?

I'm thinking in terms of small businesses or start ups having a chance against the big guys who have the resources to absorb losses for the sake of harming their competition

its a new-ish show and I only saw the first episode. he ends up buying everyone at the bar a drink because hes just really bad with girls

Seems like this could only happen if people were actually created equally as well as having equal opportunity. These are two of the most common misconceptions that people have. The inequalities of people as well as their circumstances are driving huge income inequalities in my opinion. In a democratic society, we want to maximize the number of people who are happy with their situation. Seems like we are left with having capitalism with a government extremely involved in public affairs in order to bring about equal opportunity.

with a rich father that acted like a spring board for his children so they never had to meet any real economic struggles

...human equality and equal opportunity

Another way I like to think about it is; in what services should quality be given only to the highest bidders

Some ideas to get you started

Healthcare

Schooling

Roads

I just started looking into it today and would like some basic knowledge on it.

like: does one need to get the certifications or take the classes in order; green, black, master, etc?

what kinds of jobs do you look for? it seems the higher levels of certification require one to spemd all their time on six sigma, instead of the companies primary job function.

do companies generally get certifications for employees that understand the company and have worked ther for some time, or do they hire people on directly as six sigma statisticians?

I am a recent mechanical engineering grad, and my current employer has no interest in applying six sigma to our activities. but if I were to get certification in six sigma, would it basically trump my engineering degree if I were to start another career with a different employer?

thanks

Freud has nice elaborate definitions regarding human psychology using these three terms. From his definitions, as well as the origins of the three words in German, the it, the I, and the super-I, it seems as though he was categorizing the psyche of the human mind as a microcosm of the spiritual way in which we view humans on earth, as opposed to animals, and god.

Humans tend to place themselves somehow "above" other nonhuman animals. Therefore, the id of the human represents the animal of earth. We are born as Id-ridden, as animals. Above these other animals are humans, similar to the ego. Humans, much more than any other animal uses logic and realistic assumptions to fulfill our desires and our other animalistic wants. The ego is what makes us human, per se.

The superego is said to be the final stage of the human cognitive development that few humans achieve. This would be comparative to god. This is where morality and ethics are injected into the mind. Humans have labeled this as superior to the id, and the ego. Similar to god being superior to animals and humans.

It is clear that the Id and the ego exist in the human mind, although all animals do use logic, or their ego, to sustain life. The gap between our logical capabilities is, however, enough to have invented two separate words to define the id and the ego, as well as to differentiate between humans, and non human animals.

But the only thing that would truly differentiate us from animals would be the ability to suppress our animalistic behaviors and emotions. This is why morals were invented, why religion was invented, why god was invented. Religion often users Jesus as the perfect role model for humans. Jesus seemingly completely suppressed his id, only thought of others wellbeing. Priests don't even engage in sexual activity. Sex is bad, greed is bad, violence is bad, inequality is bad, etc. Morality and god were invented to convince humans to transcend our animalistic origins, and truly become a non-animal, or a god.

In short, freud was just applying his religious views to the human mind. A lot of psychologists don't agree with him much nowadays but I don't know why.

But anyway, what do you think about my hypothesis?

Black guy, or Chinese guy, or jewish guy, or actual indian guy, etc. And use their slang names like we use "Indians". Like the chinks, the ******, the towel heads, the Jews?

It seems obviously offensive for my examples, do you think it is just as offensive for native Americans?

About 20 percent of the population is a registered republican, of them only like 20 percent actually vote in the primary. And only half of them are voting for tte frontrunner Romney. Everyone is getting all excited about who 2% of the population want to show up on the voting ballot in 2012.

Anyone else think our whole system is just a joke? Especially political parties.

What does it mean for things to "happen for a reason"?

Obviously some things happen for a reason, like I ate a hamburger because I was hungry. But everything?

If you believe a fetus is a human with rights, how can you say that it should be legal to abort a human if the father was a rapist? Te baby never chose it's father, but still you think it's perfectly ok to abort it.

It might sound odd, but I am pro-abortion, I just find it kind of disgusting the way logic is used with half *** pro-lifers

Like Caesar, hitler and ghengis khan were like just straight up badasses, even though we all hate their ideas. And I'm not talking the pussy conservatives like the GOP party who only think gays shouldn't have rights.

And the liberal historical figures are far from masculine. Like Jesus, ghandi, etc. But MLK jr was kind of badass

I would say Moses started the liberal movement but Jesus took it to a whole new level