<br>
<br>
<p>I take it that you are a Venusian.</p>
<p>“And if you enjoy the socialist ideal as much as you post here, I am sure Canada would just love to have you back.”</p>
<p>While we’re at it, let’s get rid of police, fire and flood protection, schools, roads, military protection. Those who want these socialist institutions can also move to Canada.</p>
<p>Moda, while trying to find the source, I found this instead:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The problem is that Americans are now used to spending more than they make. Over 70% of US households at the lower end of the income scale spend more than they make. That’s right-over 70%. Even in the very highest income bracket-annual incomes over $118,800-more than 15% of households spend more than they make.
[quote]
</p>
<p>The overall number is 50% though, and it was in a credible publication recently (WSJ I believe).</p>
<p><a href=“https://www.cfp.net/certificants/boardreport_2_2006.asp[/url]”>https://www.cfp.net/certificants/boardreport_2_2006.asp</a></p>
<p>I have to agree with BC here, if Keilexandra is Canadian and wants to live in a socialist environment, she’ll be much happier in Canada. And what about Bishops–a Canadian LAC.</p>
<p>just military and infrastructure would be great…</p>
<p>
I believe Keilexandra has abandoned this thread, but nowhere in it did she declare that she “wants to live in a socialist environment.” (Not that there would be anything wrong with it if she did.) What she said was that if others wanted to characterize her views as socialist, that would not bother her.</p>
<p>I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I sure have many poor students and former students who will have increased summer contribution portions to pay for next year, yet around here there really no jobs for them. What will scholls do in this case, if anyone knows.</p>
<p>Trying to get the thread back on track.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But that’s because you’re defining “elite jobs” very narrowly. It’s like the 18 yo kids on CC who think that the only jobs in business are hedge fund mgr, i-banker and mgt consultant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, it may make for great TV, but that’s a dated world. The world I live in, women are certainly able to have children, aren’t penalized for being pregnant, are able to work out all kinds of work-at-home, telecommuting, starting their own businesses, etc. Gasp – women are even the bosses now, go figure. And we’re not wearing navy skirted suits with white button-downs and floppy bow-ties, either. I’m sorry, this is just so time-warp to me. The creative class is where it’s at, and they are just as likely to come from top 40 (let’s say) schools as top 10.</p>
<p>Well obviously, different fields are following different trajectories. I live in a very upscale area. Don’t see many women raising kids and living corporate lives, but many are professionals.</p>
<p>Nightchef, posted by Keilexandra:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nothing wrong with wanting to live in a socialist country, it’s just that she’s chosen the wrong one and happens to be a citizen of one!</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I’m still witnessing the advantages in both business and academia on both coasts held by grads of top schools, the well connected and especially men in these groups. I don’t think the desperate housewives story line is farce either. Yes, it’s gotten somewhat better, but we’re a long way from a meritocracy in most businesses IMO.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seriously? You don’t see plenty of female doctors, lawyers, business executives, small business owners, etc.? Wow.</p>
<p>The ability to redistribute wealth is made much easier by the energy resources in Alberta. I haven’t read about the Alberta separatist movement in a while but not everyone in Canada likes their wealth redistributed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, then I guess other parts of the country are more progressive than the coasts. Seriously. You don’t have clients in all regions of the country? There aren’t incredibly successful people all over?</p>
<p>*Again, it may make for great TV, but that’s a dated world. The world I live in, women are certainly able to have children, aren’t penalized for being pregnant, are able to work out all kinds of work-at-home, telecommuting, starting their own businesses, etc. Gasp – women are even the bosses now, go figure. And we’re not wearing navy skirted suits with white button-downs and floppy bow-ties, either. I’m sorry, this is just so time-warp to me. The creative class is where it’s at, and they are just as likely to come from top 40 (let’s say) schools as top 10. *</p>
<p>Absolutely. I live in Austin, which is the capital of laid back, do it yourwayness. I see and know all kinds of people who are successful- some from big name schools, some kinda-known, not-known and no college at all (gasp!!). They make good livings and shock of all shocks- love what they do. Wall Street can keep itself, there are lots of people all over the US making a living doing fun, interesting things that they can do on their time- HYP not required.</p>
<p>^^and there might be regional differences. My experience is more like Pizza’s but I’m also in the midwest.</p>
<p>The last seven or so engineers that we’ve hired are all from MIT.</p>
<p>That’s nice, BC. You’re also a stone’s throw from MIT. Think that might make a difference?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I see and know lots of all of the above. I’ve know women who filed class action lawsuits against major firms for not promoting them as a whole in the same fashion their equally educated male peers were. I’m very familiar with big law and the proportion of male to female partners. My best friend is a Harvard educated MD. In choosing to work part time to take care of her kids her option was pretty much limited to low paying family practice.</p>
<p>In my previous career I had clients all over the Country and had responsibility for employees on 4 continents. Absolutely nowhere have I seen a total meritocracy.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>And Harvard, Dartmouth, WPI, UNH, Boston University, Brown, Yale, Boston College, Northeastern, Tufts, Brandeis, Bently, Wellesley, Babson, Olin, Suffolk, etc.</p>
<p>hmm…all i see are a bunch of bitter people</p>
<p>
I guess you don’t live in the world of Big Law because this industry is still trying to figure out how to fit motherhood into “lockstep” and “up-or-out.”</p>
<p>R6L and Keilexandra are among my favorite younger posters and I’m rooting for their dreams to come true, but even for my own kid I had to say “this is as much as we can do and if School X comes in above that we’ll have to say no.” I don’t see that as terrible, discriminatory or tragic. If School X is out, she applied to schools that have already shown her some serious love, even if they’re not School X, and it would be a blessing and opportunity for her to attend. I think it’s ok to say that there are some things that you can’t have – even if someone else can. I always tell my kids that if someone has something you want, unless they came in your room and stole it, it’s not your business and you need to get your own.</p>