The assumption is that with a "family owned business," you're still running the business, right?
The OP is actually saying that's one of the viable options -- to keep the business and stay at the helm.
What he's arguing is that you're not likely to ever successfully be able to keep the business (not sell), hire someone else to run it for you, and never have to work again -- the obvious exception being e.g. Bill Gates (and the difference being that Microsoft was so huge and firmly rooted that he could hand it off).
Yep. Generally, as the advice goes, when you're looking for a rental property to purchase, anticipate property management fees and include those fees in your profitability calculations -- regardless of whether you're going to hire a property manager or do it yourself. If the purchase does not make financial/business sense when including those management fees, then it doesn't make business sense at all, and you shouldn't buy it.
Better yet, why does it have to be an "individual nation" thing? Why can't all (or even just some) of the developed nations collaborate and pool funding and have a bigger team to work on the problem?
Sure. And we definitely need some kind of motivation to focus our efforts on space exploration (it's very noticeably become an afterthought ever since we stopped trying to compete).
But if we could somehow find that motivation, it would be far more productive to work together -- we'd have a lot more manpower and a higher budget that way.
If we're talking about fitness goals, generally, weight is actually a fairly poor indicator of progress. Someone can be 200 lb and another person can be 180 lb, and both can be the same height; yet the 200lb person might be stronger or more athletic, while the 180lb person could have very little muscle mass and a much higher body fat %.
Stated in another way, it's entirely possible that a person can gain weight and lose fat -- or even lose weight and accumulate fat.
The size of various parts of your body is a much better indicator compared to measuring weight (measuring one overall size isn't a great help either), although still not the best. Measuring body fat % would be best, but unfortunately, it's not very easy to do so -- at least not without special tools.
As others have said in this thread, it's entirely possible (and, in a corporate setting, very probable) that he could've been writing an email during a time in the meeting where is attention wasn't needed.
I can tell you that there have been plenty of meetings I've been in where I'm hard at work on something actually important while listening at the same time, because I know I'm not missing anything. I know which meetings are important and require my full attention (a requirements meeting for a new project, for example) compared to something I can just kinda half-listen to (e.g. the weekly team meeting where everyone discusses what they've worked on since the last meeting)
I think it's always been like that, and these days we're starting to recognize that introversion isn't a deficiency, it's just how some people are wired (and doesn't necessarily equate to "shy" or "awkward")
I imagine the OP probably meant that and simply wrote the wrong thing in the post. I probably wouldn't have noticed it was the wrong wording if not for this comment chain.
The OP is actually saying that's one of the viable options -- to keep the business and stay at the helm.
What he's arguing is that you're not likely to ever successfully be able to keep the business (not sell), hire someone else to run it for you, and never have to work again -- the obvious exception being e.g. Bill Gates (and the difference being that Microsoft was so huge and firmly rooted that he could hand it off).