The line between insanity and entrepreneurship is razor thin (and at times, non-existent). Â Envisioning a world that no one else sees can accurately describe both camps. Â In order to construct this new reality, entrepreneurs are oftenÂ forfeitingÂ a 9-5 job, steady paycheck, and comfortable living quarters in the process, while their version ofÂ “normal” is anything but. When…
Some of the highlights:
number one: “If you don’t shower because it’s viewed as getting in the way of productive work time, you might be an entrepreneur.” - Sarah Evans, Chief Evangelist at Tracky”
number five: “If you only get dressed from the waist up because that’s what’s visible on a Skype call, you might be an entrepreneur.” – Nicole Antoinette, founder at A Life Less Bullshit“
number six: “If you talk about catastrophic failures with a hint of pride and nostalgia, as in: “Oh, THAT start-up ended up as a smoking hole” (looks off nostalgically into the distance), you might be an entrepreneur.” - Bob Rogers, co-founder and COO at DealAngel”
Check out the rest of the article by clicking through the link!
Coca-Cola launching this product line of soda with names on the bottle was a brilliant marketing campaign. All this free advertising from people taking pics and posting it on social media. Even people who can’t find a bottle with their name on it are sharing pictures of Coke.
Brand awareness game flawless.
The niggas that work at Pepsi are sitting back right now like
“When Audre Lorde made that much quoted yet often misunderstood cautionary statement warning us that “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house,” she was urging us to remember that we must engage in a process of visionary thinking that transcends the ways of knowing privileged by the oppressive powerful if we are to truly make revolutionary change. She was, in the deep structure of this statement, reminding us that it is easy for women and any exploited or oppressed group to become complicit in structures of domination, using power in ways that reinforce rather than challenge or change.”—bell hooks in essay “feminist theory: a radical agenda” (via femmeanddangerous)
“Peel back the layers of any statist argument and you will quickly discover at its cold, dark heart the notion that you do not own your self. You are, to some degree, the property of another. As such, you are to be ruled, governed, harassed, intimidated, harangued, searched and taxed in whichever way the owner deems to be “in the interest of society.” It’s enough to make the questioning individual cry… or laugh… or both. Either way, their message is clear: Free men are not to be trusted with their own lives. It’s time to tell these people to mind their own [insert expletive of choice here] business.”—Joel Bowman, “No Consent Required” (via paleolibertarian)
As a recent graduate I've started looking at campaign work. I know I'm a little late to the game, but you you reccomend anything? I've already submitted my résumé and cover letter to the DCCC, DSCC, and Emily's list.
I don't know if you know this, but California recently raised its minimum wage and there is this bilboard that says "San Francisco meet your minimum wage replacement" with a picture of an iPad that says "Hello, may I take your order?" on it. This made me consider. If workers demand a higher wage, what's to stop capitalists from replacing them with machines like they threaten?
Well, on the surface what they’re saying has a grain of truth, but what they are actually trying to sell is a fallacy, namely that they would prefer to employ people than machines, and they wouldn’t replace people if they weren’t forced to by minimum wage laws. It’s an exercise in blame shifting.
If an iPad can do your job, then the major factor stopping your boss from replacing you with one is not the price of your labour - it’s the price of iPads. Ipads are infinitely preferable to employees, and they get cheaper over time while workers get more expensive. Not only that, they keep getting better and more efficient at what they do. Even if they keep wages low, the iPad will become the most profitable choice in a very short period of time, because of how quickly they lose value. They are attempting to hang a basic, yet destructive and highly unpopular feature of capitalism on minimum wage laws, blaming the worker’s greedy desire for basic sustenance for something they were going to do anyway, minimum wage or not. So yeah, I think what you’re seeing is a cynical slight of hand, trying to blame workers for their own exploitation.
“In most cultures throughout history, [justice systems have] been dominated by compensation… Medieval systems, and all tribal systems, that don’t have centralized governments are compensatory in nature. Sometimes it’s individual compensation, sometimes it’s group compensation (you compensate the clan of which the person’s a member). But it’s very compensatory… What happens is, if the communities ended up having to pony up for your crime (because they would have to pay the other clan) then they would have an interest in policing you. And if you turned out to be a repeat offender, they kicked you out, and they made you an ‘outlaw’. The term outlaw meant outside the protection of the law. They didn’t actually kill you, and they didn’t actually punish you, but once you were made an outlaw and they withdrew their protection from you, anyone else who wanted to kill you and punish you could do so with impunity, and that was a really tough spot to be in. So, by withdrawing protection, you end up ‘punishing’ people without directly punishing them.
It was only when the monarch started intervening in this local tribal system—which the people were very reticent about giving up, they were very reluctant to give up their rights to compensation—but eventually the king superseded them, and then breaching the king’s peace turned out to be the major offense. And it’s sort of the way it is today. A crime against ‘society’ is not a crime against you. So, it turns out, if you are raped, if you are assaulted, you are not the official victim of the crime in our legal system. I represented as a prosecutor ‘The People of the State of Illinois’, and I didn’t represent you. So what happened to you is simply a crime against the polity and not against you at all. Well, I think that’s perverse. And if that perversity is expressed, then people would rebel against it.”—Randy Barnett (via eltigrechico)
“The 1994 congressional election is a revealing example of the gap between rhetoric and fact. It was called a ‘political earthquake,’ a ‘landslide victory,’ a ‘triumph of conservatism’ that reflects the continuing ‘drift to the right’ as voters gave an ‘overwhelming popular…