07.05.2020  Author: admin   Build A Frame
So, I think if you only had to pick up one, you can start with building and then transition to selling. It shocks me to this day fpr much I was "handling" as a four year old. Oh, and, yes, the stock market will burst. That is the case with Elvis and most sub 6 ft celebrities. Know the downsides, woodwork for 5 year olds zero still keep your chin up. October 14, at AM. Pingback: how to plastic seal windows for winter — Idhey.

In some he appears an inch shorter than Elvis. And lots of photos taken of Elvis show him wearing shoes or boots that increased his height by at least two inches. Early in his career before he wore such footwear he looked shorter. Just compare photos of him with Col.

In the 's Elvis is the same height. Then into the 's Elvis is two to three inches taller. I doubt Col. Parker lost that much in height. In , Col. Parker was In he was Too young to have lost two to three inches. There are lots of photos taken early on in his career showing Elvis with people who he either appears to be the same height or shorter while later shots show him being taller. Perhaps you can answer this- how come a barefoot Elvis is the same height as a barefoot and 6 ft tall Ed Parker?

Out of these two examples which one is the easiest to prove? Forget all this Steve Allen and Milton Berle stuff, surely it's far easier to compare Elvis to Ed Parkers height as they are both in bare feet?

What could be easier? The answer is six foot and I know this because I've met Parker, just like thousands of other people have, and he was known as a 6 ft fighter decades before this site. Have a look at images online to gauge Parker's height so that you can compare to get an idea.

There are some with 5ft 7in - 5ft 8in Bruce Lee, and although it looks as though shoe wear is worn,Parker dwarfs Bruce. Just for information the photo of Elvis and Lee is a fake , Elvis was really standing next to a Wayne Carmen.

There are many barefoot photos of Elvis but the one with Parker offers the best for comparison. Yes, Elvis wore two inch heels in the 70's , but so did I and everyone else, it was the fashion.

To try and balance things out I think I am right in saying that just about everyone interested in how tall Elvis was agrees that he was no shorter than but I respect your opinion. I was fb friends with him for many years, so I saw all of his status update alerts. When it came to the Hitler escape theory, he offered that he had seen sworn affidavits from Argentinian residents.

If anyone were to even gently challenge his notions, he'd blow a fuse like you wouldn't believe it - as most of us here already know all too well. My problem with some of these photos is that we don't know the real heights of the other stars involved and they tend to be all wearing different footwear, and of course in movies all sorts of camera angles would be used.

There is no way that Elvis was 5ft 10 as an adult, but I see how people believe this when they see these early films. This is why I keep on banging the drum about full length bare foot photos, because height can't be disguised by lifts etc. Linda Thompson is a 5ft 9 ins former beauty queen, and karate master Ed Parker was 6 ft tall and it's clear to see that Elvis in bare feet was the same height as Parker and a few inches taller than Linda, who has nothing to gain by claiming that Elvis was 6ft 1in.

She might be rounding up the possible 6ft. She didn't exaggerate Bruce Jenner's height in her book. Like I previously said, sometimes in photographs you don't look as tall as you imagine, and I'm sure that we have all thought this at one time, but look at the barefoot photos of Elvis and you will be able see that he was tall and in the six foot region, and definitely taller than 5 ft 10in.

The pic that Tom posted of Elvis and Glenn shows that t Elvis is maximum feet. Or why if he was at least six feet was he several inches shorter than Steve Allen? Or Other actors who were definitely over six feet? I think early in his career he didn't wear lifts.

Then as he got older he did wear them. In photos they are easy to spot. Boots with two-inch heels, possibly built up inside. I had no idea such a person existed for real. Kind of sad really. But still a funny commentary by the moderator. What was Glenn thinking? If he was shorter than he advertised, then how on earth could he pull it off if he had to meet with the forum moderator?

According to Linda Thompson Elvis was 6ft 1ins and in July weighed a slender lbs. Elvis certainly was in good shape for his August '72 stint at the Hilton, and Linda correctly refers to her Husband to be Bruce Jenner as 6ft 2ins, so why can't she be correct when mentioning Elvi's height. Linda lived with Elvis for almost 5 years, and she herself stands st 5ft 9 ins , so she can speak with an authority on the subject.

It makes me smile when I keep on seeing these waist up film shots when who knows what lifts the other actors were wearing. Elvis in these early films was playing a young kid, so could it have been filmed this way, so that Elvis looked smaller.

Once again people on here live in denial. We have Elvis in bare feet next to a six foot man and a 5ft 9 ins woman and it's so ovious to see that he was a six foot male. No lifts, no waist up shots or shoe wear. You don't need this stuff and it makes me laugh that when I give my honest view on Ed Parker's height, who we can see that in bare feet he was the same size as Elvis, people including Tom simply airbrush it, or casually ignore it because it doesn't suit, and then post a waist up shot which could have involved all types of shoe wear and camera angles.

Believe me, I'm 6ft 1ins and in some photographs I don't look that tall,even walking down the street there are plenty of people who are taller than me. That was mostly fueled by Soviet propaganda and Soviet propaganda was probably the most unreliable in history until North Korea the last few decades. Other than that, it's a stupid marketing ploy used by the History Channel along with other sensationalist angles they argue weakly and then concede at the end of the program that it's not true while offering no new information.

It kind of annoys me as someone with such an interest in history, particularly that period and Germany. Maybe I'm being unfair, but I highly doubt Glenn even knows much about Hitler.

But I'll take Tom's word at face value as I'd have to see a pattern like the other aliases on other pages. Not that any of this is important. Of course, if Glenn had been old enough to meet Elvis, how tall would The King have been?

Click Here LOL, good one! It actually wouldn't shock me one bit if G thinks Elvis is still alive For example, he truly believed Hitler died in Argentina at the age of 95!! What a character! Steve Allen was supposed to be 6'3'' but in this photo he looks a good four to five inches taller than Elvis.

Click Here So either Allen was near or at 6'5'' or Elvis wasn't anywhere near 6', much less 5'11''. And check out the shoes on Elvis in that photo.

Compare them to Allen's. It will probably be worth visiting, and will also allow a close up of his stage height and footwear, although the last one didn't have any heads on the mannequins, but it will still give you an idea. I don't know a Glenn, much less despise one. MJKop, I think you're suffering from hallucinations. Fair enough. Perhaps it was all just one giant mix-up. Go to the "Height Articles" section and select "The Big Grapple" for a brief relatively speaking synopsis on G:The celebheights legend who only needs one single solitary letter.

I don't have any real issues with you. I know you despised Glenn, and you understandably despised me too, for coming to his aide all those times, but in case you haven't been kept abreast, I now dislike Glenn more than probably everyone here combined.

I realize that I've been quite the jackass and somewhat under Glenn's spell, but believe you me, I'm now permanently cured of that! I'd like to apologize to you for whenever I lashed out and made you feel not welcome here. Our opinions on height may differ, but that doesn't mean I have anything against you personally.

I know you were involved in the industry for many, many years and you gave us some truly astounding first-hand non-height-related stories and anecdotes about legends spanning numerous decades; some tales that were truly priceless from a true insider. I won't say "told ya so", or anything of the sort.

However, making multiple pseudo-comebacks with a variety of usernames KnowItAll, Steve, Tom, et al , is kinda pointless because we know who you are, and the repeated denials of your true identity just aren't very flattering, to be frank excuse the expression! Can we please have the triumphant return of the Frank2 that we all knew and loved?? You really added a lot to celebheights, and if you got past whatever irrational fear or stigma you might have of showing your face, er, name?

Despite what you may believe, I really did and still do! As far as I know, Rob never banned you, so you have nothing at all to lose from "officially" returning, and literally everything to gain - including a lot more respect from myself and the many other Frank2 fans who miss you and still visit this site.

It may very well even bring some other old timers back out of the woodwork, or encourage some of the fading original members to increase their activity! I'll try not to keep hounding you if you want to keep up the "Tom" charade you have a right to your privacy , but please Best of regards, to you. I never said Elvis was real and genuine.

I said he was a true star based on his talent. Well, we were previously discussing how legit these "stars" were on the pretense of their height claims, so it would be only logical for me to deduct Not a fake one like we see today. Last time I checked, real was the opposite of fake. You never mentioned talent as a factor beforehand And of course, we've established many times over that talent really has nothing to do with either height NOR honesty.

Why couldn't you just have stopped after the first sentence? If Elvis lost his pigmentation, he must have suffered from vitiligo, the same disease Michael Jackson had. Two kings with the same disease! What are the odds?!! Elvis was only 42 when he passed, yet those preparing his body said they had to improvise and used black eyeliner as hair dye to conceal his pure white roots before the public viewing at Graceland.

And he never had jet black hair to begin with, he was a natural blond and for almost all of his life, he compulsively dyed his hair into those jet black locks which became one of his trademarks. I'm familiar with a lot of random and fascinating celeb-related trivia, but I don't ever claim to KnowItAll. But is there any conclusive proof? And Elvis looked shorter next to Richard Egan who was 6'. One thing I've always wondered was why towards the end of his life did Elvis appear to wear a thick black wig.

Was he suffering from thinning air? He did have a thick head of hair when he was younger. What's up, Frank2? The lowest of low bare BARE minimum he could've been was 5' But most likely he was Rob's listing, if not that full, coveted six feet. I would say max 6'0. As in literally snow white. He had been dyeing his locks for quite some time, apparently. If Elvis was 5ft Have u ever search in the web to get a pic of Ed and somebody else who Has his height?

Im trying to do this but it is dificullty. The average man reaches their full height by age 18, but obviously it varies as it won't be uncommon to finish growing as early as 15 while others do grow to There are rare exceptions of growth to 25 or so, but it's outside the norm.

It typically seems to be someone like Ralph Macchio who seems to effectively be a teenager ten years later. In Elvis' case, he looked pretty grown to me, not like a Ralph Macchio, Leo DiCaprio type, but I do agree with you and Tom that he seemed taller than he did in the 50s. However, I think this is most likely footwear. That's the most common reason someone seems to grow in their 20s. Whether it was just the Cuban type heels he started wearing or whether the lift rumors or true is something I don't know.

Elvis may very well have been taller than 5'11". One thing is for sure, this will remain a mystery. At least Rob reopened the comments on this page. But I do see why you take note of Elvis' height being mentioned without shoes, but surely the other costume designer who claimed Elvis was 5' One in the s who appeared to be no more than 5'10''.

He was identical in height to Milton Berle. And Berle was 5'10". Berle was slightly shorter than Jerry Lewis in the Bellboy. They stand erect, side by side. Lewis looks half an inch taller. Then we have Elvis who from the s on who always looked tall.

At least six feet. So what's the answer? And camera angles. Plus Elvis was skinny until he gained a lot of weight in the s. If Elvis was 5'10'' then lifts could easily make him over six feet. He weighed around lbs. Had Elvis looked two inches taller than Berle, I'd not be arguing his height. I'm sure that Risingcm will agree when I say that he isn't disputing that Ed Parker and Elvis were virtually the same height, he is just disputing that Ed was also 6ft, and he is obviously entitled to his opinion.

I think we all have our views on this and I think that you and I are firmly in the 6 ft camp. Forty years ago today we lost Elvis- how time flies!

And tell him to search in the web how tall was Parker , TCB. It's just interesting that this designer makes a specific reference to Elvis being 6ft without shoes, on the army medical notes it doesn't mention this.

Regarding shoe wear , Elvis took up to a US12 depending on the fit, he actually mentions his size 12's in a concert. The problem is that Elvis doesn't seem to be believed whatever he says. So did he grow in his 20's? I have previously mentioned that in a Photoplay magazine printed just after Elvis passed away a reporter who followed Elvis throughout his career, and was on pretty good terms with him, described him as being taller when she met him after a few weeks of basic training.

There are people who have themselves mentioned on this site that they grew up to the age of 25! However I don't want to go any further with that. Personally I think that Elvis was bigger in reality than he looked on TV. Having been eye to eye with Ed Parker, who was in formal shoes and I am 6ft 1in, I can't see Elvis being 5ft 11 ins , but that's my opinion, and usually when asked I say that Elvis was around 6 ft tall.

It's a valid reference, but Elvis just doesn't look as tall as a full 6 feet without shoes to me, unless, he got measured in the morning. But you mention discrepancies with the costume designer who said Elvis was 5' A difference between a shoe size of 9 and 10 isn't enormous, especially since shoes fitting differently depending on the style can account for at least half a size itself.

I believe a UK 9 is also roughly the equivalent of a US We have a number of conflicting heights and measurements reported between 5'11", 5' There's no way to know who did the most accurate measurement, or how long Elvis was had been awake at the time of each measurement.

So it really comes down to which you think looks the most likely. Often, I think the more precise figure is the most convincing since so many people round. I can believe he was around 6'0" out of bed and would measure between 5'11"-5' This is a very respected designer; what do you think?

Surely if Elvis had been 6 feet in shoes then he would have said so? No ifs and buts here, just s factual statement by a respected designer who has actually listed a barefoot height measurement- how can this be dismissed? Hi Rising cm, if you look closely at the army photo I'm sure that Elvis is in his own footwear, as the guy behind him has his own shoes on, so the measurement wouldn't have been in army boots, if I'm correct.

Like I have said, Elvis was measured several times during this induction. What's your view on the gold suit reference to the barefoot height of Elvis- it's the only one we have seen, nothing else actually states barefoot or otherwise. This is the point I am trying to put across. If you haven't seen it then please look back on this site as I have previously posted it. But if true, then that is a cause for skepticism.

Though is there a chance he means UK 9 rather than US 9? I ask honestly because you seem to have more knowledge on this than myself. However, I do happen to think 5' I personally can't see him any taller than that in bare feet. As for the photo, well I only know of one actual military measurement and that is the apparent photo of Elvis in underwear and boots with the caption saying he measured 6'0.

I think it's a pretty reasonable assumption he was measured that time at 6'0. I don't know of any other proven measurements other than that one 6'0. Otherwise, Rob would surely mention another measurement if there was enough proof. My theory is either that Elvis was rounded up from 5' The other possibility I see would be that the 6'0" measurements were all in shoes and then the 5'11" measurement was the one barefoot measurement. Based on how tall Elvis looks to me before the years he wore big heels, I wouldn't be surprise if he was 5'11" in bare feet.

As for Parker, being listed at 6 feet does not necessarily make someone that height, otherwise, there'd be no debate on Elvis. In fact, there'd be no point in this site if listed heights were accurate. This includes athletes. At the very least, they're usually rounded to the nearest inch, so like I said, Parker could have been 5' For instance, Chuck Norris has claimed to be 5'10", but he was described as 5'9" back in his own karate days, but in reality, I think he was more like 5'8.

In short, I think Parker's height needs to be shown as 6'0" against at least several other people with known heights before we can use it to determine whether Elvis was in the 5'11" range or a full 6'0". As of now, I think Elvis looked to short without heels with the people whose height I have an idea of with Berle, Bronson and Sinatra being a few examples.

I do think the 5'11" listing in his medical records provides at least some food for thought as well. To be fair, I'll say there's a chance it was an error, but there's also a chance the other measurements were in shoes or not long after waking. I think we'll need some more information on that before we'll ever truly know.

Can you see in YouTube a video called " Rare colour footage of Elvis , meridian Mississipi , that's all right mama " In this video we can see Elvis and guy wearing sunglasses , in the comments people say that guy could be Buddy Holly. I search in the web and Holly was 6". Can you confirm this for me , because Elvis and this guy are the same height. And the year is and back then didn't use boots or hells. What are your views on the following; You mention that Bill Belew has stated 5ft We know that Elvis had much larger feet.

So what else was he incorrect about? What about the designer of the gold suit, why can't his measurements be accepted as being correct on here? Here we have a photograph which actually makes reference to a barefoot recorded height of Elvis. Doesn't this count for anything? Perhaps it is only the 6 ft height measurement which is incorrect?

What about the pant inseam or the collar measurement; are they ok? I suspect that it would be posted everywhere if it showed 5ft Also, with regard to the army height measurements, we can't say that they were taken in boots because it doesn't say on the documents.

However, if they were taken in boots then the one listing Elvis at 5ft 11ins would mean that Elvis was shorter than 5ft 10ins when taking at least a one inch heel into account, which is just as crazy as saying that Elvis was 6ft 2 in bare feet!

I have been interested in heights for many years and have taken people's height hundreds of times and sadly could mostly guess accurately their height before taking it! Ed Parker was 6ft tall, just like he was advertised in the Karate world years before being compared to Elvis. He and Elvis were the same height, the height that Elvis said he was in , the height listed on his army records, driving licence, deputy application forms and the height recorded and listed by the gold suit designer.

Like you said a half inch difference in estimation can make a difference, but that goes both ways! Of course Elvis and Joe Esposito met during their service and not at the induction but as they served together I am sure that it was highly likely that they were measured at the same time, however I am skeptical about there being documentation in existence showing heights both with and without boots, but it would be interesting.

All the best and have a good day. Both the 6'1. It is very possibly, arguably even likely he didn't mean to pass himself off 6'1. As I said in my previous post, I thought Elvis may have been claiming 6'1. As you see in my previous post, I did post the Hoffer interview, so we know Elvis was claiming 6 feet even in , but I think that makes a 6'0.

As for the 5' I've seen celebheights linked on an Elvis forum discussing his height. For instance, Steve McQueen was measured at 5'9. So we do have to view any unverified claims made on the internet about how tall Elvis measured with skepticism. I'd personally be shocked if Elvis measured cm barefoot and cm in those boots. But if I'm right and Elvis was around 5' Of course, some increase their height claims over the course of their careers so it's possible Elvis said 6'1.

It's possible Elvis may have been more honest on a form he didn't think would be viewed by as many. It's not a full pic, so it's fair to take it with a grain of salt, but Elvis looks like he may be just slightly taller than Lee Majors, who we know was only 5'11" since he admitted it: Click Here. I think that quote should be added. There is in existence an interview with Elvis by Bob Hoffer in August 56 in which Bob states that he is impressed with EP's height and that he was taller than he imagined.

When he asks Elvis his height, Elvis replies "even 6 Feet". This you can listen to quite easily and is in perfect quality. So if this is not believed then there is no point in debating anything else that Elvis himself says. I have also looked at a Shelby County Deputy application form from November , signed by Elvis and what appears to be completed in the same handwriting, although I can't say for certain, and the height is listed as 6'.

This was only two months later after Desert Storm and has I believe Elvis claiming to be the same height as when interviewed in , so he wasn't; trying to pretend on this form that he was taller than 6 foot. On numerous fingerprint forms available to view his height is listed as being 6ft 1 ins, but we don't know if this was rounded up by the person filling in the form, or whether Elvis was measured at all, but it does appear that Elvis was still happy to put down as being 6ft throughout his career.

Where did this height come from. Some people say that it was from the army records, but all the army documents we see attached to this site state 6ft or or 72 ins, apart from one 5ft 11' recording. This was apparently from Joe Esposito, and someone on a another site has stated that they have seen this army document, however I haven't seen it.

Not from any army record I believe, but perhaps a press report. It could have been referring to his height in his socks and because there is a press photo of Elvis being measured in his 'own footwear', the two are linked. I have posted on here previously another press report from when another reporter during the same period describes Elvis as being 6ft 1In!! So who is right? Finally, why is it that whenever there is documentation proving that Elvis was indeed 6ft tall it is casually dismissed?

I include virtually all the army records we have, and also the the Gold Suit designer who lists all the measurements next to the photograph of himself with Elvis in the gold suit. I have previously posted this on here too. On this photograph it clearly reads for us all to see- height in stockinged feet- without shoe 6 feet!! So if you don't believe this man, the United States Army and also the 'man himself' then you will never be satisfied, because with all this documentation , most of which is official, Elvis will always be known as being a 6 foot male, and that's because he most probably was.

All the best! Slurring words or not, an "f" doesn't sound like a vowel. I heard the "three" afterwards quite clearly as well when he was referring to the mic I believe. I know others have heard 6'1. I just came across a discussion from a decade ago on an Elvis' message board where a couple of other people hear him claim 6'1. Joe Esposito was not present when Elvis was measured.

Your reference heights haven't been scrutinized enough to use them to determine Elvis' height to the half inch since neither have a page on this site.

If both Parker and Hebler are merely a half inch shorter than you believe them to be, then you have Elvis at 5' On the other hand, I've never heard of Milton Berle wearing lifts and as I showed, Bronson had flat boxing shoes in that film. Sinatra is a possibility as he did wear lifts at times, but even if he had a 1" lift in his shoes which doesn't quite add an inch to your height then Elvis would still look more 5'11" range with him than 6', imo since Sinatra was no taller than 5'7.

Berle would have to be significantly taller than we think he is for Elvis to be 6 feet with him and as it is, I'm in the minority estimating Bronson at a full 5'0".

There are plenty of people who have said Elvis was under 6' and in the 5'11" range as well. Hell, one of his measurements was 5'11". Maybe a low height on a bad day, but you'd certainly think his costume designer would have to know his height as well. I can't see why a 6' tall man would be rounded down to 5' If anything, most legit 5' The caption to the photo of his Elvis in boots was that he measured 6'0. Why would Elvis be in just his underwear, but still have boots if he wasn't getting measured?

Rob doesn't mention any 6'1. I think Frank2's estimates varied in accuracy, but I don't believe he's a liar and he claimed he overheard Elvis admit he had just missed the 6' mark. I received a stimulus for myself but I have 3 dependents and didnt receive anything for them. Something happened with the EITC in where I werent able to file them something about a recertification. I sent that in when I did my taxes and the IRS website is still telling my taxes is being processed…just losing money smh..

Same thing for me…the exact thing…filed Feb 17th return was accepted and still waiting for the recovery rebate and I didnt get anything for my dependents for the 3rd round. Did you get your dependents this time around? Does anyone know if they even issue adult and dependents separately? I have not received 1st, 2nd, or 3rd , No dependents, no adults, and no recovery rebate.

Any information would be super helpful! Anyone know what their schedule is for each thing? What has everyone received so far LoL I need to compare my issue to others experiencing the same problem?! I am getting the same message as you are. That went through and I received my refund back with the second stimulus. For the first stimulus I received mine in June and then hers a couple months later late August I believe. Have you tried calling a tax advocate to help you with your situation?

Their number is 1 The help with refunds ect. This time I got everything at once. I am a nonfiler so I did the form last year for that. However myaelf and my SO both got ours this time and neither of us filed yet. Thanks for sharing Cortney — good info. And the link to the taxes causing delays is worrying!

Every time we got money i received my sons seperate. Last month i received the after i filed the thing they said to file online to receive your dependants money. The next day after he signed the stimulus mine and my sons was deposited at the same time. My divorce agreement states that my ex can claim our son on even numbered tax years, and I can claim him on odd numbered tax years.

How do I proceed? Anyone worried about what will happen with this third stimulus? Wait to file it on our taxes? It would be on next years taxes, no need to wait to file unless you think you might not qualify for the next one. The refund and was approved. Hopefully by the time the third stimulus is approved they will have had the kinks all worked out and give the money to people who need it.

This is likely the correct answer. The third stimulus would have to be claimed on the taxes. Who did you file you tax return with? I tried turbo tax and I was not given the option to claim the missing dependent stimulus payment. I used the free online version , filed Feb 23, refund issued 2 weeks later and it included rebate recovery for my 2 kids. Good luck! I filed and taxes. Does anyone know why this is happening?

Thank you! I would love to know how they are dishing these third round of stimulus payments out. Then you will have to file for and claim the recovery rebate.

It will asked exactly the amount you received for stimulus 1 and two. With your dependent you are claiming, it should ask if you received the full amount of for the second stimulus. Your answer should be no. As you should be because the IRS is asking for 10 extra weeks to process returns. They are so far behind. Is it still the same after the new executive order signed today by President Biden. Will we still have to wait and file our taxes to get the dependent stimulus checks.

Or are we the percentage of people that got are checks split in half both times apart of the new executive order also? The executive order that he signed was to raise the minimum wage gap for federal employees and for food benefits to go out to people who need it. A third relief package is going to go to the floor but who knows if it will get passed. At least that what i got outta it.

I was just asking are we apart of the low income families that he talking about. Because i recieved 2 check for the 1st stimulus, 1 for me and my husband and 1 for our 3 kids.

So i kinda expected to get them separated again this time also. I believe the executive order is for future stimulus checks to be sent out quickly for the American people if the stimulus passes. That raise will go into effect. If you look on IRS the get my payment tool is no longer there. Hello did u recieved the second stimulus for ur 3 kids in the mail yet??

I already got my They had a window between December 30th — Jan 15 to get as many check out as they could. If you did not receive your depends checks you will have to claim it on your taxes. Read the update to the article. After reading a few articles on this it looks like Biden has signed executive order to have the treasury department create a tool for people to be able to claim their stimulus checks.

Thanks Drew. Updated article to reflect this. I would still say filing via your tax return may be faster as the IRS will start processing refunds next month, which could include the recovery rebate credits.

But for non-filers this tool or reopening of the non-filers tool will be a boon. Everything that went out from dec 30th to the 15th that was it. The process is pretty simple on the form.

I was under the impression the second stimulus was protected from folks who owed child support. His second stimulus did not get garnished however his first did. The second stimulus was suppose to protect Americans in your situation against this.

We file taxes every other year for our child. Biological mom has odd years we have even years. We get to file her for tax year. When we go to file our taxes it asks us if we received both stimulus payments and to put the total amount we received. What do we claim?

Do we have to contact her to see if she received it for the child and put the whole amount? Or do we not claim money we actually did not receive on our taxes thus resulting in a credit.

I am nervous about claiming money on our taxes that we did not receive. I am not sure what to do but do not want to put the wrong thing that will result in a longer wait for our taxes. So you are missing from the first stimulus and from the second. When you do your taxes you should be able to disclose that when they ask if you received the full amount.

She would have received the funds since she filed her for It seems that there is a lot of different answers on this, I guess we will just put what we got and let the IRS figure out who should receive the credit.

I have the same problem somewhat. My son claimed my granddaughter that I adopted and am raising…I had surgery and he had to take charge of the household while I recovered. I was healed…my small business was up and running, everything was fine.

So the second stimulus was sent to him based on his return and he kept it. Do I only list what I actually received for myself? It says my payment was deposited into a bank account u no longer have in the 4th, a lady at the IRS said it would be returned to them and a check would be mailed out to me and still nothing. Whats going on? Yes that seems to be happening for many folks.

Just wait till the end of this week to see if you get it in a subsequent processing batch, otherwise you will likely need to claim it via your tax return. Same here.. I got a good one for you. My husband left us in November So, spring we filed separately. He claimed kids I filed individually.

Refunds and stimulus went to joint account. No problem. We worked that out. So, kids lived with me all So spring hubby e filed taxes individually and I filed paper form February My paper return with my kids and my private account still not processed…so, they based my stimulus on my individual return!!!

Kids are lost in limbo because they willy Nilly chose a year…instead of basing it on only return!!! What recourse do I have? I read an article addressing this exact problem. It saif that when the IRS processes your return that they will send you the dependent payment if you did not hqve dependents listed on your return.

It just will be longer. Grow up and quit hatin. This sucks for everyone and we know it. I need clarification on my situation. Two of my dependents were claimed on someone else taxes in therefore this person received my dependents stimulus check.

Stimulus checks were created to help everyone with the crisis. When I file my taxes for they will be on my taxes. Will I be able to submit the form to recover their stimulus payment. I feel like the IRS should make people payback the stimulus money for dependents who are not claimed on someone tax return. It is not fair for others to walk around with people money when it was NOT designed for them. I worked during …was sick the year before so he took charge of the household and claimed my adopted granddaughter.

He kept the money. Same happened with my son. Never saw the first or second payment. I filed taxes and claimed him. I feel your frustration. With the 1st stimulus, my husband and I got ours right away but our sons came 4 months later.

Now it happened again with the 2nd stimulus, we got ours within a week but not our sons. With the 1st stimulus, there was a glitch with the N-F tool which caused thousands a delay in getting their dependents stimulus. Supposedly they fixed it but, there are thousands that still have not received their stimulus money for their dependents from the 1st round of stimulus.

However, supposedly this time they will have it fixed alot sooner. As far as your situation goes, I would suggest you call one of the IRS call centers.

Also, if you are going to file taxes this year; which is soon you can claim your 1st and 2nd missing payments. I would call the IRS first to find out what all your options are. I would call ASAP! Good luck hun, I hope everything works out for you and your family. God Bless. Just a heads up from experience, you may want to call right when they open at 7am. I was told to do so and had the luck of getting to someone at the IRS this morning.

So much for emergency relief money! However if you fill out the non filers form for you should be able to claim the Recover rebate for the stimulus that you missed. Thanks Drew and spot on in line with official IRS guidance on claiming the missing stimulus check aka recovery rebate. Generally, you are eligible to claim the Recovery Rebate Credit if you were a U. You must file Form or Form SR to claim the Recovery Rebate Credit even if you are normally not required to file a tax return.

Free File is a public-private partnership between the IRS and many filing and tax preparation software providers who provide their brand-name products for free. The safest and fastest way to get a tax refund is to combine electronic filing with Direct Deposit. These forms can also be used by people who are not normally required to file tax returns but are eligible for the credit. Any eligible individual who did not receive the full amount of the recovery rebate as an advance payment, also known as an Economic Impact Payment, can claim the Recovery Rebate Credit on a Form or Form SR.

I wish it were that easy as I am in the same boat as you. So I would have to claim the Recovery Rebate on my taxes this year. I spoke with them early yesterday morning.

Our stimulus was deposited on the 4th…. The get my payment portal is not showing any new deposits. I got my second stimulus payment, my fiancee got his, we filed separately and I claimed both of our kids. Now both our kids recieved the first payment but got it in August of I still have not received my childs check who qualified for one.

I have a question for you? When u Ck the IRS, does it say u received your payment? We got a payment 3 of us but still waiting on the other 3? So confused. The first round of stimulus we received the entire payment without any problems at all. He probably wont file for this one either. I have his social security number. How can I get his stimulus to go to child support without him? Is there anything I can do? So what happened to me is odd.

I married petition for divorce was filed before 1st stimulus and we done nothing to continue the divorce so we are still married. So why is my and my husbands getting 2 separate checks one mailed the other went to emerald card. Has anyone else experienced this? If so why would they break the check up like that? This happened to me last time. Non filer no social security benefits……. I pray that we recieve this money for our children soon!!! They should jave fixed the glitch.

It makes no sense at all. The first Stimulus Payment we had no problems but with the Second one is a different story. Where is it?!

At least you people have gotten something. Honestly, you sound like a bunch of brats! Major error. Why would you act that way when we are ALL hurting! We are missing huge lumps. People with their smart ass remarks, oh be grateful. Should we be grateful? While people are going hungry and Pakistan gets billions for gender study? Should we be grateful with our and just shut up..

I will never be quite about what our government is trying to do to us!!! You have every right to be upset!! You sound like a brat yourself. Or a very young immature little girl. Everyone else here is simply staying their frustration over the issue and you just come out of the woodwork acting childish. Maybe learn how to take some action and attempt to find out what the problem is instead of being hateful to the people who are trying to figure out the problem.

Thats awful! Leave your nastiness elsewhere! Very SAD! Any help please it would be greatly appreciated!! You will have to file in order to get the missing stimulus money. We are all asking questions on this forum because we can, and have the right too. The government has stated each person, dependant receives x amount of dollars. How dare you say anyone sounds like a brat for asking where or how to go about receiving the money that is owed to them.

This time we are in is hard enough and unprecedented. Same situation. Took til thanksgiving for them to give us some back but still left out 2 of the kids. What the hell is really going on? Post-internet you can turn that into a career. Nivi: Talk a little bit about what industries you should think about working in. What kind of job you should have? And who you might want to work with? Naval: Yeah, this is an insight into what makes Silicon Valley work, and what makes high trust societies work.

Essentially, all the benefits in life come from compound interests. It was compounding, so it just grew, and grew, and grew until you suddenly got a massive amount of whatever it is. So, I think compound interest is a very important force. You have to be able to play a long-term game. Then they do right by each other because they know this person will be around for the next game.

But essentially if you want to be successful, you have to work with other people. And you have to figure out who can you trust, and who can you trust over a long, long period of time, that you can just keep playing the game with them, so that compound interest, and high trust will make it easier to play the game, and will let you collect the major rewards, which are usually at the end of the cycle. So, for example, Warren Buffett has done really well as an investor in the U. Or the U.

So, in his case, he was playing a longterm game. And the trust came from the U. That might be the best opportunity. There are also industries in which people are transient by definition. Politics is an example of that, right? In politics new people are being elected. Whereas every time you get a new incoming freshman class in the House of Representatives, which turns over every two years with a big wave election.

Nothing gets done because of a lot fighting. And their ethics are visible through their actions. Nivi: In a long-term game, it seems that everybody is making each other rich.

And in a short-term game, it seems like everybody is making themselves rich. Naval: I think that is a brilliant formulation. Now this is not to excuse the socialists, right? A good leader basically tries to inspire people, so the team gets the job done. And then things get divided up according to fairness, and who contributed how much, or as close to it as possible, and took a risk, as opposed to just whoever has the longest knife… the sharpest knife at the end.

All returns in life, whether in wealth, relationships, or knowledge come from compound interest. The friction goes down, you can do bigger, and bigger things together. For example, the simplest one is getting married to someone, and having kids, and raising children.

Investing in those relationships. Those relationships end up being invaluable compared to more casual relationships. You know, the fitter you are, the easier it is to stay fit. Whereas the more you deteriorate your body, the harder it is to come back, and claw your way back to a baseline. It requires heroic acts. Nivi: Regarding compound interest, I think I saw retweet something a while back.

Maybe it was from Ed Latimore. So, the idea was to gain some initial traction, and never fall back, just keep ratcheting up, and up. But I think that was right. Pick business partners with high intelligence, energy and integrity. You need someone high-energy because the world is full of smart, lazy people. And we also know people who are very high energy, but not that smart.

And smart is not a pejorative. So, depending on what you want to do well, you have to find someone who is smart at that thing. So, for example, someone might be really unmotivated to go to a job, and sit in an office.

But they might be really motivated to go paint, right? Well, in that case they should be a painter. They should be putting art up on the internet.

Trying to figure out how to build a career out of that, rather than wearing a collar around their neck, and going to a dreary job.

So, you have to figure out if the person is high-integrity. And as we talked about, the way you do that is through signals. And signals is what they do, not what they say. When I was younger, I used to try and talk people into things. I had this idea that you could sell someone into doing something. You can get them inspired initially. So, you have to make sure people actually are high-energy, and want to do what you want them to do, and what you want to work with them on. Integrity is what someone does, despite what they say they do.

Reading signals is very, very important. Signals are what people do despite what they say. So, angry, outraged, vindictive, short-term thinking people are essentially that way in many interactions in real life. People are oddly consistent. So, you want to find long-term people. You want to find people who seem irrationally ethical.

For example, I had a friend of mine whose company I invested in, and the company failed, and he could have wiped out all of the investors. But he kept putting more and more personal money in. Through three different pivots he put personal money in until the company finally succeeded.

And in the process, he never wiped out the investors. And I was always grateful to him for that. I did it for me. Another quote that I like, I have a tweet on this. But I kind of modified it a little bit.

So, good people, moral people, ethical people, easy to work with people, reliable people, tend to have very high self-esteem because they have very good reputations with themselves, and they understand that. Self-esteem and ego are different things. Because ego can be undeserved, but self-esteem at least you feel like you lived up to your own internal moral code of ethics.

If you overtly bid for status, if you overtly talk about being high status, that is a low status move. That is a characteristic of con men. So, yeah, pick an industry in which you can play long-term games with long-term people.

Their beliefs are self-fulfilling. Naval: Yes. Essentially, to create things, you have to be a rational optimist. Rational in the sense that you have to see the world for what it really is. And yet you have to be optimistic about your own capabilities, and your capability to get things done.

We all know people who are consistently pessimistic, who will shoot down everything. Everyone in their life has the helpful critical guy, right? They think their job is to shoot holes in things. They want to tell you why the thing is not going to work. And all the really successful people I know have a very strong action bias. They just do things. The easiest way to figure out if something is viable or not is by doing it.

At least do the first step, and the second step, and the third, and then decide. So, if you want to be successful in life, creating wealth, or having good relationships, or being fit, or even being happy, you need to have an action bias towards getting what you want. And you have to be optimistic about it.

Not irrationally. But you have to be rational. Know all the pitfalls. Know the downsides, but still keep your chin up. Why not try to build something big? And he provides an example for people to think big. And it takes a lot of work to build even small things. Maybe even more. Obviously, rationally, within your means, stay optimistic. And so the world to me just looks like a world where nobody can do anything.

But if you succeed, then you just make me look bad. Historically, if you go back 2, years, 5, years, 10, years, two people are wandering through a jungle, they hear a tiger. But modern society is far, far safer. There are no tigers wandering around the street. Much more likely that the upside is unlimited, and the downside is limited. So, adapting for modern society means overriding your pessimism, and taking slightly irrationally optimistic bets because the upside is unlimited if you start the next SpaceX, or Tesla, or Uber, you can make billions of dollars of value for society, and for yourself, and change the world.

It made sense to be pessimistic in the past. Even a Third World country. I actually think the economic opportunities in Third World countries are much larger. The one thing you have to avoid is the risk of ruin. Ruin means stay out of jail. And stay out of total catastrophic loss. That could mean that you stay out of things that could be physically dangerous, hurt your body. You have to watch your health. And stay out of things that can cause you to lose all of your capital, all of your savings.

But take rationally optimistic bets with big upside. And then there are people who list all of the obvious exceptions, no matter how obvious they are. I barely get exposed to that anymore. And he used to pin that acronym at the end of his articles for a while.

But Twitter is overrun with nitpickers. Nivi: Do you want to talk a little bit about the skills that you need, in particular specific knowledge, accountability, leverage and judgment. Naval: If you want to make money you have to get paid at scale. The thing is that we have this idea that everything can be taught, everything can be taught in school. In fact, the most interesting things cannot be taught.

But everything can be learned. Classic example is investing, but it could be in anything. It could be in judgment in running a fleet of trucks, it could be judgment in weather forecasting. So, specific knowledge is the knowledge that you care about. Rather, you get to look at what you have already built by that point in time, and then you can build on top of it.

If you can be trained for it, if you can go to a class and learn specific knowledge, then somebody else can be trained for it too, and then we can mass-produce and mass-train people. Heck, we can even program computers to do it and eventually we can program robots to walk around doing it. So really, your returns just devolve into your cost of training plus the return on investment on that training.

For example, someone who goes and gets a degree in psychology and then becomes a salesperson. Well if they were already a formidable salesperson, a high grade salesmanship to begin with, then the psychology degree is leverage, it arms them and they do much better at sales.

So, specific knowledge is found much more by pursuing your innate talents, your genuine curiosity, and your passion. Very often specific knowledge is at the edge of knowledge. For example, I wanted to be a scientist and that is where a lot of my moral hierarchy comes from.

I view scientists sort of at the top of the production chain for humanity. And the group of scientists who have made real breakthroughs and contributions that probably added more to human society, I think, than any single other class of human beings.

My whole value system was built around scientists and I wanted to be a great scientist. But when I actually look back at what I was uniquely good at and what I ended up spending my time doing, it was more around making money, tinkering with technology, and selling people on things. Explaining things, talking to people.

So, I have some sales skills, which is a form specific knowledge that I have. I have some analytical skills around how to make money. And I have this ability to absorb data, obsess about it, and break it down and that is a specific skill that I have. I also just love tinkering with technology. And all of this stuff feels like play to me, but it looks like work to others. This is ironic, but the first person to actually point out my real specific knowledge was my mother.

She did it as an aside, talking from the kitchen and she said it when I was like 15 or 16 years old. So, she knew that I had more of a business curious mind, but then my obsession with science combined to create technology and technology businesses where I found myself.

So, very often, your specific knowledge is observed and often observed by other people who know you well and revealed in situations rather than something that you come up with. Specific knowledge can be taught through apprenticeships. The classic line here is that Warren Buffett went to Benjamin Graham when he got out of school.

Benjamin Graham was the author of the Intelligent Investor and sort of modernized or created value investing as a discipline. And Warren Buffett went to Benjamin Graham and offered to work for him for free.

When it comes to a very valuable apprenticeship like the type that Graham was going to give Buffet, Buffet should have been paying him a lot of money. That right there tells you that those are skills worth having. Specific knowledge is often highly creative or technical. Specific knowledge also tends to be technical and creative.

Even today, for example, there are probably meme lords out there on the Internet who can create incredible memes that will spread the idea to millions of people. Or are very persuasive — Scott Adams is a good example of this. He is essentially becoming one of the most credible people in the world by making accurate predictions through persuasive arguments and videos. That is an example of someone who has built up a specific knowledge over the course of his career.

He has massive leverage on top of that brand and he can build wealth out of it if he wanted to build additional wealth beyond what he already has.

Specific knowledge is specific to the individual and situation. Nivi: Should we be calling it unique knowledge or does specific knowledge somehow make more sense for it? Naval: You know, I came up with this framework when I was really young. So, at the time specific knowledge stuck with me so that is how I think about it.

I can kind of rebrand it. And by doing that, you become the only person in the world who can do those three things in the 25th percentile. So, instead of trying to be the best at one thing, you just try to be very, very good at three or more things. Is that a way of building specific knowledge? Naval: I actually think the best way is just to follow your own obsession.

Someone else is likely to be the number one in each of those 10,, unless you happen to be one of the 10, most obsessed people in the world that at a given thing. So, it just becomes much less competitive. Build specific knowledge where you are a natural. Everyone is a natural at something. Naval: This is a very broad category.

One is building the product. It can include design, it can include development, it can include manufacturing, logistics, procurement, it can even be designing and operating a service. It has many, many definitions. But in every industry, there is a definition of the builder. The other side of it is sales. Again, selling has a very broad definition. So, generally, the Silicon Valley startup model tends to work best. But generally, you will see this pattern repeated over and over. And venture and technology investors are almost trained to look for this combo whenever possible.

The ultimate is when one individual can do both. The living example is Elon Musk. He may not necessarily be building the rockets himself, but he understands enough that he actually makes technical contributions. He may be optimistic on the timelines but he thinks this is within reasonableness for delivery. Even Steve Jobs developed enough product skills and was involved enough in the product that he also operated in both of these domains.

Larry Ellison started as a programmer and I think wrote the first version of Oracle, or was actually heavily involved in it. Marc Andreessen was also in this domain. He may not have had enough confidence in his sales skills, but he was the programmer who wrote Netscape Navigator, or a big chunk of it. So, I think the real giants in any field are the people who can both build and sell.

It requires too much focused time. But a builder can pick up selling a little bit later, especially if they were already innately wired to be a good communicator. Now, your sales skills could be in a different than traditional domain. And writing is a skill that can be learned much more easily than, say, in-person selling, and so you may just cultivate writing skills until you become a good online communicator and then use that for your sales.

Long term, people who understand the underlying product and how to build it and can sell it, these are catnip to investors, these people can break down walls if they have enough energy, and they can get almost anything done. Nivi: If you could only pick one to be good at, which one would you pick? So, sales skills actually scale better over time. So, I think if you only had to pick up one, you can start with building and then transition to selling. This is a cop-out answer, but I think that is actually the right answer.

Avoid business magazines and business class, study microeconomics, game theory, psychology, persuasion, ethics, mathematics and computers. And the problem is, what do I read? How do I read? So, the most important thing is just to learn how to educate yourself and the way to educate yourself is to develop a love for reading. Everybody I know who reads a lot loves to read, and they love to read because they read books that they loved.

And then eventually, you will just get bored of the simple stuff. So you may start off reading fiction, then you might graduate to science fiction, then you may graduate to non-fiction, then you may graduate to science, or philosophy, or mathematics or whatever it is, but take your natural path and just read the things that interest you until you kind of understand them.

Even reading is full of junk. There are actually things you can read, especially early on, that will program your brain a certain way, and then later things that you read, you will decide whether those things are true or false based on the earlier things. So, it is important that you read foundational things. And foundational things, I would say, are the original books in a given field that are very scientific in their nature.

Instead of reading a book on biotech right now that may be very advanced, I would just pick up The Eighth Day of Creation by Watson and Crick. If you understand the basics, especially in mathematics and physics and sciences, then you will not be afraid of any book.

Then after that we were left memorizing equations, memorizing concepts without being able to derive them from first principles. So the foundations are ultra important. You know that you can take any book off the shelf, you can read it, you can understand it, you can absorb what is true, you can reject what is false, and you have a basis for even working that out that is logical and scientific and not purely just based on opinions. The means of learning are abundant; the desire to learn is scarce.

The beauty of the internet is the entire library of Alexandria times 10 is at your fingertips at all times. So, you really have to cultivate the desire. Children have a natural curiosity. Why is this? But one of the problems is that schools and our educational system, and even our way of raising children replaces curiosity with compliance.

And once you replace the curiosity with the compliance, you get an obedient factory worker, but you no longer get a creative thinker.

And you need creativity, you need the ability to feed your own brain to learn whatever you want. As Nassim Taleb says, it is easier to macro bullshit than it is the micro bullshit. Because macroeconomics is voodoo-complex-science meets politics.

There are even macroeconomists out there now peddling something called Modern Monetary Theory which basically says, hey, except for this pesky thing called inflation, we can just print all the money that we want.

Yes, except for this pesky thing called inflation. So, you really want to focus on the foundations. The ultimate foundation are mathematics and logic. If you understand logic and mathematics, then you have the basis for understanding the scientific method. What you are really looking for are algorithms. What you are really looking for is understanding. Nivi: To lay a foundation for learning for the rest of your life I think you need two things, if I was going to try and sum it up.

In fact let me expand that a little bit. Naval: In that sense, business to me is bottom of the barrel. Even then you will find that basic concepts from game theory, psychology, ethics, mathematics, computers, and logic will serve you much, much better. I would focus on the foundations, I would focus with a science bent. That [reading] is the foundation for your self-education. Similarly, a lot of people think they can become really skilled at something by watching others do it, or even by reading about others doing it.

Or even opening a little retail store down the street. But which ones matter more? Which ones do you apply more often? Which ones matter in which circumstances? For example, my personal learning has been that the principal-agent problem drives so much in this world.

You can almost put down the game theory book after that. By the way, the best way to learn game theory is to play lots of games. I never even read game theory books. I consider myself extremely good at game theory. You can always learn better by doing it on the job. But doing is a subtle thing.

Doing encapsulates a lot. Whereas if I was putting in thousands of iterations, that would be different. So, the learning curve is across iterations [not iterations]. So if I was trying new marketing experiments in the store all the time, I was constantly changing up the inventory, I was constantly changing up the branding and the messaging, I was constantly changing the sign, I was constantly changing the online channels that are used to drive foot traffic in, I was experimenting with being open at different hours, I had the ability to walk around and talk to other store owners and getting their books and figure out how they run their businesses.

So you just have to get very, very comfortable with frequent small failures. Nassim Taleb talks about this also. He made his fortune, his wealth by being a trader who basically relied upon black swans. Nassim Taleb made money by losing little bits of money every day and then once in a blue moon he would make a lot of money when the unthinkable happened for other people.

That is, by the way, entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs bleed every day. Society will reward you with responsibility, equity, and leverage. Leverage comes in labor, comes in capital, or it can come through code or media. But most of these, like labor and capital, people have to give to you.

For labor, somebody has to follow you. For capital, somebody has to give you money or assets to manage or machines. So to get these things, you have to build up credibility and you have to do those under your own name as much as possible, which is risky.

So accountability is a double-edged thing. It allows you to take credit when things go well and to bear the brunt of the failure when things go badly. Maybe it turns out to be foolish in the end, but if you look at a Kanye or an Oprah or a Trump or an Elon or anyone like that, these people can get rich just off their name because their name is such powerful branding. Regardless of what you think of Trump, you have to realize that the guy was among the best in the world at just branding his name.

Why would you go to Trump Casino? Used to be because Trump. Why would you go to a Trump tower? Because of Trump. Same thing with Oprah. These people also take risks for putting their name out there. Obviously Trump is now probably hated by half or more than half of the country and by a big chunk of the world as he sticks his name out there.

By putting your name out there, you become a celebrity, and fame has many, many downsides. Absolutely agree with that. A lot of our training socially is telling us to not stick our necks out of the crowd.

If you have a small team and you have clearly delineated responsibilities, then you can still keep a very high level of accountability. Accountability is really important because when something succeeds or fails, if it fails, everybody points fingers at each other, and if it succeeds, everybody steps forward to take credit. There were probably a few people in there who did a lot of the work.

Then there are a few people who just did a lot of grandstanding or positioning to do the work. Clear accountability is important. But you take risk. You take risk of failure.

You take risk of humiliation. You take risk of failure under your own name. The people who have the ability to fail in public under their own names actually gain a lot of power.

Up until about , , my public persona was an entirely around startups and investing. Only around , did I start talking about philosophy and psychological things and broader things. It made me a little nervous because I was doing it under my own name. This is stupid. But when you put your name out there, you take a risk with certain things. You also get to reap the rewards. You get the benefits. If you have high accountability, that makes you less replaceable.

Then they have to give you equity, which is a piece of the upside. Equity itself is a good example because equity is also a risk-based instrument. Equity means you get paid everything after all the people who need guaranteed money are paid back. If you look at the hierarchy of capital in a company, the employees get paid first. They get paid the salary first. In legal [bankruptcy] proceedings, the salaries are sacrosanct.

Finally there are the equity holders. These people are actually going to get most of the upside. Once the debt holders are paid off and the salaries are paid off, whatever remains goes to them.

The equity holders take on greater risk, but in exchange, they get nearly unlimited upside. You can do the same with all of your work. Essentially, taking accountability for your actions is the same as taking an equity position in all of your work. Realize that in modern society, the downside risk is not that large. Even personal bankruptcy can wipe the debts clean in good ecosystems. Naval: I think it could actually be fragile.

If you screw up, you crash the ship, and there are immediate consequences. In the old days, the captain was expected to go down with the ship.

If the ship was sinking, then literally the last person who got to get off was the captain. The risk here would be that you would probably be the last one to get your capital back out. Bernie Madoff, for example, Madoff investments, that name is never going to be good again in the investment community. You are not going to go into the investment business because he ruined the family name. I think these days the accountability risk with a name happens more around integrity, rather than it does around purely economic failure.

Nivi: The big takeaway for me on accountability is that you will be rewarded directly in proportion with your accountability. I also think this is why people like Taleb rail against CEOs who get rewards without accountability. If you want to get anywhere in modern life and understand how modern systems work, then Skin In The Game would be near the top of my list to read.

Wood Floor Sanding Machine Rental Video
Diy Wood Plank Projects Pvt Ltd
Glider Hardware Home Depot Online