Here’s my question. When will television program executives take a look at why these channels are growing. Why are people choosing shows that are 30 plus years old instead of the newer shows.
Could it be that the shows they put on are purely a waste of time and money. Reality shows being at the top of my list. I think television exec’s think we are just stupid and will watch any piece of junk they put in front of us. How do we show them that ‘we’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore’. What do you think? Classic TV or current TV?

PS: Can you name the movie that quote came from.

Sorry, I goofed and put it in an incorrect category.

The movie was "Network" in which people became mad as hell…

The only way to change the minds of the TV people is to stop watching what they put out. Reality shows rack up great ratings and they are the least expensive shows to produce. The TV people want to make money and we’re giving it to them. If you can get people to boycott that crap, then more power to you. I can’t boycott as I don’t watch them to begin with.

Since reality doesn’t look like it is going to be too kind to Republicans this year maybe Newtromtorum is a good idea?

well the GOP is not mentally prepare to win in 2012

Romney, Santorum and Newt Gingrich are just clowns

the only one can defeat Obama is Ron Paul
but the GOP is to stupid to endorse Ron Paul

In labour and social policy, the manifesto calls for:
The quick enactment of a law of the state that sanctions an eight-hour workday for all workers;
A minimum wage;
The participation of workers’ representatives in the functions of industry commissions;
To show the same confidence in the labor unions (that prove to be technically and morally worthy) as is given to industry executives or public servants;
Reorganisation of the railways and the transport sector;
Revision of the draft law on invalidity insurance;
Reduction of the retirement age from 65 to 55.

Creation of a short-service national militia with specifically defensive responsibilities;
Armaments factories are to be nationalised;
A peaceful but competitive foreign policy.

In finance, the manifesto advocates:
A strong progressive tax on capital (envisaging a “partial expropriation” of concentrated wealth);
The seizure of all the possessions of the religious congregations and the abolition of all the bishoprics, which constitute an enormous liability on the Nation and on the privileges of the poor;
Revision of all contracts for military provisions;
The revision of all military contracts and the seizure of 85 percent of the profits therein.

I was going to get there anyway but you do realize you give it away in your text (hint: look in the sixth line).

That would be fascist Italy.

What point do you think you make with this? -that the degeneracy of liberalism leads to totalitarianism? Hmm… and which early twentieth century fascist doctrine does that one sound like, Einstein?

Hard work is important. Connections only go so far until real talent has to start keeping up. Like, knowing a McDonalds corporate employee might help you become a location manager, but it won’t get you into regional or corporate positions without having the relevant experience or education as applicable. Business students who are the most driven, who participate in student government and major student organizations, who achieve high grades, who have accumulated experience, and who use their school and community involvement to meet various people, have the best shot at become a wealthy yuppy. Companies definitely do want to snatch up the most talented people.

The major companies that employ these yuppies are willing to pay a lot for the talent that they seek. So a 24 year old doesn’t have to be a top executive to earn a great salary. And it’s not necessarily just business careers that can pay great either. A friend of a friend of mine was earning about $800 a day at age 26 doing some sort of tech consulting for companies like HP.

In a nutshell:
Great talent in demanded fields pays well, and having connections is an easy way into great jobs as long as the person is actually capable of doing it.

For what it’s worth, I think you’re doing just fine. Business is the most popular degree; more students choose that major than any other. So you can imagine how many young recent graduates are out there vs. the number of wealthy 25 year olds. Wealthy yuppies are only one segment of the total yuppy population in any given city; not every young professional is making mad bank, and it’s definitely true that some of them are riding their wealthy parents’ coattails to at least some extent.

Add onto that the still-awful unemplyoment rate, and the fact that you have a promising career in front of you is doubly good compared to other people.

In the USA, the Honolulu, New Mexico and Syracuse orchestras are no more, the Philadelphia Orchestra has filed for bankruptcy protection, the Detroit Symphony Orchestra has been almost ruined by strikes and many other leading orchestras are in deep financial trouble. In the USA there is no state subsidy for the arts.

In Europe, many smaller German orchestras have disappeared or have merged and in the Netherlands, some of the most prestigious musical organisations are in danger of going bust without their traditional state subsidies (or huge cuts in them). In Europe, state subsidy is normal (to varying degrees) for orchestras.

It seems neither system is working right now, so what’s the answer? Of course, many orchestras would survive on playing the classical pops time after time with freelance players drafted in as necessary (some very major orchestras in the UK have always used freelance rather than contracted musicians), but what service does that give to music? How would living composers get their new works played? How would we get to hear fine music that didn’t draw-in the crowds? Not very ‘creative’, is it?

When times get tough, the arts are always the first target for cuts. Yet orchestras’ budgets are TINY in the great scheme of things. The annual bonus awarded to a top banking executive in the City of London would keep a chamber orchestra in the UK going for about 2 years. How can this be right (don’t think that the money-grabbing banker is going to part with any of his wad to support music – he won’t!)? So, in reality, these swingeing and crippling cuts make very little difference to the national debt whatsoever, yet politicians always focus on orchestras and opera companies first. Could it be that the cynical politicians are relying on the (erroneous) public perception that the arts are a huge drain on the economy? And don’t forget that orchestras put BACK a lot of money into the coffers through taxes and tourism.

So, good people, what’s the way forward?

In Germany, and by extension, to most of the other major continental european countries, this has a definite starting point: Arts and Culture policies after the Great War ( WWI). Music somehow held on during the brief respite until WWII, but afterwards the re-building of cities took precedence over art of any kind. My older colleagues ( now retired or dead) told stories of how the whole city of Aachen contributed to rebuilding the opera house after it too was damaged severely in bombing raids. visitors often paid in coal or foodstuffs.
With the re-establishment of a more-or-less normal standard of living in the late 50s and 60s, Government started neglecting the educational aspects of music and culture. Perhaps because they had grown up without? Perhaps it just didn’t seem relevant enough to the business world.
With the reunion in 1989 to East Germany,( which even most conservative economists say was chivvied along too quickly and unrealistically) many of the "New" german communities found their cultural establishments strapped for the subsidized funds no longer available, and were forced into mergers. From about 150 opera houses and orchestras throughout the country, we are down to about 100 to date, an our nation-wide orchestral union regularly sends out messages to rally around one or another opera theater/orchestra at the edge of existence.
the last couple of years’ economic disaster has taken its toll here as well. Wages are frozen, many perks have been cut, never to return ( dry cleaning for your tuxedo!, string money for the whole string section, fender-bender repairs for brass, reeds for the winds).
Our orchestra just last night taped a piece for the benefit for the colleagues in Holland ( within spitting distance for us)to help out their desperate situation.
More and more orchestras are fishing for sponsors and other private measures. That means more work, mind you, as these groups expect their very own set of concerts for no extra pay, of course.
I think, until music and arts are firmly re-established in a country’s/culture’s educational concept, the whole idea of participation and support will continue to languish. If one thing positive can be said about our global links through the net, it can be this: classical music is also being broadcast more than before. Granted, YouTube doesn’t include some of the treasures that many of you may have at home, but more than the Top 10 is available!
Don’t despair, friends, but continue to make music.

I recently was accepted into Grad school in a technology program that would guarantee me work once I graduate. Even though I’m happy to be accepted, I will need to live frugally for the next two years.

Today, my girlfriend told me that she wants to leave her job just because she wants a change. She has been offered a position for $30,000 as an administrative assistant for a small realty company. This is a new business, and I do not even know if she would receive quality insurance if she takes the position. I feel that the timing is way off, since I’m trying to figure out all of our expenses for the next two years. She would essentially be leaving her job for one where she could possibly be forced to live paycheck to paycheck in New York City (which is a very expensive city). Also, there is not guarantee that the position will last especially if the business folds.

Am I wrong to think that she is crazy to leave here job for another job in a start-up with nearly a 50% pay cut? Being unemployed during these economic times, I realize that having a job is a blessing while having a well-paying job is more than a blessing. Am I wrong to think that she is being impractical to make this change when I’m on the verge of attending grad school with student loans? If she loses her job while I’m in the middle of grad school, I do not know what will happen. Today, she has a secure job. I would not leave it. After I graduate, I plan to find work and move to a more affordable city (ex. Austin) with my girlfriend, so I just want her to be patient.
To clarify to anyone that does not know how to read between the lines, my girlfriend is NOT putting me through school, and she has not been paying more for the expenses since my layoff. Everything has been split 50%. It was the same way when I was employed. My girlfriend is a painter. Her dream is to be a full-time painter. If she were to pursue that, I have no problem with this. The job she is considering is NOT her dream job. She just get bored easily being at one job. I know for a fact that she runs the risk of possibly losing her job if she pursues this position. I’m just saying that I would be in no position to support her if she lost her job – especially if I’m in grad school.

It sounds like she’s being a bit selfish, and you might want to ask her if she’s really committed to your relationship and spending your lives together. It just seems like the timing is really off, and it’s such a risky job move for her too.

I think you need to sit down and have a long talk with her about your future. It might be better for you to split, apply for financial aid, and live in the dorms or a much cheaper place while you finish your degree. I applaud you for taking this opportunity to better your skills and your job prospects in the future, but it doesn’t sound like she does, or else she hasn’t put much thought into her future with you.

My husband worked a lot of overtime to help put me through grad school, and now I have a much better job, we have a beautiful home, and our lives are so much better for it.

I recently was accepted into Grad school in a technology program that would guarantee me work once I graduate. Even though I’m happy to be accepted, I will need to live frugally for the next two years.

Today, my girlfriend told me that she wants to leave her job just because she wants a change. She has been offered a position for $30,000 as an administrative assistant for a small realty company. This is a new business, and I do not even know if she would receive quality insurance if she takes the position. I feel that the timing is way off, since I’m trying to figure out all of our expenses for the next two years. She would essentially be leaving her job for one where she could possibly be forced to live paycheck to paycheck in New York City (which is a very expensive city). Also, there is not guarantee that the position will last especially if the business folds.

Am I wrong to think that she is crazy to leave here job for another job in a start-up with nearly a 50% pay cut? Being unemployed during these economic times, I realize that having a job is a blessing while having a well-paying job is more than a blessing. Am I wrong to think that she is being impractical to make this change when I’m on the verge of attending grad school with student loans? If she loses her job while I’m in the middle of grad school, I do not know what will happen. Today, she has a secure job. I would not leave it. After I graduate, I plan to find work and move to a more affordable city (ex. Austin) with my girlfriend, so I just want her to be patient.
To clarify, my girlfriend is NOT putting me through school. I am using my own funds. My concern is that this new job is not secure; and, if she loses this job, I do not know how I would be able to support her. She is my girlfriend, but I intend to marry her after I finish school. We have been together for 4 years already.

You do not sound crazy and it sounds like your girl friend is not being practical. With that said, it is her choice and if it is something that will make her happy you will have to be able to respect her choice. If I were in your shoes I would just remind her of your concerns, but I would not force her her in to making the choice you want her to make.