Episode 114: Resisters versus Producers, Fake Pictures and Donny Deutsch

Topics: 

  • Ana Navarro rant – the extended cut
  • President Trump’s tweet “resisters versus producers”
  • Time cover photo, the crying child
  • Open borders, who supports that?
  • Morning Joe, Donny Deutsch compares Trump supporters to Nazis

 

I fund my Periscopes and podcasts via audience micro-donations on Patreon. I prefer this method over accepting advertisements or working for a “boss” somewhere because it keeps my voice independent. No one owns me, and that is rare. I’m trying in my own way to make the world a better place, and your contributions help me stay inspired to do that.

See all of my Periscope videos here.

Find my WhenHub Interface app here.

 

The post Episode 114: Resisters versus Producers, Fake Pictures and Donny Deutsch appeared first on Dilbert Blog.


Dilbert Blog

Reed and Delphine Krakoff on Curating a Home Versus Decorating a House

Known for their beautiful and memorable home interiors, Reed and Delphine Krakoff are finally showing off their work with a new Rizzoli book, “Houses That We Dreamt Of: The Interiors of Delphine & Reed Krakoff,” which they signed copies of Thursday evening at the Rizzoli store in Manhattan.
“Delphine and I had done quite a few projects together and we had always thought about capturing those projects and having them more as a record for us,” Reed said from the signing, which was hosted by Amy Astley of Architectural Digest. “We met Ivan Terestchenko through a different project and he had photographed Pierre Bergé and YSL’s houses, and we loved his work. He photographed one of our spaces and he did an amazing job. What we particularly liked is that he is pretty much on his own; he works with no lighting, no assistant, no stylist, nothing.”
“It’s real,” said Delphine, who is an interior decorator. “It was more of a diary; it’s a true representation of how we live.”
“That’s what was really appealing,” Reed said. “Anything that is in the home — flowers or branches — was there. I wasn’t even around when he was shooting.”
Giving Terestchenko that freedom allowed the photographs

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.

Read More…
WWDWWD
Milanoo.com Ltd

Stars Debate Cats Versus Dogs at Givenchy

PET SOUNDS: Collections aside, Clare Waight Keller for her Givenchy debut Sunday impressed guests with her choice of venue: the Paris Law Courts.
“It’s so spectacular, imagine working here every day,” marveled Julianne Moore making her way down the marble-floored corridor to the show space, set in a cavernous hall with rose windows. “How great is Clare, right? This is really, really exciting, the first woman to head a major couture house. It’s pretty impressive to see,” added the actress. When asked if she was into cats, which feature in Waight Keller’s recently released teaser of her vision for the house, Moore replied: “I have dogs.”
On her heels, Fergie revealed she was a cat woman. “My first pet was a cat, his name was Sneaky — and I’m always a fan of a cat eye,” purred the singer.
“Apparently a lot of the series that we’re watching at the moment were shot here,” marveled Natalia Vodianova, who also weighed in on the pet talk. “Antoine [Arnault] wanted to offer me a kitten two years ago, but I chickened out because I have young children.”
Rooney Mara looked a little overwhelmed. “This is my first time at Paris Fashion Week and I’m very excited and anxious to

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.

Read More…
WWDWWD
TideBuy Black Friday Sale 90% Off+ Extra Coupon

The Trump Versus Sanders Match-up: Part of the Trump Persuasion Series

Smart people tell me that Bernie Sanders is the Democratic Party’s best hope for beating Donald Trump. Some say Sanders has sensible ideas based on models that have worked elsewhere. He reminds us of the angry yet lovable uncle we now realize has been right all along. We wish we had paid attention to Bernie instead of allowing ourselves to be distracted by Kardashians and Trumps. 

Supporters of Bernie Sanders say his insider experience matched with his outsider mentality, his ability to speak truth, his compassion for people, and his fighting spirit are exactly what this country needs. I have no reason to disagree with any of that. I can see the appeal. But I haven’t looked into any of Sanders’ actual ideas. And I wouldn’t be psychic enough to know how good those ideas are anyway.

But I don’t think it matters.

I have been blogging about Trump’s linguistic mastery, but he is also a wizard at visual imagery and branding. And he knows a thing or two about strategy. If history is our guide, Trump only achieved a full boner for the presidency when three conditions were met:

1. Trump got a strong start in the polls because of name recognition. (Check)

2. Trump’s brand value and International influence would increase even if he did not go all the way. (Check)

3. Trump had some sort of natural match-up advantage over each individual in the field. In other words, the chess board was set for a win. (Check)

By traditional political reckoning, one could argue that Bernie Sanders is an exceptionally strong “outsider” candidate in an election where the common wisdom says the public wants an outsider. You would expect a close race if Sanders and Trump squared off at the end.

But on the third dimension of chess that Trump plays, Sanders is extraordinarily disadvantaged compared to Trump. The third dimension is the irrational connections you make in your mind, often engineered by Master Wizards, but in this case one that occurred naturally and Trump recognized the opening.

I’ll show you what I mean. And you should stop reading here if you do not want to be permanently influenced. This is a real warning. You can’t unsee what follows.

—- influence starts here —-

When you think of Sanders, or Trump, you have one image in your mind for each that is some average of the photos and videos you have seen. But you also reflexively associate each candidate with a variety of other images based on associations you have picked up over time.

For example, when you think of Trump, you also automatically associate him with a variety of images he has carefully cultivated in your mind for decades. Here are a few images you reflexively associate him with.

Trump Image Association one (his name is right on it)

Trump Image Association two (check out his suit colors)

Trump Image Association three (and the obvious)

Yes, Trump literally dresses in American Flag colors, and has for decades. Love him or hate him, his entire visual vibe is oriented toward power, success, and country.

Then we have Bernie Sanders. This is where we have the match-up problem. When you think of Bernie Sanders, what visual associations automatically jump into your head? Don’t click the next link until you have that secondary image in your head. Remember, this is not what Sanders looks like, rather just the reflex association that springs to mind, the way money springs to mind with Trump.

When I think of Bernie Sanders, here’s the image I see.

I’m not kidding. And I apologize for even mentioning it, but it is central to explaining this prediction:

Prediction: If Sanders is the Democratic nominee, Trump will win with 65% of the popular vote. And pundits will wonder why the voters ignored sensible leadership in favor of the spectacle that is Trump.

For more on the Moist Robot view of the world, you can read my book about success.

In Top Tech Blog, check out the latest in tech advances. It’s a good way to know what is coming.


Scott Adams Blog

Kardashians and Jenners Vote on “Who Wore It Best?!” in Kris Versus Kylie Swimsuit Photo


“Duh… me,” Kylie voted.

read more



Style

A Good Relationship Versus A Bad Relationship In One Comic

One way to know you’re in the right relationship? Your spouse finds your little quirks and odd habits endearing rather than embarrassing. 

Cartoonist Sarah Andersen of the website Sarah’s Scribbles highlights that important distinction between a good relationship and a crappy one in the cute comic below: 

Also on HuffPost:

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.




Comedy – The Huffington Post
ENTERTAINMENT NEWS-Visit Mobile Playboy today for the hottest adult entertainment online!

Versus to Show at London Fashion Week in September

NEW PLACES, NEW FACES: Anthony Vaccarello will head to Britain in September to show Versus Versace on the runway for the first time during London Fashion Week. Other newcomers to the LFW calendar include Toga, Amanda Wakeley and John Smedley, which will debut its women’s wear collection. Alexander Lewis, Edeline Lee, Hill & Friends, Natasha Zinko, Peter Jensen, Manuel Faccini will also join the official lineup with presentations.
The British Fashion Council released a provisional schedule for the spring 2016 shows, which take place from Sept. 18-22. This season will see the debut of a new official venue on Brewer Street in Soho. The BFC will host runway shows, designer showrooms and events – including free talks open to the public – at Brewer Street Car Park, a working car park not far from Piccadilly Circus.
RELATED STORY: London Fashion Week Sets New Venue >>
As reported, Topshop’s NewGen sponsorship initiative includes 1205, Ashley Williams and Ryan Lo who will showcase their collections on the runway. Claire Barrow, Danielle Romeril, Faustine Steinmetz and Molly Goddard will host presentations while Marta Jakubowski and Sadie Williams will design installations.
RELATED STORY: BFC Names Nine NewGen Sponsorship Winners >>
 

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.

Read More…
WWD » Versus to Show at London Fashion Week in September
Milanoo.com Ltd

Versus Versace RTW Fall 2015

For his first full collection as creative director, Anthony Vaccarello evoked the spirit of Versus in its Nineties heyday, and looked to images of those collections captured by snappers including Richard Avedon, Helmut Newton, and Bruce Weber. Since 2013, this collection has been a seasonless one, and Vaccarello’s 17 looks, which have an autumnal feel, will go on sale online and in-store later this week.
 
The collection is packed with tailored topcoats, flannel shirts, and lightweight wool tartans in earth tones such as olive, berry red and brown. Vaccarello used those tartans for leg-flashing pleated kilts or the pleated edging on dresses with sculpted, asymmetrical hemlines. He also paired a dark, floor-grazing kilt with a thick mohair knit inspired by a Weber image of Kristen McMenamy from two decades ago.
 
Vaccarello played with denim, too, covering tops, skirts and jeans with the Versus lion’s head logo done in faded devoré. “I really wanted this collection to be less conceptual and easy to understand, and to create pieces that can last through the seasons,” said the designer, whose evening looks included very little black dresses, some strapless, others draped with kilt-like fastenings, and others still with flippy pleated skirts, all adorned with the

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.</p Read More…
WWD » Fashion Shows
Beauty.com

Versus Versace RTW Fall 2015

For his first full collection as creative director, Anthony Vaccarello evoked the spirit of Versus in its Nineties heyday, and looked to images of those collections captured by snappers including Richard Avedon, Helmut Newton, and Bruce Weber. Since 2013, this collection has been a seasonless one, and Vaccarello’s 17 looks, which have an autumnal feel, will go on sale online and in-store later this week.
 
The collection is packed with tailored topcoats, flannel shirts, and lightweight wool tartans in earth tones such as olive, berry red and brown. Vaccarello used those tartans for leg-flashing pleated kilts or the pleated edging on dresses with sculpted, asymmetrical hemlines. He also paired a dark, floor-grazing kilt with a thick mohair knit inspired by a Weber image of Kristen McMenamy from two decades ago.
 
Vaccarello played with denim, too, covering tops, skirts and jeans with the Versus lion’s head logo done in faded devoré. “I really wanted this collection to be less conceptual and easy to understand, and to create pieces that can last through the seasons,” said the designer, whose evening looks included very little black dresses, some strapless, others draped with kilt-like fastenings, and others still with flippy pleated skirts, all adorned with the

Follow WWD on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook.</p Read More…
WWD » Fashion Shows
Beauty.com

The royals versus the media

Some British journalist say Prince William has gone too far to stop the publication of images of his family. Alicia Powell reports.


Reuters Video: Entertainment

Find your Soulmate Live webcam chat!

Good Girls Versus Bad Girls and Being Mean

2015-03-06-1425669512-3811608-GwenethPalTrow.jpg
Photo: WENN

In middle school I was forced to include every fourth grade girl in my babysitters’ club, because it wasn’t fair according to my teachers, so I cancelled the club and gave back the members’ dues (that were suppose to be used for a lunchroom party). In college, I dealt with (jealous) mean sorority girls, which ultimately resulted in a dorm room change, and other things I can’t disclose. Therefore, I’m no moron to dealing with mean girls, being a mean girl, and using that (ultimate) power to get what I want.

I knew there were some things about my personality that needed work. My goals have always been clear cut and straight ahead of me​. To write, to make my own money and to make myself happy​. Though, the way I was currently experiencing my personal life did not entail ​exactly ​all of the above. To put it shortly, I wasn’t getting what I wanted. There’s been bouts of​ ​cutting people off and just being plain rude.​ And that’s fine. But I’ve learned to tone some of those things down. That realization allowed me to effortlessly embrace my no shit policy I’d ​initially ​written down first semester of sophomore year in college. It felt great to be on this agenda, and for me, it meant learning how to passionately say no, and say, look this isn’t the worst conversation you’ve had. Symbolically, my life declaration has coincided with a few recent headlines about women owning their bitchness, the rise of the resting bitch face and the overall culture of women displaying any sort of emotion opposite of the traditional, good and nice girls ain’t no daddies and boys, a saying my great grandmother repeated all the time.

It’s interesting to read these headlines and articles about how this newfound behavior in women (perhaps third wave feminism) can be detrimental and demeaning for one’s character. In 2013, a study was released about how women have evolved to be bitches based on “indirect aggression,” and “physical appearance that mean girls come to value and used for hating other who “wear makeup and other physical attractions,” that are seen as a threat and get worse with age. I’m not going to bore you with all the research and statistics, but there is a general phenomenon happening right now, in our culture, about why women are more openingly being badasses. To further this argument of how women are constantly being put in a bubble of despair or pink cotton candy, a recent Gallup poll states that 2 billion women around the world are “struggling and suffering.” But I beg to differ: Are we really down and out, mad ursulas wanting to claw our tentacles around victims, thanks to PMS and other regional dilemmas that apparently are suppose to affect our mental state of being? Ironically, in the spirit of women’s history month, the exploration of this topic, actually comes just in time! What is it that makes us want to openly characterized ourselves as strong and powerful beings with a sassy attitude, with openly mean tendencies that equate to using the words bitch and badass? Or, maybe, it’s not about focusing on these words and how they may materialize in one’s actions. Perhaps, it’s a division of female sexuality. Like clothing, we use our outer appearance to exude the non verbal traits in our personality. Nevertheless, here’s my top favorite situations of women being bitchy and badass.

Drinking On The Job: I witnessed this a few times prior and thought about the woman and her right to choose. However, this time it was more blatant, in a more professional setting. We were having “goodbye drinks” in a conference room at work when Michelle (who was seven months pregnant at the time) decided to have a drink, too. With the majority of the room being men, the topic of goodbye drinks quickly became about a woman’s right to choose if she wants to have a drink while carrying her child. From Michelle’s perspective, she felt that it was her right to choose if she wanted to have a drink once in a while, and that people in public often make this choice for her, and it’s annoying and rude. The conversation was all very eye opening and reasonable given the situation, and what varying doctors have to say. Is one glass of champagne going to put your baby in danger, maybe not. Does the public have the right to enforce societal guidelines on women, even if they are pregnant? Insert your answer here.

To add to this, there’s a recent article in The Cut about a female reporter who hid her pregnancy because she didn’t want to be denied opportunities to work in the field (as a war and conflict reporter), but felt guilty for making her husband worry. Though it’s easy to understand why being pregnant puts you at risk for any job (I often contemplate how an unplanned pregnancy as a non-married lady could be a detriment to my own brand), there’s something to say about people who feel strongly about how a woman should act in public, in the workplace and judge one based on notions of what is “normal.”

2015-03-06-1425669861-3564842-wenn20876189.jpg

Photo: WENN

Jessa from Girls, actually just Jemima Kirke in general:
Though her most popular roles in film and TV have been under her friend Lena Dunham’s direction, the woman is dynamic and unapologetic. In her racy nude shoot with Vice Magazine, she made it clear her photos weren’t going to be ” mainstream beautiful” and photoshopped. Jemima Kirke is that girl in fourth grade with the nose piercing, she’s that girl who’s not afraid to say what she wants, and being called a bitch probably make her happy. In season three of GIRLS, Jemima’s character is even more crude and open about her sexual schemes. She could be the blame to the broken relationship of Adam and Hannah, she’s already been married and divorced, and has gone to rehab on the show. All of these situations make her character even more likeable. Women like Jessa are needed in a world where prim and proper trumps rogue and unpredictable. Being bitchy in this case means saying things that people don’t want to hear, doing things that are selfish and in the best interest of one’s own agenda. And sometimes, it’s okay to be your own cocky cheerleader.

Those Snobby Fashion Industry Characters Or Work People In General:
I’ve made friends with colleagues on the basis of this topic. A few weeks ago, I was at an event in which I formerly did not know anyone, so I did what I was supposed to do at a networking cocktail hour: made friends. At least I tried, while approaching a group of fashion people dressed in all black. I was shot down with snobby badass attitudes that displayed as much eagerness as the bounce in my newly blown out hair. “What do ya’ll think about Zendaya?” One editor asked. As my writer friend attempted to answer, in unison the group of editors dressed in all black looked away and thumbed with their iPhones. They basically closed their ears in tandem, not really looking for a response, as they made it clear that the question was rhetorical. We looked at each other, giggled at their rudeness and retreated to the snack table. All jokes aside, we were impressed with how openly bitchy and badass our fellow peers were and how much they’d given in to the stereotype. Though in retrospect you can’t force anyone to be friends with you, but you can always laugh at those who choose otherwise.

Responding to Catcalls: How many times have you’ve been unwarrantably harassed, “complimented” or whatever you call getting talked to by random people on the street with sexual undertones? If it’s a lot, then it’s time to standup for yourself. Start talking back. And talk back clearly, so that your harasser will hear you have a voice and you are not pleased by what they are saying to you at 8:00 a.m. in the morning or 7:00 p.m. at night with your children. Responding to catcalls means you’re a total badass. Some people may think you are endangering your life, but if you’re not in a dark alley way, and some nasty dude is talking to you, unwarrantedly, throw him an “As if” or “In your dreams”, or “gross” with attitude. These phrases seriously helped me feel better about myself, and also helped my anxiety of feeling helpless when some random stranger is all up in my grill. But what do I know! This is totally an individually perceived judgement call.
Style – The Huffington Post
FASHION NEWS UPDATE-Visit Shoe Deals Online today for the hottest deals online for shoes!

Corporations versus Countries

Corporations keep getting bigger. Some have their own fleets of aircraft, ships, and sometimes even submarines.

At the same time, the more problematic countries – in terms of spawning terrorism – are the ones that are shrinking, both in population and GDP. Syria is smaller now. Afghanistan and Iraq are smaller.

At some point I believe it is inevitable that a corporation will go to war with a small, terror-spawning country.

It isn't legal, you say? Bah. A big corporation can do almost anything it wants by creating shell companies in other countries, using proxies, doing things in secret, bribing governments, and that sort of thing. The law won't stop any of this. Nor will any government necessarily want to stop it, assuming the corporation is fighting a terrorist state or group.

You might think a corporation would not put the rest of its employees and their families in jeopardy across the globe by declaring war against some group of terrorists, pirates, or corrupt small government. But corporations are sneaky. You wouldn't necessarily know who the parent company is or the name of even one employee.

That's the secret sauce for fighting terror. If a big nation attacks terrorists, it can put the homeland at risk. And that means you have to do a measured response. Doing otherwise pisses off even your allies. Winning against terror by being the bigger evil can backfire in the long run.

Sooner or later the bad guys will get better weapons, thanks to technology and miniaturization. If all we do is keep wounding terrorists at the same time we give them our home address, we don't have winning plan.

This is where a private company comes in. Imagine a secret corporation formed by one hundred founders, each from a different country, and each with a secret identity. Now imagine them with a hundred billion dollars, the best technology money can buy, no voters to placate, no international blow-back risk, and no home base to defend. It's a virtual corporation, with unlabeled and disguised assets around the globe. The corporation takes its strategy from the terrorists themselves. You can't kill who you can't find.

Now let's consider the future of war robots. My guess is that we could build a "robot attack swarm" with today's technology. Imagine: A drone spots some bad guys in ISIS territory and an overwhelming mass of small but deadly robots swarm in that direction, by ground and air, and just shoot everything that registers a human heat signature. The entity controlling the robots takes no casualties, and no one is sure of the identity or nationality of the people managing the robots.

What I am describing is all criminal, of course, much the way piracy on the open seas is illegal. Keep in mind that the reason piracy is such a problem is that it isn't anyone's specific job to stop it. So imagine a private corporation going to war with the enemies of your country. Would you reelect a politician that used your tax money to stop the enemy of your enemy?

As long as the hypothetical secret corporation is somewhat transparent about its intent to kill bad guys, and it reported its progress in a credible way, I think the democratic governments of the world would have minimal voter support to stop it. And the dictator countries would just enjoy watching the show.

The big risk, obviously, is that no matter who starts the secret corporation it will be seen as an American invention, or it will involve American-made technology, or imagined American funding, so there will still be blow-back. But I think the hypothetical corporation could do enough corporate "marketing" to sell itself as a legitimate independent force over time. That's what corporations do. I don't own six Apple devices because I want to. I own them because Apple made me buy them. Corporations do marketing better than democratic governments.

If you think corporations will never go to war with terrorist countries, I would argue that perhaps it has already happened with Sony and North Korea. We don't know the details, and probably never will, but at the very least you can see it might have happened. That's what gave me the idea for this post.

In my opinion, there is a 100% chance you will see a private corporation go to war with a small country, and win, within twenty years.

Obviously there's a risk to the world when a private company builds its own robot army and learns how to use it. But that sort of army wouldn't threaten a traditional government that has air superiority and more. At least not right away. I will concede there is a big risk here. But our current plan of wounding our enemies and giving them our home address at the same time seems risky too.

On a related note, when terrorists killed French newspaper folks it changed the game. We media professionals just went from attempting to be objective to, well, fuck it. Most of us won't admit it, but now it's personal. The only thing keeping ISIS-held territory from turning into a giant fireball is that American citizens haven't demanded it of their government. If you believe the media drives public opinion, and it probably does, ISIS has a new and bigger problem now. Goodbye measured response. I can't speak for anyone else in the media, but I'm all in now.

But I won't be getting humorous about the founder of Islam because I would see that as an insult to Muslims who were minding their own business. I'm not a believer, but I've evolved to be pro-religion because I observe religion to be a functional interface to a reality our brains aren't designed to understand.

————————
Scott Adams

Here's a link to the paperback of How to Fail Almost Everything And Still Win Big

Co-founder of CalendarTree.com    

Twitter Dilbert: @Dilbert_Daily

Twitter for Scott: @ScottAdamsSays

 

 


Dilbert.com Blog

Words versus Reason

The problem with reason is that we humans use words to construct thoughts. And words come pre-loaded with all sorts of bias. No matter how hard you try to be reasonable, if you use words, sometimes you simply can't get there from here.

This is part of a larger topic of great interest to me: Ideas that can't be communicated because of their nature. I have several of them trapped inside me.  (I'll blog on that another day.)

Anyway, take for example a headline I saw this morning at BusinessInsider.com: "1/1000 of the US Now Controls More than 1/5 of The Wealth"

"Controls"?

I can't think of a word that is more accurate. And yet the most accurate word is still probably 80% misleading because the word carries too much bias in it.

Stop controlling things, you rich jerks!

As I have previously written, a billionaire can't spend all of his money on himself. In effect, the billionaire possesses maybe $ 50 million that he can personally spend over his lifetime. The rest will necessarily be spent by others, or become part of the productive economy. Does the billionaire really "own" that money in the sense you own your favorite shirt? Yes, technically. But the billionaire's ownership of the excess money (the money he can't realistically spend) is actually more of a responsibility than a benefit.

I meet a lot of super-rich folks in the course of my job. The one thing they all have in common is that they are putting a huge effort into being "responsible" with their excess wealth. Bill Gates is fixing Africa and whatnot. Craig Newmark is deeply involved in veteran issues and other charities. Marc Benioff is building a children's hospital and promoting corporate giving. Warren Buffett is writing gigantic checks to the Gates Foundation, etc.

So while it is perfectly accurate to say the super-rich "control" great wealth, it is equally true to say they will spend a tiny percentage of their wealth on their own pleasure. The rest of it forms a deep responsibility to the world that they are working ceaselessly to satisfy.

I'm sure there are selfish rich people trying to spend it all before they die. But honestly, I haven't met that person. I only meet the ones that are thinking some form of "What can I do for the world with all of this wealth I "control"?

My point is that "control" is an accurate word but a loaded one. It would also be entirely fair and accurate to say a small group of extraordinarily talented folks are working hard to put their excess wealth to good use for the benefit of humanity. But it doesn't make a good headline.

So let me put it to you this way. If a hundred billion dollars suddenly appeared from nowhere, and someone had to be in "control" of it, who would the world prefer for that job? I would pick any of the billionaires I just listed because they would be "responsible" with it while "controlling" it and channeling it to the right places. They wouldn't spend a nickel on themselves because they already have more than they need.

I understand the presumed risk to society when too much wealth is concentrated in too few hands. But keep in mind that this is primarily a psychological issue, albeit one that can turn quickly into a real world problem as ideas so often do. But let's be careful with our choice of words. Bill and Melinda Gates are certainly "controlling" their wealth. But it is also fair to say that their excess wealth confers on them a responsibility to the world that they take seriously.

There's an old saying in banking that if you get a small loan, the bank owns you. But if you get a huge loan, you own the bank. By analogy, if you make $ 50 million, you own that money. But if you make a billion, it owns you.

Don't feel sorry for the billionaires with their burden of giving away their money responsibly. They aren't suffering. I'm just saying we should be conscious of the bias in our words.

——————–

Scott Adams
Co-founder of CalendarTree.com     
Author of this book 
Twitter Dilbert: @Dilbert_Daily
Twitter for Scott: @ScottAdamsSays

 


Dilbert.com Blog

Systems Versus Goals again

Those of you who were nice enough to read my latest book (How to Fail…) will recognize my writing as the uncredited source material for this video. The credit information probably got separated from the product at some point. 
In any event, the systems-versus-goals idea seems to be taking on a life of its own. I like that.

——————–

Scott Adams
Co-founder of CalendarTree.com     
Author of this book 

Twitter Dilbert: @Dilbert_Daily

 Twitter for Scott: @ScottAdamsSays


Dilbert.com Blog