State Budgets: Day of Reckoning

[Djshakes]

[quote=CA renter]
Do realize that wealth can be defined in a number of ways, but I define it as the control and ownership of the world’s finite resources — the monetary units might change, but the end result is what I care about. In this sense, it is most definitely “zero-sum.”[/quote]

You can define wealth however you want to compliment your stance. In regards to finite resources, what maybe currently overlooked today could very well be tomorrow’s resource. The only thing finite is man’s ability to discover and utilize new resources. 400 years ago no one would have ever imagined a combustible engine or what would power this engine, although the resources existed. Assuming resources are finite is assuming mankind is at the peak of his knowledge in discovering new resources or utilizing them. What if man discovers a way to efficiently utilize a resource with zero waste? Then it doesn’t matter if there is a finite source of that resource as long as the finite source is able to meet the demand.

[CA renter]

[quote=Djshakes][quote=CA renter]
Do realize that wealth can be defined in a number of ways, but I define it as the control and ownership of the world’s finite resources — the monetary units might change, but the end result is what I care about. In this sense, it is most definitely “zero-sum.”[/quote]

You can define wealth however you want to compliment your stance. In regards to finite resources, what maybe currently overlooked today could very well be tomorrow’s resource. The only thing finite is man’s ability to discover and utilize new resources. 400 years ago no one would have ever imagined a combustible engine or what would power this engine, although the resources existed. Assuming resources are finite is assuming mankind is at the peak of his knowledge in discovering new resources or utilizing them. What if man discovers a way to efficiently utilize a resource with zero waste? Then it doesn’t matter if there is a finite source of that resource as long as the finite source is able to meet the demand.[/quote]

I’m more concerned with those who control natural resources (mining, farming, water, land, etc.) and also those who control labor and infrastructure…and money! It’s not the waste that concerns me the most, it’s the ability of those at the top to control the price, quantity, and quality of basic resources. This power is concentrated in too few hands, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=Djshakes][quote=CA renter]
Do realize that wealth can be defined in a number of ways, but I define it as the control and ownership of the world’s finite resources — the monetary units might change, but the end result is what I care about. In this sense, it is most definitely “zero-sum.”[/quote]

You can define wealth however you want to compliment your stance. In regards to finite resources, what maybe currently overlooked today could very well be tomorrow’s resource. The only thing finite is man’s ability to discover and utilize new resources. 400 years ago no one would have ever imagined a combustible engine or what would power this engine, although the resources existed. Assuming resources are finite is assuming mankind is at the peak of his knowledge in discovering new resources or utilizing them. What if man discovers a way to efficiently utilize a resource with zero waste? Then it doesn’t matter if there is a finite source of that resource as long as the finite source is able to meet the demand.[/quote]

I’m more concerned with those who control natural resources (mining, farming, water, land, etc.) and also those who control labor and infrastructure…and money! It’s not the waste that concerns me the most, it’s the ability of those at the top to control the price, quantity, and quality of basic resources. This power is concentrated in too few hands, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=Djshakes][quote=CA renter]
Do realize that wealth can be defined in a number of ways, but I define it as the control and ownership of the world’s finite resources — the monetary units might change, but the end result is what I care about. In this sense, it is most definitely “zero-sum.”[/quote]

You can define wealth however you want to compliment your stance. In regards to finite resources, what maybe currently overlooked today could very well be tomorrow’s resource. The only thing finite is man’s ability to discover and utilize new resources. 400 years ago no one would have ever imagined a combustible engine or what would power this engine, although the resources existed. Assuming resources are finite is assuming mankind is at the peak of his knowledge in discovering new resources or utilizing them. What if man discovers a way to efficiently utilize a resource with zero waste? Then it doesn’t matter if there is a finite source of that resource as long as the finite source is able to meet the demand.[/quote]

I’m more concerned with those who control natural resources (mining, farming, water, land, etc.) and also those who control labor and infrastructure…and money! It’s not the waste that concerns me the most, it’s the ability of those at the top to control the price, quantity, and quality of basic resources. This power is concentrated in too few hands, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=Djshakes][quote=CA renter]
Do realize that wealth can be defined in a number of ways, but I define it as the control and ownership of the world’s finite resources — the monetary units might change, but the end result is what I care about. In this sense, it is most definitely “zero-sum.”[/quote]

You can define wealth however you want to compliment your stance. In regards to finite resources, what maybe currently overlooked today could very well be tomorrow’s resource. The only thing finite is man’s ability to discover and utilize new resources. 400 years ago no one would have ever imagined a combustible engine or what would power this engine, although the resources existed. Assuming resources are finite is assuming mankind is at the peak of his knowledge in discovering new resources or utilizing them. What if man discovers a way to efficiently utilize a resource with zero waste? Then it doesn’t matter if there is a finite source of that resource as long as the finite source is able to meet the demand.[/quote]

I’m more concerned with those who control natural resources (mining, farming, water, land, etc.) and also those who control labor and infrastructure…and money! It’s not the waste that concerns me the most, it’s the ability of those at the top to control the price, quantity, and quality of basic resources. This power is concentrated in too few hands, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=Djshakes][quote=CA renter]
Do realize that wealth can be defined in a number of ways, but I define it as the control and ownership of the world’s finite resources — the monetary units might change, but the end result is what I care about. In this sense, it is most definitely “zero-sum.”[/quote]

You can define wealth however you want to compliment your stance. In regards to finite resources, what maybe currently overlooked today could very well be tomorrow’s resource. The only thing finite is man’s ability to discover and utilize new resources. 400 years ago no one would have ever imagined a combustible engine or what would power this engine, although the resources existed. Assuming resources are finite is assuming mankind is at the peak of his knowledge in discovering new resources or utilizing them. What if man discovers a way to efficiently utilize a resource with zero waste? Then it doesn’t matter if there is a finite source of that resource as long as the finite source is able to meet the demand.[/quote]

I’m more concerned with those who control natural resources (mining, farming, water, land, etc.) and also those who control labor and infrastructure…and money! It’s not the waste that concerns me the most, it’s the ability of those at the top to control the price, quantity, and quality of basic resources. This power is concentrated in too few hands, IMHO.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=paramount][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Paramount: If you think Belichick isn’t nervous about the prospect of facing the Chargers in the playoffs, you’re crazy.

[/quote]

For some reason, I don’t think New England is to worried about the Chargers.

The Bengals CRUSHED, DESTROYED and DOMINATED the Chargers today.

Norv Turner is done at San Diego.[/quote]

Paramount: Well, when I’m wrong, I’m WRONG. Wow. I watched that Chargers game and was just amazed. Of course, being a Raider fan, I watched with a perverse sense of enjoyment (my other favorite Bungles – Chargers game was the AFC Championship Game about 100 years ago).

I’m not sure Norv is done, unless Jeff Fisher leaves Tennessee, or Cowher decides he wants to move to SoCal. With a potential walkout pending, I don’t see the Spanos family making a change like this one, unless its for either of those two.

New England is scary good right now, and after that laugher Atlanta played last night, I’m not sure anyone in the NFC (except GB with a healthy Rodgers) can take them. NE and Philly would be fun to watch.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=paramount][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Paramount: If you think Belichick isn’t nervous about the prospect of facing the Chargers in the playoffs, you’re crazy.

[/quote]

For some reason, I don’t think New England is to worried about the Chargers.

The Bengals CRUSHED, DESTROYED and DOMINATED the Chargers today.

Norv Turner is done at San Diego.[/quote]

Paramount: Well, when I’m wrong, I’m WRONG. Wow. I watched that Chargers game and was just amazed. Of course, being a Raider fan, I watched with a perverse sense of enjoyment (my other favorite Bungles – Chargers game was the AFC Championship Game about 100 years ago).

I’m not sure Norv is done, unless Jeff Fisher leaves Tennessee, or Cowher decides he wants to move to SoCal. With a potential walkout pending, I don’t see the Spanos family making a change like this one, unless its for either of those two.

New England is scary good right now, and after that laugher Atlanta played last night, I’m not sure anyone in the NFC (except GB with a healthy Rodgers) can take them. NE and Philly would be fun to watch.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=paramount][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Paramount: If you think Belichick isn’t nervous about the prospect of facing the Chargers in the playoffs, you’re crazy.

[/quote]

For some reason, I don’t think New England is to worried about the Chargers.

The Bengals CRUSHED, DESTROYED and DOMINATED the Chargers today.

Norv Turner is done at San Diego.[/quote]

Paramount: Well, when I’m wrong, I’m WRONG. Wow. I watched that Chargers game and was just amazed. Of course, being a Raider fan, I watched with a perverse sense of enjoyment (my other favorite Bungles – Chargers game was the AFC Championship Game about 100 years ago).

I’m not sure Norv is done, unless Jeff Fisher leaves Tennessee, or Cowher decides he wants to move to SoCal. With a potential walkout pending, I don’t see the Spanos family making a change like this one, unless its for either of those two.

New England is scary good right now, and after that laugher Atlanta played last night, I’m not sure anyone in the NFC (except GB with a healthy Rodgers) can take them. NE and Philly would be fun to watch.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=paramount][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Paramount: If you think Belichick isn’t nervous about the prospect of facing the Chargers in the playoffs, you’re crazy.

[/quote]

For some reason, I don’t think New England is to worried about the Chargers.

The Bengals CRUSHED, DESTROYED and DOMINATED the Chargers today.

Norv Turner is done at San Diego.[/quote]

Paramount: Well, when I’m wrong, I’m WRONG. Wow. I watched that Chargers game and was just amazed. Of course, being a Raider fan, I watched with a perverse sense of enjoyment (my other favorite Bungles – Chargers game was the AFC Championship Game about 100 years ago).

I’m not sure Norv is done, unless Jeff Fisher leaves Tennessee, or Cowher decides he wants to move to SoCal. With a potential walkout pending, I don’t see the Spanos family making a change like this one, unless its for either of those two.

New England is scary good right now, and after that laugher Atlanta played last night, I’m not sure anyone in the NFC (except GB with a healthy Rodgers) can take them. NE and Philly would be fun to watch.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=paramount][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Paramount: If you think Belichick isn’t nervous about the prospect of facing the Chargers in the playoffs, you’re crazy.

[/quote]

For some reason, I don’t think New England is to worried about the Chargers.

The Bengals CRUSHED, DESTROYED and DOMINATED the Chargers today.

Norv Turner is done at San Diego.[/quote]

Paramount: Well, when I’m wrong, I’m WRONG. Wow. I watched that Chargers game and was just amazed. Of course, being a Raider fan, I watched with a perverse sense of enjoyment (my other favorite Bungles – Chargers game was the AFC Championship Game about 100 years ago).

I’m not sure Norv is done, unless Jeff Fisher leaves Tennessee, or Cowher decides he wants to move to SoCal. With a potential walkout pending, I don’t see the Spanos family making a change like this one, unless its for either of those two.

New England is scary good right now, and after that laugher Atlanta played last night, I’m not sure anyone in the NFC (except GB with a healthy Rodgers) can take them. NE and Philly would be fun to watch.

[SD Realtor]

Unfortunately Norv is not done. There is no such thing as accountability with this franchise. Lost games early in the year because the gm was to stubborn to sign a much needed receiver and a much needed tackle hurt badly. Think Rivers could have used VJ down at the goal line against KC and SEA at the end of those games?

Norv and Wade P are similar in nature. Soft and lacking true leadership. Although they may be considered “tacticians” they are clearly not the stuff of sucessful head coach material. In football the talent level between most all of the players is pretty close save for the cream of the crop. There are plenty of great coordinators out there but not great coaches.

Final examination shows the true measure of coaches and gms in the records, especially playoff wins for coaches, and development of draft choices for gms. Draft choice development by the chargers is pathetic at best. Norvs record in the playoffs since he has been here:

2-1 – first year
1-1 – second year
0-1 – third year
did not qualify this year.

Seems like an easy decision for me at least.

[SD Realtor]

Unfortunately Norv is not done. There is no such thing as accountability with this franchise. Lost games early in the year because the gm was to stubborn to sign a much needed receiver and a much needed tackle hurt badly. Think Rivers could have used VJ down at the goal line against KC and SEA at the end of those games?

Norv and Wade P are similar in nature. Soft and lacking true leadership. Although they may be considered “tacticians” they are clearly not the stuff of sucessful head coach material. In football the talent level between most all of the players is pretty close save for the cream of the crop. There are plenty of great coordinators out there but not great coaches.

Final examination shows the true measure of coaches and gms in the records, especially playoff wins for coaches, and development of draft choices for gms. Draft choice development by the chargers is pathetic at best. Norvs record in the playoffs since he has been here:

2-1 – first year
1-1 – second year
0-1 – third year
did not qualify this year.

Seems like an easy decision for me at least.

[SD Realtor]

Unfortunately Norv is not done. There is no such thing as accountability with this franchise. Lost games early in the year because the gm was to stubborn to sign a much needed receiver and a much needed tackle hurt badly. Think Rivers could have used VJ down at the goal line against KC and SEA at the end of those games?

Norv and Wade P are similar in nature. Soft and lacking true leadership. Although they may be considered “tacticians” they are clearly not the stuff of sucessful head coach material. In football the talent level between most all of the players is pretty close save for the cream of the crop. There are plenty of great coordinators out there but not great coaches.

Final examination shows the true measure of coaches and gms in the records, especially playoff wins for coaches, and development of draft choices for gms. Draft choice development by the chargers is pathetic at best. Norvs record in the playoffs since he has been here:

2-1 – first year
1-1 – second year
0-1 – third year
did not qualify this year.

Seems like an easy decision for me at least.

[SD Realtor]

Unfortunately Norv is not done. There is no such thing as accountability with this franchise. Lost games early in the year because the gm was to stubborn to sign a much needed receiver and a much needed tackle hurt badly. Think Rivers could have used VJ down at the goal line against KC and SEA at the end of those games?

Norv and Wade P are similar in nature. Soft and lacking true leadership. Although they may be considered “tacticians” they are clearly not the stuff of sucessful head coach material. In football the talent level between most all of the players is pretty close save for the cream of the crop. There are plenty of great coordinators out there but not great coaches.

Final examination shows the true measure of coaches and gms in the records, especially playoff wins for coaches, and development of draft choices for gms. Draft choice development by the chargers is pathetic at best. Norvs record in the playoffs since he has been here:

2-1 – first year
1-1 – second year
0-1 – third year
did not qualify this year.

Seems like an easy decision for me at least.

[Author]

Posts