"If I were a rich man," as the song goes.
Although i'd love to have more money, I also recognize that to do so I'd have to change. Take some bigger risks, work longer hours, put more effort in, do things I'm not as comfortable doing.
The alternative is to accept who I am, what I do, and the income that yeilds. I've accepted that I don't have the true drive and desire to take those risks etc. Thus I've also accepted that I will never be a member of the idle rich either. However, I'm also not struggling to put food on the table and a roof over my head.
--ericball Tue Aug 8 09:56:24 2006
Well, you know what they say...
Assuming that no film exec already has his eyes on "The Tragedy of Flight 66" documentary, I should stumbling into Boston this morning.
Why is the USA seemingly so much more into "Laissez-Faire" than Europe? Is it our history of "rugged individualism"? Some hangover from the red scares of the 50s? I guess it predates that.
It's funny to realize that "it doesn't have to be this way". I'm sure libertarians think it's not nearly enough that way, and other groups might wish there was more co-operation in general.
I guess in general our system tried to minimize the "Tragedy of the Commons"... it's "sink or swim" for many of us, but with enough legislation to try to avoid the abuses that a completely hands off system might lead to.
--you-in-the-future Tue Aug 8 17:02:30 2006
There's pros and cons to either way of going, I bet.
For me, though, I don't want to put the effort into making the big bucks because I want to devote myself to the future family and also many independent projects that I have planned. Maybe an independent project or two will make me some money, though.
--The_Lex Tue Aug 8 21:03:14 2006
Now we know who the sesnilbe one is here. Great post!
--Pepper Tue Oct 18 18:27:51 2011
Comments Disabled... (Thanks Dirty Rotten Spammers)
Feel free to write kirkjerk at gmail dot com!