"D Murphy" wrote in message
...
"John R. Carroll" wrote in
:


"D Murphy" wrote in message
...
"John R. Carroll" wrote in
m:

"D Murphy" wrote in message
...
"John R. Carroll" wrote in
m:
"D Murphy" wrote in message
...
jim rozen wrote in
:

In article ,
Gunner says...




Too bad if that is the case. Bigger companies throw away loads of good
business opportunities. Enterprising employees often take the discarded
ideas and run with them.

Time will tell and this is the country to begin again if you must.


I don't get why some people give up and are resigned to accepting their
lot in life. Another thing, why is working two jobs no longer an option
for people? I did that for a while, it got my wife and I on our feet when
we were young and very poor. Most weeks I worked 90 hours. Did it suck?
You bet. Then I quit the second job and went to school at night. That
sucked too. But it payed off in the long run.

One of my most repeated sayings is that if it was easy everybody would be
doing it.
I did a real tool and die apprenticeship and then went on to the University
of Michigan.
I worked ten hour night shifts running a big Droop and Rein through my
entire time in Ann Arbor and I doubled in Engineering and Math.
I then collected a wife. Shrewd move that was. She was a good woman but I
had too many unresolved issues. The past is frequently difficult to
reconcile. She only had to startle awake me once and that memory is still
something I inwardly cringe at.
Living in Rochester Michigan and working 12 hour shifts at Joy road and
Telegraph was bad enough but like yourself, I took a second job from 1 in
the afternoon to 6. The wife was the Beverage Manager for the Harris Machus
chain. We had a lot of money but not much of a marriage and it didn't last.
I blame myself. What newly wed couple needed 120K per year in 1978. The
really funny thing was that I went to work building big injection molds and
not taking an engineering job. It would have meant a 50 percent pay cut so I
said to hell with that!


Here is an update on it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2005/08/27/AR2005082700943.html

No matter which version wins out, it's a reauthorization, not a permanent
change. Otherwise it wouldn't stand up to the constitutional sniff test.

This thing is toxic Dan and most of it is going to be permanent. Only what
are refered to as "the most controversial provisions" sunset and that is a
ways out. God help us all if the House version is reflected in the
conferenced ones. This entire area of the law and the collection of
departments it supports need to be scrapped and rebuilt. I won't hold my
breath and I'll bet real money that the courts aren't going to be interested
in striking any of it for a while at best.


--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com