CDZ Finding one's fortune is easier to do when one looks in the right place

[320 Years of History]

In fourteen-hundred ninety-two,
Columbus sailed the ocean blue.
...
October 12 their dream came true,
You never saw a happier crew!

"Indians! Indians!" Columbus cried;
His heart was filled with joyful pride.

But "India" the land was not;
It was the Bahamas, and it was hot.

The Arakawa natives were very nice;
They gave the sailors food and spice.

Columbus sailed on to find some gold
To bring back home, as he'd been told.

He made the trip again and again,
Trading gold to bring to Spain.

History has no shortage of explorers and pioneers who came from Europe to America and who set westward from the East Coast. Few if any of those folks were just going sightseeing. They left seeking opportunity that quite simply eluded them in the places from which they left. Some of them had the idea to go looking on their own. Others were engaged to go at the behest of a well off patron, and yet others were somewhat "along for the ride,: figuring they weren't going to come into anything less than what they already had.

Whatever their reasons, the key is that a good number of them surely looked at their then current circumstances and concluded, "WTF, my life here sucks...I can see sure as the day is long that what I've been doing 'here' ain't gettin' me anywhere I want to be. May as well see if there's something there." People did that for about 500 years, from ~1500 to the early 1900s, the heydays, if you will, of immigration to America. Emigrants are still doing it. Indeed, I learned about one "serious one-percenter" who arrived in the U.S. with literally a quarter to his name and is today among the wealthiest folks in the country.

But those folks are leaving where they are hoping to find their "pot of gold" in America. What about the folks who are in America and who cannot find theirs? Well, it seems to me that the valuable lesson they should be taking is the very one given by European immigrants since the 1500s: go somewhere that isn't so well developed and therefore that opportunity is greater than it is in the U.S. Duh.

Believe it or not, there are still places on Earth that don't "have everything." Far from it, in fact. Those are the places to which one should go and go into business upon getting there. Why? Because it's very expensive to "live like a king" in developed nations like America, Canada, and Western Europe. What places might these be? There are lots of them, but some ideas include:

• Costa Rica
• Nicaragua
• Mali
• South Africa
• Uruguay
• Mexico
• Portugal
• Bulgaria
• Argentina
• Peru
• Panama
• Bolivia
• Guatemala

If one can muster the verve that one's immigrant forebears did, the opportunity to find one's fortune in less well developed places is there, but one must go seek it. That's what my ancestors did. They left "dirty smelly" England as commoners, came to America, and with some grit, a bit of savvy, and decades of hard, physical work, went from meager trappers, hunters, fishermen and speakers of the native tongue -- all out of necessity more than anything else -- to becoming merchants and "dry goods" producers/sellers, and eventually land owning farmers, which back then was the thing to be seeing as the economy was agrarian.

Obviously, the world is different now and that model may not work for you, but then again, it might, depending on where one goes, I don't know....The point of what I'm saying is that my ancestors came to the U.S., found something they could do, did it, and built upon it from there. They arrived in America at the end of the 17th century with basically nothing but their freedom. They didn't "get rich quick," but by the end of the 18th century they had become solidly upper middle class headed toward being well off.

Of course, these places to which one might go aren't going to be "just like the U.S.," but a place just like the U.S. isn't likely to offer any greater potential for "finding your oyster" than does the U.S. Just like your immigrant ancestors left Europe or wherever, leaving the U.S may be the thing for you to do. If the U.S. wasn't "doing it" for me, that's what I'd do. I'd start saving up, looking for a suitable place, figuring out what I'll do when I get there, and figuring out what I need when I get there to do it.

If instead I didn't want to leave the U.S., I'd ask myself, "What can I do that people in the U.S. will pay me handsomely to do?" I suspect for myself, it'd entail creating some sort of phone app or other software application. I'd have to partner with someone who writes code or learn how to write code myself, but that's still what I'd do. Seeing as you folks are here, I suggest you develop an app that somehow pertains to the political process seeing as you clearly have an interest in the political process and folks here at least think they know something about it.

How do you know what kind of app/software program to create? I've found that the easiest way to make a ton of money is to find a need and fill it. To do that in a political context, you might start by going to your local XYZ campaign headquarters and finding out what it is they need/want to do that they cannot do or cannot do easily...it doesn't even have to be for the party you prefer. (Remember, you are looking for a financial opportunity, not an emotionally satisfying win for your party; GOP, Dem, Lib, their money all looks the same when it in your bank account.) If you have an idea of your own, I suggest you try it. It's certainly not going to put you in a worse position if it doesn't pan out.

Yes, if an airplane carrying a cache of diamonds explodes, the diamonds will nonetheless survive unscathed, and you might catch them or find them. That'd probably be a pretty easy road to riches. Short of that, you need to put a good deal of effort into "growing your oyster." In today's society, that hard work needs to begin about when one is 12. But, surprise, that's also about the age at which our ancestors had to start 500 years ago.

So, having said all that, here're the thread questions...

• What the heck is it with so many Americans that they would rather gripe about what they don't have and what is hard for them to do rather than "getting over" how hard it may be to do X or Y?
• Why do so many of our countrymen dwell on what they don't have instead of what they do have and exploiting that to their advantage?
• Why do so few Americans not realize that "getting rich" (whatever that means to them) or close to it does not and did not happen easily for anyone?

 

[320 Years of History]

BTW, this thread was inspired by someone who in another thread asked me what suggestions I have for folks who aren't finding the success they desire. And FWIW, though I live in the U.S. I focused my career on providing business professional advising services to companies outside the U.S. To an extent, I've done exactly what I've suggested in the OP, only I knew from the start of my career that it was what I wanted to do.

Here are some things I'd suggest folks explore before and during their process of finding their oyster.

• What do you have to offer to anyone, be it as an employee, a business partner with someone else, or as a business owner selling whatever it is you think you have to sell?
• Is there any demonstrable evidence that what you can offer is is something people need?
  
• What developing countries are most stable? Economically, politically, etc.
• What are the nascent industries and services in various developing nations?
• What's the cost of living in various countries?
• What does it take to go into business in various countries?
• With whom might you partner in going into business?
• Are there U.S. companies that can use your skills to ply their trade in foreign countries?

 

[The Great Goose]

I find, when something won't fix, use a hammer.

 

[tinydancer]

Always use a hammer

 

[JoeMoma]

Sometimes I use a screwdriver as a hammer.

 

[320 Years of History]

Sometimes I use a screwdriver as a hammer.

I'm not saying that can't sometimes work. I bet, however, you aren't going to persist in using the screwdriver to achieve your aim when you can tell it's not working, and the obvious and simple solution is to use a hammer.

How that applies to the OP is that in the U.S. the "goal" used to be to "drive a nail" through balsa wood. Now the "wood" is oak.

 

[JoeMoma]

Sometimes I use a screwdriver as a hammer.

I'm not saying that can't sometimes work. I bet, however, you aren't going to persist in using the screwdriver to achieve your aim when you can tell it's not working, and the obvious and simple solution is to use a hammer.

I usually use my screwdriver as a hammer because I can't remember what I did with my damn hammer.

 

[320 Years of History]

Sometimes I use a screwdriver as a hammer.

I'm not saying that can't sometimes work. I bet, however, you aren't going to persist in using the screwdriver to achieve your aim when you can tell it's not working, and the obvious and simple solution is to use a hammer.

I usually use my screwdriver as a hammer because I can't remember what I did with my damn hammer.

Okay. Fine. But when the nail doesn't get fully driven by your using the screwdriver, are you going to blame the nail or the wood, or will you own the fact that you can't get the nail driven through your own fault? I suspect you'll do the latter.

 

[Holos]

To me, the poem, as well as the entire historical accounts of the navigations initiated at the European renaissance period, simply symbolizes an extended counseling parody, a dynamic tale of many authors to challengely expose modern day intellectual lag, and not an actual account of dullified, descriptive facts. I understand the controversial position my perspective may appear as, especially as legitimate letters and documents may be found and ascribed to authentic historical figures, but let us go to my in depth analysis:

The first two lines are a strong signifier of a journey that, if at all endured, was at the end to no avail.
Sailing an ocean blue is like swimming an ocean blue, nothing but the ocean.

Second two lines is pure irony. A dream is true by its very experiential essence. We sleep, we dream, we wake up.
If it was a dream which was really important to the crew in its expectation of becoming, than it is obvious that their waking life was miserable.
Of course, as we are outsiders in this story, we don't want to be dragged by their fatalities, so we know that to the worse of miseries there is also an appreciative relief.

The call of "Indians" has to be a reference to the "Indian Ocean" and those who were promoting its cartography (notice the strong punctuation of transition between line one and two: there are two distal events being referred to).
The pride and the joy could not be of waking miseries and escaping dreams, necessarily contingent in 15th century navigation, it had to be of paradigm pioneering. An experienced voyager, plentiful of skill to be waged for hire by the court by whatever "mercantilist" rewards, has to be motivated by novelty and not by riches, from whence his skill has already come from and accordingly prevailed.

Third two lines, we again are reminded of the vast unforgiving ocean as the pervading reality, even as there was a land in aim.

Natives would definitely not call themselves natives, unless under request, therefore also creating the subjectivity of tribe affiliation. If it is a particular person, in a particular situation, asking in a specific way for what kind of native I am, I may say how I feel about them asking me that, or what I can best do to contribute, or what else is there to do in the region that might be more interesting than where the question is coming from. For natives, that is, people who recognize they are in their own land - the one below their feet, of which they have nourished and been nourished - no matter what settled boundaries they may have crossed (even if bureaucratically trespassing, the land is common ground, by which water, air and dirt flows) it is always easy to provide for themselves and also for others.

The second to last two sentences of the poem then reinstate the fact that "home" had to be brought back. The idea that somewhere was a land which did not already belong to the people who were well up on their feet is somewhat puzzling, and so it requires some "journeying space and time" for putting it together, organizing it, improving it and eventually sharing the work to clarify the confusion.

Finally, the puzzle wasn't all that simple and had plentiful of missing pieces which had to be continuously received under further inspecting exchange with the old paradigm (of lands and languages which were alien, disowned or to be conquered, instead of simply honored by any civilian's stand, respectively recognized and therein effectively participated).

 

[320 Years of History]

To me, the poem, as well as the entire historical accounts of the navigations initiated at the European renaissance period, simply symbolizes an extended counseling parody, a dynamic tale of many authors to challengely expose modern day intellectual lag, and not an actual account of dullified, descriptive facts. I understand the controversial position my perspective may appear as, especially as legitimate letters and documents may be found and ascribed to authentic historical figures, but let us go to my in depth analysis:

The first two lines are a strong signifier of a journey that, if at all endured, was at the end to no avail.
Sailing an ocean blue is like swimming an ocean blue, nothing but the ocean.

Second two lines is pure irony. A dream is true by its very experiential essence. We sleep, we dream, we wake up.
If it was a dream which was really important to the crew in its expectation of becoming, than it is obvious that their waking life was miserable.
Of course, as we are outsiders in this story, we don't want to be dragged by their fatalities, so we know that to the worse of miseries there is also an appreciative relief.

The call of "Indians" has to be a reference to the "Indian Ocean" and those who were promoting its cartography (notice the strong punctuation of transition between line one and two: there are two distal events being referred to).
The pride and the joy could not be of waking miseries and escaping dreams, necessarily contingent in 15th century navigation, it had to be of paradigm pioneering. An experienced voyager, plentiful of skill to be waged for hire by the court by whatever "mercantilist" rewards, has to be motivated by novelty and not by riches, from whence his skill has already come from and accordingly prevailed.

Third two lines, we again are reminded of the vast unforgiving ocean as the pervading reality, even as there was a land in aim.

Natives would definitely not call themselves natives, unless under request, therefore also creating the subjectivity of tribe affiliation. If it is a particular person, in a particular situation, asking in a specific way for what kind of native I am, I may say how I feel about them asking me that, or what I can best do to contribute, or what else is there to do in the region that might be more interesting than where the question is coming from. For natives, that is, people who recognize they are in their own land - the one below their feet, of which they have nourished and been nourished - no matter what settled boundaries they may have crossed (even if bureaucratically trespassing, the land is common ground, by which water, air and dirt flows) it is always easy to provide for themselves and also for others.

The second to last two sentences of the poem then reinstate the fact that "home" had to be brought back. The idea that somewhere was a land which did not already belong to the people who were well up on their feet is somewhat puzzling, and so it requires some "journeying space and time" for putting it together, organizing it, improving it and eventually sharing the work to clarify the confusion.

Finally, the puzzle wasn't all that simple and had plentiful of missing pieces which had to be continuously received under further inspecting exchange with the old paradigm (of lands and languages which were alien, disowned or to be conquered, instead of simply honored by any civilian's stand, respectively recognized and therein effectively participated).

I'm sure all of that is relevant to something, I damn sure don't know what. I do know it has nothing to do with the theme of the OP.

The only point of the poem that opened the thread is to say that if one isn't finding an, or a large enough, "oyster" where and via the methods one is using, looking elsewhere is a good idea. The poem merely illustrates one situation in which people applied that concept some 500+ years ago.

 

[Holos]

To me, the poem, as well as the entire historical accounts of the navigations initiated at the European renaissance period, simply symbolizes an extended counseling parody, a dynamic tale of many authors to challengely expose modern day intellectual lag, and not an actual account of dullified, descriptive facts. I understand the controversial position my perspective may appear as, especially as legitimate letters and documents may be found and ascribed to authentic historical figures, but let us go to my in depth analysis:

The first two lines are a strong signifier of a journey that, if at all endured, was at the end to no avail.
Sailing an ocean blue is like swimming an ocean blue, nothing but the ocean.

Second two lines is pure irony. A dream is true by its very experiential essence. We sleep, we dream, we wake up.
If it was a dream which was really important to the crew in its expectation of becoming, than it is obvious that their waking life was miserable.
Of course, as we are outsiders in this story, we don't want to be dragged by their fatalities, so we know that to the worse of miseries there is also an appreciative relief.

The call of "Indians" has to be a reference to the "Indian Ocean" and those who were promoting its cartography (notice the strong punctuation of transition between line one and two: there are two distal events being referred to).
The pride and the joy could not be of waking miseries and escaping dreams, necessarily contingent in 15th century navigation, it had to be of paradigm pioneering. An experienced voyager, plentiful of skill to be waged for hire by the court by whatever "mercantilist" rewards, has to be motivated by novelty and not by riches, from whence his skill has already come from and accordingly prevailed.

Third two lines, we again are reminded of the vast unforgiving ocean as the pervading reality, even as there was a land in aim.

Natives would definitely not call themselves natives, unless under request, therefore also creating the subjectivity of tribe affiliation. If it is a particular person, in a particular situation, asking in a specific way for what kind of native I am, I may say how I feel about them asking me that, or what I can best do to contribute, or what else is there to do in the region that might be more interesting than where the question is coming from. For natives, that is, people who recognize they are in their own land - the one below their feet, of which they have nourished and been nourished - no matter what settled boundaries they may have crossed (even if bureaucratically trespassing, the land is common ground, by which water, air and dirt flows) it is always easy to provide for themselves and also for others.

The second to last two sentences of the poem then reinstate the fact that "home" had to be brought back. The idea that somewhere was a land which did not already belong to the people who were well up on their feet is somewhat puzzling, and so it requires some "journeying space and time" for putting it together, organizing it, improving it and eventually sharing the work to clarify the confusion.

Finally, the puzzle wasn't all that simple and had plentiful of missing pieces which had to be continuously received under further inspecting exchange with the old paradigm (of lands and languages which were alien, disowned or to be conquered, instead of simply honored by any civilian's stand, respectively recognized and therein effectively participated).

I'm sure all of that is relevant to something, I damn sure don't know what. I do know it has nothing to do with the theme of the OP.

The only point of the poem that opened the thread is to say that if one isn't finding an, or a large enough, "oyster" where and via the methods one is using, looking elsewhere is a good idea. The poem merely illustrates one situation in which people applied that concept some 500+ years ago.

That's not really what I understood from the title, or from the OP.
I thought you meant to say that any place is a good enough place, and still think that is what you really want to say.

If it is the method which is not helping, why would going to another place be a good idea? If a method begins as mental process and proceeds to be applied either to a single situation or to a variety of circumstances, why would going to a new situation or a new variety of conditions be a good idea, considering the beneficial relation we have with affording time and the experience of delineated problems?

 

[320 Years of History]

If it is the method which is not helping, why would going to another place be a good idea?

Because in a different place, one may be better able to compete. If one is not content to be a small fish in a big pond, either find a smaller pond or find a pond with smaller fish.