Српска привреда

Share
avatar

Posts : 6051
Join date : 2014-12-09

Re: Српска привреда

Post by uskok i ajduk on Tue Jul 03, 2018 6:29 pm

Србија и Колумбија имају исти ниво бруто домаћег производа (БДП). Србија има одличну географску позицију, бољу инфраструктуру, квалитетнију радну снагу, бољи образовни систем, добре инжењере из области технолошких наука... У истраживање и развој Србија улаже 0,69 одсто БДП-а, што је висок удео за земљу тог нивоа развијености. Али упркос томе, Колумбија има већи привредни раст од Србије. И то је мистерија о Србији коју не могу да разрешим и немам одговор на питање зашто је то тако.
Овом занимљивом паралелом Вилијам Малони, водећи економиста Светске банке, почиње разговор за „Политику”. Како каже, у којој год земљи на свету да је био и питао привреднике шта је највећа препрека у пословању, сви су најчешће одговарали једно те исто: „Порези су високи”.
– Нисам био у посети ниједној српској фирми, али у ком год предузећу на свету да сам био, нико од привредника ми није рекао да не зна да управља фирмом, или да нема одговарајућу стратегију продаје или развоја. Нико од њих не види своје слабости. Поента је у томе да бизнисмени заправо не знају шта не знају – рекао је Малони.
А шта је оно што не знају српски тајкуни? У земљама овог нивоа развијености научна и пословна заједница обично нису блиско повезане, каже наш саговорник.
– Тако научници обично мисле да своје брилијантне умове не могу да троше на нешто тако тривијално као што је бизнис, док привредници, са друге стране сматрају да то што раде институти и научна заједница њима не значи ништа и да они од тога немају никакве користи. Те везе бизниса и науке је неопходно ојачати. Шта мислите зашто је Никола Тесла био један од најбрилијантнијих светских умова? Зато што је његов изум имао веома брзу и широку примену у приватном сектору. Сигурно је да Србија и данас има брилијанте умове. Питање које себи морате да поставите јесте колико су они интегрисани у приватни сектор – каже Малони који је у Београд допутовао као гост конференције „Јавно-приватни дијалог”, коју су организовали НАЛЕД и УСАИД.
avatar

Posts : 6892
Join date : 2012-02-10

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Quincy Endicott on Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:10 pm

lebe mekani


_____
Veteran of two wars.
Father of nine children.
Drowned in the Caspian Sea.
avatar

Posts : 6892
Join date : 2012-02-10

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Quincy Endicott on Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:38 pm

Ajde da ne ispadne da se samo krstim i desnom i levom, kakvo tacno istrazivanje ja mogu da uradim za Yuru ili za Momirovica?


_____
Veteran of two wars.
Father of nine children.
Drowned in the Caspian Sea.
avatar

Posts : 2672
Join date : 2017-11-27

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Mr. Moonlight on Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:54 pm

Ja mislim da je najgore za nauku da bude povezana sa biznisom. Ako nauka bude išla za potrebama biznisa, eto nas u još većem kurcu, globalno otopljavanje ne postoji. Od trivijalnog propagandističkog, kada nauka tvrdi da je zejtin zdraviji od svinjeske masti, pa se malo malo pojavljuju radovi koji tvrde da u proizvodu X ima tih i tih zdravih supstanci koje sprečavaju rak, ifarkt ili nešto treće, pa sve do kompleksnih multidisplinarnih istraživanja koja kasnije usmeravaju industriju strogo definisanim pravcima. Ne sme nauku da finansira niko ko ima definisan interes, već samo opšti.


_____
    .i.

When I Get Low, I Get High.

Writing in the book of life, a chapter of insanity
avatar

Posts : 6051
Join date : 2014-12-09

Re: Српска привреда

Post by uskok i ajduk on Tue Jul 03, 2018 8:23 pm

Hubert de Montmirail wrote:Ajde da ne ispadne da se samo krstim i desnom i levom, kakvo tacno istrazivanje ja mogu da uradim za Yuru ili za Momirovica?

Мени је тешко да расправљам када разговор иде у једном правцу. (после се Мунлајт и њему слични буне да не одговарам на читаве пасусе и то је истина, не одговарам.  ) Радије бих поставио контра-питање, сећаш ли се оне твоје идеје да историјски институт штампа албум са самолепивим сличицама на тему другог светског рата? Или нешто томе слично. Ја мислим да је то суштина оне изјаве о преплитању науке и бизниса, то преплитање би требало да буде пре свега интелектуално и духовно, тј. да не наручује бизнис од науке, него исто тако и да наука ствара бизнис. Тј. треба да се заврши са схватањем бизниса као неке нужно анти-интелектуалне или плитко-интелектуалне делатности.
avatar

Posts : 21595
Join date : 2014-10-27

Re: Српска привреда

Post by bruno sulak on Tue Jul 03, 2018 9:28 pm

album sa samolepljivm slicicama?

evo malo preplitanja biznisa i nauke

http://www.noviplamen.net/tekstovi/kakav-je-zaista-materijalni-polozaj-stanovnistva-srbije/


_____
The law provides us structure to guide us through paralyzing and trying times. But it requires us a vision to its procedures and higher purposes. Before we assume our respective roles in this enduring drama just let me say that when these frail shadows we inhabit now have quit the stage we'll meet and raise a glass again together in Valhalla.
avatar

Posts : 6892
Join date : 2012-02-10

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Quincy Endicott on Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:26 pm

pa da kao Panini svetsko prvenstvo samo sa partizanima, cetnicima, ustasama, ljoticevcima, handzar divizijom itd. posaljite 20 praznih kesica na adresu DECJE NOVINE, Narodnih heroja BB Gornji Milanovac i dobicete YASSA trenerku sa vezenim grbom Dinarske divizije i slicno


_____
Veteran of two wars.
Father of nine children.
Drowned in the Caspian Sea.
avatar

Posts : 21595
Join date : 2014-10-27

Re: Српска привреда

Post by bruno sulak on Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:58 pm

draza bude rare silver foil kartica


_____
The law provides us structure to guide us through paralyzing and trying times. But it requires us a vision to its procedures and higher purposes. Before we assume our respective roles in this enduring drama just let me say that when these frail shadows we inhabit now have quit the stage we'll meet and raise a glass again together in Valhalla.
avatar

Posts : 1578
Join date : 2015-02-17

Re: Српска привреда

Post by ontheotherhand on Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:06 pm

Ovo boldovano za vezu nauke i biznisa nije tačno, makar ne u svim oblastima naravno. Postoji transfer tehnologije, ekskluzivno licenciranje rezultata istraživanja industriji. Industrija finansira partnerstva sa državnim i privatnim univerzitetima u zamenu za prioritet u komercijalizovanju otkrića. Startapovi u NT parku se pokreću, itd.
avatar

Posts : 6892
Join date : 2012-02-10

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Quincy Endicott on Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:07 pm

da ne idemo dalje od Srbije, pola nase nauke su instituti za kukuruz i slicni


_____
Veteran of two wars.
Father of nine children.
Drowned in the Caspian Sea.
avatar

Posts : 1578
Join date : 2015-02-17

Re: Српска привреда

Post by ontheotherhand on Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:29 pm

Inače +1 na ovo Munlajtovo, evo jednog finog teksta na tu temu.


Bad Science


Spoiler:
At the heart of the US healthcare system’s profit-based approach to medical science is the harsh truth that money alone can prolong life. Take, for example, the class of genes dubbed “tumor suppressors.” Because of their ability to regulate cell growth, tumor suppressors are at the forefront of cancer-prevention research. A positive test for mutations in a tumor suppressor gene like BRCA1 or BRCA2 is a leading indication of high risk for breast or ovarian cancer.

But despite the potential life-saving importance of the discovery, the cost of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 test is prohibitively expensive. At $4,000 a test, it is four times that of a full genetic sequencing. The only reason the price for a potentially life-saving evaluation could be this outrageous is due to the actions of one company, Myriad Genetics. While the Supreme Court recently struck down Myriad’s claim to the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, declaring that human genes can’t be patented, Myriad continues to assert its monopoly on the test  for susceptibility to breast cancer.

What’s even more egregious about Myriad’s price-gouging is that many of the costs of developing the BRCA1 and BRCA2 test have already been paid for by the public. The research to identify those genes as cancer triggers was publicly funded through the University of Utah School of Medicine. Myriad Genetics was simply a startup founded by researchers at the university to take possession of the patent after the test’s discovery. And it was only because of the Bayh-Dole Act that this could take place.

At the time of its passage, the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act was intended to drive innovation in academic research. By removing restrictions on what universities could do with their scientific discoveries, it would ostensibly bring more money to the university system. To pay for their work, academic research facilities could now sell off their patents,or hand out exclusive licenses to private industry. With a monopoly on intellectual property provided by the patent, the private sector would be incentivized to quickly develop those patents into advanced consumer products and services.

The supporters of Bayh-Dole claimed that the opportunity to make more money would push academic science to make more discoveries and encourage private industry to bring more of those discoveries to market. Not long after its passage, the financial repercussions were already being realized. Researchers at Columbia University applied for patents on the process of DNA cotransformation, known as the Axel patents, that would eventually earn the university hundreds of millions in licensing fees. The Cohen-Boyer patent on recombinant DNA would earn Stanford over two hundred million. Along with the 1980 Diamond v. Chakrabarty Supreme Court decision that allowed biomedical material to be patented, it was the beginning of the biotech boom. Universities scrambled to build advanced research labs to make new claims on intellectual property from software to DNA sequencing that could be patented and sold to the public.

Previously, discoveries made by public universities could only be given out to private industry through non-exclusive licenses. Private entities could develop new drugs and new inventions based on groundbreaking research, but so could any other company. The supporters of Bayh-Dole argued that this grace period was essentially a disincentive to innovate. If one company didn’t have exclusive rights to an invention, then there was little money to be made in its development. Why bother innovating if the competition could do the same and eat away at the potential profit margin? Inventions would be left to “rot on the shelf.”

Yet what might seem like an arcane bit of legal minutia related to intellectual property is at the forefront of the university research system’s decline. The public-license restriction protected academic research from descending into an intellectual-property gold rush. Removing it has unleashed a flood of capital from private industry eager to possess a monopoly on cutting-edge scientific advancements. Private bodies now help fund academic institutions in return for priority in the process of “tech transfer” — the exclusive licensing of publicly-funded research to private industry. Giant pharmaceutical conglomerates like Merck and GlaxoSmithKline fund partnerships with private and state universities on projects to research currently incurable diseases, with the explicit stipulation that those companies will reap the benefits by obtaining exclusive licenses on any forthcoming discoveries. Those discoveries, whether they are related to the original aim of the project or not, are then turned into overpriced, brand-name pharmaceutical drugs.

Not only do patents push higher prices onto consumers, they burden the research world with the increased costs of paying for the intellectual property needed to do further research. Research labs have to pay thousands of dollars for the strains and processes needed to build upon current developments, adding more costs to cutting-edge research. The profit-driven atmosphere of the current research system is a far cry from the one Jonas Salk worked in when he discovered the cure for polio. His discovery, which affected millions around the world suffering from a debilitating disease, was effectively given away for free. While Salk rhetorically wondered whether it was acceptable to “patent the sun” to make a profit, today’s race for intellectual property claims is quickly approaching that absurd proposition.

Though having more money invested in public education and hastening the development of new technology is ostensibly a public good, the influence of capital from private industry is largely corruptive. Combined with the sharp decline in state funding for education, Bayh-Dole has helped privatize the public university system. Without those public funds, universities have become ever more dependent on private investment through grants and donations. And with that money comes corrosive influences on academia.

Nowhere is this conflict of interest as prevalent as in pharmacology and biotechnology. Academics in those fields are commonly paid to sign their names to ghostwritten journal articles, promote drugs, and discover drugs based on market potential rather than the public good. They earn outsized consulting fees and lucrative speaking deals at industry-funded conferences in exchange for their compliance. In the case of Pfizer and their anticonvulsant drug Neurontin, academics were paid $1,000 a paper to sign their names to journal articles written by unknown medical ghostwriters and to speak at conferences extolling the virtues of a drug, initially intended for epilepsy sufferers, to treat anything from bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and insomnia to restless leg syndrome, hot flashes, migraines, and tension headaches. Not only are consumers misinformed about the safety and efficacy of the prescription drugs they take, but they pay the costs three times over: by funding public university research to discover these drugs, by paying the higher costs on patented drugs, and by accepting the pharmaceutical industry’s tax write-offs for their university sponsorships.

Even with limited public funding and an increased dependence on private financing, universities haven’t stopped spending, particularly on new facilities. A McGraw-Hill Construction survey estimated that over $11 billion had been spent on construction by higher education institutions between 2010 and 2012. By floating massive bonds to pay for new biomedical research facilities and state-of-the-art gymnasiums, schools hope to attract the students, star researchers, and funding that will help pay for it all. But these schools have wildly overcommitted themselves, and by doing so they’ve entered into the vicious cycle of a debtor’s beauty contest. They are spending massively to do research that can attract the grants and land the intellectual property jackpot to pay for the bloated administrative costs and massive debt they’ve incurred.

The burden of this scramble for money and fame is left on the students. Over the last thirty years, tuition costs have increased sixfold. There are fewer and fewer post-graduate opportunities, even in the world of academic research where so much is being spent. The flood of private money coming to the research system hasn’t made its way to expanding academic careers. Instead of employing more staff scientists, underpaid post-doctoral students are hired for half the cost to produce the eye-catching research that attracts grant money. Those students then go on to graduate into a science field flooded with other post-docs who are in direct competition for the dwindling number of established research positions available. The result is a highly competitive job market where too many are left fighting for fewer positions.

Across the whole university system, the pressure to cut costs means that tenure-track positions are being replaced by adjuncts with low pay and no job security as the salaries of administrators and college presidents continually rise.

In what Georgia State University economics professor Paula Stephan has referred to as an academic pyramid scheme, the resulting discrepancy between underpaid post-docs and adjuncts with minimal career prospects and the diminishing number of tenured, well-paid, and established star scientist positions mimics a tournament structure for scientific inquiry. It is a cutthroat beauty-contest atmosphere that takes its toll on the science being done. More and more earth-shattering studies by star scientists need to be published in prominent journals to garner the attention and the grants needed to keep up appearances and keep the lights on in the lab. In Stephan’s words, “Bigger is seen as better: more funding, more papers, more citations, and more trainees — regardless of whether the market can sustain their employment.”

The end result is a greater imperative not just to publish or perish, but to publish groundbreaking, provocative insights into our understanding of the world around us that require further investigation in highly respected journals — or perish. In the words of Stephen Quake, professor of bioengineering at Stanford, it is “funding or famine.” Within that decision matrix, the incentive to falsify findings, cut corners, and cherry-pick data becomes more advantageous. Whatever it takes to get more papers out the door and more grants coming in. It has come to a point that academics are insisting “there is no cost to getting things wrong. The cost is not getting them published.” In a meta-analysis of published research for the Public Library of Science (PLOS), John P. A. Ioannidis placed the blame specifically on the financial underpinnings of research, noting that “the greater the financial and other interests and prejudices in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true.”

The results are readily apparent. The overwhelming number of retractions due to flawed methodology, flawed approach, and general misconduct over the last decade is staggering. Stories in almost every field have seen a rash of inaccuracies. The percentage of scientific articles retracted because of fraud has increased tenfold since 1975. Only a fraction of heart disease and cancer studies have held up to scrutiny as their results were not reproducible. The free-radical theory of aging, once a well-regarded theory of how antioxidant enzymes affect cell life, has been thrown out, along with the USDA’s guidelines for measuring antioxidants in food. This, in turn, has called into question the whole supplemental vitamin industry,which is based in large part on the need for more antioxidants. The positive effects of omega-3 fatty acids on everything from cancer prevention to brain development have been challenged after follow-up stories showed no significant effect. The benefits of regular mammograms have been called into question as the results of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study showed no decline in the rate of mortality from breast cancer owing to their use, and regular testing sometimes led to overdiagnosis.

While there is certainly still a center of reputable, respectable, and reproducible science, it is surrounded by a cloud of inaccuracy and chicanery. Enthusiastic discoveries about possible cancer cures are swallowed whole and regurgitated by a media desperate for content that is unwilling or unable to decipher the false leads, flawed methodology, and erroneous statistics used to get those results. The public’s understanding of controversial topics like genetically modified organisms and endocrine disruptors is muddled further by the release of inaccurate studies supporting each disputed side. Those stories are then turned into short-lived diet fads and health scares, like those linking autism to vaccinations at birth.

Results that are quick to produce and quick to publish are more likely to be inaccurate. Proper science takes time, and refuting flawed science can take even longer. While it took over nine months to disprove a recent genetic test for autism, it took only three days for the original study to go from submission to print. In that time, few of those who heard the exciting news of the initial discovery will likely hear of the disappointment surrounding its correction. When a paper is published trumpeting the discovery of a genetic test for longevity, it immediately inspires cottage industries dedicated to providing longevity exams. When that paper is retracted — not because of fraud or misconduct but because of a flawed approach — those genomic testing operations don’t necessarily disappear overnight. They survive in a gray-market economy that profits off the public’s lack of knowledge of current scientific research.

The privatization of academic research not only hinders the scientific process, it also means that direct corruption — where scientists are paid off by private industry to deceive the public about toxins in their food or pollution in their air — has more opportunity to continue unabated. Researchers desperate for funding to maintain their positions and sustain their work are more susceptible to financing from industries eager to distort science to their own whims. It only encourages the perverse incentives of the free market to take advantage of what were once public institutions. When the health risks of cancerous flame-retardant chemicals can be distorted by an industry eager to make money off of their proliferation, then science ceases to work for the public interest. Eventually, the market-based approach to academic research ceases to be about science but about attracting attention and money under the gloss of scientific research.

If anything, the neoliberal approach to academic research is a return to the privately funded, pre-tenure origins of the university system when numerous schools were simply research labs and promotional arms for private industry rather than institutions of knowledge advancing science in the public interest. Back then, professors worked at the behest of the school’s donors and board of trustees. They could be easily fired for outspoken criticism or for publicizing research that affected the school’s or their donors’ bottom line. Supporting labor rights, advocating for socialist policies, believing in evolution, advocating against slavery, or informing the public about the toxic consequences of copper smelting fumes could lead to instant dismissal. Thorstein Veblen went so far as to acknowledge an unspoken blacklist amongst academics:

So well is the academic blacklist understood, indeed, and so sensitive and trustworthy is the fearsome loyalty of the common run among academic men, that very few among them will venture openly to say a good word for any one of their colleagues who may have fallen under the displeasure of some incumbent of executive office.

With tenure and public funding, researchers could speak freely and focus on topics that avoided short-term, consumer-based, money-making propositions. Advancements that might not have an immediate profit potential could be developed without a constant need to publish or perish. In the postwar era, government investment in academia and research led to many of the innovative breakthroughs we take for granted today. What so many have ascribed to the advancements of the digital revolution, from the internet and GPS to the DNA sequencing found in the Axel patents, were once large-scale, government-funded projects developed on university campuses begun decades before the Bayh-Dole agreement was even conceived of.

Despite the claims of Bayh-Dole proponents, those inventions have not been left on the shelf to rot.
avatar

Posts : 6506
Join date : 2016-06-25

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Zuper on Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:45 pm

Србија и Колумбија имају исти ниво бруто домаћег производа (БДП). Србија има одличну географску позицију, бољу инфраструктуру, квалитетнију радну снагу, бољи образовни систем, добре инжењере из области технолошких наука... У истраживање и развој Србија улаже 0,69 одсто БДП-а, што је висок удео за земљу тог нивоа развијености. Али упркос томе, Колумбија има већи привредни раст од Србије. И то је мистерија о Србији коју не могу да разрешим и немам одговор на питање зашто је то тако.

Velika misterija.
avatar

Posts : 2262
Join date : 2016-06-09
Location : Multitudes, yo

Re: Српска привреда

Post by ♏ on Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:46 pm

Btw, zbog čega je uopšte citirani štakor svraćao u domet Politikinih novinarki...

usaid.gov wrote:Projekat javno-privatnog dijaloga za razvoj je četvorogodišnji projekat vredan 1,43 miliona dolara, koji pomaže izgradnji delotvorne, održive javno-privatne saradnje između Vlade Srbije, privatnog sektora i civilnog društva u cilju unapređenja poslovnog okruženja i generisanja dinamičnijeg i održivijeg ekonomskog rasta.

Projekat će osnovati Korisnički centar za javno-privatni dijalog kako bi podsticao kulturu dijaloga u vezi sa osnovnim ekonomskim reformama.

Inovativno.
avatar

Posts : 48466
Join date : 2012-06-10

Re: Српска привреда

Post by William Murderface on Wed Jul 04, 2018 12:57 am

[size=32]Korisnički centar za javno-privatni dijalog [/size]


[size=32]Jbt kurac, koji je ovo nivo prodavanja muda za bubrege.[/size]


_____
"Oni kroz mene gledaju u vas! Oni kroz njega gledaju u vas! Oni kroz vas gledaju u mene... i u sve nas."

Dragoslav Bokan, Novi putevi oftalmologije
avatar

Posts : 4224
Join date : 2016-03-28

Re: Српска привреда

Post by disident on Wed Jul 04, 2018 2:00 am

bruno sulak wrote:album sa samolepljivm slicicama?

evo malo preplitanja biznisa i nauke

http://www.noviplamen.net/tekstovi/kakav-je-zaista-materijalni-polozaj-stanovnistva-srbije/



_____
Admin
avatar

Posts : 10287
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Gargantua on Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:01 pm

Sviđa mi se da stoji ovde 

TASIĆ‏ @nemanja_tasic  17 сатипре 17 сати

imao sam drugara koji je imao dosta para i koji sada nema para. ovo je priča o njemu.

sve počinje tako što je, kao i svaka mlatikurčina, rešio da uloži novac negde i započne svoj biznis, iako, najblaže rečeno, nije znao baš ništa da radi u životu

naravno, pošto smo srbi, nekako se kao prvo logično rešenje nameće KAFIĆ. Ja sam kao pravi prijatelj zdušno podržao svaki glup predlog, ali su ga neki drugi ljudi iz najbolje namere odvukli na drugu stranu. Izgleda da je Beogradu potrebna još jedna PICERIJA!

Odmah je krenuo da traži prostor i drugi dan je našao lokal u Mirijevu, preko puta neke osnovne. Lokal u Mirijevu je morao odmah da se uzme, jer ko zna kada će se ponovo ukazati takva šansa.

Zvuči nelogično, ali izgleda da nije dovoljno da samo uzmeš lokal, izgleda da ti treba neko da pravi picu, a i pica peć i tako dalje

Šest meseci kasnije imao je 2.000 evra manje jer je uredno plaćao zakup. nešto je valjalo promeniti. upisao je kurs za pica majstora. nakon dve nedelje otišli smo do njega da vidimo šta je naučio.

Ako je cilj kursa bio da praviš pice u obliku Finske, onda je kurs vredeo svaki dinar. Pošto je ta prepreka preskočena, sledeća je nabavka pica peći.

Pričao sam sa nekim ljudima i rekli su reci ortaku da uzme polovnu peć, niko ne uzima novu na ovom svetu. Naravno, shvatio sam da neko nekad mora da uzme novu peć, da bi neko drugi mogao nekad da uzme polovnu, ali okej.

Stara i potpuno funkcionalna peć od 200 evra nije dolazila u obzir, ali zato nova od 1400 evra jeste.

Sada je sve bilo tu, nabavljen je materijal, i sve je moglo da počne. Ipak, postojao je mali problem, jer ortak nikad nije radio i nije baš imao radne navike. Ustajao je oko 17h.

Naravno kad ustaneš u 17h jasno je da si propustio oba velika odmora. Bio je previše ponosan da zaposli radnika, a i hteo je da racionalizuje potrošnju.

Mesec dana kasnije uspevao je da se probudi taman da stigne za onaj veliki odmor u drugoj smeni, ali izgleda da pice nisu išle kao lude. Smislio je. PICA SENDVIČI.

Okej ideja, jedino je bilo malo naporno što je on mislio da je upravio izmislio novu stvar i raspitivao se kako da tu ideju zaštiti negde.

Ispostaviće se da ni to nije baš nešto išlo, ali zato brate znaš šta će raditi top. ŠEĆERNA VUNA. Kupio je aparat za šećernu vunu i stavio je lokal. Ne mogu da tvrdim, ali mislim da takav slučaj nije zabeležen.

Naravno svaka genijalna ideja ima svoje ALI, a problem sa aparatom za sećernu vunu je taj što dok se napravi jedno ono sranje, završi se veliki odmor i onda drugo dete ne može da kupi, jer mora nazad na čas iz biologije.

Kao šlag na tortu mašina je eksplodirala i ona vuna je bila svuda po lokalu, tada se nas 10 spakovalo u dva automobila i doletelo iz Jerkovića da uživa u prizoru.

Na moju neizmernu žalost, zatvorio je lokal. Prošlo je nekih godinu i po dana, i baš kada se krčkala nova ideja koju sam takođe podržao - uvoz kuća od trske iz Indije, Bog ga je pogledao i stiglo mu je rešenje da je dužan za porez 3.000 evra. Izgleda da moraš da odjaviš firmu.

Zaboravio sam deo kad smo iznosili peć i Denisu ispadne, tresne o beton i sjebe se tako da više nije mogao da je zavalja ni kao polovnu. Mislim niko nije očekivao da menja svet, ali zaista najgora preduzetnička rola što se mene tiče, a poznajem dosta bolida.
avatar

Posts : 4597
Join date : 2017-11-16
Location : Nosgoth

Re: Српска привреда

Post by KinderLad on Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:05 pm

Loš čovek
avatar

Posts : 4224
Join date : 2016-03-28

Re: Српска привреда

Post by disident on Tue Jul 17, 2018 2:58 pm

Btw , moze na vise tema, al ljudi su lose primili ovo jucerasnje poskupljenje cigara. Bas se vidi, posebno na lm loftu koji je bio 210 a sad je 220, tj ljudima koji kupuju isti, da su na ivici pucanja.


_____
Admin
avatar

Posts : 10287
Join date : 2015-11-22

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Gargantua on Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:49 pm

EKSKLUZIVNO Jura deo proizvodnje seli iz Leskovca u Albaniju, napisano 350 otkaza, strepi još 700 ljudi ?!
Autor: Milica Ivanović 2722.09.2018 04:59 pm

Fabrika Jura otvorena je u Leskovcu 2012. godine za šta je dobila subvencije države Srbije po oko 7.000 evra za svakog novozaposlenog radnika i garantovala da neće biti otpuštanja u narednih pet godina, taman dok se za plate radnika ne potroše državne pare. Tih 5 godina je prošlo, Korejci nisu lagali.
...

http://jugmedia.rs/ekskluzivno-jura-deo-proizvodnje-seli-iz-leskovca-u-albaniju-napisano-350-otkaza-strepi-jos-700-ljudi/
avatar

Posts : 4597
Join date : 2017-11-16
Location : Nosgoth

Re: Српска привреда

Post by KinderLad on Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:26 pm

Sjajan biznis.
avatar

Posts : 19159
Join date : 2012-02-10

Re: Српска привреда

Post by xie saike on Mon Sep 24, 2018 1:49 pm

dobro, i onako su neka socioloska i psiholoska istrazivanja pokazala da je dobro menjati posao na svakih 5-6 godina 


_____
U Srbiji vlada bezvezništvo, u pravom smislu te reči.
Želimir Žilnik





-----------------------------------------------------
Фолу-Уп Гроуп Боард
avatar

Posts : 634
Join date : 2015-01-20

Re: Српска привреда

Post by katamaran on Sun Sep 30, 2018 1:55 pm

http://mondo.rs/a1135595/Info/Ekonomija/Telekom-Srbija-kupuje-Telekom-Albanija.html

Zanimljivo...

Mislim da nema teorije da se to stvarno i desi.

edit: nadjoh samo ovo. Mi se ne pominjemo.

https://www.agenzianova.com/a/0/2089607/2018-09-28/albania-fonti-stampa-operatore-telefonia-mobile-telekom-in-negoziati-di-vendita


_____
Belaj Boy

Re: Српска привреда

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:00 am