And that reason is that helpless people are easy to manage. Helpless people
can be counted upon to act as their own jailers because they are so
inadequate to complex reality they are afraid of new experience. They’re
like animals whose spirits have been broken. Helpless people take orders
well, they don’t have minds of their own, they are predictable, they won’t
surprise corporations or governments with resistance to the newest product
craze, the newest genetic patent – or by armed revolution. Helpless people
can be counted on to despise independent citizens and hence they act as a
fifth column in opposition to social change in the direction of personal
When training beats education, civilization dies.
No where is nightlife more “stiff” than in Los Angeles (San Fran doesn’t have a nightlife). Maybe OC and San Diego are on par. People just pose in those cities. If you go to any “Hot” Hollywood nightclub, it’s mostly a place for rich-kid, well-connected, wannabe or actual starlets to hang out, look cool, and posture. Forget about going to any Hollywood nightclub and seeing tons of really hot girls dancing and having fun. Not saying it never happens, just don’t be surprised if you don’t find it. It seems to happen randomly, and almost always at SBE venues. It is such a difference when you go to Miami Beach or NYC. People are having fun. Dancing. Laughing. Enjoying life.
Moreover, is it just me, or do big cities in the US just kind of suck compared to other countries? In most other countries, in the big cities. There is 24 hour life, all night night life, street vendors and markets all over, and generally there is just an energy everywhere, opportunity around every corner. People doing things everywhere you look. US cities on the other hand, tend to resemble suburbs to me. Not much street life. Everything shuts down at 2 a.m. (or earlier). And a generally uptight feeling with rules and regulations on just about everything. It kind of kills the idea of living in a city to me at all.
If you’re boring, insular, cold, soulless and shallow with a few exceptions. Tech companies love the bay for those reasons. Corporations LOVE to have lots of lonely people who get more socialization at work than anywhere else. Just take a look at Google or Facebook. You have people there working 16 hours a day for FREE because it satisfies their social appetite. Seriously, what else are they going to do in Silicon Valley besides work? Hang out at the bar that closes at 11pm? It’s a great trick! The victim will never know.
People investing in Google are stupid. Google has barely innovated anything for the real world since search over a decade ago. The reality is Google hasn’t really been recruiting the type of people who disrupt thinking too much. Googlers are not rule-breakers, nor disruptive people. They are screened out (intentionally) by Google’s interview process. Even the more “creative” questions are still left-brain oriented – analytical, problem solving, breaking things down into steps, etc. All of the people who have the disruptive attitude who you meet at Google were hired before 2004. Now engineering talent is devoted to improving search algorithms, and its business talent is devoted to how to improve performance on those little text ads which are slapped everywhere.
This company is going nowhere. Their corporate culture is implementation focused rather than theoretical or conceptual research focused. Those that branch out usually do so due to greed or frustration (sick of being unable to do anything or of being unable to.. boss everyone around), and don’t really have an idea worth building a business around, just some minor efficiency gain, some minor optimization, or some minor pain point not really worth addressing.
Also, most don’t really have that strong a business sense, even if they were
on the business side while at Google, and can’t operate unless they have the
leverage of a big company name behind them. Most, not all. Also, I mean,
look at the companies Google has acquired. Most of them weren’t that
special, and their founders usually move on to create something else that
isn’t that special, or, more likely, “retire.”
Sure there may be a few superstars, but by and large the employees there are average, at best, and, more than that, are risk-averse and wired to be told what to do. That is, if you give them something to do that’s worth doing or that’s difficult (and they are one of the talented ones), then they will rise to the challenge and probably nail the design/implementation, but leave them to fend for themselves and they’ll have problems.
It’s classic far right wing economics. There should be no public enterprises. None. If one exists it needs to have laws put on it to kill it.
The biggest reason the USPS is losing money and can’t turn a profit is because right wing nuts passed a 2006 law saying the USPS has to fund the next 75 years of pensions in the next 10 years! No other private company in the country would be expected to do that why would they do it to the PO? Because they want to privatize and give the business to FedEx and UPS. If this law were erased, the PO would not be having anywhere near the money problems it’s having now.
It’s simple folks – remove the pre-funding for USPS postal current and future employees (exactly why does this “plan” sound stupid?) and let the USPS get back to delivering mail. “The Postal Service has been a kind of cash cow for the federal government for the last 40 years,” says Postal Regulatory Commission chairman Ruth Goldway. Congress passed that part of the law during the Bush years to pad the federal treasury and make it look better than it was.
The game is being rigged in favor of private companies. Massive pre-funding of retiree and health benefits—75 years in advance!! Right. What the republican party is doing is increasing the cost of living for all Americans in the not so distant future. Without government competition the sky is the limit for private services. Thanks again republicans shafting the people in your efforts to further differentiate between the haves and have nots as you see fit. For those that care to read the republican bill and see the insidious legislation here is the link –
The mentally ill should not be living among normal citizens. Dumping crazy people out of hospitals, saves mental health system money but increases overall cost to taxpayers by shifting care to more expensive jails and prisons. We’re talking one-third of the homeless population – 250,000 people – and half the prison population has a diagnosable mental illness and they are the fastest growing segment of the prison population.
The New York Times reported that in Berkeley, California, “on any given night there are 1,000 to 1,200 people sleeping on the streets. Half of them are deinstitutionalized mentally ill people. It’s like a mental ward on the streets.”
There are some very sick people living on the streets and in public shelters. Some hardly seemed to have the ability to cross the street safely. I believe that there are many, many homeless people who do not have the mental ability to take care of themselves and it would be a godsend if they at least had a facility where they could sleep and eat meals. Some shelters become known as havens for these ill wanderers and take on the appearance of a hospital psychiatric ward. Others who are psychiatrically ill live in the woods on the outskirts of cities, under bridges, and even in the tunnels that carry subway trains beneath cities.
The homeless population, especially homeless persons with serious mental illness, should be looked up. I’m suggesting we round these people up and put them safe spaces for people who need full-time support. Not everyone is equipped to live in the community – particularly not without a concerted effort on treatment first. And once a person has stabilized in a facility they can be moved to places that still offer support but also independence. We do this for people with addictions – sober living facilities – so where are the facilities for people with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder?
After this years commercials all I can say is, there should be a lot of ad execs on the unemployment lines tomorrow. There wasn’t even an average commercial in the lot. Poor, poor, poor.
That godaddy commercial was really SICKENING to watch…the sounds were beyond creepy.,…the sucking spit slurping noise from that DISGUSTING ANDROGYNOUS FAT GINGER. I almost threw up my pizza after watching that. I think it should have been sponsored by maybe Pepto Bismol or Zantac, for it made you sick to your stomach. The “guy” on that commercial looked like “PAT”, the character on Saturday Night Live who no one could figure out whether she/he was a man or a woman! The only thing that would have made the go daddy commercial worst is if they had 2 dudes. I would still be throwing up, I would call in sick, burn my clothes etc.. What was Bar Refaeli thinking to commit to this ad? I really really hope this girl got paid mad cash because her career might have just seen better days. Seriously, who says prostitution isn’t legal in the U.S.A.? Hot women are for sale, face it.
Then you have the Calvin Klein commercial which was ridiculous. You have a guy in ‘mood lighting’ bending and posing. I’m surprised they didn’t have him bend over and present his asshole to show the ‘360 seamless technology.’ Both of these are wastes of commercial spots.. I mean really, why is there an oiled up, 95% naked man flexing and giving close ups of his crotch? Obviously not a commercial intended for heterosexual male viewers.