Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Left Wing Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (3964)	2/10/2001 10:16:38 PM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Respond to of 6089

Bland has never balanced his checkbook, either, despite being quite proficient at balancing others' for them. He simply makes a point, as you say, of taking out less than he puts in.

To: Lane3 who wrote (3964)	2/11/2001 8:07:06 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6089

I don't want to make too much of this check-book balancing topic although it seems to have provoked a bit of interest. I would, however, like to make the general point that we often spend time, money, and energy on things that we do out of habit or because of some vague notion that we're supposed to. I think that it can be useful to take a moment to consider if we really need to put unnecessary pressure on ourselves. Maybe what we're doing is worth the investment; maybe it's not. I remember when the directions on shampoo bottles routinely instructed us to shampoo, rinse, and repeat so everyone repeated. I just looked at my bottle of Paul Mitchell Tea Tree Special Shampoo. It says "A second shampoo may not be necessary." I remember when there was a big issue about what turned out to be a gimmick to get us to use more shampoo. There are probably lots of people around who still think they have to shampoo twice. Maybe their hair will fall out if they don't. Or the microchip monitor in the shampoo bottle will register their transgression and alert the authorities. Who knows. Karen