Now socialism is getting popular and a lot of positive press. This is indeed the end of times for the USA.

I dont get the math- If there are 120 employees and they were making an average of 20,000 (unlikely) at the start, he would have to cough up $6m in extra payroll at a minimum. His salary was only $1m. If I was a customer OR employee I would label this guy as a real kook who has lost it. The company cant be far behind.

Good catch!

Oh, sure!

mcsandberg...can I use that....please?

...written more accurately:

The ideas in your response are like those that led Dr. Stadler to find himself where he did.

While the outcome was foreordained, it is a little amazing it only took 90 days. I guess that gives hope to those (of us) who would consider "stopping the motor or the world" that it might not linger on for years, if not decades.

As you wish.

Oh, Lord help me.

Ideas like that are how Dr. Stadler wound up where he did.

I thought that was "Don't start a land war in Asia!" ;)

Ka-pla!

Everyone follows some philosophy, even if it's only implicit, eclectically absorbed over the years. Observations by themselves don't tell you how they fit together, what to do next, and what the standards of deciding are.

Pragmatism is a parasitic philosophy -- in it's opposition to principle on principle it presupposes philosophical principles it does not acknowledge. Pragmatism doesn't tell you what it means to "work" and what the standards of deciding are. Anything can be rationalized by such an approach.

The philosophy of Pragmatism does not mean understanding what works by what established standards and experience and acting accordingly.

You "can" do anything legal in any realm. That doesn't mean you should. To understand Pragmatism listen to Leonard Peikoff's lecture on it in his History of Western Philosophy course.

He's guided by a false ethics.

This stuff about following philosophy over real-world observations and reason and about supporting what actually works in business being "rationalization" could come straight from Floyed Ferris.

"I think it explains how you can rationalize support for anyone who risks their own money and "admire whatever works."
I could not undersetand everything from the Lexicon entry, but if this means I can't do anything legal I think will work with my business, then I completely disagree with Rand on this point. It doesn't matter if my business model disagrees with some esteemed theory of business. All that matters is it works: willing customers, willing vendors, and makes a profit.

"http://www.today.com/video/ceo-reveal..."
Just before the 1 min mark, he says it's not about making a profit.. What? I don't understand what he's trying to do with all those resources and equipment that could be making a profit. I have no idea what he's taking about.

The only step I can determine that he skipped was, 'Turn Brain On'.

Marvelous.

He skipped a logical step, but maybe he has one. I admire people who try things and take risks. Contrary to the articles, there's nothing singular about this. Maybe he'll turn it into a high-end provider with all top-notch staff, with a cleaning person after hours who goes out of his role to track down someone to handle a customer emergency. Maybe he'll fall flat on his face bc even the best clerk isn't worth two cheaper clerks. It depends on what they're doing.

I'm dealing with a similar issue personally, and I'm learning as I go, talking to people about best practices and then making decisions with some element of educated guessing. Time will tell if we fall on our faces. We're funding it with our own cash, so it's our money to blow if we're wrong.

"What difference at this point does it make?"

(Sorry, I couldn't resist. ;) )

Her pragmatism is legendary.

Yes. I make one of these points in the long version of the link.

Yes. I'm saying it's he's skipping a logical step. He doesn't explain why this emotional well-being matters. If it doesn't translate into more revenue, based on the numbers in the Apr article, those jobs can't exist for long.