Make Dwellings more Generic for renters

My friend has just become a real estate agent inNYC, (Predominantly Brooklyn,) NY. This would have been a grave decision a year ago, but I feel the unique thing about her job is that she's solely showing apts for rent. So she has a bit of a more consistent income with renting higher than buying in NYC. Personally I would only buy, but I observe and assert the value of not taking a mortgage to live in an apt. People typically stay in apts for a lot less time than people who buy apts so there is more of a market supply and demand which is good for my friend. Unfortunately, for all the reasons you listed Mark; this isn't good for brokers. Though I like to have something to show for when I'm finished living in a particular dwelling, that I can make some money back on, or even profit on, it seems the market is in turn with renting for unforseen economic reasons.

"And the Lord Brought us baseball."

there are clear examples that Bureaucracies are plauging companies, outside of government. With respect to your baseball example(I'm not patronising you,though I first must touch on what youdid not write on bureaucracy. The response to the baseball example will be addressed shortly), unfortunately bureaucracy hardly is limited to government. "Excessive multiplication of, and concentration of power in, administrative bureaus or administrators." That's one definition that you forgot to list, and should be covered, because this term absolutely is not limited to the realm of government, it's in businesses. (It's even in Baseball, Point in case the steroid scandal where excessive multiplication of power within players unions, within the team owners associations have basically fed the players who took steroids with a spoon, while the fans, and the integrity of the game is diminished. The ethical thing to do would be to enforce steroid convictions, with higher punishment than expulsion from the league on their 3rd violation, to prevent youthful fans from taking illicit substances the decadent players who are doing them must not be allowed to influence them to the point of where many youth are in rehab, as well as deceased from steroids. It's wrong, unconscionable, and indeed a bureaucracy because no player, or owner will say that they want steroid users to continue to influence. But when you get them on camera and the union leaders are watching, they change their tone immediately and respond a cold "No Comment." Well actions speak louder than words. I wonder how Colonel Meilinger would have felt about making that the 11th rule of following. I may be an existentialist, but when the dynamic from the performance enhancing scandals caused by bureaucracies are affecting the entire composition of baseball from peewee league to multi billion dollar choices, Baseball is not optimistically considered a "Follower" implementer by my account. Many institutions are precursors for corrupted bureaucratic policies. In addition to just baseball There are businesses which have many higher ups, unfortunately , that acting ethically, or intuitively in a bureaucratic circumstances with excessive higher ups is limited by excessive multiplication and concentration of power in the administrative bureaus, opposed to the market, and the workers within who are trying to succeed an optimistic objective. Still, I'm going to respond to your baseball example in a moment.

Institutions as innocent in appearance wise, like the appeal of baseball,though are plagued with bureaucracies and are common in our every day lives. Moving on, your listed definition of "bureaucracy is a form of government with red tape" is transitioning to a provoked thought. I used to be alarmed at the thought of our government being run as a company previously in the last eight years (Most observed to have been an overall self destructing institution). I feel that both Baseball(My favorite past time if you couldn't tell:-) and the U.S. Government were operated on parallel un- bio-ethical precursors. I assert institutional leadership will decide if the need to implement Colonoel Melinger's 10 rules for seamless, responsible, and of course sophisticated management is a question to invest in (not just for baseball and government but for all prospective institutions and enterprises), depending on experience with bio-ethics and discipline.

Now Rusty, what provoked my thought was your mention of freedom of speech during course observed through the center fielder's, and the coaches and manager's experiences from your great example. In this hypothetical Rusty, My man, I asserted the center-fielder impulsively decided to play 10 ft. closer. Factors to this impulse could have been the wind, the sun affecting the batters' vision when pitched a ball, the probably chances of hitting a pop up when matched against that pitcher, how many players on base and outs, etc.. Whether this was a statistically conservative impulse the center-fielder made, or plain a fundamental impulse that is in this player's ether which marks him for doom every time he makes this impulse is not known, not even Johnny Damon, or Willie Randolph (A center-fielder and 2nd baseman that I have great respect for in their analytics of the game) would know for 100% sure. Your example and my question really have the same question, when is this players impulse asserted as an action to follow, or an impulse to confront with the manager and coaches? I like to express that I feel impulses can be observed as organically cultivated sparks of geniuses in some dynamics, and some impulses are just utter foobar, for lack of a better word. Where on these rules of engagement can you allow an impulse to demand the same power that puts the gears of the 10 rules to work for follower-ship, without having a controversy, or a catalyst for bureaucracy instill? It's bad enough to see a confrontation that gets dramatized by a second baseman and a center-fielder (metaphorically speaking) ensue, and the last thing you want to see is "Pundits like Johnny damon and Willie Randolph debating this situation while the integrity is decreasing and no efficient actions are being developed, cultivated. While those two express their abstract value for Colnolel's rules of follower-ship. Fans are liable to leave the game during the inning because the energy is utterly bureaucratic and unappealing. The freedom of speech/impulse has to have an ethical mechanism that doesn't allow a real elemental fan from shooting himself in the foot because of what's ensuing.