HR for SHTF, Sales Process for Mate-Search

Not only that, but in this morning’s ChartPack, we discuss a number of “Lazarus Lines” in chart theory where a sudden Hillary recovery could be auspicious, or not so much.

Wait:  Did he say he say “Sales Processes for Mating?”

Oh, sure.  Life is not a singular thing and you question me when I tell you dating is sales?  Of course it is…and it applied to everyone including seniors who are eyeing the uncertain future.  So yeah, a worthwhile process discussion to be undertaken.

Sounds like an interesting cup of noodles, doesn’t it?

More for Subscribers       ||| SUBSCRIBE NOW!       |||      Subscriber Help Center.

10 thoughts on “HR for SHTF, Sales Process for Mate-Search”

  1. Who actually creates world conflicts and depressions and why!

    My thought is the wealthy do to create more wealth ( which is a false view money is only worth what people give it to be worth the minute a major depression or drought hits the views change drastically over night just like health we take our health for granted..then when something major hits our whole perspective changes in a moment..) ..
    There was An interesting intense conversation around the patio the other day was this where everyone thinks I have a negative view of our legislators and the motives of our lobbyists ..The conversation revolved around a grandchild that is going to college to become a doctor.. That child has been a straight A student and received a couple of scholarships to further their education.. but a good deal of the costs will have to be handled through school loans since the parents aren’t wealthy enough to pay the total tuition.. the part that shocked everyone was the school loan has an interest rate of 10% or..00027 daily interest per dollar.
    The daughter asked me what I thought about that.. I told her about twelve years ago the rate on school loan interest had changed to discourage the children of middle class families from obtaining a college degree and force them into the service industry… My thought was that by discouraging the average wage earners children from gaining a useful education this would put more families at the mercy of the wealthiest thirty percent.To limit the amount that would be at the mercy we create a conflict put these young people in the middle of a conflict someplace in the world reduces the number that they would have to manage and by the conflict having been created production would be working double duty at propelling sales and their profits.. ( where I see this having changed and isn’t really being considered is we have changed and reborn as a consumption nation not a production nation and the area’s we would have to create the conflicts with are the very ones our nation depends on for products.. ). of course there was a lot of argument towards they wouldn’t do that.. they are the class of equalization and progress etc. not one of greed. where I still stand by my assessment.. if only the wealthy thirty percents children can get a decent education will keep the children in lower income levels subjected to lower payed positions.. take a friend that finished her college.. the gain was a quarter an hour but the costs for that education she had to come up with five dollars an hour to pay back loans for over twenty years.

    Maybe I am wrong.. who knows. I still stand by my original prediction that six months into the next administration. since the incoming administration thinks they have the true view in reality there is a lot no one is saying you can’t continue to print your way out of this mess..that is just dumping water on the table to push a noodle across it.

    • An alternative answer is in Hitler’s second book: Wars are how the Warrior Class of young are kept sharp and they must be used or a country loses its vitality. thus arises the conflict between the peacenik-speak of Hil and the war votes and the train wreck of her diplomacy. She never had a chance – failed to see her built-in dialect failure.

      • Carl Von Clausewitz famously opined that “war is policy by other means.” A nation will negotiate only so far to get what it wants and/or needs. One need only examine the U.S. Constitution, in which Article One, Section Eight states “Congress [by its nature a political entity] shall have power to … declare War”. So Clausewitz was right two hundred years ago – war IS policy, and it is a indisputable political tool of the ruling elite. Marvin Benjamin Fried defines war aims as “the desired territorial, economic, military or other benefits expected following successful conclusion of a war.” Wars embrace a wide area of combat, to include cultural, economic,philosophical and psychological. But we traditionally end to identify war with the physical destruction of real property and the violent death of soldiers and citizens.

        “War does not determine who is right. War determines who is left.”
        – Unknown

      • Warhammer’s reply made me think of Kipling’s poem “Tommy” where the solder is ordinarily scorned until needed in war . . . that made me think of the same poet’s work – If – which I am sure that Donald Trump believes that he ‘fits’ most admirably . . . that delusion may lead our country into a final war, wherein the ‘survivors’ will not be the ‘lucky ones’.

      • The alternative is bowing to sharia law and no, that ain’t me, thanks.
        Always been one of those rage, rage into the night kind of people.

      • OH absolutely.. that book is on my scariest book list.. since you can take either political party and lay them side by side and see compare them..

  2. Re:
    “W??s ??? ??? ??? W?????? C??ss ?? ????? ??? ???? s???? ??? ???? ??s? ?? ?s?? ?? ? ??????? ??s?s ??s ????????”

    Yet somehow many US veterans of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan aren’t “sharp”. They’re forever deeply traumatized, often permanently physically injured, treated like garbage and denied proper treatment by the VA, and in too many cases unable to fit back into their previous lives at home.

    The above quote makes it seem almost like Hitler was crazy or something.

  3. Just printed yesterday – the top article in Newsweek Magazine about why Donald Trump, with all his contacts in business (legal, but with some ‘interesting people’) most certainly cannot be president as not only would his businesses have to be put in a blind trust – but because of ‘undue influence’, his family (meaning his children) would not be able to work in those businesses, perhaps FOREVER . . . Now that would be an ‘October Surprise’.

  4. Thanks for addressing the human side of “Environment”. It’s the one thing that’s killing much of my productivity and happiness. The logical sales progression is definitely right, though finding qualified prospects is very difficult for a guy, especially in the USA. Screening thousands is only a start.

    What’s the deal with “hell week” if it’s only non-sexual “dating”? Without known sexual compatibility, any deep bonding will be mental with reservations and sexual tension, rather than sexual/emotional. I can certainly relate to non-sexual dates as hell.

    When is sex supposed to enter the relationship? And what agreements need to be made to assure that sex and intimacy will always be shared willingly and gracefully? That’s the elephant in the room! I do think that the couple should write a statement of rights and responsibilities of each mate in the form of an agreement. This can be the basis of a prenup when and if they decide to initiate a formal marriage. Other details include “how to end an argument” or suspend it without rancor, joint visions and expectations, and financial arrangements.

    As I see it, there’s the partnership financial thing, and the partnership/sexual/intimacy thing. Conventional marriage blends both, and sometimes it works, but to find someone that’s right in both areas can be nearly impossible. You spent 10 years before finding Elaine(I think). I have an even chance of being six feet down in 10 years, so that timeline doesn’t work very well.

    For me, a workmate, bedmate, and soulmate is plenty. A financial mate is optional. If she wants or needs financial wealth from me, that’s OK and a separate negotiation. Transactional relationships are fine, as long as there is only one transaction, and that’s for life.

    I have to take issue with the “show me the paperwork” thing. It seems a bit much prior to living with each other. A formal marriage might take a few years to prepare for, and that’s when paperwork might be organized and shared.

Comments are closed.