used to discuss
>this with a manager client at their site.
>We provided some bodies for them, but they did all the project
>management.
>This guy had come up through the ranks and knew the business backwards
>and forwards, both technical and business ends.
>He was a "relationship" kind of guy but expected excellence from his
>workers. By "relationship" I mean he had built many project teams and
>knew the meaning of "loyalty."
>But in our discussions about farming out different operations it was
>evident he had no real problem with that, as it wasn't affecting
>current staff.
>I disagreed with that philosophy for a number of reasons.
>I felt they should be hiring and training to maintain their
>excellence.
>I liked that company's culture, and it was the best of any I dealt
>with. I had done a 4 1/2 year consulting stint there some years
>before and had been sorry to leave.
>His quality was a perfect example of what the culture produced.
>There were many quality people there.
>Besides that, visiting different companies and being blue collar until
>my thirties I had a different perspective on the value of company
>culture and the differences. All his experience was at one place.
>But his argument - from his perspective - was he didn't have to get
>close and personal with project management, hiring interviews, etc,
>etc. He had done all that for 30 years, and if he didn't have to do
>it anymore, fine with him.
>If he had to only keep a few hired consulting project leaders in line,
>and set up the required management meetings, it was an easier life.
>I really couldn't convince him, nor tried hard to, given our business
>relationship at that time, that the long term implications were not
>good.
>The business is a major insurance company, and he was a high level
>(bonus) investment department IT manager.
>This was about 1996, the stock market was on fire, his generous
>company benefits were secure, and the future looked rosy to him.
>A couple years later I was working for him as a contractor running his
>fixed income system, then a couple years later left my consulting
>company when he actively recruited me to the company from a different
>department he was heading.
>I was putting my mainframe application to bed as it went to another
>platform, and the post Y2K job market was looming.
>It was all very serendipitous. A difference in circumstances might
>have meant losing my house in the future, and not being comfortably
>retired as I am.
>Many comfortable people don't know the meaning of "There, but for the
>grace of God..." That's a serious character flaw to me.
>But I've had hard times, and know how it works. For all the talk of
>"Work hard and you can write your own ticket." it doesn't always work
>that way.
>Pure dumb luck and circumstances often make the call.
>And relationships. I was always good at what I did, but so are many
>others who ended up out of work.
>It was knowing this manager and him seeing me work, and the timing of
>it all that ended up making a huge difference in my life.
>No one element alone would have made a difference.
>Dumb luck.
>Sometimes you can predict the future or get close, but often you are
>just tossed on the tides as the sea of life will move you.
>When I left the shop floor of IH in 1976 to go to college I didn't do
>it because I feared I would lose my job, but because I was bored with
>it. A buddy there implored me not to leave, saying "You're giving up
>a locked in lifetime job and good retirement."
>A few years later he was out of work. while I was starting a new
>career. Dumb luck.
>I'm seeing stories now about those who lost their jobs a few years ago
>and went to college to get teaching degrees. All the right moves.
>They can't find work. Bad luck.
>It's the little things that are easier to control.
>Knowing I was being recruited but still a contractor at heart, I
>called an IT recruiter I was friendly with and who knew the market.
>He said the market looked to be bad soon and I should take the job.
>I controlled making that call. It decided me.
>When he was recruiting me this manager worked me hard, coming upstairs
>to bug me numerous times. All good-natured. One time he casually
>said "There might be a hiring bonus in it" as part of the repartee.
>A few months later when I bit on the job the personnel office took
>over and called me to make an offer. It was a good one and I
>accepted.
>Just before I hung up with her I remembered Tom made mention of a
>bonus once, and thought "What the hey, nothing ventured, nothing
>gained," and told her that Tom had mentioned a bonus. She said she
>didn't know anything about that but would get back to me the next day
>when he came back to the office. It was purely an afterthought on my
>part, and wouldn't have mattered. I had accepted the job.
>Next day she calls and says there will be a $10k bonus included with
>the offer.
>Easiest 10 g's I ever made, and you could say I controlled that.
>But the real important events in my life are mostly the result of dumb
>luck. Sure, I took advantage when opportunity knocked, but being
>where opportunity was knocking was always dumb luck.
>And maybe I didn't hear other even better opportunities knocking.
>I can think of some, but I've never been greedy or even real
>ambitious. Just happy for what I have, because I take "There but for
>the grace of God...." to heart.
>The only conclusion I can readily make from all this is to move
>around, keep your eyes open, and try to hear the knocking.
>Still have to get lucky. You can't make luck, but you should try hard
>to recognize it.
>For boomers there was plenty of knocking early on.
>Tom was eventually forced to retire early when he resisted the
>off-shoring that was taking place.
>He saw too many of the company cultural elements being destroyed.
>Too late. He probably couldn't have changed much anyway.
>Wall Street runs the show. Money is all that matters since Wall
>Street took over the American culture and its means of production.
>We remained friendly, after many sometimes heated arguments.
>When he left, there nobody left there that had his glow or quality,
>and the place was just a shell where I went to work at.
>There was no culture left.
>We were never social friends, but who's at work matters.
>I did my usual good job for a few more years then retired myself.
>I should have missed that place, but never did.
>Though he is "very" secure financially and I am happy with my
>financial security, neither of us were happy with what happened to a
>company we spent years devoting our labor to.
>Or that our children will never have the opportunity to work hard and
>get fat as we had. They'll be lucky if they just get to work hard.
>The boomers got fat, then sold out their children to foreigners.
>That's the bottom line as I see it.
>Probably just human nature and history taking its course.
>Don't mean I have to like it.
>Okay, done rattling. Meandered there a bit. It's a habit.
>I imagine there's much some might take issue with there, but chances
>are nobody will read it, so I ain't worried.
>--Vic
>
XML site map
>but I'm not looking for them. Thinking can get old, and tiring as one
>grows old and tired. Naw, I ain't that old.
>Brought that "interesting" up because I was just googling for an old
>thread that I was reminded about today, and saw many fairly in-depth
>and intelligent arguments while I was looking for the thread.
>Even the lies and insults seemed better than those of today, but maybe
>I'm wrong about that.