DooDiligence

PBM's

Did you go out & hold up his end of the revs?

It's important to be selling what's appropriate to u. Do u like ideas or r u a things person? Tangibles or Intangibles Ability to transfer enthusiasm is key. Knowledge can breed passion. Then comes motivation. Organization. Gotta sell what you like with integrity (any missing traits will develop naturally...)

This reminds me of the embarrassing situation where I was put on the select team in Soccer even though I sucked because they confused me with a much better player who has the same first name. I think you are confusing with the far more intelligent poster Roark33. I have one comment on Ocwen and it reads: intelligent, honest, self-effacing, disciplined & courageous (Sanjeev should prob add you to the list) come to think of it, most everyone here (even the irrational politicobullS) have enough integrity to make the cut. stay the horse ;) oh, and https://www.sporcle.com/games/salifou/samenamegame

Yay (and my ESRX cost basis is lower) I just hope this doesn't wind up being a quick in/out like he did with Alcoa (probably found management to be unpalatable & decided it was a mistake...)

Very cool!

Yes, it created wealth *at the top end* but it also meant a big chunk of the population were disincentivised and unproductive. If it was such a good system for creating wealth, there's a decent chance the south would have been wealthy enough to beat the north. In fact, the north's economy dramatically outperformed the south's and was a major factor in winning the war. Similarly if slavery was an effective economic system great wealth would have been created in feudal Europe; in fact, wealth creation exploded as we moved away from the feudal system. Slavery is a great system for moving wealth from the poor to the rich; it is not a great system for creating wealth, not compared to free trade. Ha! Fair. Although everything is relative: what I meant was that America didn't start with a feudal system and have to waste centuries persuading the lords to give up their serfs. +1 The problem with slavery is that so much human capital get's underutilized. Since sales have no prospects, their productivity is low and you lose the human capital of smart and ingenious people's with a lot of skill just working the cotton fields. The main reason the south lost was because the North had the numbers and the industrial capacity that the south could never build, partly because of slavery Thank the Buddha they didn't put all those field workers into munitions manufacturing or we might all be whistling dixie right now... Anyone ever read Farnham's Freehold - Heinlein? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farnham's_Freehold

:-[ Haven't used Facebook in years. >:( Ditto Microsoft. 8) Apple FanBoy ??? I'm all thumbs without Google (with DDG as a fallback.) ;) Amazon has spare thumbs https://www.amazon.com/Vernet-Thumb-Tip-Standard-Size/dp/B00168IS4K/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1494689966&sr=8-7&keywords=thumbs

+1. I don't think it is necessarily politics per se that is the problem, it is when people get rude and mean. It should be possible to discuss any topic civilly. What distinguishes politics is that it tends to bring out emotional responses, but that doesn't mean that a bunch of intelligent adults can't keep their emotions in check to have a reasonable discussion. I don't blame Sanjeev for locking many of the topics he has locked. The board is working fairly well IMHO. Things can be discussed with minimal to no moderation, but Sanjeev steps in and locks topics only when people start getting out of hand. I'd vote for no changes, except maybe people could make a conscious effort to be more civil when they post. Re-read what you write before hitting post and make sure there are no ad hominem attacks and that you are focusing completely on ideas rather than attacking the other members personally. ++

Absolutely! Many users will present brilliant financial analyses & insights (myself not included) & then get all irrational & start screeching in the middle of a philosophical or political discussion. I tend to like the philosophical discussions & try my best to ignore the politics (the last election was like WWE & elicited a lot of fan engagement.)

Wouldn't this indicate that the health of the citizenry is tied to productivity? (provided the spend is effective...) Well you would have to do an actual analysis on the correlation/causation here but I'm sure there are pro's and cons to this. Do note that in order to pay for that healthcare, most countries have a higher tax rate. ;) Agreed and Americans don't see what they get for what they pay, they only know how to complain about where they don't want funds to be spent.

Wouldn't this indicate that the health of the citizenry is tied to productivity? (provided the spend is effective...)

Yeah, somebody should probably notify social services. Or at least inform the police if he starts buying assault rifles. Really? Jeez...

Me or Scott? Please let it be me!!!

Crap, there goes my Monopoly plans...

Thomas Jefferson, an outspoken early liberal, who fought constantly against the early conservative Alexander Hamilton, summed up the difference between the two in a thoroughly biased statement that sounds (to liberals) still accurate today: “Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties: 1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes. 2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise, depository of the public interests.” --- In pointing to trust, Jefferson is getting to the heart of the difference between liberals and conservatives — where they put their trust. http://donellameadows.org/archives/liberal-isnt-a-dirty-word-conservative-isnt-either/

I read that wrong - thanks...

I view just having my holdings in my signature as a way to keep me intellectually honest. On the flip side it exposes me to anchoring & a reluctance to change course in the event of a mistake (don't want to look like an idiot even though this may be unavoidable in my case...)

I mostly do this. Great. Do you have examples...more is better. No. Examples or evidence won't change your mind, you will block it out and look for evidence that aligns with your view. Unless you understand & acknowledge anchoring bias...

Dragging anchor & eventually hauling it in to search for better holding grounds...

I now prefer listening to calls to get tone & nuance. After that, industry pubs & discussions on forums like this one (including the sociological & philosophical threads) helps me to edge around that which doesn't get talked about by management. The qualitative & strategic aspects of a company's operations are more important in figuring where the puck will be...

GoodRX driving transparency in pharma pricing. Are companies like this able to improve adherence & compliance?

Is there a mechanism somewhere to short Blue Jays tickets? ::) Short LYV? ;D

never fart if you have any doubts... (that's one of my closely held beliefs) (all others need to be burnt down...)

Another quick question Can you describe entering into a credit default swap with another player in House Rules Monopoly & what happens when the third player comes up short after landing on a pimped-out Boardwalk? Please... (I'm serious, I wanna do this with some friends this weekend...)