On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 10:23:24 PM UTC-4, Micky wrote:
That sure sounds like working her way up from secretary to me. If
you're a dunce and incompetent, they probably don't let you move
from secretary to real estate agent, do they?
I don't think she's a dunce or an incompetent (at that level) and she
did work her way up from receptionist to broker.
Then she went to school and started all over again.
And why does history
only start when she got an MBA?
Because the people who hire an MBA don't care if you were once a
secretary, beautician, newspaper delivery girl, a real estate
saleswoman, or an ice cream vendor when they hire the MBA.
They
probably do care, since she's not 18 or even 22 anymore, that she
wasn't in prison or living in a sex commune, but a history of
receptionist and real estate doesn't do anything to get you hired once
you have the MBA and an MS in management.
I see. So according to you, hiring managers don't care if you're a 23
year old MBA right out of school, with only summer jobs at McD's or a 30 year
old who just got an MBA and has a record of selling $10 mil a year
in real estate? It doesn't matter if you have a record of moving up
from a new hire trainee, to a management position, five or ten years
experience, then getting an MBA?
Of course in the real world, it's all relevant. I'd hire an MBA that
had a track record of success, of moving up the ladder, any day over
one that's newly minted with no experience other than working at
McDonald's summer jobs.
Being a real estate agent or even
a receptionist, you're already working in a business.
So is mopping the floor at a business.
Bingo, you're learning. Now show us the mopper who moved from that
to selling real estate, etc and you have a track record of success.
Why do libs
seek to denigrate, undermine hard work?
What a bunch of baloney. I didn't criticize hard work,
You just denigrated hard work again, above.
and you
should ask yourself what makes you imply that I did. Hard work is
good, and it was good that she had a job, but she didn't work her way
up from secretary like it** sounds. That's all I said.
And you're 100% wrong. She *did* work herself up from a secretary
to CEO. She's not a secretary anymore and she was CEO. QED
Can't you
read? **"go from a Secretary to leading a Fortune 20 company". Like
Finch goes from window washer to chairman of the board in the musical
"How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying". A few people do
that without taking a break for a one or two masters, but she didn't.
No one ever said or implied that she didn't get an MBA. WTF is
wrong with you? It's part of the ladder of success.
Why do conservative believe any fool thing that other conservatives
tell them?
You're the fool. It's a demonstrated fact that she worked herself
up from being a secretary to CEO. If some lib loon told you she got
there by affirmative action or the govt doing it for her, why then
libs would be celebrating her path to success.
Libs would celebrate it if
she was hired under affirmative action,
Don't be a stupid fool.
I won't invade your safe space, you have a monopoly on that position.
was demonstrating her
business skills selling drugs on the street,
Don't be a stupid fool.
or got to the top like
Hillary did, riding the coattails of her husband.
She did plenty well at Yale law school herself.
I see, so what Hillary did at Yale, why that's on her record of
success. But Fiorina works her way up from secretary to real estate
agent, to CEO, and that's no good. Go figure.
And everyone who
knew her in the Senate, including quite a few Republicans says she was
a hard worker who came to committee meetings and everywhere else very
well prepared.
Tell us what she accomplished in those years in the Senate, beside
filling up space. Tell us her accomplishments as Sec of State.
Reset button? Syria? Libya? Fall of Iraq? Mideast on Fire?
Of course her husband was a big advantage to her. So
were the Bush brothers' father, the Rockefellers' father, but you
don't hear Democrats bring that up until conservatives bring up their
corresponding nonsense.
Oh, no. The libs never bring up the Bush's. Never. It's always
conservatives who start things. Good grief.
Why do conservatives try to criticize people for no good reason, when
all I did is set the record straight on the fact that Fiorina did not
work her way up from secretary to executive.
You're the one here who is criticizing and lying. You just did it again.
Any more than my
neighbor would say he worked his way up from mowing lawns to VP of
Boeing.
If you're neighbor did in fact mow lawns, put himself through school,
and wound up VP of Boeing then it's true that he worked himself up
from mowing lawns to VP. Why do you libs disparage success?
BTW, the other problem with Fiorina is that she's a liar. She told
several blatant lies when she was running for Prez, only comparable to
Bachmann but far behind Trump. So even if she said she had a real
estate license, I doubt she did, but afaik she hasn't even said that.
Wikip: "In the United States, however, real estate brokers and their
salespersons (commonly called "real estate agents" or, in some states,
"brokers")** assist sellers in marketing their property and selling it
for the highest possible price under the best terms. Crucially, in the
U.S. each state has their own laws defining the types of relationships
that can exist between clients and real estate professionals and those
relationships, such as brokerage and agency, can vary markedly."
**The article said she was a broker, which this paragraph says may be
a mere salesperson who assists the agent. Maybe someone can find out
the law in California and if she was really a broker or just an
assistant or a saleswoman.
WTF don't you go do that instead of posting pure speculative rubbish?
I'd be very surprised if one can call themselves a real estate agent
or broker in CA without being licensed. But heh, you could get off your
lazy ass and prove us wrong.